UNlVERSiT 
DEPART!-,  ENT  C 


OFdxlIA 


^LIFORNIA 


Engineering 
T.ilirary 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

DEPARTMENT  OF  CIVIL,  ENGINEERING 

BERKELEY,  CALIFORNIA 


HANDBOOK 

OP 

COST    DATA 

FOR 
CONTRACTORS  AND  ENGINEERS 


' 


WORKS  OF  HALBERT  P.  GILLETTE. 


Gillette— Handbook  of  Cost  Data 

1854  p.,  4*4  x  7,  fully  ill.,  flex.  Cost  data  on  every  con- 
ceivable civil  engineering  subject  from  cement  sidewalks  to 
railroad  systems,  with  governing  conditions,  hours  of  labor 
and  units  of  material,  given  in  detail,  so  that  costs  under 
different  conditions  may  be  accurately  determined. 

Gillette — Handbook  of  Rock  Excavation,   Methods  and  Cost 

825  p.,  5x7^,  fully  ill.,  flex.  A  manual  of  the  best 
modern  practice  in  drilling  and  handling  rock  of  all  kinds 
under  all  conditions,  illustrating  latest  machines  and  methods, 
with  costs  of  actual  work  done. 

Gillette — Earthwork  and  Its  Cost 

1100  p.,  5x7^,  fully  ill.,  flex.  A  thorough  treatise  of  the 
best  modern  practice  in  handling  earth  of  all  kinds.  First 
discusses  all  types  of  excavating  machinery  and  then  shows 
how  various  kinds  of  earth  work  may  be  most  efficiently 
accomplished. 

Gillette — Handbook   of  Clearing  and   Grubbing 

241  p.,  4%x71/i,  ill.,  cloth.  Methods  and  cost,  hand 
grubbing;  burning;  blasting;  horse  and  power  clearing;  heavy 
plows.  Also  valuable  chapters  on  estimating  and  appraising 
and  specifications. 

Dana — Handbook    of    Construction    Plant 

702  p.,  4%  x  7,  fully  ill.,  flex.  A  complete  manual  on 
construction  e'quipment  giving  prices,  weights  and,  in  many 
cases,  cost  of  operation  and  maintenance.  A  few  items  are 
air  compressors,  barges,  cable-ways,  crushers,  derricks,  en- 
gines, mixers,  pumps,  shovels,  tractors,  trenching  machines, 
wagons. 

Gillette  and  Dana — Mechanical  and   Electrical  Cost   Data 

1750  p.,  4%x7,  ill.,  flex.  Gives  net  prices,  shipping 
weights,  etc.,  of  machines  and  appliances,  mechanical  and 
electrical,  together  with  costs  of  installation  and  operation. 
The  costs  are  in  such  detail,  with  a  resume  of  governing 
conditions,  that  they  are  invaluable  aids  in  making  estimates 
and  operating  existing  plants.  Rates  of  wages  and  prices 
of  material  units  are  stated  so  that  a  proper  substitution  may 
be  made  for  times  and  communities  where  different  conditions 
prevail. 

Gillette  and  Dana — Cost  Keeping  and  Management  Engineering 
350  p.,  6x9,  ill.,  cloth.  Practically  the  first  book  on 
cost  keeping  for  managers  of  engineering  construction.  The 
book  presents  also  the  fundamental  principles  of  the  science 
of  engineering  management.  It  is  the  first  handbook  to 
couple  these  two  interrelated  subjects. 

Gillette   and   Hill — Concrete   Construction;    Methods   and   Cost 
700   p.,    6x9,    fully   ill.,    cloth.      A   treatise   on   concrete   and 
reinforced   concrete    structures    of   every    kind. 

Gillette     and     Thomas — Handbook     of     Road     Construction; 

Methods   and   Cost 
Over  800  p.,   4%  x  7,   fully  ill.,   flex.     In  preparation. 


HANDBOOK 

OF 

COST  DATA 

FOR 

CONTRACTORS  AND  ENGINEERS 


A  REFERENCE  BOOK  GIVING  METHODS  OF  CON- 
STRUCTION  AND   ACTUAL  COSTS  OF  MA- 
TERIALS AND  LABOR  ON  NUMEROUS 
ENGINEERING  WORKS 


BY 

HALBERT  P.  GILLETTE 

Consulting  Engineer,  Editor  in1  Chief,  Engineering  and 

Contracting 

Member  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers,  Member 

American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers, 

Member  American  Institute  of 

Mining  Engineers,  Etc. 


SECOND  EDITION 


McGRAW-HILL  BOOK  COMPANY,  INC. 
239  WEST  39TH  STREET.     NEW  YORK 


LONDON:  HILL  PUBLISHING  CO.,  LTD. 

6  &  8  BOUVERIE  ST.,  E.  C. 

1920 

(Revised,  1918) 


Engineering 
Library 


COPYRIGHT,  1910, 


BY 


THE  MYKON  C.  CLARK  PUBLISHING  Co. 

Reprinted,  January,  1918 
Reprinted,  September,  1920 


<&* 

N 


PREFACE  TO  1918  REPRINT 

The  war-begotten  rise  in  wages  and  prices  would  have  rendered 
most  of  the  information  in  this  book  valueless  had  it  been  merely  a 
book  of  prices  devoid  of  details  as  to  quantities  of  materials  and  amount 
of  labor  per  unit,  but,  as  pointed  out  in  the  preface  to  the  first  edition 
12  years  ago,  this  is  not  a  price  book;  it  is  a  cost  data  book.  Prices 
are  more  or  less  ephemeral  and  local,  whereas  costs  may  be  so  pre- 
sented as  to  be  longlived  and  national. 

As  an  illustration,  take  the  cost  of  the  cement  walk,  given  on  page 
445.  The  number  of  men  in  the  gang,  their  respective  daily  wages 
and  the  number  of  square  feet  laid  per  day,  are  given.  Then  follow 
the  respective  quantities  of  sand,  stone  and  cement  per  100  sq.  ft.  of 
walk,  and  the  prices  therefor.  If,  now,  the  present  rates  of  wages  and 
prices  of  materials  in  any  given  locality  are  substituted  for  those  given 
here,  it  becomes  a  matter  of  simple  arithmetic  and  a  few  moments 
spent  in  calculation  to  derive  the  present  cost  per  square  foot  of  walk 
of  similar  design. 

Throughout  this  book  my  plan  has  been  so  to  present  the  details  of 
organization  of  working  gangs,  time  spent  and  amount  of  work  ac- 
complished per  day,  as  to  enable  the  cost  estimator  to  apply  the  data 
to  his  own  conditions.  There  are  instances  where  the  details  are  not 
as  complete  as  may  be  desired,  but  even  in  those  cases  a  half  loaf 
is  better  than  none. 

Careless  critics  of  published  cost  data  often  charge  an  author  with 
defects  of  omission  that  the  author  himself  regrets  even  more  keenly 
than  his  critic.  Unfortunately  it  is  easier  to  perceive  a  barren  spot  in 
a  corn  field  than  to  make  corn  grow  on  it.  And  in  the  field  of  cost 
data  there  always  will  be  some  barren  places,  for  actual  detail  costs 
are  not  to  be  secured  for  every  possible  condition.  However,  if  each 
critic  of  cost  data  will  himself  contribute  his  quota  for  publication, 
there  will  eventually  be  fewer  critics  as  well  as  fewer  bald  spots  in 
the  literature  of  the  subject, 

HALBERT  P.  GILLETTE. 

Chicago,  Oct.  16,  1917. 


PREFACE  TO  SECOND  EDITION 

The  first  edition  of  this  work  contained  the  equivalent  of  about 
250,000  words,  while  this  edition  contains  more  than  a  million.  Its 
four-fold  growth  has  been  due  not  only  to  the  filling  of  many  gaps 
that  formerly  existed,  but  ta  the  addition  of  certain  kinds  of  cost 


PREFACE 


'dita  th'at- interest-  tagfneers  only.  In  writing  the  first  edition,  I  had 
primarily  in  mind  the  contractor,  whose  concern  is  to  know  the  most 
economical  method  of  construction  and  the  unit  costs  in  every  detail. 
While  every  engineer  should,  and  many  do,  take  as  keen  an  interest 
as  the  contractor  in  itemized  unit  costs,  all  engineers  are  called  upon, 
at  one  time  or  another,  to  give  approximate  preliminary  estimates  of 
costs,  and  these  must  often  be  furnished  before  the  structure  has 
been  designed.  For  example,  a  hydraulic  engineer  may  be  asked  the 
probable  cost  of  a  filter  plant  for  a  city  consuming  a  given  amount  of 
water.  He  should  be  able  to  state  the  cost  of  sand  filter  beds  per 
acre,  covered  or  uncovered,  and  the  annual  cost  of  operation  per 
million  gallons  filtered.  To  illustrate  again:  A  railway  engineer  finds 
that  a  high  steel  viaduct  may  be  needed  to  cross  a  valley.  He  desires 
a  rational  formula  by  which  the  approximate  weight  of  steel  in  such 
a  viaduct  can  be  computed,  knowing  the  profile  area.  Or,  if  he  plans 
a  high  timber  trestle,  he  wants  a  method  of  approximating  the  number 
of  feet  board  measure  and  the  pounds  of  iron  it  will  require. 

In  brief,  the  engineer  needs  frequently  to  ascertain  the  number  of 
units  in  a  structure  of  a  given  class  and  size,  as  well  as  the  unit  costs; 
whereas  the  contractor  is  usually  satisfied  with  data  giving  the  item- 
ized unit  costs  under  stated  conditions.  I  have  tried  to  supply  both 
wants  in  this  edition. 

During  the  last  four  years  I  have  continued  accumulating  data  on 
methods  and  costs,  a  large  part  of  which  have  been  published  in 
Engineering-Contracting.  When  I  began  to  make  these  data  a  feature 
of  Engineering-Contracting,  I  received  several  letters  expressing  the 
hope  that  I  should  be  able  to  continue  the  work  of  publishing  such 
cost  data,  but  at  the  same  time  voicing  a  fear  that  the  good  material 
would  soon  be  exhausted.  So  long  as  men  remain  possessed  of  in- 
ventive faculties  and  of  genius  for  organization,  we  need  never  fear 
that  new  and  valuable  cost  data  will  be  unobtainable.  Management 
engineering  is  an  infant  science,  and  we  shall  see  astonishing  changes 
in  methods  of  doing  work,  in  machines  used,  and  consequently  in 
unit  costs. 

This  comparatively  new  study  of  engineering  costs  has  not  only 
had  a  pronounced  effect  upon  methods  of  construction,  but  has 
already  begun  to  work  a  change  in  designs  of  engineering  structures. 
Specifications  drawn  by  engineers  who  are  ignorant  of  the  items  of 
actual  unit  costs  are  often  absurd  in  their  requirements.  Hence,  as  a 
knowledge  of  costs  spreads,  we  may  confidently  expect  radical  changes 
in  designs  and  in  specifications.  These  changes  will  result  in  entirely 
new  cost  data,  so  that  a  dearth  of  this  sort  of  information  is  not  to 
be  expected  from  now  on. 

I  wish  to  acknowledge  my  indebtedness  to  the  files  of  the  following 
periodicals  and  society  transactions: 

Engineering-Contracting,  Engineering  News,  Engineering  Record, 
Railway  Age-Gazette,  Electric  Railway  Journal,  Municipal  Engineering 
Magazine,  Municipal  Journal  and  Engineer,  Good  Roads  Magazine, 
Engineering  Magazine,  American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers,  Western 
Society  of  Engineers,  Association  of  Engineering  Societies,  Canadian 
Society  of  Civil  Engineers,  Illinois  Society  of  Engineers,  Engineers' 


PREFACE  vii 

Society  of  Western  Pennsylvania,  Engineers'  Club  of  Philadelphia, 
New  England  Water  Works  Association,  American  Water  Works 
Association,  American  Railway  Engineering  and  Maintenance  of  Way 
Association,  American  Association  of  Railway  Superintendents  of 
Bridges  and  Buildings,  and  the  Institution  of  Civil  Engineers. 

HALBERT  P.  GILLETTE. 
New  York,  March  14,  1910. 


PREFACE  TO  FIRST  EDITION 

Four  years  ago  I  announced  in  my  little  book,  "Economics  of 
Road  Construction,"  that  I  had  in  preparation  a  handbook  of  cost 
data  for  engineers  and  contractors.  At  that  time  this  handbook  had 
been  under  way  for  eight  years,  and  it  seemed  nearly  ready  for  pub- 
lication; but  other  duties  prevented  a  speedy  finishing  of  the  task. 
The  delay,  however,  has  been  fortunate  in  that  I  have  added  very 
much  to  my  knowledge  of  the  general  subject.  In  the  meantime, 
two  books  have  grown  out  of  the  original  manuscript,  namely,  my 
books  on  earthwork  and  on  rock  excavation.  The  writing  of  these 
two  books  has  better  fitted  me  for  the  writing  of  this  book,  and  has 
put  me  in  touch  with  many  engineers  and  contractors  who  have 
generously  furnished  additional  cost  data. 

So  far  as  I  know,  this  is  the  first  book  on  engineering  cost  data 
ever  published.  There  are  "price  books"  written  for  house  builders, 
but  they  are  essentially  what  their  name  implies — books  on  prices  of 
materials  and  contract  prices.  This  book  differs  from  all  such  works, 
aside  from  the  fact  that  it  covers  the  whole  field  of  civil  engineering, 
in  that  it  is  a  book  in  which  costs  are  analyzed  and  discussed.  A 
contract  price  is  one  thing,  a  contract  cost  is  an  entirely  different 
thing,  in  spite  of  the  common  confusion  of  these  terms.  In  order 
fully  to  understand  any  analysis  of  unit  costs  it  is  necessary  to  have 
a  detailed  description  of  the  methods  used  in  construction  and  opera- 
tion. Hence,  although  itemized  cost  data  occupy  many  scores  of 
pages  in  this  book,  there  are  many  more  scores  of  pages  devoted  to 
descriptions  of  how  the  work  was  done,  the  organization  of  the  forces, 
and  the  machines  used.  The  records,  in  all  cases,  are  actual  records 
taken  from  every  available  source  of  published  information,  from 
personal  letters  sent  by  engineers  and  contractors  and  from  my  own 
records. 

It  is  often  said  that  cost  data  are  of  no  value  to  an  inexperienced 
man.  Generally  the  men  who  make  such  statements  are  themselves 
possessed  of  few  records  of  cost,  or  use  this  argument  as  an  excuse  for 
not  making  public  such  records  as  they  do  possess.  The  very  secret- 
iveness  of  men  having  cost  data  which  they  refuse  to  make  public, 
nullifies  their  statement  that  such  data  can  be  of  no  use  to  others. 

We  also  hear  it  argued  that  conditions  vary  so  widely  that  grave 
errors  occur  when  an  attempt  is  made  to  apply  published  cost  data. 


Vlll 


PREFACE 


Those  who  have  not  been  trained  to  study  the  conditions  affecting 
costs  are  likely  to  make  serious  blunders  in  any  case;  but,  if  this  book 
is  in  even  a  slight  degree  what  it  aims  to  be,  it  will  be  of  greatest 
benefit  to  just  such  men;  for  it  will  indicate  to  them  how  to  analyze 
costs  and  how  to  study  methods  of  performing  work  economically. 

Many  of  the  erroneous  ideas  about  the  value  of  cost  recording  arise 
from  a  confusion  of  the  term  cost  with  the  term  price.  This  is  not  a 
handbook  of  prices,  although  many  prices  are  given.  I  could  have 
filled  ten  volumes  with  prices,  and  with  summaries  of  costs  written 
by  engineers  who  have  failed  to  state  rates  of  wages  and  conditions 
under  which  the  work  was  performed.  But,  a  short  time  after  publi- 
cation, all  such  matter  is  hardly  worth  the  ink  that  it  is  printed  with, 
since  wages  and  prices  are  subject  to  constant  change. 

The  attention  of  contractors  is  called  to  the  first  part  of  the  book 
in  which  systems  of  cost  keeping  are  described.  I  have  outlined  what 
I  believe  to  be  some  of  the  best  systems  of  cost  keeping.  Samples 
of  other  record  cards  and  methods  than  my  own  are  shown;  for  my 
purpose  has  been  to  elucidate- principles,  rather  than  to  exploit  pet 
theories  as  to  business  management  and  accounting. 

HALBERT  P.  GILLETTE. 
New  York,  Sept.  1,  1905. 

PREFACE  TO  THE   1920  ISSUE 

Although  most  of  the  matter  in  this  book  is  ten  years  old,  and  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  construction  wages  and  prices  have  more  than 
doubled  in  the  past  five  years,  there  is  relatively  little  that  I  should 
be  willing  to  eliminate  were  I  to  rewrite  the  book. 

The  reasons  for  this  desire  to  preserve  practically  all  that  this  book 
contains  are  two-fold:  First,  the  unit  costs  are  so  analyzed  that  they 
can  be  brought  down  to  date  merely  by  substituting  present  rates  of 
wages  and  present  prices  for  those  given  in  the  book.  Second,  very  few 
methods  of  construction  have  changed;  hence  nearly  all  the  methods  de- 
scribed in  this  book  are  still  applicable,  and  probably  will  remain  applica- 
ble for  many  years  to  come. 

There  is  prevalent  a  belief  that  engineering  or  contracting  methods 
that  are  more  than  about  ten  years  old  are  out  of  date.  Yet  any  engi- 
neer or  contractor  who  has  been  in  professional  practice  or  in  business 
for  more  than  ten  years,  needs  but  to  review  the  changes  that  have 
occurred  in  that  time  to  assure  himself  that  they  have  been  relatively 
few.  In  spite  of  all  our  boasted  progress,  we  progress  very  slowly. 
When  I  read  the  article  by  Elwood  Morris  on  the  methods  and  costs 
of  moving  earth  with  drag  scrapers  in  1840,  I  am  impressed  with  the 
fact  that  even  80  years  of  "phenomenal  progress"  has  not  rendered 
obsolete  such  primitive  methods.  Furthermore,  I  find  that  the  costs 
recorded  by  Morris  hold  true  today,  if  proper  allowance  is  made  for 
changes  in  wages.  The  article  by  Morris  is  typical  of  hundreds  that 
are  as  valuable  today  as  the  day  they  were  written. 

Instead  of  preparing  a  new  edition  of  this  hand  book,  I  have  chosen 
to  produce  an  entirely  new  book  which  will  be  a  companion  volume. 
The  new  book  which  is  almost  ready  for  the  press,  is  the  "Handbook 
of  Civil  Engineering  and  Contracting  Cost  Data."  None  of  the  matter 
in  the  new  book  is  the  same  as  in  this  book,  although  the  general 
method  of  presentation  and  the  scope  are  identical. 

HALBERT  P.  GILLETTE. 
July  10,  1920. 


CONTENTS.  Page 

INTRODUCTION    1 

SECTION    I. — Principles    of   Engineering   Economics   and    Cost 

Keeping   7 

Definitions. — Compound  Interest  Tables. — Sinking  Fund 
Tables. — Present  Worth  of  Annuity. — References  and  Cross- 
References.— Identity  of  Machine  and  Engineering  Struc- 
ture.— Problem  I.  Which  of  Two  New  Machines  (or  Struc- 
tures) to  Select. — Problem  II.  When  to  Retire  an  Old 
Machine  in  Favor  of  an  Improved  or  Larger  One. — The 
Life  of  a  Machine  or  Structure  and  the  Growth  of  Annual 
Repairs. — Problem  III.  To  Determine  When  Repairs 
Have  Grown  So  Great  as  to  Justify  Renewal. — 
Straight  Line  Formula  of  Depreciation. — The  Bastard 
Straight  Line  Formula  of  Depreciation. — Sinking  Fund 
Formula  of  Depreciation. — The  Unit  Cost  Deprecia- 
tion Formula. — Physical  Property  Valuations. — Going 
Concern  Value. — Commercial  Valuations. — How  to  Prepare 
Estimates  and  Bids. — A  Schedule  of  Items  of  Cost. — Plant 
Expense. — Cost  of  Superintendence  and  General  Expense. — 
Percentage  to  Allow  for  Contingencies. — Percentage  to  Al- 
low for  Profits. — Causes  of  Underestimates. — Indexing  Con- 
tract Prices. — Unbalanced  Bids. — Surety  Company  Bonds. — 
Reasons  Why  Contract  Work  Is  the  Most  Economic  Method 
of  Doing  Public  Work. — Thomas  Telford  on  the  Day  Labor 
System. — The  Opinions  of  Members  of  the  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 
on  the  Day  Labor  System. — The  Metcalf  and  Eddy  Report 
on  the  Day  Labor  System  in  Boston. — Mr.  S.  Whinery's 
Report  on  the  Day  Labor  System  in  Boston. — Experience 
with  Day  Labor  on  the  Chicago  Main  Drainage  Canal  and 
at  Panama. — Subletting  Work  and  Purchasing  Materials. — 
Instructions  to  Superintendents  and  Foremen. — The  Ten 
Laws  of  Management. — 1.  The  Law  of  Sub-Division  of 
Duties. — 2.  The  Law  of  Educational  Supervision. — 3.  The 
Law  of  Co-Ordination. — 4.  The  Law  of  Standard  Perform- 
ance Based  on  Motion  Timing. — 5.  The  Law  of  Divorce  of 
Planning  from  Performance. — 6.  The  Law  of  Regular  Unit 
Cost  Reports. — 7.  The  Law  of  Reward  Increasing  with  In- 
creased Performance. — 8.  The  Law  of  Prompt  Reward. — • 
9.  The  Law  of  Competition. — 10.  The  Law  of  Managerial 
Dignity. — Measuring  the  Output  of  Workmen. — Units  for 
Concrete  Work. — Two  or  More  Units  for  the  Same  Class 
of  Work. — Uniformity  of  Units  of  Measurement. — Units  of 
Transportation. — Recording  Single  Units. — Record  Cards 

ix 


x  CONTENTS 

Attached  to  Each  Piece  of  Work. — Measurements  of 
Length. — Measurements  of  Area. — Measurements  of  Vol- 
ume.— Measurements  of  Weight. — Functional  Units  of 
Measure. — Key  Units  of  Measure. — Key  Units  on  Draw- 
ings.— Keys  Marked  on  Separate  Members. — Conclu- 
sion.— Cost  Keeping. — Cost  Keeping  Defined. — Differences 
Between  Cost  Keeping  and  Bookkeeping. — Time  Keep- 
ing Defined. — Daily  Cost  Reports,  By  Whom  Made. — 
Written  Card  vs.  Punch  Card  Reports. — Time  Cards 
That  Show  Changes  of  Occupation. — Individual  Rec- 
ord Cards. — Kind  of  Punches  to  Use. — Size  and  Kind  of 
Daily  Report  Cards. — Foreman's  Diary. — Designing  Punch 
Card  Reports. — Record  Cards  Accompanying  Each  Piece  of 
Work. — Store  Keeper's  Reports.— Reports  on  Materials  and 
Supplies. — Cost  Charts. — Progress  Charts. — Methods  of 
Payment  in  Proportion  to  Performance. — Profit  Sharing. — 
Piece  Rate  System. — The  Bonus  System. — The  Differential 
Piece  Rate  System. — The  Differential  Bonus. — Task  Work 
with  a  Bonus. — The  Premium  Plan. — Principles  Governing 
the  Fixing  of  a  Piece  Rate  or  Bonus. — Benefits  of  the  Bonus 
System. — Time  Cards  and  Time  Books. — Recording  Work 
by  Minute  Hand  Observations. 

SECTION  II.— Earth  Excavation 119 

Magnitude  of  the „  Subject. — Earth  Measurement. — Earth 
Shrinkage. — Kinds  of  Earth. — Definitions  of  Haul  and 
Lead. — Work  of  Teams. — Cost  of  Plowing. — Cost  of  Picking 
and  Shoveling. — Cost  of  Trimming,  Rolling,  Etc. — Cost  of 
Wheelbarrow  Work. — Cost  by  Wagons. — Cost  by  Drag 
Scrapers. — Cost  by  Wheel  Scrapers. — Cost  by  Fresno 
Scrapers. — Cost  by  Elevating  Graders. — Steam  Shovel  Data. 
— Hauling  with  Dinkeys. — Summary  of  the  Cost  of  Steam 
Shovel  Work. — Cost  of  Digging  a  Well  or  Cesspool. — Cost 
of  Trenching,  Cross-References. — Cost  of  Backfilling  a 
Trench  with  a  Scraper. — Prices  of  Drainage  Ditch  Work. — 
Cost  of  Boring  Test  Holes  in  Earth. — Cost  of  Wash  Bor- 
ings on  a  Canal  Survey. — Cost  of  Wash  Drill  Borings  on  a 
Canal  Survey. — Cost  of  Boring  Test  Holes. — Cost  of  Testing 
for  Bridge  Foundations. — Cost  of  Making  Test  Borings,  111., 
Etc. — Cost  of  Test  Borings  with  Wood  Augers. — Cost  of 
Drilling  Test.  Holes  with  a  Well  Driller. — Cost  of  Diamond 
Drilling,  Cross-References. — Cost  of  Sinking  a  Well. — Ref- 
erences and  Cross-References  on  Earthwork. 

SECTION  III. — Rock  Excavation,  Quarrying  and  Crushing. ...   171 

Weight  and  Voids. — Voids  in  Broken  Stone  and  Gravel. — 
Weight  and  Voids  in  Crushed  Limestone. — Settlement  of 
Crushed  Stone  in  Wagons. — Weight  of  Crushed  Stone  in 
Wagons  and  Cars. — The  Per  Cent  of  Voids  in  Railway 
Embankments. — Voids  in  Rock  Blasted  under  Water.— 
Measurement  of  Rock. — Kinds  of  Hand  Drills. — Cost  nf 
Hammer  Drilling-. — Cost  of  Hand  Drilling  in  Granite. — Cost 


CONTENTS  xi 

of  Churn  Drilling. — Sizes  of  Air  Drills. — Data  as  to  Rock 
Drills. — Test  of  Air  Consumption  at  the  Rose  Deep  Mine. — 
Tables  of  Air  Consumption.- — Steam  Consumption.— Gaso- 
line Air  Compressors. — Percentage  of  Lost  Time  in  Drill- 
ing.— Rule  for  Estimating  Drilling  per  Shift. — Rates  of 
Drilling  in  Different  Rocks. — Cost  of  Drill  Repairs. — Cost 
of  Operating  Drills. — Piece  Rate  and  Bonus  System  in 
Drilling. — Cost  of  Loading  by  Hand. — Cost  of  Hand- 
ling Crushed  Stone. — Cost  of  Unloading  Broken  Stone 
with  a  Clamshell. — Cost  of  Handling  Broken  Stone 
with  a  Derrick. — Cost  of  Loading  Blasted  Rock 
with  Steam  Shovels. — Cost  of  Hauling  in  Carts  and 
Wagons.— Open-Cut  Excavation. — Spacing  Holes  in  Open- 
Cut  Excavation. — Cost  of  Excavating  Sandstone  and  Shale. 
— Summary  of  Open-Cut  Data. — Cost  of  Excavating  Gneiss, 
New  York  City. — Cost  of  Gneiss  Excavation  for  Dams. — 
Summary  of  Costs  on  Chicago  Canal. — -Trenching  in  Rock. 
— Cost  of  Drilling  and  Blasting  in  Trenches. — Cost  of  Quar- 
rying and  Crushing  Trap  Rock. — Cost  of  Crushing  at 
Newton,  Mass. — Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Quartz- 
ite. — Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Limestone  for  Ma- 
cadam.— Price  of  Road  Building  Plant. — Cost  of  Jaw 
Crusher  Renewals. — Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Lime- 
stone, Missouri.— Cost  of  Crushing  and  Hauling  Cobble- 
stones.— Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Trap  and  Bal- 
lasting, D.  L.  &  W.  Ry. — Cost  of  Quarrying,  Crushing  and 
Ballasting,  and  Life  of  Ballast. — Cost  of  Crushing  with  City 
Plant,  Boston. — Data  on  Jaw  Crushers. — Data  on  Gyratory 
Crushers. — Cost  of  Breaking  Stone  by  Hand. — -Diamond 
Drilling. — Price  of  Diamonds. — Water  Required. — Price  of 
Diamond  Drills. — Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in  Virginia. — 
Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in  Lehigh  Valley. — :Cost  of  Dia- 
mond Drilling  on  Croton  Aqueduct. — Cost  of  Hand  Dia- 
mond Drilling  in  Arizona.— Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in 
Pennsylvania. — Consumption  of  Diamonds  in  Drilling,  Ten- 
nessee.—Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in  British  Columbia. — 
Cost  of  Core  Drilling  with  a  Well  Driller.— Cost  of  Dia- 
mond Drilling  and  Wash  Borings  Near  New  York  City. — 
Rock  Excavating  Using  Well  Drills. — Cost  of  an  Artesian 
Well.— Cost  of  Drilling  Limestone  with  a  Well  Drill,  for 
a  Quarry. — Cost  of  Drilling  Rock  with  a  Well  Drill. — Cost 
of  Drilling  Copper  Ore  with  Well  Drills. — Cost  of  Tunnel- 
ing, Shaft  Sinking  and  Mining,  Cross-References. — Cost  of 
Subaqueous  Rock  Excavation. — Cost  of  Chamber  Blasting. 

SECTION   IV. — Roads,  Pavements   and   Walks 258 

Definitions. — ^^Cross-References  to  Excavation  and  Rock 
Crushing. — Units  Used  in  Measuring  Macadam. — Items 
of  Cost  of  Macadam. — Quantity,  of  Stone  and  Binder  Re- 
quired for  Macadam. — Cost  of  Loading  Stone  from  Cars  into 
Wagons. — Cost  of  Loading  Stone  from  Bins  into  Wagons. — 


xu  CONTENTS 

Cost  of  Hauling  Stone  in  Wagons. — Cost  of  Spreading  Stone 
by    Hand. — Cost    of    Spreading    Stone   with    a    Leveler    or 
Grader. — Cost   of   Rolling. — Cost   of    Sprinkling. — Summary 
of   Cost   of  Macadam. — Estimating   the   Cost   of  Macadam, 
New  York  State. — Prices  Allowed  for  Extra  Work  on  New 
York    State    Roads. — Macadam    Road    Prices    in    Massa- 
chusetts.— Per  Cent  of  Engineering  for  Road  Construction. 
— Cost  of  Macadam  Roads,  New  Jersey. — Cost  of  a  Lime- 
stone Macadam  Road,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. — Cost  of  a  Sandstone 
and  Trap   Macadam,    Rochester,   N.   Y. — Cost  of  Macadam 
Roads,    Illinois. — Data    on    Depreciation    and    Repairs    of 
Steam  Rollers. — Cost  of   Steam   Roller  Repairs   in   Massa- 
chusetts.— Cost  of  Scarifying  Macadam  by  Hand. — Cost  of 
Scarifying  with  a  Machine. — Cost  of  Scarifying  Macadam. 
Rhode    Island. — Cost    of    Resurfacing    Old    Limestone    Ma 
cadam. — Cost    of    Repairing    Sandstone    Macadam,    Albion, 
N.  Y. — Cost  of  Resurfacing  Macadam  and  Data  on  Com- 
pression   of    Broken    Stone. — Cost    of    Repairing   Macadam 
in  Ireland. — Cost  of  Maintaining  Macadam  Roads,   Massa- 
chusetts.— Cost  of  Using  Calcium  Chloride  as  a  Dust  Pre- 
ventative. — Cost   of  Tarring  Macadam,  Michigan. — Cost  of 
Tarring   Macadam,    Massachusetts. — Cost   of    Tarring    Ma- 
cadam, Tennessee. — Cost  of  Oiling  Macadam,  Tennessee. — 
Cost  of  Oiled  Earth  Road,  Arkansas. — Cost  of  Oiling  Ma- 
cadam,  New  York   State. — Cost  of  Oiling  Macadam,   Kan- 
sas City,  Mo. — Cost  of  Tar  Macadam,  Massachusetts. — Cost 
of  Tar  Macadam,  Duluth,  Minn. — Cost  of  Asphalt  Macadam, 
Redlands,    Cal. — Cost    of    Petrolithic    Macadam. — Cost    of 
Petrolithic   Road. — Cost   of   Telford   Roads,    New   Jersey. — 
Cost  of  Sand-Clay  Roads. — Cost  of  Sand-Clay  Road,  Iowa. 
— Cost   of   Cinder-Clay   Road,   Iowa. — Cost   of   Burnt   Clay 
Roads. — Cost  of  Maintaining  Earth  Roads  by  Dragging. — 
— Cost  of  Making  a  Corduroy  Road. — Cost  of  Gravel  Street, 
Michigan. — Cross-References  on  Cost  of  Grading  Roads. — 
Cost  of  Grading  a  Road,  New  York. — Cost  of  Grading  a 
Road,   Maryland. — Cost   of   Grading  a  Road   with   a  Road 
Machine,   Michigan. — Average  Prices  of  Pavements  in  100 
Representative  Cities,  Together  with  Wages  of  Labor  and 
Prices    of   Materials. — Cost   of   Pavements    in    50    Cities. — 
Prices  for  Estimating  Street  Work. — Cost  of  Unloading  and 
Hauling   Bricks. — Gravity    Conveyor   for   Handling   Paving 
Bricks. — Cost    of    Laying    Bricks. — Summary    of    Cost    of 
Brick    Pavement. — Cost   of   Filling   Joints   of   Brick   Pave- 
ment.— Number  and  Weight  of  Paving  Brick  per  Sq.  Yd. — 
Cost  of  a  Brick  Pavement,  Illinois. — Cost  of  80,000  Sq.  Yds. 
of  Brick  Pavement,  Iowa. — Cost  of  Laying  Brick  Pavement, 
Indiana. — Cost    of   Laying    Brick    Pavement,    New   York. — 
Bricks  Laid  Per  Man  Per  Day,  Michigan. — Cost  of  a  Brick 
Pavement,   Minneapolis. — Cost  of  a  Brick  Pavement,   Ten- 
nessee.— Cost  of  a  Brick  Pavement,  Maryland. — Cost  of  Re- 
moving,   Chipping   Off   Tar   and   Relaying   Brick. — Cost    of 


CONTENTS 

Removing  and  Replacing  a  Brick  Pavement. — Cost  of  Lay- 
ing a  Stone  Block  Pavement,  St.  Paul. — Cost  of  Stone  Block 
Pavement,  Rochester,  N.  Y. — Cost  of  Stone  Block  Pave- 
ment, Baltimore. — Cost  of  Granite  Block  Pavement,  New 
York  City. — Cost  of  Laying  Block  Pavement,  New  York 
City. — Cost  of  Granite  Block  Pavement,  Baltimore. — Cost 
of  Dressing  Old  Granite  Blocks. — Cost  of  Removing  and 
Relaying  a  Cobblestone  Pavement. — Cost  of  Laying  Asphalt 
Block  Pavement,  New  York  City. — Cost  of  Asphalt  Block 
Pavement,  Baltimore. — Cost  of  Creosoted  Wood  Block  Pave- 
ment, Minneapolis. — Labor  Cost  of  Creosoted  Wood  Block 
Pavement,  Seattle. — Cost  of  Creosoted  Wood  Block  Pave- 
ment, Massachusetts. — Life  of  Wood  Block  Pavement. — 
Cost  of  Asphalt  Pavement  in  California. — Cost  of  77,200 
Sq.  Yds.  of  Asphalt  Pavement. — Cost  of  Asphalt  Pave- 
ments, Winnipeg. — Cost  of  Laying  Asphalt  Pavement. — 
Cost  of  Asphalt  Pavement,  New  York  City. — Cost  of  Patch- 
ing Asphalt,  Indianapolis. — High  Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt, 
New  Orleans. — Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt,  Marion,  Ind. — 
High  Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt,  Brooklyn. — Cost  of  Bitu- 
lithic  and  Asphalt  Pavements  and  Repairs,  Toronto. — Cost 
of  Repairs  to  Asphalt  Pavements,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. — Cost  of 
Repairs  and  Life  of  Asphalt,  Washington,  D.  C. — Cost  of 
Repairing  Asphalt  Pavement  in  Various  American  Cities. — 
Specific  Gravity  of  Bitulithic  and  Asphalt  Pavements. — 
Cost  of  Asphalt  Cross  Walks. — Cost  of  Mixing  Concrete 
Base  by  Hand. — Cost  of  Machine  Mixing  and  Wagon  Haul- 
ing.— Cost  of  Mixing  Concrete  with  a  Continuous  Mixer. — 
Cost  of  Concrete  Pavement,  Windsor,  Ont. — Cost  of  Exca- 
vating a  Concrete  Base  and  Laying  New  Concrete. — Cost 
of  Excavating  an  Asphalt  Pavement  and  Its  Concrete 
Base. — Amount  of  Materials  for  Cement  Side  Walks. — Cost 
of  Cement  Walks. — Cost  of  Cement  Walk,  San  Francisco. — 
Cost  of  Cement  Walk,  Toronto. — Cost  of  Cement  Walk, 
Forbes  Hill  Reservoir. — Cost  of  Acid  Finish  on  Cement 
Walks. — Cost  of  Cement  Curb  and  Walk,  Indiana. — Cost  of 
Cement  Curb,  Iowa.: — Cost  of  Cement  Curb  and  Gutter. — 
Cost  of  Cement  Curb,  Baltimore. — Cost  of  Cement  Curb  and 
Gutter,  Ontario. — Cost  of  Setting  Stone  Curb. — Cost  of 
Cutting  and  Setting  Granite  Curb. — Cost  of  Resetting  Stone 
Curb. — Recording  Cost  of  Street  Sprinkling. — Cost  of  Street 
Sprinkling,  Washington,  D.  C. — Cost  of  Sprinkling  Streets 
and  Roads. — Sprinkling  Car  Tracks. — Amount  of  Water  for 
Sprinkling  Streets. — Recording  Cost  of  Street  Sweeping. — 
Cost  of  Street  Sweeping  in  35  Cities. — Cost  of  Street 
Cleaning,  Washington,  D.  C. — Cost  of  Sweeping  with  a 
"Pick-up"  Sweeper. — Estimated  Cost  of  Machine  Sweep- 
ing.— Estimated  Cost  of  Flushing  Streets. — Cost  of  Street 
Sweeping,  Minneapolis. — Cost  of  Street  Sweeping,  Williams- 
port,  Pa. — Cost  of  Street  Sweeping,  Albany,  N.  Y. — Cost  of 
Street  Flushing  and  Sweeping,  St.  Louis. 


xiv  CONTENTS 

SECTION    V.— Stone    Masonry 475 

Definitions. — Percentage  of  Mortar  in  Stone  Masonry. — 
Cost  of  Laying  Masonry. — Estimating  the  Cost  of  Stone 
Dressing. — Data  on  Stone  Sawing. — Cost  of  Stone  Dress- 
ing.— Cost  of  Sandstone  Piers  for  Bridge. — Cost  of  Cutting 
Granite  for  a  Dam. — Cost  of  Cutting  Granite,  New  York 
City. — Cost  of  Quarrying,  Cutting  and  Laying  Granite. — 
Cost  of  Plug  Hole  Drilling  by  Hand. — Cost  of  Pneumatic 
Plug  Drilling. — Cost  of  Quarrying  Granite. — Cost  of  a 
Masonry  Arch  Bridge. — Cost  of  Centers  for  a  30-ft.  Arch. — 
Cost  of  Arch  Culverts  and  Abutments,  Erie  Canal. — Cost 
of  Lock  Masonry,  Erie  Canal. — Cost  of  Sweetwater  Dam. — 
Cost  of  a  Granite  Dam,  Wyoming. — Cost  of  Masonry,  New 
Croton  Dam. — Cost  of  a  Rubble  Dam. — Data  on  Laying 
Masonry  with  a  Cableway. — Cost  of  Masonry  and  Timber 
Crib  Dam. — Cost  of  Laying  Masonry,  Dunning' s  Dam. — 
Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Laying  a  Limestone  Wall. — Cost  of 
Masonry  Abutments. — Cost  of  Laying  Bridge  Pier  Masonry. 
— Cost  of  Sodom  Dam. — Cost  of  Dams  and  Locks,  Black 
Warrior  River. — Cost  of  Rock-Fill  Dams. — Cost  of  Cyclo- 
pean Masonry,  Cross-References. — Cost  of  Limestone  and 
Sandstone  Slope  Walls. — Cost  of  Granite  Slope  Wall. — 
Cost  of  Laying  a  Limestone  Slope  Wall.— Cost  of  Slope  Wall, 
Upper  White  River. — Cost  of  Riprap  on  River  Bank. — Cost 
of  Riprap  and  Brush  Mattress,  Cross-References. — Cost  of 
Riprap  in  a  Crib  Dam. — Cost  of  Riprap  in  Cribs. — Cost  of 
Riprap,  Stone,  Cross-References. — Cost  of  Cleaning  Ma- 
sonry with  Acid. — Cost  of  Excavating  Masonry. — Cost  of 
Pointing  Old  Bridge  Masonry. — Cost  of  Lining  Tunnel 
with  Masonry. — Cross-References  on  Masonry. 

SECTION    VI.— Concrete    and    Reinforced    Concrete    Construc- 
tion    530 

Definitions. — Magnitude  of  the  Subject  and  General  Dis- 
cussion.— Cost  of  Manufacturing  Cement. — Theory  of  the 
Quantity  of  Cement  in  Mortar  and  Concrete. — Size  and 
Weight  of  Barrels  of  Cement. — Effect  of  Size  of  Sand 
Grains  on  Voids. — Tables  for  Estimating  the  Cost  of  Con- 
crete and  for  Designing  Reinforced  Concrete  Beams  and 
Slabs. — Percentage  of  Water  in  Mortar. — Estimating  the 
Cost  of  Steel  in  Reinforced  Concrete. — Cost  of  Sand. — Cost 
of  Washing  Sand  in  Tank  Washer. — Cost  of  Washing  Sand 
with  a  Hose. — Washing  Sand  with  Ejectors. — Cost  of  Wash- 
ing Gravel. — Cost  of  Making  Concrete  by  Hand.— Unload- 
ing the  Materials  from  Cars. — Cost  of  Loading  the  Ma- 
terials.— Cost  of  Transporting  the  Materials. — Cost  of 
Mixing  the  Materials  by  Hand. — Cost  of  Loading  and 
Hauling  Concrete. — Cost  of  Dumping,  Spreading  and  Ram- 
ming.— Example  of  High  Cost  of  Tamping. — Cost  of  Rolling 
and  Finishing  Concrete  Floors. — Cost  of  Superintendence. — 
Summary  of  Costs  of  Making  Concrete  by  Hand. — Cost  of 


CONTENTS  xv 

Mixing  Concrete  with  Machines. — Cost  of  Mixing  with  a 
Gravity  Mixer. — Cost  of  Forms. — Cost  of  Fortification 
Work,  California. — Cost  of  Fortification  Work. — Cost  of 
Breakwater,  Buffalo. — Cost  of  Locks,  Upper  White  River. — 
Cost  of  Locks,  Coosa  River.: — Cost  of  Locks,  Cascade  Canal. 
— Cost  of  Locks,  Illinois  and  Mississippi  Canal. — Labor 
Cost  of  Retaining  Walls. — Cost  of  Retaining  Walls,  Chicago 
Canal. — Cost  of  Retaining  Wall. — Cost  of  Retaining  Walls, 
References. — Cost  of  Filling  Pier  Cylinders  with  Concrete. 
— Cost  of  Harbor  Pier,  Wisconsin. — Rubble  Concrete 
Data. — Cost  of  the  Boonton  Dam,  Cyclopean  Masonry. — 
Some  English  Data  on  Rubble  Concrete. — Cost  of  a  Rubble 
Concrete  Abutment. — Cost  of  a  Rubble  Concrete  Dam, 
Central  States. — Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Fence  Posts. — 
Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Telephone  Poles. — Cost  of 
Poles. — Bills  of  Materials  and  Cost  of  Poles. — Cost  of  Re- 
inforced Concrete  Piles  for  a  Building. — Cost  of  Piles  for 
an  Ocean  Pier. — Cost  of  Pile  Dike. — Cost  of  Raymond  Piles. 
— Cost  of  Rolled  Concrete  Piles. — Cost  of  Simplex  Piles. — 
Cost  of  Concrete  Oil  Tank. — Cost  of  Concrete  Tanks, 
References. — Cost  of  Small  Cement  Pipes. — Cost  of  Cement 
and  Concrete  Pipes  and  Sewers,  Cross-References. — Cost 
of  a  Band  Stand. — Cost  of  Sylvester  Wash  and  Sylvester 
Mortar. — Cost  of  Waterproofing  with  Tar  Felt  and 
Asphalt. — Cost  of  Waterproofing  Batteries  with  Tar  and 
Sand. — Cost  of  Waterproofing  Bridge  Floors. — Cost  of 
Waterproofing,  Cross-References. — Cost  of  Removing  Efflo- 
rescence with  Acid. — Cost  of  Bush-Hammering  Concrete. — 
Cross-References  and  References  on  Concrete. 

SECTION  VII.— Water   Works 645. 

Definitions. — Cost  of  Complete  Water  Works  Systems. — 
Average  Cost  of  Constructing  and  Operating  Water  Works 
in  Massachusetts. — Prices  of  Cast-Iron  Pipe. — Weight  of 
Cast-Iron  Pipe. — Lead  for  Joints. — Items  of  Cost  of  Pipe 
Laying  and  Materials. — Cost  of  Loading  and  Hauling  Cast- 
iron  Pipe. — Trenches. — Cost  of  Digging  a  36-Mile  Trench 
with  a  Machine. — Trenching  in  Quicksand,  Using  a  Ma- 
chine.— Cost  of  Trenching,  Corning,  N.  Y. — Cost  of  Trench- 
ing, Great  Falls,  Mont. — Cost  of  Trenching,  Astoria,  Ore. — 
Cost  of  Trenching,  Hilburn,  N.  Y. — Cost  of  Pipe  Laying, 
Providence,  R.  I. — Cost  of  Laying  107,877  Ft.  of  Mains, 
Cleveland,  O. — Cost  of  Pipe  Laid,  Boston. — Comparative 
Cost  of  Pipe  Laying  in  New  England  Cities. — Cost  of  Pipe 
Laying  and  Placing  Hydrants,  Atlantic  City.— Cost  of 
Laying  Pipe,  Pennsylvania. — Cost  of  Pipe  Laid,  Alliance, 
O. — Cost  of  Pipe  Laid  and  Service  Connections,  Porter- 
ville,  Cal. — An  Unusually  Expensive  Piece  of  Work. — Cost 
of  a  Pipe  Line,  Ohio. — Cost  of  Main  and  Service  Pipes 
Laid  in  a  Southern  City. — Cost  of  Laying  Wrought-Iron 
Pipe,  Maryland. — Cost  of  Taking  Up  an  Old  Pipe  Line. — 


xvi  CONTENTS 

Cost  of  Constructing  and  Laying  Cement  Lined  Pipe, 
Plymouth,  Mass.,  and  Portland,  Me. — Cost  of  Lining  Iron 
Service  Pipes  with  Cement. — Cost  of  Setting  Meters  and 
Laying  Service  Pipes. — Cost  of  Meters  and  Setting,  Cleve- 
land, O. — Cost  of  Setting  Meters  and  Maintenance, 
Rochester,  N.  Y. — Cost  of  Operating  and  Maintaining  Meters, 
Reading,  Pa. — Cost  of  Placing  Hydrants,  Chicago. — Cost 
of  Concrete  Vaults  for  Valves. — Cost  of  Dipping  Pipes. — 
Cost  of  Cleaning  Water  Pipes,  Pittsburg,  Pa. — Cost  of 
Cleaning  Pipes,  St.  John,  N.  B. — Cost  of  Cleaning  Pipe, 
Boston. — Cost  of  Hydrant  Maintenance  in  Winter. — Cost  of 
Thawing  Water  Pipes  by  Electricity. — Cost  of  Stop  Cock 
Box  Repairs,  Etc. — Cost  of  Subaqueous  Pipe  Laying. — Cost 
of  Laying  a  Submerged  Pipe  Across  Deal  Lake,  N.  J. — 
Cost  of  Laying  Pipe  Across  the  Susquehanna. — Cost  of 
Laying  a  Submerged  Pipe,  New  Jersey  to  Ellis  Island. — 
Cost  of  Submerged  Pipe  Laying,  Massachusetts. — Cost  of 
Laying  Submerged  Pipe,  Vancouver. — Cost  of  Laying  Pipe 
Across  the  Willamette  River. — Cost  of  a  Wood  Stave  Pipe 
Line,  Denver. — Cost  of  Wood  Stave  Pipe  Line,  Astoria, 
Ore. — Estimated  Cost  of  Wood  Stave  Pipe. — Cost  of  Wood 
Stave  Pipe  Line,  Atlantic  City. — Labor  on  Wood  Stave 
Pipe,  Ogden,  Utah. — Labor  on  Wood  Stave  Pipe,  Lynch- 
burg. — Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Conduit. — Cost  of  a 
Brick  Conduit — Weight  of  Steel  Stand  Pipes. — Cost  of  a 
Standpipe,  Quincy,  7  lass. — Cost  of  Steel  Standpipe  Encased 
in  Brick. — Brick  Casing  Around  Standpipe. — Cost  of  a 
Steel  Tank  and  Tower,  Ames,  la. — Cost  of  Steel  Tank  and 
Tower,  Porterville,  Cal. — Cost  of  Steel  Tank  and  Tower, 
Fairhaven,  Mass. — Cost  of  Steel  Tank  and  Tower,  Provi- 
dence, R.  I. — Cost  of  Scraping  and  Painting  a  Stand  Pipe. — 
Weight  of  Wooden  Tank  and  Steel  Tower. — Cost  of  a 
Wooden  Tank,  La  Salle,  111. — Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete 
Standpipe,  Attleborough,  Mass. — Materials  in  a  Reinforced 
Concrete  Standpipe. — Cost  of  a  12-in.  Well,  Portersville, 
Cal. — Relative  Cost  of  Water  Works  and  Filters. — Cost 
of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Ashland,  Wis. — Cost  of  Filter,  Ber- 
wyn,  Pa. — Cost  of  Filter,  Nyack,  N.  T. — Cost  of  Filter  and 
Filtering,  Superior,  Wis. — Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering, 
Washington,  D.  C. — Cost  of  Filtering  at  Washington,  Al- 
bany and  Philadelphia. — Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering, 
Albany,  N.  T. — Cost  of  Groined  Arches  and  Forms  on  the 
Albany  Filter  Plant. — Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Law- 
rence, Mass. — Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Mt.  Vernon, 
N.  T. — Cost  of  Filtering,  Poughkeepsie. — Cost  of  Ice  Re- 
moval from  Filters. — Estimated  Cost  of  Filters  and  Filter- 
ing, Cincinnati,  O. — Cost  of  Filtering  and  Ice  Removal. 
Reading,  Pa. — Cost  of  Filtering,  Brooklyn,  N.  T. — Out- 
put of  Sand  Washers. — Cost  of  Filter,  Lambertville,  N.  J. — 
Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Roof  for  Filter,  Indianapolis. 
—Cost  of  Seven  Mechanical  Filters. — Cost  of  Mechanical 


CONTENTS  xvii 

Filter,  Danville,  111. — Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter  and  Filter- 
ing, Norfolk,  Va. — Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter  and  Filtering, 
Wilkes-Barre,  Pa. — Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter,  Asbury 
Park,  N.  J. — Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter  and  Filtering,  El- 
mira,  N.  Y. — Cost  of  Water  Softening. — Cost  of  Concrete, 
Asphalt  and  Brick  Lining  of  Reservoir. — Cost  of  Lining  a 
Reservoir  with  Asphalt. — Cost  of  Lining  a  Reser- 
voir with  Concrete. — Cost  of  Concrete  Reservoir  Floor, 
Pittsburg. — Cost  of  Reservoir,  Forbes  Hill,  Mass. — 
Cost  of  Concrete  Lining  and  Plastering,  Forbes  Hill  Reser- 
voir.— Cost  of  Concrete  Lined  Reservoir,  Clinton,  111. — 
Cost  of  Covered  Reservoirs  of  Various  Sizes. — Cost  of  Small 
Covered  Reservoir,  Portersville,  Gal. — Cost  of  a  Covered  Re- 
inforced Concrete  Reservoir,  Fort  Meade,  S.  D. — Cost  of 
Concrete  Reservoir,  Pomona,  Cal. — Cost  of  Storage  Reser- 
voir, Hagerstown,  Md. — Cost  of  a  Wooden  Covering  for 
Reservoir,  Quincy,  111. — Cost  of  a  Concrete  Core  Wall. — 
Cost  6f  Puddle. — Cost  of  Sheeting  and  Bracing  a  Small 
Circular  Reservoir. — Cost  of  Dams  Per  Million  Feet  of 
Water  Stored. — Cross-References  on  Dams  and  Reser- 
voirs.— Water  Works  Valuation  and  Plant  Depreciation. — 
Going  Value  of  Water  Works. — Life  of  Cast-Iron  Pipe. — 
Life  of  Wrought-Iron  Pipe. — Life  of  Pipe,  St.  John,  N.  B. — 
The  Life  of  Pipe  and  Appraisal  of  Syracuse  Water 
Works. — Estimated  Depreciation  of  Water  Pipe,  Los 
Angeles,  Cal. 

SECTION  VIII.— Sewers 80fl 

General  Considerations. — Cost  of  Pumping  Water  from 
Trenches. — Cost  of  Trenching  with  Trench  Excavators. — Cost 
of  Excavation  with  Trench  Machines. — Cost  of  Trench  Ex- 
cavation in  Massachusetts,  Using  a  Carson  Machine. — Cost 
of  Excavating  with  a  Potter  Trench  Machine. — Cost  of 
Excavating  with  a  Trench  Machine. — Cost  of  Trenching 
by  Cableways.— Cost  of  Sewer  Trench  and  Backfilling. — 
Cost  of  Excavating  Trench  with  Orange  Peel  Bucket. — 
Cost  of  Sewer  Trenching  Using  a  Derrick. — Sizes  and  Prices 
of  Sewer  Pipe. — Cement  Required  for  Sewer  Pipe  Joints. — 
Cost  of  Laying  Sewer  Pipe. — Diagram  Giving  Contract 
Prices  of  Sewers. — Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers,  Atlantic,  la. — 
Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers,  Centerville,  la. — Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers, 
Laurel,  Miss. — Estimated  Cost  o'f  Pipe  Sewers. — Cost  of 
Pipe  Sewer  in  Quicksand. — Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers  and  Man- 
holes, Oskaloosa,  la. — Cost  of  Two  Pipe  Sewers. — Cost  of 
Pipe  Sewer,  Cordele,  Ga. — Cost  of  Pipe  Sewer,  Me- 
nasha,  Wis. — Cost  of  Pipe  Sewer,  Ithaca,  N.  Y. — 
Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers,  Toronto. — Brick  Sewer  Data. — 
Cost  of  Large  Brick  Sewers,  Denver. — Cost  of  an  Egg- 
Shaped  Sewer,  Springfield,  Mass. — Cost  of  a  Large  Brick 
Sewer,  Gary,  Ind. — Cost  of  a  Brick  Sewer  in  Water- 
Soaked  Land,  Gary,  Ind. — Cost  of  66-in.  Brick  Sewer, 


xvtii  CONTENTS 

Gary,  Ind. — Cost  of  Rock  Excavation  in  Trenches,  St. 
Louis. — Cost  of  Pipe  and  Brick  Sewers,  St.  Louis. — Cost 
of  a  Brick  Sewer,  Including  Tunneling  in  Earth  and  Rock, 
St.  Louis. — Cost  of  Pipe  and  Brick  Sewers  and  Manholes, 
St.  Louis. — Cost  of  a  Brick  Sewer  and  Tunneling,  Syra- 
cuse.— Cost  of  a  Sewer  Tunnel,  Using  a  Hydraulic  Shield, 
Chicago. — Cost  of  a  Sewer  Tunnel,  Using  a  Hydraulic 
Shield,  Cleveland. — Cost  of  a  Sewer  in  Tunnel,  Cleveland. 
— Labor  Cost  of  a  Large  Brick  Sewer,  Chicago. — Cost  of 
a  Concrete  and  Brick  Sewer. — Cost  of  a  Concrete  Sewer. — 
Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer,  Cleveland. — Cost  of 
Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer,  Wilmington,  Del. — Cost  of  Re- 
inforced Concrete  Sewer,  Kalamazoo,  Mich.— Cost  of  Rein- 
forced Concrete  Sewer,  South  Bend,  Ind. — Cost  of  a  Large 
Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer,  St.  Louis. — Cost  of  a  Reinforced 
Concrete  Sewer. — Cost  of  Making  Blocks  for  a  Concrete 
Sewer. — Cost  of  Concrete  Sewer  Blocks. — Cost  of  Concrete 
Block  Manholes. — Diagram  for  Estimating  Cost  of  Man- 
holes.— A  Device  for  Building  Brick  Manholes. — Cost  of 
a  Concrete  Manhole. — Cost  of  Brick  Manholes. — Cost  of 
Brick  Manhole,  Flush  Tank  and  Laying  Pipe  Sewer. — Cost 
of  Making  Cement  Pipe. — Cost  of  Cement  Pipe  Sewer 
(Egg-Shaped)  and  Manholes,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. — Cost  of 
Constructing  Cement  Pipe  Sewer  in  Place. — Cost  of  Clean- 
ing a  Large  Brick  Sewer. — Cost  of  Cleaning  Sewers  and 
Catch  Basins. — Cost  of  Sewage  Purification,  Providence, 
R.  I. — Cost  of  Sewage  Disposal,  6  Cities. — Estimated  Cost 
of  Sewage  Filtering. — Cost  of  Sewage  Filters,  Pawtucket, 
R.  I. — Cost  of  Sewage  Filters,  Waterloo,  Ont. — Cost  of  a 
Sewage  Filter  and  Septic  Tank,  with  Costs  of  Operation. — 
Cost  of  Cleaning  Sewers  and  Catch  Basins. — Cost  of 
Flushing  Sewers. 

SECTION  IX.— Timberwork 945 

Definitions. — Importance  of  Timberwork.-*-Measurement 
of  Timberwork. — Cubic  Contents  and  Weight  of  Piles  and 
Poles. — Cost  of  Manufacturing  Lumber. — Prices  of  Yellow 
Pine  for  14  Years. — Life  of  Trestle  and  Bridge  Timbers. — 
Life  of  Treated  and  Untreated  Fence  Posts. — Life  of  Creo- 
soted  Ties. — Cost  of  Treating  Timber,  Cross-References. — 
Processes  for  Treatment  of  Timber  and  Costs. — Cost  of 
Creosoting  and  Life  of  Creosoted  Timber. — Cost  of  Creo- 
soting  Ties. — Cost  of  a  Zinc  Chloride  Treating  Plant. — Ties 
Treated  with  Crude  Asphaltic  Oil. — General  Data  on  the 
Cost  of  Framing  and  Erecting  Timber. — Cost  of  Loading 
and  Hauling  Timber. — Sawing,  Boring  and  Adzing. — Formu- 
las for  Quantity  of  Materials  in  Trestles. — Methods  and 
Cost  of  Building  a  Railway  Trestle. — Cost  of  a  Timber 
Viaduct. — Cost  of  Wagon  Road  Trestles. — Cost  of  Trestles, 
Cross-References. — Estimated  Prices  of  Howe  Truss 
Bridges. — Cost  of  160-ft.  Howe  Truss  Bridge  and  Cribs. — 


CONTENTS  xix 

Cost  of  Log  Culverts. — Materials  Required  for  Timber 
Box  Culverts. — Cost  of  a  Wooden  Reservoir  Roof 
on  Iron  Posts. — Cost  of  Crib  Dam. — Cost  of  Timber .  Cribs 
for  Dams,  Etc. — Cost  of  Four  Caissons. — Cost  of  Two 
Small  Scows. — Cost  of  a  Semi-Circular  Flume. — Cost  of 
a  Flume. — Cost  of  Lock  Gates. — Cost  of  a  Railway  Box  Car. 
— Cost  of  Making  Bodies  for  Dump  Cars. — Cost  of  Mak- 
ing Tool  Boxes. — Cost  of  Plank  Roads. — Piles. — The 
Steam  Hammer  vs.  the  Drop  Hammer. — Cost  of  Making 
Piles. — Life  of  Pile  Driver  Rope. — Cost  of  Driving  Piles 
with  a  Horse  Driver. — Cost  of  Driving  Foundation  Piles  for 
a  Building. — Construction  and  Cost  of  a  Small  Pile  Driver. 
— Cost  of  Driving  Piles  for  Wagon  Road  Trestles. — Cost 
of  Driving  Piles  for  Trestle  Renewals. — Cost  of  Driving 
Piles  for  a  Trestle,  N.  P.  Ry.— Cost  of  Pile  Driving,  O.  & 
S.  L.  Ry.— Cost  of  Pile  Driving,  C.  &  E.  I.  Ry.— The  Record 
for  Rapid  Pile  Driving  on  the  O.  &  M.  R.  R. — Cost  of  Pile 
Trestle,  Sheet  Piles,  Etc. — Cost  of  a  Pile  Docking. — Data 
on  Driving  Plumb  and  Batter  Piles,  N.  Y.  Docks. — Cost  of 
Pulling  Piles,  Driving  Piles  and  Timberwork. — Cost  of 
Driving  and  Sawing  Off  Piles. — Data  on  Driving  with  a 
Steam  Hammer  and  Sawing  Off  Piles. — Cost  of  Driving 
Piles  for  a  Swing  Bridge. — Cost  of  Sawing  Off  42-ft.  Piles 
Under  Water. — Data  on  Sawing  Off  Burlington  Bridge 
Pier  Piles. — Cost  of  Pulling  and  Driving  Piles  for  a  Guard 
Pier. — Cost  of  Driving  Foundation  Piles  and  Sheet  Piles. 
— Cost  of  Pulling  Piles. — Cost  of  Blasting  Piles. — Cost  of 
Driving  and  Pulling  Test  Piles. — Cost  of  Driving  Piles  for 
Shore  Protection. — Cost  of  Driving  Wak<3field  Sheet  Piles. — 
Cost  of  Piling,  Cross-References. — Estimating  Cost  of 
Brush  Revetment.— Cost  of  Brush  Mattress  and  Slope  Wall, 
Missouri  River. — Cost  of  Brush  Mattress  and  Revetment, 
Mississippi  River. — Cost  of  Brush  Revetment  Ballasted 
with  Concrete. — Cost  of  Brush  Mattresses.— Cost  of  Mat- 
tress and  Slope  Wall,  M.  K.  &  T.  Ry,— Cost  of  Brush 
Mattresses  and  Dikes. — Cost  of  Clearing  Land. — Design  of 
Stump  Pullers. — Cost  of  Removing  Stumps. — Cost  of  Clear- 
ing and  Grubbing,  Ohio. — Cost  of  Blasting  3,500  Stumps. — 
Cost  of  Blasting  1,100  Stumps. — Cost  of  Clearing  and  Grub- 
bing by  Blasting. — Cost  of  Clearing  and  Grubbing  for  a 
Railway. — Cost  of  Transporting  Logs  by  River  Driving  and 
by  Trains. — Cost  of  Cordwood  and  Cost  of  a  Wire  Rope 
Tramway. — Cost  of  Planting  Trees,  Washington,  D.  C. — 
Cost  of  Tree  Planting,  Mass. — Cost  of  Digging  Holes  and 
Planting  Trees  and  Shrubs. 

SECTION  X. — Buildings 1069 

Cost  of  Items  of  Buildings  by  Percentages. — Cost  of 
Buildings  Per  Cu.  Ft. — Cost  of  Miscellaneous  Buildings. — 
Cost  of  Concrete  Buildings. — Cubic  Foot  Costs  of  Reinforced 
Concrete  Buildings. — Cost  of  Mill  Buildings. — Estimating 


xx  CONTENTS 

Quantity  of  Lumber. — Cost  of  Timberwork  in  Different 
Kinds  of  Buildings. — Cost  of  Laying  and  Smoothing  Floors. 
— Cost  of  Placing  Ceiling,  Wainscoting  and  Siding. — Cost  of 
Shingling. — Cost  of  Laying  Base  Boards. — Cost  of  Placing 
Doors,  Windows  and  Blinds. — Cost  of  Making  Stairs. — Cost 
of  Tin  Roofing. — Building  Papers  and  Felts. — Cost  of 
Gravel  Roofs. — Cost  of  Slate  Roofs. — Brick  Masonry 
Data. — Cost  of  Laying  Brick. — Cost  of  Mortar. — Cost  of 
Brickwork  in  a  Shop. — Cost  of  Brickwork  in  Five  Manufac- 
turing Buildings. — Cost  of  Brick  Chimneys. — Cost  of  High 
Brick  Stacks. — Cost  of  Brickwork,  Cross-References. — Cost 
of  Rubble  Walls. — Cost  of  Ashlar. — Cost  of  Cut 
Stone  Work. — Cost  of  Wood  Lathing. — Cost  of  Metal 
Lathing. — Cost  of  Plaster. — Cost  of  Placing  Tile  Fire- 
Proofing. — Cost  of  Terra  Cotta  Brick  Fireproofing. — 
— Cost  of  Ornamental  Terra  Cotta  Work. — Cost  of 
Combined  Concrete  and  Tile  Floors. — Cost  of  Combination 
Concrete  and  Tile  Floors  in  Three  Buildings. — Cost  of  Bitu- 
minous Concrete  for  a  Mill  Floor. — Cost  of  Passenger  Sta- 
tions.— Cost  of  Four  Frame  Depots. — Cost  of  57  Frame 
Depots. — Cost  of  5  Frame  Section  Houses. — Cost  of  Black- 
smith Shop,  Barn  and  Telegraph  Office. — Cost  of  40  Hand 
Car  Houses. — Cost  of  Six  Tool  Houses. — Capacity  and  Cost 
of  Ice  Houses. — Cost  of  11  Ice  Houses. — Cost  of  Car 
Shops. — Cost  of  Engine  Roundhouses. — Cost  of  Roundhouse, 
Coaling  Station,  Turntable,  Etc. — Cost  of  a  Brick  and  Steel 
Building. — Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Buildings. — Cost  of 
Reinforced  Concrete  Building  Construction. — Cost  of  Re- 
inforced Concrete  Factory. — Cost  of  a  House  of  Separately 
Molded  Concrete  Members. — Cost  of  Two  Reinforced  Con- 
crete Buildings. — Cost  of  Metal  Forms  for  Concrete  Build- 
ings.— Cost  of  Concrete  Buildings,  References. — Cost  of 
Moving  a  Frame  Dwelling. — References  on  Buildings. 

SECTION  XI.— Railways 1174 

Cross-References  on  Cost  of  Grading. — Cross-References 
on  Bridges,  Culverts  and  Buildings. — Cross-References  on 
Telegraphs,  Fences,  Etc. — Cost  0*  Transporting  Men,  Tools 
and  Supplies  on  Railroads  for  Grading. — Cost  of  Three 
Short  Single  Track  Tunnels. — Cost  of  the  Stampede  Tun- 
nel.— Cost  of  the  Stampede  Tunnel  Lining. — Wabash  R.  R. 
Tunnel  Costs. — Cost  of  Mount  Wood  and  Top  Mill  Tun- 
nels.— Cost  of  Hand  Driven  Tunnel,  B.  &  O. — Cost  of  the 
Busk  Tunnel. — Cost  of  a  Double  Track  Tunnel,  N.  Y. 
Central. — Cost  of  Tunnels,  Alaska  Central  Ry. — Cost  of  the 
New  Raton  Tunnel. — Cost  of  Lining  the  Mullan  Tunnel. — 
Cost  of  Lining  a  1,000-ft.  Tunnel. — Cost  of  Brick  and  Stone 
Lining. — Weights  and  Prices  of  Rails. — Prices  of  Rails 
Since  1876. — Cost  of  Track  Laying. — Cost  of  Track  Laying, 
M.  St.  P.  &  S.  M.— Cost  of  Track  Laying,  50-lb.  Rails.— 
Cost  of  Track  Laying,  A.  T.  &  S.  P. — Cost  of  Track  Lay- 


CONTENTS  xxi 

ing  with  Machines. — Cost  of  Laying  Narrow  Gage  Track. — 
A  Method  of  Unloading  Rails. — Cost  of  Renewing  Rails, 
C.  C.  C.  &  St.  L. — Rail  Relaying  Gangs. — Cost  of  Relaying 
Rails. — Cost  of  Laying  Side  Tracks  and  Switches. — Esti- 
mated Cost  of  Growing  Tie  Timber. — A  Cheap  Way  of 
Loading  Ties. — Cost  of  Burnettizing  Timber  and  Ties. — 
Cost  of  Burnettizing  Ties,  S.  P.  Ry. — Cost  of  Creosoting 
Piles  and  Ties. — Cost  of  Treating  Ties  with  Zinc  Chloride 
and  Creosote,  Galesburg,  111. — Labor  Cost  of  Renewing  Ties. 
Life  of  Treated  Ties. — Estimated  Life  of  Ties. — Life  of  Ties 
as  Affected  by  Weight  of  Rail. — Prices  of  Ties  and  Labor 
Cost  of  Renewals. — Average  Price  of  Ties  in  America. — 
Cost  of  Gravel  Ballast. — Cost  of  Gravel  and  Rock  Ballast- 
ing Old  Tracks. — Cost  of  Gravel  Ballasting. — Cost  of  Ce- 
mented Gravel  Ballast. — Cost  of  Washing  Gravel, — Cost 
of  Ballasting,  Using  Dump  Cars. — Cost  of  Rock  Ballast. — 
Prices  of  Frogs,  Crossings,  Etc. — Cost  of  Track  Scales. — 
Cost  of  Water  Tanks. — Cost  of  Track  Tank. — Turntable 
Construction  and  Costs. — Cost  of  Turntables. — Cost  of  Snow 
Sheds. — Cost  of  Snow  Fences. — Cost  of  Mail  Cranes. — 
Definitions  of  "Mile  of  Railway." — Average  Cost  of  Rail- 
ways in  America. — Cost  of  Railway  Lines. — Cost  of  a 
Mining  Railway. — Cost  of  a  Logging  Railway. — Cost  of  a 
Branch  Line,  Texas. — Cost  of  a  Cheap  Railway,  Georgia. — 
Report  of  H.  P.  Gillette  to  the  Washington  R.  R.  Com- 
mission on  the  Valuation  of  the  Railways  of  Washington. — 
Cost  of  the  Great  Northern  Ry.  in  the  State  of  Washing- 
ton.—Cost  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  (1,645  Miles)  in 
the  State  of  Washington. — Cost  of  the  O.  R.  &  N.  (500 
Miles)  in  the  State  of  Washington. — Appraised  Value  of 
the  Railways  of  Wisconsin. — Cost  Per  Mile  of  Railways 
in  Wisconsin  and  Michigan. — Appraised  Value  of  the  Rail- 
ways of  Minnesota. — Cost  of  1,100  Miles  of  the  C.,  M.  & 
St.  P.  in  South  Dakota. — Prices  Used  in  Estimating  the 
Cost  of  Railways  in  Texas. — Itemized  Cost  of  the  Northern 
Pacific  Ry.  System  as  Estimated  by  Its  Chief  Engineer. — 
Itemized  Cost  of  the  Great  Northern  Ry.  System  as  Esti- 
mated by  Its  Chief  Engineer. — Contract  Prices  for  Railway 
Work  in  the  State  of  Washington. — Weight  and  Cost  of 
Steel  in  Brooklyn  Elevated  Railways. — Cost  of  Elevated 
Railways  in  New  York  City. — Cost  of  Tracklaying  and 
Erecting  Steel,  New  York  Elevated  Railways. — Cost  of 
Elevated  Railways,  Brooklyn  and  New  York. — Cost  of 
Foundations,  Boston  Elevated  Ry. — Cost  of  Elevated  Rail- 
way and  Subway,  Berlin. — Cost  of  Excavation,  New  York 
Subway. — Itemized  Cost  to  the  Contractors  for  Excavating, 
Concrete,  Steelwork,  Etc.,  New  York  Subway. — Prices  of 
Tools,  Machines  and  Supplies,  New  York  Subway. — Cost  of 
Excavating  a  Subway,  Brooklyn,  Long  Island  R.  R. — Cost 
of  Cable  Railways  in  Cities. — Cost  of  Constructing  and 
Operating  Cable  Railways,  Kansas  City. — Cost  of  a  Cable 


xxii  CONTENTS 

Railway  in  an  Eastern  City. — Cost  of  Operating  Cable 
Railways,  Chicago. — Cost  of  Brickwork  in  Vaults  of  a  Cable 
Railway. — Cost  of  an  Inclined  Cable  Railway  for  Hand- 
ling Freight  Cars. — Coist  of  a  Rack  Railway,  Pike's  Peak. — 
Cost  of  Conduit  Electric  Street  Railways. — Cost  of  an  Elec- 
tric Railway,  Denver. — Cost  of  an  Electric  Railway,  Third 
Rail  Line. — Cost  of  Interurban  Trolley  Line. — Cost  of  Third 
Rail  and  Trolley  Lines  Compared. — Cost  of  Two  Electric 
Railways. — Cost  of  Steel  Railway  Track. — Comparative 
Cost  of  Street  Railway  Track  Built  with  Steel  and  with 
Wood  Ties. — Cost  of  Welding  Rails  by  Thermit  Process. — 
Cost  of  Electrically  Welding  3,087  Rails. — Cost  of  Erecting 
Trolley  Poles. — Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Trolley  and 
Transmission  Line  Poles. — First  Cost  and  Cost  of  Operat- 
ing a  Trolley  Line. — Cost  of  Power  Plants  for  Electric 
Railways.^ — Cost  of  Power  Plant  and  Equipment  of  an  Elec- 
tric Railway. — Cost  of  a  Street  Railway  Power  Plant  and 
Its  Operation. — Cost  of  Operating  Street  Railways. — 
Power  to  Operate  Street  Cars. — Cost  of  Operating  an 
Elevated  Railway. — Power  to  Operate  New  York  Elevated 
and  Surface  Cars. — Weight  and  Power  of  Motor  Cars. — Cost 
of  Maintenance  of  Motor  Cars. — Railway  Operating  Ex- 
penses, Etc. — Life  of  Rails  and  Cost  of  Renewals. — Curva- 
ture of  Rails. — Cost  of  Maintenance  of  Equipment  in 
America. — Cost  of  Maintenance  of  Equipment,  N.  P.  Ry. — 
Life  of  Railway  Cars  and  Locomotives  and  Cost  of  Repairs, 
S.  P.  Ry. — Percentage  of  Engines  Laid  Off  for  Repairs. — 
Percentage  of  Freight  Cars  Laid  Off  for  Repairs. — Price  of 
Locomotives. — Cost  of  Shop  Machinery. — Cost  of  Stopping 
Trains. — Cost  of  Handling  Locomotives  at  Terminals. 

SECTION    XII.— Bridges   and   Culverts 147J 

Weight  of  Steel  Bridges. — Weights  of  Steel  Bridges  for 
Highway,  Railway  and  Electric  Railway  Bridges. — Weights 
of  Standard  Bridges,  A.  T.  &  S.  F.  Ry. — Weights  of 
Standard  Bridges,  N.  P.  Ry. — Weights  of  Standard  Bridges, 
111.  Central  Ry. — Tyrrell's  Formulas  for  Weights  of  High- 
way, Railway  and  Electric  Railway  Bridges. — Weight  of 
a  465-ft.  Highway  Bridge.— Weight  of  a  4 06-ft.  Highway 
Bridge. — Weight  and  Cost  of  a  Highway  Bridge,  120-ft. 
Spans. — Weight  of  a  450-ft.  Highway  Swing  Bridge. — 
Weight  of  a  520-ft.  Double  Track  Railway  Swing  Bridge. 
— Weight  of  a  450-ft  Double  Track  Swing  Bridge. — Weight 
of  a  438-ft.  Single  Track  Swing  Bridge.— Weight  and  Cost 
of  a  334-ft.  Four  Track  Swing  Bridge. — Weight  of  a  231-ft. 
Single  Track  Swing  Bridge. — Weight  of  a  216-ft.  Double 
Track  Swing  Bridge. — Weight  and  Cost  of  a  1,504-ft.  Canti- 
lever Double  Track  Bridge. — Weight  and  Cost  of  a  1,296-ft 
Cantilever  Double  Track  Bridge. — Weight  and  Cost  of  a 
2,750-ft.  Cantilever  Double  Track  Bridge. — Weight  of  a 
1,380-ft.  Cantilever  Highway  Bridge. — Weight  and  Cost  of 


CONTENTS  xxiii 

Scherzer  Highway  and  Railway  Lift  Bridges.— Cost  of 
Page  Highway  and  Railway  Lift  Bridges. — Cost  of  Ericson 
Trunnion  Bascule  Lift  Bridges. — Weight  of  an  840-ft.  Span 
Arch  Bridge.— Weight  and  Cost  of  a  195-ft.  Arch  High- 
way Bridge. — Weight  of  a  207-ft.  Arch  Railway  Bridge. — 
Weight  and  Cost  of  a  440-ft.  Arch  Railway  Bridge. — Cost  of 
an  Arch  Highway  Bridge. — Weight  of  the  Burlington 
Bridge,  C.  B.  &  Q.  Ry.— Weight  of  a  195-ft.  Double  Track 
Swing  Bridge. — Weight  of  a  583-ft.  Span  Railway  Bridge 
and  of  a  323-ft.  Swing  Bridge.— Weight  of  a  1,024-ft. 
Cantilever  Highway  Bridge. — Estimating  Cost  of  Steel 
Bridge  Erection. — Cost  per  Lin.  Ft.  and  Per  Sq.  Ft. — Most 
Economical  Span. — Life  of  Steel  Railway  Bridges. — Amount 
of  Work  Done  Per  Man  in  a  Large  Bridge  Works. — Cost 
of  Erecting  Bridges,  A.  T.  &  S.  F.  Ry. — Falsework  for  a 
Railway  Bridge. — Cost  of  a  Steel  Railway  Bridge  and 
Substructure. — Cost  of  a  Steel  Railway  Bridge  of  155-ft. 
Span. — Cost  of  a  Steel  Railway  Bridge  of  180-ft.  Span. — Cost 
of  Two  Steel  Bridges  of  180-ft.  Span  and  One  Plate  Lattice 
Girder  of  100-ft.  Span. — Cost  of  Erecting  Pratt  Truss 
Bridge. — Cost  of  Three  Plate  Girder  Bridges,  10  Spans. — Cost 
of  a  Plate  Girder  Railway  Bridge  with  Concrete  Piers. — 
Cost  of  Erecting  Plate  Girder  Bridge. — Cost  of  Bridge  and 
Abutments. — Cost  of  Plate  Girder  Bridge  with  Concrete 
Piers. — Cost  of  Erecting  a  236-ft.  Draw  Bridge. — Cost  of 
Howe  Truss  Bridges,  Cross-References. — Cost  of  a  150-ft. 
Howe  Truss  Railway  Bridge. — Cost  of  Two  Howe  Trjiss 
Bridges,  120-ft.  and  130-ft.  Spans.— Cost  of  Six  Crib  Piers, 
Three  Howe  Truss  Spans  and  One  Steel  Draw  Span. — 
Cost  of  the  Frazer  River  Bridge. — Estimates  of  the  Cost  of 
Combination  and  All-Steel  Highway  Bridges. — Cost  of  a 
300-ft.  Highway  Draw  Bridge. — Cost  of  a  Steel  Arch  High- 
way Bridge. — Estimated  Cost  of  a  Cantilever  and  of  a 
Bridge. — Cost  of  Three  Plate  Girder  Bridges,  10  Spans.— 
Cost  Brooklyn  Suspension  Bridge. — Cost  of  the  Williamsburg 
Suspension  Bridge. — Cost  of  Caisson  Foundations  for  the 
Williamsburg  Bridge. — Cost  of  Erecting  Towers  and  End 
Spans  of  the  Williamsburg  Bridge. — Cost  of  the  Anchorage 
of  the  Williamsburg  Bridge. — Labor  Cost  of  the  Founda- 
tions of  the  City  Island  Bridge,  New  York. — Cost  of  a 
Bridge  Foundation  Excavation  and  Cofferdam. — Cost  of 
Stone  Masonry  Bridge  Piers  and  Abutments. — Labor  Cost 
of  a  Bridge  Abutment. — Cost  of  Concrete  Foundations  for 
a  Railway  Bridge. — Cost  of  a  Cofferdam  and  of  a  Concrete 
Pier  on  Piles. — Cost  of  a  Pneimiatic  Caisson  and  Masonry 
Bridge  Pier. — Cost  of  Two  Caissons  and  Bridge  Piers. — 
Cost  of  a  Caisson,  Arizona. — Cost  of  a  Caisson,  Tennessee. — 
Materials  for  a  Caisson. — Cost  of  Erecting  Three  Steel 
Viaducts  and  a  New  Formula  for  Computing  the  Weight  of 
Viaducts. — Cost  of  the  Pecos  Viaduct — Cost  of  the  Marent 
Viaduct. — Cost  of  the  Old  Kinzua  '"laduct. — Cost  of  the 


xxiv  CONTENTS 

New  Kinzua  Viaduct.— Weight  of  a  Steel  Viaduct— Data 
on  Riveting  a  Viaduct. — Cost  of  Concrete  Pedestals  for  a 
Steel  Viaduct. — Cost  of  Abutments  and  Pedestal  Piers, 
Lonesome  Valley  Viaduct. — Cost  of  Paint. — Weight  and 
Surface  Area  of  Steel  Bridges. — Cost  of  Painting  a  Howe 
Truss  Bridge. — Cost  of  Painting  6  Railway  Bridges. — Cost 
of  Painting  6  Railway  Bridges  and  2  Viaducts. — Cost  of 
Painting  50  Plate  Girder  Bridges. — Cost  of  Cleaning  and 
Painting  10  Bridges. — Cost  of  Painting  48  Bridges  and  2 
Viaducts. — Cost  of  Cleaning  and  Painting  4  Bridges,  St. 
Louis. — Cost  of  Painting  2  Bridges. — Cost  of  Painting 
Plate  Girders,  Truss  Bridges  and  Trestles. — Cost  of  Paint- 
ing, Cross-References. — Cost  of  Bridge  Abutments. — Data 
on  32  Concrete  and  Masonry  Highway,  Railway  and  Elec- 
tric Railway  Bridges,  Including  Yardage,  Cost,  Etc. — Di- 
mensions and  Cost  of  45  Concrete  Arch  Bridges. — Cost  of 
a  Reinforced  Concrete  Arch  Bridge. — Cost  of  Three 
Reinforced  Concrete  Bridges. — Cost  of  Small  Rein- 
forced Concrete  Highway  Bridges. — Cost  of  Mixing 
and  Placing  Concrete  for  an  Arch  Bridge. — Cost 
of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Arch  Bridge. — Cost  of  a 
Concrete  Ribbed  Arch  Bridge. — Cost  of  Centers  of  a  233-ft. 
Arch. — Materials  for  Centers  of  a  50-ft.  Arch. — Data  on  a 
Concrete  Viaduct. — Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Trestle. — 
Yardage  in  Concrete  Culverts. — Cost  of  Reinforced  Con- 
crete Culvert. — Cost  of  6  Arch  Culverts  and  6  Bridge 
Abutments. — Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Culvert. — Cost 
of  a  Stone  Arch  Culvert. — Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete 
Subways. — Cost  of  a  Masonry  Box  Culvert. — Cost  of  Con- 
crete Culvert  Pipe. — Cost  of  Placing  Cast-Iron  Pipe  Cul- 
verts.— Cost  of  a  Corrugated  Metal  Culvert. — Cost  of  Tear- 
ing Down  a  Small  Bridge. — Cost  of  Moving  a  6 5 -ft.  Bridge. 

SECTION  XIIL— Steel  and  Iron  Construction 171? 

Need  of  More  Printed  Data. — Cross-References. — Cost 
of  Pneumatic  Riveting. — Pneumatic  and  Hand  Riveting. — 
Cost  of  Erecting  Steel  in  New  York  Subway. — Weight  of 
the  Eiffel  Tower. — Cost  of  Gas  Pipe  Hand  Railing. — Cost 
of  Erecting  a  160-Ft.  Steel  Stack. — Cost  of  Iron  Work. — 
Cost  of  Shop  Drawings  for  Steel  Work. — Cost  of  Sheeting 
a  Foundation  Pit  with  Steel  Sheet  Piling. — Cost  of  Driving 
Steel  Sheet  Piling  for  Cut-Off  Wall  of  a  Dam. — Cost  of  Sheet 
Piling  for  Cofferdam. — Cost  of  Driving  Steel  Sheet  Piling. — 
Cost  of  Steel  Sheet  Piling  in  a  Cofferdam  and  in  Cais- 
sons.— Cutting  Off  Steel  Sheet  Piles  with  the  Electric  Arc. — 
Cost  of  Driving  Steel  Sheet  Piling. — Cost  of  Cleaning  Steel 
by  Sand  Blast  and  Painting  by  Compressed  Air. 

SECTION  XIV. — Engineering  and  Surveys 1745 

Cost  of  Engineering. — Engineering  Charges  for  Services. 
— Cost  of  Engineering  on  City  Work. — Cost  of  Engi- 
neering in  Reservoir  Construction. — Rations  for  Men 


CONTENTS  xxv 

Camping. — Cost  of  Rations.  U.  S.  Reclamation  Service. — 
Equipment  for  and  Cost  of  Railroad  Surveys. — Cost  of  2,000 
Miles  of  Railway  Surveys. — Cost  of  a  Railway  Survey,  Can- 
ada,— Cost  of  Reconnaissance  Survey  for  Railway  in 
Alaska. — Cost  of  Locating  Two  Railroad  Lines  in  Michigan 
and  Wisconsin. — Cost  of  a  Railroad  Re-Survey,  Canada. — 
Cost  of  Re-Survey  of  Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry. — Cost 
of  Re-Survey  of  Detroit,  Grand  Rapids  &  Northern  Ry. — 
Cost  of  Railway  Surveys.— ^Cost  of  Transit  Lines  in  Heavy 
Timber. — Cost  of  Topographic  Survey  for  160- Acre  Park. — 
Cost  of  Topographic  Survey  of  St.  Louis. — Cost  of  Stadia 
Survey,  Baltimore. — Cost  of  Topographic  Survey,  West- 
Chester  Co..  N.  Y. — Cost  of  Topographic  Survey  Near 
Baltimore. — Cost  of  Three  Stadia  Topographic  Surveys. — 
Cost  of  Surveys.  Erie  Canal. — Cost  of  U.  S.  Deep  Water- 
way Survey,  New  York. — Cost  of  Government  Topographic 
Surveys. — Cost  of  Triangulation  and  Plane  Table  Surveys. — 
Cost  of  Topographical  Survey,  Texas. — Cost  of  Two  Small 
Surveying  Jobs. — Cost  of  Level  Survey  for  a  Drainage 
Plan. — Cost  of  Sounding  Through  Ice. 

SECTION  XV.— Miscellaneous  Cost  Data 177)1 

Supplies  and  Plant  Prices  of  Materials. — Cost  of 
Fences. — Cost  of  Barbed  Wire  Fences. — Cost  of  a  Wire 
Fence. — Cost  of  Digging  Post  Holes  for  a  Fence. — Cost  of 
Digging  Post  and  Pole  Holes. — Cost  of  Digging  600  Trolley 
Pole  Holes. — Weight  of  Ashes,  Garbage,  Etc. — Cost  of  Gar- 
bage Reduction  and  Collection  at  Cleveland,  O. — Cost  of 
Garbage  Disposal,  Milwaukee,  Wis. — Garbage  Incineration, 
San  Francisco. — Cost  of  Removing  Ashes. — Cost  of  Tile 
Drains. — Weight  of  Drain  Tile. — Prices  of  Tile  Drains  in 
Place. — Cost  of  Digging  a  Trench  and  Laying  Tile  Drains. — 
Cost  of  Farm  Drainage. — Cost  of  Tile  Trenching  with  a 
Machine. — Cost  of  Laying  Small  Gas  Mains  on  Six  Jobs. — 
Cost  of  Laying  Wrought  Iron,  Screw  Joint  Pipe  for  Com- 
pressed Air  Mam. — Cost  of  Maintaining  Teams. — Cost  of 
Horse  Maintenance. — Cost  of  Maintaining  Horses,  New 
York  City. — Feed  of  Street  Car  Horses. — Cost  of  Main- 
taining Farm  Horses  and  Raising  Hay  and  Oats  in  Minne- 
sota.— Cost  of  Maintaining  Mules. — Shipping  Contractors' 
Horses  in  Cars. — Hauling  Heavy  Machinery  in  Wagons. — 
Handling  Teams  with  a  Jerk  Line.— ^Coat  of  Plowing  Farm 
Lands  with  a  Steam  Traction  Engine. — Cost  of  Traction 
Engine  Haulage  of  Ore. — Cost  of  Handling  and  Screening 
Cinders. — Size,  Weight  and  Price  of  Expanded  Metal. — 
Price  of  Mineral  Wool. — Cost  of  Sodding. — A  Device  for 
Cutting  Soil  for  Sodding. — Painting  Data. — Cost  of  Paint- 
ing a  Tin  Roof. — Unloading  Coal  from  Cars  with  a  Clam- 
shell.— Cost  of  a  28-Mile  Telegraph  Line. — Cost  of  a 
Telephone  Line. — Cost  of  Two  Telephone  Lines. — Life  of 
Telephone  Line  Equipment. — Cost  of  Laying  Electric  Con- 


xxvi  CONTENTS 

duits.— Cost  of  Vitrified  Conduits,  Memphis.— Cost  of  Brick 
Manholes  for  Electric  Conduits. — Methods  and  Cost  of 
Laying  Vitrified  Conduits  for  Electric  Wires. — Cost  of  Pole 
Lines,  Vitrified  Conduits,  Manholes,  Etc. — Labor  Cost  of  an 
Electric  Transmission  Line. — Cost  of  a  Transmission  Line 
for  Interurban  Electric  Railways. — Estimating  the  Horse- 
power of  Contractors'  Engines  and  Boilers. — Cost  of  Cut- 
ting Cord  Wood. 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


INTRODUCTION. 

John  Stuart  Mill  has  said :  "Without  any  formal  instruction,  the 
language  in  which  we  grow  up  teaches  us  all  the  common  philosophy 
of  the  age." 

If  it  is  even  partially  true  that  general  knowledge  is  affected  by 
words  and  expressions  in  common  use,  it  is  certainly  undeniable  that 
formal  definitions  of  words  have  a  much  greater  effect  upon  the 
scope  of  mental  vision.  When  the  formal  definition  is  of  a  word 
that  denotes  a  profession,  the  far-reaching  consequence  can  hardly 
be  estimated.  No  definition  of  any  profession  has  had  wider  circula- 
tino  and  more  general  acceptance  than  the  old  one  formulated  by 
Tredgold  and  adopted  in  its  infancy  by  the  Institution  of  Civil 
Engineers : 

"Engineering  is  the  art  of  directing  the  great  sources  of  power 
in  nature  for  the  use  and  convenience  of  man." 

Note  the  entire  absence  of  any  reference  to  economics  in  this 
definition.  Engineering,  when  Tredgold  lived,  was  in  the  stage  of 
development  when  the  common  problem  before  an  Engineer  was 
not  whether  a  thing  could  be  done  economically  but  whether  it  could 
be  done  at  all.  Then  followed  the  reign  of  the  mathematicians 
who  took  up  engineering,  just  as  in  previous  years  mathematicians 
had  seized  upon  astronomy  as  a  delightful  science  in  which  to  exer- 
cise their  talents.  But  among  mathematicians  there  has  always 
been  a  liking  for  the  ancient  toast :  "Here's  to  pure  mathematics. 
May  it  never  be  of  any  use  to  anybody."  So  it  was  naturally  to  be 
expected  that  anything  so  "commercial"  as  saving  money  should  not 
have  appealed  very  strongly  to  the  mathematicians  who  had  taken 
up  engineering.  Nor  did  it.  Nor  has  there  been  an  entire  escape 
to  this  day  from  the  bondage  of  that  early  type  of  engineering. 
Tredgold's  definition  really  fails  to  define,  or  limit,  the  word  engi- 
neering. Under  his  definition  any  man  who  directs  any  of  the  great 
forces  of  nature  for  the  use  of  men  is  an  engineer.  The  farmer 
who  utilizes  that  enormous  force — the  sun's%  heat — for  the  "use 
and  convenience  of  man,"  is  an  engineer.  So,  too,  is  the  sailor  who 
directs  that  other  vast  force,  the  wind,  to  the  driving  of  his  ship. 
In  fact,  there  is  no  limit  to  the  classes  of  men  who  fall  within  the 
literal  wording  of  this  definition.  It  is,  therefore,  a  very  unsatis- 
factory definition  because  of  its  vagueness.  However,  I  object  to  it 
not  so  much  upon  the  ground  that  it  includes  too  much  as  upon  the 
ground  that  it  fails  to  include  what  it  should,  namely  the  funda- 
mental function  of  the  modern  engineer,  which  is  to  solve  problems 
in  economic  production. 

I  recall  with  what  keen  interest  I  first  read  that  now  historic 
work,  Wellington's  "Economic  Theory  of  the  Location  of  Railways.'' 
I  was  particularly  struck  with  this  opening  paragraph: 


2  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

"I.t  would  be  well  if  engineering  were  less  generally  thought  of, 
andjeveti' defined,  an  tne  art  of  constructing.  In  a  certain  important 
sense  it  is  rather  the  art  of  not  constructing ;  or,  to  define  it  rudely 
but  not  inaptly,  it  is  the  art  of  doing  that  well  with  one  dollar, 
which  any  bungler  can  do  with  two  after  a  fashion." 

Wellington  made  no  attempt  to  give  a  complete  definition  of  engi- 
neering, but  he  certainly  was  among  the  first,  if  not  the  first,  to 
indicate  the  inherent  weakness  of  such  definitions  as  that  of  Tred- 
gold.  Wellington  has  it  to  his  lasting  credit  that  he  made  a  valiant 
effort  to  reduce  railway  location  to  an  economic  science.  That  he 
made  many  errors,  or  that  he  was  not  always  even  logical,  detracts 
little  from  his  eminent  position  as  one  of  the  greatest  teachers  of 
what  engineering  really  is. 

Engineering  is  the  conscious  application  of  science  to  the  problems 
of  economic  production. 

Under  this  definition,  which  may  ultimately  be  regarded  as  too 
broad,  I  aim  to  include  that  part  of  engineering  which  relates  to  the 
scientific  management  of  men,  and  the  scientific  development  of 
methods  of  construction  and  operation,  as  well  as  the  design  of  the 
most  economic  structures  and  machines  for  a  given  service.  The 
word  art  does  not  appear  in  the  definition,  for  it  is  obvious  that  in 
the  application  of  scientific  principles  in  the  solution  of  any  problem, 
what  may  be  termed  "art"  must  be  exercised  if  the  greatest  success 
is  to  follow.  Natural  aptitude,  practice  and  experience  are  the 
qualifications  of  every  man  who  is  a  real  artist  in  the  execution  of  a 
task.  These  are  the  qualities  that  cannot  be  imparted  by  teaching. 

Since  engineering  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  term  consists  in 
solving  problems  in  economic  construction  and  operation,  it  should 
be  apparent  to  all  that  cost  data  are  of  primary  importance  to  every 
engineer.  For,  just  as  data  on  the  resistance  of  materials  to  stress 
are  essential  in  economizing  the  materials  in  a  bridge,  a  building, 
or  a  machine,  so  data  as  to  unit  costs  of  construction,  operation  and 
maintenance  are  vitally  valuable  to  every  engineer  who  attempts 
to  be  an  engineer  in  the  modern  meaning  of  the  term. 

To  my  great  surprise,  the  first  edition  of  this  Handbook  of  Cost 
Data  was  scarcely  off  the  press  before  editorials  and  articles  began 
to  appear  in  certain  engineering  periodicals  belittling  the  value  of 
cost  data.  I  had  taken  particular  care,  as  I  had  thought,  in  pointing 
out  the  difference  between  the  price  of  anything  and  its  actual  cost. 
Yet  it  was  said  by  waiters  that  prices  fluctuated  so  rapidly  that  cost 
records  are  of  no  particular  value  except  for  very  short  periods  of 
time.  Lest  this  confusion  of  terms  shall  continue  to  mislead,  I 
purpose  oriefly  indicating  again  their  meaning. 

The  price  of  any  article  is  the  money  paid  for  it  by  a  consumer. 
It  is  the  cost  to  the  consumer,  and  in  that  sense  of  the  word  I  use 
the  term  cost  occasionally  in  this  book,  but  never  in  such  a  way 
as  to  cause  confusion,  the  meaning  being  always  obvious  by  the 
context. 

The  cost  of  any  article  is  money  paid  by  the  producer  for  ma- 
terials, supplies,  labor,  etc.,  necessary  in  its  production.  His  profit 
is  the  difference  between  this  cost  and  the  price  he  receives. 


INTRODUCTION.  8 

Clearly,  then,  if  we  give  the  number  of  hours  or  days  of  labor  of 
a  stated  class  required  to  produce  a  unit  of  product,  we  have 
given  its  cost  in  terms  that  may  be  of  permanent  value,  so  long  as 
the  same  methods  of  doing  the  work  remain  «in  vogue.  In  brief, 
we  have  given  the  cost  in  terms  of  the  day's  output  of  a  man,  and 
this  is  by  no  means  a  quantity  subject  to  erratic  fluctuations.  In- 
deed, under  equally  good  management  such  costs  are  often  astonish- 
ingly stable.  If  anyone  doubts  this  statement,  I  ask  him  to  com- 
pare the  data  in  my  little  book  "The  Economics  of  Road  Construc- 
tion," written  in  1900,  with  corresponding  data  in  Aitken's  "Road 
Making  and  Maintenance,"  published  a  few  weeks  after  I  had  turned 
over  my  manuscript  to  my  publishers.  Aitken  wrote  of  English 
methods  and  cost  of  building  macadam  roads.  He  used  American 
rock  drills  and  English  steam  rollers.  I  used  machines  and  tools 
almost  identical,  and  our  respective  unit  costs  were,  on  most  items, 
nearly  identical  when  reduced  to  the  same  unit  rates  of  wages. 

It  is  the  veriest  nonsense  to  attribute  to  cost  data  an  ephemeral  or 
purely  local  value,  because  prices  vary  with  supply  and  demand, 
or  because  local  conditions  differ  more  or  less.  Prices  have  nothing 
to  do  with  the  matter  at  all  in  making  proper  comparisons  of  cost 
data,  since,  if  quantities  of  materials  and  quantities  of  labor  are 
stated,  the  substitution  of  standard  prices  for  materials  and  of 
standard  wages  for  labor  is  a  mere  matter  of  common  sense  and 
the  multiplication  table. 

Fallacies,  however,  die  with  cat-like  protraction.  Hence,  when 
the  first  published  objections  to  the  real  and  general  value  of  pub- 
lished cost  data  were  seemingly  killed,  I  found  them  struggling  to 
life  again.  In  a  recent  paper  before  the  American  Society  of  Civil 
Engineers  it  was  urged  that,  while  cost  data  may  be  valuable 
they  are  of  no  great  value  except  to  the  man  who  gathered  the 
data!  This  same  fallacy  has  also  been  repeated  in  two  engineering 
journals,  both  editorially  and  in  contributed  articles. 

Were  it  not  for  the  sources  of  these  errors  I  should  ignore  them. 
But  they  seem  to  merit  at  least  a  passing  notice. 

Cost  data  differ  from  other  engineering  data  in  no  essential 
respect,  except,  perhaps,  in  this:  Workmen  who  are  underpaid,  or 
poorly  managed,  or  arrogant  because  of  a  false  feeling  of  independ- 
ence, may  not  do  a  full  day's  work.  When  this  is  so,  unit  costs  are 
necessarily  high  if  measured  in  terms  of  the  man-day.  This  con- 
dition, however,  can  be  recorded,  and,  in  fact,  it  records  itself  if 
we  have  other  data  for  comparison. 

Cost  data  can  be  so  reduced  to  items  and  accompanied  by  state- 
ments of  conditions  as  to  be  of  as  much  value  to  engineers  and 
contractors  as  any  other  kind  of  data.  Data  of  strengths,  for  ex- 
ample, are  very  misleading  if  unaccompanied  by  descriptions  of  the 
size  of  test  pieces,  chemical  composition,  and  many  other  factors, 
which  are  entirely  analogous  to  the  "local  conditions"  that  cause 
variations  in  cost  data.  By  curious  coincidence,  one  of  the  engi- 
neers who  has  most  severely  criticized  cost  data  is  the  author  of  a 
250-page  book  giving  nothing  but  records  of  strength  and  elasticity 
tests  of  Portland  cement  and  concrete.  If  cost  data  were  subject  tc 


4  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

a  tenth  of  the  variation  found  in  these  cement  strengths,  well 
might  we  dispair  of  reducing  the  subject  of  cost  estimating  to  a 
science. 

This  last  expression  leads  me  to  the  real  heart  of  the  subject  of 
this  book,  and  the  heart  is  not  cost  estimating — at  least  it  is  not  that 
per  se.  Important  as  the  matter  of  estimating  costs  often  is,  the 
overshadowing  value  of  cost  data  as  a  guide  in  reducing  costs  will 
be  apparent  to  every  engineer,  contractor  or  manufacturer  who  has 
been  long  engaged  as  a  producer  of  things  for  sale. 

Comparison  of  unit  costs  is  the  only  scientific  criterion  by  which 
to  judge  the  economic  merit  of  a  structure,  a  machine,  or  a  method 
of  doing  work. 

This  fact  is  so  self-evident  that  its  meaning  needs  but  to  be 
understood  to  find  full  acceptance  by  everyone  of  open  mind  and 
unclouded  brain.  Yet,  failure  to  formulate  this  law  has  led  to  some 
of  the  most  astounding  methods  of  designing  and  of  selecting  engi- 
neering structures.  For  example,  in  nearly  every  American  treatise 
on  highway  construction  will  be  found  a  method  which  the  highway 
engineer  is  supposed  to  follow  in  selecting  the  type  of  pavement 
for  a  given  street.  The  method  consists  in  assigning  percentages  to 
each  of  the  qualities  that  pavement  has,  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

Low    first    cost 15 

Low   cost   of  maintenance 20 

Ease    of    traction 10 

Good    foothold    5 

Ease    of    cleaning 10 

Noiseless 15 

Healthfulness     10 

Free   from  mud  and   dust 10 

Comfortable    to    use 3 

Non-absorbent  of   heat 2 

Total     100 

If  a  pavement  possesses  any  one  of  these  qualities  to  perfection, 
the  full  percentage  assigned  to  each  quality  is  credited  to  that  pave- 
ment. The  pavement  showing  the  highest  total  percentage  is  the 
one  to  be  selected.  This  looks  somewhat  scientific,  with  its  tabula- 
tion of  ratios,  but  it  is  not  even  scientific  guesswork.  As  well  choose 
a  suit  of  clothes  by  assigning  10%  to  the  buttons,  50%  to  the  cloth 
and  40%  to  the  style.  Pseudo-science  of  this  sort  would  never  have 
gotten  into  the  pages  of  engineering  textbooks  had  there  been  a 
clear  and  complete  definition  of  engineering  in  the  minds  of  the 
authors.  I  need  not  stop  to  point  out  the  scientific  method  of  de- 
signing or  selecting  a  pavement,  for  that  will  follow  as  a  corollary 
to  the  criterion  for  economic  design,  given  later. 

I  wish  here  to  emphasize  the  fact  that  no  paper  read  before  an 
engineering  society,  nor  any  article  printed  in  an  engineering  peri- 
odical on  the  design  of  a  machine  or  structure,  is  ideal  in  its  char- 
acter unless  it  is  accompanied  by  cost  data.  I  would  not  be  under- 
stood, however,  as  saying  that  the  absence  of  cost  data  makes  an 
article  of  this  sort  worthless.  Far  from  it.  But  the  absence  of  cost 
data  weakens  the  article,  for,  without  the  accurate  criterion  that 


INTRODUCTION.  5 

cost  data — and  cost  data  only — furnish,  a  nrecise  judgment  as  to 
the  economic  merit  of  the  machine  or  structure  Is  impossible. 

The  same  holds  true  of  a  method  of  doing  work,  and  that  is  why 
I  have  chosen  to  link  the  words  methods  and  cost  in  the  subtitles  of 
several  of  my  books  on  construction. 

Often  a  cost  is  so  nearly  a  function  of  the  amounts  of  material 
required  in  a  structure  or  machine  that  the  dollar's  mark  need  not 
appear  at  all — simply  the  quantities  of  each  kind  of  material  per 
unit  of  product.  This  is  particularly  true  of  steel  bridges.  Pejhaps 
this  fact  accounts,  in  a  measure,  for  the  indifference  of  some  bridge 
engineers  to  the  importance  of  cost  data.  They  fail  to  see  that  in 
other  lines  of  engineering  the  quantity  of  materials  is  not  always 
a  function  of  the  cost.  But  even  in  bridge  work  it  is  fatal  to  true 
economy  to  have  eyes  only  for  the  amount  of  materials  required 
for  the  structure.  A  study  of  the  section  on  bridgework  in  this  book 
will  make  evident  this  fact. 

In  the  operation  of  plants  of  given  capacity  and  of  stated  class, 
cost  data  are  invaluable  as  a  criterion  of  the  efficiency  of  machines, 
of  men  and  of  management.  Unfortunately,  most  writers  on  this 
branch  of  cost  data  have  hitherto  recorded  only  the  dollars  and  cents 
cost  of  the  various  items  of  operating  expense.  We  often  find,  for 
example,  that  the  item  of  fuel  has  cost  so  and  so  many  dollars  per 
year,  or  per  horsepower-year,  without  a  word  as  to  the  number  of 
tons  of  fuel  and  the  price  per  ton.  We  read  that  the  wages  of  opera- 
tion totaled  so  and  so,  without  finding  a  detailed  statement  of  the 
organization  of  the  operating  crew  and  the  rates  of  wages  paid  to 
each  class  of  men.  We  are  told  that  repairs  cost  so  and  so  many 
dollars  per  year,  but  the  first  cost  of  the  plant  is  omitted,  so  that 
we  are  unable  to  reduce  the  repairs  to  a  percentage  of  the  first 
cost ;  nor  is  the  age  of  the  plant  stated,  so  that,  even  if  its  first 
cost  were  given,  we  should  be  in  doubt  as  to  whether  the  plant  had 
been  long  enough  in  use  to  reach  a  stage  of  average  repairs. 

All  such  omissions,  however,  are  not  a  fair  indictment  of  cost  data. 
A  just  criticism  of  imperfect  cost  data,  or  of  imperfect  records  of 
the  conditions  to  which  they  apply,  is  quite  a  different  thing  from 
an  attempt  to  belittle  the  value  of  all  cost  data  "except  to  the  man 
who  gathered  them."  Were  it  literally  true  that  cost  data  are  of 
worth  only  to  the  man  who  has  seen  the  local  conditions,  we  should, 
indeed,  be  in  a  sorry  state.  The  civil  engineer  engaged  in  locating 
a  railway,  having  never  personally  gathered  any  railway  operating 
costs,  would  be  compelled  to  ignore  all  such  cost  data  in  solving  the 
various  problems  of  location. 

Where,  indeed,  will  this  nonsense  lead  us,  if  we  will  be  lead  by  it? 
Obviously  to  a  point  where  no  engineer  will  dare  use  any  cost  data 
at  all,  except  his  own  meager  pickings  from  his  own  little  crab- 
apple  tree  of  experience. 

The  great  and  steadily  greater  growing  efficiency  of  engineers  is 
due  to  their  use  of  all  kinds  of  data — cost  data  included — gathered 
by  all  kinds  of  engineers. 

I  expect  to  live  to  see  the  day  when  a  knowledge  of  cost  data  and 
how  to  use  them  will  be  generally  regarded  by  engineers  as  of 


6  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

greater  ifnportance  even  than  a  similar  knowledge  of  the  physical 
properties  of  materials. 

Finally,  in  this  foreword,  I  would  impress  upon  young  engineers 
the  importance  of  examining  the  definitions  of  all  terms  with  care. 
I  have  indicated  how  a  confusion  as  to  the  words  price  and  cost  haa 
often  resulted  in  speaking  of  costs  as  not  being  stable  when  what 
was  meant  was  the  instability  of  prices.  I  have  indicated  how  an 
ancient  definition  of  the  word  engineering  may  have  been  a  factor 
in  leading  many  engineering  educators  to  follow  the  old  precedent 
too  closely  for  the  good  of  the  students  who,  upon  graduation,  must 
change  their  conceptions  of  what  are  the  most  common  and  the 
most  important  engineering  problems. 

In  the  following  pages  will  be  found  a  striking  illustration  of  the 
errors  that  some  engineers  have  made  through  confusing  the  words 
depreciation  and  repairs. 

I  commend  to  all  engineers  the  careful  study  of  Mill's  "System  of 
Logic,"  and  particularly  his  chapters  on  Definition  and  on  Fallacies 
of  Confusion. 


SECTION    I. 

PRINCIPLES  OF  ENGINEERING    ECONOMICS  AND 
COST   KEEPING. 

Definitions. — Not  only  for  the  benefit  of  younger  men  and  of 
foreign  engineers  does  it  seem  wise  to  give  the  following  definitions, 
but  because  there  is  not  at  present  an  entire  uniformity  among 
American  engineers  as  regards  the  meaning  of  some  of  the  terms. 

Amount. — The  principal  plus  accumulated  interest. 

Amortisation. — The  extinction  of  a  debt  by  means  of  a  sinking 
fund,  or  the  provision  for  the  redemption  of  an  investment  in  a 
plant,  a  mine,  or  the  like,  by  means  of  a  sinking  fund. 

Betterment. — An  improvement.  In  railway  parlance,  any  expendi- 
ture for  "addition  and  improvement." 

Bid. — To  submit  a  contract  price;  the  bidding  price  being  the 
tender. 

Book  Value. — The  value  of  a  plant  as  recorded  in  the  accounting 
books  of  a  company.  Often  it  represents  the  price  paid  for  the 
plant  and  the  franchise  under  which  it  operates.  Often  it  is  the  esti- 
mated depreciated  value. 

Bonus. — A  payment  to  a  workman  in  addition  to  his  hourly,  daily 
or  weekly  wage.  The  bonus  system  is  a  modified  piece  rate  system 
by  which  a  workman  receives  a  stipulated  price  (=  bonus)  for  each 
unit  of  work  done  in  excess  of  a  stipulated  minimum,  in  addition  to 
his  regular  wage. 

Capitalize. — To  divide  an  annual  operating  or  maintenance  expense 
by  a  rate  of  interest.  The  quotient  thus  obtained  is  called  the 
capitalized  cost  of  the  annual  expense. 

Contingencies. — Unforeseen  expenses. 

Cost. — The  actual  cost  of  materials,  supplies,  labor,  etc.,  required 
to  produce  an  article  or  to  perform  a  service.  Also  frequently  used 
to  denote  the  price  that  a  purchaser  has  paid. 

Cost  of  Reproduction. — The  present  cost  of  a  plant,  or  plant  unit, 
regarded  as  reproduced  new  at  present  prices. 

Data. — Facts,  and  particularly  those  that  can  be  numerically  ex- 
pressed. The  word  is  the  plural  of  datum,  but  so  many  writers 
use  the  word  data  with  a  singular  verb  that  it  seems  likely  to  fol- 
low the  precedent  of  such  words  as  news.  In  Shakespeare's  time, 

7 


8  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA.      • 

news  was  used  only  in  the  plural ;    now  it  is  always  singular. 

Demurrage. — The  amount  paid  a  railway  company  for  holding  a 
car  beyond  a  certain  time. 

Depreciation. — Decrease  in  value.  It  is  preferable  not  to  use  the 
word  to  denote  "repairs  and  renewals,"  but  to  use  "maintenance" 
for  that  purpose.  Depreciation  is  best  used  only  to  denote  annual 
expense  for  the  entire  renewal  of  a  plant  unit.  It  will  then  be 
either  the  amount  annually  placed  in  a  sinking  fund,  or  the  amount 
paid  out  of  current  income  for  plant  renewals,  renewals,  in  the  lat- 
ter case,  being  regarded  merely  as  repairs  on  a  larger  scale.  Three 
formulas  for  depreciation  are  given  in  the  following  pages :  ( 1 )  The 
straight  line  formula;  (2)  Sinking  fund  formula;  (3)  Unit  cost  of 
production  formula. 

Equipment. — In  railway  parlance,  rolling  stock,  including  locomo- 
tives and  cars.  Unfortunately  the  term  has  been  latterly  used  to  in- 
clude the  power  stations  and  electrical  plant  of  electric  railways.  It 
will  be  well  to  discontinue  the  use  of  equipment  in  any  sense  but  as 
relating  to  rolling  stock. 

Fixed  Charges. — Often  used  to  denote  only  the  interest  charges 
on  the  funded  debt  of  plant,  but  more  often  used  to  include  all  ex- 
penses that  go  on  whether  a  plant  is  in  operation  or  not. 

Funded  Debt. — The  bonds  of  a  railway. 

Going  Concern  Value. — The  amount  of  money  expended  in  build- 
Ing  up  a  business,  or  the  measure  of  increased  value  possessed  by  an 
old  business  over  a  similar  business  just  started  with  a  new  plant. 

Maintenance  Expense. — The  annual  expense  for  repairs  and  en- 
tire renewals  of  plant  units. 

Materials. — The  substances  actually  entering  the  construction  of 
a  machine  or  structure,  as  distinguished  from  supplies.  This  dis- 
tinction is  not  always  made,  but  is  desirable. 

Obsolescence. — The  state  of  going  out  of  use  through  becoming 
obsolete. 

Operating  Expense. — In  railway  parlance  this  includes  the  ex- 
pense of  operating  and  maintaining  a  railway  plant.  The  operating 
ratio  is  the  ratio  of  operating  expense  to  gross  earnings.  In  manu- 
facturing and  contracting  parlance,  operating  expense  of^en  does 
not  include  maintenance,  which  is  classed  as  a  distinct  item,  and 
includes  repairs  and  renewals. 

Original  Cost. — The  actual  original  cost  of  a  plant,  including  ad- 
ditions and  improvements,  but  not  including  profits  resulting  from 
the  sale  of  the  completed  plant. 


COST   KEEPING.  9 

Overhead  Charges. — Generally  used  to  include  only  office  expenses 
and  general  miscellaneous  expenses,  the  latter  being  so  general  that 
they  can  not  be  charged  either  against  the  office  or  field  or  shop, 
and  are  incurred  in  the  maintenance  of  the  business  in  general. 

Piece  Rate. — A  rate  paid  to  a  workman  for  each  unit,  or  piece,  of 
work  performed.  When  an  increasing  piece  rate  is  paid  as  the  num- 
ber of  units  of  output  increases,  it  is  called  a  differential  piece  rate. 

Plant. — The  physical  property  used  in  production,  including  ma- 
chines, land,  etc. 

Present  Value. — Depreciated  value. 

Price. — The  market  price,  as  distinguished  from  the  actual  cost 
to  produce  a  structure,  machine,  or  the  like. 

Principal. — The  original  sum  upon  which  interest  is  calculated. 

Reciprocal. — The  reciprocal  of  a  number  is  1  divided  by  that  num- 
ber. The  reciprocal  of  20  is  1/20,  or  0.05,  or  5%. 

Salvage  Value. — The  price  that  is  realized  from  the  sale  of  a  de- 
preciated machine  or  structure. 

Shop  Repairs. — The  repairs  that  a  machine  receives  in  a  shop,  as 
distinguished  from  repairs  received  in  the  field. 

Sinking  Fund. — A  fund  established  for  the  ultimate  payment  of 
a  debt,  or  for  the  redemption  of  an  investment  in  a  plant,  mine,  etc. 
An  annual  deposit  is  ordinarily  made  in  the  fund,  and  the  fund  in- 
creases by  these  deposits  and  by  compound  interest. 

Supplies. — All  items  of  material  necessary  to  carry  on  work,  but 
which  are  rapidly  destroyed  in  the  process  of  production ;  e.  g.,  coal, 
oil,  rope,  hose,  etc.  See  Materials,  above  defined. 

Tender. — To  bid. 

Unbalanced  Bid. — A  bid  in  which  certain  unit  prices  are  above  a 
fair  price  and  other  unit  prices  are  below  a  fair  price. 

Unit  Cost. — The  total  cost  of  producing  a  unit,  such  as  a  cubic 
yard  of  concrete. 

Unit  interest  cost  is  the  total  annual  interest  on  a  plant  invest- 
ment divided  by  the  total  number  of  units  of  product.  A  plant  unit 
is  a  single  machine,  or  a  single  structure. 

Value. — The  worth  of  a  thing.  This  may  be  its  market  price,  or  it 
may  be  a  sum  arrived  at  by  estimating  depreciated  value,  or  it  may 
be  a  sum  determined  by  capitalizing  annual  net  earnings,  or  it  may 
be  a  sum  determined  by  capitalizing  annual  saving  in  operating  or 
maintenance  expense.  See  Book  Value,  above. 

Compound  Interest  Tables.— These  are  ordinarily  given  in  two 
forms,  as  in  Tables  I  and  II. 


10  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Let  A  .==  amount,  or  accumulation  of  $1  and  interest  during  n  yeara 
r  =  rate  of  interest,  payments  made  at  the  end  of  each  year. 
n  =  number  of  years. 

Then   (1)   A  =  (l  +  r)*. 

Table  I  is  calculated  by  formula  (1).  If  the  principal  is  $20, 
simply  multiply  the  amount  found  in  Table  I  by  20  ;  and  in  like 
manner  for  any  other  principal.  It  is  convenient  to  bear  in  mind 
that  money  at  compound  interest  doubles  itself  in  approximately  the 
number  of  years  obtained  by  dividing  72  by  the  rate  of  interest. 
This  is  not  strictly  accurate,  as  may  be  seen  from  Table  I,  but,  for 
the  rough  and  ready  estimates  that  an  engineer  is  often  called  upon 
to  make,  it  will  generally  suffice. 

Table  I  is,  for  many  engineering  purposes,  less  convenient  than 
Table  II,  which  is  also  a  compound  interest  table.  The  amounts 
given  in  Table  II  are  the  reciprocals  of  the  corresponding  amounts 
in  Table  I.  Table  II  is  useful  in  determining  the  present  value  or 
present  justifiable  expenditure  to  secure  a  return  of  $1  at  the  end  of 
any  number  of  years. 

To  illustrate  the  use  of  Table  II,  suppose  it  to  be  probable  that 
the  traffic  of  a  projected  change  of  railway  line  will  be  double  in 
ten  years  what  it  is  at  present. 

Suppose  that  present  operating  expenses  can  be  reduced  by  an 
improved  location  of  the  line,  and  that  the  capitalized  value  of  the 
saving  in  present  operating  expenses  is  $1.  Then  there  is  certainly 
economic  warrant  for  spending  that  ?1,  but  how  much  may  be  now 
spent  to  save  the  other  ?1  in  operating  expenses  which  will  be 
effected  by  this  improvement  when  traffic  shall  have  doubled  10 
years  hence? 

Table  II  gives  the  answer;  for  if  money  can  be  borrowed  at  5%, 
the  table  shows  that  f  0.61 4  may  be  spent  now  to  secure  a  better- 
ment which  will  yield  a  capitalized  value  of  $1  in  reduced  operating 
expenses  10  years  hence. 

Therefore  the  total  present  justified  expenditure  becomes  51.614, 
of  which  $1  is  the  capitalized  saving  in  present  operating  expense 
and  $0.614  the  capitalized  saving  in  future  operating  expense  when 
the  traffic  shall  have  doubled. 

As  Wellington  points  out,  this  is  the  maximum  justifiable  expendi- 
ture to  effect  a  future  saving  in  operating  expense ;  for,  unless  there 
is  assurance  that  earnings  will  be  sufficient  to  pay  the  interest  upon 
the  increased  obligations,  danger  exists  of  financial  embarrassment 
which  may  result  disastrously  to  the  railway  owners. 


COST   KEEPING.  11 


TABLE  I. — COMPOUND  INTEREST  TABLE. 
Amount  of  $1  Placed  at  Compound  Interest  for  a  Term  of  Years. 


3 

3% 

4 

5 

6 

8 

10 

Years. 

per 

cent. 

per 
cent. 

per 
cent. 

per 
cent. 

per 

cent. 

per 

cent. 

per 
cent. 

1  

1.03 

1.03 

1.04 

1.05 

1.06 

1.08 

1.10 

2  

1.06 

1.07 

1.08 

1.10 

1.12 

1.17 

1.21 

3  

1.09 

1.11 

1.12 

1.16 

1.19 

1.26 

1.33 

4  

,  ...  1.13 

1.15 

1.17 

1.22 

1.26 

1.36 

1.46 

5  

.  ..  1.16 

1.19 

1.22 

1.28 

1.34 

1.47 

1.61 

6  

...  1.19 

1.23 

1.27 

1.34 

1.42 

1.59 

1.77 

7  

.  ..  1.23 

1.27 

1.32 

1.41 

1.50 

1.71 

1.95 

8  

...  1.27 

1.32 

1.37 

1.48 

1.59 

1.85 

2.14 

9  

...  1.30 

1.36 

1.42 

1.55 

1.69 

2.00 

2.36 

10  

...  1.34 

1.41 

1.48 

1.63 

1.79 

2.16 

2.59 

11  

...  1.38 

1.46 

1.54 

1.71 

1.89 

2.33 

2.85 

12  

...  1.43 

1.51 

1.60 

1.80 

2.01 

2.52 

3.14 

13  

.  .  .  1.47 

1.56 

1.67 

1.89 

2.13 

2.72 

3.45 

14  

...  1.51 

1.62 

1.73 

1.98 

2.26 

2.94 

3.79 

15  

.  .  .  1.56 

1.68 

1.80 

2.08 

2.40 

3.17 

4.17 

16  

...  1.60 

1.73 

1.87 

2.18 

2.54 

3.43 

4.60 

17  

...  1.65 

1.79 

1.95 

2.29 

2.69 

3.70 

5.05 

18  

...  1.70 

1.86 

2.03 

2.41 

2.85 

4.00 

5.55 

19  

...  1.75 

1.92 

2.11 

2.53 

3.03 

4.31 

6.11 

20  

...  1.81 

1.99 

2.19 

2.65 

3.21 

4.66 

6.72 

21  

...  1.86 

2.06 

2.28 

2.79 

3.40 

5.03 

7.39 

22  

...  1.92 

2.13 

2.37 

2.93 

3.60 

5.44 

8.13 

23  

...  1.97 

2.21 

2.46 

3.07 

3.82 

5.87 

8.94 

24  

.  ..  2.03 

2.28 

2.56 

3.23 

4.05 

6.34 

9.83 

25  

.  ..  2.09 

2.36 

2.67 

3.39 

4.29 

6.85 

10.81 

26  

.  ..  2.16 

2.45 

2.77 

3.56 

4.55 

7.39 

11.90 

27  :. 

.  ..  2.22 

2.53 

2.88 

3.73 

4.82 

7.99 

13.08 

28  

.  ..  2.29 

2.62 

3.00 

3.92 

5.11 

8.62 

14.39 

29  

.  ..  2.36 

2.71 

3.12 

4.12 

5.42 

9.31 

15.83 

30  

.  ..  2.43 

2.81 

3.24 

4.32 

5.74 

10.06 

17.41 

31  

.  .  .  2.50 

2.91 

3.37 

4.54 

6.09 

10.86 

19.15 

32..  

.  ..  2.58 

3.01 

3.51 

4.76 

6.45 

11.74 

21.06 

33  

.  ..  2.65 

3.11 

3.65 

5.00 

6.84 

12.67 

23.17 

34  

.  ..  2.73 

3.22 

3.79 

5.25 

7.25 

13.69 

25.48 

35  

.  ..  2.81 

3.33 

3.95 

5.52 

7.68 

14.78 

28.03 

36  

.  ..  2.90 

3.45 

4.10 

5.79 

8.15 

15.96 

30.83 

37  

.  ..  2.99 

3.57 

4.27 

6.08 

8.63 

17.24 

33.91 

38  

.  .  .  3.07 

3.70 

4.44 

6.39 

9.15 

18.62 

37.30 

39  

...  3.17 

3.83 

4.62 

6.70 

9.70 

20.11 

41.02 

40  

.  ..  3.26 

3.96 

4.80 

7.04 

10.28 

21.72 

45.12 

42  

,  ..  3.46 

4.24 

5.19 

7.76 

11.56 

25.33 

54.59 

44  

,  .  .  3.67 

4.54 

5.62 

8.56 

12.98 

29.54 

66.04 

46  

.  .  3.90 

4.87 

6.07 

9.43 

14.59 

34.46 

79.90 

48  

.  .  4.13 

5.21 

6.57 

10.40 

16.39 

40.19 

96.67 

50  

,  ..  4.38 

5.58 

7.11 

11.47 

18.42 

46.88 

117.00 

12  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


TABLE  II. — COMPOUND  INTEREST  TABLE. 

Giving  Sums  Which  at  Compound  Interest  Will  Amount  to  $1  in  a 

Given  Number  of  Years. 

With  Interest  at — 


3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

10 

per 

per 

per 

per 

per 

per 

per 

Years. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

1  

971 

.961 

.952 

.943 

.935 

.926 

.909 

2  

943 

.925 

.907 

.890 

.873 

.857 

.827 

3  

915 

.889 

.864 

.840 

.816 

.794 

.751 

4  

888 

.855 

.823 

.792 

.763 

.735 

.683 

5  

863 

.822 

.783 

.747 

.713 

.681 

.621 

6  

837 

.790 

.746 

.705 

.666 

.630 

.565 

7  

813 

.760 

.711 

.665 

.623 

.584 

.513 

8  

.789 

.731 

.677 

.627 

.582 

.540 

.467 

9  

766 

.703 

.645 

.592 

.544 

.500 

.424 

10  

744 

.676 

.614 

.558 

.508 

.463 

.386 

11  

,  ...  .722 

.650 

.585 

.527 

.475 

.429 

.351 

12  

,  ...  .701 

.625 

.557 

.497 

.444 

.397 

.31U 

13  

...  .681 

.601 

.530 

.469 

.415 

.368 

.290 

14  

.661 

.577 

.505 

.442 

.388 

.340 

.264 

15  

.  ..  .642 

.555 

.481 

.417 

.362 

.315 

.240 

16  

.623 

.534 

.458 

.394 

.339 

.292 

.218 

17  

.  ..  .605 

.513 

.436 

.371 

.317 

.270 

.198 

18  

.  ..  .587 

.494 

.415 

.350 

.296 

.250 

.180 

19  

...  .570 

.475 

.396 

.330 

.276 

.232 

.164 

20  

.554 

.456 

.377 

.312 

.258 

.215 

.149 

21  

...  .537 

.439 

.359 

.294 

.241 

.199 

.135 

22  

...  .522 

.422 

.342 

.277 

.226 

.184 

.123 

23  

...  .507 

.406 

.326 

.262 

.211 

.170 

.112 

24  

...  .492 

.390 

.310 

.247 

.197 

.158 

.102 

25  

...  .478 

.375 

.295 

.233 

.184 

.146 

.092 

26  

...  .464 

.361 

.281 

.220 

.172 

.135 

.084 

27  

...  .450 

.347 

.268 

.207 

.161 

.125 

.076 

28  

...  .437 

.333 

.255 

.196 

.150 

.116 

.069 

29  

...  .424 

.321 

.243 

.185 

.141 

.107 

.063 

30  

...  .412 

.308 

.231 

.174 

.131 

.099 

.057 

31  

.400 

.296 

.220 

.164 

.123 

.092 

.052 

32  

...  .388 

.285 

.210 

.155 

.115 

.085 

.047 

33  

...  .377 

.274 

.200 

.146 

.107 

.079 

.043 

34  

...  .366 

.264 

.190 

.138 

.100 

.073 

.039 

35  

.  .  .  .355 

.253 

.181 

.130 

.094 

.068 

.036 

36  

...  .345 

.244 

.173 

.123 

.087 

.063 

.032 

37  

.  .  .  .335 

.234 

.164 

.116 

.082 

.058 

.029 

38  

...  .325 

.225 

.157 

.109 

.076 

.054 

.027 

39  

...  .316 

.217 

.149 

.103 

.071 

.050 

.024 

40  

...  .307 

.208 

.142 

.097 

.067 

.046 

.022 

42  

.289 

.193 

.129 

.086 

.058 

.039 

.018 

44  

...  .272 

.178 

.117 

.077 

.051 

.034 

.015 

46  

...  .257 

.165 

.106 

.068 

.044 

.029 

.013 

48 

.  .  .  .242 

.152 

.096 

.061 

.039 

.025 

.010 

50.  . 

.228 

.141 

.087 

.054 

.034 

.021 

.009 

COST  KEEPING.  13 


O  O  3»       «OCOCO£Nt-       OJOO«OOO<O        m^«<CC-JOO        CO  to  t- «O  O  • 


OOrHCQt-  TfrHOOOt-  «O  l»  in  •«*<  't'        CO  CO  CO  W  CM        rH  rH  O  O  O  < 

•^CONiH  rHrHrHOO  OOOOO       OOOOO       OOOOOO 

v««OtO<MrH  rHOiOOOOtO  in  O  «P  N  «O        in  O  OJ  rH  «O        in  OO  Cl  CO  **  O 

rOtC  in  O  O^  inOC^OOt-*  OOrH^Ci^        Ot>-COrHOO        OSCOO5t*«m^ 

USOOrHCOt-  -*(MOOOt>.  <£>  <O  in  T><  T*       Tt<COCOeON       rHiHOOOO 

•0<COC<JrH  rHrHrHOO  OOOOO       OOOOO       OOOOOO 

OrHrHoo  Neqs<ia>o  as  co  m  e<i  Tf 

•  ooiMoai  ooot-eom  coooTfoco 

J<  -^COWrH  rHrHrHOO  OOOOO       OOOOO       OOOOOO 

H 

r*t  Ot~-iJ<OT  OOt-Ot^OO 


®       C          ^"^^     r1r1r1cjcj     °.GJCJ0.CJ      °.°.c?0.0.     ®°.°.®^^ 

S    I    ^°* 


3  ^COiNiH       rHrHrHOO       OOOOO       OOOOO       OOOOOO 

»         Jeo'oe'o     eo'aiooo     Nrn'o^'oo" 


O  COOJe^JCOOO  U3WOO5OO  t— «0«0inin  ^»*T»iCOCOCO  WrHrHrHOO 

3          ,D  ^COCvJrH  r^r^T^G^CJ  °,0,O,°,0,  "R®0.®®  ®®°.<=J°.Ci 

"       d 

o  H,  c^i^too  t»  t-  oo  •*>•  •&  0>30tot~o  oo  T»<  e>j  •*  «o  t-t-ocomco 

C)  vn^f  <3>  M  rj<  «o  m  T»<  if  e<i  OTt<omoo  tooooasco  toeoooo^to 

3  r^rHrHt-to  eqoootam  toooiMcorn  t--*«ot~in  inasinrHost- 

9        '3  ^COffqr-l  rHrHrHOO  OOOOO  OOOOO  OOOOOO 


e 


O 


M         ^3  C7SWIMUS        THrHtOTjH-*  t-«OCOCOt>  rH  U5  rH  rH  (M  CO  N  -«f  tO  OO  t- 

W         >  <£>USOCO       <OW<*<rt«M  0-«*<0lrtt>-  «00>t-eO(M  •<»«  O  iff,  (M  t-  00 

*"  CO^MOiOO       rf«OiMOOt-  OOO^OOCO  OSlftlMOit-  t-^WCOOOO 

M         Clj  TfCONrHrHrHrHOO  OOOOO  OOOOO  O^OOOO 


eouscoo     ooocotA^f     o»t-M«cot-     o^osoooo 
iweooieo     laio^^N      O-^OIOL-      «OOI«OC-TH 

CO  TfOJOJiOrHCOOJOO       OirHlrtOS^        OtOCOOOO 


Q-<       ^-^COlMrH       r-trHrHOO       OOOOO       OOOOO       O  <=>  O  O  O  O 
•M  ........     •  ...........      •.... 

^         §  00  •<»<  •«*  •<*       «0«C-«010       rHOSlfl-^t-       OCOt-tO**       C-  00  O  •«»<  t~  «O 


OO  «M  (M 


rH        rHrHrHrHO        OOOOO        OOOOO        O  «=>  O  O  O  O 

' 


IrtCOrHOOi        OOt^tCKOkft        in  •"*!  Tfi  ^  Tf 
rHrHrHrHO        OOOOO     .OOOOO 


«O  COC^rHC<lCO  OO  «O  C^l  O  CO  mt^OOOUS  C<1  ^  O  U5  rH  C<1 

rH  lOlrttOirSCO  rHtOi-HOOO  SOOit-C-rH  M^OL^OiOO 

IC<l  OO-^«O(Mi-H  CO  Tj<  OO  C<I  t--  COOKOCOrH  rH  •*  O  «O  CO  rH 

OS  iftCOrHOOi  OOt-«C<Oin  lOTt<T*<Tf<f  CO^CqrHrHrH 

rH  rHrHrHrHO  OOOOO  OOOOO 


14  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Sinking   Fund  Tables.  —  Table  III  is  a  sinking  fund  table,  01   an- 
nuity table,  that  gives  the  deposit  that  must  be  annually  placed  in  a 
fund  drawing  compound  interest  to  amount  to  $1  at  the  end  of  a 
given  term  of  years. 
Let 

d  =  annuity,   or  sum  deposited  at  the  end  of  each  year,  which 

will  amount  to  $1  in  n  years. 
r  =  rate  of  interest,  interest  payments  being  made  at  the  end  of 

each  year. 

n  =  number  of  years. 
Then 

r 
d  =  - 


Table  III  gives  the  values  for  d,  for  any  rate  of  interest  (r)  and 
any  term  of  years  (n). 

If  it  is  desired  to  redeem  an  investment  of,  say,  $1,200,  at  the 
end  of  25  years,  interest  being  4%,  Table  III  gives  d  =  0.02401,  which 
would  redeem  $1.  Hence  0.02401  X  $1,200  =  $28.812,  which  is  the 
annual  deposit  in  the  sinking  fund  necessary  to  redeem  the  $1,200. 

Table  IV  is  also  a  sinking  fund  table,  its  values  being  the  recipro- 
cals of  the  corresponding  values  in  Table  III.  Table  IV  gives  the 
accumulation  of  annual  deposits  of  $1  at  the  end  of  each  year  and 
the  interest  on  the  same  compounded  annually.  The  use  of  this 
table  involves  the  operation  of  division,  which  is  not  ordinarily  so 
rapid  as  the  operation  of  multiplication.  To  illustrate,  let  us  assume 
the  same  problem  as  before  :  It  is  desired  to  ascertain  the  annual 
deposit  in  a  sinking  fund  necessary  to  redeem  $1,200  at  the  end  of 
25  years,  interest  being  4%.  Table  IV  gives  the  accumulation  of  $1 
in  25  years  at  4%  as  being  $41.66.  Hence  $1,200  -^  41.66  =  $28.805. 
This  is  not  quite  the  same  as  the  result  secured  with  Table  III,  due 
to  the  fact  that  Table  IV  is  not  carried  out  to  as  many  decimal 
places. 

Present  Worth  of  Annuity.  —  Table  V  is  useful  in  determining  the 
justifiable  present  expenditure  to  save  $1  per  year  for  various  terms 
of  years.  In  other  words,  Table  V  gives  the  capital  sum  that  will 
return  $1  per  year  in  interest  during  the  term  of  years  and  will  also 
return  an  additional  sum  in  interest  each  year  sufficient  to  ex- 
tinguish the  principal  at  the  end  of  a  term  of  years  if  placed  at 
compound  interest. 

The  present  worth,  Wf  of  an  annuity  is  given  by  the  formula 


(1  +  r)*  r 

Table  V  was  calculated  by  this  formula. 

References  and  Cross-  References.  —  At  the  end  of  the  Waterworks 
Section  of  this  book  will  be  found  an  abstract  of  an  excellent  article 
by  Mr.  Leonard  Metcalf  on  the  appraisal  of  waterworks,  wherein  are 
given  various  sinking  fund  formulas  and  curves. 

For  the  deduction  of  the  formulas  given  in  the  preceding  pages, 
consult  any  higher  algebra,  or  Frye's  "Civil  Engineer's  Pocketbook." 


COST  KEEPING. 


15 


TABLE  IV. — SINKING  FUND. 

(The  amount  (or  accumulation)  when  $1  is  deposited  annually  in 
fund  whose  interest  is  compounded.) 


At  End 

—  Rate  of  Interest,  Per  Cent.  — 

of  Year. 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

1  

1.00 

1.00 

1.00 

1.00 

1.00 

1.00 

1.00 

2  

2.02 

2.03 

2.04 

2.05 

2.06 

2.07 

2.08 

3  

3.06 

3.09 

3.12 

3.15 

3.18 

3.21 

3.25 

4  

4.12 

4.18 

4.25 

4.31 

4.37 

4.44 

4.51 

5  

5.20 

5.31 

5.42 

5.52 

5.64 

5.75 

5.87 

6  

6.31 

6.47 

6.63 

6.80 

6.98 

7.15 

7.34 

7  

7.43 

7.66 

7.90 

8.14 

8.39 

8.65 

8.92 

8  

8.58 

8.89 

9.21 

9.55 

9.90 

10.26 

10.64 

9  

9.7b 

10.16 

10.58 

11.03 

11.49 

11.98 

12.49 

10  

10.95 

11.46 

12.01 

12.57 

13.18 

13.82 

14.49 

11  

12.17 

12.81 

13.49 

14.21 

14.97 

15.78 

16.65 

12  

13.41 

14.19 

15.03 

15.91 

16.87 

17.89 

18.98 

13  

14.68 

15.62 

16.63 

17.71 

18.88 

20.14 

21.50 

14  

15.97 

17.09 

18.29 

19.60 

21.01 

22.55 

24.22 

15  

17.29 

18.60 

20.02 

21.58 

23.27 

25.13 

27.15 

16             .  .  .    . 

18.64 

20.16 

21.82 

23.65 

25.67 

27.89 

30.33 

17  

20.01 

21.76 

23.70 

25.84 

28.21 

30.84 

33.75 

18  

21.41 

23.42 

25.66 

28.13 

30.90 

34.00 

37.45 

19  

22.84 

25.12 

27.68 

30.54 

33.76 

37.38 

41.45 

20  

24.30 

26.87 

29.79 

33.06 

36.78 

41.00 

45.76 

21.  . 

25.78 

28.68 

31.98 

35.72 

39.99 

44.86 

50.43 

22  

27.30 

30.54 

34.26 

38.50 

43.39 

49.01 

55.46 

23  

28.84 

32.46 

36.63 

41.43 

46.99 

53.44 

60.90 

24  

30.42 

34.43 

39.10 

44.50 

50.81 

58.18 

66.77 

25  

32.03 

36.46 

41.66 

47.72 

54.86. 

63.25 

73.11 

26  

33.67 

38.56 

44.33 

51.11 

59.15 

68.68 

79.96 

27  

35.34 

40.71 

47.10 

54.66 

63.70 

74.48 

87.35 

28  

37.05 

42.93 

49.98 

58.39 

68.52 

80.70 

95.34 

29  

38.79 

45.22 

52.98 

62.31 

73.64 

87.35 

103.97 

30  

40.57 

47.58 

56.10 

66.43 

79.05 

94.46 

113.29 

31  

42.38 

50.01 

59.34 

70.75 

84.80 

102.07 

123.35 

32  

44.23 

52.51 

62.72 

75.29 

90.88 

110.22 

134.22 

33  

46.11 

55.08 

66.23 

80.05 

97.34 

118.93 

145.96 

34  

48.03 

57.73 

69.88 

85.05 

104.18 

128.26 

158.63 

35  

50.00 

60.46 

73.67 

90  31 

111.43 

138.24 

172.32 

36  

51.99 

63.28 

77.62 

95.82 

119.11 

148.91 

187.11 

37  

54.03 

66.18 

81.72 

101.61 

127.26 

160.34 

203.08 

38  

56.11 

69.16 

85,99 

107.69 

135.90 

172.56 

220.33 

39  

58.24 

72.24 

90.43 

114.08 

145.05 

185.64 

238.95 

40  

60.40 

75.40 

95.05 

120.78 

154.75 

199.63 

259.07 

41  

62.61 

78.67 

99.85 

127.82 

165.04 

214.61 

280.79 

42  

64.86 

82.03 

104.84 

135.21 

175.94 

230.63 

304.26 

43  

67.16 

85.49 

110.04 

142.97 

187.50 

247.78 

329.60 

44  

69.50 

89.05 

115.44 

151.12 

199.75 

266.12 

356.97 

45  

71.89 

92.72 

121.06 

159.68 

212.73 

285.75 

386.52 

46  

74.33 

96.51 

126.90 

168.66 

226.50 

306.75 

418.44 

47  

76.82 

100.40 

132.98 

178.10 

241.09 

329.22 

452.92 

48  

79.35 

104.41 

139.30 

188.00 

256.55 

353.27 

490.15 

49  

81.94 

108.55 

145.87 

198.40 

272.94 

379.00 

530.37 

50  

84.58 

112.80 

152.70 

209.32 

290.32 

406.54 

573.80 

16 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


TABLE  V. — PRESENT  WORTH  OF  ANNUITY. 
Showing  Justifiable  Present  Expenditure  to  Save   $1   Per  Tear  for 

Various  Terms  of  Years. 
Justifiable  Present  Expenditure  with  Interest  at — 


Term 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

of 

per 

per 

per 

per 

per 

per 

per 

per 

Years. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

cent. 

1  

.  .   $0.97 

$0.96 

$0.95 

$0.94 

$0.93 

$0.93 

$0.92 

$0.91 

2  

.  .      1.91 

1.89 

1.86 

1.83 

1.81 

1.78 

1.76 

1.74 

3  

.  .      2.83 

2.78 

2.72 

2.67 

2.62 

2.58 

2.53 

2.49 

4  

.  .      3.72 

3.63 

3.55 

3.47 

3.39 

3.31 

3.24 

3.17 

5  

.  .      4.58 

4.45 

4.33 

4.21 

4.10 

3.99 

3.89 

3.79 

6  

.  .      5.42 

5.24 

5.08 

4.92 

4.77 

4.62 

4.49 

4.36 

7  

.  .      6.23 

6.00 

5.79 

5.58 

5.39 

5.21 

5.03 

4.87 

8  

.  .      7.02 

6.73 

6.46 

6.21 

5.97 

5.75 

5.53 

5.34 

9  

.  .      7.79 

7.44 

7.11 

6.80 

6.52 

6.25 

6.00 

5.76 

10  

.  .      8.53 

8.11 

7.72 

7.36 

7.02 

.6.71 

6.42 

6.14 

11  

.  .      9.25 

8.76 

8.31 

7.89 

7.50 

7.14 

6.81 

6.50 

12  

.  .      9.95 

9.39 

8.86 

8.38 

7.94 

7.54 

7.16 

6.81 

13  

.  .    10.64 

9.99 

9.39 

8.85 

8.36 

7.90 

7.49 

7.10 

14  

.  .    11.30 

10.56 

9.90 

9.30 

8.75 

8.24 

7.79 

7.37 

15  

.  .    11.94 

11.12 

10.38 

9.71 

9.11 

8.56 

8.06 

7.61- 

16  

.  .    12.56 

11.65 

10.84 

10.11 

9.45 

8.85 

8.31 

7.82 

17  

.  .    13.17 

12.17 

11.27 

10.48 

9.76 

9.12 

8.54 

8.02 

18  

.  .    13.75 

12:66 

11.69 

10.83 

10.06 

9.37 

8.76 

8.20 

19  

.  .    14.32 

13.13 

12.09 

11.16 

10.34 

9.60 

8.95 

8.37 

20  

.  .   14.88 

13.59 

12.46 

11.47 

10.59 

9.82 

9.13 

8.51 

21  

.  .    15.42 

14.03 

12.82 

11.76 

10.84 

10.02 

9.29 

8.65 

22  

.  .    15.94 

14.45 

13.16 

12.04 

11.06 

10.20 

9.44 

8.77 

23  

.  .    16.44 

14.86 

13.49 

12.30 

11.27 

10.37 

9.58 

8.88 

24  

.  .    16.94 

15.25 

13.80 

32.55 

11.47 

10.53 

9.71 

8.99 

25  

.  .    17.41 

15.62 

14.09 

12.78 

11.65 

10.67 

9.82 

9.08 

26  

.  .    17.88 

15.98 

14.38 

13.00 

11.83 

10.81 

9.93 

9.16 

27  

.  .    18.33 

16.33 

14.64 

13.21 

11.99 

10.94 

10.03 

9.24 

28  

.  .    17.76 

16  66 

14.90 

13.41 

12.14 

11.05 

10.12 

9.31 

29  

..    19.19 

16.98 

15.14 

13.59 

12.28 

11.16 

10.20 

9.37 

30  

.  .   19.60 

17.29 

15.37 

13.76 

12.41 

11.26 

10.28 

9.43 

81  

.    20.00 

17.59 

15.59 

13.93 

12.53 

11.35 

10.34 

9.48 

32  

.  .    20.39 

17.87 

15.80 

14.08 

12.65 

11.43 

10.41 

9.53 

33  

.  .    20.77 

18.15 

16.00 

14.23 

12.75 

11.51 

10.46 

9.57 

34  

..    21.13 

18.41 

16.19 

14.37 

12.85 

11.59 

10.52 

9.61 

35  

..    21.49 

18.67 

16.37 

14.50 

12.95 

11.65 

10.57 

9.64 

36  

.  .    21.83 

18.91 

16.55 

14.62 

13.04 

11.72 

10.61 

9.68 

37  

..    22.17 

19.14 

16.71 

14.74 

13.12 

11.78 

10.65 

9.71 

38  

..    22.49 

19.37 

16.87 

14.85 

13.19 

11.83 

10.69 

9.73 

39  

..    22.98 

19.58 

17.02 

14.95 

13.26 

11.88 

10.73 

9.76 

40  

..    23.12 

19.79 

17.16 

15.05 

13.33 

11.93 

10.76 

9.78 

41  

.    23.41 

19.99 

17.29 

15.14 

13.39 

11.97 

10.79 

9.80 

42  

.  .    23.70 

20.19 

17.42 

15.23 

13.45 

12.01 

10.81 

9.82 

43  

.  .    23.98 

20.37 

17.55 

15.31 

13.51 

12.04 

10.84 

9.83 

44  

.  .    24.25 

20.55 

17.66 

15.38 

13.56 

12.08 

10.86 

9.85 

45  

.  .    24.52 

20.72 

17.77 

15.46 

13.61 

12.11 

10.88 

9.86 

46  

.  .    24.78 

20.89 

17.88 

15.52 

13.65 

12.14 

10.90 

9.88 

47  

.  .    25.03 

21.04 

17.98 

15.59 

13.69 

12.16 

10.92 

9.89 

48  

.  .    25.27 

21.20 

18.08 

15.65 

13.73 

12.19 

10.93 

9.90 

49  

.  .    25.50 

21.34 

18.17 

15.71 

13.77 

12.21 

10.95 

9.91 

50...      ... 

.  .   25.73 

21.48 

18.26 

15.76 

13.80 

12.23 

10.96 

9.92 

COST  KEEPING.  17 

Identity  of  Machine  and  Engineering  Structure.— An  engineering 
structure  that  performs  a  useiul  service  is,  in  essence,  a  machine* 
A  railway  i's  a  machine  for  manufacturing  transportation.  A  street 
or  road  is  part  of  a  similar  machine,  the  vehicles  being  the  other 
part.  Buildings  are  part  of  a  manufacturing  plant.  Even  when 
built  merely  to  rent,  they  are  machines  for  producing  rentable  floor 
area. 

In  solving  problems  in  engineering  economics,  the  young  engineer 
will  be  greatly  aided  by  keeping  in  mind  this  identity  of  what  is 
commonly  called  a  "machine"  and  what  is  commonly  called  a 
"structure." 

Problem  I.     Which  of  Two  New  Machines  (or  Structures)  to  Se- 
lect.— This  problem  consists  in  determining  which  machine  yields 
the  desired  number  of  units  of  product  at  the  lowest  cost. 
Let 

N  —  number  of  units  produced  annually  by  the  1st  machine. 

n  =  number  of  units  produced  annually  by  the  2d  machine. 

C  =  first  cost  of  the  1st  machine. 

c  =  first  cost  .of  the  2d  machine. 

D  =  per  cent  of  annual  renewals,  or  annuity  in  sinking  fund  for 
1st  machine. 

d  =  per  cent  of  annual  renewals,  or  annuity  in  sinking  fund,  for 
2d  machine. 

R  =  per  cent  of  annual  repairs  for  1st  machine. 

r  =  per  cent  of  annual  repairs  for  2d  machine. 

/  =  per  cent  of  annual  interest  on  capital. 

O  =  annual  operating  expense  of  1st  machine. 

o  =  annual  operating  expense  of  2d  machine. 

U  =  unit  cost  of  production  with  1st  machine. 

u  =  unit  cost  of  production  with  2d  machine. 
Then 

O  +  RC  +  DC  +  1C 

(1)  U  = 

2V 
o  +  re  +  dc  +  Ic 

(2)  M  =  — 


n 

Since  U  must  be  less  than  u,  to  warrant  the  selection  of  the  1st 
machine  in  preference  to  the  second,  we  have 

O  +  RC  +  DC  +  1C        o  +  rc  +  dc  +  Ic 
(3) <  

N  n 

Ordinarily,  the  number  of  units  to  be  produced  by  each  of  the  two 
machines  is  equal,  or  JV  =  n.  Then  we  have : 

(4)      O  +  RC  +  DC  +  1C    <  o  +  rc  +  dc  +  Ic 

Expressed  in  words  we  have  this  criterion : 

Select  the  machine  that  shows  the  least  sum  of  these  four  item* 
•of  cost:  (1)  annual  operating  expense,  (2)  average  annual  repairs, 
(S)  average  annual  renewals,  and  (4)  annual  interest  on  the  invest- 
ment. 

Note  carefully  that  there  are  two  different  methods  of  determining 
D,  the  percentage  of  first  cost  allowed  for  annual  renewals.  By  the 


18  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

method  in  vogue  on  railways,  D  is  the  reciprocal  of  the  life  of  a 
machine,  hence  for  a  locomotive  having  a  life  of  25  years,  D  is  4%. 
By  the  method  often  used  for  smaller  plants,  D  is  the  annuity  placed 
in  a  sinking  fund  to  redeem  to  the  investment  in  a  machine  at  the 
end  of  its  life.  In  the  first  case,  renewals  are  treated  like  current 
expenses  for  repairs,  and  this  is  justified  where  a  large  number  of 
plant  units  of  different  ages  are  in  operation. 
Formula  (4)  can  be  put  in  another  form,  thus: 

(5)  I(C  —  c)   <    (o  +  re  +  dc)  —  (O  +  RC  +  DC) 
A  still  more  common  form  is  this: 

(o  +  re  +  dc)  —  (O  +  RC  +  DC) 

(6)  C  —  c  < 

Between  two  new  machines  of  equal  capacity,  the  higher  first  coat 
of  one  is  economically  justified  when  its  excess  cost  is  less  than  the 
capitalized  saving  in  annual  operating  and  maintenance  expenses  due 
to  its  use. 

For  the  benefit  of  young  engineers  the  meaning  of  the  word 
"capitalize"  should  be  explained. 

To  capitalize  an  annual  expense  consists  in  dividing  it  by  the  rate 
of  interest  at  which  money  can  be  borrowed. 

Thus,  if  a  man  is  required  to  perform  a  certain  class  of  work  at 
an  annual  expense  of  $600,  and  if  the  rate  of  interest  is  6%,  the  cap- 
italized cost  of  this  annual  expense  is  $600  -h  6%  =  $10,000. 

Reverting  to  the  rule  following  formula  (6)  we  see  that  it  is  the 
one  which  Wellington  has  applied  to  the  various  problems  of  rail- 
way location  in  his  "Economic  Theory  of  Railway  Location."  I 
prefer,  however,  to  use  the  criterion  as  given  in  formula  ,(6),  because 
sight  is  not  then  lost  of  the  fact  that  maintenance  expenses  are  a 
function  of  the  first  cost  of  the  machine  under  consideration.  That 
this  is  an  important  improvement  over  Wellington's  criterion  will  be 
seen  when  one  examines  Wellington's  data  on  the  maintenance  of 
locomotives,  as  well  as  other  maintenance  data  in  his  book.  There 
the  maintenance  is  recorded  not  as  a  percentage  of  the  first  cost  of 
the  locomotive  but  in  the  train-mile  as  the  unit.  Yet  Wellington 
knew  that  the  first  cost  was  a  factor  in  maintenance  cost,  for  he 
says  (p.  144  of  his  book)  :  "Half  the  total  cost  of  engine  repairs 
varies  as  the  weight,  and  half  is  independent  thereof."  Incidentally, 
I  may  say  that  he  was  entirely  wrong  in  this  conclusion,  for  the  cost 
of  annual  repairs  varies  almost  directly  as  the  weight  of  a  locomo- 
tive. Again  he  speaks  (p.  148)  of  the  fact  that  passenger  engines 
cost  about  20%  less  for  repairs  than  freight  engines,  without  recog- 
nizing that  the  difference  in  weight  and  first  cost  was  what  ac- 
counted for  this  difference  in  repairs. 

Formula  (3)  or  (6)  should  be  invariably  used  not  only  by  engi- 
neers who  are  selecting  or  designing  machines  for  a  given  purpose, 
but  by  engineers  who  are  designing  structures  of  all  kinds.  I  have 
already  stated  that  engineering  structures  should  be  regarded  either 
as  machines  or  as  parts  of  machines.  At  first  sight  it  may  appear 
that  some  structures  are  not  at  all  like  machines  in  that  they 
seemingly  have  no  operating  expense  (O). 


COST  KEEPING.  19 

In  the  case  of  a  country  road,  for  example,  the  item  of  operating 
expense  ( O )  may  appear  to  be  non-existent ;  although,  in  fact,  a 
little  thought  makes  it  clear  that  the  owners  of  the  horses  and 
wagons,  motor  cars,  etc.,  pay  this  operating  expense,  which  should 
be  as  certainly  considered  by  the  engineer  who  is  locating  and  de- 
signing a  road  or  street  as  it  would  be  considered  if  he  were  locating 
and  designing  a  railway. 

In  certain  classes  of  work,  serious  error  will  occur  if  there  is 
failure  to  give  proper  consideration  to  N  and  n  in  formula  (3). 
This  is  strikingly  seen  in  the  ordinary  designs  of  country  highways, 
where  failure  to  determine  the  number  of  ton-miles  (=N)  to  be 
hauled  annually  leads  to  the  most  glaring  blunders  in  designing  the 
road. 

In  selecting  an  engine  for  a  given  purpose,  the  same  error  is  fre- 
quent. The  engineer  whose  mind  is  fixed  upon  economy  of  fuel, 
for  example,  is  very  apt  to  choose  a  type  of  engine  so  expensive  in 

/ 
first  cost  that  the  unit  interest  is  so  greatly  increased  as  to 

exceed  greatly  the  unit  fuel  saving. 

A  blunder  often  made  by  contractors  is  the  selection  of  a  machine 
that  is  too  large  for  the  work  in  hand.  Not  only  does  too  large  a 
machine  increase  the  unit  interest  and  unit  maintenance,  but  it  often 

O 
increases  the  unit  operating  expense  ,  due  to  the  fact  that  its 

size  makes  it  expensive  to  move  or  shift  from  place  to  place.  This 
is  particularly  true  of  large  steam  shovels  used  on  small  excavations. 

The  item  of  operating  expense  (O),  as  the  term  is  here  used, 
includes  supervision,  *  taxes,  labor  (except  for  maintenance),  fuel 
and  other  supplies,  materials,  etc. 

Some  statisticians  insist  that  taxes  should  not  be  regarded  as  an 
operating  expense,  because  unit  taxes  tend  to  increase  while  other 
unit  operating  items  tend  to  decrease  as  the  plant  grows  in  size. 
Even  if  this  were  true,  I  fail  to  see  sufficient  reason  for  segregating 
taxes  with  fixed  charges.  But  I  deny  the  truth  of  the  statement  that 
unit  taxes  must  necessarily  increase.  If  corporations  have  lied  to 
tax  assessors,  then  unit  taxes  do  eventually  increase  when  the  lies 
are  found  out,  and  that  is  precisely  what  has  caused  most  of  the  in- 
crease in  unit  taxes  in  recent  years.  The  subject,  however,  is  not 
one  of  sufficient  importance  in  this  connection  to  merit  more  than 
passing  notice. 

The  item  of  annual  repairs  (RC)  is  commonly  underestimated, 
and  is  grossly  underestimated  in  the  majority  of  instances  that  I 
have  seen  in  print. 

The  cost  of  annual  repairs  is  not  a  constant  for  each  year,  but 
increases,  at  least  for  a  time,  as  the  plant  grows  older.  Hence,  if 
estimates  of  maintenance  are  based  upon  the  maintenance  costs  dur- 
ing the  earlier  part  of  the  life  of  a  machine  .(or  structure),  seri- 
ous errors  result.  This  subject  will  receive  consideration  at  greater 
length  in  subsequent  pages. 

The  item  of  renewals   (DC)    relates  to  entire  renewals  of  plant 


20  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

units,  such  as  the  entire  renewal  of  a  locomotive.  The  rate,  D,  may 
be  the  reciprocal  of  the  life  of  the  plant  unit.  Thus  if  the  life  is  20 
years,  the  annual  rate  of  renewal  (D)  is  5%.  Many  engineers  pre- 
fer to  use  the  annuity  deposited  in  a  sinking  fund,  instead  of  this 
rate  of  renewal,  D.  In  such  a  case,  use  Table  III.  For  example,  a 
life  of  20  years,  with  interest  at  5%,  would  require  an  annual  de- 
posit of  $0.0372  to  redeem  $1,  which  is  equivalent  to  3.72%  rate  to 
be  used  instead  of  the  5%  obtained  by  the  straight  line  formula. 

I  prefer,  however,  not  to  use  the  sinking  fund  method  in  cases 
where  a  large  number  of  similar  plant  units  are  under  considera- 
tion, as  in  the  case  of  a  railway.  The  reasons  for  this  preference 
Will  be  given  subsequently. 

Problem  II.  When  to  Retire  an  Old  Plant  Unit  or  Machine. 
—  Let  the  depreciated  value  of  the  old  unit  or  machine  be  v,  let  its 
scrap  or  salvage  value  be  s,  and  let  the  scrap  or  salvage  value  of  a 
new  machine  be  8.  Use  the  symbols  on  page  17,  letting  capitals 
refer  to  the  new  machine  and  small  letters  refer  to  the  old  machine. 
Let  D  be  the  functional  depreciation  rate  due  to  obsolescence  and 
inadequacy,  and  R  the  natural  depreciation  rate  due  to  wear  and 
tear.  Then 

(7)    U  =  O  +  RC  +  D   (C 


N 
(8)   u  =  o  +  re  +  d  (v  —  s)  +  Iv 


Since  U  must  be  less  than  u,  and  since  s  must  equal  v,  to  warrant 
the  purchase  of  a  new  machine,   we  have 

(9)    O  +  RC  -f  D   (C  —  S)+  1C         o  +  rc  +  Is 


N  n 

Ordinarily  N=n,  then 

(10)  O  +  RC  +  D     (C  —  S)+  IC<o  +  rc  +  Is 

Let  equated  annual  operating  expense  and  equated  annual  re- 
pairs be  E  for  the  new  machine  and  e  for  the  old  machine,  then, 
since  O  +  RC=E,  we  have 

(11)  E  +  D   (C  —  S)+  IC<e  +  Is 

Expressed  in  words  equation   (11)   is: 

//  the  annual  output  of  product  is  the  same  for  the  old  as  for 
the  new  machine,  then  the  old  machine  should  be  retired  in  favor 
of  the  new  machine  when  the  equated  annual  operating  expense 
plus  functional  depreciation  and  interest  charges  on  the  new  ma- 
chines are  less  than  the  annual  operating  expense  plus  interest 
charge  on  the  salvage  value  of  the  old  machine. 

The  solution  of  the  problem  on  page  28,  etc.  is  one  involving  only 


COST  KEEPING. 


21 


natural  depreciation,  and  is  therefore  less  greneral  than  the  rule 
above  given.  However,  the  method  on  page  28,  etc.  gives  the  same 
results  as  are  obtained  by  the  above  rule,  provided  a  sinking  fund 
depreciation  rate  is  used  instead  of  the  straight  line  depreciation 
rate  that  is  applied  on  page  28. 

The  Life  of  a  Machine  or  Structure  and  the  Growth  of  Annual 
Repairs.  —  Probably  no  subject  in  engineering  economics  has  been 
enveloped  in  a  greater  haze  of  contradictory  opinions  than  this. 
Many  eminent  engineers  maintain  the  doctrine  that  the  curve  of 
annual  maintenance  resembles  some  sinking  fund  accumulation 
curve  —  a  doctrine  that  rests  wholly  on  speculation  and  has  never  had 
a  single  curve  of  actual  maintenance  cost  adduced  in  its  support,  so 
far  as  I  have  been  able  to  discover.  Actual  curves  of  machine  re- 
pairs of  individual  machines  are  ordinarily  not  regular  curves  at  all, 
but  are  saw-toothed  lines,  usually  of  great  irregularity. 

As  fairly  typical  of  a  large  class  of  machines,  I  will  take  a  rail- 
way freight  car,  whose  wheels,  axles,  brasses,  brakes,  draw-bars, 
trusses,  paint,  etc.,  constitute  the  separate  parts  subject  to  the  wear 
and  tear  due  to  use  and  exposure  to  the  elements.  The  life  of  each 
of  these  parts  is  the  average  life,  and  the  cost  of  renewal  of  the 
part  is  the  cost  ascertained  by  deducting  the  scrap  value  from  the 
original  value  of  the  part  in  place.  This  is  not  strictly  correct,  for 
the  labor  of  renewing  a  part  is  usually  greater  than  the  labor  origi- 
nally involved  in  assembling  the  parts.  For  our  present  purpose, 
however,  this  difference  is  not  material. 

Table  VI  gives  the  data  for  a  small  box  car  of  about  30,000  Ibs. 
capacity,  and  will  serve  our  purpose  if  we  bear  in  mind  that  it 
slightly  underestimates  the  actual  cost  of  renewals  of  parts,  for 
the  reason  above  given. 

TABLE  VI.  —  Box  CAR  REPAIRS. 

Truck-  First 

Item.  cost. 

(1)  Wheels    ......  %  90 

(2)  Axles    .......      45 

(3)  Brasses    .....      10 

(4)  Frame    ......      95 

Total  truck..$240 
Box: 

(5)  Brakes   ......  $10 

(6)  Draw-bars    ...     29 

(7)  Frame    ......      60 

(8)  Roof   ........      29 

(9)  Floor  ........      12 

(10)  Sides    ........  44 

(11)  Painting    ____  8 

(12)  Trimmings  ...  20 

(13)  Trusses    .....  6 


Scrap 
value. 
$  35 
15 
4 
25 

Net  cost 
repairs. 
$  55 
30 
6 
70 

Life, 

years. 

3 
35 

Average 
annual 
repairs. 
$13.75 
3.75 
2.00 
2.00 

*  79 

$2 
6 

10 
4 
1 
2 
0 
3 
3 


|161 

$8 
23 
50 
25 
11 
42 

8 
17 

3 


$21.50 


6 

6 
15 

8 

10 
20 

7 

20 
20 


Total  box   ..$218  $  81  $187  ..  $16.95 

Grand   totai:$458  $110  $348  $38.45 

There  are  13  parts  given  in  Table  VI.     If  we  add  their  lives,  as 

given  in  the  last  column,  and  divide  by  13,  we  get  12.2  years,  which 

might  be  called  the  "unweighted"  average  life.     It  is  obviously  not 

the  true  average. 


22  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

If  we  divide  the  total  average  annual  repairs,  $38.45,  into  t.  , 
total  net  cost  of  repairs,  $348,  we  get  9.1,  which  has  been  called  tn^ 
"average  life  of  the  car,"  but  this,  too,  is  deceptive.  Nor  would  ic 
be  more  correct  to  divide  the  total  first  cost,  $458,  by  $38.45,  for 
the  quotient,  11.9,  is  not  the  average  life.  The  fact  is,  that  the  aver- 
age life  of  a  car,  taken  as  a  whole,  bears  no  necessary  relation  to  the 
average  life  of  any  or  all  its  parts,  as  will  be  explained  more  fully 
later  on.  Average  annual  repairs,  such  as  the  $38.45  given  in  Table 
VI,  is  an  item  involving  credits  for  scrap  value,  thus  making  it  im- 
possible to  derive  the  average  life  of  the  parts,  using  life  in  any  true 
sense  of  the  word.  The  average  life  of  a  machine  is  not  deducible 
from  its  average  annual  repairs. 

Referring  to  Table  VI,  we  see  that  the  life  of  the  frame  of  the 
truck  is  35  years.  Therefore,  before  the  frame  requires  renewal, 
nearly  all  the  other  parts  will  have  been  renewed  several  times.  If 
the  frame  were  assigned  a  life  of  40  years,  there  would  not  be  a 
single  part  that  had  not  required  at  least  two  lives  to  equal  the  life 
of  the  frame.  But  the  life  of  the  longest  lived  part  does  not  itself 
determine  the  life  of  the  machine,  for.  as  in  this  case  of  the  car.  a 
new  truck  frame  might  be  provided  at  the  end  of  35  years.  Then 
the  car  would  be  prepared  to  go  on  living  another  35  years. 

We  see,  then,  that  the  average  life  of  a  machine  taken  as  a  whole 
may  bear  no  necessary  relation  to  the  average  life  of  any  of  its 
parts,  even  of  its  longest  lived  part.  The  fact  is  that  the  actual  life 
of  most  machines  is  determined  by  no  self-contained  elements  of 
destruction,  but  by  "improvements  in  the  art"  or  by  increase  in  the 
service  required  of  the  machine,  necessitating,  in  the  first  case,  an 
improved  machine,  and,  in  the  second  case,  a  larger  machine.  The 
death  of  most  machines  is,  therefore,  caused  by  obsolescence — the 
machine  having  outlived  its  economic  usefulness,  though  still  cap- 
able of  rendering  service.  In  America,  the  actual  average  life  of 
railway  cars  and  locomotives  has  not  much  exceeded  20  to  25  years. 
In  Europe  and  England,  cars  and  locomotives  more  than  half  a  cen- 
tury old  are  in  common  use  yet.  On  the  whole  Northern  Pacific 
Railway  (U.  S.)  the  oldest  locomotive  is  only  33  years  vi.  Such 
is  the  difference  in  obsolescence  in  America  and  Europe.  In  a  grow- 
ing community  it  is  obvious  that  obsolescence  of  certain  classes  of 
machines  will  be  much  more  rapid  than  in  a  community  whose 
growth  is  slow.  Thus,  a  pump  may  economically  serve  a  water- 
works in  a  growing  community  not  longer  than  ten  years,  while  the 
same  pump  might  economically  serve  a  non-growing  community  for 
thirty  years,  or  more,  provided  no  radical  improvement  in  pump  de- 
sign were  effected. 

;  In  America  we  have  had  not  only  rapidly  growing  communities, 
but  ingenious  men  and  aggressive  business  managers  who  have  been 
little  hampered  by  labor  union  resistance  to  improved  machinery. 
Hence  obsolescence  of  machinery  due  to  "improvements  in  the  art" 
has  played  a  very  important  part.  I  think  I  am  safe  in  saying  that 
the  vast  majority  of  machines  in  America  have  had  a  life  averaging 
not  to  exceed  about  20  years.  Often  the  life  of  certain  classes  ha? 


COST   KEEPING.  23 

not  been  five  years.  Witness  the  short  life  of  cable  railways  in  our 
large  cities,  due  to  the  rapid  improvement  in  electric  car  transporta- 
tion. Cableway  systems  had  been  hardly  installed  in  New  York  and 
Philadelphia  before  they  were  torn  out  to  make  way  for  electric 
traction. 

While  the  total  actual  life  of  a  machine  is  usually  independent  of 
the  amount  of  service  it  renders,  but  is  usually  determined  by  obso- 
lescence, the  life  of  the  parts  of  the  machine  is  determined  by  three 
factors:  (1)  The  activity  of  use;  (2)  the  care  in  lubrication,  etc., 
to  reduce  wear ;  and  ( 3 )  the  amount  and  character  of  exposure  to 
the  elements. 

Activity  of  use  is  an  exceedingly  important  factor  in  the  wear  of 
most  machine  parts.  Hence  records  of  repair  costs  should  give 
some  statement  of  work  done  that  will  indicate  the  activity  of  the 
machine.  Thus,  the  car-miles  per  year  will  show  the  activity  of  a 
car.  The  number  of  hours  of  actual  work  per  year  is  often  a  suffi- 
cient index  as  to  work  done.  A  steam  road  roller  usually  works 
about  300  days  of  10  hours,  or  1,000  hours  per  year.  A  locomotive 
usually  works  nearly  three  times  that  number  of  hours,  and  its  an- 
nual repairs  form  about  three  times  as  great  a  percentage  of  the 
first  cost  as  the  percentage  of  repair  cost  of  a  steam,  roller. 

A  rock  drill  working  two  shifts  of  8  hours  daily  will  show  almost 
twice  the  annual  repairs  incurred  when  only  one  daily  shift  is 
worked.  Incidentally,  I  may  add  that  under  severe  and  constant 
service,  the  annual  cost  of  repairs  of  a  rock  drill  may  exceed  the 
first  cost  of  the  machine. 

Fortunately  there  are  many  classes  of  service  that  differ  so  little 
that  annual  repair  costs  or  life  of  parts  can  be  correctly  judged 
without  having  at  hand  a  statement  as  to  the  precise  activity  of 
the  machine. 

Let  us  now  plot  the  costs  of  car  repairs  given  in  Table  VI,  so  as 
to  secure  a  curve  of  actual  annual  repairs.  To  do  so  we  must  first 
tabulate  rthe  recurring  costs  of  renewals  of  parts  given  in  Table  VI 
as  follows: 

Ervfo  ;     Items  Total 

of  year,     repaired.  Repairs. 

1  None    None 

2  None    None 

3  (3)    Brasses %      6 

4  (1)   Wheels   %    55 

5  None    None 

6  (3),   (5)   and   (6)    $    36 

7  (11)    %      8 

8  (1),   (2)  and   (8) ?  110 

9  (3)    *      6 

10  (9)     ?    11 

11  None    None 

,       12  (1),   (3),   (5)  and  (6) ?    92 

13  None None 

14  (11)    %      8 

,     15  (3)  and  (7)    %    56 

16  (1),   (2)  and   (8) ?  110 

17  None    None 

18  (3),    (5)   and  (6) $    36 

19  None    None 

20  (1).    (9),   (10).    (12)  and  (13) ?    86 


24 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Plotting  the  total  annual  repairs,  for  this  20  year  period,  we  have 
the  "curve"  shown  in  Fig.  1,  which  bears  no  resemblance  whatever 
to  the  "sinking  fund  curve  of  depreciation." 

I  have  not  carried  the  "curve"  out  to  the  35  year  period  (the  life 
of  the  truck  frame),  since  our  present  purpose  is  fully  served  by 
considering  the  20  year  period. 


110 


01234567 


/0      //     //     / 
Years. 


Fig.  1.     Repairs  of  Freight  Car. 


This  saw-toothed  "curve"  of  annual  repairs  of  individual  cars 
obviously  will  resolve  itself  into  a  straight  line  if  the  total  annual 
repairs  to  a  large  number  of  different  cars  of  slightly  different  ages 
is  taken.  During  the  first  eight  years  of  life  of  a  group  of  wooden 
box  cars,  the  total  annual  repairs  will  increase  rapidly,  but  after 
that  there  will  be  comparatively  little  increase  in  the  totals  for 
each  year. 


COST  KEEPING.  25 

The  same  general  law  holds  of  all  machines  in  active  and  regu- 
lar service.  For  a  period  there  will  be  a  rising  cost  of  repairs,  de- 
termined, as  to  rapidity  of  rise,  by  the  life  and  cost  of  the  various 
parts.  Eventually  the  curve  of  repairs  will  become  a  saw-tooth  line, 
whose  general  direction  is  either  horizontal  or  slightly  ascending.  In 
no  class  of  machine  of  which  at  present  I  have  knowledge  is  there  a 
repair  curve  bearing  the  remotest  resemblance  to  a  curve  derived  by 
plotting  any  function  of  any  "sinking  fund  formula." 

I  should  leave  the  discussion  of  this  subject  in  somewhat  Incom- 
plete form  were  I  not  to  touch  upon  such  structures  (or  parts  of 
machines)  whose  life  is  terminated  by  the  various  forms  of  chemi- 
cal change.  The  rusting  of  iron,  the  rotting  of  wood  (due  to  fungi), 
the  decay  of  asphalt  (due  to  little  understood  chemical  action),  and 
various  other  forms  of  plant  deterioration  fall  into  one  general  class 
for  which  it  may  be  possibly  claimed  that  annual  repairs  of  individ- 
ual units  follow  some  sort  of  regular  curve,  ascending  rapidly  to- 
ward the  close  of  life.  I  think  that  the  reasoning  that  has  led  to 
such  a  belief  can  readily  be  seen  to  b«  fallacious,  if  we  start  out  by 
drawing  a  sharp  distinction  between  the  annual  repairs  required  by 
a  single  unit  and  the  annual  repairs  of  a  group  of  similar  units. 

Let  us  take  a  railway  cross-tie  of  untreated  yellow  pine,  for  ex- 
ample. If  we  confine  our  attention  to  one  tie,  we  shall  find  that 
for,  say,  7  years  it  gives  perfectly  uniform  service  without  requir- 
ing any  particular  attention.  Then,  perhaps,  the  qualities  by  virtue 
of  which  it  has  resisted  decay,  begin  to  depart,  and  rot  fungus  gains 
a  hold  here  and  there.  The  growth  of  this  fungus  under  the  rail 
may  result  in  the  decay  of  the  wood  fibres  to  such  an  extent  that  a 
spike  works  loose  and  the  track  foreman  finds  it  necessary  to  pull 
the  spike  and  drive  it  in  another  place.  Some  time  later  he  may 
shift  the  tie  slightly  and  redrive  all  the  spikes.  Finally  he  decides 
that  the  tie  is  so  weakened  by  decay  as  to  be  unsafe,  and  removes 
it.  The  current  repairs  (the  spike  pulling,  shifting,  etc.)  have 
been  so  slight  in  cost  as  to  be  entirely  negligible  when  compared 
with  the  one  great  repair  of  entire  renewal  of  the  tie.  Hence  there 
exists  no  curve  of  repairs  for  this  single  tie  at  all,  other  than  the 
one  final  upleap  in  the  "curve,"  due  to  its  renewal. 

Let  us  see  now  what  happens  to  a  group  of  .the  same  ties.  Each 
tie  differs  slightly  from  the  others,  both  in  its  physical  and  chemi- 
cal make  up.  The  character  of  the  service  differs  also.  One  tie  is 
near  a  rail  joint,  another  is  not.  Some  ties  are  on  curves,  some  on 
tangents.  Some  efre  near  soil  where  the  spores  of  rot  fungus  are 
numerous,  others  are  not.  Hence  at  the  end  of,  say,  5  years,  some 
ties  are  so  badly  rotted  that  they  must  come  out  of  the  track ;  at  the 
end  of  10  years  many  ties  are  still  in  service,  although  the  great 
majority  may  have  been  removed  at  the  end  of  8  or  9  years.  Now 
if  we  plot  the  curve  of  annual  tie  renewals  of  this  group  of  ties,  we 
shall  find  it  following  the  zero  line  for  5  years,  then  slightly  ascend- 
ing until  about  8  years  when  it  takes  a  sudden  leap  upward  for  a 
year  or  two — and  all  is  over.  This  final  action  and  sudden  rise  in 
the  renewal  curve  indicates  the  somewhat  varying  life  of  the  differ- 
ent ties,  and  nothing  more. 


26  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  repairs  of  an  asphalt  pavement  show  a  similar  sudden  rise 
toward  the  end  of  the  life  of  the  asphalt,  and  for  similar  reasons. 
Each  square  yard  of  the  asphalt  may  be  regarded  as  a  unit  similar 
to  a  railway  tie.  Slight  original  differences  in  chemical  and  physi- 
cal constitution  exist  in  the  different  square  yards.  Differences  in 
severity  of  traffic  exist  in  different .  places.  Hence,  as  in  the  case 
of  a  group  of  railway  ties  of  the  same  age,  there  will  be  differences 
in  the  life  of  different  square  yards  of  asphalt.  This  will  show  in 
the  sudden  rise  of  annual  repairs  of  asphalt  pavement  after  15  to  20 
years  of  life. 

In  general,  any  machine  or  structure  consisting  of  a  number  of 
parts  of  equal  age  and  subject  to  about  the  same  exposure  to  the 
elements,  or  to  wear,  will  have  a  curve  of  repairs  that  will  eventu- 
ally take  a  sudden  rise.  This  rise  in  repairs  is  simply  the  evidence 
of  the  termination  of  the  life  of  the  group  of  units  composing  the 
machine  or  structure.  If  the  machine  or  structure  is  of  a  kind  that 
permits  the  economic  renewal  of  each  of  those  units  by  itself,  as  in 
the  case  of  railway  ties  or  rails,  no  problem  in  economics  presents 
itself. 

There  is  obviously  nothing  to  do  but  to  renew  each  unit  as  rapidly 
as  it  reaches  the  limit  of  its  endurance. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  units  are  so  interrelated  that  the  renew- 
al of  single  units  is  more  expensive  than  the  renewal  of  the  entire 
group  of  units  at  one  time,  then  a  problem  in  economics  does  pre- 
sent itself,  the  question  being  this :  When  does  the  rising  curve  of 
cost  of  repairs  to  the  expiring  units  reach  a  point  where  it  becomes 
economic  to  abandon  the  entire  group  of  units  and  procure  a  new 
group  of  units? 

This  problem  is  not  one  that  comes  before  many  classes  of  engi- 
neers, but  it  does  present  itself  to  highway  engineers,  particularly 
In  connection  with  repairs  to  asphalt  pavements.  In  view  of  this 
fact,  and  because  several  entirely  erroneous  solutions  of  the  prob- 
lem have  been  published  by  engineers  eminent  in  the  field  of  highway 
engineering,  I  have  prepared  a  correct  solution  of  the  problem.  (See 
page  27.) 

While  on  the  subject  of  repairs,  it  may  be  well  to  discuss  briefl> 
the  identity  of  repairs  and  renewals  in  cases  where  a  plant  is  being 
operated  with  a  large  number  of  plant  units  of  different  ages. 

A  railway  is  a  plant  for  manufacturing  transportation,  as  Wel- 
lington has  well  put  it.  The  principal  plant  elements  are: 

1.  Roadbed. 

2.  Ballast. 

3.  Ties. 

4.  Rails. 

5.  Buildings. 

6.  Rolling  stock,  or  equipment. 

7.  Repair  shops  and  tools. 

Minor  repairs  of  roadbed  and  track  are  being  constantly  made. 


COST  KEEPING.  27 

A  bolt  is  renewed  here,  a  spike  there,  a  bit  of  ballast  in  another 
place — all  renewals  of  plant  on  a  minor  scale.  About  10%  of  the 
wooden  ties  are  replaced  annually — renewals  again,  though  on  a 
larger  scale.  About  5%  of  the  rails  are  replaced  annually — still 
more  renewals.  About  4%  of  the  cars  and  locomotives  are  entirely 
renewed  annually — renewals  on  a  still  larger  scale.  But  from  the 
worn-out  track  bolt  to  the  worn-out  locomotive,  we  have  renewals 
of  plant  elements,  varying  in  size  and  cost,  it  is  true,  but  differing 
not  one  whit  in  the  real  character  of  the  process. 

Evidently,  then,  after  any  large  plant  has  been  in  use  for  a  con- 
siderable period  of  years,  there  is  no  logical  reason  for  distinguish- 
ing between  minor  renewals  (called  repairs)  and  major  renewals 
(called  renewals,  or  "entire  renewals").  They  are  all  one  and  the 
same  thing  in  fact,  differing  only  in  degree.  Accountants  have 
preached  for  a  century  or  more  about  the  dire  consequences  of 
failure  to  provide  sinking  funds  for  the  redemption  of  large  plant 
elements  at  the  expiration  of  their  life.  But  the  great  majority  of 
managers  of  railways,  lighting  companies,  mills,  factories  and  mines, 
have  ignored  the  arguments  of  the  accountants,  and  have  gone  right 
on  without  providing  a  fund  for  renewals,  but  regarding  renewals 
as  identically  the  same  in  nature  as  repairs.  In  this  I  conceive  that 
they  have  been  right. 

The  managers  and  owners  of  plants  have  known,  what  accountants 
have  ignored,  that  money  is  worth  more  to  a  company  for  use  in 
extensions  and  betterments  of  plant  than  it  could  possibly  bring 
by  placing  it  in  a  sinking  fund,  since  all  sinking  funds  draw  com- 
paratively small  interest.  This  has  undoubtedly  been  a  strong  actu- 
ating motive — and  a  sound  one — with  plant  managers,  but  I  am 
satisfied  that  the  inherent  reasonableness  of  regarding  even  large 
renewals  as  repairs  must  have  appealed  quite  as  strongly  to  the 
managers  of  large  plants. 

Problem  III.  To  Determine  When  Repairs  Have  Grown  so  Great 
as  to  Justify  Renewal. — The  following  discussion  can  be  understood 
only  after  a  study  of  the  preceding  paragraphs. 

This  problem  is  one  that  seldom  arises  except  in  considering  the 
repairs  to  such  a  structure  as  an  asphalt  pavement,  for  reasons 
previously  given.  If  the  rising  "curve  of  annual  repairs"  is  either 
a  straight  line  or  any  curve  which  can  be  expressed  as  an  equation, 
an  accurate  solution  of  the  problem  is  possible  by  the  use  of  the 
method  about  to  be  explained,  aided  by  the  application  of  differential 
calculus. 

An  approximate  solution  is  possible  even  without  resort  to  the 
higher  mathematics,  as  will  be  now  shown. 

For  simplicity  of  illustration,  and  not  because  it  represents 
actual  conditions,  let.  us  first  assume  that  repairs  increase  at  a 
uniform  rate.  It  should  be  clear  that  the  problem  consists  in 
finding  the  minimum  Quotient  obtained  by  dividing  the  sum  of  the 
cost  of  the  structure  and  the  total  repairs  by  the  economic  life  in 
years. 


3  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Let 

C  =  first  cost  of  structure. 

R  =  total  repairs  during  y  years  of  steadily  increasing  repairs. 

Then  when 
C  +  R 
— is   a   minimum   we    have   the   period    beyond   which   it   is 


uneconomic  to  continue  repairs. 

In  other  words: 

The  average  annual  first  cost  plus  the  average  annual  repair  coat 
must  be  a  minimum. 

We  need  not  consider  the  item  of  interest  in  first  cost,  for  that 
is  a  constant  that  goes  on  forever,  unaffected  by  the  period  of  re- 
newal of  the  structure.  To  those  acquainted  with  calculus  this  state- 
ment should  be  self-evidently  true,  and  to  those  who  are  not  familiar 
with  the  higher  mathematics  it  should  become  self-evident  if  they 
will  consider  the  item  of  annual  interest  as  being  entirely  analogous 


Years 


yfe? 


Fig.    2. 

to  an  expense  for  sweeping  a  street,  a  cost  that  depends,  it  is  true, 
upon  the  character  and  therefore  the  first  cost  of  the  pavement,  but 
one  having  no  bearing  upon  the  question  of  »w  hen  an  old  pavement 
shall  be  replaced  by  a  new  one  of  the  same  sort. 

Let  us  assume  that  the  annual  repairs  rise  steadily,  at  the  rate 
of  4  cts.  increase  per  year.  Let  us  assume  that  the  first  cost  of 
this  asphalt  is  $1  per  sq.  yd.,  not  including  the  concrete  base  which 
is  permanent,  and  therefore  should  not  enter  the  problem  any  more 
than  should  the  cost  of  sweeping,  or  the  annual  interest  on  the 
investment  Then  we  can  show  the  "curve  of  repairs"  as  in  Fig.  2. 

By  a  series  of  approximations,  we  can  now  determine  when  the 


value  of  ---  is  a  minimum.     Let  us  first  assume  5  years.     Then 

y 
y  =  5.     The  total  repairs  during  this  five-year  period  can  be  readily 


COST   KEEPING.  29 

calculated  by  determining:  the  area  of  the  triangle  ABC,  in  Fig.  2, 
20X5 

which  is  =$0.50. 

2 
Hence  we  have 

C  +  R      $1.0J  +  $0.50 

= -;=  |0.30, 

y  5 

which  is  the  average  annual  first  cost  of  the  pavement  and  its  re- 
pairs for  the  5-year  period.  If  this  seems  high,  let  us  try  a  4-year 
period.  Then  we  have  R  =  $0.32., 

C  +  R      $1.00  +  $0.32 

= =  $0.33. 

y  4 

Evidently,    then,    the   economic   period    is  not   less   than   5   years, 
and  may  be  greater.     Let  us  try  10  years.     Then  R  =  $2.00, 
C  +  R      $1.00 +  $2.00 

= =  $0.75. 

y  10 

This  is  much  higher  than  for  the  5-year  period.  Let  us  try  7 
years.  Then  B  =  $0.98. 

C  +  R       $1. 00  + $0.98  _ 

V  7 

Further  tests  will  show  that  this  is  practically  the  minimum.  It 
should  be  noted  that  the  minimum  is  attained,  in  this  case,  when 
the  total  repairs  for  the  period  of  rising  repairs  equals  the  first 
cost  of  the  asphalt  wearing  coat.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  this  is  a 
law  of  general  application  wherever  the  curve  of  rising  annual 
repairs  is  a  straight  line,  that  is  wherever  repairs  increase  annu- 
ally by  any  constant  percentage.  I  will  prove  this  generalization 
by  the  aid  of  calculus,  but  it  can  be  demonstrated  in  the  more 
roundabout  and  primitive  way  above  used. 

In  all  cases,  no  matter  what  the  curve  of  increasing  repairs  may 
be,  the  method  of  plotting  the  annual  repairs  and  determining  the 
area,  to  ascertain  total  repairs  (R)  will  enable  anyone  to  find  when 
C  +  R 
is  a  minimum,  by  a  series  of  approximations. 

For  the  engineer  who  is  familiar  with  calculus  the  following 
method  will  afford  a  more  direct  solution  of  the  problem.  The  prob- 

C  +  R 
lem  is  to  determine  when  1C  -\ =  u  is  a  minimum,  u  being  the 

y 

unit  annual  pavement  cost. 

When  repairs  increase  regularly  each  year,  by  a  rate  a,  then  the 
equation  of  a  straight  line  x  —  ay  gives  us  the  "curve  of  annual  re- 
pairs." Since  R  is  the  area  of  a  triangle  whose  base  is  y  (see 
Fig.  2), 

xv 

R= , 

2 
But  x  =  ay, 

ay2 
Hence  R  = . 


30 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Substituting  this  value  of  R  in  the  equation 

C  +  R 

1C  H  -----  —  u,  we  have 
y 

C       ay 

1C  +  —  +  —  =  u. 

V         2 

Differentiating,  we  see  that  1C    (the  annual  interest)   disappears, 
as  It  is  a  constant,  and  we  have 

—  Cdy       ady 
----  •  +  •"  -  •—  du. 

y*  2 

Solving  for  a  minimum  by  placing 
du 

—  =  o,  we  have 


2C 

—, 
a 


-v- 


This  gives  us  the  desired  formula  for  determining  the  time 

C 


when  it  becomes  economic  to  renew  the  entire  pavement.     If,  as  in 
the  example  above  given,  a  =  4%  of  C,  we  have 


y- 


•—  7.07   years. 


Since    the    minimum    average   annual    plant    expense    is   attained 


when  y 


=  V" 


ay 

and  since  R  = ,  we  have 

2 
a         2C 

R  =  —  X =  C. 

2          a 
Hence : 

When  annual  repairs  increase  steadily  by  a  constant  ratio  it 
ceases  to  be  economic  to  retain  a  structure  or  machine  in  service 
after  the  aggregate  repairs  exceed  the  first  cost  of  the  structure  or 
machine. 

Should  the  structure  or  machine  have  any  salvage  value,  substi- 
tute the  expression  "first  cost  minus  salvage  value"  in  the  fore- 
going criterion  in  place  of  the  expression  "first  cost." 

As  a  further  example,   let  us  assume   that   the   curve  of  annual 


COST  KEEPING.  31 

repairs  is  a  parabola  instead  of  a   straight  line,    as   indicated  In 
Fig.  3. 

The  area  ABC  gives  us  the  total  repairs,  or  R  ;    and  for  a  para- 
bola this  external  area  is 

xy 
J2  =  —  . 

3 

Since  the  curve  of  the  parabola  is 

2/a 

2/a  =  2px,    x  =  —  . 
2p 
Hence 


6p 

Our  equation  of  condition  is,  as  before. 
CM-_R_ 

y 

Hence 


y         6p 
Differentiating  and  placing 

du 
--  =  ot  we  have 

dy 

—  C       ydy 
--  1  --  =  o, 


y 

Substituting   the  values   of   p    and    C   in  this   equation  will   give 
us  the  period  of  years   during  which  it  continues  to  be  economic 
to  pay  the  increasing  cost  of  repairs. 
2/» 

Since  R  = ,  and  since  y  —  V  3pC,  combining  we  have 

*" 

R  = . 

2 

Hence : 

When  annual  repairs  increase  steadily  according  to  the  curve  of 
a  parabola,  it  ceases  to  be  economic  to  retain  a  structure  or  machine 
in  service  after  the  aggregate  repairs  exceed  half  the  first  coat  of 
the  structure  or  machine. 

In  the  case  of  an  asphalt  or  block  pavement,  annual  repairs  are 
usually  very  slight  for  a  considerable  term  of  years,  the  repairs 
often  amounting  to  nothing  at  all.  Let  us  assume  that  for  K  ye.ars 
there  are  no  repairs  and  that  then  the  repairs  increase  uniformly 
at  the  rate  a  for  2  years.  Then  the  annual  repairs  (x)  at  any 
given  year  after  the  period  of  no  repairs  are  given  by  this  equation 
x  =  ae 

And  the  total  repairs  are 

,    xz       az2 


32  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  average  unit  cost  (u)  of  repairs  per  year  is 
_C  +  R 

~  K  +  z 

K  +  z  being  the  total  life  (y). 
az2 
Substituting  for  R  its  value  —  we  have 


As   before,    solve  for   a  minimum   by   differentiating  and  placing 
the  first  differential  coefficient  equal  to  zero.     To  do  this,  let 


Then 

C        az2 

u  =  --  1  -- 
y       2y 


—  Cdy       a    S2yzdz  —  z2dy  \ 

du  = 1 I  • —   I 

y'  2\  y*  J 

lence 

(2yzdy  —  z2dy  \ 
V*  / 


But,  since  K  +  *  =  y,  dy  =  dz,  hence 

—  Cdy       a     SZyzdy  —  z2dy 
du  =  --  1  -- 


du 

Then  if  we  make  —  =0,  we  have 
dy 


2 

2C 

—  z*  +  2yz  =  -- 
a 
But   u  =  K  4-  *.  hence 

2C 


a 

2C 

z*  +  2Kz  =  — 
a 

2C 

K*  +  2Kz  +  K*  =  --  h  K* 
a 


I      2C 

=    +1      — 

v       a 


a 

But  z-\-K  is  the  economic  life  (y)  of  the  pavement,  hence 
expressed  in  words  this  formula  becomes : 

When  a  structure  requires  no  repairs  for  a  period  of  years  (K), 
and  then  the  repairs  increase  annually  by  a  regular  rate  fa),  the 
economic  life  (.in  years)  of  the  structure  is  equal  to  the  square 
root  of  the  sum  of  (I)  twice  the  first  cost  (in  dollars)  of  the 
structure  divided  by  the  rate  (a)  and  (2)  the  square  of  the  number 
of  years  (K)  of  no  repairs. 

Thus  if  the  period  of  no  repairs  (K)  is*  ten  years,  and  if  the 
repairs  then  start  and  increase  steadily  at  the  annual  of  rate  (a) 


COST  KEEPING.  33 

of  0.04    (or  4%)   of  the  first  cost,  and  if  the  first  cost   (c)   is  $1, 
we  have :  

Economic  life    («  +  K)  =  J  — °-  +  100  =    V^TTO  =  12.25 

Hence  the  economic  life  would  be  12.25  years,  or  only  2*4  years 
after  the  10  year  period  of  no  repairs  has  expired. 

In  like  manner  formulas  can  be  readily  deduced  for  any  other 
curves  of  repairs. 

Having  now  before  us  a  mathematically  correct  method  of  solv- 
ing problems  of  this  nature,  it  may  be  well  to  examine  at  least 
one  of  the  incorrect  solutions  that  have  previously  been  published. 
In  the  following  paragraphs  will  be  found  an  erroneous  method  of 
attacking  this  problem. 

Fallacious  Formula  For  Determining  When  Increasing  Repairs 
Justify  Resurfacing  a  Pavement.— In  1906,  Mr.  George  M.  Tillson, 
Chief  Engineer,  Bureau  of  Highways,  Brooklyn,  New  York  City, 
read  a  paper*  before  the  Mechanical  and  Engineering  Section  of 
the  Franklin  Institute,  in  which  a  method  was  given  for  solving  a 
problem  that  often  comes  before  highway  engineers.  Mr.  Tillson 
said:  "It  is  often  desirable  to  know  positively  when, the  cost  of  re- 
pairing a  pavement  has  become  so  great  that  it  would  be  econom- 
ical to  relay  the  pavement.  This  can  be  determined  by  the  same 
formula,  as  its  result  governs  the  cost  of  maintaining  the  pavement 
perpetually,  so  that  when  the  annual  repairs  equal  or  exceed  the 
perpetual  annual  cost,  it  is  time  to  repave." 

R 

The  formula  to  which  he  alludes  is  A  +  CI  -\ =  annual  ex- 
pense, in  which  N 

N  —  life  of  pavement  in  years. 

C  =  first  cost  per  square  yard. 

I  =  rate   of  interest. 

A  =  amount  to  be  paid  in  each  year  to  create  a  sinking  fund  tc 
equal  C  in  N  years. 

R  =  total  cost  of  repairs. 

Mr.   Tillson  gives  the  following  example: 

"Take  for  instance  an  asphalt  pavement  and  let  N  equal  15  years, 
C  equal  $1.50,  I  equal  0.035,  and  R  equal  $0.40.  Then  A  will  equal 
0.0807  and  -tne  equation  becomes  $0.0807  +  0.0525  +  0.0267  = 
$0.1599  ;  or  if  the  street  be  repaved  it  will  cost  annually  $0.16  till 
It  is  renewed.  Consequently  if  the  life  of  asphalt  be  correctly  as- 
sumed at  15  years,  it  should  not  be  repaved  until  the  annual  cost 
approaches  $0.16  per  sq.  yd.  Assuming  the  life  to  be  20  instead 
of  15  years  and  applying  the  formula  as  before,  the  annual  cost 
will  be  reduced  to  $0.1356  per  yard.  The  author  believes  this  is  the 
true  scientific  way  in  which  to  determine  when  an  asphalt  pavement, 
from  an  economical  standpoint,  should  be  relaid." 

The  problem  that  Mr.  Tillson  undertakes  to  solve  Is  when  a  pave- 

•The  paper  was  reprinted  in  full  in  Engineering-Contracting, 
July  17,  1907. 


34  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ment  should  be  relaid.  Therefore  the  unknown  quantity  should  be 
y,  Ihe  number  of  years  of  economic  life  ;  but  where  does  y  appear 
in  Mr.  Tillson's  equation?  It  really  exists  on  both  sides  of  the 
equation  and  is  not  transposed  to  one  side  before  solving.  If  we 
study  Mr.  Tillson's  method,  we  see  that  it  amounts  to  this:  His 
equation  of  condition  is  that  when  current  repairs  (r)  for  any  given 
year  equal  "average  annual  cost,"  then  it  .is  time  to  renew  the  pave- 
ment. But  we  have  seen  that  his  assumed  average  "annual  ex- 

R 
pense  is  A  +  CI  -\  --  .     Now,  calling  the  current  repairs  for  any 

tfven  year  r,  we  have 


This  is  the  equation  that  we  are  to  solve.  Where  is  y,  the  num- 
ber of  years?  If  the  repairs  are  increasing  annually  —  and  that  is 
one  of  the  conditions  of  this  problem  —  r  must  be  a  function  of  y,  so 
we  have  y  on  the  left  side  of  the  equation.  What  is  R?  R  is  the 
total  cost  of  repairs  during  the  life  y,  so  R  is  also  a  function  of  y. 
Hence  the  very  thing  we  are  trying  to  ascertain  is  assumed  in  the 

R 
expression  -  . 

Tet  this  is  not  the  only  place  where  it  is  assumed,  for  the 
amount  to  be  paid  annually  into  a  sinking  fund,  A,  is  also  a 
function  of  y.  Hence  one  function  of  y  is  placed  on  the  left  side  of 
the  equation,  and  two  functions  of  y  and  a  constant  are  placed  on 
the  right  side.  We  are  then  told  that  if  we  will  juggle  with  the 
variable,  y,  until  there  is  an  equality,  we  have  solved  for  y.  Fur- 
ther comment  on  such  misuse  of  mathematics  appears  to  be 
unnecessary. 

Straight  Line  Formula  of  Depreciation.—  The  most  common  way 
of  determining  the  depreciated  value  of  a  machine,  where  ap- 
praisal of  physical  property  is  being  made,  is  by  the  "straight 
line  formula  of  depreciation."  This  consists  simply  in  regarding 
each  lost  year  of  plant  life  as  causing  a  depreciation  propor- 
tionate to  the  entire  loss  of  value  at  the  end  of  its  life.  In  other 
words,  the  rate  of  annual  depreciation  is  1  -r-  the  total  number  of 
years  of  life.  Thus,  when  the  average  life  of  a  railway  tie  is  10 
3'ears,  each  year  causes  a  depreciation  of  1/10,  or  10%  of  the  first 
cost  of  the  tie.  At  the  end  of  6  years  it  has  lost  60%,  and  its  de- 
preciated value  is  40%. 

For  some  purposes  of  appraisal  of  present  value  of  plant  units, 
this  method  is,  perhaps,  satisfactory.  Its  simplicity  appeals  to  all. 
But  with  increased  knowledge  as  to  life  and  cost  of  plant  repairs, 
this  simple  method  is  likely  to  give  way  to  the  exact  method  of  the 
Unit  Cost  Depreciation  Formula  (page  36). 

It  should  be  remembered  that  where  a  plant  contains  a  large 
number  of  similar  plant  units  of  varying  age  —  as  in  the  case  of  all 
old  railways  —  the  average  annual  renewals  are'  identically  the 
same  as  the  annual  depreciation  obtained  by  the  straight  line 


COST   KEEPING.  35 

formula.  Thus  if  locomotives  average  a  life  of  25  years,  annual 
depreciation  by  the  straight  line  formula  is  4%,  and  if  the  loco- 
motives are  of  equal  value  but  of  different  ages,  annual  renewals 
will  be  exactly  4%  of  the  cost  new. 

As  I  have  stated  elsewhere,  this  condition  makes  it  unnecessary 
to  use  a  sinking  fund  table  for  determining  depreciation,  since  re- 
newals Of  entire  plant  units  are  regarded  as  identically  the  same 
as  renewals  of  parts  of  each  plant  unit  commonly  called  repairs. 

The  Bastard  Straight  Line  Formula  of  Depreciation.— It  is  not  an 
uncommon  practice  to  "write  off"  a  certain  percentage  for  plant 
depreciation  each  year.  When  the  amount  written  off  is  a  fixed 
percentage  of  the  first  cost  of  the  plant  there  is  an  application  of 
the  straight  line  formula  of  depreciation.  However,  it  is  the  prac- 
tice among  many  accountants  to  "write  off"  each  year  a  percent- 
age of  the  last  year's  "book  value"  of  the  plant.  This  produces 
a  curve  of  "depreciated  value  of  plant"  that  rapidly  flattens  out, 
and  extends  to  infinity.  There  is  certainly  no  logical  defense  possi- 
ble for  this  method  of  estimating  depreciated  values. 

Sinking  Fund  Formula  of  Depreciation.— According  to  this  method 
it  is  assumed  that  the  total  depreciation  of  a  machine  or  structure 
at  any  given  age  is  the  amount  already  accumulated  in  a  sinking 
fund  established  for  its  redemption  at  the  end  of  its  life. 

Table  IV  (page  15)  gives  the  accumulation  (a)  of  $1  for  any 
number  of  years  (n). 

Table  III  (page  13)  gives  the  annual  deposit  (p)  in  a  sinking 
fund  to  redeem  $1  at  the  end  of  the  life  of  the  machine,  that  is 
at  the  end  of  N  years.  Hence  the  accumulation  in  n  years  of  an 
annual  deposit  of  d  will  be 

(16)  A  =  dXa, 

d  being  taken  for  N  years  (life)  from  Table  III, 
a  being  taken  for  «  years  (age)  from  Table  IV. 
But,  as  previously  shown  in  explaining  these  two  tables, 

1 

a  =  — , 
d1 

d1  being  taken  for  n  years  from  Table  III.     Hence, 
d 

(17)  A  = , 

d1 

d  being  taken  for  N  years  (life)   from  Table  III, 
d1  being  taken  for  n  years  (age)  from  Table  III. 
Equation   (16)    is  the  most  convenient  for  general  use,  but  it  is 
well  to  remember  that  equation  (17)   is  equally  applicable. 

To  illustrate  by  an  example  let  us  determine  the  depreciation  of 
a  railway  tie  6  years  of  age,  whose  total  life  will  be  10  years.  If 
we  assume  a  rate  of  interest  of  4%  we  have  by  formula  (17)  and 
Table  III 

d          .0829 

A  = •=) =55%   nearly, 

.  d1         .1508 
~ "fcich  is  the  percentage  of  depreciation  or  lost  value. 


36  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

Since  the  depreciation  by  this  sinking  fund  formula  is  55%  of 
the  first  cost,  the  present  value  is  45%. 

By  the  straight  line  formula  the  depreciation  is  60%  and  the 
present  value  is  40%. 

The  same  result  (55%  depreciation)  is  obtained  with  more  ex- 
pedition by  the  use  of  equation  (16)  and'  Tables  III  and  IV. 

See  pages  798  and  799  for  depreciation  curves  calculated  by 
the  method  just  described. 

Rational  or  Unit  Cost  Depreciation  Formula.  It  has  been  main- 
tained that  depreciated  value  is  "  purely  a  matter  of  judgment  " 
and  that  it  can  be  arrived  at  either  with  or  without  the  aid  of 
formulas.  That  judgment  plays  an  important  part  in  estimating 
any  value,  depreciated  or  undepreciated,  is  true,  but  that  judgment 
unaided  by  formulas  can  determine  value  is  not  true  where  the 
operating  expense  is  a  factor  in  the  value. 

Given  the  choice  between  an  old  and  a  new  plant  unit,  each 
capable  of  yielding  the  same  service  or  output,  the  new  plant  unit 
would  be  selected  unless  the  old  plant  unit  were  procurable  at  a 
price  such  that  "fixed  charges"  on  that  price  plus  the  annual 
operating  expenses  were  equal  to  or  less  than  the  corresponding 
annual  cost  with  the  new  plant  unit.  Any  business  man  will  grant 
the  truth  of  this  criterion  the  moment  he  understands  it.  Expressed 
as  a  formula  it  is: 

Rv  +  e  =  RC  +  E     .............................  (1) 

In  which  R  is  the  "fixed  charge"  rate  (interest,  etc.)  ;  v  is  the 
depreciated  value  of  the  old  plant  unit  whose  average  annual  oper- 
ating expenses  are  e;  C  is  the  first  cost  of  an  equivalent  new  plant 
unit  and  E  its  average  annual  operating  expenses.  From  this  equa- 
tion the  following  is  derived  : 


This  is  the  simplest  form  of  what  may  be  termed  the  Rational 
Depreciation  Formula,  a  more  general  form  of  which  is  the  Unit 
Cost  Depreciation  Formula  which  we  are  about  to  deduce.  This 
formula  was  first  deduced  in  this  "  Handbook  of  Cost  Data." 

Although  all  the  data  for  the  accurate  application  of  the  unit 
cost  depreciation  formula  may  not  always  be  available,  it  is  im- 
portant to  appreciate  that  it  is  the  only  rational  depreciation  for- 
mula of  perfect  generality  ;  and  that  any  other  depreciation  formula 
that  may  be  used  can  be  justified  only  on  the  ground  that  it  gives 
results  approximating  those  derivable  from  the  use  of  the  unit  cost 
depreciation  formula.  The  author  makes  no  qualification  whatso- 
ever in  the  foregoing  statement,  and  he  emphasizes  it  because 
there  still  remain  many  engineers  who  think  that  some  such  age-life 
formula  as  the  "  straight  line  formula  "  is  quite  as  logical  and 
fully  as  general  in  its  application  as  any  other.  Yet  no  advocate 
of  an  age-life  formula  has  yet  been  able  to  refute  the  following: 


COST  KEEPING.  37 

//  it  cannot  be  shown  tthat  the  substitiition  of  a  new  plant  unit 
(or  group  of  plant  units)  will  decrease  average  operating  expenses, 
then  the  value  of  the  old  plant  unit  is  as  great  as  the  value  of  a 
new  plant  unit. 

Recently  I  had  occasion  to  apply  this  generalization  in  the  case 
of  a  water  works  reservoir  that  was  30  years  old.  It  had  suffered 
no  natural  depreciation  except  a  small  leak  which  could  be  repaired 
for  about  $100.  The  reservoir  was  of  permanent  construction,  and 
it  was  adequate  in  capacity  not  only  for  present  but  for  future 
needs.  No  larger  reservoir  would  be  built  if  a  new  one  were  built 
to-day.  A  stand  pipe  could  not  be  economically  substituted  for  it, 
and  no  other  suitable  reservoir  site  existed  nearer  to  the  city  or 
more  desirable  because  of  greater  pressure.  I  held  that  its 
age  of  30  years  had  not  the  slightest  bearing  upon  its  depreciated 
value.  My  judgment  as  to  its  value  would  be  unaffected  were  it 
300  years  old  or  3  years  old.  The  criterion  of  its  value  was  en- 
tirely independent  of  its  age.  The  criterion  was  the  total  annual 
cost  of  the  most  economical  substitute  for  it,  and  by  this  test  the  30- 
year-old  reservoir,  instead  of  being  worth  less  than  a  new  alterna- 
tive reservoir,  was  worth  more.  This  added  value  is  to  be  regarded 
as  the  value  of  the  reservoir  site. 

In  the  following  discussion  of  the  unit  cost  depreciation  formula 
the  term  "  old  plant "  will  be  used  to  designate  the  existing  plant 
unit  or  group  of  units  whose  depreciated  value  is  to  be  determined, 
and  the  term  "  new  plant  "  will  designate  the  most  economic  new 
plant  unit  having  the  same  annual  output  as  the  old  plant  unit. 
Wherever  the  word  "  annual "  occurs,  it  is  intended  to  mean 
"  equated  annual  "  or  true  average  annual.  Where  the  word  "  an- 
nual "  occurs  in  reference  to  the  old  plant,  it  relates  to  the  average 
for  the  remaining  years  of  its  life,  but  where  the  word  "  annual  " 
occurs  in  reference  to  the  new  plant,  it  relates  to  the  average  for 
its  total  economic  life.  Small  letters  relate  to  the  old  plant,  and 
capital  letters  relate  to  the  new  plant. 
Let  — 

a  —  Age   of   old   plant   in   years. 

C  —  First  cost  of  the  new  plant. 

c  =  First   cost  of  the   old   plant. 
D  =  Depreciation  annuity  rate  for  the  total  natural  life. 

d  —  Ditto   for   remaining    natural    life. 

E  =  Equated  annual  operating  expenses  (including  taxes)  dur- 
ing entire  life  of  the  new  plant,  inclusive  of  repairs  and 
cost  of  natural  depreciation,  but  exclusive  of  functional 
depreciation  annuity. 

e  —  Ditto  for  old  plant  during  its  remaining  life. 

F  =  Functional  depreciation  annuity  rate  for  new  plant. 

/  =  Functional  depreciation  annuity  rate  for  old  plant. 
K  —  Total   equated   annual   cost    during   entire   life    of   the    new 
plant. 

lc  =  Total  equated  annual  cost  during  remaining  life  of  the  old 

plant. 
N  =  Total  life  of  new  plant  in  years. 

n  =  Remaining  life  of  old  plant  in  years. 

R  =  Interest   rate  plus  functional   depreciation  rate. 

r  =  Interest  rate,  including  risk  insurance  and  proprietary  su- 
pervision not  included  in  F,  f,  E.  e. 

S  =  Salvage  value  of  new  plant. 


38  HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


s  =  Salvage  value  of  old  plant.  . 

U  —  Unit  cost  of  product  of  new  plant. 
u  =  Unit  cost  of  product  of  old  plant. 
i>  =  Depreciated   value   of  old  plant. 
Y  =  Number  of  units  annual  product  with  new  plant. 
y  =  Ditto  with  old  plant. 

Then  we  have  : 
K 

V=y= 


k        e+(v  — 
u  =  —  =  -     ...................  (4) 

y  y 

The  old  plant  must  have  a  depreciated  value,  v,  such  that  the 
unit  cost,  u,  of  its  product  must  equal  the  unit  cost,  U,  of  the 
product  of  the  new  plant.  Were  u  more  than  U,  it  would  be  more 
profitable  to  buy  the  new  plant.  Were  u  less  than  U,  it  would  be 
more  profitable  to  buy  the  old  plant.  But  a  condition  of  equity 
exists  only  when  it  is  as  profitable  to  buy  the  old  plant  at  the  value, 
v,  as  to  buy  the  new  plant  at  the  cost  C.  This  condition  of  equity 
is  satisfied  when  u  —  U. 

Then  — 

+(v  —  s)f  +  rv 


y    \ 

= 1 

r  +  fl 


Y  y 

E  +(C  —  S)  F  +  rC       e  —  fs    1 
I   (6) 


Equation  (6)  is  the  most  general  expression  of  the  economic  de- 
preciation formula,  but  it  may  be  reduced  to  much  simpler  terms 
for  ordinary  use.  Usually  Y  —  y,  and  S  =  s,  or  if  these  are  not 
exactly  equal  the  quality  is  so  close  that  v  is  not  appreciably 
affected  by  assuming-  perfect  equality.  Also  it  often  happens  that 
F  and  /  are  equal  or  nearly  so.  Assuming  these  equalities,  we 
have: 

E  —  e  e  —  E 

v  =  C  H =  C (7) 

r  +  /  R 

Equation  (7)  is  the  economic  depreciation  formula  in  a  simplified 
but  still  very  general  form.  Expressed  verbally.  Equation  (7)  is: 

Assuming  equal  gross  income,  equal  annual  output,  equal  salvage 
value  and  equal  prospective  functional  life  for  new  and  old  plant 
units,  the  depreciated  value  of  an  old  plant  unit  is  equal  to  the 
cost  of  a  new  plant  unit  of  most  economic  design  minus  the  capi- 
talized difference  in  their  equated  annual  operating  expenses  during 
the  prospective  economic  life. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  rate  of  capitalization  (R)  is  the  sum  of 
the  interest  rate  (r)  and  the  functional  depreciation  rate  (/)  when 
the  operating  expenses  (e  and  E)  do  not  include  functional  depre- 
ciation annuities.  This  is  an  important  point,  and  one  that  is 
frequently  overlooked  in  capitalizing  incomes  and  expenses. 


COST  KLEP1NG.  39 

Formula  for  Accrued  Natural  Depreciation:  When  functional 
depreciation  is  non-existent,  we  have  f  =  o,  and  then  the  depre- 
ciation formula,  equation  (7),  becomes: 


(8) 


In  this  case  C  is  the  cost  new  of  a  plant  unit  of  the  same  size 
and  class  as  the  old  unit  whose  depreciated  value  is  v.  E  is  the 
equated  annual  operating  expense,  including  the  depreciation  an- 
nuity required  for  a  sinking  fund  to  redeem  the  full  wearing  value 
(C  —  S),  during  N  years  total  natural  life  of  the  unit;  and  e  is  the 
equated  annual  operating  expense,  including  the  depreciation  an- 
nuity required  for  a  sinking  fund  to  redeem  the  remaining  wearing 
value  (v  —  s)  during  the  remaining  natural  life  of  n  years. 

If  annual  operating  expenses  other  than  depreciation  are  M, 
and  are  the  same  for  a  new  as  for  an  old  plant  unit,  we  have  : 

E  =  D  (C  —  S)+  M (9) 

e  =  d  (v  —  sj+  M (10) 

Substituting  in  equation  (8),  and  remembering  that  s  =  S,  we 
have : 

r  C  —  d  (v  —  S )  +  D  ( C  —  S) 

v  = (11) 

r 
D  +  r 

v  =  S  H (C  —  S) (12) 

d  +  r 

Equation  (12)  gives  identically  the  same  results  as  the  ordinary 
sinking  fund  formula  for  depreciation,  which  is: 


[H  +  r)a  —  1   I 
1 —  I      (C  —  8) 
(1  +  r)N  —  i  J 


(13) 


That  Equations  (12)  and  (13)  give  identical  results  may  be 
shown  by  the  use  of  sinking  fund  tables  in  the  solution  of  specific 
numerical  examples.  In  view  of  the  importance  of  the  subject,  a 
strict  mathematical  proof  may  be  demanded  by  some  engineers. 
Accordingly  it  is  given  herewith. 

Proof  of  Identity  of  Equations  (12)  and  (13): 

n  =  N  —  a  ....................................  (14) 


(15) 


(16) 


Substitute   these  values  of  D   and  d  in  Equation    (12'). 


40  HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


(1  4.  r)N  —  1 


+  r 


(1  +  r)N-a  —  1 


+  r)N-a  —  in 

. L    (C  —  S)    .(17) 


Multiplying-   both    numerator   and   denominator   by    (1  +  rjN-a   we 
have : 

+r)N 

S) 


•(1  -f  r)o-| 

(C  — 

—  1) 


(1  +  r)N 

[(1  +  r)a  — 1    - 
1 (C  —  S)     (18) 
( 1  -|-  r )  N  —  1    J 

„  Since  Equation  (18)  is  the  same  as  Equation  (13),  it  follows  that 
Equation  (12)  gives  the  same  value  for  v  as  does  Equation  (13), 
which  was  to  be  proved.  Hence  the  special  case,  Equation  (12), 
of  the  rational  depreciation  formula,  Equation  (8),  is  seen  to  be 
another  form  of  the  sinking  fund  formula  for  depreciation.  Hence 
the  sinking  fund  formula  is  correctly  applicable  only  where  natural 
depreciation  is  involved  and  only  where  current  repairs  are  uniform 
or  absent. 

Inspections  and  Tests.  In  order  to  apply  the  "  rational  depre- 
ciation formula,"  it  is  usually  necessary  to  inspect  the  plant  units 
and  it  is  often  necessary  to  test  some  classes  of  them.  These  steps 
are  taken  in  order  to  estimate  the  prospective  operating  expenses. 

Studies  of  the  accounting-  records  may  be  of  considerable  aid  in 
determining  what  the  prospective  costs  of  repairs  will  be  by  show- 
ing the  amount,  character,  expense  and  dates  of  past  repairs.  Thus, 
a  boiler  whose  flues  have  been  recently  renewed  will  obviously  cause 
less  prospective  operating  expense  than  one  whose  flues  are  old ; 
therefore  it  will  have  a  higher  depreciated  value. 

Tests  of  the  efficiency  of  a  pump  will  indicate  its  fuel  consump- 
tion as  contrasted  with  a  new  pump.  Inspection  of  the  pump  will 
disclose  what  parts  are  worn,  and  what  the  probable  date  of  their 
renewal  will  be.  With  these  factors  known,  and  with  a  knowledge 
of  efficiency  and  maintenance  costs  of  modern  pumps,  the  "  rational 
depreciation  formula "  can  be  applied  with  considerable  accuracy. 
Whereas  merely  to  guess  at  the  depreciated  value  after  an  inspec- 
tion is  likely  to  yield  results  far  from  the  truth.  To  apply  an 
"  age-life  formula  "  is  likely  to  result  in  even  greater  error.  This 
is  notably  so  in  the  case  of  buildings,  reservoirs  and  other  struc- 
tures that  are  practically  everlasting  if  properly  maintained. 

Criterion  for  Retiring  Obsolete  or  Inadequate  Plant.  The  general 
formula  for  depreciated  value,  Equation  (5),  may  be  used  as  a 
criterion  for  determining  whether  a  plant  unit  has  ceased  to  be 
economic  and  should  be  retired.  The  condition  for  such  retirement 


COST  KEEPING.  41 

is  that  the  depreciated  value,  v,  shall  be  equal  to  or  less  than  the 
salvage  value,  s;  for  if  the  depreciated  value,  v,  has  reached  so  low 
an  amount  that  the  plant  has  no  greater  value  as  an  economic 
producing  instrument  than  its  salvage  value,  then  it  is  worth  more 
to  its  owner  as  merchandise  than  as  a  productive  instrument. 
Hence  if  we  let  v  =  s  and  y  —  Y,  equation  (5)  becomes: 

E  +(C  —  S)  F  +  rC  —  e  +  r  s     (19) 

When  the  equality  of  (19)  is  destroyed  because  the  left  hand 
member  of  (19)  is  less  than  the  right  hand  member,  the  old  plant 
should  be  retired  in  favor  of  the  new  plant. 

How  to  Prepare  Estimates  and  Bids. — In  estimating  a  unit  price 
for  any  kind  of  work,  contractors  often  place  too  much  reliance 
on  published  prices  for  similar  work.  There  are  seven  serious 
sources  of  error  in  so  doing :  ( 1 )  The  conditions  may  vary  greatly  in 
places  but  a  few  miles  apart ;  ( 2 )  rates  of  wages  often  vary  widely, 
being,  for  example,  higher  in  large  cities  than  in  small  cities  or  in 
the  country  ;  ( 3 )  specifications  and  the  interpretations  of  identical 
specification  clauses  by  different  engineers  vary  greatly  ;  ( 4 )  con- 
tractors inexperienced  in  the  particular  work  in  question  often  have 
bid  prices  altogether  too  low  ;  ( 5 )  the  bidding  prices  may  be  pur- 
posely unbalanced,  being  too  high  on  certain  items  and  too  low  on 
others;  (6)  a  unit  price  that  is  fair  for  a  large  job  is  generally  too 
low  for  a  small  job;  (7)  a  contractor  already  equipped  with  a 
plant  can  often  afford  to  bid  lower  than  the  contractors  not  so 
equipped. 

While  previous  bidding  prices  should  be  used  as  a  guide,  they 
should  never  be  relied  upon  implicitly  if  the  work  is  of  any  con- 
siderable magnitude.  Each  item  should  be  estimated  in  detail,  and 
this  estimating  should  be  done  systematically  to  avoid  some  serious 
omission.  The  cost  of  any  item  of  work  may  be  divided  into  five 
parts : 

1.  Development  expenses. 

2.  Plant  expense  and  supplies. 

3.  Materials. 

4.  Labor. 

5.  Superintendence  and  general  expense   (overhead  charges). 

Development  expense  Includes  the  cost  of  making  roads,  deliver- 
ing and  installing  the  plant,  draining  the  site  of  the  work,  salaries 
of  foremen  and  others  on  the  idle  list  pending  the  beginning  of 
work,  and  all  expenses  involved  in  getting  ready  to  build  the 
structure.  On  small  jobs  this  item  of  development  expense  is  often 
a  very  large  percentage  of  the  total  cost ;  and  on  large  jobs  it 
seldom  can  be  neglected  in  estimating  probable  unit  costs. 

Development  expense  has  to  be  estimated  for  each  particular 
job,  by  securing  freight  rates  or  estimates  for  carting,  etc.  In 
some  cases  it  includes  temporary  road  building,  installing  pipes  for 
water  supply,  etc. 

Plant    expense    includes    interest,    repairs,    depreciation    and    in- 


42  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

surance  on  all  tools,  machines,  buildings,  stored  materials,  trestles, 
falsework ;  and  supplies  include  fuel,  oil,  etc. 

Materials  include  only  such  materials  as  actually  go  into  the  fin- 
ished structure,  and  the  wastage  of  materials  due  to  breakage  in 
handling  or  sawing  and  shaping.  The  cost  of  materials  includes 
freight  and  hauling  to  the  site  of  work. 

Labor  includes  all  skilled  and  common  labor,  except  superintend- 
ents, clerks  and  office  men. 

Superintendence  and  general  expense  includes  foremen,  man- 
agers, timekeepers,  watchmen,  bookkeepers,  supply  clerks,  rents, 
taxes,  traveling  and  entertaining  expenses,  stationery,  etc. 

To  the  experinced  contractor  an  enumeration  of  these  items  may 
seem  unnecessary,  but  it  is  indeed  surprising  to  see  how  often  inex- 
perienced contractors  err  through  failure  to  consider  all  of  these 
items.  Engineers,  and  not  always  young  engineers,  are  prone 
to  omit  development  and  plant  expenses,  either  in  whole  or  in 
part,  from  their  estimates  of  cost. 

Returning  to  the  subject  of  deciding  upon  bidding  prices,  make  it 
a  practice  always  to  check  the  quantities  given  in  the  bidding  sheet 
as  far  as  possible.  If  the  contract  is  a  large  one,  or  the  work  is 
such  that  you  cannot  personally  do  all  the  checking,  employ  an 
engineer  to  do  so.  It  is  astonishing  to  note  the  number  of  errors, 
typographically  or  otherwise  made,  that  creep  into  quantity  sheets. 
An  error  of  transposition  is  not  uncommon ;  thus,  the  engineer 
may  have  correctly  determined  that  there  are  3,000  cu.  yds.  of  em- 
bankment and  1,200  cu.  yds.  of  riprap,  but  in  the  bidding  sheet 
the  quantities  may  be  transposed  so  as  to  read,  1,200  cu.  yds. 
of  embankment  and  3,000  cu.  yds.  of  riprap.  In  looking  over  the 
quantities,  therefore,  always  ask  yourself  whether  each  quantity 
"looks  about  right,"  or  not.  A  shrewd  contractor  will  thus  dis- 
cover errors  that  a  whole  staff  of  engineers  have  overlooked. 
Whenever  you  see  a  small,  and  what  appears  to  be  an  arbitrary 
quantity,  like  10  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  or  50  cu.  yds.  of  rock  ex- 
cavation, look  carefully  over  the  plans  and  specifications  to  dis- 
cover if  possible  where  this  quantity  is  shown  in  detail.  If  it  can- 
not be  found  that  the  quantity  has  been  actually  measured,  it  is 
safe  to  assume  that  it  has  been  guessed  at,  and  that  in  conse- 
quence it  may  subsequently  prove  to  be  an  under-estimate.  Bid 
liberally  on  such  items,  but  bid  not  too  liberally.  More  contractors, 
otherwise  shrewd,  than  one  would  expect  to  see  make  the  error  of 
bidding  unreasonably  high  on  such  small  items.  The  result  some- 
times is  that  their  bids  are  rejected  because  they  are  "unbalanced"  ; 
or,  if  accepted,  and  later  it  is  found  that  a  larger  quantity  of  the 
unbalanced  item  exists,  the  engineers  may  either  change  the  plans 
or  relet  the  work  covering  that  item.  Set  it  down  that  seldom 
is  it  good  business  policy  to  bid  an  unreasonably  high  price  on 
any  item  even  on  public  works  contracts,  and  it  never  is  wise  to 
do  so  on  private  contracts.  Even  though  the  item  is  small,  and  the 
cost  of  putting  up  a  plant  to  perform  the  work  is  large,  still  bid 
only  a  little  higher  price  on  the  item  than  you  would  bid  if  it 


COST  KEEPING.  43 

Were  many  times  larger,  and  distribute  the  estimated  cost  of  plant 
over  the  other  items. 

A  Schedule  of  Items  of  Cost. — In  preparing  an  estimate  of  unit 
cost  there  is  always  danger  of  omitting  some  important  item.  To 
avoid  such  an  omission  I  find  it  desirable  to  compare  my  estimates 
with  a  schedule  of  items,  such  as  follows: 

1.  Cost  of  temporary  roadways 

2.  Cost  of  right  of  way  through  farms,  etc. 

3.  Cost  of  clearing  and  grubbing  the  site. 

4.  Cost  of  snow  removal  and  draining  the  site. 

5.  Cost  of  the  site. 

6.  Cost  of  sheds,   barns,  offices,  etc. 

7.  Cost  of  delivering  and  installing  plant. 

8.  Cost  of  supplies,   including  explosives,  water,  fuel,  oil,  etc. 

9.  Plant,  interest,   depreciation,  and  repairs. 

10.  Cost  of  shifting  plant  units  from  one  point  of  attack  to  an- 

other, including  lost  time  of  workmen  waiting  during  the 
shifting. 

11.  Cost   of   trestles,    falsework,    bracing,    forms   and   temporary 

supports. 

12.  Quarry  rent,  sand  pit  rent,  timber  stumpage,  etc. 

13.  Cost  of  materials  f.  o.  b.  for  a  unit  of  the  structure,  includ- 

ing wastage. 

14.  Freight   on   materials. 

15.  Cost  of  unloading,  hauling  and  storing  of  materials. 

16.  Cost  of  delivery  and  re-handling  materials  until  at  the  place 

to  be  used. 

17.  Labor   of  handling,    shaping  and  placing  materials,   and   all 

operating  labor. 

18.  Foremen's  salaries. 

19.  Salaries  of  watchmen,  timekeepers,  clerks,  bookkeepers,  etc. 

20.  Office  and  traveling  expenses. 

21.  Interest  on  cash  capital  other  than  plant. 

22.  Taxes,  licenses  and  insurance  of  property. 

23.  Insurance  of  workmen  and  the  public  against  accident. 

24.  Premium    paid    to    bondsmen    or    surety    company   for    bond 

required. 

25.  Advertising,   legal   expense,   charity. 

26.  Discount   on   warrants,   notes   or   other  paper   payments   for 

work  done. 

27.  Riot  protection  and  detective  work. 

28.  Sanitation. 

29.  Housing  plant  during  winter. 

30.  Providing  waterproof  garments. 

31.  Engineering. 

32.  Percentage    added    to    materials    and    percentage    added    to 

labor,  to  cover  contingencies. 

33.  Percentage  for  profit. 

Plant  Expense. — Plant  expense  is  commonly  underestimated. 
First  it  is  necessary  to  consider  the  time  limit  allowed  for  the 


44  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

work.  Then  a  plant  must  be  figured  upon  that  will  perform  the 
work  at  least  20%  within  the  time  limit,  making  also  liberal  allow- 
ances for  bad  weather  delays,  as  well  as  for  delays  in  delivering 
and  installing  the  plant,  and  delays  due  to  breakdowns. 

Use  with  great  caution  the  figures  of  output  given  in  most  cata- 
logs ;  they  are  almost  invariably  based  upon  ideal  conditions,  and 
not  infrequently  are  wholly  deceptive.  Even  where  the  output  of  a 
machine  is  correctly  stated,  remember  that  such  an  output  may  not 
be  possible  in  your  case,  due  to  inability  to  get  materials  to  the 
machine  or  away  from  it.  Consider  always  the  limiting  factor. 
A  derrick,  for  example,  may  be  able  to  handle  200  cu.  yds.  a  day, 
but  if  it  serves  a  few  men  working  in  a  confined  space,  its  actual 
output  may  not  be  30  cu.  yds.  Time  and  again  this  self-evident 
fact  has  not  been  evident  to  the  inexperienced  man. 

To  give  another  example,  suppose  the  work  is  rock  excavation. 
Do  not  guess  at  the  number  of  rock-drills  required  ;  but  estimate 
the  probable  spacing  of  the  drill  holes  in  the  given  kind  of  rock 
and  from  this  calculate  the  number  of  cubic  yards  of  rock  each 
drill  will  break  daily  on  a  basis  of,  say,  50  ft.  of  hole  drilled 
per  machine  per  shift.  Knowing  the  time  limit,  compute  the  num- 
ber of  drills  required ;  and,  knowing  the  number  of  drills,  com- 
pute the  boiler  power  required.  Guess  at  nothing.  If  you  have  no 
other  data,  secure,  by  letter,  some  estimates  of  output  from  the 
large  and  old  manufacturing  firms,  whose  estimates  are  frequently 
very  close  to  the  truth. 

Allow  liberally  for  plant  that  is  idle  during  shop  repairs.  On 
railways,  for  example,  8  to  12%  of  the  total  number  of  locomotives 
are  constantly  in  the  shop  undergoing  repairs. 

Having  liberally  estimated  the  size  and  kind  of  plant  required, 
and  having  secured  quotations  on  the  plant,  charge  the  full  cost 
of  the  plant  up  to  the  job  to  be  done,  and  determine  how  many 
cents  per  yard,  or  per  other  units  involved,  are  thus  chargeable  to 
first  cost  of  plant.  This  will  give  a  maximum  charge,  and  it  is  well 
to  know  the  worst.  But  if  the  full  cost  of  a  plant  is  charged  to  a 
small  job,  some  other  contractor  will  probably  get  the  work.  Go, 
therefore,  to  a  dealer  in  second-hand  machinery,  and  ask  him  to 
name  a  fair  price  on  a  second-hand  plant  such  as  yours  will  be 
when  you  are  through  with  it.  If  you  can  secure  a  tentative  bid  on 
the  machinery,  you  will  have  a  fairly  reliable  estimate  of  the  sal- 
vage value.  In  most  cases  you  can  form  some  estimate  of  the  sal- 
vage value,  by  finding  what  second-hand  plants  are  selling  for. 
If  you  are  still  afraid  that  your  charge  for  depreciation  will  be  so 
high  as  to  lose  the  job,  there  is  left  just  one  safe  way  of  estimating, 
namely,  to  secure  a  rental  quotation.  There  are  many  firms  who 
make  a  business  of  renting  contracting  plants,  and  such  a  plant  as 
is  wanted  can  usually  be  rented  for  a  daily  or  monthly  price  that 
includes  ordinary  wear  and  tear.  The  longer  the  plant  is  to  be 
used  the  lower  the  daily  rate  of  rent,  therefore  be  careful  to  secure 
a  sliding  scale  lease.  A  hoisting  engine  and  boiler  may  be  rented 
for,  say,  $2  a  day,  if  the  period  is  to  be  30  days ;  but,  for  each  added 


COST  KEEPING.  45 

30  days,  there  should  be  a  reduction  in  the  rate,  down  to,  say,  $1, 
beyond  which  no  further  reduction  is  given.  The  reason  why  such 
a  sliding  scale  can  be  secured  is  briefly  this: 

The  season  for  contract  work  is  usually  limited ;  road  work,  for 
example,  is  limited  to  the  summer  and  fall  months.  Most  of  the 
contracts  are  awarded  at  an  early  date,  so  that  if  a  plant  remains 
unrented  well  into  the  season,  the  chance  of  renting  it  falls  off 
rapidly.  Periods  of  idleness  between  times  of  rental  soon  cut  down 
the  net  income  from  a  plant,  yet  interest  on  the  investment  goes  on 
uninterruptedly.  If  these  periods  of  idleness  can  be  reduced  the 
owner  of  a  plant  can  afford  to  accept  a  lower  per  diem  rate  of 
rental,  yet  be  a  gainer  at  the  end  of  the  year. 

Then,  too,  there  are  some  seasons  when  contractors  and  their 
plants  are  abundant,  and  work  is  scarce.  The  revenues  from  such 
plants  are  then  correspondingly  small. 

I  have  found  that  a  roadmaking  plant  does  not  average  100  days 
actually  worked  per  year.  A  10-ton  steam  roller  costs,  say,  $2,500  ; 
and,  if  interest  is  charged  at  6%  per  annum,  we  have  $150  to  be 
distributed  over  100  days — not  over  365  days,  as  many  engineers 
have  done. 

Depreciation,  of  course,  does  not  go  on  as  rapidly  when  a  plant 
is  idle  as  when  working,  provided  the  plant  is  properly  housed  and 
cared  for ;  but  the  housing  and  the  care  cost  money.  Moreover, 
many  kinds  of  machines  become  obsolete  in  a  few  years,  so  that 
depreciation  cannot  be  said  wholly  to  cease  while  the  plant  is  idle. 
All  the  annual  repairs  and  depreciation  and  all  the  cost  of  hous- 
ing and  caring  for  the  plant  should  be  distributed  over  the  average 
number  of  days  actually  worked.  If,  on  a  10-ton  steam  roller,  the 
annual  depreciation  is  $200,  we  have  $200 -f- 100,  or  $2  per  day 
worked;  and  if  we  add  to  this  the  $1.50  per  day  charged  to  in- 
terest, we  have  a  total  of  $3.50  per  day  worked.  Now,  such  a 
charge  should  be  made  by  the  contractor  even  where  he  uses  his 
own  roller. 

It  may  be  asked  why  the  interest,  repairs  and  depreciation  are 
distributed  over  the  days  actually  worked.  The  answer  is  that  the 
output  of  the  plant  is  usually  estimated  as  so  and  so  many  units 
per  day,  and  that,  in  consequence,  all  costs  should  be  reduced  to 
the  same  basis. 

In  such  states  as  New  York  there  are  only  about  8  months  of 
the  year,  and  about  21  or  22  days  per  month,  suitable  for  economic 
outdoor  work  of  the  class  of  earth  excavation.  Weather  records 
will  enable  any  one  to  predict  with  reasonable  accuracy  the  num- 
ber of  working  days  per  year  in  any  locality. 

Cost  of  Superintendence  and  General  Expense.— The  cost  of  fore- 
manship  on  contract  work  seldom  exceeds  15%  of  the  cost  of  labor, 
and  it  seldom  runs  much  below  5%.  If  one  must  guess,  perhaps  10% 
is  a  fair  average.  These  percentages  include  the  salaries  of  fore- 
men only.  The  salaries  of  general  superintendents  and  office  men, 
and  all  office  expenses  are  preferably  called  "general  expenses" 
or  "fixed  expenses."  General  expenses  seldom  amount  to  less  than 
4%,  and  on  small,  intermittent  job  work  they  may  run  much  higher. 


46  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  estimating  supervision  by  the  percentage  method,  care  should 
be  taken  to  exclude  the  cost  of  materials  and  to  base  the  estimate 
upon  the  labor  only.  As  an  illustration :  The  General  Expenses 
for  the  average  American  railway  are  3.9%  of  the  total  expense  of 
operation  (including  maintenance),  distributed  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

Salaries   of   general    officers 0.826 

Salaries    of    clerks    and    attendants 1.372 

General   office   expenses   and   supplies 0.263 

Insurance     0.481 

Law   expenses 0.452 

Stationery  and  printing    (general   office) 0.182 

Other    expenses 0.300 


Total   general   expense 3.876 

This  does  not  include  superintendence  of  "maintenance  of  way," 
or  of  "maintenance  of  equipment,"  nor .  of  "conducting  transporta- 
tion." The  first  of  these  items  is  not  reported  separately,  but  we 
shall  assume  it  to  be  the  same  as  maintenance  of  equipment  since 
the  gross  expense  for  maintenance  of  way  is  practically  the  same 
as  for  maintenance  of  equipment. 

Per  cent. 

Maintenance  of   way    (assumed)  .  . 0.561 

Maintenance    of    equipment 0.561 

Conducting     transportation 1.776 


2.898 

This  gives  a  total  of  practically  3%  for  superintendence  and  39r 
more  for  general  expense  if  we  exclude  "insurance"  and  "law  ex- 
pense" from  general  expense.  But  this  combined  6%  is  6%  of  the 
gross  operating  and  maintenance  expense,  only  60%  of  which  is 
labor,  the  remaining  40%  being  for  materials,  supplies,  etc.  Hence, 
the  percentage  based  on  labor  alone  is  10%  for  general  expense  and 
superintendence,  about  equally  divided  between  the  two.  For 
further  study  of  these,  see  the  Railway  Section. 

For  data  on  the  expense  of  engineering  supervision  of  public 
works,  see  the  Surveying  and  Engineering  Section. 

Throughout  this  book  are  numerous  data  on  costs  of  supervi- 
sion, for  which  consult  the  index  under  Supervision.  Also  con- 
sult the  index  under  General  Expense. 

Percentage  to  Allow  for  Contingencies. — After  estimating  the 
probable  cost  of  every  item  of  work  as  closely  as  possible,  including 
superintendence  and  general  expenses,  a  percentage  should  generally 
be  added  for  contingencies.  A  very  common  allowance  is  10%  ; 
but  no  such  rough  guessing  is  indulged  in  by  either  a  careful  engi- 
neer or  by  an  experienced  contractor. 

Contingencies  is  an  item  used  to  insure  against  oversights  and 
ignorance.  On  work  where  sub-contracts  can  be  let  at  once  for  the 
materials,  there  is  practically  no  risk  taken  on  materials,  hence 
there  is  no  justification,  on  the  part  of  the  contractor,  in  making  an 
allowance  to  cover  contingencies  on  materials.  The  engineer  who 
designs  a  structure  may  be  justified  in  making  such  an  allowance 
to  cover  possible  bills  for  "extras,"  but  not  otherwise.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  often  wise  to  make  an  allowance  to  cover  pos- 


COST   KEEPING.  47 

sible  inefficiency  of  laborers,  or  possible  strikes,  or  possible  rise  in 
rates  of  wages ;  for,  after  estimating  the  average  cost  of  labor  on 
a  given  structure,  there  is  always  some  risk  of  exceeding  the  aver- 
age, for  some  unforeseen  reason.  On  large  jobs  both  the  design- 
ing engineer  and  the  contractor  are  justified  in  adding  from  5  to 
20%  to  estimated  labor  costs  to  cover  contingencies.  If  the  price 
of  materials  has  been  steadily  rising,  then  a  study  should  be  made  of 
price  curves  extending  over  several  years  in  order  that  some  rational 
allowance  may  be  made  for  the  probable  rise  in  prices  of  materials 
before  they  can  be  sub-contracted  for.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  prices 
are  on  the  downward  curve,  a  contractor  may  feel  justified  in 
bidding  lower  than  he  otherwise  would.  The  best  way  to  arrive  at 
an  allowance  for  contingencies  is  to  keep  a  full  record  of  the  esti- 
mated cost  of  each  item  of  work,  and  subsequently  compare  it  with 
the  actual  cost.  In  this  way  it  will  be  found  that  there  is  seldom 
a  job  on  which  every  item  of  cost  can  be  accurately  predicted. 

Percentage  to  Allow  for  Profits — The  common  method  of  adding 
uniformly  10  or  15%  for  profits  is  open  to  serious  objections,  among 
which  are  the  following:  (1)  The  percentage  to  add  for  profits  on 
materials  should  usually  be  less  than  the  percentage  to  add  for 
profits  on  labor,  particularly  when  profits  and  contingencies  are 
lumped  together ;  ( 2 )  the  time  element  and  the  size  of  the  job 
should  always  be  factors  in  considering  profits,  for  profits  are, 
strictly  speaking,  the  salaries  of  the  contractors;  (3)  the  number 
of  dollars'  worth  of  contract  work  that  can  be  secured  and  handled 
each  average  year  must  be  considered,  for  the  reason  just  given  ; 
(4)  the  percentage  for  profits  is  often  made  to  include  interest  on 
plant  and  on  cash  capital  invested,  and,  if  so,  there  is  added  rea- 
son for  not  using  a  uniform  percentage  like  15%. 

That  there  is  need  of  calling  attention  to  these  elementary  prin- 
ciples is  apparent  when  one  notes  erroneous  statements  found  in 
many  text-books. 

On  materials,  such  as  brick,  timber  and  steel,  that  can  be  bought 
by  sub-contract  immediately  after  the  award  of  the  main  contract, 
one  may  estimate  a  low  profit,  say,  10  or  15%  ;  but  on  labor  the 
profit  should  usually  range  from  15  to  25%,  or  even  higher  if  con- 
tingencies are  included  in  the  percentage  allowed  for  profits. 

On  contract  work  that  can  be  done  only  during  a  few  months  of 
the  year,  and  especially  on  work  requiring  a  large  investment  in 
plant,  such  for  example  as  macadam  road  work,  the  percentage  of 
profits  must  usually  be  above  the  average  of  the  percentage  on  work 
that  extends  over  a  longer  period.  If  engineers  fully  realized  the 
importance  of  this  fact  they  would  be  at  more  pains  to  award  all 
highway  contracts  early  in  the  spring  of  the  year,  so  that  a  longer 
season  would  be  available  than  is  now  the  case. 

Causes  of  Underestimates.— Engineers  have  been  said  to  be  men 
who  can  be  relied  upon  in  every  respect  save  one — ability  to  pre- 
dict the  cost  o£  work.  The  reasons  why  engineers'  estimates  have 
so  often  been  unreliable  may  be  enumerated  as  follows : 

1.  Students  of  engineering  are  seldom  trained  in  the  art  of  cost 
estimating,  but  left  to  acquire  that  art  haphazard  after  graduation. 


48  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

2.  Articles   descriptive   of  engineering   structures   seldom   contain 
an  analysis  of  the  unit  costs. 

3.  A  subsurface  survey  is  frequently  not  made;   and,   as  a  con- 
sequence, unexpected  materials  are  encountered  in  excavating. 

4.  A    study   of   the   sources   of   local   materials,    their    suitability 
for  the  work,  and  their  unit  cost  delivered,  is  often 'not  made;  and, 
as    a    result,    specifications    are    frequently    drawn    that    cannot    be 
lived  up  to  except  by  importing  materials  at  great  expense. 

5.  The  cost  of  clearing,   and  draining  the  work  is  often  under- 
estimated,  or   ignored   entirely. 

6.  The  cost   of   temporary   bracing,    support,    roadways   and    de- 
velopment expenses  are  frequently  underestimated  or  omitted. 

7.  Delays  due  to  bad  weather,  and  delays  incident  to  the  shifting 
of  plant  from  place  to  place  are  often  not  considered. 

8.  Interest   and    depreciation    of   plant,    and    the   percentage    for 
profits,   are  usually  underestimated. 

9.  Inadequate  allowance   is  made  for   superintendence   and    gen- 
eral expense. 

10.  The   cost   of   inspection   and    engineering   may   be   underesti- 
mated. 

11.  Legal  expenses  due  to  the  abandonment  of  the  work  by   a 
contractor,  or  due  to  suits  brought  by  those  who  claim  damages  to 
life,   limb  or  property,  are  generally  not  allowed  for. 

12.  Changes  in  the  alinement  or  in  the  design,  made  after  con- 
tracts have   been    awarded,    may   result   in   large   claims    for    extra 
compensation. 

13.  Omissions  due  to  carelessness  or  ignorance  of   subordinates 
in  the  engineering  staff  may  result  in  further  claims  for  extras. 

14.  Rates  of  wages  and  prices  of  materials  may  rise;  and,  if  the 
work  is  large,  the  work  itself  may  be  the  cause  of  such  increases. 

15.  When  high  wages  are  due  to  scarcity  of  men,  an  "independ- 
ence"  is  bred  in  the  workmen  which  decreases  their  efficiency. 

16.  A  large  number  of  competent  foremen  frequently  can  not  be 
secured  for  a  large  work,  resulting  in  decreased  efficiency  of  work- 
men. 

17.  If  an  estimate  is  based  upon  previous  contract  prices  there 
is  grave  danger  of  error,  due  to  change  in  conditions,  unbalanced 
bids,  etc. 

18.  If  unit  prices  are  estimated   before  the     specifications     are 
drawn,  the  specification  requirements  may  be  made  such  as  greatly 
to  increase  the  cost  of  important  items. 

19.  Limiting  competition  by  the  drawing  of  unfair,  or  indefinite 
specifications,    is  a   common   cause   of  high   bidding  prices.      Severe 
interpretation  of  indefinite  clauses  often  causes  failure  of  contract- 
ing firms,  and  the  history  of  such  failures  operates  to  limit  subse- 
quent competition,   and  raise  prices. 

20.  Contractors  may  combine,   especially  where   the  work  is   let 
in  very  large  contracts,  and  raise  prices. 

Indexing  Contract  Prices. — In  order  to  fix  a  bidding  price  on  the 
proposed  work,  if  no  actual  records  of  similar  work  are  available, 
it  is  customary  to  hunt  up  bidding  prices  on  similar  work,  strike  an 


COST  KEEPING.  49 

average,  bid  a  little  below  the  average — and  trust  to  luck.  To 
make  this  process  less  of  a  gamble,  it  is  wise  to  secure  back  vol- 
umes of  engineering  periodicals,  and  make  a  scrap  book  using  the 
pages  of  the  journal  that  relate  to  contract  prices.  Then  as  the 
scrap  book  should  be  indexed,  a  word  as  to  indexing  may  be  of  as- 
sistance. There  should  be  heads  corresponding  to  the  items  usually 
found  in  bidding  sheets,  as  follows:  Asphalt  Pavement,  Ballast, 
Bolts  and  Spikes,  Brick  Masonry,  Brick  Sewers,  Brick  Paving, 
Bridges,  Castings,  Catch-basins,  Cement,  Clearing  and  Grubbing, 
Concrete,  Curbs,  Earth  Excavation,  Embankment,  Flagging,  Flush- 
tanks,  Gravel,  Gutter,  Hydrants,  Iron,  Lampposts,  Lead,  Macadam, 
Manholes,  Masonry  (stone  only,  and  not  brick  or  concrete),  Piles, 
Pipe  Sewers,  Puddle,  Railing,  Riprap,  Rock  Excavation,  Sidewalks, 
Sodding,  Specials,  Steel,  Stone,  Timber,  Tracklaying,  Valves,  Water 
Pipe,  etc.  As  far  as  possible  select  headings  that  denote  the  kind 
of  material  used  in  the  structure  ;  but  where  this  cannot  be  done 
without  confusion  select  the  name  of  the  structure  as  it  ordinarily 
appears  in  bidding  sheets.  Do  not,  as  a  rule,  use  such  headings  as 
the  following:  Abutments,  Filling,  Dredged  Material,  Foundation, 
Vitrified  Brick  Paving,  etc.  An  abutment  often  contains  piling, 
concrete  and  cut  stone  masonry,  and  in  using  the  index  it  may  not 
occur  to  you  to  look  under  abutment  when  looking  up  prices  on 
concrete. 

Having  decided  upon  headings,  cut  up  a  lot  of  paper  strips  about 
an  inch  wide  and  four  inches  long,  and  proceed  to  go  through  the 
printed  pages  to  be  indexed.  When  a  bid  on  Concrete  is  found, 
write  on  one  of  these  slips,  "Concrete,  pavement  foundation,  p.  80." 
Throw  the  slips  aside  as  the  index  entries  are  made ;  and,  after  a 
volume  has  been  indexed,  assort  the  slips  alphabetically,  and  have 
a  typewritten  index  copied  from  them.  Simple  as  this  method  is, 
the  inexperienced  man  is  not  likely  to  think  of  it,  and  failing  to 
think  of  it  he  will  look  upon  the  job  of  indexing  as  being  so  great 
a  task  that  in  "all  probability  no  index  will  be  made.  Indexes  pub- 
lished at  the  end  of  the  year  by  the  technical  journals  are,  as  a  rule, 
of  no  value  to  the  contractor ;  furthermore,  the  current  issues  of 
construction  news  should  be  indexed  as  fast  as  received.  Especial 
care  should  be  taken  to  index  classes  of  work  that  are  out  of  the 
ordinary,  for  whenever  bids  must  be  submitted  on  similar  work  no 
better  guide  than  previous  contract  prices  is  apt  to  be  found. 

In  recording  bidding  prices,  it  is  well  to  record  not  only  the  lowest 
bid,  but  the  average  of  all  bids,  stating  the  number  of  bidders. 

In  judging  the  reasonableness  of  a  bidding  price,  it  is  of  great 
assistance  to  know  the  experience  of  the  bidder  on  the  particular 
class  of  .  work  in  question.  Hence  a  knowledge  of  the  history  of 
contractors  H  a  decided  aid. 

Care  should  be  taken  to  examine  not  merely  a  contractor's  bid 
upon  the  one  item  that  is  under  consideration,  but  his  bidding 
prices  on  all  the  items,  to  judge  whether  or  not  he  may  have  un- 
balanced his  bid  to  conceal  his  judgment  as  to  a  fair  price  for  each 
item. 


50  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Unbalanced  Bids. — A  bid  is  said  to  be  unbalanced  when  too  high 
a  price  is  purposely  bid  upon  one  or  more  items,  accompanied  by 
an  offsetting  low  price  on  one  or  more  of  the  remaining  items. 
Thus,  if  a  fair  bidding-  price  for  earth  excavation  is  25  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.,  and  for  rock,  $1.00  per  cu.  yd.,  the  following  forms  an  ex- 
ample of  a  bid  that  is  balanced,  and  one  that  is  unbalanced : 

BALANCED    BID. 

1,000  cu.  yds.  rock,  at  $1.00 $1,000 

20,000  cu.  yds.  earth,  at  $0.25 5,000 

Total     $6,000 

UNBALANCED   BID. 

1.000  cu.   yds.    rock,    at    $2.00 $2,000 

20,000  cu.    yds.    earth,    at    $0.20 4,000 

Total $6,000 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  total  bid,  $6,000,  is  the  same  in  both 
cases.  In  the  second  case,  however,  the  $2  bid  on  rock  is  alto- 
gether too  high,  and  the  20-ct.  bid  on  earth  is  too  low,  hence  the 
bid  is  unbalanced.  The  objects  of  unbalancing  bids  may  be  three : 
(1)  TQ  secure  an  abnormally  high  profit  on  any  item  the  yardage 
(or  quantity)  of  which  is  likely  to  be  increased  after  the  contract 
has  been  awarded ;  ( 2 )  to  secure  a  large  profit  on  the  items  of 
work  that  must  be  done  first,  thus  skimming  the  cream  of  the  con- 
tract in  the  very  beginning ;  ( 3 )  to  conceal  from  engineers  and 
from  competitors  what  each  item  of  work  is  actually  worth. 

To  prevent  the  unbalancing  of  bids,  engineers  resort  to  various 
expedients,  among  which  are  the  following:  (1)  Insertion  of  a 
clause  in  the  "invitation  to  bidders"  warning  them  that  an  unbal- 
anced bid  will  cause  the  rejection  of  the  bid;  (2)  requiring  a  lump- 
sum  bid  on  the  work;  (3)  publishing  the  engineer's  schedule  of 
items  and  an  estimated  price  for  each  item,  then  requiring  either 
(a)  that  each  contractor  shall  bid  a  uniform  percentage  on  all  the 
items,  or  (b)  that  the  contractor  shall  bid  his  own  price  on  each 
item,  no  unit  price  being  in  excess  of  a  certain  percentage  of  the 
engineer's  estimated  unit  price..  The  first  of  these  two  methods  is 
called  the  "percentage  method  of  bidding." 

A  fourth  method  of  preventing  unbalancing  of  bids  on  small  items 
likely  to  be  increased  in  quantity  may  be  suggested.  It  would 
consist  in  naming  a  definite  unit  price  that  will  be  paid  on  each  of 
themminor  items,  and  leaving  the  contractor  free  to  bid  his  own 
prices  on  the  other  items. 

The  greatest  danger  from  an  unbalanced  bid  lies  in  subsequent 
change  of  quantities.  Suppose  that  in  the  above  given  example,  ac- 
tual work  discloses  that  a  far  greater  quantity  of  rock  exists  than 
the  1,000  cu.  yds.  given  in  the  bidding  sheet.  Suppose  the  actual 
quantities  in  the  final  estimate  are  reversed,  and  that  there  are 
20,000  cu.  yds.  of  rock  and  1,000  cu.-yds.  of  earth.  "We  then  have 
these  results : 

BALANCED  BID. 

20.000  cu.  yds.  rock,  at  $1.00 $20,000 

1,000  cu.    yds.    earth,    at    $0.25 250 

Total  $20,250 


COST   KEEPING.  51 

UNBALANCED   BID. 

20,000  cu.   yds.    rock,    at   $2.00 $40,000 

1,000  cu.   yds.    earth,    at    $0.20 200 

Total     .' $40,200 

We  see  that  if  the  unbalanced  bid  is  accepted  the  work  costs  in 
the  end  almost  twice  as  much  as  it  would  have  cost  had  the  bal- 
anced bid  been  accepted;  yet  the  two  bids  were  the  same  ($6,000), 
according  to  the  preliminary  estimate. 

It  rarely  happens  that  such  an  extreme  case  as  this  occurs  in 
practice,  although  I  have  known  several  quite  as  bad.  The  prin- 
ciple, however,  is  best  illustrated  by  an  extreme  example. 

It  is  common  practice  among  paving  contractors  in  many  cities  to 
unbalance  their  bids  for  the  sake  of  concealing  their  estimates  of 
actual  worth ;  as,  for  example,  among  asphalt  paving  companies. 
Bidding  prices  must,  therefore,  be  looked  upon  with  suspicion  al- 
ways, especially  when  used  as  guides  for  estimating. 

An  unbalanced  bid  is  a  two-edged  sword.  It  may  actually  ruin 
the  contractor  who  makes  it,  if  it  happens  that  he  has  erred  and 
that  the  quantities  on  which  he  has  bid  too  low  are  greatly  increased, 
without  a  corresponding  increase  in  the  quantities  on  which  he  has 
bid  high.  Like  all  tricky  practices,  it  is  a  dangerous  one. 

Surety  Company  Bonds.— It  is  becoming  more  and  more  the  prac- 
tice to  require  contractors  to  furnish  the  bonds  of  a  surety  com- 
pany rather  than  the  bonds  of  individuals  for  the  faithful  perform- 
ance of  the  work.  This  is  not  only  good  public  policy,  but  it  is  in 
the  best  interests  of  contra'ctors  themselves. 

No  man  should  put  in  jeopardy  tho  property  of  his  friends  by 
asking  them  to  go  on  his  bonds  for  a  contract.  It  matters  not 
how  sure  he  may  be  of  himself  and  of  his  ability  to  execute  the 
work  at  a  profit,  for  he  should  bear  in  mind  that  a  strike  beyond 
his  control  may  upset  all  calculations.  Furthermore,  a  young  con- 
tractor's own  estimate  of  himself  is  apt  to  have  an  optimistic  tint, 
to  say  the  least.  A  surety  company  should  be  consulted,  and  it  is 
well  to  go  to  such  a  company  at  first  with  only  a  small  contract  for 
which  bondsmen  are  desired.  Be  prepared  to  give  them  in  detail 
your  experience  and  your  financial  resources,  exaggerating  neither  ; 
for,  in  case  of  subsequent  failure,  criminal  proceedings  may  be 
brought  against  a  man  who  has  misrepresented  his  resources.  If 
you  have  but  little  cash  capital,  frankly  say  so,  but  be  prepared  to 
show  in  detail  how  you  propose  doing  the  work  with  the  funds 
available.  Suppose  you  expect  to  have  a  $5,400  earth  work  jpb 
to  do;  that  you  will  have  12  weeks  in  which  to  do  it,  with  two 
weeks  margin  for  delays,  etc.  ;  and  that  payments  of  85  per  cent  of 
the  estimated  value  of  the  work  done  are  to  be  made  monthly, 
and  you  purpose  beginning  the  work  the  middle  of  the  month.  You 
estimate  the  work  to  cost  $4,800,  hence  your  weekly  pay-roll  will 
be  $400  if  the  work  is  done  in  12  weeks.  You  are  to  pay  your  men 
every  two  weeks,  hence  you  need  only  $800  in  cash  to  carry  you 
until  the  first  of  the  month,  and  as  your  contract  calls  for  the 
monthly  payment  to  be  made  the  10th  day  of  the  month,  you  can 


52  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

count  upon  receiving  $765  (85%  of  one-sixth  of  $5,400)  in  time  to 
apply  on  the  next  pay  roll.  Your  cash  capital  to  start  with  is 
$1,800,  or  practically  twice  as  much  cash  as  will  carry  the  work,  in 
case  there  are  no  unforeseen  delays,  and  in  case  you  have  not  under- 
estimated its  cost.  If  you  are  able  to  persuade  the  surety  com- 
pany's representative  that  your  estimate  of  actual  cost  of  the  work 
is  reliable  there  should  be  no  difficulty  in  securing  their  agreement 
to  act  as  your  bondsmen. 

Reasons  Why  Contract  Work  Is  the  Most  Economic  Method  of 
Doing  Public  Work. — There  are  two  methods  of  doing  public  work: 
( 1 )  The  day  labor,  or  government  force,  method ;  and  ( 2 )  the  con- 
tract method. 

By  the  day  labor  method  the  government  ("county,  town,  city, 
county,  city  or  federal)  hires  the  workmen  and  directs  their  work. 
The  alleged  advantages  of  this  method  are: 

1.  It  saves  the  contractor's  profits. 

2.  It  insures  better  work. 

3.  It  avoids  lawsuits. 

4.  It    permits    beginning    work    without    a    complete    survey    or 
plans,  and  thus  hastens  completion. 

5.  It  gives  employment  to  local  citizens  and  keeps  all  the  money 
at  home. 

As  to  the  first  alleged  advantage  there  is  an  evident  fallacy,  for 
tha  attitude  is  one  of  regarding  a  contractor's  profit  as  something 
other  than  a  recompense  for  his  skilled  services.  A  contractor's 
profit  is  his  compensation  for  services — nothing  else.  Hence  when 
a  contractor  is  dispensed  with  there  must  be  a  substitution  of  some 
one  in  his  place  to  render  the  service  of  manager.  It  is  often  urged 
that  since  a  government  must  supervise  a  contractor,  to  see  that  he 
does  his  work  properly,  it  is  really  paying  twice  for  supervision  of 
the  workmen.  This,  again,  is  fallacious  for  two  reasons:  (1) 
Supervision  that  is  merely  inspection  is  far  cheaper  than  supervi- 
sion that  consists  in  managing  men  ;  ( 2 )  there  should  be  inspection 
of  work  done  by  government'  employes,  and,  in  my  opinion,  there  is- 
need  of  a  much  more  rigorous  and  expensive  inspection  of  their^ 
work  than  of  work  done  by  contract.  Government  employes  are 
prone  to  depart  from  plans  and  specifications,  often  for  the  sole 
purpose  of  partly  concealing  the  otherwise  high  costs  that  would 
become  evident  to  all.  It  is  the  verdict,  too,  of  practically  all  un- 
biased and  experienced  engineers  that  day  labor  work  does  not 
deliver  as  good  quality  of  product  as  contract  work.  This  answers 
argument  2. 

As  to  argument  3.  avoidance  of  lawsuits,  we  have  an  advantage 
that  is  certainly  well  founded.  It  does,  but  the  average  cost  of 
lawsuits  is  so  small  a  fraction  of  the  total  cost  of  construction 
work  done  by  contract  as  to  be  unworthy  of  serious  consideration. 
Moreover  lawsuits  of  this  kind  are  almost  invariably  the  result 
either  of  ambiguous  specifications  or  of  changing  plans  without 
equitable  provision  for  payment  arising  from  a  change.  The 
remedy  for  this  condition  is  not  an  entire  abandonment  of  the  con- 
tract system.  As  well  might  a  surgeon  cut  off  a  man's  legs  be- 


COST  KEEPING.  53 

cause  he  squints.  Lawsuits  are  avoidable  and  are  avoided  by  the 
best  engineers,  for  they  perfect  their  plans  before  securing  bids, 
their  specifications  are  so  framed  as  to  provide  perfectly  for  any 
changes,  and,  finally,  they  never  vitiate  the  written  contract  by 
departing  one  iota  from  its  provisions. 

There  are  many  so  called  "contractors'  lawyers"  in  our  larger 
cities,  who  are  little  else  than  skilled  thieves  in  league  with  other 
thieves  who  get  contracts.  That  these  "contractors'  lawyers"  are 
able  to  make  money  for  themselves  and  their  clients  is  due  almost 
entirely  to  the  fact  that  engineers  do  not  adhere  rigorously  to  the 
specifications.  For  if  a  lawyer  can  prove  that  the  specifications 
have  been  violated,  even  to  no  great  extent,  no  contract  exists,  and 
there  is  ground  for  recovery  of  profits  quantum  meruit—a.s  much 
as  he  deserved.  This  leads  to  expert  testimony  as  to  profits  reason- 
ably to  be  expected,  and  this  usually  leads  to  a  verdict  that  is  a 
compromise  between  the  two  extremes  of  testimony.  Railways  and 
private  corporations  are  not  so  frequently  afflicted  with  lawsuits 
because  their  policy  is  not  to  award  contracts  to  contractors  of  the 
kind  above  mentioned.  Public  officials  should  also  be  empowered 
to  reject  bids  from  contractors  who  have  a  record  as  litigants,  as 
well  as  from  contractors  who  can  not  show  sufficient  experience  and 
financial  resources.  A  remedy  for  an  evil  is  always  preferable  to 
the  wholesale  execution  of  innocent  and  guilty  alike. 

As  to  the  alleged  advantage  of  beginning  work  before  plans  are 
complete,  I  deny  it  to  be  an  advantage.  Innumerable  increases  in 
estimated  cost  of  public  work  are  due  to  this  very  thing — beginning 
work  in  advance  of  the  fullest  study  of  conditions. 

Finally,  as  to  employment  of  local  citizens,  this  is  precisely  what 
a  contractor  does.  But — and  mark  well  the  difference — a  con- 
tractor does  not  make  his  organization  an  old  men's  home  or  an 
asylum  for  the  afflicted.  The  place  for  such  is  not  on  a  piece  of 
construction  where  they  not  only  take  up  valuable  room  but  act  as 
the  worst  sort  of  examples  for  the  young,  ambitious  and  capable 
workmen. 

Now  let  us  consider  briefly  why  the  contract  system  of  doing 
public  work  is  advantageous : 

1.  The  contractor  is  paid  for  his  services  by  his  profits,  which  is 
in   strict  accord  with  the  fundamental   law   of  management.      (See 
page  74). 

2.  He  is  free  to  pay  his  superintendents  according  to  his  judg- 
ment of  their  worth,  and  all  his  employes  according  to  the  bonus' 
system. 

3.  The  contractor  is  a  manager  appointed  by  no  official,  elected 
by  no  "voice  of  the  people"   (which  is  more  often  the  voice  of  ignor- 
ance than   "the  voice  of  God"),  selected  by  no  civil  service  exami- 
nation.     He  has   become   a  manager   by   virtue   of  the   law   of   the 
survival    of    the    fittest,    as    determined    by    strife    for    excellence. 
When  this  method  of  selection  is  to  be  improved  upon  by  men,   it 
may  be  well  to  consult  the  Deity  who  established  it. 

4.  A  "public  servant"   is  a  servant  without  a  master.      He  may 
have  a  "boss"  who  acts  as  a  proxy  for  the  master,  but  the  master, 


"4  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

the  owner  of  the  house — where  is  he?  He  is  the  butcher,  the  baker 
the  candlestick  maker,  a  thousand,  a  million,  or,  maybe,  a  hundred 
million  of  him  scattered  across  all  the  acres  between  two  seas.  He 
never  is  seen  by  the  servant,  nor  felt,  nor  heard.  This  master  who 
foots  the  bills  of  those  who  boost  the  bills  never  approaches  an 
indolent  superintendent  and  lays  a  hand  upon  his  shoulder,  nor 
says:  See  here,  my  man,  unless  this  ends,  you  end  this. 

A  contractor  is  a  master,  and  the  "servants"  see  and  hear  him. 
He  is  tangible ;  no  vague  rich  Uncle  Sam  off  somewhere,  but  a 
living  personality  on  the  job  ;  not  a  genial  personality,  with  lots  of 
money  to  throw  away,  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  a  niggard.  His  aim 
is  to  pay  proportionately  to  service  rendered.  He  may  be  crude  in 
his  methods  of  doing  so,  but  that  at  least  is  his  method,  which  is 
infinitely  more  effective  than  any  a  government  uses. 

5.  A  contractor  will  experiment  with  labor  saving  devices.     He 
will  invent  or  he  will  encourage  inventors  by  his  aid.     What  gov- 
ernment ever  bred  inventors  in  its  service?     A  government  super- 
intendent may  occasionally  be  so  inventive  by  nature  that  not  the 
most  discouraging  situations  can  stifle  his  ambition.     But,  as  a  rule, 
the  government  superintendent,  having  nothing  to  gain  by  success- 
ful application  of  an  experimental  machine  or  process,  and  having 
much  to  lose  in  case  of  failure — probably  his  job — adheres  to   the 
ancient  motto :     "It  is  better  to  be  safe  than  sorry." 

6.  A   contractor   is   not   restricted    to   working   his   plant   in   one 
locality  nor  on  one  class  of  work.     Hence  he  is  frequently  able  to 
keep  his  plant  and  his  men  busy,  in  whole  or  in  part,  nearly  all  the 
time.     In  the  Roads  and  Streets  Section  of  this  book  the  high  cost 
of  municipal  i  tant  and  supervision  expenses  in  New  Orleans  illus- 
trates the  point  very  well.     During  the  season  when  the  teams  can 
not  work  on  paving,  they  are  idle.     So  are  all  the  "salaried  men." 
A  contractor  would  have  kept"  the  teams  at  work  hauling  coal,   or 
what  not,   for  private  concerns,   if  not  in  New  Orleans,   then  else- 
where.     But   the  municipality  of  New   Orleans  can   not   engage   in 
private  work,  nor  can  it  compete  for  public  work  in  other  munici- 
palities. 

7.  A  contractor  can  usually  buy  machines,   materials  and   sup- 
plies more  cheaply  than  any  government.     The  absence  of  red  tape 
delays  in   getting  "action,"   the  certainty  that  no    "graft"   must  be 
paid  to  officials,  and  other  factors  operate  in  a  contractor's  favor,  to 
say   nothing   of    the   fact    that   he    is   usually   a   more    skilled   pur- 
chaser. 

8.  A  contractor  almost  invariably  does  his  work  at  less  expense 
for   "overhead   charges."      On    the    Panama    Canal,    which    is   being 
built   by    government    forces,    the    item    of    General    Administration 
alone   amounts   to   13   per  cent    (in   1909)    of   the   total   cost!      And 
when  we  consider  that  the  total  cost  is  fully  double  what  it  would 
cost  a  contractor,   we  have  some   idea  of  the  meaning  of  this  ex- 
pense item. 

The  following  extracts  from  a  few  editorials  of  mine  on  this  gen- 
eral  subject   of   the   inefficiency   of   the  day   labor   system   of   doing 


COST   KEEPING.  55 

government  work  will  be  found  to  contain  the  opinions  of  several 
eminent  engineers  : 

Thomas  Telford  on  the  Day  Labor  System.*— One  of  the  greatest 
civil  engineers  of  all  time,  and  the  greatest  of  his  own  time,  was 
Thomas  Telford,  the  inventor  of  the  telford  road,  engineer  of  hun- 
dreds of  large  bridges  and  builder  of  numerous  canals  and  docks. 
He  was  the  first  president  (1820)  of  the  Institution  of  Civil  Engi- 
neers. 

Of  all  the  monuments  to  Telford's  hard,  common  sense  and  engi- 
neering skill  none  is  greater  than  the  "Rules  for  Repairing  Roads," 
of  which  he  is  author.  Rule  7  is  entitled  "Management  of  Labour," 
and  reads  as  follows  : 

'All  labor  by  day's  wages  ought,  as  far  as  possible,  to  be  dis- 
continued. The  surveyors  should  make  out  specifications  of  every 
kind  of  work  that  is  to  be  performed  in  a  given  time.  This  should 
be  let  to  contractors,  and  the  surveyors  should  take  care  to  see  it 
completed  according  to  the  specifications  before  it  is  paid  for. 
Attention  to  this  rule  is  most  essential,  as  in  many  cases  not  less 
than  two-thirds  the  money  expended  by  day  labor  is  usually 
wasted." 

This  rule  was  written  a  century  ago,  but  time  has  not  altered  the 
nature  of  men  nor  the  soundness  of  Telford's  advice. 

It  is  interesting  in  this  connection  to  record  Telford's  success  in 
the  building  of  nearly  1,000  miles  of  roads  in  Scotland  by  contract. 
He  let  120  contracts  for  this  work,  Wiiich  extended  over  a  period  of 
18  years,  and  in  that  time  there  was  not  a  single  lawsuit  arising 
from  any  of  these  contracts.  The  work  was  done  with  an  economy 
unueard  of  before  Telford's  time,  and  it  was  small  wonder  that  his 
fame  spread  beyond  the  British  Isles  and  led  to  his  being  called  as 
consulting  engineer  on  numerous  engineering  projects  in  Europe. 

Telford  had  discovered — or,  rather,  rediscovered— the  principle 
that  workmen  are  far  more  efficient  when  in  the  employ  of  an  indi- 
vidual or  firm  than  when  in  the  employ  of  a  government,  whether 
it  be  of  county,  town,  city  or  state.  His  success  as  an  engineer 
rested  as  much  upon  the  application  of  this  principle  as  upon  his 
own  genius  as  a  designer  of  engineering  structures. 

The  Opinions  of  Members  of  the  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.  on  the  Day 
Labor  System. t — In  1896  there  appeared  in  the  Transactions  of  the 
American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers  a  paper  by  Mr.  W.  W.  Follett 
on  tae  "Cost  of  Sewer  Construction,  Denver,  Colorado,"  in  which 
were  given  data  intended  to  prove  the  economy  of  day  labor  as 
compared  with  contract  work.  Doubtless  the  author  was  somewhat 
surprised  to  find  not  a  single  out  and  out  supporter  of  his  contention 
among  all  the  members  of  the  society  who  discussed  his  paper.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  day  labor  system  was  unanimously  condemned 
as  a  system  to  be  applied  in  general  to  city  work.  Some  of  the 


*  Abstract  from  an  editorial  in  Engineering-Contracting,  May  5, 
1909. 

t  Abstract  of  an  editorial  in  Engineering-Contracting,  June  2, 
1909. 


•">ti  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

expressions  of  opinion  are  not  without  interest  even  now,  coming  as 
they  do  from  men  high  in  the  profession.     We  quote : 

Most  cities  began  their  public  works  by  the  day  labor  plan,  but 
have  been  forced  to  adopt  the  contract  system  in  self  defense. — • 
Foster  CroweU,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 

Contract  work  is  more  desirable  and  cheaper  as  a  rule  than  work 
by  the  day. — Henry  Goldmark,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 

The  writer's  experience  has  been  that  sewer  work  generally  costa 
.  a  city  less  by  contract  than  by  day  labor. — William  B.  Landreth,  M. 
Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 

The  tabulated  results  [given  in  Mr.  Follett's  article]  as  to  cost 
do  not  show  any  striking  gain  over  that  of  contract  work  in  this 
case.  This  is  one  of  a  few  instances  where  experiments  of  this  kind 
have  been  successful.  In  probably  seven  cases  out  of  ten  the  politi- 
cal tendencies  of  boards  made  up  wholly  of  scheming  politicians  to 
give  sinecures  to  political  hangers  on  would  have  largely  increased 
the  cost  of  the  work. — Andrew  Rosewater,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 

It  is  the  writer's  opinion  that  in  most  cities  public  work  can  be 
done  to  better  advantage  and  at  less  cost  by  contract  than  by  hired 
labor. — G.  T.  Nelles,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. 

We  may  add  that  Denver  sewers,  under  discussion,  were  large 
brick  sewers,  and  that  each  brick  mason  averaged  2,080  brick  per 
8  hour  day,  wages  being  $4,  which  is  far  and  away  better  than  the 
usual  output  on  day  labor  construction,  but  less  than  half  what 
many  contractors  secure  from  their  brick  layers  on  sewer  work. 

It  should  also  be  pointed  out  that  a  strenuous  effort  was  made 
by  the  city  officials  in  this  case  to  prove  that  day  labor  work 
would  be  the  most  economical  for  all  sewer  construction  to  be  done 
in  the  future,  and  they  were  not  only  free  to  alter  the  specifica- 
tions to  attain  their  end,  but  naturally  prompted  to  do  so  by  self 
interest.  In  discussing  this  feature  of  the  case,  Mr.  G.  T.  Nelles,  M. 
Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  said : 

"Another  important  factor  in  the  cost  of  work  done  under  proper 
supervision  in  this  manner  by  cities  is  the  fact  that  they  do  not  enter 
Into  a  binding  contract  with  themselves  to  do  the  work  in  a  fixed 
manner  and  under  rigid  specifications,  as  is  the  case  when  work  is 
done  by  contract.  On  the  contrary,  they  are  always  at  liberty  to 
make  such  change  in  methods  or  materials  as  experience  may 
prove  to  be  beneficial  and  economical  to  the  work.  Under  the  con- 
tract system  it  is  rarely  possible  to  make  such  changes,  no  matter 
how  desirable  they  may  be,  without  raising  a  cry  of  fraud  or  violat- 
ing some  of  the  terms  of  the  contract.  As  a  consequence  when- 
ever there  is  a  choice  of  materials  or  methods  under  the  contract 
system,  the  most  expensive  to  the  contractor  is  usually  adopted." 

We  have  italicized  this  last  clause,  for,  unfortunately,  it  ex- 
presses the  truth  about  the  tendency  on  the  part  of  many  engineers 
to  exact  not  merely  the  last  pound  of  flesh,  but  to  call  for  an 
avoirdupois  pound,  although  the  specifications  might  well  be  inter- 
preted to  refer  to  a  Troy  pound.  This  particular  feature  of  con- 
tract work  is  perhaps  the  one  most  worthy  of  careful  consideration 
by  the  engineer  who  aims  to  secure  low  bids  from  reliable  firms. 


COST   KEEPING.  57 

There  is  but  one  way  of  accomplishing  this  end — namely  :  by  pre- 
paring1 specifications  with  as  great  care  as  is  given  to  the  work  of 
making  the  drawings.  Sewer  specifications  are,  as  a  rule,  par- 
ticularly weak  in  all  that  relates  to  the  excavation  of  materials. 
Generally  no  soundings  or  test  pits  are  made  by  the  engineers  and 
no  classification  of  materials  other  than  "earth"  and  "rock"  is 
given.  Not  only  is  there  no  sub-surface  survey,  but  there  is  not 
even  a  fair  attempt  in  tne  specifications  to  provide  for  payment 
based  upon  what  may  actually  be  encountered.  Practically  all  the 
"changes"  to  which  Mr.  Nelles  refers  would  be  unnecessary  were 
proper  sub-surface  surveys  made  in  advance  of  making  the  design 
and  drawing  the  specifications. 

Mr.  Franklin  Riffle,  in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  33  (1895),  p. 
590,  says: 

"Some  years  ago,  while  connected  with  railroad  construction  on 
the  Pacific  coast,  the  writer  took  pains  to  compare  the  cost  of  com- 
pany work  with  the  cost  of  contract  work,  and  was  somewhat  sur- 
prised to  discover  that  in  nearly  every  case  investigated  the  former 
exceeded  the  latter,  the  excess  ranging  from  25  to  100%.  The  re- 
cently constructed  water  works  system  of  Portland,  Oregon,  fur- 
nishes an  instructive  example.  *  *  -  *  There  was  considerable 
work  done  by  day  labor,  under  the  mistaken  idea  that  this  method 
would  ensure  the  most  satisfactory  results,  but  the  cost  of  the  work 
largely  exceeded  the  estimate." 

The  Metcalf  and  Eddy  Report  on  the  Day  Labor  System  in  Bos- 
ton.— This  report  contains  the  results  of  the  most  exhaustive  inves- 
tigation into  the  relative  economy  of  the  day  labor  and  the  contract 
systems  ever  published  and  is  convincing  in  its  demonstration  of 
the  economy  of  the  contract  system.  The  report  is  one  made  in 
1909  to  the  Boston  Finance  Commission,  important  extracts  from 
which  were  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  25,  1909, 
and  in  faibsequent  issues. 

I  regard  this  investigation  as  the  forerunner  of  many  more  of  its 
kind  to  be  made  by  consulting  engineers  for  finance  commissions  in 
other  cities.  In  fact  I  look  to  see  such  finance  commissions  become 
permanent  institutions,  whose  function  it  shall  be  to  investigate 
every  department  of  a  municipality,  with  a  view  to  determining 
unit  costs.  Thus  will  the  public  be  put  in  possession  of  unbiased 
facts  about  the  economic  or  uneconomic  conduct  of  the  business  of 
government. 

Mr.  S.  Whinery's  Report  on  the  Day  Labor  System  in  Boston.* — 
On  pages  139  to  142  of  his  report  to  the  Boston  Finance  Commis- 
sion, Mr.  Samuel  Whinery  says : 

"(1)  The  claim  that  a  municipality  can  execute  its  public  work  at 
an  actual  cost  as  low  as  the  same  work  can  be  done  by  a  contractor 
and  thus  save  the  profit  that  the  contractor  is  entitled  to  make 
may  be  true  as  an  abstract  theory,  but  experience  has  shown  that 
it  is  not  generally  true  in  practice.  It  has  in  many  cases  been 

•Abstract  from  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  29,  1909. 


58  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

found  true  In  isolated  instances  or  for  short  periods  of  time,  but 
when  the  practice  has  been  continued  for  a  considerable  period  it  is 
almost  invariably  the  case  that  direct  work  becomes  more  expen- 
sive than  contract  work.  The  reasons  for  this  are  not  difficult  to 
find.  *  *  * 

"(2)  The  claim  that  public  work  executed  directly  by  the 
municipality  Is  more  certain  to  be  of  good  quality  than  if  done  by 
contr.'tct  is  not  well  founded. 

"It  is  a  plausible  proposition  that  municipal  officers,  having  no 
personal  financial  interest  in  the  results,  will  be  actuated  only  by 
the  desire  to  secure  to  the  city  the  best  quality  of  work,  but  ex- 
perience has  not  shown  it  to  be  true.  There  are  motives  other  than 
the  mere  saving  of  money  that  may,  and  as  a  rule  do,  influence  city 
officials  to  cut  down  the  cost  of  public  work  done  under  their  direct 
supervision  to  the  lowest  figure,  with  possible  detriment  to  the 
quality  of  the  work  done.  *  *  * 

"I  have  had  good  opportunity  to  observe  in  many  cities  the 
comparative  quality  of  work  done  by  the  municipality  direct  and  by 
contract,  and  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that,  as  a  rule,  the  former  is 
not  usually  superior  to  the  latter. 

"(3)  The  claim  that  it  is  either  better  or  more  economical  for 
the  municipality  to  purchase  and  furnish  contractors  the  supplies 
required  for  public  work  is  not  supported  by  the  facts,  *  *  * 
many  of  which  are  obvious.  Nor  is  it  true  as  a  rule  that  a  better 
quality  of  supplies  is  secured  when  purchased  by  the  city  than 
when  they  are  purchased  by  contractors  under  proper  city  specifi- 
cations and  subjected  to  proper  inspection. 

"(4)  The  claim  sometimes  made  that  by  doing  its  work  directly 
the  municipality  can  so  provide  for  the  employment  and  control  of 
labor  as  to  benefit  the  city  at  large  or  its  dependent  citizens  is 
fallacious  in  practice.  When  public  work  is  to  be  done  the  neces- 
sary labor  must  be  employed  either  by  the  city  or  by  the  contrac- 
tor. For  doing  the  same  work  the  city  can  use  no  more  labor  than 
the  contractor  if  the  labor  employed  by  each  is  equally  efficient  and 
equally  well  directed.  If  economical  results  are  to  be  obtained, 
equal  care  and  discrimination  must  be  exercised  in  securing  labor 
by  the  one  as  by  the  other.  If  it  be  said  that  the  city  may  so 
manage  the  labor  supply  as  to  afford  employment  to  indigent  or 
inefficient  laborers  (whom  no  contractor  would  employ),  who  would 
otherwise  have  to  be  aided  from  the  city  treasury,  it  may  be  an- 
swered that  the  city  can  no  more  afford  to  employ  that  class  of 
labor  than  the  contractor,  and  that  it  is  better  and  cheaper  in  the 
end  to  pension  or  otherwise  care  •  for  the  disabled  or  inefficient. 
Laborers  belonging  to  these  classes  do  not  earn  the  wages  paid 
them  and  a  few  of  them  scattered  among  strong  and  able  workmen 
have  a  demoralizing  effect  upon  the  whole  body  by  setting  a  low 
standard  of  accomplishment." 

Experience  With  Day  Labor  on  the  Chicago  Main  Drainage  Canal 
and  at  Panama.*— We  now  have  the  annual  report  of  the  Isthmian 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  4,  1907. 


COST   KEEPING.  59 

Canal  Commission,  teeming  with  arguments  in  favor  of  continuing 
the  day  labor  system.  We  quote : 

"Omitting  profits  derived  from  subsistence  and  general  stores  and 
assuming  the  hours  of  labor  the  same  in  both  cases,  it  stands  to 
reason  that  the  government,  when  warranted  in  making  the  neces- 
sary outlay  for  plant,  can  do  work  cheaper  than  a  contractor,  for 
no  question  of  profits  enters  into  the  consideration." 

It  does  not  stand  to  reason  that  any  government  can  do  work  as 
cheaply  as  a  private  party.  Indeed,  to  make  such  a  claim  is  going 
contrary  both  to  reason  and  to  experience  upon  which  all  reasoning 
Is  founded.  The  Isthmian  Commission  goes  on  to  explain  that  on 
jobs  of  less  magnitude  than  the  Panama  Canal  it  does  pay  to  do 
the  work  by  contract  because  in  such  cases  the  government  has 
neither  the  plant  nor  the  organization  to  do  the  work.  In  the  case 
of  Panama,  however,  the  government  has  both.  The  grave  fallacy 
In  this  argument  lies  in  the  assumption  that  it  is  economic  to 
award  contracts  only  because  a  suitable  plant  and  an  organized 
force  of  men  can  be  secured  quickly.  These,  it  is  true,  are  factors 
In  favor  of  a  contractor,  but  if  they  were  the  only  factors,  govern- 
ment contracting  would  have  disappeared  entirely  fifty  years  ago. 
The  government  could  well  afford  to  own  a  sufficient  plant  to  do 
all  its  construction  work,  and  it  would  not  take  long  to  build  up  an 
organization  to  handle  the  plant.  But  plant  and  organization  are 
merely  the  tools.  Back  of  these  tools  must  be  a  great  incentive  if 
work  is  to  be  done  economically  with  this  plant  and  this  organiza- 
tion. Plant  is  nothing,  organization  is  nothing,  unless  the  brain 
that  directs  both  is  keenly  bent  upon  saving  every  penny  and  en- 
tirely free  to  bring  every  resource  to  bear  in  effecting  economy.  It 
is  this  lack  of  sufficient  incentive  and  of  sufficient  freedom  of  action 
that  makes  every  government  manager  of  work  far  inferior  to  the 
ordinary  contractor.  A  government  employe  knows  that  his  salary 
will  go  on  regardless  of  the  cost.  Earth  work  may  be  costing  the 
government  50  cts.  a  yard  that  would  cost  a  contractor  30  cts.,  but 
Col.  Goethals  will  draw  his  salary  just  the  same,  and  so  will 
every  other  employe  clear  down  to  the  water  boy.  It  is  true 
that  the  chief  engineer  is  actuated  by  the  vague  desire  to  make  a 
"good  recoid,"  but  he  is  also  well  aware  that  his  "record"  can  not 
be  measured  by  any  standard  except  the  accomplishment  of  his 
two  predecessors.  The  great  desire  to  make  wealth  for  himself  is 
wholly  absent.  His  brain  is  warmed  t«  mild  glow  by  the  hope  of 
being  able  to  "make  good,"  but  there  is  no  fire  under  his  boiler  that 
sets  the  steam  valve  popping.  But  granting  him  even  a  consider- 
able amount  of  feverish  desire  to  "make  good,"  we  find  him  bound 
hand  and  foot,  not  by  red  tape  but  by  the  indifference  of  the  vast 
majority  of  his  employes.  Why  should  his  lieutenants  sit  up 
nights  devising  ways  of  reducing 'costs?  Why  should  they  go  about 
jumping  on  the  workers  by  day  to  sting  them  into  action?  The  one 
act  may  break  down  health,  they  will  tell  you,  and  the  other  will 
surely  make  enemies  of  the  men.  What  recompense  will  there  be 
for  these  two  losses?  A  share  in  the  saving  effected?  No.  A  part- 
nership in  the  business?  No.  An  increase  in  salary?  No,  for 


60  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

governments  do  not  pay  on  the  scale  of  what  a  man  saves  but 
upon  the  scale  of  what  he  spends.  There  are  no  bonuses,  no  special 
salaries  for  excellence  in  service,  no  partnerships — nothing  but  a 
mild  hope  that,  if  one  does  not  die  at  the  bottom,  promotion  to  a 
higher  rank  will  come  some  day  as  a  result  of  death  at  the  top. 
That  is  government  work,  and  that  is  why  a  contractor's  profit 
represents  not  additional  cost  to  the  government  but  merely  a 
small  fraction  of  the  saving  effected  by  a  capable  man  driven  by 
the  fierce  desire  to  make  that  saving  as  large  as  possible. 

To  illustrate  what  happens  even  to  a  contractor  when  this  in- 
centive is  removed :  On  the  Chicago  Main  Drainage  Channel  the 
firm  of  MacArthur  Bros,  was  put  in  charge  of  excavating  a  section 
of  glacial  drift  on  a  percentage  basis.  They  furnished  the  plant 
and  organization,  but  did  not  pay  for  the  labor  or  supplies  out  of 
their  own  pockets.  That  was  paid  for  by  the  Sanitary  District,  and 
MacArthur  Bros,  received  15%  for  use  of  plant  and  supervision. 
After  a  considerable  amount  of  the  earth  had  been  excavated  at  a 
cost  of  86%  cts.  per  cubic  yard,  the  Sanitary  District  gave  up  this 
day  labor  method  in  disgust.  In  a  report  on  the  work  Chief  Engi- 
neer Isham  Randolph  said :  "This  work  may  be  regarded  as  an 
object  lesson,  clearly  demonstrating  from  an  economic  standpoint 
the  unwisdom  of  entering  into  any  arrangement  for  carrying  on  the 
construction  work  of  the  Sanitary  District  by  the  direct  employ- 
ment of  labor."  (Hill's  "Chicago  Main  Drainage  Channel,"  page  33.) 

We  cite  this  case  because  the  MacArthur  Bros,  are  among  the 
most  competent  contractors  in  the  country,  but  even  they  could  not 
combat  the  irresistible  tendency  of  men  to  loaf  the  minute  they 
know  that  a  government  Is  going  to  foot  the  bill  and  not  a  con- 
tractor. 

Subletting  Work  and  Purchasing  Materials. — There  is  seldom  a 
contract  that  does  not  involve  subcontracting,  even  when  the  origi- 
nal contract  specially  prohibits  subcontracting.  Every  purchase  o£ 
materials  for  which  cash  is  not  paid  at  once  is  a  subcontract.  The 
term  subcontracting,  however,  is  commonly  applied  to  the  awarding 
of  a  contract  by  the  contractor,  the  subcontractor  being  one  who 
undertakes  to  furnish  the  labor  and  materials  necessary  to  perform 
a  given  portion  of  the  original  contract. 

Whether  it  be  a  purchase  of  materials  or  an  award  of  a  subcon- 
tract, there  Is  one  thing  the  contractor  should  never  neglect  to  do 
and  thac  is  to  attach  a  copy  of  the  original  specifications  to  his 
letter  or  to  his  subcontract.  In  his  letter  or  his  subcontract  he 
should  make  definite  reference  to  the  attached  specifications,  stating 
that  the  materials  or  the  work,  or  both,  must  conform  to  those 
specifications.  Failure  to  do  this  may  lead  to  serious  misunder- 
standings and  loss.  For  example,  in  ordering  paving  bricks  from  a 
manufacturer  if  the  contractor  fails  to  say  that  they  must  be  subject 
to  the  inspection  and  tests  of  the  engineer  and  if  a  large  per- 
centage of  the  bricks  are  "culled"  (rejected),  the  manufacturer  may 
refuse  to  supply  other  bricks  to  replace  the  "culls." 

Another  point  that  should  never  be  overlooked  is  to  have  a 
written  contract  (an  exchange  of  letters  will  suffice)  for  any  mate- 


COST   KEEPING.  01 

rials  or  work  involving  a  sum  In  excess  of  the  sum  specified  in  the 
Statute  of  Frauds  of  the  state  in  which  the  material  is  purchased. 
In  some  states  this  sum  is  less  than  $100  and  in  others  it  is  $500. 
Any  verbal  contract,  no  matter  how  many  witnesses  may  be  brought, 
is  voi.lable  if  the  sum  involved  is  in  excess  of  that  prescribed  in  the 
Statute  of  Frauds.  Once  the  materials  ordered  under  verbal  con- 
tiact  have  been  delivered  and  accepted,  the  verbal  contract  as  to 
pr'ce  becomes  binding. 

It  is  poor  practice,  in  my  judgment,  to  buy  or  rent  anything  by 
word  of  mouth,  and  foremen  should  be  required  to  make  all  pur- 
chases by  written  order,  keeping  a  carbon  copy.  All  renting  of 
tools  or  plant  should  be  recorded  in  writing,  by  an  exchange  of 
letters  or  otherwise,  so  as  to  have  the  terms  of  the  rental  signed  by 
both  parties.  I  have  had  the  verbal  rental  of  a  plow  by  a  fore- 
man cost  me  $100  in  lawyers'  fees,  etc. 

A  fe-v  suggestions  regarding  the  subletting  of  work:  Subletting 
should  not  be  forbidden  in  the  original  contract.  Repeated  sub- 
lotting  of  the  same  part  of  a  job  may  be,  and  often  is,  pernicious 
in  its  effect  upon  the  quality  of  the  work.  One  subletting  often  re- 
sults in  lower  cost  of  work,  for  a  subcontractor  who  gives  all  his 
attention  to  a  small  job  can  usually  get  the  workmen  to  do  more 
work  than  a  large  contractor  who  has  many  things  to  attend  to. 
The  subcontractor  is  really  a  superintendent  or  foreman  whose 
salary  is  paid  in  profits,  and  he  has  the  best  possible  spur  to  secure 
the  greatest  possible  economy. 

The  letting  of  several  independent  contracts  for  the  different 
parts  of  a  structure  often  leads  to  delays  and  claims  for  extras  due 
to  delays.  One  independent  contractor  may  purposely  delay  an- 
other. All  this  is  avoided  by  awarding  the  whole  structure  to  one 
contractor,  who  can  usually  manage  several  subcontractors  much 
better  than  several  independent  contractors  can  be  managed  by  an 
engineer.  , 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  an  uncommon  mistake  to  let  a  con- 
tract too  great  in  size  to  secure  active  competition  from  several 
contracting  firms.  One  of  the  best  managed  large  pieces  of  public 
work  was  the  Chicago  Main  Drainage  Canal,  contracts  for  which 
were  let  in  sections  of  moderate  size,  with  the  result  that  there 
were  many  able  competitors  who  named  low  prices. 

Instructions  to  Superintendents  and  Foremen. — Some  of  the  most 
successful  contracting  firms  have  sets  of  rules  and  instructions 
printed  for  the  use  of  foremen  and  others.  Certain  of  the  "rules" 
are  inflexible  and  must  be  obeyed  ;  others  are  more  in  the  nature  of 
suggestions  intended  to  guide  the  foreman  in  doing  his  work, 
handling  his  men,  purchasing  materials,  and  the  like. 

Gilbreth's  "Field  System"  is  a  book  of  rules  used  by  him  in 
managing  his  contract  work.  His  "Bricklaying  System"  is  another 
such  book. 

I  will  give  a  list  of  instructions  that  is  by  no  means  exhaustive, 
but  varied  enough  to  give  some  hints  as  to  the  character  of  a  set 
of  instructions.  Rules  such  as  these  can  be  mimeographed  on 


<;2  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

small   sheets  of  paper  and  bound  together  with  clips,   so  that  they 
can  be  carried  in  the  pocket  for  reference. 

1.  When  a  foreman  arrives  at  a  place  where  he  Is  to  have  charge 
of   work,   he   must   notify   the   home   office   at   once   by   postal    card, 
giving  the  address  of  his  boarding  place  and  his  office  address. 

2.  A  daily  report  must  be  sent  to  the  home  office  on  the  blanks 
provided.     If  no  work  is  being  done,  still  a  report  must  be  sent  In 
stating  that  fact  and  giving  reasons  for  delays,  etc. 

3.  Each  foreman  must  keep  a  small  diary  in  which  to  jot  down 
ihe  principal  events  of  the  day.     Such  a  diary  may  be  of  great  value 
m  case  of  a  law  suit. 

4.  Each   foreman   must  write   all   orders  for   materials,    supplies, 
etc.,   in   the  book  provided  for  the  purpose,   so  that  a  carbon  copy 
of  every  order  will  be  kept.     He  must  be  careful  to  insert  the  day 
of  the  month.     When  a  foreman  wishes  grading  stakes  or  instruc- 
tions from  engineers  in  charge  of  work,  let  him  send  a  written  order 
to  the  engineer  stating  exactly  what   is  wanted.     This  precaution 
may   save  misunderstandings  and   delays,   and   the   carbon   copy   of 
such  an  order  is  often  useful  to  check  the  memory.     The  sooner  a 
foreman  learns  to  be  methodical  in  such  small  matters,  the  sooner 
will  he  be  fitted  to  handle  larger  matters. 

5.  No    superintendent,    walking    boss,    engineer,    time    keeper,    or 
other  employe  of  this  firm  is  permitted  to  give  an  order  direct  to 
any   workman,    except    in    case    of   great   emergency.      Not   even    a 
member   of  this  firm   is  exempt   from   this   rule.      The   foreman   in 
direct  charge  of  a  gang  of  men  is  the  only  man  permitted  to  in- 
struct his  men  what  to   do.      He  is  the  officer  in  charge,   and  his 
superior  officers  must  not  intentionally  or  unintentionally  degrade 
him  in  the  eyes  of  his  men  by  issuing  orders  over  his  head. 

6.  A  foreman  is  not  permitted  to  work  with  his  men.     He  is  em- 
ployed  to  use  his  wits,   not  his  hands.     Occasionally  he  must   in- 
struct a  man  how  to  do  his  work,  but  he  must  teach  the  man  and 
not  attempt  to  take  the  man's  place.     It  may  take  a  foreman  longer 
to  teach  a  man  than  to  do  it  himself ;  nevertheless  it  is  cheaper  in 
the  long  run  to  teach  the  man. 

7.  Do  not  use  laborers  to  do  the  work  of  masons  or  carpenters, 
but   provide   a    sufficient  number   of   laborers   to   assist    the   skilled 
workmen.     A  15-ct.  man  can  lift  as  many  pounds  of  wood  or  stone 
as  a  50-ct.  man.     Exercise  your  wits'  in  keeping  each  class  of  men 
busy  at  their  particular  class  of  work. 

8.  In  rainy  weather  keep  all   steady  pay  men  busy  overhauling 
machines  and  tools,  sharpening  tools,  branding  tools,  splicing  ropes, 
etc. 

9.  Rush  all   percentage  or   force  account  work   exactly   as   if   it 
were  part  of  the  regular  contract.     The  reputation  of  this  firm  is 
worth  more  money  than  can  ever  be  made  by  "making  work  last." 

10.  Small  jobs  of  extra  work  are  usually  taken  on  a  basis  of  20% 
profit  on  both  materials  and  labor.     This  leaves  but  a  small  margin 
of  profit  after  deducting  general   expenses.      It   is  particularly   de- 
sirable to  work  as  many  men  as  possible  on  a  small  job,  so  as  to 
reduce  the  percentage  of  general  expenses. 


COST   KEEPING.  63 

11.  Keep  the  addresses  of  good  workmen. 

12.  Do  not   be   a    "good   fellow"   with   the   men   under   you   after 
working  hours,   or  you  will  lose  their  respect.     Remember  the  old 
adage,  "Familiarity  breeds  contempt." 

13.  In  case  of  any  accident  to  a  workman  or  to  a  spectator  notify 
the  home  office  at  once  by  letter.     If  the  accident  is  fatal,  notify  by 
telegraph  or  telephone.     We  are  insured  against  such  accidents,  but 
by  the  terms  of  our  policy  we  must  notify  the  insurance  company 
within  24  hours. 

14.  The   best   and   cheapest   Insurance  against   accidents   is  care. 
Provide   barricades,    warning   notices    and    red    lights   wherever    an 
excavation  is  made.     Even  a  small  hole  unprotected  may  cause  the 
loss  of  a  life,  for  which  the  courts  may  hold  this  firm  responsible. 
When  a  street  is  closed  by  barricades,  do  not  permit  an  outsider  to 
enter  even  at  his  own  risk,  for  should  an  accident  occur  a  law  suit 
is  certain  to  follow  regardless  of  the  rights  involved. 

15.  Accept  no  orders  for  extra  work  except  in  writing,  and  for- 
ward such  orders  at  once  to  the  home  office. 

16.  Fill  in  your  expense  account  blank  every  Saturday  night  and 
send  to  the  home  office. 

17.  When  plans  are  received  indorse  your  name  upon  them,  with 
the  day  of  the  month  and  year.     Write  on  blueprints  with  a  red 
pencil. 

18.  Avoid  all  controversy  with  an  engineer  or  inspector.     A  small 
quarrel  often  leads  to  a  big  loss.     Notify  the  home  office  in  case  of 
unfair  or  unreasonable  orders. 

19.  When  a  car  arrives,  record  its  number  and  character  of  con- 
tents.    Remember  that  a  demurrage  is  charged  on  all   car  freight 
held  more  than  72  hours  ;  but  on  most  roads  demurarge  is  estimated 
by  averaging.     Thus,  if  one  car  is  held  24  hours  before  unloading 
and   another   is   held   96   hours,    the   average   is    (24+96)-=-2,    or    60 
hours. 

20.  Pile  lumber  with  the  boards  slanting  so  that  water  will  drain 
off.     Lay  as  few  boards  or  timbers  directly  on  the  ground  as  possi- 
ble.    See  that  the  top  layer  of  boards  is  turned  over  occasionally  to 
prevent  warping. 

21.  Insure  all  lumber  and  timber  work  against  fire. 

22.  Count  and  measure  all  sticks  of  lumber  to  check  the  bill.     To 
calculate  the  number  of  feet  board  measure   (ft.  B.  M.)   in  a  sawed 
stick   of  timber,   multiply   the  width   in   inches  by  the   thickness  in 
inches,   divide  this  product  by  12,  and  multiply  the  quotient  by  the 
length  of  the  stick  in  feet. 

23.  See  that  all  shipments  of  materials  are  counted  or  measured 
and  recorded. 

24.  For  convenience  in  estimating  the  weight  of  materials  remem- 
ber the  following :  Cu.  f t  per  ton 

Material.                                                                      of  2,000  Ibs. 

Water  ( 62  ya  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft. ) 32 

Sand  or  gravel   20 

Broken  sandstone,   limestone  or  granite 22 

Broken    trap-rock    20 

Solid  blocks  of  granite    12 

Coal,    broken     40 


04  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Green  white  oak  is  heavier  than  water  and  weighs  more  than  5 
Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M.  (there  being  12  ft.  B.  M.  per  cu  ft.).  Green 
southern  yellow  pine  weighs  4^5  Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M.  Kiln  dried  oak 
weighs  3%  Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M.  and  kiln  dried  yellow  pine  weighs  3 
Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M.  In  any  case,  by  floating  a  block  of  wood  in  water 
and  measuring  the  total  depth  of  the  block  and  the  submerged 
depth,  the  weight  can  be  calculated  by  simple  proportion,  thus: 

Depth  of  block  submerged :  Total  depth  of  block : :  The  weight  per 
it.  B.  M. :  5.2.  Thus  if  the  block  is  6  ins.  deep  and  4  ins.  are  sub- 
merged when  it  floats,  we  have  : 

4:6::x:5.2. 

Whence  we  find  that  x  is  nearly  3%  Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M. 

Familiarize  yourself  with  other  rules  useful  in  computing  weights, 
etc. 

25.  On  short  hauls  where  dump  wagons  are  not  available  provide 
extra  wagons  which  can  be  loaded  while  the  full  wagons  are  going 
to  the  dump  and  returning.     Extra  wagons  can  usually  be  rented, 
and  in  some  cases  it  will  pay  to  buy  them,  for  the  lost  team  time 
soon  eats  up  the  price  of  a  wagon.      Extra  wagons  are  especially 
useful   where   a   small   gang   of    men    is   unloading   brick,    stone    or 
timber  from  a  car  onto  the  wagon.  When  a  team  comes  up  with  an 
empty  wagon,  unhitch  from  the  empty,  hitch  to  the  full  wagon,  and 
with  a  tail  rope  pull  the  empty  wagon  up  to  place  as  the  full  wagon 
moves  ahead. 

26.  In   erecting  a   derrick   or   pile   driver    remember    that   a   gin 
pole  or  mast  can  often  be  used  to  advantage.     Gin  poles  are  not 
used  as  often  as  they  should  be  for  this  kind  .of  work. 

27.  In  erecting  a  trestle  for  falsework,  frame  and  bolt  the  bents 
together  on  the  ground,  then  up-end  them. 

28.  Use  round  timber  for  legs  of  temporary  trestles,   for  trench 
braces,  and  wherever  struts  are  needed.     Round  timber  can  usually 
be  bought  for  much  less  money  than  sawed  stuff. 

29.  In  buying  brick  consider  the  size  of  each  brick ;  bricks  vary 
greatly   in   size.      Large   bricks  are  worth  more  per   M   than   small 
ones.     If  2x4x8-in.   bricks  are  worth  $6.50  per  M,   every    %   in.   in- 
crease in  the  length  adds  10  cts.  per  M  to  the  value,  and  every  in- 
crease of  %  in.  in  thickness  adds  25  cts.  per  M. 

30.  In   buying   cement,    consider   the   size   of   the    barrel    and    the 
amount  of  cement  paste  that  can  be  made  with  a  barrel.     There  is 
a  great  variation  in  the  product  of  different  factories. 

31.  Buy  cement  in  wooden  barrels  for  use  on  small  jobs  that  are 
liable  to  lag.     Buy  cement  in  cloth  bags  for  most  work.     Pack  the 
bags  in  bundles  of  50,  and  ship  to  factory.     Cement  improves  with 
age  up  to  a  certain  point,  if  the  air  is  not  too  damp.     Use  the  oldest 
cement  first. 

32.  Dynamite  must  never  be  thawed  in  any  way  except  with  a 
hot  water  thawer  of  the  kind  furnished  by  this  firm.     Never  thaw 
in  front  of  a  fire,   or  on  a  hot  stone  removed   from   a  fire,    or  by 
piling  sticks  on  a  boiler,  or  in  an  oven      We  know  of  fatal  acci- 
dents due  to   each  of  these  methods.     There  may  be  safe  methods 


COST   KEEPING.  (tf 

other  than  the  one  above  ordered,  but  we  can  not  afford  to  experi- 
ment where  lives  are  at  stake. 

33.  Never  store  dynamite,  or  acid,  or  gasoline  in  a  tool  box.  The 
dynamite  may  be  exploded  ;  the  acid  vapors  will  eat  into  ropes  and 
rot  them  ;  the  gasoline  vapors  may  explode  or  spilled  gasoline  may 
result  in  a  fire.     Use  sand  to  put  out  a  gasoline  fire.     Hemp  rope  is 
weakened  not  only  by  acid  vapors,  but  by  saturation  with  oil.     All 
rope  should  be  kept  dry. 

34.  In  using  steam  engines,  steam  drills  and  derricks,  the  follow- 
ing precautions  should  be  observed : 

Daub  grease  over  all  bright  parts  before  storing,  also  in  wet 
weather.  Oil  the  derricks,  crushers,  wire  ropes,  and  all  movable 
parts  of  machines  every  day.  Cheap  black  grease  is  usually  daubed 
on  wire  ropes ;  but  where  the  ropes  are  moving  over  sheaves  almost 
continuously,  provide  an  oil  drip  cup  to  feed  oil,  drop  by  drop,  onto 
the  moving  rope. 

Do  not  permit  men  to  wash  their  hands  in  the  water  barrel  or 
tank  that  supplies  water  to  a  steam  boiler,  for  the  grease  from  their 
hands  will  cause  "priming." 

Boiler  flues  are  frequently  "burned"  because  water  is  allowed  to 
get  too  low  in  the  boiler.  Aside  from  the  danger  of  a  boiler  explo- 
sion in  such  cases,  there  is  the  certain  cost  of  repairs.  See  that 
the  steam  cocks  are  blown  off  several  times  daily,  and  do  not  rely 
upon  the  water  glass. 

A  lazy  or  ignorant  fireman  will  pile  on  coal  and  then  rest  until  it 
has  burned  low.  See  to  it  that  a  thin  bed  of  fuel  is  kept  steadily 
burning.  On  large  boilers  use  an  automatic  pressure  recording  gage 
to  make  the  firemen  attend  to  their  business  properly.  It  will  not 
only  save  coal,  but  result  in  greater  output  of  engines  and  steam 
drills. 

Cylinders  of  engines  and  steam  drills  are  frequently  cracked  in 
cold  weather  by  suddenly  letting  in  steam.  To  avoid  this  open  drip 
cocks  and  cocks  on  steam  chest  and  blow  in  steam  for  a  few  min- 
utes to  warm  up  the  cylinder  before  starting  the  machine.  A 
broken  cylinder  may  delay  work  for  a  week. 

Do  not  let  a  friction  clutch  get  wet,  for  it  may  slip  if  it  does. 

Lower  the  boom  of  each  derrick  at  night,  so  that  it  can  not  be 
dropped  by  some  one  for  fun  or  for  spite.  Lay  down  short  logs  at 
intervals  to  keep  the  hoisting  rope  clear  of  the  ground. 

The  foregoing  will  serve  as  examples  of  instructions  and  hints 
issued  by  a  contractor.  As  they  stand  they  possess  the  disadvan- 
tage of  not  being  classified  into  instructions  that  must  be  obeyed  and 
hints  that  may  be  followed. 

Each  contracting  firm  will  have  certain  plasses  of  work  in  which 
it  specializes,  and  will  find  it  advisable  to  prepare  mimeographed  or 
printed  instructions  not  only  of  a  general  nature  but  of  a  special 
nature.  Thus  a  firm  engaged  in  building  construction  may  give 
sketches  of  scaffolding  and  instructions  as  to  its  erection.  A  firm 
engaged  in  bridge  building  may  prepare  a  set  of  rules  to  gipdo  the 
foremen  in  coffer  damming  and  in  false  work  building, 

System  is  fast  taking  the  place  of  the  hit  or  miss  style  of 


(10  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ing  work.     A   well   prepared   set  of   instructions  to  foremen    is  an 
essential  part  of  any  complete  system  of  management. 

The  Ten  Laws  of  Management.* — The  managing  of  industrial  en- 
terprises, such  as  construction  work  in  the  field,  is  still  an  art,  and 
there  are  few  who  realize  that  it  can  be  reduced  to  a  truly  scientific 
basis.  Nevertheless  there  are  certain  underlying  principles  of 
effective  management  of  men  which  may  be  expressed  in  the  form  of 
laws.  Application  of  these  laws  leads  invariably  to  a  greater  out- 
put on  the  part  of  workmen,  and  this  invariability  of  result  proves 
the  scientific  basis  of  the  laws.  The  most  important  of  them  can 
be  grouped  under  ten  general  headings,  which  are  as  follows : 

1.  The  law  of  subdivision  of  duties. 

2.  The  law  of  educational  supervision. 

3.  The  law  of  coordination. 

4.  The  law  of  standard  performance  based  on  motion  timing. 

5.  The  law  of  divorce  of  planning  from  performance. 

6.  The  law  of  regular  unit  cost  reports. 

7.  The  law  of  reward  increasing  with  increased  performance. 

8.  The  law  of  prompt  reward. 

9.  The  law  of  competition. 

10.     The  law  of  managerial  dignity. 

Below  are  given  the  main  characteristics  of  each  : 

1.  The  Law  of  Sub- Division  of  Duties. — Men  are  gifted  with  fac- 
ulties and  muscles  that  differ  extremely.  One  man  will  excel  at 
running  a  rock  drill,  another  is  better  at  lifting  loads,  a  third  is 
clever  in  the  application  of  arithmetic,  a  fourth  is  a  born  teacher — 
and  so  through  'the  gamut  of  human  occupation.  Moreover,  prac- 
tice serves  to  accentuate  these  inborn  differences.  It  is  clear,  there- 
fore, that  the  fewer  duties  any  one  man  has  to  perform,  the  easier 
it  is  to  find  men  who  can  do  the  task  well.  But  give  a  man  many 
duties  to  perform  and  he  is  almost  certain  to  do  at  least  one  of 
them  poorly,  if,  indeed,  all  are  not  miserably  attended  to.  Hence 
the  following  law  of  management :  So  organize  the  work  as  to  give 
each  man  a  minimum  number  of  duties  to  perform. 

This  law  needs  little  emphasizing  as  to  its  general  truth,  but  it 
is  nevertheless  ignored  frequently  by  those  who  have  not  applied  a 
scientific  treatment  to  management.  Thus  a  foreman  is  often 
charged  with  a  multitude  of  duties.  He  is  expected,  for  example, 
to  watch  the  workmen  and  spur  them  to  action  when  slothful,  to 
teach  his  men  how  to  do  their  work  in  a  more  economic  fashion, 
to  discover  and  remedy  defects  in  the  machines  and  tools  employed, 
to  plan  the  arrival  of  materials  at  the  proper  time  and  in  the  proper 
amount,  to  keep  records  of  daily  performance,  etc.,  etc. 

Mr.  Fred  W.  Taylor  was  the  first,  we  believe,  to  urge  the  sub- 
division of  the  duties  of  foremen  and  to  have  what  he  calls  "func- 
tional foremen."  One  foreman,  for  example,  is  the  machinery  and 
tool  foreman.  It  is  his  sole  duty  to  study  the  work  done  by  ma- 
chines and  tools,  to  effect  improvements,  to  reduce  delays,  and  to 
supervise  repairs. 


*These   ten   laws   of   management   were   first   published    in    "Cost 
Keeping  nnd  Management  Engineering,"  by  Gillette  and  Dana. 


COST   KEEPING.  67 

Another  foreman  is  the  gang  foreman.  His  function  is  to  organ- 
ize the  gangs,  to  direct  their  operation,  and  to  instruct  them  in  the 
performance  of  their  work. 

A  material  foreman  is  employed  on  large  jobs.  His  function  is 
to  confer  with  other  foremen  and  ascertain  what  materials,  ma- 
chines and  supplies  will  be  needed.  He  orders  the  materials,  ar- 
ranges for  their  shipment,  and  follows  up  the  manufacturing  and 
railway  companies  to  secure  prompt  delivery.  If  necessary,  he 
sends  men  to  the  factory,  to  the  stone  quarry,  or  to  the  freight 
yard  to  see  to  it  that  deliveries  are  made  with  dispatch.  Such  a 
man  is  often  invaluable,  for  upon  him  may  depend  the  entire 
progress  of  the  work. 

According  to  the  magnitude  of  the  contract  there  may  be  different 
kinds  of  foremen,  all  coming  in  contact  with  the  same  men  perhaps, 
but  all  performing  different  functions.  Such  an  organization  as  this 
differs  radically  from  a  military  organization,  wherein  each  man 
reports  to  only  one  superior  officer  on  all  matters. 

Most  industrial  organizations  today  resemble  military  organ- 
izations, with  their  generals  and  intermediate  officers,  down  to 
corporals,  each  man  reporting  to  but  one  man  higher  in  rank.  There 
is  little  doubt  that  the  present  tendency  in  industrial  organizations  is 
to  abandon  the  military  system  to  a  very  large  extent,  and  for  the 
following  reasons: 

A  soldier  has  certain  duties  to  perform,  few  in  number  and 
simple  In  kind.  Hence  the  man  directly  in  command  can  control 
the  actions  of  his  subordinates  easily  and  effectively.  Control 
moreover  should  come  invariably  from  the  same  officer,  to  avoid 
any  possibility  of  disastrous  confusion  and  to  insure  the  instant 
action  of  a  body  of  men  as  one  single  mass.  On  the  other  hand, 
industrial  operations  do  not  possess  the  same  simplicity,  particular- 
ly where  men  are  using  machines,  nor  is  there  the  necessity  of 
action  in  mass.  The  military  organization,  therefore,  should  be 
modified  to  suit  the  conditions ;  and  one  of  these  modifications  is 
the  introduction  of  two  or  more  foremen  in  charge  of  certain 
functions  or  duties  of  the  same  men  or  groups  of  men. 

On  contract  work  it  is  often  impossible  to  subdivide  the  duties 
of  men  to  as  great  an  extent  as  can  be  done  in  large  manufacturing 
establishments.  The  smaller  the  contract,  the  less  the  subdivision 
of  duties  possible.  In  such  cases  an  approach  to  the  ideal  system 
of  subdivision  is  secured  not  by  employing  different  men  for  dif- 
ferent purposes  "but  by  a  systematic  assignment  of  duties  to  the 
same  men  to  be  performed  at  specified  hours  of  the  day  or  days 
of  the  week.  Thus  a  small  gang  of  carpenters  is  engaged  in 
building  forms  for  concrete,  in  repairing  wooden  dump  cars,  and 
in  framing  and  erecting  trestle  work.  By  timing  the  men  and  by 
planning  their  work  upon  the  timing  records  and  the  requirements 
of  the  work  this  carpenter  gang  can  be  assigned  certain  hours  or 
days  for  each  class  of  work.  Thus  is  avoided  the  intermittent  and 
uncertain  shifting  of  the  gang  from  one  class  of  work  to  another, 
involving  not  only  a  loss  of  time  in  frequent  shifting  but  a  loss  of 
interest  in  work  that  is  done  piecemeal.  Moreover  a  methodical 


68  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

change  of  occupation  permits  a  methodical  record  of  the  number 
of  units  of  each  class  of  work  performed,  and  thus  leads  to  the 
use  of  the  bonus  system  of  payment. 

2.  The  Law  of  Educational  Supervision.— It  is  not  alone  sufficient 
to  give  instructions  to  workmen  and  foremen  from  time  to  time  by 
word  of  mouth,  but  the  gist  of  all"  Important  instructions  should  be 
reduced  to  written  or  printed  form.  Among  contractors  the  pioneer 
observer  of  this  law  is  Mr.  Frank  B.  Gilbreth,  whose  "Field 
System"  is  a  200-page  book  of  rules  for  his  superintendents,  fore- 
men and  others  to  follow.  His  "Bricklaying  System"  is  another 
set  of  rules  for  the  guidance  of  his  brick  masons  and  foremen. 

Among  manufacturers  there  are  many  examples  of  those  who 
have  prepared  more  or  less  elaborate  sets  of  rules  to  be  followed, 
but  the  most  interesting  of  these  compilations  that  have  come  to 
our  attention  is  the  one  furnished  to  its  salesmen  by  the  National 
Cash  Register  Co.  In  this  book  are  gathered  a  vast  number  of 
useful  hints  and  practical  suggestions  and  arguments  to  be  used 
in  selling  National  cash  registers.  Each  possible  objection  that  a 
prospective  purchaser  may  raise  is  met  with  one  or  more  specific 
answers.  This  company  not  only  provides  its  salesmen  with  a  text 
book  but  has  a  school  for  training  salesmen.  At  regular  intervals 
all  the  salesmen  meet  together  and  discuss  their  respective  methods 
of  selling  cash  registers.  Any  new  suggestions  that  are  good  be- 
come subsequently  a  part  of  the  book  of  instructions.  Thus  the 
combined  wisdom  of  hundreds  of  salesmen  is  preserved  and  de- 
livered to  every  salesman  that  the  company  employs.  This  plan  is 
followed  also  by  many  of  the  life  insurance  companies.  Railway 
companies  have  long  made  it  their  practice  to  furnish  their  civil 
engineers  with  printed  sets  of  rules  for  railway  location,  as  ex- 
emplified in  McHenry's  "Railway  Location."  All  these  are  forms 
of  educational  supervision,  and  some  are  very  elaborate.  The  small 
contractor  need  not  necessarily  have  a  printed  book  of  rules  of  his 
own  making,  but  he  can  supplement  some  such  book  of  rules  and 
hints  by  a  typewritten  or  mimeographed  set  of  sheets  containing 
the  most  important  of  his  own  instructions.  In  this  manner  the 
repetition  of  a  costly  blunder  by  a  foreman  or  workman  can  be 
avoided  by  a  special  rule  or  hint,  while  a  labor  saving  "trick"  can 
be  passed  on  to  other  men  in  the  contractor's  employ. 

In  developing  a  system  of  educational  supervision  the  greatest 
assistance  can  be  obtained  from  articles  in  engineering  and  con- 
tracting periodicals,  for  there  will  be  frequently  recorded  labor 
saving  methods  well  worthy  of  trial  by  other  contractors.  In  a 
long  article  it  may  be  only  a  small  hint  that  is  worthy  of  being 
abstracted  and  placed  among  the  hints  for  foremen. 

In  preparing  a  set  of  rules  and  hints,  take  pains  to  distinguish 
sharply  between  what  is  a  rule  always  to  be  followed  and  what  is 
a  hint  to  be  followed  optionally.  It  is  well  to  have  a  set  of  rules, 
each  with  its  specific  number,  and  a  separate  set  of  hints,  also 
numbered. 

The  second  law  of  management  is  briefly  this: 


COST   KEEPING.  69 

Secure  uniformity  of  procedure  on  the  part  of  employes  by  pro- 
viding written  or  printed  rules,  supplemented  by  educational  sug- 
gestions or  hints  to  guide  them  in  their  work. 

3.  The  Law  of  Co-ordination. —  So  schedule  the  performance  of 
each  gang  of  men  that  they  will  work  in  perfect  coordination  with 
other  gangs,,  either  adjacent  or  remote. 

Perfect  coordination  involves  the  working  of  each  man  to  his 
capacity  all  the  time.  This  necessitates  not  only  the  organization 
of  gangs  of  just  the  right  size  but  the  prompt  arrival  of  standard 
supplies  and  materials,  and  freedom  from,  breakdowns  of  plant. 

An  examination  of  almost  any  piece  of  construction  work  in 
progress  will  disclose  the  fact  that  most  of  the  men  spend  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  their  time  waiting  either  for  somebody  else  to 
do  something  or  for  materials  to  arrive,  before  they  can  proceed. 
The  cause  is  improper  coordination  of  the  work.  One  gang  may 
have  too  many  men  and  therefore  may  be  able  to  work  considerably 
faster  than  another,  and  be  continually  catching  up  with  it.  They 
will  then  adopt  a  slower  pace,  keep  seemingly  busy,  and  manage 
to  kill  a  large  percentage  of  their  working  time.  These  delays  are 
chargeable  to  lack  of  coordination,  although  a  careless  inspection 
of  the  work  may  seem  to  indicate  that  everything  is  going  smooth- 
ly. A  job  can  look  smooth  and  at  the  same  time  be  so  badly  co- 
ordinated as  to  be  uneconomical. 

The  necessary  adjuncts  to  proper  coordination  of  work  are 
briefly  as  follows : 

1.  A  carefully  drawn  schedule  of  performance. 

2.  Regular  arrival  of  material  and  supplies. 

3.  Prompt  and  proper   repairs  to   equipment. 

4.  The  proper  quality  of  supplies. 

The  best  method  that  has  so  far  been  devised  for  making  things 
happen  on  time  is  first  to  prepare  a  time  table,  and  then  to  live 
up  to  it  as  far  as  the  interruptions  of  the  weather  and  the  limita- 
tions of  human  nature  will  permit.  To  prepare  a  time  table 
properly  it  is  necessary  to  know  how  fast  work  can  be  done  under 
the  conditions  which  are  to  govern  it.  At  the  best  there  will  be  a 
considerable  variation  to  be  accounted  for  by  ignorance  on  the 
part  of  the  planning  department  on  the  one  hand  and  by  the  in- 
terference of  the  elements  on  the  other.  A  form  of  chart,  made 
on  tracing  cloth,  with  various  symbols  to  indicate  the  kinds  of 
work  to  be  done,  has  been  found  very  useful.  As  the  work  pro- 
gresses the  performance  can  be  checked  off  on  the  chart,  and  thus 
indicate  whether  the  work  is  proceeding  on  time.  Where  the 
work  is  such  as  that  of  building  construction  and  there  is  but 
little  storage  capacity  for  materials,  it  is  best  to  have  the  chart 
prepared  a  considerable  time  in  advance  so  that  materials  will 
arrive  when  they  are  needed  and  yet  not  so  much  in  advance  of  the 
proper  time  as  to  require  large  storage  capacity  at  the  site  of  the 
work. 

4.     The   Law  of  Standard   Performance   Based  on   Motion  Timing. 

• — Nearly  every  operation  performed  by  a  workman  involves  several 


70 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


motions,  although  at  first  sight  it  may  often  seem  that  there  is  but 
one. 

Mr.  Frank  B.  Gilbreth  has  coined  the  term  "motion  study"  to 
denote  his  method  of  observing  the  number  and  kind  of  motions 
made  by  a  man — a  brick  layer,  for  example — in  performing  a  given 
operation.  His  plan  is  to  analyze  the  motions,  assigning  a  name 
to  each  motion.  His  next  step  is  to  endeavor  so  to  arrange  the  sup- 
ply of  materials,  the  position  of  tools,  etc.,  as  to  reduce  the  num- 
ber of  motions  and  the  distance  of  each  motion  to  a  minimum. 

TABLE  VII. 
Cableway  No.  2,  Handling  Concrete. 


Rl 
Tl 
Fl 

Process 
40   ft 

1908. 
Observj 
tions. 
30 

i-  Min. 
time. 
6.0 
31.0 
22.0 
16.8 
19.4 
26.5 
11.0 
12.0 

Ave. 
time. 
10.5 
47.3 
30.8 
61.7 
23.7 
37.2 
42.9 
73.2 

Max. 
time. 
17.3 
63.0 
44.7 
140.4 
29.3 
64.5 
96.0 
234.0 

Efficiency. 
Standard  Per 
time.       cent. 
6.0          40.0 
31.0          65.5 
22.0          71.5 
16.8          27.2 
19.0           80.4 
26.5           71.1 
11.0          25.6 
9.4           12.8 

470  ft 

33 

123    ft  

..  .      37 

...      37 
...      36 
36 

Re 
Te 
Fe 

123    ft.. 
470    ft 

40    ft  

..  .      35 

28 

1 

Rl 
Tl 
Fl 

'otals,   1,266 

Process 
40    ft.  . 

ft. 

Cableway 
1908. 
Observe 
tions. 
...      18 

144.7           327.3 

TABLE  VIII. 
No.    3,   Handling 

i-  Min.            Ave. 
time.          time. 
8.0            13.6 
35.5            39.3 
25.0            39.4 
20.0            62.5 
19.0             28.5 
30.0             46.6 
18.0             29.1 
38.0            75.6 

689.2 

Concrete. 

Max. 

time. 
18.2 
68.0 
77.0 
119.0 
36.0 
102.0 
48.0 
220.0 

141.7 

Efficiency. 
Standard  Per 
time.       cent. 
6.0          44.1 
31.0          78.0 
22.0          55.9 
16.8          26.9 
19.0          66.8 
26.5          56.9 
11.0          37.8 
9.4          12.4 

470    ft  

...      17 

123    ft  
D 

...      21 
22 
.  .'.      22 

Re 

Te 
Fe 

123    ft    . 

470    ft 

22 

40    ft  
L 

20 
16 

193.5          334.6          688.2          141.7 

Mr.  Fred  W.  Taylor  was  the  first,  we  believe,  to  adopt  the  prac- 
tice of  invariably  studying  each  motion  by  the  aid  of  a  stop- 
watch. A  large  number  of  stop-watch  observations  not  only  give 
the  average  time  of  a  motion,  but,  what  is  of  far  greater  im- 
portance, they  indicate  what  the  minimum  time  for  each  motion 
may  reasonably  be  expected  to  be.  It  then  follows  that  the  sum 
of  these  minimum  times  for  the  different  motions  represents  a 
standard  time  of  accomplishment  of  the  entire  process.  Hence  our 
law  of  motion  timing : 

In  the  performance  of  every  process  the  sum  of  the  minimum 
times  observed  for  each  motion  gives  a  standard  of  performance 
possible  of  attainment  under  sufficient  incentive. 

Mr.  Harrington  Emerson  calls  this  standard  of  excellence  100%, 
and  has  developed  the  plan  of  rating  all  actual  performances  in 
percentages.  Thus  if  the  standard  time  for  drilling  a  10-ft.  hole  in 
a  certain  rock  were  60  minutes  and,  if  the  actual  time  were  90 
minutes,  this  performance  would  be  rated  at  60-^-90=66.67%. 


COST   KEEPING.  71 

In  establishing  a  standard  time  of  performance,  the  first  step  is 
to  ascertain  the  unit  times  upon  the  work  as  ordinarily  performed. 
The  next  step  is  by  study  of  the  time  elements  and  the  local  con- 
ditions to  eliminate  as  many  motions  as  possible  and  to  reduce 
the  time  of  others,  either  by  shortening  the  path  of  motion  or  by 
accelerating  the  velocity  of  the  motion. 

To  illustrate  by  an  example  we  give  the  following  time  study, 
which  was  made  by  Mr.  Dana  some  time  ago  on  some 
cableway  work.  Since  this  was  done  the  Lidgerwood  Mfg.  Co.  has 
completely  redesigned  its  cableway  engine  and  fall  rope  carriers 
and  has  introduced  new  features  in  control  (notably  in  the  Gatun 
cableways  in  Panama).  Therefore,  while  the  data  are  correct  as 
history,  they  must  not  be  taken  as  indicating  the  limit  of  present 
possibility.  A  considerable  number  of  studies  was  made,  but  one 
only  is  given  for  purposes  of  illustration.  (See  Table  VII,  p.  70.) 

The  first  column  gives  the  abbreviations  of  the  processes,  dis- 
tances, etc. ;  the  second  gives  the  number  of  recorded  observations 
on  each  process ;  the  third  gives  the  minimum  observed  time  in 
seconds  for  each  process  in  that  table  ;  the  fourth  gives  the  aver- 
age ;  the  fifth  gives  the  maximum  time ;  the  sixth  gives  the  mini- 
mum of  all  the  observed  times  for  each  process.  While  this  is  by 
no  means  the  shortest  possible  time  in  which  the  process  could  be 
accomplished,  it  is  the  shortest  one  observed,  and  has  here  been 
taken  to  represent  standard  (100%)  efficiency.  By  dividing  the 
standard  time  by  the  average  for  each  process  the  average  effi- 
ciency as  observed  is  obtained.  This  is  shown  in  the  seventh 
column. 

As  a  result  of  this  time  study,  it  was  possible  to  make  an  esti- 
mate of  the  probable  increase  in  efficiency  that  could  be  obtained 
by  rebalancing  the  engines.  A  further  improvement  was  discov- 
ered in  the  method  used  in  signaling  to  the  operator,  and  an  esti- 
mate of  the  saving  to  be  obtained  in  this  manner  was  made.  A 
further  improvement  in  regard  to  the  position  of  the  operator  was 
discovered.  A  collateral  improvement  was  perceived  in  the  line  of 
altering  the  design  of  the  towers,  so  that  the  cost  per  unit  of  han- 
dling materials  could  be  reduced,  and  further  suggestions  of  a  con- 
fidential nature,  which  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  discuss  here,  were 
made. 

5.  The  Law  of  Divorce  of  Planning  From  Performance. — As  a 
corollary  to  the  law  of  the  subdivision  of  duties,  we  have  the  law 
of  divorce  of  planning  from  performance,  first  formulated  by  Mr. 
Taylor. 

According  to  the  old  style  method  of  management,  each  foreman 
is  left  largely  to  his  own  resources  in  planning  methods,  in  addition 
to  his  other  functions.  This  multiplicity  of  duties  can  be  properly 
performed  only  by  a  foreman  possessed  of  a  multiplicity  of  talents. 
rfSince-  few  men  can  comply  with  such  a  specification  for  brains,  it 
follows  that  good  foremen  of  the  old  style  are  rare  indeed.  The 
modern  system  of  management  consists,  as  far  as  possible,  in  tak- 
ing away  from  the  foremen  the  function  of  planning  the  work,  and 


72  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

in  providing1  a  department  to  do  the  planning.  Under  planning  we 
include  inventing,  that  is,  the  improvement  of  existing  methods  and 
machines. 

A  common  error  in  management  is  the  assumption  that  the  man 
on  the  job  in  direct  charge  of  the  work  is  the  man  best  fitted  to 
plan  and  improve.  Nothing  is  further  from  the  truth.  Rare,  in- 
deed, is  the  man  possessed  of  a  trained  inventive  faculty,  and  it 
requires  such  a  faculty  not  only  to  develop  new  methods  and  ma- 
chines but  to  plan  the  use  of  any  machine  with  greatest  economy. 
Nearly  every  piece  of  contract  work  presents  new  'conditions,  and 
this  solving  of  new  economic  problems  is  beyond  the  power  of  any 
but  the  trained  and  skilled  economist.  But  even  where  the  prob- 
lems remain  identical,  the  necessity  of  a  divorce  of  planning  from 
performance  exists,  as  we  shall  indicate. 

The  brain  is  an  organ  that  requires  frequent  exercise  in  doing 
the  same  thing  before  it  becomes  proficient  enough  not  to  suffer 
great  fatigue.  Thus,  the  man  who  is  learning  to  ride  a  bicycle 
finds  that  half  an  hour's  lesson  has  tired  him  more  than  ten  hours' 
work  at  his  accustomed  occupation.  Attempting  to  do  something 
new  is  wearisome  beyond  measure,  except  to  the  mind  whose 
training  has  been  in  solving  new  problems.  Hence  the  ordinary 
man  finds  much  fatigue  and  little  pleasure  in  attempting  to  do  his 
work  in  a  fashion  that  differs  at  all  from  that  to  which  he  has  long 
been  accustomed.  The  mental  inertia  that  resists  a  change  in 
methods  of  performing  work  is  almost  beyond  comprehension,  and 
it  is  found  not  only  in  the  lowest  type  of  workman  but  in  the 
highest. 

Repetition  develops  skill,  and  skill  gives  pleasure.  To  a  strong 
man  used  to  his  work  there  is  actual  pleasure  in  mowing  hay,  as 
Tolstoi  has  admirably  pictured  in  one  of  his  novels.  Conversely, 
fatigue  merges  into  pain  and  is  repulsive. 

In  addition  to  these  fundamental  reasons  why  men  adhere  to 
precedent  in  their  performance,  there  is  the  fear  of  ridicule  in 
case  of  failure  to  succeed  in  any  new  attempt.  The  child  learns  to 
speak  a  foreign  language  more  rapidly  than  an  adult  not  only  be- 
cause of  a  more  "flexible  tongue"  but  because  it  does  not  fear 
laughter  at  its  blunders.  Partial  failure  is  expected  of  the  child, 
and  it  is  not  ridiculed.  But  an  adult  seems  witless  if  he  does  not 
immediately  learn  the  new  word  and  its  pronunciation  ;  hence  the 
laughter.  So  it  is  with  every  new  performance.  Furthermore,  a 
serious  mistake  may  lead  to  the  loss  of  a  position,  thus  adding 
another  reason  for  sticking  to  the  "good  old  way." 

Finally,  there  is  no  method  so  fruitful  in  effecting  improvements 
in  methods  and  machines  as  a  study  of  the  time  required  to  per- 
form each  movement  or  operation.  A  workman  or  foreman  rarely 
studies  his  own  work  in  this  manner.  Hence  his  experience,  upon 
which  he  is  wont  to  brag,  is  like  the  experience  of  the  swallow 
building  its  nest — an  unchanging  adherence  to  precedent,  regardless 
of  possibilities  of  improvement. 

It  is  a  significant  fact  that  nearly  all  the  great  inventions  have 
been  the  pi'oduct  of  brains  divorced  from  the  actual  performance 


COST   KEEPING.  73 

of  the  machines  that  they  have  invented.  Eli  Whitney,  inventor  of 
the  cotton  gin,  was  a  lawyer,  and  not  even  a  southern  planter. 
Smiles'  "Self  Help"  is  a  volume  full  of  instances  of  important  in- 
ventions made  by  men  remotely,  if  at  all,  connected  with  the  class 
of  industry  in  which  their  machines  are  used.  Nothing,  therefore, 
is  more  ridiculously  illogical  than  the  common  belief  that  the  "men 
behind  the  gun"  are  either  capable  of  being  the  inventors  of  the 
gun  or  the  ones  most  likely  to  improve  it.  Yet  it  is  this  illogical 
belief  that  prevents  railway  companies,  manufacturers  and  con- 
tractors from  making  hundreds  of  radical  economic  improvements. 
Summing  up,  we  have  this  law : 

For  maximum  economy  of  performance,  the  planning  of  methods 
of  doing  work  should  be  the  sole  function  of  a  manager  who  is  not 
a  workman  himself  nor  in  direct  charge  of  the  workmen. 

6.  The  Law  of  Regular  Unit  Cost  Reports. — Having  planned  a 
method  of  performance,  it  becomes  necessary  to  secure  daily,  week- 
ly and  monthly  reports  of  such  completeness  that  a  manager  can 
tell,  almost  at  a  glance,  what  the  actual  and  relative  performances 
are.  This  systematic  reporting  is  more  fully  treated  under  the  head 
of  cost  keeping.  The  success  of  nearly  all  large  corporations,  such 
as  the  Standard  Oil  Company,  is  due,  in  large  measure,  to  a  system 
of  regular  reports  that  put  the  various  managers  in  constant  touch 
with  the  performance  of  the  men  under  them..  Reports  to  be  of 
much  value  must  come  at  short,  regular  intervals,  must  be  in  the 
same  form,  and  must  show  quantitative  results  that  admit  of  in- 
stant comparison  with  previous  reports.  To. permit  comparison  there 
must  be  either  similarity  of  conditions,  or  there  must  be  a  reduction 
to  units  that  are  themselves  practically  identical.  For  example,  a 
weekly  record  of  the  number  of  yards  of  earth  excavated  and  hauled 
at  a  given  unit  cost  is  usually  of  little  or  no  value  to  the  manager 
unless  there  is  a  further  subdivision  of  units  of  cost.  The  cost  of 
loading  per  cubic  yard  should  be  segregated  from  the  cost  of  haul- 
ing, so  that  the  cost  of  hauling  can  itself  be  expressed  in  the  unit 
of  the  yard-mile  or  ton-mile  hauled. 

The  law  of  regular  unit  cost  reports  may  be  formulated  as  fol- 
lows :  Report  all  costs  in  terms  of  units  of  such  character  that 
comparison  becomes  possible  even  under  changing  conditions,  and 
let  these  reports  be  made  daily  if  possible,  weekly  in  any  event, 
and  with  a  monthly  summary. 

It  is  in  the  adherence  to  the  terms  of  this  law  that  managers  of 
contract  work  in  the  field  will  find  their  greatest  difficulty.  First, 
there  is  the  difficulty  of  selecting  suitable  units  upon  which  to  re- 
port costs.  In  pavement  work,  the  square  yard  is  a  convenient  unit 
and  the  number  of  units  is  easily  measured  daily.  But  in  rein- 
forced concrete  building  construction,  there  is  needed  not  merely 
the  cubic  foot  or  cubic  yard  unit,  but  many  others,  some  of  which 
are  not  easily  ascertained  every  day. 

For  example,  the  pound  of  steel  reinforcement  is  one  unit  upon 
wh4ch  reports  should  be  made,  for  the  number  of  pounds  of  steel 
per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  differs  widely.  The  thousand  feet  board 


74  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

measure  in  the  forms  is  another  necessary  unit,  and  the  square 
foot  of  concrete  area  covered  by  the  forms  is  still  another.  Yet 
these  and  other  units  must  be  used  to  admit  of  any  rational  com- 
parison of  performance  from  day  to  day  and  week  to  week. 

Furthermore,  such  units  must  be  properly  selected  for  the  still 
more  important  purpose  of  paying  the  workmen  according  to  any 
bonus  system.  In  another  chapter  we  discuss  this  problem  of  se- 
lecting units  of  measurement  at  considerable  length,  for  upon  such 
selection  depends  the  success  of  contract  work  under  the  modern 
method  of  management. 

7.  The  Law  of  Reward  Increasing  With  Increased  Performance. 
— All  payments  for  work  should  be  proportionate  to  the  work  done. 
This  is  the  fundamental  law  of  economic  production.  When  this 
law  is  ignored — and  it  is  partly  ignored  to-day  on  practically  every 
.class  of  work — the  producer  ceases  to  take  keen  interest  in  his 
work.  Under  the  common  wage  system  of  payment,  one  brick  mason 
receives  as  much  as  another,  regardless  of  skill  and  energy.  In- 
dividual incentive  is  lacking,  save  as  it  is  supplied  by  fear  of  dis- 
charge. When  laborers,  working  under  the  wage  system,  are  put  at 
the  task  of  shoveling  earth  into  a  wagon,  each  man  seeks  to  do  as 
little  as  his  neighbor,  and  the  slowest  becomes  the  pacemaker  for 
the  rest.  Such  ambition  as  any  individual  may  possess  is  stifled 
by  the  knowledge  that  his  increased  output  will  never  be  known 
by  his  employer,  and  consequently  never  rewarded.  Moreover,  an 
ambitious  man  in  such  a  gang  is  chided  by  his  fellows  who  warn 
him  not  to  set  a  "bad  example"  by  working  himself  out  of  a  job. 

The  wage  system  is  responsible  in  the  first  place  for  lack  of  suf- 
ficient incentive  to  good  performance,  but  its  vicious  effects  have 
been  greatly  augmented  by  the  stupid  actions  of  many  labor  unions, 
such  as  the  restriction  of  daily  output,  the  limiting  of  the  number 
of  apprentices,  the  demanding  of  wages  that  have  no  relation  what- 
ever to  the  output  of  individuals,  the  refusal  to  work  under  fore- 
men who  are  not  also  members  of  the  union,  the  refusal  to  do  any 
sort  of  work  except  that  prescribed  by  the  union,  and  the  like.  In 
the  long  run,  all  such  restriction  of  output,  whether  due  to  the  lack 
of  sufficient  incentive,  or  to  the  rules  of  labor  unions,  or  to  the  cus- 
toms of  a  country  crystallized  into  caste  such  as  exists  in  India, 
lead  to  a  reward  commensurate  with  the  output.  Summing  up : 
The  wage  received  becomes  ultimately  proportionate  to  the  output. 
The  high  wages  prevalent  in  America  are  due  neither  to  labor 
unions,  as  some  profess  to  suppose,  nor  to  abundance  of  natural  re- 
sources, but  to  the  fact  that  in  America  labor  unions  have  not  thus 
far  greatly  restricted  the  output  of  individuals  except  in  a  few 
trades,  and  more  particularly  to  the  fact  that  they  have  not  opposed 
the  introduction  of  labor  saving  machinery.  In  addition,  American 
managers  are  far  in  advance  of  all  others  In  their  recognition 
the  fundamental  law  of  management — namely,  that  the  rewai 
should  be  proportionate  to  the  performance.  Hampered  though  the 
have  been  by  the  wage  system,  American  managers  have  been  lil 
eral  in  their  policy  of  payments  for  work  performed.  In  recognitic 
of  his  share  in  the  greater  output  of  earth  excavation,  the  steal 


COST   KEEPING.  75 

shovel  enginemen   in   the  United  States  receives  $125.00  to  $175.00 
a  month. 

Within  the  past  decade  still  further  strides  have  been  made  by 
American  managers  toward  a  more  effective  recognition  of  this 
fundamental  law  of  proportionate  rewards.  Various  systems  of 
payment,  known  as  the  bonus  system,  the  differential  piece  rate  sys- 
tem, and  the  like,  have  come  intj  more  general  use,  and  even  the 
old  piece  rate  system  has  received  a  new  lease  of  life,  all  tending 
wonderfully  to  stimulate  the  energy  and  wits  of  workmen,  because 
they  are  in  accord  with  the  law  of  proportionate  reward. 

8.  The    Law    of    Prompt    Reward. — Any    reward    or    punishment 
that*  is  remote  in  the  time  of  its  application  has  a  relatively  faint 
influence  in  determining  the  average  man's  conduct.     To   be  most 
effective,   the  reward  or  punishment  must  follow  swiftly  upon  the 
act.     Hence  a  managerial  policy  that  may  be  otherwise  good  is  like- 
ly  to   fail   if  there  is   not  a  prompt   reward  for  excellence.      Most 
profit-sharing  systems  have  failed,  principally  because  of  failure  to 
recognize  the   necessity   of  prompt  reward,   as  well  as  because   of 
failure  to  recognize  the  necessity  of  individual  incentive. 

The  lower  the  scale  of  intelligence,  the  more  prompt  should  be 
the  reward.  A  common  laborer  should  receive  at  least  a  statement 
of  what  he  has  earned  every  day.  If,  in  the  morning,  he  receives  a 
card  stating  that  he  earned  $2.10  the  previous  day,  he  will  go  at 
his  task  with  a  vim,  hoping  to  do  better.  But  if  he  does  not  know 
what  he  has  earned  until  the  end  of  a  week,  his  imagination  is  not 
apt  to  be  vivid  enough  to  spur  him  to  do  his  best. 

A  daily  or  weekly  statement  of  earnings,  followed  "by  prompt  pay- 
ment, is  a  stimulus  essential  in  securing  the  maximum  output  of 
workmen. 

9.  The  Law  of  Competition. — The  pleasure  of  a  competitive  game 
lies  in  conquering  an  opponent,  and  this  follows  logically  from  the 
fact  that  competitive  games   are  an   evolution   from   the  primitive 
chase  or  battle.     Work  conducted  as  a  competition  becomes  a  game, 
and  thus  stimulates  those  engaged  not  only  to  strive  with  great  en- 
ergy but  to  derive  keen  pleasure   from  the  contest.      The  business 
man  who  continues  to  pile  up  millions,  long  after  his  wealth  is  suf- 
ficient to  satisfy  every  possible  want,  does  so  from  pure  joy  in  the 
contest  to  excel  others  engaged  in  the  same  business.     He  is  follow- 
ing the  law  of  competitive  work. 

By  pitting  one  gang  of  workmen  against  another  gang,  the  spirit 
of  contest  is  easily  aroused.  But  it  is  impossible  to  maintain  this 
spirit  indefinitely  without  following  the  seventh  law  of  manage- 
ment of  men — na,mely,  by  making  the  reward  proportionate  to  the 
performance.  When,  however,  this  seventh  law  of  management  is 
observed,  an  added  spirit  is  given  to  men  by  pitting  one  gang  against 
another.  Thus,  in  laying  concrete  by  hand  for  a  pavement,  the  best 
method  is  to  have  two  distinct  gangs  working  side  by  side,  each 
gang  concreting  from  the  center  of  the  street  to  the  curb.  When 
this  is  done  under  a  bonus  system  of  payment,  the  output  is  aston- 
ishing 

Where  competing  workmen  cannot  see  one  another's  output,  a  bul- 


76  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

letin  board  should  be  used,  whereon  the  number  of  units  of  work 
performed  by  each  man  or  each  gang  of  men  should  be  posted. 

Convert  work  into  a  competitive  game  by  organising  competing 
gangs  of  men  and  "by  posting  their  performance. 

10.  The  Law  of  Managerial  Dignity.— That  there  should  be  any- 
thing like  caste  among  managers  seems,  at  first,  repulsive  to  demo-' 
cratic  principles  of  government,  whether  the  government  be  politi- 
cal or  industrial.  Nevertheless,  a  study  of  the  personality  of  the 
most  successful  managers  usually  discloses  a  characteristic  of  firm- 
ness coupled  with  a  sort  of  austere  dignity.  The  best  manager  is 
never  "one  of  the  boys." 

Managerial  control  reaches  its  acme  of  excellence  in  the  arVny, 
and  there  we  find  class  distinctions  most  scrupulously  observed. 
The  officers  do  not  "mess"  with  the  men,  nor  do  they  form  close 
friendships  with  the  soldiers  in  the  ranks. 

Familiarity  breeds  contempt,  or  it  breeds  at  least  a  feeling  that 
the  great  man  is  not  so  great  after  all.  All  managers  are  under 
the  constant  fire  of  criticism  of  their  subordinates,  whether  they 
realize  it  or  not.  The  best  shield  that  a  manager  can  wear  is  dis- 
tance. His  little  foibles— and  all  men  have  them — may  thus  be 
kept  concealed.  It  is  essential  that  they  be  concealed,  for  men  of 
less  mental  endowment,  will  always  seize  upon  the  little  defects  of 
greater  men's  character  or  attainment  as  evidence  of  lack  of  any 
real  superiority.  The  eye  of  criticism  is  a  microscope  for  human 
frailties.  Being  a  microscope,  it  is  wise  to  keep  beyond  its 
range,  so  that  the  whole  character  may  be  viewed  by  the  naked  eye 
in  its  true  perspective. 

Discipline  in  an  industrial  army  is  as  essential  as  in  a  military 
organization,  and  it  is  best  secured  by  military  methods.  This  in- 
volves :  ( 1 )  The  social  separation  of  the  officers  from  the  men  ;  and 
(2)  a  sequence  of  responsibility  from  the  man  in  the  ranks  to  the 
highest  officer. 

For  every  act  on  the  work  every  man  should  be  responsible  to 
some  particular  man  higher  in  authority.  There  should  never  be 
any  doubt  as  to  whom  a  man  is  responsible  ;  but  it  does  not  follow 
that  a  man  should  be  responsible  to  only  one  person,  except  for  cer- 
tain acts.  As  we  have  previously  shown,  an  industrial  organization 
may  have  several  classes  of  foremen,  to  each  of  whom  each  work- 
man is  responsible  for  certain  acts.  What  we  now  emphasize  is  the 
importance  of  not  dividing  the  responsibility  for  any  particular  act. 
A  contractor,  for  example,  should  rarely  give  any  orders  to  a  work- 
man. All  orders  should  come  through  the  proper  foreman.  To  do 
otherwise  results  not  only  in  reducing  the  workman's  respect  for 
the  foreman,  but  it  frequently  angers  the  foreman,  who  feels  that 
he  has  lost  dignity  in  the  eyes  of  the  workmen. 

It  is  often  wise  to  change  foremen  from  one  gang  to  another,  in 
order  to  preserve  the  class  distinction  between  foremen  and  men. 
As  foremen  become  acquainted  with  the  men,  they  generally  want 
to  be  regarded  as  good  fellows,  and  will  then  permit  infractions  of 
rules  and  a  general  decrease  in  activity.  Who  has  not  noticeJ  that 


COST   KEEPING.  't'f 

short  jobs  usually  move  with  a  "snap"  that  is  not  always  character- 
istic of  longer  jobs? 

We  may  sum  up  thus: 

Discipline  is  best  secured  by  managerial  dignity,  and  dignity  is 
best  preserved  by  social  separation  of  managers  from  subordinates 
and  by  an  invariable  sequence  of  responsibility. 

Measuring  the  Output  of  Workmen.* — Before  men  can  be  paid 
according  to  their  performance  it  obviously  is  necessary  to  devise 
methods  of  measuring  the  number  of  units  of  work  done,  but  it  is 
not  always  so  obvious  what  units  to  select  nor  how  to  measure  them 
readily  after  the  selection  of  units  has  been  made.  Indeed,  this  dif- 
ficulty accounts  in  large  part  for  the  slowness  with  which  piece  rate 
and  bonus  systems  have  been  adopted. 

Subdivision  of  Units  into  Other  Units.  In  engineering  construc- 
tion the  cubic  yard  is  a  very  common  unit  upon  which  contract 
prices  are  based,  but  the  cubic  yard  itself  is  frequently  a  very  un- 
certain unit  of  performance,  for  it  is  a  composite  of  other  units. 
Thus,  in  rock  excavation  there  are  several  distinct  operations  in- 
volved, which  may  be  enumerated  as  follows: 

1.  Drilling. 

2.  Charging  and  firing    (or   blasting). 

3.  Breaking  large  chunks  to  suitable  sizes. 

4.  Loading  into   cars,   carts,   skips,   or   the  like. 

5.  Transporting. 

6.  Dumping. 

The  important  item  of  drilling  depends  largely  upon  the  spac- 
ing of  the  drill  holes,  which  varies  in  different  kinds  of  rock,  and 
in  different  kinds  of  excavation,  trenches  and  tunnel's  requiring  close 
spacing.  Clearly,  then,  the  lineal  foot  of  drill  hole  is  a  unit  of 
work  that  must  be  adopted  by  the  rock  contractor  in  measuring  the 
output  of  his  drillers,  and  not  the  cubic  yard. 

Transportation  is  largely  a  function  of  distance,  hence  the  unit 
of  transportation  cost  should  be  the  ton  (or  yard)  carried  100  ft. 
or  1  mile,  and  not  the  cubic  yard  without  the  factor  of  distance. 

Our  first  rule  to  be  applied  in  seeking  units  that  truly  express  the 
amount  of  work  done  is  as  follows :  Divide  the  contract  price  units 
into  sub-units,  selecting  the  "foot-pound"  of  work  as  the  sub-unit 
wherever  possible. 

A  foot-pound  is  the  unit  of  work  used  in  theoretical  and  applied 
mechanics.  It  is  the  amount  of  work  required  to  lift  1  pound  a 
height  of  1  foot.  All  forms  of  work  are  capable  theoretically  of 
being  expressed  in  foot-pounds,  but  it  is  often  very  difficult  to  do 
so  in  practice.  For  example,  it  is*  not  an  easy  matter  to  ascertain 
how  many  foot-pounds  of  work  a  man  performs  in  shoveling  earth 
into  a  wagon,  for  there  is  not  only  the  number  of  foot-pounds  in- 
volved in  lifting  the  earth  but  in  pushing  the  shovel  into  the  earth, 


*The  following  pages  relating  to  the  measurement  of  the  output 
of  workmen  have  been  abstracted  from  "Cost  Keeping  and  Man- 
agement Engineering,"  by  Gillette  and  Dana. 


78  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  lifting  the  shovel,  in  lifting  the  upper  part  of  his  own  body,  and 
In  overcoming  the  inertia  of  earth,  shovel  and  body.  However,  the 
theoretical  ideal  unit  is  the  foot-pound,  and,  in  selecting  the  actual 
unit  to  be  used,  the  effort  should  be  made  to  secure  a  unit  that  is 
as  closely  equivalent  to  the  foot-pound  as  possible.  Thus,  In  drill- 
ing, there  are  certain  units  of  work  done  by  the  drill  in  pulverizing 
the  rock  in  the  drill  hole,  and  this  work  is  quite  closely  represented 
by  the  number  of  lineal  feet  of  drill  hole  in  any  given  kind  of 
rock.  Hence  the  most  practical  unit  of  work  in  drilling  is  the  foot 
of  hole  drilled. 

The  second  point  to  consider  in  selecting  suitable  units  of  work 
is  the  different  processes  involved.  Each  process  on  field  contract 
work  usually  involves  a  different  class  of  men.  In  rock  excavation 
the  six  items  above  given  usually  involve  six  separate  gangs  of 
men.  Although  all  contribute  their  part  to  the  final  contract  unit 
upon  which  payment  is  received — the  cubic  yard — yet  the  work  of 
each  may  be,  and  usually  is,  better  measured  in  terms  of  some  other 
unit.  We  already  have  seen  that  the  lineal  foot  of  drill  hole — and 
not  the  cubic  yard — is  the  unit  to  select  for  the. drilling  gang.  The 
pound  of  explosive  charged  in  the  drill  holes  is  a  good  unit  by 
which  to  measure  the  work  done  by  the  blasting  gang.  The  cubic 
yard  of  rock  usually  is  the  only  practical  unit  of  breaking  large 
rock  chunks.  So,  too,  the  cubic  yard  becomes  the  unit  for  loading 
and  for  dumping,  whereas  the  yard-mile,  or  ton-mile,  is  made  the 
unit  of  transportation.  Still  further  subdivisions  of  some  of  these 
six  processes  are  often  desirable,  yielding  still  other  units  that  more 
closely  approximate  the  foot-pound  unit. 

Therefore,  our  second  rule  is  as  follows :  Since  construction  usu- 
ally is  divided  into  processes,  and  since  a  separate  gang  usually 
performs  each  process,  select  sub-units  based  upon  the  work  done 
by  each  gang. 

In  order  to  apply  this  rule  it  frequently  is  necessary  to  reorgan- 
ize the  work  so  that  each  process  is  performed  by  its  special  gang. 
Where  the  work  is  not  of  sufficient  magnitude  to  keep  distinct 
gangs  busy  on  each  separate  process,  it  is  still  often  possible  to 
work  the  same  gang  a  few  hours  at  one  process  and  then  shift  it 
to  another  process,  instead  of  working  the  same  men  in  a  heterogen- 
eous fashion  on  two  or  more  processes  at  the  same  time. 

Units  for  Concrete  Work. — The  cost  of  a  cubic  yard  of  concrete 
varies  between  about  $3.00  for  cheap  pavement  sub-base  to  about 
$20.00  for  certain  parts  of  a  reinforced  concrete  building.  A  hasty 
generalization  drawn  from  such  variations  as  this  has  led  many 
an  engineer  to  scout  the  usefulness  of  cost  data,  particularly  such 
data  as  have  not  been  gathered  by  the  individual  who  attempts  to 
draw  conclusions  from  them.  However,  when  the  cubic  yard  of 
concrete  is  divided  into  proper  sub-units  of  cost,  it  is  astonishing 
to  note  the  fading  away  of  all  seeming  difficulties,  either  in  esti- 
mating costs  of  concrete  or  in  securing  data  upon  which  to  judge 
the  efficiency  of  workmen. 

The  labor  processes   in  concrete  may   be  classified   as  follows: 
1.      Receiving    and    storing    materials. 


COST   KEEPING.  79 

2.  Delivering  materials   to    the  mixer    (loading  and  hauling). 

3.  Mixing  concrete. 

4.  Transporting  concrete. 

5.  Placing  concrete. 

6.  Ramming  concrete. 

7.  Finishing   the   surface. 

8.  Framing  the  lumber  for  forms. 

9.  Erecting  forms. 

10.  Shifting  and  cleaning  forms. 

11.  Taking  down  forms. 

12.  Shaping  the  reinforcing  steel. 

13.  Placing  the  reinforcing  steel. 

Some  of  these  processes  may  be  still  further  subdivided,  and  fre- 
quently it  is  desirable  to  do  so.  While  the  cubic  yard  of  concrete 
is  usually  a  satisfactory  unit  for  items  one  to  six,  it  is  clear  that 
the  square  foot  or  square  yard  is  a  unit  that  must  be  used  for  item 
7.  Items  8  to  11  should  be  expressed  in  terms  of  the  1,000  ft.  B. 
M.  as  the  unit,  and  it  is  usually  desirable  also  to  use  the  square  foot 
of  concrete  surface  covered  by  forms  vised  as  another  unit  for 
estimating  the  cost  of  work  on  forms.  Items  12  and  13  should  be 
expressed  in  terms  of  the  pound  of  steel  as  the  unit,  since  the  num- 
ber of  pounds  of  steel  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  varies  widely. 

Two  or  More  Units  for  the  Same  Class  of  Work.— As  just  indi- 
cated, it  is  frequently  desirable  to  use  more  than  one  unit  of  meas- 
urement. The  unit  on  which  the  contract  price  is  based  is  usually 
a  desirable  one  in  which  to  express  all  items  of  cost.  In  addition 
to  this,  the  cost  of  each  item  may  be  expressed  in  other  units,  such, 
for  example,  as  the  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  and  the  square  foot  of  area  for 
form  work  in  concrete  construction.  Such  units  should  be  select- 
ed as  will  permit  comparison  not  only  of  one  day's  work  with  an- 
other, but  of  one  job  with  another,  and  frequently  it  is  desirable  to 
select  units  that  may  be  used  in  .comparing  two  entirely  different 
classes  of  work. 

Uniformity  in  Units  of  Measurement. — The  economic  importance 
of  uniformity  in  units  of  measurement  cannot  be  over-estimated. 
To  illustrate :  The  common  unit  of  concrete  work  is  the  cubic  yard, 
but  it  is  customary  to  measure  cement  walks  in  square  feet.  Now 
tnis  leads  to  many  blunders,  not  only  in  estimating  the  cost  of 
walks,  but  in  effecting  reductions  in  cost.  Not  only  does  the  thick- 
ness of  cement  walks  vary  widely,  but  the  proportion  of  cement  to 
sand  in  each  layer  of  the  walk  is  variable.  Therefore,  to  say  that 
it  takes  so  many  barrels  of  cement  to  make  100  sq.  ft.  of  walk 
means  next  to  nothing  unless  the  plans  and  specifications  for  the 
walk  are  also  given.  For  purposes  of  accurate  estimating  it  is 
necessary  to  prepare  tables  of  cost  of  mortars  and  concretes  in 
terms  of  the  cubic  yard ;  then  by  remembering  that  100  sq.  ft. 
having  a  thickness  of  1  inch  are  almost  exactly  0.3  cu.  yd.,  it  is  a 
simple  matter  to  convert  costs  per  cubic  yard  into  costs  per  square 
foot. 

Not  only  in  computing  costs  of  cement  walks,,  and  the  like,  but  in 


80  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

reducing  costs,  does  it  aid  us  to  use  the  cubic  y;ii  1  as  the  unit,  for 
it  enables  us  to  make  comparisons,  and  thereby  discover  ineffi- 
ciency of  workers.  Elsewhere  in  this  book  a  case  is  cited 
where  the  labor  cost  of  the  face  mortar  for  a  concrete  wall 
was  out  of  all  proportion  to  what  it  should  have  been.  Had  the 
contractor  estimated  the  cost  of  this  mortar  in  cubic  yards,  he 
would  have  discovered  that  it  was  excessive.  The  labor  of  mixing 
mortar  should  not  be  much  greater  than  the  labor  of  mixing  con- 
crete per  cubic  yard,  nor  should  the  labor  of  conveying  the  mortar 
in  wheelbarrows  be  greater.  The  labor  of  placing  it  in  a  thin 
layer  is  obviously  greater  than  for  placing  concrete  in  thick  layers  ; 
but,  in  the  case  mentioned,  the  contractor  was  losing  his  money  in 
mixing  and  conveying  the  mortar.  He  had  not  recognized  the  fact 
because  he  had  not  reduced  the  cost  to  dollars  per  cubic  yard  of 
mortar. 

In  like  manner,  one  may  often  see  money  wasted  in  making  and 
delivering  mortar  to  bricklayers  and  masons,  because  the  cost  of  the 
mortar  itself,  in  terms  of  the  cubic  yard  of  mortar  (not  of  ma- 
sonry), has  not  been  calculated. 

The  cost  of  labor  on  forms  and  falsework  should  always  be  re- 
corded in  terms  of  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  as  the  unit;  for  that  is  the 
common  unit  of  timber  work,  and,  being  so,  ready  comparisons  can 
be  made  only  in  dollars  per  M.  ft.  B.  M. 

It  is  surprising  how  few  managers  of  men  have  realized  the 
value  of  reducing  the  cost  of  each  item  of  work  to  units  that  are 
comparable  ;  and  by  this  we  mean  units  in  terms  of  which  entirely 
different  classes  of  work  may  be  compared.  Thus,  in  a  brick  pave- 
ment there  is  grout  used  between  the  joints.  This  grout  is  a  thin 
cement  mortar,  and  it  averages,  let  us  say,  6  cents  per  sq.  ft.  of 
pavement.  Now,  what  does  it  average  per  cubic  yard  of  grout? 
Probably  not  one  paving  contractor  in  a  thousand  knows  ;  but,  until 
he  does  know,  he  cannot  compare  the  cost  of  grouting  with  the 
cost  of  other  kinds  of  cement  work.  Many  a  time  have-  we  had 
our  eyes  opened  to  unsuspected  losses  and  inefficiencies  only  by 
reducing  the  costs  of  the  elements  of  work  to  units  comparable  with 
the  units  of  similar  work  in  other  fields. 

The  ton  is  a  very  convenient  unit  to  use  when  comparing  the 
cost  of  loading  and  handling  materials  of  all  kinds.  The  ton  of 
brick,  the  ton  of  gravel,  the  ton  of  timber,  the  ton  of  cast-iron  pipe, 
are  loaded  upon  wagons  by  hand  at  a  cost  differing  not  so  much, 
one  from  the  other,  as  might  at  first  be  supposed.  When  reliable 
data  are  not  available  for  estimating  the  cost  of  handling  any  given 
material,  by  reducing  it  to  tons  an  approximate  estimate  can  usu- 
ally be  made  that  will  be  satisfactory,  at  any  rate  far  more  reliable 
than  a  guess. 

Units  of  Transportation. — On  contract  work,  distances  of  trans- 
portation are  usually  so  short  that  the  percentage  of  time  "lost" 
by  cars,  carts,  etc.,  while  being  loaded,  becomes  a  very  large  part 
of  the  total  day's  time.  Hence  the  unit  of  transportation  must  not 
be  simply  a  unit  of  weight,  or  of  volume,  transported  a  unit  dis- 
tance. For  example,  a  wagon  may  be  loaded  with  earth  in  4% 


COST   KEEPING.  81 

minutes,  transported  100  ft.,  dumped  and  returned  in  l1/^  min- 
utes, or  less:  total,  6  minutes.  Of  this  time  less  than  25%  is 
spent  in  transporting  the  earth.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  haul  is 
6,000  ft.,  the  time  spent  in  transporting  may  be  93%.  The  cost 
per  100  ft.  transported  is  almost  four  times  as  much  in  one  case 
as  in  the  other.  Therefore,  unless  the  hauls  are  so  long  that  the 
time  lost  in  loading  and  unloading  is  an  insignificant  part  of  the 
total  time,  it  is  essential  to  divide  the  work  of  transportation  intc 
three  elements: 

1.  Time  lost  loading. 

2.  Time    lost   transporting. 

3.  Time  lost  unloading. 

Often  this  third  item  is  so  small  that  it  may  be  disregarded.  On 
contract  work  it  is  often  necessary  to  have  a  fourth  item  : 

4.  Time   lost   during   the   shifting  of   tracks,    and  other   changes 
in  plant  location. 

In  brief,  the  lost  time,  of  whatsoever  nature,  must  be  deter- 
mined and  deducted  from  the  total  time,  before  the  number  of 
units  of  transportation  performance  can  be  divided  by  the  correct 
number  of  hours. 

Transportation,  therefore,  must  be  divided  into  two  main  units 
of  cost : 

1.  Non-productive    (lost   time    loading,    dumping,    shifting   plant, 
etc.). 

2.  Productive. 

The  total  cost  of  the  non-productive  time  is  divided  by  the  total 
number  of  yards  or  tons  moved  to  get  the  unit  non-productive  cost 
of  transportation. 

The  productive  cost  of  transportation  is  the  ton-mile,  the  cubic 
yard-mile,  the  ton-station  (station  =  100  ft.),  or  the  like. 

The  distance  of  transportation  is  usually  computed  from  a  map, 
but  it  is  often  desirable  to  attach  an  odometer  to  one,  if  not  ayl, 
of  the  wagons,  locomotives  or  the  like. 

Odometers  of  the  kinds  used  on  automobiles  and  bicycles  can  be 
advantageously  used  in  a  great  many  places  on  contract  work,  a 
few  of  which  are  as  follows :  On  wagons,  on  wheel  scrapers,  on 
locomotives,  on  traction  engines,  on  road  rollers,  on  derricks  (to 
record  the  number  of  swings),  on  hoisting  engines,  on  cableway 
carriages,  etc.  Indeed,  wherever  a  machine  or  tool  has  a  revolv- 
ing or  reciprocating  part,  an  odometer  or  counter  can  be  used  to 
record  'the  number  of  reciprocations  or  revolutions,  and  from  the 
data  so  recorded  the  amount  of  work  can  often  be  calculated  with 
great  accuracy. 

Recording  Single  Units. — There  are  many  classes  of  work  in 
which  the  only  practicable  unit  to  be  used  is  the  single  or  individ- 
ual unit  itself ;  thus,  the  telegraph  pole  erected,  the  pile  driven,  the 
door  hung,  etc.  Obviously  records  of  units  of  this  sort  are  so  read- 
ily made  as  to  require  almost  no  comment. 

A  punch  card  is  a  convenient  record  of  single  units.  Some  con- 
tractors prefer  a  tally  board  on  which  each  unit  is  marked  or  tal- 


82  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

lied  with  a  pencil.  Others  use  a  board  like  a  cribbage  board,  having 
holes  in  which  plugs  are  put  to  record  the  number  of  units.  Still 
others  give  out  tickets  to  the  men  for  each  unit  of  work  delivered. 

Record  Cards  Attached  to  Each  Piece  of  Work. — In  doing  ma- 
chine-shop work  it  is  often  necessary  to  have  one  piece  of  metal 
pass  through  the  hands  of  several  different  workers.  For  example, 
one  man  may  drill  holes  of  a  certain  size,  another  man  may  drill 
holes  of  another  size,  still  another  man  may  thread  the  holes,  and 
so  on.  In  such  a  case  it  is  common  practice,  where  careful  cost 
records  are  kept,  to  provide  a  card  that  is  attached  to  each  piece  or 
each  lot  of  pieces.  In  blanks  provided  on  the  card,  each  worker 
enters  his  number,  and  the  number  of  hours  and  minutes  spent  by 
him  in  doing  a  specified  kind  of  work  on  the  piece.  A  modified  form 
of  this  method  is  to  attach  a  card  or  a  brass  check  to  each  piece, 
giving  a  serial  number  and  letter  to  the  piece.  Each  workman  on 
the  piece  notes  its  number  on  his  own  record  card,  and  opposite 
this  number  be  enters  the  amount  of  time  spent  on  the  piece. 

While  this  method  of  recording  output  cannot  be  as  frequently 
used  in  engineering  contract  work  as  in  machine  shop  work,  it 
should  not  be  overlooked  by  the  general  contractor.  It  might  well 
be  applied  to  timber  work  where  one  gang  of  men  bores  the  holes, 
another  gang  saws  and  a  third  gang  "daps"  or  adzes  the  sticks,  and 
so  on.  It  is  desirable  always  to  assign  different  kinds  of  work  to 
different  men,  not  only  because  the  time  usually  lost  in  changing 
tools  may  be  saved,  but  because  men  become  more  expert  when 
they  do  one  class  of  work  only.  The  record  card  facilitates  the 
differentiation  of  labor  into  classes,  and  is,  therefore,  a  great  aid 
in  increasing  the  output  of  a  given  number  of  men. 

Measurements  of  Length. — For  a  great  many  kinds  of  contract 
work  the  lineal  foot  is  the  best  unit  to  use.  Track  laying,  fence 
building,  pipe  laying,  setting  curb,  etc.,  come  under  this  head. 
Many  other  classes  of  work  are  commonly  measured  only  in  terms 
of  the  lineal  foot,  when,  to  permit  of  true  comparisons,  some 
other  unit  or  units  should  also  be  adopted.  Sewer  work,  for  ex- 
ample, is  commonly  recorded  only  /  in  terms  of  the  lineal  foot ; 
but  the  amount  of  excavation  varies  greatly  per  lineal  foot  in  differ- 
ent sewers  and  often  in  the  same  sewer ;  hence  the  excavation 
should  be  measured  with  the  cubic  yard  as  the  unit. 

Tunnel  excavation  should  also  be  reduced  to  the  cubic  yard 
standard.  A  contractor  has  no  very  definite  idea  whether  the 
"mucking"  (loading  of  cars)  in  a  tunnel  is  being  done  economically 
or  not  until  he  has  determined  how  many  cubic  yards  each  man  is 
loading  daily. 

Measurements  of  length  are  often  best  made  by  driving  a  line 
of  stakes  100  ft.  apart,  calling  each  stake  a  "station."  The  start- 
ing point  or  station  is  called  Station  o.  The  next  station,  100 
ft.  from  the  start,  is  Sta.  1;  the  next  station,  200  ft.  from  the 
start,  is  Sta.  2  ;  and  so  on.  Hence  the  mark  on  any  given  station 
stake  gives  the  number  of  hundreds  of  feet  from  the  starting 
point.  Points  intermediate — that  is  between  any  two  stations — 


COST   KEEPING.  83 

are  called  "pluses."  Thus,  a  point  40  ft.  in  advance  of  Sta.  2 
is  called  "two  plus  forty,"  ana  is  written  Sta.  2  +  40,  by  which  it 
is  clear  that  it  is  240  ft.  from  the  start. 

Having  driven  a  line  of  station  stakes,  properly  marked  with 
their  station  number,  a  foreman  or  timekeeper  can  quickly  ascer- 
tain the  station  and  plus  at  which  the  day's  work  has  been  com- 
pleted. 

In  many  instances,  measurements  of  length  are  best  made  by 
counting  the  number  of  pipe  lengths  laid,  or  the  number  of  rajl 
lengths. 

Measurements  of  Area.— Paving,  painting,  roofing,  plastering,  and 
many  other  classes  of  construction  work  are  best  measured  in 
terms  of  the  square  yard,  square  foot,  or  "square"  (100  sq.  ft.) 
as  the  unit.  Since  areas  are  usually  measured  with  ease,  it  is 
noticeable  that  area  work  is  generally  done  with  much  greater 
economy  than  mass  work,  which  is  usually  more  difficult  to  meas- 
ure and  consequently  not  measured  every  day  on  most  jobs.  It 
is  sometimes  not  easy  to  measure  the  number  of  thousand  feet 
board  measure  in  concrete  forms,  in  which  case  it  may  be  prefer- 
able to  measure  the  area  of  concrete  covered  by  the  forms,  from 
which,  if  desired,  the  amount  of  lumber  can  be  calculated  approxi- 
mately. 

Measurements  of  Volume.— This  class  of  measurements  is  usually 
the  most  difficult  to  make  for  purposes  of  daily  output  reports. 
Excavation,  for  example,  is  not  easily  measured,  as  a  rule,  except 
by  a  surveyor.  Of  massive  masonry  the  same  is  true.  Hence  there 
are  few  contractors  who  know  accurately  how  many  cubic  yards  of 
this  sort  of  work  should  be  accredited  each  day  to  each  gang 
Record  should  be  kept  of  the  number  of  car  or  wagon  loads  of 
excavated  material ;  but,  to  derive  much  benefit  from  such  records, 
care  must  be  taken  to  have  cars  and  wagons  of  uniform  size  uni- 
formly loaded,  or  to  keep  record  of  the  capacities  of  the  different 
vehicles.  Where  daily  measurements  of  volume  are  difficult  to 
secure,  some  one  or  more  of  the  following  methods  may  be  adopted. 

Measurements  of  Weight. — Loaded  cars  or  wagons  can  be  weighed 
on  track  scales  or  on  portable  platform  scales,  and  this  can  be 
profitably  done  far  oftener  than  it  is.  Loaded  skips  and  buckets 
can  be  weighed  with  spring  balances  attached  to  the  hoisting 
rope  of  a  derrick.  It  is  sometimes  very  difficult  to  measure  volumes 
of  certain  quantities  in  the  field  and  it  then  becomes  of  advantage 
to  weigh  them.  It  is  not  easy  to  tell  how  much  rock  there  is  on 
a  skip  load  without  weighing  the  loaded  skip  either  by  placing 
it  on  scales  or  by  putting  a  spring  balance  on  the  derrick.  Spring 
balances  of  that  character  can  be  purchased  of  a  capacity  up  to 
2,600  Ibs.  and  costing  about  $150.  Another  form  of  rock  measuring 
apparatus  is  in  the  nature  of  a  balance,  costing  about  $115.  A 
great  advantage  of  a  spring  balance  on  a  derrick  is  that  it  takes 
no  extra  time  for  handling,  and,  while  the  first  cost  seems  rather 
high,  the  information  obtained  on  a  large  piece  of  work  is  well 
worth  its  cost. 


84  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  a  good  many  of  the  Hudson  River  Trap  Rock  Quarries  the 
stone  is  handled  in  cars  which  are  pushed  along  on  the  tracks  for 
purposes  of  weighing  and  the  men  are  paid  for  performance  ac- 
cording to  the  weights  on  the  cars.  This  is  a  very  accurate  and, 
where  it  is  practicable,  a  highly  satisfactory  method  of  measuring 
output. 

This  method  has  long  been  in  use  at  coal  mines  where  every 
car  is  numbered,  and  is  weighed  before  dumping. 

On  contract  work,  such  as  macadamizing,  for  example,  each 
wagon  load  may  be  weighed,  if  the  amount  of  the  work  warrants 
the  purchase  and  use  of  platform  scales.  It  is  usually  considered 
sufficiently  exact,  however,  to  measure  the  size  of  a  few  loads, 
and  simply  count  the  number  of  loads.  However,  loads  often 
vary  so  greatly  in  size  that  this  method  of  counting  loads  becomes 
very  unsatisfactory.  This  holds  true  particularly  of  loads  of 
quarried  stone,  of  earth  loaded  by  steam  shovels,  and  the  like.  In 
such  cases  the  contractor  should  seriously  consider  the  advisability 
of  weighing  each  load. 

One  of  the  most  difficult  classes  of  construction  work  to  measure 
daily  is  rubble  masonry.  Yet  we  have  found  two  very  satisfactory 
methods  of  recording  the  work  done  by  each  derrick  gang.  One 
way  is  to  use  wooden  skips  that  are  loaded  at  the  quarry  with 
stone,  put  upon  cars  and  transported  to  the  work.  Each  skip  is 
provided  with  a  clip  for  holding  a  brass  check.  The  checks  are 
numbered  serially,  and  the  weight  of  stone  corresponding  to 
each  number  is  entered  in  a  book ;  for  before  delivery  to  the 
masonry  derricks  each  skip  is  lifted  by  a  derrick,  placed  on  scales 
and  weighed.  It  is  sometimes  preferable  to  provide  a  large  spring 
balance  for  weighing,  instead  of  using  scales.  The  mason  in 
charge  of  the  derrick  gang  removes  the  brass  check  from  the  skip 
and  keeps  it,  entering  its  number  on  a  card  which  is  turned  over 
to  the  timekeeper  at  night,  together  with  the  brass  checks.  Thus 
it  is  possible  quickly  to  ascertain  the  number  of  tons  of  rubble 
laid  by  each  gang. 

Functional  Units  of  Measure.— Under  this  head  we  class  all 
measurements  of  units  that  are  functions  of  the  desired  units. 
Thus,  in  any  given  mixture  of  concrete,  the  number  of  barrels  or 
bags  of  cement  is  a  function  of  (i.  e.,  it  bears  a  definite  relation 
to)  the  number  of  cubic  yards  of  concrete.  Hence  a  record  of  the 
amount  of  cement  used  each  day  will  enable  making  a  close  approxi- 
mation to  the  number  of  cubic  yards  of  concrete. 

In  rubble  or  cyclopean  masonry,  a  record  of  the  number  of 
buckets  of  mortar  will  enable  making  a  close  calculation  of  the 
yardage  of  masonry.  If  spalls  are  liberally  used  to  reduce  the 
amount  of  mortar,  as  they  should  be,  then  the  number  of  buckets 
or  skips  of  spalls  should  also  be  recorded. 

The  number  of  gallons  of  paint  used  is  ordinarily  a  fair  criterion 
of  the  area  of  surface  painted. 

By  the  use  of  packets  for  handling  bricks,  Gilbreth  has  de- 
veloped a  system  of  measuring  the  work  done  by  each  bricklayer, 
for  count  is  made  of  the  empty  packets  stacked  up  by  each  mason. 


COST   KEEPING.  85 

Since  each  packet  is  loaded  with  a  definite  number  of  bricks,  this 
gives  an  accurate  record  of  each  man's  output. 

Stockpile  Measurements. — There  are  certain  kinds  of  construction 
that  are  best  measured  indirectly  by  ascertaining  what  has  been 
removed  each  day  from  the  stock  piles.  Thus,  in  erecting 
a  frame  building,  the  different  kinds  and  sizes  of  lumber 
can  be  piled  in  stock  piles  of  regular  size,  easily  meas- 
ured. Rolls  of  paper,  bundles  of  shingles,  etc.,  can  be  stored 
in  such  manner  that  a  daily  inventory  of  stock  on  hand  is  readily 
made.  By  subtracting  the  amount  shown  by  the  inventory  at  the 
end  of  each  day  from  the  amount  on  hand  the  previous  day,  an 
accurate  record  is  obtained  of  materials  that  have  gone  into  the 
building.  Since  a  carpenter's  work  is  usually  best  measured  in 
terms  of  the  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  the  square  of  shingles,  and  the  like,  it 
is  evident  that  stock  pile  measurements  can  be  used  to  great  ad- 
vantage in  determining  the  number  of  units  of  certain  kinds  of 
work  performed  on  a  building. 

The  measuring  of  material  is  greatly  facilitated  by  using  a 
standard  method  of  handling.  Gilbreth's  rule  for  cement  (see  his 
"Field  System")  is  to  place  the  bags  one  on  top  of  the  other  in 
piles  of  fifty. 

One  of  the  most  difficult  of  the  materials  to  check  regularly  is  the 
reinforcing  steel  for  concrete.  If  this  is  handled  in  plain  bars 
they  can  be  weighed  and  wired  in  bundles  of  100  Ibs.,  this  being 
a  suitable  size  for  two  men  to  carry.  The  bundles  are,  of  course, 
nearly  always  more  or  less  than  100  Ibs.,  and  when  the  steel  is 
wired  it  is  a  good  plan  to  attach  to  each  bundle  a  tag  giving  its 
weight,  which  tag  can  be  left  with  the  storekeeper  for  record  as 
the  bundles  are  removed  to  the  work.  The  difficulty  of  obtaining 
these  records  is  caused  by  the  fact  that  the  material  is  usually 
placed  in  a  haphazard  way  wherever  it  happens  to  be  most 
convenient  for  the  men  placing  i£  without  any  systematic  regard 
for  its  use  on  the  work. 

Key  Units  of  Measure. — It  is  always  desirable  to  relieve  the 
foreman  or  timekeeper  of  the  work  of  computing  the  number  of 
units  of  work  done  daily,  wherever  such  computation  involves  either 
many  measurements  or  much  labor  in  computing.  A  foreman  can 
readily  report  the  number  of  "stations"  of  road  graded  or  macadam- 
ized, leaving  to  the  office  force  the  work  of  deducing  the  number  of 
units  of  work  performed. 

A  further  step  in  the  same  direction  is  the  use  of  key  letters  and 
numbers  to  designate  sections  of  work  whose  dimensions  the  fore- 
man may  not  know  but  which  are  recorded  in  the  office,  and  from 
which  the  number  of  units  of  work  performed  can  be  readily  ascer- 
tained. For  convenience  we  call  these  units  key  units,  since  they 
are  designated  by  key  letters  or  numbers. 

Key  Units  on  Drawings.— Any  given  structure  can  usually  be 
divided  into  "sections"  identical  in  shape  and  character  of  work. 
Thus,  in  a  concrete  building,  there  are  a  number  of  columns  of 
identical  size,  a  number  of  beams  also  identical,  a  number  of 


80  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Identical  floor  slabs,  and  so  on.  To  each  of  these  "sections"  a  key 
letter  or  number,  or  a  combination  letter  and  number,  may  be 
assigned  and  written  on  the  drawing. 

If  numbers  from  100  to  199  are  reserved  for  "sections"  on  the 
first  floor,  and  the  letter  C  is  used  to  denote  columns,  then  C  100 
will  designate  a  particular  kind  of  column  on  the  first  floor  ;  while 
C  200  will  designate  a  corresponding  column  on  the  second  floor : 
Having  assigned  keys  to  all  "sections,"  the  foreman  or  timekeeper  is 
furnished  with  blueprints  on  which  the  "sections"  with  their  re- 
spective keys  are  marked.  In  some  instances  it  is  preferable  to 
furnish  only  a  few  large  blueprints  containing  many  "sections"  on 
each  print,  but  it  Is  usually  desirable  to  supplement  these  large  blue- 
prints with  small  ones  Of  notebook  size,  which,  if  preferred,  can  be 
punched  and  bound  in  a  loose-leaf  binder. 

The  foreman  or  timekeeper  reports  daily  the  number  of  each  class 
of  "sections"  built  by  each  gang,  using  the  proper  key  to  desig- 
nate each  "section."  The  office  force,  having  computed  the  number 
of  units  of  work  in  each  section,  is  then  able  to  record  the  total 
number  of  units  of  work  done,  with  accuracy  and  with  rapidity.  If 
a  full  "section"  is  not  completed,  the  foreman  or  timekeeper  esti- 
mates the  percentage  completed,  and  reports  accordingly. 

Keys  Marked  on  Separate  Members. — On  certain  classes  of  work 
a  modification  of  the  above  plan  is  preferable.  Instead  of  pro- 
viding the  foreman  or  timekeeper  with  drawings  having  keyed 
"sections,"  a  key  number  or  letter  is  painted,  or  otherwise  marked, 
on  each  separate  member  of  the  structure  before  it  is  put  into 
place.  Thus,  each  block  of  cut  stone  is  measured  in  the  stock 
yard  and  a  "key"  is  painted  upon  it.  Then,  when  the  foreman 
reports  that  block  A  105  has  been  laid  In  the  wall,  the  office  force 
can  determine  its  volume  from  the  recorded  measurements.  The 
authors  have  found  this  to  be  the  most  satisfactory  method  of  re- 
cording cut  stone  work,  for  it  ie  thus  possible  not  merely  to  tell 
the  total  amount  laid  each  day  by  several  derrick  gangs  but  to  tell 
precisely  what  each  gang  has  done,  for  each  boss  mason  can  be 
required  to  record  the  key  number  of  every  stone  laid  under  his 
direction.  The  office  work  of  computing  the  volume  of  each  stone  is 
Insignificant  in  amount  if  tables  are  used  for  computation,  such  as 
Nash's  "Expeditious  Measurer"  ($2.00).  These  tables  give  the 
volume  of  any  block,  progressing  in  size  by  inches  up  to  4  ft.  9  in. 
x  6  ft.  4  in.  x  1  ft.  1  in.  The  tables  also  give  surface  areas,  pro- 
gressing by  inches,  up  to  4  ft.  1  in.  x  8  ft.  5  in.  in  size. 

Structural  steel  members  can  be  marked  with  key  letters ;  so, 
too,  can  heavy  timbers,  moveable  sections  of  forms  and  falsework, 
and  many  other  classes  of  materials  used  in  construction  work. 

Conclusion.— Upon  the  ingenuity  of  the  management  engineer 
.who  devises  ways  of  recording  the  daily  output  of  work  done 
rests  the  success  or  failure  of  any  effort  to  introduce  modern 
methods  of  management  on  complicated  contract  work.  The  prob- 
lem before  him  is  often  one  to  tax  his  ability  almost  to  the  elastic 
limit,  for  it  is  not  sufficient  to  devise  a  method  of  measuring  daily 


COST   KEEPING.  87 

output  after  a  fashion.  He  must  devise  not  only  an  accurate  method 
but  one  that  permits  of  application  at  the  hands  of  men  com- 
paratively unskilled  mentally,  and  under  the  varying  conditions  that 
characterize  field  construction  work.  Many  a  contractor  has  given 
UP  in.  disgust  his  attempt  to  install  a  modern  system  of  cost  keep- 
Ing  and  has  charged  his  failure  to  the  folly  of  "new-fangled  no- 
tions." Such  failures  are  usually  the  outcome  of  trying  to  teach  old 
dogs  new  tricks  without  so  much  as  hiring  a  competent  teacher. 
Eventually,  it  will  be  recognized  that  management  engineering  is  a 
science  not  to  be  picked  up  and  mastered  at  one  reading  of  any 
article  or  book,  but  that  it  requires  study  extending  over  a  con- 
siderable period  of  time. 

Cost  Keeping. — The  following  pages  on  cost  keeping  have  been 
taken  from  "Cost  Keeping  and  Management  Engineering,"  by 
Gillette  and  Dana.  In  this  brief  summary  here  given  it  is  obviously 
impossible  to  give  more  than  general  principles.  For  further  eluci- 
dation of  the  subject  by  specific  examples,  the  reader  is  referred  to 
the  book  from  which  this  abstract  has  been  made. 

The  two  primary  objects  of  cost  keeping  are : 

1.  To   enable  a  manager   to  analyze  unit  costs  with  a  view  to 
securing  the  minimum   cost   possible   of  attainment   under   existing 
conditions. 

2.  To  provide  data  upon  which  to  base  estimates  of  the  probable 
cost  of  projected  work. 

As  a  result  of  the  analysis  of  unit  costs,  followed  by  a  com- 
parison of  the  items  with  corresponding  cost  items  of  similar  work 
previously  done,  a  manager  may  discover : 

1.  Excessive  use  of  materials  in  erecting  a  given  structure. 

2.  Excessive  use  of   supplies    (coal,   etc.)    in   operating  a  plant, 
whether  due  to  ignorance,  carelessness  or  theft. 

3.  Inefficiency  of  workmen. 

4.  Inefficiency  of  foremen. 

5.  Padded  payrolls. 

6.  Excessive  loss  of  time  due  to:      (a)    plant  breakdowns,    (b) 
plant  shifting,    (c)    waiting  for  materials  or  supplies,   etc. 

7.  Improper  design  of  plant. 

Cost  keeping  also  leads  to  the  introduction  of  piece-rate  or  bonus 
systems  of  payment,  which  may,  in  fact,  be  said  to  be  one  of  the 
ultimate  objects  of  cost  keeping. 

Cost  keeping  secures  many  incidental  advantages,  like  the  fol- 
lowing: 

1.  Fewer  "bosses"   are  required  on  certain  classes  of  work,  fof 
the  report   card  is  a  more  persuasive  stimulus  than   the  eye  of  a 
taskmaster. 

2.  One   skilled  manager   can   direct  many  more   men,    and   with 
much   greater   effectiveness   than   is  possible  where  a   cost  keeping 
system  does  not  exist. 

3.  Systematic   analysis   of  costs  leads  inevitably   to   a   study   of 
reasons  for  differences  in  costs,  and  this  study  of  reasons  is  the  first 
step  toward  inventing  new  machines  and  new  methods  for  reducing 
costs. 


88  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Cost  Keeping  Defined.— For  the  purpose  of  the  discussions  in 
this  book,  a  distinction  must  be  drawn  between  bookkeeping  and 
cost  keeping. 

Bookkeeping,  as  we  treat  it,  is  the  process  of  recording  com- 
mercial transactions  for  the  purpose  of  showing  debits  and  credits 
between  different  "accounts."  These  "accounts"  may  be  individuals 
or  firms,  or  they  may  be  arbitrary  accounts,  the  latter  being  an  evo- 
lution in  bookkeeping  that  came  after  individual  accounts  became  so 
large  or  so  complicated  as  to  be  insufficient  to  show  the  status  of 
the  business  and  the  profits  derived  from  any  given  transaction. 

Cost  keeping,  as  we  treat  it,  is  the  process  of  recording  the  num- 
ber of  units  of  work  and  the  number  of  units  of  materials  entering 
into  the  production  of  any  given  structure,  or  into  the  perform- 
ance of  any  given  operation.  To  these  units  of  work  or  materials, 
actual  or  arbitrary  wages  or  prices  may  or  may  not  be  assigned. 
The  object  of  cost  keeping  is  primarily  to  show  the  efficiency  of  per- 
formance;  hence  actual  money  disbursements  need  not  be  recorded, 
as  in  bookkeeping.  This  distinction  is  vital,  and  will  be  discussed  at 
greater  length. 

Differences  Between  Cost  Keeping  and  Bookkeeping — Bookkeep- 
ing was  first  devised  and  subsequently  developed  by  merchants. 
Cost  keeping  was  devised  and  developed  by  engineers.  The  mer- 
chant is  a  student  of  profits ;  the  engineer  is  a  student  of  costs. 
Although  profits  depend  upon  costs,  there  is  a  vast  difference  in  the 
point  of  view  of  the  merchant  and  the  engineer. 

In  the  study  of  costs,  as  we  have  previously  pointed  out,  the  aim 
of  the  engineer  is  to  reduce  all  costs  to  a  unit  basis,  selecting  such 
units  as  most  closely  conform  to  the  theoretical  unit  of  work — the 
foot-pound.  This  study  often  necessitates  the  use  of  several  differ- 
ent units  for  the  same  class  of  work.  It  necessitates  the  recording 
of  conditions,  and  the  making  of  measurements — all  of  which  is 
more  or  less  foreign  to  the  fundamental  idea  of  bookkeeping.  Yet, 
in  groping  toward  methods  of  cost  keeping,  it  has  become  the  prac- 
tice of  most  contractors,  manufacturers,  railway  companies,  etc., 
to  endeavor  to  develop  a  cost  keeping  system  in  the  bookkeeping 
department.  Hence  we  have  to-day  systems  of  bookkeeping  that  are 
wonderfully  complex,  and,  withal,  show  very  little  that  they  attempt 
to  show  as  to  unit  costs. 

Take,  for  example,  the  accounting  department  of  an  American 
railway.  Here  we  find  skilled  accountants  loaded  up  with  a  mass 
of  work  called  for  in  distributing  the  costs  to  different  accounts. 
Calculating  machines  that  carry  the  cost  of  railway  spikes  out  to 
the  third  decimal  place  are  clicking  away  from  morning  to  night.  A 
prodigious  amount  of  figuring  is  done  so  that  scores  of  distribu- 
tions may  be  made,  without  the  error  of  a  cent  in  the  balancing 
of  accounts.  Yet,  with  it  all,  what  do  these  railway  accounts  show 
as  to  unit  costs?  Next  to  nothing  worthy  of  the  name  of  cost 
keeping.  The  authors  have  in  their  possession  a  mass  of  railway 
accounting  records ;  some  of  it  of  great  value,  but  most  of  it 
valuable  only  to  show  bookkeeping  gone  mad.  The  accounting  de- 
partment of  the  average  railway  has  no  true  record  of  unit  costs. 


COST   KEEPING.  89 

The  average  railway  engineering  department  is  even  worse  off,  as 
shown  by  the  ridiculous  estimates  often  submitted.  After  a  struc- 
ture is  built,  the  auditor  of  the  railway  takes  the  superintendent 
of  construction  to  account  for  having  exceeded  the  engineer's  esti- 
mate. The  engineer  is  put  on  the  rack  and  calls  the  superintend- 
ent inefficient — which  is  usually  true.  The  superintendent  retorts, 
in  his  letter  to  the  accounting  department,  that  the  engineer  does  not 
know  how  to  estimate  correctly — which,  also,  is  usually  true.  Figures, 
figures,  figures,  but  not  a  single  unit  cost!  This  is  typical  of  rail- 
way accounting  costs  to-day.  We  emphasize  it  because  it  is  also 
typical  of  the  accounting  departments  of  many  contracting  firms. 
And  we  emphasize  it  again  because  it  illustrates  so  well  our  con- 
tention that  bookkeeping  and  cost  keeping  must  be  divorced  if  there 
is  to  be  a  simple,  effective  system  of  ascertaining  the  efficiency  of 
workmen,  and  permit  of  such  study  of  their  performance  as  will 
result  in  greater  efficiency. 

We  shall  now  give  in  concise  form  some  of  the  various  reasons 
why  cost  keeping  records  should  be  kept  entirely  distinct  from 
bookkeeping  records. 

1.  Since  the  primary  object  of  bookkeeping  is  to  show  debits  and 
credits,  all  accounts  must  be  summarized  in  one  book — the  ledger. 
Since    the   primary   object   of   cost    keeping   is   to    reduce   costs,    no 
book  corresponding  to  a  ledger  is  needed.      Indeed   it  is  often   de- 
sirable  to   have   cost   records  of  different   classes   of  work   kept   in 
different   books,    in    different    ways,    by    different   men,    in   order    to 
localize  responsibility  as  well  as  to  apply  different  units  as  stand- 
ards of  comparison. 

2.  Cost   keeping   should  partake   of  the  nature  of  daily  reports 
by  which   a   superintendent   can   gage   the   daily   performance,    and  ' 
discover  inefficiency  at  once.     Bookkeeping  accounts  may  not  be,  and 
usually  are  not,  posted  promptly  or  completely  until  some  time  sub- 
sequent to  any  performance. 

3.  Bookkeeping  records  must  balance  to  a  penny.     Cost  keeping 
records   need   not   be   keot   with   mathematical    precision,    except    in 
so  far  as  bonus  payments  to  workmen  are  involved.     The  object  of 
cost  keeping  is  to  show  efficiency,  and  this  may  usually  be  shown 
by   approximations    fully    as   well    as   by    hair    splitting   exactness. 
Hence  cost  keeping  records  may  be  devised  that  will   require  far 
less  clerical  work  than  is  necessary  when  mathematically  accurate 
bookkeeping  is  used. 

4.  Bookkeeping  Is  a  clerical  function  ;    cost  keeping  is  an  engi- 
neering function.     It  is  a  rule  of  successful  management  not  to  ask 
one  man   to   exercise  many   functions,    particularly   when   they   are 
diverse    in    nature.     -An    engineer    is    not    interested    in    recording 
debits  and   credits,    or   In    the   rendering   of  bills — functions  of   the 
bookkeeper.      On   the  contrary,   a  bookkeeper  knows  nothing  about 
construction      methods     and      not      only      has      little     interest      in 
construction  costs,   but  lacks  the  necessary  engineering  training  to 
interpret  cost  records  and  to  devise  methods  of  reducing  costs. 

5.  A    contractor    who    has    an    effective    and    simple    system    of 
bookkeeping  naturally  objects  to  a  change  to  a  more  complex  sys- 


90  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

tern,  such  as  is  necessary  when  cost  keeping  is  added  to  the  book- 
keeper's duties. 

6.  When  cost  keeping  is   begun,   it   is  well   to   start  in   a   smal1 
way,  taking  some  particular  kind  of  work,  like  teaming,  and  apply- 
ing a  system  of  daily  reports.     When  this  phase  of  the  work  hai 
been  analyzed  and  organized,   some  other  feature  is  taken  up,  an  I 
so   on,    thus   developing  a   cost    keeping   system   gradually.      Resist- 
ance to  change  is  bound  to  be  encountered,  and  the  way  to  overcome 
it   Is  in  this  manner,   a  little   at  a   time.      Bookkeeping  cannot   be 
changed  a  little  at  a  time.     A  new  system  of  bookkoeping  mean? 
an  entire  revision  all  at  once,  for  accounts  are  interdependent. 

7.  Cost  keeping  records  should  state  conditions,  such  as  weather, 
distance  of  haul,  etc.,  which  are  essential  to  interpretation  of  results. 
Sketches   sho,wing   design    of   structures    should    form    part    of   per- 
manent  cost    records.      Such    things   are   entirely    foreign    to    book- 
keeping, and,  if  placed  upon  bookkeeping  records,   simply  serve  to 
confuse  them. 

8.  The   bookkeeper    enters    bills   for   materials   as   they   are    re- 
ceived, crediting  the  firm  that  furnishes  them.     A  barrel  of  spikes 
may  be  followed  by  a  dozen  picks  on  the  bill.     It  is  not  the  book- 
keeper's  function   to   trace   the   spikes   to    their   place   in   the  work, 
and,   when   the  work   is  finished,   to   ascertain   the   total   number  of 
barrels  of  spikes  used  in  a  particular  structure.     That  is  the  func- 
tion of  the  cost  keeper  on  the  ground.     The  bookkeeper  must  show 
that  John  Smith  Co.  has  been  credited  with  the  spikes.     The  cost 
keeper,  on  the  other  hand,   cares  nothing  as  to  the  particular  firm 
credited.     He  is  concerned  only  with  the  quantity  of  spikes  and  the 
use  to  which  they  have  been  put.     It  is  hopelessly  confusing  to  try 
to  show  in  one  set  of  records  both  credits,  and  unit  costs. 

9.  In  studying  cost  records  to  ascertain  efficiency,  it  is  often  nec- 
essary to  have  several  different  units  as  standards.     On  reinforced 
concrete  work,  for  example,  the  primary  unit  is  the  cubic  yard,  but 
there   should   be  at   least   three  other   units,   namely,    the   pound   of 
steel   (for  comparing  costs  of  handling  and  placing  the  steel   rein- 
forcement), the  thousand  feet  B.  M.   (for  comparing  costs  of  forms), 
and   the   square   foot   of   exposed    surface    (not   only  for   comparing 
costs  of  form  work  but  costs  of  surface   dressing).      Cost  records 
must  be  sufficiently  detailed  for  these  purposes,  if  not  in  every  case, 
at  least  in  some  cases  of  concrete  work.     Bookkeeping  records  be- 
come hopeless  of  interpretation  unless  they  are  uniform,  and,  to  be 
uniform,   they  must  have  few  units  of  comparison.     In  brief,  book- 
keeping is  not  flexible.      To   generalize   further,    cost  keeping  costs 
must  be  divided  by  units  of  work  done,   so  as  to  secure  unit  costs 
for  comparison,  which  is  a  process  foreign  to  bookkeeping. 

10.  Since  cost  keeping  has  as   its  primary  object  the  reduction 
of  costs,   since  comparison   of  results  secured   by   different  men   or 
different   machines   or   different    methods   are   necessary,    it    follows 
that  standard  wages  and  standard  prices  of  materials  must  be  used. 
It  may  happen  that  on  one  job  the  cement  may  be  purchased   at 
different   times  at   prices   ranging   from    $1.20   to    $1.50   per   barrel 
and  that  common  laborers  may  receive  from  $1.50  to   $1.75  a  day. 


COST   KEEPING.  91 

In  comparing  unit  costs  a  standard  price  of  cement  should  be  as- 
sumed, as  $1.30  per  barrel,  and  a  common  labor  standard  wage,  as 
$1.50  per  day  Then  comparisons  become  possible.  A  bookkeeper 
cannot  assume  any  rate  of  wage  or  any  price  ;  he  must  give  the 
actual  wage  or  price.  A  cost  keeper  usually  finds  it  desirable  to 
use  standard  wages  or  prices  which  approximate  the  average,  or 
actually  are  the  average. 

Time  Keeping  Defined. — Time  keeping,  in  its  old  fashioned  sense, 
is  a  part  of  the  bookkeeping  system,  and  the  timekeeper  is  charged 
with  the  task  of  ascertaining  what  time  each  man  has  worked 
during  the  day,  week  or  month,  according  to  the  arrangement  under 
which  he  is  employed,  and  what  amount  of  money  is  due  him 
on  pay-day.  The  timekeeper  was  not  concerned  with  how  much 
work  a  man  did  or  on  what  process  his  time  was  spent,  so  long 
as  the  general  distribution  of  the  work  was  obtained.  Of  late  years 
the  timekeeper's  distributions  have  become  much  more  elaborate 
and  now  he  is  often  charged  with  considerable  cost  keeping  re- 
sponsibility. When  he  does  cost  keeping  work,  the  records  should 
ordinarily  be  kept  on  separate  blanks  from  the  time  keeping. 

If  a  timekeeper,  unaided,  attempts  to  distribute  the  labor  accord- 
ing to  the  work  done,  his  records  become  complex  and  are  rarely 
reliable,  for,  due  to  his  going  from  place  to  place,  he  must  rely 
upon  what  others  (like  foremen)  tell  him  as  to  the  performance  of 
different  men.  In  his  attempt  to  balance  th#  statements  made  to 
him  with  the  total  time,  he  usually  '"fudges"  his  distributed  records. 

Daily  Cost  Reports,  By  Whom  Made.— Daily  cost  reports  may 
be  made  by:  (a)  individual  workmen,  (b)  foremen,  or  (c)  time- 
keepers or  by  all  three  of  these  classes  of  employes. 

Individual  workmen  are  not  always  competent  to  fill  out  reports 
properly,  but,  if  the  report  is  simple  in  form  and  relates  to  work 
done  by  "skilled  workmen,"  it  is  usually  possible  to  get  very  satis- 
factory results.  Certainly,  the  individual  report  is  to  be  encour- 
aged wherever  it  can  be  applied,  for  it  heightens  the  individual's 
interest  in  his  work. 

On  field  contract  work  the  foreman  is  the  man  usualiy  required 
to  make  the  daily  reports.  His  constant  presence  on  the  work 
enables  him  to  make  a  more  accurate  report  than  a  timekeeper  can 
make,  if  the  timekeeper  is  required  to  cover  considerable  territory, 
as  is  usually  the  case. 

In  addition  to  his  duty  in  keeping  the  time  of  the  men  for  pur- 
poses of  raying  them  properly,  the  timekeeper  is  often  able  to  attend 
to  filling  out  the  daily  cost  reports,  or  one  or  more  special  time- 
keepers may  be  appointed  for  the  special  purpose  of  rendering  daily 
cost  reports.  If  the  timekeeper  is  not  able  to  be  present  constantly 
where  a  gang  is  at  work,  it  is  often  wise  to  prepare  certain  blanks 
upon  which  he  receives  reports  from  the  foreman  of  the  gang,  and, 
from  this  foreman  reports  and  reports  of  individuals,  combined  with 
his  own  observations  and  measurements,  the  timekeeper  is  able  to 
fill  out  the  complete  report. 

No  hard  and   fast  rule  can  be  laid   down   as  to  the  best   persons 


92  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

to  whom  report  making-  is  to  be  entrusted.     The  character  of  the 
workmen,  the  size  of  the  job,  and  other  conditions  govern  the  choice. 

Written  Card  vs.  Punch  Card  Reports. — Daily  cost  reports  are 
best  made  on  forms  or  blanks,  and  these  forms  are  preferably  cards 
In  which  the  blank  spaces  are  marked  either  in  writing  or  by  punch- 
ing holes  with  a  conductor's  punch.  The  written  card  possesses  the 
following  advantages  over  the  punch  card  : 

1.  It  is  more  flexible,   because  the  punch  card  is  limited  in  the 
scope  of   the  record   to  what   has  been   foreseen   in   the   office   plus 
what  can  be  written  in  a  small  space  reserved  for  remarks.     The 
pad  and  pencil  are  not  so  limited. 

2.  A  man  can  usually  go  ahead  filling  out  blanks  in  a  written 
card  without  any   previous  directions,   while  he  has   to   have   some 
instruction  in  the  use  of  the  punch. 

3.  Erasures   are   possible   with   pencil    and   pad   but  not   with   a 
punch  card.     This  is  not  always  an  advantage  on  the  side  of  the 
written  card,   however. 

The  punch  card  possesses  the  following  advantages  over  the  writ- 
ten card  : 

1.  By   folding   the   card,    or  by   superimposing  one   card   on   an- 
other, a  duplicate  record  is  secured  without  the  use  of  the  carbon 
paper  necessary  to  secure  duplicates  with  written  cards.     This  dupli- 
cate record  cannot  be  altered  or  erased,  and  one  copy  may  be  kept 
by   the  superintendent  for  his  record  in   discussing  the  work  with 
the  home  office,  the  other  being  sent  in  as  a  regular  report  to  the 
proper  department. 

2.  A  dirty  thumb  can  greatly  interfere  with  the  legibility  of  a 
written  record.     Moreover  the  average  foreman  or  time  keeper  does 
not  write  a  particularly  clear  hand.     Punch  card  records  are  abso- 
lutely clear  and  legible. 

3.  It  is  sometimes  expedient  to  have  records  from  two  or  more 
men  on  the  same  card.     By  having  no  two  punches  alike  on  the  job 
and  having  each  man's  punch  charged  to  his  name  on  the  records  it 
is  possible  to  have  a  clear  and  complete  record  of  who  made  the 
record  without  wasting  time  and  space  for  signatures. 

4.  The  hole  made  by  the  punch  is  usually  less  than  one-eighth  of 
an   inch   in   diameter,   and   consequently   a   much  larger  number  of 
facts  can  be  recorded  upon  a  small  card  by  the  punch  than  by  writ- 
ing,   the    number    of    groups    of    facts,    however,    being    somewhat 
limited. 

5.  To  punch  a  hole  in  a  card  takes  much  less  time  than  to  make 
the  average   pencil   record,    especially   where   duplicate   records  are 
made.     Where  a  time  keeper  has  to  keep  track  of  a  large  number 
of  men  this  is  a  very  valuable  feature. 

6.  A  hole  can  be  accurately  punched  while  riding  on  a  hand-car, 
wagon   or   locomotive,   when   the  vibration  would  greatly  distort  a 
man's  handwriting. 

7.  Punch  cards  can  be  made  on  blue  print  paper  from  a  tracing, 
which   is   an  advantage  where  a  mimeograph  is  not  available  for 
making  white  cards  to  be  filled  in  with  pencil. 


COST   KEEPING.  93 

Time  Cards  that  Show  Changes  of  Occupation. — In  field  contract 
ivork  there  is  usually  more  or  less  change  of  occupation  constantly 
occurring.  A  gang  of  workmen  may  be  engaged  in  grading  for  a 
while  and  then  may  be  shifted  to  track  laying;  or  at  least  some 
individual  in  the  gang  may  be  thus  shifted  from  one  class  of  work 
to  another.  Hence  it  is  usually  desirable  to  have  daily  report  cards 
arranged  so  as  to  record  the  exact  amount  of  time  spent  by  each 
individual  on  each  class  of  work.  This  may  be  accomplished  in 
either  one  of  two  ways :  First,  by  having  a  separate  card  for  each 
workman  ;  or,  second,  by  having  a  gang  card  on  which  each  work- 
man's name  or  number  appears,  and  so  arranged  that  his  time  may 
be  placed  opposite  or  under  the  tabulated  class  of  work  that  he  has 
performed. 

The  individual  card  (a  card  for  each  workman)  is  often  pref- 
erable when  the  bonus  system,  or  its  equivalent,  is  employed.  On 
most  contract  work,  however,  the  bonus  system  is  not  yet  in  opera- 
tion, and  gang  cards,  filled  in  by  the  foreman,  will  serve  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  the  total  performance  of  the  gang  and  the  times 
spent  by  the  various  individuals  on  different  work.  There  are 
several  ways  of  recording  the  individual  times  spent  by  men  work- 
ing in  a  gang,  among  which  the  following  are  typical. 

Each  employee  is  given  a  number,  and  the  numbers  are  arranged 
in  a  horizontal  line  across  the  top  of  a  time  sheet,  as  shown  in  Fig. 
4.  The  different  classes  of  work  are  printed  in  a  column  at  the 
left,  one  line  being  assigned  to  each  subclass.  If  team  No.  J  works 
from  7  to  9  a.  m.  plowing,  the  record  is  made  by  the  foreman,  who 
writes  7-9  opposite  "Plowing"  and  under  No.  1  ;  since  this  is  2  hours' 
work,  the  figure  2  is  subsequently  written  directly  below  the  7-9. 
If  team  No.  1  is  then  transferred  to  work  connected  with  rolling 
subgrade,  and  is  thus  engaged  from  9  to  11  a.  m.,  this  fact  is  indi- 
cated, as  shown,  by  writing  9-11  under  No.  1  and  opposite  "Rolling 
Subgrade." 

Another  method  involves  the  use  of  "key  letters"  to  indicate  each 
class  of  work,  the  proper  key  letter  being  placed  opposite  the  em- 
ployee's name  and  under  the  nearest  half  hour  when  he  began  doing 
the  class  of  work  represented  by  the  key  letter.  Fig.  5  shows  that 
employee  No.  1,  whose  name  is  Smith,  began  work  at  7  a.  m.,  the 
key  letter  A  being  under  7,  and  that  he  was  engaged  in  excavation, 
since  A  is  the  "key"  for  excavation.  He  continued  on  excavation 
until  10:30  a.  m.,  when  he  began  backfilling,  as  shown  by  the  key 
letter  C  entered  under  10  and  in  the  lower  square.  The  upper 
squares  indicate  the  even  hour,  and  the  lower  squares  indicate  the 
half  hour.  At  3  p.  m.  he  was  transferred  to  concrete  work,  as  shown 
by  the  key  letter  F  under  3,  where  it  will  be  seen  that  the  number 
of  hours  worked  by  each  rnan  on  each  class  of  work  is  recorded 
under  a  column  headed  with  a  combination  of  key  letters  that  indi- 
cate the  class  of  work. 

Wherever  men  are  being  frequently  shifted  from  one  class  of 
work  to  another,  some  method  of  recording  the  time  of  shifting,  at 
least  to  the  nearest  half  hour,  should  be  used,  as  outlined  in  the 
different  ways  above  given.  If  a  foreman  does  not  make  «,n  imme- 


94 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


diate   record  of   such    shifting,    but   relies  upon   his  memory   to  fill 
in  his  report  blanks  at  night,  he  is  almost  certain  to  make  serious 


Slreet 

«zv. 

is 

o 

r 

ty 

N.   OF  EMPLOYEE 

i 

t 

s 

H°l'< 

OHADLNQ 

Plowing 

7-9 

B 

BxcaTaUng 

Boiling  Bubgrade 

% 

BABE 

Hauling  *  Loading  Concrete  Gravel 

n-i'i 
l 

Hauling  *  Loading  Concrete  Stone 

Htullog  ft  Loading   Concrete   Sand 

Laying  Concrete 

Raullnc  *  Unloading  Cement 

•KICK 

Hauling  ft  Unloading 

i-t> 

$ 

Laying  Brick 

i-o 

1 

Making  Cnibloo 

8-12 
4 

Hauling  ft  Loading  Cuihlon  Sand 

Onlllne   BricJ. 

^ 

Boiling  Brick 

FILLEB 

Putting  In  Filler 

f 

Hauling  ft  Loading  filler  Sand 

Putting  in  Expansion  Joints 

BBWBBAOE 

Putting  In  Sower*  ft  InleU 

Potting  in  Catch  Bajdni 

Putting  In  Manholes 

•AND 

Screening  Bind 

CUBBING 

Hauling  ft  Loading  Gravel  or  Stone 

Hauling  ft  Loading  Sand 

Hauling  and  Unloading  Cement 

lUSDBIES 

Hauling   ft   Loading   filling   Gravel 
or  Sand 

Cleaning  up 

Genera! 

MACADAM 

Boiling  Stone 

Spreading  Stone 

Total  Honn 

10 

10 

Bate  Per  Hoar 

J5 

20 

AH  remark* 

BUM  appear  on  the  .tier  ilde. 

p 

Fig.    4.     Time   Sheet. 


mistakes.  Moreover,  it  is  not  unusual  for  a  foreman  to  "fudge"  the 
reports  thus  made,  and  even  to  falsify  them  grossly,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  a,  seemingly  high  efficiency  of  the  men  on  certain 


COST   KEEPING. 


N) 

X 

M 

1 

»-»"BO£ 

»»sn< 

>H 

1 

•-j  •« 

O'H 

0 

1 

X    « 

ra«a 

0 

i 

i  i 

o  •* 

•qad 

!d 

o    : 

fa    » 

»W3U 

00 

r  "i 

p  : 

w 

waju 

»0 

r 

S  : 

a 

Bn[dJ 

nSl 

r 

Q    '• 

U     II 

JV 

Ea 

jj 

a    a 

us 

i 

M 

BA«3 

«a 

1 

i  rrn 

L  _ 

i 

<0 

•0 

i 

2* 

• 

g 

•w 

i 

• 

SD 

.9 

§ 

« 

u< 

I 

BrS 

2 

X 

c« 

S 

t> 

«2 

£ 

j 

— 

'o 

% 

sa 

.£ 

c5 

*> 

Rii'-Hil 

&? 

1 

Q 

S 

B 

g 

y 

o 

-      -1 

s 

E 

0> 

.___  = 

is 

o 

CO 

3 

a 

| 

t- 

i 

i        I     H 

H 

i 

^| 

o 

iiou  x4j  p 

J  ni  ^33ip  V 
TO  uoiinqm 

noi 

Bid 

*J 

* 

to 

| 

^ 

•3 

£ 

g 

g 

X 

/ 

i 

a 

1 

£ 

I 

1 

| 

1 

IS 

II 
fcl 

11 
51 

| 

See  instructions 

I 

1 

\                    i 

I 

i 

H* 

j 

3 

96  HANDBOOK    OF    COST   DATA. 

classes  of  work  ;  but,  if  a  blank  must  be  filled  in  during  the  prog- 
ress of  the  work,  and  not  at  night,  a  foreman  risks  discovery  of 
any  attempted  deceit,  since  his  record  card  may  be  examined  at  an 
unexpected  time  of  the  day. 

Gang  Report  Cards.— These  are  usually  made  by  the  foreman  in 
charge  of  the  gang.  If  the  aung  is  always  engaged  on  the  same 
class  of  work,  it  is  not  necessary  for  the  foreman  to  keep  a  time 
record  of  each  man's  occupation,  in  the  manner  just  described;  for 
the  foreman  can  fill  in  the  daily  report  card  from  memory.  In 
this  case  the  timekeeper  records  each  workman's  name  and 
hours  of  work,  while  the  foreman  concerns  himself  only  with  report- 
ing the  total  number  of  men  engaged  on  each  class  of  work  and 
their  day's  performance. 

A  gang  report  card  should  usually  show  most  of  the  following 
things  : 

1.  Number  of  contract. 

2.  Location  of  the  job. 

3.  Character  of  the  job. 

4.  Date  of  the  report. 

5.  Kind  of  weather. 

6.  Name  of   the   foreman. 

7.  Classification  of  work,  or  "key  letters." 

8.  Total  hours  labor  under  each  class. 

9.  Rates  per  hour. 

10.  Total   pay. 

11.  Number  of  units  of  each  class  of  work  done. 

12.  Units  of  material  and  supplies  used. 

13.  "Units  of  materials  received. 

14.  Units   of  material  in  stock. 

15.  Delays,  time  and  cause. 

16.  Time  machines  are  actually  working. 

17.  Kind  of  machine  or  tool  used  and  its  condition. 

18.  Remarks. 

Obviously  there  are  many  classes  of  work  that  do  not  require  a 
daily  statement  containing  all  these  17  facts;  but  in  preparinc  a 
daily  report  card  it  is  desirable  to  have  this  list  at  hand,  to  ma::o 
sure"  that  no  omissions  occur. 

The  space  reserved  for  "Remarks"  is  usually  so  small  that  it  is 
rarely  used.  Special  conditions  that  would  naturally  be  recorde.1 
under  "Remarks"  had  better  be  recorded  in  a  loose  leaf  diary  kept 
by  the  foreman,  of  which  more  will  be  said  later. 

In  designing  a  gang  report  card,  the  most  difficult  feature  is  the 
classification.  This,  however,  is  greatly  simplified  if  done  accord- 
ing to  the  following  system : 

1.  Select  for  the  general  class  heads  the  items  upon  which  the 
unit  contract  prices  are  based,  such  as  excavation   (cu.  yds.),  ma- 
cadam  (sq.  yds.),  curb   (lin.  ft.). 

2.  Divide  each  of  these  pay  items  into  the  operations  involved. 
Thus   excavation   involves    (a)    loosening,    (b)    loading,    (c)    trans- 
porting, and  (d)  dumping. 

3.  Divide  each  opei-ation  into  as  many  subheadings  as  there  are 


COST  KEEPING.  97 

classes  of  workmen  engaged  upon  it.  Thus,  the  operation  of  loosen- 
ing earth  may  involve  (a)  teams  plowing,  and  (b)  men  holding 
plow. 

Summing  up  we  would  have  the  following  subclasses  under  the 
class  Excavation : 

Excavation — 

Loosening:     Men  holding  plow. 

Teams  plowing. 
Loading :     Men   shoveling. 
Transporting :     Teams. 
Dumping :     Men. 

The  next  thing  to  consider  is  whether  the  men  are  of  the  same 
class,  receiving  the  same  rates  of  wages  ;    for,  if  they  are  not,  there 
must  be  a  further  subdivision.     For  example,  on  cement  curb  con- 
struction, the  classification  would  be  as  follows: 
Curb- 
Trenching  :     Laborers. 
Placing  cinders :     Laborers. 
Mixing  and  placing :     Laborers. 
Setting  forms  :     Skilled  laborers. 
Finishing:     Skilled   finishers. 

Helpers. 

There  are  many  kinds  of  pay  items,  such  as  macadam,  that  often 
involve  processes  that  are  performed  at  widely  separated  places. 
Thus,  quarrying  and  crushing  are  processes  far  removed  from 
spreading,  rolling  and  sprinkling  the  macadam.  Whenever  this  is 
the  case,  it  is  usually  unwise  to  attempt  to  show  all  the  processes 
on  one  report  card.  A  good  general  rule  to  follow  is  to  group  to- 
gether on  the  same  report  card  only  those  processes  that  come 
directly  and  constantly  under  the  eye  of  one  foreman.  Therefore 
one  report  card  should  show  the  quarrying  and  crushing,  another 
should  show  the  grading  of  the  road  ;  and  possibly  the  spreading, 
rolling  and  sprinkling  of  the  macadam  should  also  be  placed  upon 
the  same  card  with  the  grading,  but  not  unless  the  grading  gang 
is  to  be  always  a  very  short  distance  in  advance  of  the  ma- 
cadamizing. 

The  commonest  mistake  in  designing  report  blanks  is  to  endeavor 
to  reduce  the  number  of  the  blanks.  It  is  far  better  to  have  more 
blanks  and  to  distribute  the  work  of  reporting,  for  it  not  only  sim- 
plifies the  blanks,  but,  by  giving  each  foreman  less  to  report,  greater 
accuracy  is  secured.  In  fact,  there  are  many  operations  that  can 
best  be  reported  by  the  workmen  themselves.  Thus,  to  continue  the 
illustration  of  the  macadam  road  work,  each  of  the  teamsters  haul- 
ing broken  stone  should  carry  an  individual  report  card  which  is 
punched  or  marked  by  workmen  at  each  end  of  the  trip. 

We  have  said  that  the  pay  items  should  be  analyzed  according 
to  the  operation  involved,  but  care  must  be  taken  not  to  select 
operations  upon  which  men  are  engaged  for  but  a  few  moments  con- 
tinuously. To  illustrate:  In  mixing  concrete  by  hand,  there  are 
usually  the  following  operations:  (a)  loading  wheelbarrows,  (b) 


98  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

wheeling,  (c)  mixing,  (d)  loading,  (e)  transporting,  (f)  spreading 
and  ramming.  Some  gangs  are  so  organized  that  a  few  men  are 
kept  constantly  busy  loading  wheelbarrows  with  sand  and  stone, 
while  the  rest  of  the  gang  spends  a  few  minutes  wheeling,  a  few 
more  mixing,  and  so  on.  Clearly  it  would  be  foolish  to  subdivide 
the  operations  on  the  report  cards  where  the  organization  is  of  this 
character,  for  most  of  the  men  are  changing  their  operations  so 
frequently  that  a  foreman  would  have  time  left  for  doing  nothing 
but  to  record  their  changes. 

We  see  that  the  designer  of  a  report  blank  should  know  ap- 
proximately what  the  organization  of  the  gang  and  what  the 
methods  of  operation  are  to  be,  before  he  can  design  a  report  blank 
that  will  be  concise,  and  complete,  but  with  no  superfluous  headings. 
Since  there  are  almost  innumerable  methods  of  doing  work,  it  is 
obviously  impossible  to  furnish  a  set  of  printed  report  cards  that 
will  exactly  serve  all  cases,  unless  the  classification  headings  used 
are  very  general.  However,  the  designing  of  a  report  card  is  a 
comparatively  simple  matter  once  the  organization  and  methods  of 
doing  the  work  are  known,  provided  the  foregoing  system  is  used. 
'  A  tentative  report  blank  can  be  designed  either  by  using  some 
existing  report  card  for  similar  work  as  a  guide,  or  by  referring 
to  some  book  that  gives,  in  detail,  the  costs  of  construction  work 
similar  to  that  for  which  the  report  blank  is  intended.  From 
the  items  of  cost  given  in  published  records,  a  classification  can  be 
prepared  that  will  be  of  decided  help  in  planning  the  report  card. 

In  order  to  economize  space  on  a  report  blank,  it  is  not  always 
necessary  to  print  the  classes  or  subclasses  in  full.  Abbreviations 
and  key  letters  may  be  used.  Sometimes  the  mere  recording  of 
the  rate  of  wages  opposite  a  class  will  show  the  subclass.  Thus, 
under  the  class  of  "Forms"  (building  wooden  forms  for  concrete) 
if  a  wage  of  20  cts.  per  hour  appears,  also  a  wage  of  35  cts.  per 
hour,  it  will  be  understood  that  the  latter  refers  to  the  carpenter, 
while  the  former  refers  to  the  carpenter's  helper. 

Having  decided  upon  the  classification  of  operations  and  em- 
ployes, the  next  thing  to  determine  is  the  character  of  the  perform- 
ance report  which  is  usually  to  be  recorded  on  the  same  card. 

We  have  discussed  the  difficulties  of  reporting  daily  performance, 
and  have  indicated  ways  of  overcoming  the  difficulties.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  a  foreman  or  timekeeper  should  not  be  expected  to  report 
the  number  of  units  of  each  class  of  work  performed  if  any  con- 
siderable amount  of  difficult  measurement  is  involved.  Hence,  It  is 
usually  futile  to  provide  for  a  daily  report  of  the  number  of  cubic 
yards  of  earth  excavated.  On  the  other  hand,  the  number  of 
wagon  loads,  or  car  loads,  may  usually  be  reported,  and  the  blank 
used  for  excavation  should  usually  provide  for  such  a  report. 

If  some  of  the  excavated  material  is  shoveled  directly  into  the 
embankment  or  hauled  by  scrapers,  while  some  is  hauled  by 
wagons,  it  will  be  futile  to  provide  for  a  daily  report  of  loads 
hauled.  In  such  cases,  it  is  often  advisable  to  report  merely  the 
number  of  lineal  feet  of  work  done  daily.  Thus,  in  road  work, 
where  the  excavation  is  shallow  and  mostly  from  ditches,  the 


COST   KEEPING.  99 

report  should  show  the  station  and  plus  up  to  whieh  the  grading 
is  completed  at  the  end  of  the  day.  It  is  then  the  function  of  the 
office  force  to  determine  the  yardage  from  the  office  records. 

The  amount  of.  concrete  and  cement  work  of  all  kinds  can 
be  reported  with  considerable  accuracy  by  stating  the  number  of 
bags  of  cement  used  during  the  day. 

The  amount  of  supplies,  like  coal,  used  each  day,  can  usually 
be  reported  if  some  system  is  devised  for  recording  consumption 
or  for  readily  inventorying  the  stock  on  hand  each  night.  It  Is 
generally  wise  to  require  coal  to  be  measured  in  boxes  or  in 
wheelbarrows  of  uniform  size,  uniformly  filled.  Then  each  fire- 
man reports  the  number  of  cubic  feet  (or  boxes)  of  coal  used 
during  the  day. 

Empty  dynamite  boxes  are  often  convenient  for  purposes  of 
measurement,  as  they  hold  exactly  %  cu.  ft.  each. 

Individual  Record  Cards. — Wherever  individual  workmen  are 
paid  by  the  bonus  or  price  rate  systems,  it  is  usually  best  to  pro- 
vide a  separate  record  card  for  each  workman,  for  it  is  difficult 
to  make  a  compact  record  on  one  card  that  will  show  not  only  the 
occupations  of  a  number  of  men,  but  the  performance  of  each 
man.  This  is  particularly  true  where  the  men  are  repeatedly 
shifted  from  one  class  of  work  to  another. 

Where  one  man  operates  a  machine,  like  a  rock  drill,  it  is 
usually  wise  to  provide  him  with  his  own  individual  record  card, 
upon  which  he  is  required  to  record  his  day's  performance.  A 
modification  of  this  plan  is  to  let  the  foreman  carry  the  individual 
records  of  all  the  men,  and  fill  in  each  card  himself. 

The  engineman  on  a  dinky  locomotive  should  be  required  to 
make  and  fill  in  a  daily  report,  showing  the  number  of  train 
loads  hauled,  time  lost,  etc. 

A  teamster  should  usually  be  required  to  carry  a  card  whereon 
are  recorded  the  times  of  arrival  or  departure  at  each  end  of  each 
trip. 

A  steam  roller  engineman  should  be  required  to  fill  in  a  card 
report  showing  number  of  lineal  feet  of  road  rolled,  and  the  num- 
ber of  miles  traveled  by  the  roller.  The  latter  should  be  recorded 
by  an  odometer. 

Kind  of  Punches  to  Use. — If  punch  card  reports  are  to  be  used. 
.  an  ordinary  conductor's  punch  will  serve  for  small  cards ;  but  it  is 
generally  desirable  to  have  large  cards,  which  necessitates  the  use 
of  a  special  punch  having  a  2-in.  reach.  Such  special  punches 
are  made  by  L.  A.  Sayre  &  Co.,  of  Newark,  N.  J.,  and  by  other 
railroad  supply  concerns. 

Size  and  Kind  of  Daily  Report  Cards.— It  is  usually  desirable  to 
have  report  cards  of  a  size  that  will  be  suitable  for  filing  in  the 
standard  card  index  files.  A  size  that  will  be  found  satisfactory 
for  general  use  is  5x7%  ins. 

If  reports  are  to  be  written  and  made  out  in  duplicate,  the 
report  cards  should  be  made  up  in  pads  of  alternate  thin  and  thick 
cards,  so  that  a  carbon  paper  may  be  inserted  between  a  thin  card 
and  a  thick  one. 


100 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


It  is  generally  wise  to  have  the  cards  tinted  one  color  for  the 
original  and  another  color  for  the  duplicate.  It  is  also  a  good 
plan  to  designate  the  kind  of  report  card  by  a  key  letter,  or  com- 
bination of  letters,  which  may  be  stamped  in  red  in  one  corner 
of  the  card.  Thus  the  letter  T  may  be  used  to  designate  the  daily 
report  card  of  teamsters.  Instead  of  using  mnemonic  key  letters, 
some  contractors  prefer  to  use  different  tints  for  different  classes 
of  report  cards. 

This  works  well  when  there  are  only  a  few  classes,  but  becomes 
confusing  when  there  are  many,  and  is  worthless  as  a  means  of 
distinguishing  cards  at  a  glance  when  there  are  very  many 
classes. 

Where  a  great  deal  of  information  must  be  crowded  on  one  card, 
it  is  often  desirable  to  orovide  for  writing  the  report  on  both 


Team                                Day 
^.dkuJwvlfcZ.        M^.l.im 

6 

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

7 

• 

8 

+ 

9 

10 

II 

12 

I 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

Length  of  Haul  

Fig.    6.     Punch  Card   For  Teams. 


faces  of  the  card.  This  is  objectionable,  however,  because  it  makes 
It  impracticable  to  produce  a  duplicate  by  the  use  of  carbon  paper. 
It  is  also  inconvenient  to  examine  such  a  card  after  it  is  placed 
tn  a  filing  case. 

Foreman's  Diary.— The  foreman  or  the  superintendent  should 
usually  be  required  to  keep  a  daily  diary  in  which  should  be 
entered : 

1.  Verbal  orders  received  from  engineers  and  owners. 

2.  Verbal  requests  made  to  the  engineers  for  grade  stakes,  etc. 

3.  Weather  conditions. 

4.  Remarks  as  to  hardness  of  digging,  poor  quality  of  materials 
and  supplies,  slowness  of  their  delivery,  general  inefficiency  of  the 
men   available,    and    such   other   conditions   as   bear   upon    the    eco- 


COST   KEEPING.'  101 

nomic  performance  of  the  work  but  can  .not,  be  snown  ia  the  daily 
report. 

The  ordinary  field  foreman  will  not  keep  a  diary  of  much  value 
unless  its  pages  are  inspected  daily.  This  requires  that  it  shall  be  a 
duplicate  loose  leaf  diary,  the  original  leaf  being  sent  to  the  office 
with  the  daily  cost  report,  and  ihe  duplicate,  or  carbon  copy,  being 
retained  by  the  foreman  and  bound  in  a  loose  leaf  binder. 

Designing  Punch  Card  Reports. — We  have  already  enumerated 
the  advantages  of  the  punch  card  for  certain  kinds  of  daily  reports. 
One  of  the  earliest  punch  cards  devised  for  this  purpose  is  shown  In 
Fig.  6,  and  was  designed  by  one  of  the  authors  for  recording  the 
daily  work  done  by  each  team  in  hauling  broken  stone  for  ma- 
cadam. Each  teamster  carries  a  card  which  he  presents  for  punch- 
ing at  each  end  of  the  trip.  The  diamond  punch  hole  indicates 
that  the  loaded  team  left  the  crusher  bin  at  7  :05  a.  m.  The  cross 
punch  holes  shows  that  it  dumped  its  load  on  the  road  at  8:20  a.  m. 
A  new  card  is  issued  to  each  teamster  each  day ;  but,  if  it  is  de- 
sired to  provide  one  card  that  will  serve  for  a  full  week,  one  is 
easily  designed. 

A  more  elaborate  form  of  individual  punch  card  is  shown  in 
Fig.  7,  and  is  designed  to  show  the  daily  performance  of  each  rock 
drill  in  great  detail  and  in  duplicate.  Note  that  the  upper  half  of 
the  card  is  to  be  folded  back  on  the  lower  half,  so  that  the  holes 
are  punched  in  duplicate. 

The  punch  holes  in  tnis  particular  card  show : 

1.  That  the  holes  were  spaced  4  ft.  one  way  and  5  ft.  the  other. 

2.  That  +  bits  were  used. 

3.  That  the  drill  was  in  good  condition. 

4.  That  the  drill  was  No.  2. 

5.  That  a  3-in.  starting  bit  was  used. 

6.  That  54  ft.  of  hole  were  drilled. 

7.  That   there  were  4   holes/  Nos.    1,   2,    3  and   4,   whose  depths 
were  15,  14,  13  and  12  ft.,  respectively. 

(Note:  A  hole,  No.  0,  is  provided,  in  case  a  partly  drilled  hole 
of  the  previous  day  has  to  be  completed,  for,  in  that  event,  the  num- 
ber of  feet  drilled  to  complete  the  hole  is  punched  above  hole 
No.  0.) 

8.  That  the  date  was  July  16. 

9.  That  work  besran  at   7 :02    a.   m..   and  hole  No.    1   was  com- 
pleted at  9  :44  ;    that  work  was  stopped  at  12  m.  and  begun  again  at 

1  p.  m.  ;  that  hole  No.  2  was  finished  at  1 :18  p.  m.,  hole  No.  3  at 

2  :36,  hole  No.  4  at  4  :52. 

It  is  not  usually  necessary  to  record  rock  drill  operations  to  the 
nearest  even  minute,  as  the  nearest  5  minutes  will  ordinarily  suffice  ; 
but  it  is  sometimes  desirable  to  have  the  drillers  record  the  time 
of  starting  one  hole  and  of  starting  the  next  hole.  In  that  case 
this  card,  which  provides  for  a  time  record  on  2-min.  intervals,  is 
more  satisfactory  than  one  designed  for  5-min.  intervals.  Drillers 
are  often  very  slow  in  shifting  drills  from  one  hole  to  the  next, 
which  is  well  shown  up  if  the  time  of  finishing  one  hole  and  of 
starting  the  next  is  punched.  Punching  two  holes  in  the  card  in  one 


102 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


square   (ptmchthg  double),  can  be  used  to  Indicate  time  of  starting 
a  hole,  while  punching  one  hole  indicates  its  time  of  completion. 

Note  that  in  designing  punch  cards,  space  can  be  economized  by 
the   arrangement  shown   in   the  upper   left  hand   corner   of   Fig.    7 


fr  9 


°>  9 


5?  2? 


zSWprpew 
6 


Qo 


1/8/02 


jo 


9f£ut£»  VWd 


0/0  <** 


01  CH  01  01  O/  W 


c  c 


•  PC  C 


f  « 


i\z  c  +[f\9Wff\e\oo/       *u*L 


/es  Dri/tect 


Tens 


3\+ 


S\C>\7\8\9\o 


J)e.f>fh  of  Hole,  (fee 


2  2  2 


10  10  10  10 

« 


33  33 


v 


/Of  A? 


•5-  ^Spacing  or  /fo/e-s  in  reeT 


f\/na  or 


Condition  or  On// 


B  4 


9  10 


DfVLL   f?FCO/=?D 


Punch  JJouS/e  »4cst 
<&  <fuM'ry  H*arfr,  incf  fufich  f/'me. 
Punch  •nS/fy/<e  for  time  of 


Fig.    1.     Duplicate   Punch  Card. 

where  the  upper  line  indicates  "tens"  and  the  lower  line  Indicates 
"units." 

On  some  classes  of  work,  particularly  shop  work,  it  is  often  de- 


COST   KEEPING. 


103 


sirable  to  have  a  separate  punch  card  for  each  class  of  work, 
instead  of  recording  several  classes  of  work  on  the  same  card. 
Fig.  8  illustrates  such  a  card  that  has  been  used  by  the  National 
Switch  &  Signal  Co.  and  was  described  by  Mr.  Chas.  Hansel  and 
published  in  the  "Complete  Cost  Keeper,"  1903.  Each  workman 
perforates  the  5-min.  time  card  for  each  job  on  which  he  is  em- 
ployed, simply  piercing  the  card  at  the  5-min.  points  most  nearly 
representing  his  times  of  beginning  and  ending  work  on  the  job  in 
hand,  the  appropriate  order  number  being  entered  on  the  card  by  the 
foreman.  When  the  workman  enters  the  shop  in  the  morning,  he 
is  furnished  with  one  time  card,  which  he  hangs  on  the  upper  hook 
of  his  individual  time  board,  after  perforating '  it  at  his  beginning 
thue.  If  the  foreman  gives  the  workman  a  second  job  before  the 
first  is  completed,  he  fills  in  the  order  number  on  a  second  card, 


TIME  a 

Workman's  No.  . 

A.RD 

Date 

Date  Commenced  

H|         Min. 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
1 
~2 

dl  cnl  cnl  cnl  cni  cni.cn 

10 
10 

To 

10 

15 
15 
15 
15 

20 
20 
20 
20 

25 

25 
25 
25 

30 
30 
30 
30 

35 
35 
35 
35 

40 
40 
40 
40 

45 
45 
45 

45 

50 
50 
50 
50 

55 
55 
55 
55 

Order  No  
Catalog  No  

10 
10 
10 

15 
15 
15 

20 
20 
20 

25 
25 
25 

30 
30 
30 

35 
35 
35 

40 
40 
40 

45 
45 
45 

50 
50 
50 

55. 
55 
55 

Number  Pieces  

Operation  No 

5 
5 
5 
5 
5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

45 

50 

55 

3 

4 
5 
6 

10 
10 
10 
10 

15 
15 
15 
15 

20 
20 
20 
20 

25 
25 
25 
25 

30 
30 
30 
30 

35 
35 
35 
35 

40 
40 
40 
40 

45 
45 
45 
45 

50 
50 
50 
50 

55 
55 
55 
55 

Date  Finished  

Approved 
] 

7oreman 

Fig.  8.     Punch  Card. 

and  hangs  this  second  card  on  the  upper  hook.  Thus  the  workman 
may  have  any  number  of  jobs  before  him,  each  order  being  given 
on  a  separate  card.  When  any  job  is  completed  its  card  is  trans- 
ferred to  the  lower  hook.  The  time  cards  on  the  lower  hook  are  re- 
moved by  the  timekeeper  each  morning,  cards  on  the  upper  hook 
being  left  undisturbed. 

Record  Cards  Accompanying  Each  Piece  of  Work. — In  doing  ma- 
chine shop  work,  it  is  often  necessary  to  have  one  piece  of  metal 
pass  through  the  hands  of  several  workers.  For  example,  one 
man  may  drill  holes  of  a  certain  size,  another  may  drill  holes 
of  another  size,  still  another  may  thread  the  holes,  and  so  on.  In 


104  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

such  a  case  a  record  card  may  be  attached  to,  or  accompany  each 
piece  or  lot  of  pieces.  In  blanks  provided  on  the  card,  each  worker 
enters  his  number  and  the  amount  of  time  spent  in  doing  a  specified 
kind  and  amount  of  work  on  the  piece. 

Using    Several    Record    Cards,  One    For    Each    Piece   of   Work A 

method  that  is  usually  preferable  to  the  one  just  described  for  shop 
work,  is  to  give  each  workman  several  record  cards.  As  each  new 
piece  of  work  comes  to  him,  he  enters  its  "order  number"  on  a 
record  card,  and  records  the  time  he  spends  on  the  piece.  When 
finished,  he  uses  another  record  card  for  the  next  piece. 

Store  Keeper's  Reports.— The  store  keeper's  duties  include  the 
following : 

1.  He  must  receipt  for  and  take  charge  of  all  material  delivered 
for  temporary  storage. 

2.  He  must  see  that  all  of  this  material  is  properly  accounted 
for  and  none  lost  or  stolen. 

3.  He  must  take  charge   of  the  issuing  of  materials  and   sup- 
plies to  the  men  and  see  that  they  are  issued  in  proper  quantity 
and  that  there  is  no  waste. 

4.  He  should  see  that  needed  material  and  supplies  are  issued 
without  loss  of  time. 

To  accomplish  these  objects  it  is  necessary  that  some  one  be 
on  hand  at  the  store  house  at  all  times  when  material  is  likely  to  be 
delivered  or  called  for.  This  includes  the  noon  hour  as  well  as 
other  times.  Considerable  economy  results  from  sending  to  the 
store  house  in  the  noon  hour  to  obtain  articles  that  are  needed  in 
the  afternoon. 

The  second  duty  of  the  storekeeper  is  often  interfered  with  by 
men  going  to  the  store  house  for  articles  needed  in  a  hurry  and  not 
leaving  receipts  for  them.  The  only  way,  then,  that  the  storekeeper 
can  account  for  his  materials  would  be  by  periodical  inventories, 
and  then  at  the  best  there  is  nothing  whereby  the  periodical  in- 
ventory can  be  checked.  The  perfunctory  inventory  is  generally 
useless.  All  the  men  in  the  field  in  the  position  of  authority  or  who 
are  likely  to  require  to,  have  materials  issued  to  them  should  be  pro- 
vided with  small  requisition  blanks,  and  the  storekeeper  should 
require  a  requisition  slip  as  a  receipt  for  all  material  issued. 

At  the  end  of  the  month  these  receipts  for  material  issued 
should  tally  with  his  inventory  and  list  of  material  received. 

Reports  on  Materials  and  Supplies. —  Fig.  9  is  a  card  for  report- 
ing supplies  received.  It  includes  the  oil,  waste,  powder,  caps  and 
fuse  supplied  to  the  various  field  organizations,  such  as  drillers, 
pumps,  various  steam  shovels,  dinkeys,  cars,  shovels,  and  also 
shows  the  amount  remaining  on  hand.  This  is  for  steam  shovel 
work  in  rock. 

Fig.  10  is  material  card  designed  to  be  used  daily  by  the  fore- 
man on  concrete  work  for  recording  the  materials  received.  The 
size  of  various  loads  of  cement,  gravel,  sand,  screenings,  stone,  and 
the  number  of  feet  board  measure  of  lumber  are  shown  on  one  half 
of  the  card,  and  on  the  other  half  are  the  amounts  of  glass,  steel, 


COST   KEEPING. 


105 


SUPPLY  BEPOBT  NO.  1. 

190.... 

Drillora. 

Pumps, 

No.  1 
Shovel. 

Ko.  2 
Shovel. 

NO,  1 
Dinkey. 

No.  2 
Dinkey. 

No.  3 
Dinkey. 

Cars. 

Shop. 

Little 
Hill. 

On  Hand. 

Xng  " 

Blk.   " 

Waste 

Dynamite. 
Exploders. 

• 

Fuse 

1 

Fig.  9.     Supply  Report. 

Job  No.                                                                     MATERIALS  RECEIVED 
Date                                        190                                                                                                               Foreman 

ze  or  Brand                                From  Whom  Received 
bbls.                      Cement 
baga 
Ids.                         Gravel 
Band 
"                          Screenings 
Ibe.                         Stone 

Ida.                        Sand 
ft.                         Lumber 

Size  or  Brand                                From  Whom  Received 
tblflv                        Glaen 
bars                       Steel 
•f                             <• 

Iba.                         Lampblack 
«                            Oakum 
«•                          Hall* 

Fig.    10.     Materials  Report 

{06  HANDBOOK    OF    COST   DATA. 

lampblack,  oakum,  nails,  etc.  On  the  back  of  the  card  an  entry  is 
supposed  to  be  made  of  all  material  sent  away  from  the  shop  or  re- 
maining on  the  work  at  night,  thus  giving  a  check  upon  the  quan- 
tity of  materials  used. 

Checking  the  Accuracy  of  Reports — Systematic  checking  of  the 
accuracy  of  reports  made  by  individuals  or  foremen  is  of  para- 
mount importance,  for,  unless  this  is  done,  there  is  apt  to  be  gross 
falsification  of  the  reports  in  order  to  make  a  favorable  showing 
of  performance.  Thus,  if  a  drill  runner  is  not  checked  occasionally 
as  to  his  report  of  number  of  feet  drilled,  he  is  apt  to  add  several 
feet  to  his  actual  performance. 

On  one  railway  with  which  the  authors  are  familiar,  the  master 
mechanic  is  in  the  habit  of  reporting  the  time  of  men  spent  in 
building  new  cars  as  if  it  were  spent  in  repairing  old  cars.  The 
object  in  doing  this  is  to  make  a  creditable  showing  of  the  cost 
of  making  new  equipment.  While  it  is  true  that  this  seems  like 
robbing  Peter  to  pay  Paul,  it  must  be  remembered  that  there  is 
usually  great  difficulty  in  determining  just  what  is  a  reasonable 
cost  of  repairing  a  car,  whereas  there  is  no  difficulty  in  fixing  upon 
a  reasonable  cost  of  making  a  new  car. 

So  many  men  are  dishonest,  particularly  in  ways  that  are  not 
actually  criminal,  that  implicit  trust  should  not  be  placed  in  re- 
ports that  are  not  verified  by  systematic  investigation  at  unexpected 
intervals  of  time,  if  they  are  not  subject  to  constant  checking. 

On  construction  work  it  should  be  the  duty  of  someone  to  make 
reports  that  will  check  the  reports  made  by  individual  workmen 
and  by  foremen.  The  timekeeper  is  usually  the  man  upon  whom 
part  of  this  checking  devolves.  Thus,  the  timekeeper  may  be  re- 
quired to  make  certain  measurements  at  the  close  of  the  day,  from 
which  a  foreman's  report  of  performance  can  be  checked,  as,  for 
example,  the  number  of  drill  holes  and  the  depth  of  each.  The  time- 
keeper may  also  be  required  to  visit  each  part  of  the  work  fre- 
quently, noting  the  number  of  men  engaged  in  each  class  of  work 
at  the  time  of  each  visit.  Frequent  visits  are  often,  made  possible 
by  providing  the  timekeeper  with  a  horse  or  a  motorcycle. 

Checking  the  distribution  of, the  men  of  a  gang,  as  well  as  ob- 
serving the  energy  with  which  they  are  working,  may  frequently 
be  done  to  advantage  by  means  of  a  telescope  or  field  glasses  in  the 
hands  of  an  observer  located  in  a  tower  or  on  some  high  point  of 
ground. 

By  requiring  different  foremen  and  different  individuals  to  report 
on  the  same  performance,  an  excellent  check  can  often  be  secured. 
Thus,  the  dinkey  locomotive  engineman  should  report  the  number 
of  trains  hauled,  and  either  the  dump  foreman  or  the  steam  shovel 
engineman  should  render  a  similar  report. 

The  monthly  estimates  of  engineers  should,  of  course,  be  used  to 
check  the  daily  reports  of  foremen,  as  far  as  possible ;  and  on 
large  jobs  it  is  often  desirable  for  a  contractor  to  employ  engineers 
to  cross-section  and  measure  the  work  once  a  week,  if  not  more 
frequently. 


COST  KEEPING.  107 

Where  the  gang  under  a  foreman  is  frequently  shifted  from  one 
class  of  work  to  another,  the  foreman  should  always  record  the  time 
that  the  change  is  made,  in  one  of  the  ways  already  indicated. 
When  this  is  done,  the  superintendent  or  walking  boss  should  exam- 
ine the  foreman's  record  occasionally,  during  the  day — not  neces- 
sarily every  day — to  assure  himself  that  the  foreman  is  posting 
the  record  properly  and  at  the  time  each  change  is  made. 

There  should  always  be  some  system  of  recording  the  receipt  of 
daily  reports  at  the  office.  This  is  sometimes  effected  by  having 
a  tabular  list  of  all  the  reports  that  should  be  received,  and  by 
placing  a  check  mark  opposite  the  name  of  each  report  (or  each 
foreman  or  individual  making  the  report)  under  the  day  of  the 
month  to  which  the  report  relates.  A  glance  at  such  a  tabulation 
shows  whether  any  report  is  missing. 

If  it  is  the  practice  to  plot  or  chart  the  returns  shown  by  each 
report  daily,  then  no  further  check  may  be  needed  to  show  that 
the  report  has  been  received. 

One  of  the  advantages  gained  by  divorcing  cost  keeping  from 
bookkeeping  is  the  check  thus  obtainable  on  both.  The  aggregate 
weekly  payroll  shown  by  the  timekeeper's  report  should  check  fairly 
well — not  necessarily  with  great  precision — with  the  aggregate  pay- 
roll deduced  from  the  foreman's  reports.  Incidentally  this  check 
makes  it  more  difficult  for  a  timekeeper  to  "pad  the  payroll,"  that 
is  to  enter  fictitious  names  upon  the  payroll  or  to  credit  a  man  with 
more  time  than  he  is  entitled  to.  Many  a  contractor  has  been 
robbed  in  this  manner. 

If  the  distribution  of  costs  shown  on  the  books  corresponds  with 
the  distribution  derived  from  the  daily  report  cards,  a  fairly  close 
check  is  obtainable. 

It  is  generally  wise  to  have  accounts  for  each  of  the  main  items 
of  materials  and  supplies,  such  as  lumber,  cement,  coal,  explosives, 
etc.  Then  the  total  consumption  of  coal,  for  example,  as  deduced 
from  the  foremen's  daily  cost  reports,  should  check  fairly  well 
with  the  amount  purchased,  as  recorded  by  the  bookkeeper.  Like- 
wise the  bookkeeper  may  divide  the  payroll  into  certain  general 
classes  of  labor  and  assign  an  account  for  each  class,  which  should 
check  with  the  cost  records  turned  in  by  the  foremen.  But,  in  our 
opinion,  it  is  a  serious  mistake  to  encumber  the  bookkeeper  with  a 
multiplicity  of  accounts  intended  either  to  show  detailed  costs  or  to 
check  the  various  details  of  cost  deduced  from  the  daily  cost  reports. 

Cost  Charts. — For  showing  relative  performance  or  relative  unit 
costs,  no  method  is  so  satisfactory  as  a  diagram  or  chart.  A 
glance  at  the  unit  cost  line  plotted  on  a  chart  shows  the  manager 
whether  there  is  cause  for  congratulation  or  alarm.  The  up  and 
down  waves  of  a  cost  line  are  far  more  impressive  than  columns 
of  figures  ever  are. 

A  chart  of  daily  performance  has  the  incidental  advantage  of 
affording  an  automatic  check  on  whether  all  the  daily  cost  reports 
have  been  turned  in  or  not,  for  without  the  reports  the  lines  on  the 
chart  cannot  be  plotted. 

Progress   Charts. — It   is  generally  desirable  to  record  graphically 


108 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


the  progress  of  each  particular  class  of  work  on  a  contract.  This 
is  best  done  by  means  of  a  progress  chart  similar  to  that  shown  in 
Fig.  11. 

This  chart  relates  to  excavation.  The  first  column  is  a  percent- 
age column.  The  second  column  gives  the  length  of  the  excavation 
(trench,  ditch,  or  the  like).  The  third  column  gives  the  number 


Fig.    11.     Progress  Chart. 


of  cubic  yards.  The  fourth  column  gives  the  estimated  cost.  The 
fifth  column  gives  the  actual  cost ;  a  sixth  column  of  actual  cost  is 
provided  in  case  it  overruns  the  estimated  cost.  The  total  length 
of  the  excavation  to  be  done  is  775  ft,  which  is  written  opposite 
the  100%.  Then  the  length  column  is  divided  into  7%  parts,  each 
representing  100  ft.,  or  a  "station." 

The  total  yardage  in  this  length  of  775  ft.  is  1,600  cu.  yds.,  which 


COST   KEEPING.  109 

is  also  written  opposite  the  100%.  Then  this  yardage  column  is 
divided  into  16  parts,  each  representing  100  cu.  yds.  The  work  has 
been  estimated  to  cost  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  therefore  the  total  cost  of 
the  1,600  cu.  yds.  should  be  $800,  which  is  written  opposite  the 
100% ;  and  the  estimated  cost  column  is  divided  into  8  parts, 
each  representing  $100. 

This  work  on  section  of  excavation  is  scheduled  to  begin  June  3, 
as  indicated  in  the  space  to  the  left  of  the  per  cent  column  and  at 
the  bottom ;  and  it  is  scheduled  to  be  finished  in  three  weeks,  as 
indicated. 

The  work  is  begun  on  schedule  time,  June  3,  as  indicated  by  the 
entry  to  the  right  of  the  last  column,  and  at  the  end  of  the  first 
week  (beginning  of  the  next),  June  10,  the  progress  and  cost  are 
shown  by  the  hatched  portion  below  the  heavy  black  line.  It  will 
be  seen  that  the  excavation  has  been  completed  to  station  1  +  50 
(=150  ft.),  as  shown  in  the  second  column;  and  that  350  cu.  yds. 
have  been  excavated,  as  shown  in  the  third  column.  The  esti- 
mated cost  of  the  350  cu.  yds.  is  $175.  as  shown  in  the  fourth  col- 
umn. The  actual  cost  has  been  proved  to  be  the  same  as  the  esti- 
mated cost,  or  $175,  as  shown  in  the  fifth  column.  The  yardage 
completed  up  to  June  10  is  22%  of  the  total,  as  seen  by  comparing 
the  first,  or  percentage,  column  with  the  third,  or  yardage,  column  ; 
whereas,  to  have  lived  up  to  the  estimated  schedule,  33%  of  the 
yardage  should  have  been  excavated  by  June  10. 

The  performance  of  the  next  week  is  similarly  shown  by  the  heavy 
black  line  opposite  June  17,  which  shows  that  47.5  ft.  of  length 
(reaching  therefore  to  Sta.  4-J-75)  and  900  cu.  yds.  have  been 
completed.  The  total  actual  cost  is  now  $400,  as  compared  with  an 
estimated  cost  of  $450,  showing  that  the  work  is  being  handled 
satisfactorily. 

If  the  chart  is  plotted  on  tracing  cloth,  blue  prints  are  readily 
made.  Instead  of  cross-hatching  the  performance  area  of  each 
week,  paints  of  different  tints  may  be  used. 

On  jobs  of  long  duration,  a  similar  chart  showing  progress  by 
months  is  usually  desirable,  in  addition  to  a  weekly  progress  chart. 
Then  it  is  often  desirable  to  paint  the  area  on  the  monthly  prog- 
ress chart,  using  colors  of  paints  to  designate  the  different  months. 

Methods  of  Payment  in  Proportion  to  Performance. — The  funda- 
mental law  of  management  involves  that  payment  for  work  done 
shall  be  proportionate  to  performance — that  is,  an  increased  number 
of  units  of  work  done  by  a  man  shall  result  in  his  receiving  in- 
creased pay.  The  ordinary  wage  system  is  based  upon  this  law, 
but  only  in  a  very  crude  manner,  since  it  throws  men  into  large 
groups  or  classes,  individuals  of  which  receive  the  same  pay,  or 
practically  so. 

We  shall  now  consider  some  of  the  various  methods  that  aim  to 
recompense  a  workman  in  proportion  to  his  performance. 

Profit  Sharing. — According  to  the  method  of  profit  sharing,  each 
individual  receives  not  only  his  wage  but  a  pro  rata  of  any  profits 
that  arise  from  the  business.  Either  quarterly,  semi-annually,  or 


110  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

annually,  the  profits  of  the  business  are  estimated,  and  a  certain 
percentage  of 'these  profits  is  distributed  to  the  workmen  and  their 
managers.  Often  this  distribution  of  profits  is  confined  to  the  man- 
agers only. 

While  this  is  an  improvement  over  the  wage  system,  it  violates 
the  eighth  law  of  management — namely,  the  law  of  prompt  reward. 
The  imagination  of  the  ordinary  workman  is  not  enough  to  main- 
tain his  interest  in  his  work  at  the  high  pitch  necessary  to  enable 
him  to  do  his  very  best.  Moreover,  any  community  interest  in  a 
commercial  enterprise  lacks  sufficient  stimulus.  It  requires  a  more 
direct,  personal  interest  in  the  outcome  to  arouse  a  man  to  action. 

Profit  sharing,  whether  by  the  payment  of  profits  direct,  or  in  the 
form  of  dividends  on  stock  held  by  the  workman,  is,  at  best,  only  a 
moderate  step  in  advance  of  the  ordinary  wage  system  so  far  as  the 
average  workman  is  concerned. 

Piece  Rate  System. — According  to  the  piece  rate  system,  each 
workman  is  paid  a  certain  stipulated  amount  per  unit  of  work  done 
by  him.  If  all  managers  were  fair  in  their  dealings  with  workmen, 
and  if  all  workmen  were  reasonable,  the  piece  rate  system  would  be 
almost  ideal  as  a  method  of  paying  men  wherever  the  work  is  of 
a  character  that  admits  of  measuring  individual  performance.  Due 
to  hoggishness  on  the  part  of  managers  and  unreasonableness  on 
tne  part  of  .workmen,  the  piece  rate  system  usually  fails  to  accom- 
plish the  desired  end. 

Having  established  a  piece  rate  of,  say,  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
shoveling  earth  into  wagons,  on  the  assumption  that  15  cu.  yds.  per 
day  per  man  is  a  fair  output,  it  requires  more  than  ordinary  fore- 
sight and  liberality  not  to  cut  the  rate  when  laborers  begin  to  load 
25  cu.  yds.  a  ^ay.  The  typical  contractor  will  then  begin  to  reason 
about  as  follows:  "These  men  have  been  soldiering  on  me  in  the 
past.  I  always  thought  so  ;  now  I  know  it.  Well,  now  that  I  do 
know  it,  and  they  know  I  Know  it,  they  will  have  to  work  at  this 
rate  hereafter  or  get  out.  What's  more,  I  am  not  going  to  be 
gouged  out  of  an  extra  dollar  a  day,  either.  If  they  make  25  cts. 
extra  a  day,  it's  more  than  they  ever  got  before,  and  it's  all  they 
are  entitled  to,  so  we  will  just  drop  that  10-ct.  rate  down  to  7  cts. 
That  will  satisfy  them."  But  the  trouble  is  that  it  doesn't.  The 
men  immediately  become  angry,  and  rightly  so.  If  they  do  not  quit 
entirely,  they  lose  all  further  ambition  and  desire  to  increase  their 
output,  knowing  full  well  that  the  piece  rate  will  be  so  cut  as  to 
enable  them  to  earn  only  a  slight  advance  over  their  original  day's 
wages. 

This  experience  has  been  so  general  that  nearly  all  labor  unions 
have  put  a  ban  on  the  piece-rate  system.  Bear  in  mind,  however, 
that  the  piece-rate  system  is  not  inherently  at  fault,  and  that  it  is 
used  with  great  success  in  many  places  where  the  management  has 
been  liberal  and  far-sighted. 

On  piece-rate  work  that  involves  the  use  of  machinery,  it  is  mani- 
fest that  any  improvement  in  the  machinery  which  enables  the  men 
to  turn  out  more  units  daily,  should  be  accompanied  by  sonje  re- 
fluction  in  the  piece  rate.  Workmen,  however,  are  usually  unrea- 


COST   KEEPING.  Ill 

sonable  and  oppose  any  reduction  in  the  rate.  This  unreasonable- 
ness disgusts  the  manager  as  much  as  a  manager's  hoggishness  dis- 
gusts the  workmen.  If  the  manager  goes  to  the  expense  of  buying 
and  operating  improved  machinery,  he  is  entitled  to  his  share  of  the 
increased  profit,  but  the  workman  is  not  quick  to  see  things  in  that 
light. 

Obviously,  any  piece-rate  system  is  productive  of  more  or  less 
friction  between  managers  and  men,  yet  no  system  is  free  from  some 
friction.  Probably  the  chief  function  of  the  labor  unions  of  the 
future  will  be  to  protect  workmen  in  agreements  with  managers, 
and  to  be  parties  in  arriving  at  what  those  agreements  shall  be. 

The  Bonus  System. — This  system  involves  paying  each  workman 
a  daily  wage  plus  a  piece  rate  on  each  unit  in  excess  of  a  stipulated 
minimum.  This  piece  rate  on  excess  product  is  called  a  bonus. 
For  example,  a  laborer  receives  $1.50  a  day  for  shoveling  earth, 
and  on  each  cubic  yard  in  excess  of  15  cu.  yds.  shoveled  per  day 
he  receives  a  bonus  of  7  cts.  If  he  shovels  25  cu.  yds.,  he  receives 
11.50+  (0.07  X  10)  =$2.20. 

The  bonus  system  is  really  a  piece-rate  system  with  a  guarantee 
of  a  certain  minimum  wage.  Slight  though  this  difference  from 
the  piece-rate  system  is,  it  is  generally  viewed  with  more  favor  by 
workmen. 

The  Differential  Piece  Rate  System — The  principle  of  this  system 
is  to  pay  a  certain  piece  rate  up  to  a  certain  output  per  man,  and  a 
higher  rate  (but  still  a  piece  rate)  above  that  output.  Applied  to 
drilling,  for  example,  the  drill  runner  would  be  paid,  say,  6  cts. 
a  foot  up  to  a  performance  of  50  ft.  per  day,  and  8  cts.  a  foot  for 
every  foot  above  50.  The  helper  might  still  be  paid  $2  a  day 
straight,  but  it  is  wise  always  to  give  him  also  a  contingent  interest 
in  the  result  of  his  work. 

The  Differential  Bonus. — This  is  based  on  the  same  principle  as 
the  differential  piece  rate  while  guaranteeing  to  a  man  a  fixed  mini- 
mum of  wages.  We  have  applied  it  in  drilling  work,  offering  the 
men  2  cts.  per  fpot  drilled  for  every  foot  above  70,  and  3  cts.  for 
every  foot  above  80  per  day,  while  at  the  same  time  paying  them 
their  regular  rate  of  wages. 

Task  Work  With  a  Bonus.— Mr.  H.  L.  Gantt,  one  of  Taylor's 
pupils,  invented  a  system  of  differential  payment  known  as  "Task 
Work  with  a  Bonus,"  which  has  been  very  successful  in  practice 
and  has  great  flexibility  of  application  under  varying  conditions. 
The  workman  under  this  system  is  paid  his  regular  day's  wages 
in  any  event  and  a  certain  lump  bonus  if  he  succeeds  in  accom- 
plishing the  standard  task.  The  amount  of  this  bonus  is  usually 
about  one-third  of  his  regular  wages.  Mr.  Taylor  says  that  this 
system  is  especially  useful  during  the  difficult  and  delicate  period 
of  transition  from  the  slow  pace  of  ordinary  day  work  to  the  high 
speed  which  is  the  leading  characteristic  of  good  management. 
During  this  period  of  transition  in  the  past,  a  time  was  always 
reached  when  a  sudden  leap  was  taken  from  improved  day  work 
to  5bme  form  of  piece  work  ;  and  in  making  this  jump  many  good 


112  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

men  inevitably  fell  and  were  lost  from  the  procession.  Mr.  Gantt's 
system  bridges  over  this  difficult  stretch  and  enables  the  workman 
to  go  smoothly  and  with  gradually  accelerating  speed  from  the 
slower  pace  of  improved  day  work  to.  the  high  speed  of  the  new 
system.  , 

The  Premium  Plan.— This  is  the  term  used  by  Mr.  F.  A.  Halsey 
to  describe  what  Mr.  Taylor  calls  the  Towne-Halsey  system.  It  is 
based  on  the  proposition  of  paying  a  bonus  for  achieving  an  esti- 
mated performance,  the  means  to  be  employed  and  the  methods 
being  left  to  the  ingenuity  and  initiative  of  the  men,  rather  than  to 
the  management. 

Principles  Governing  the  Fixing  of  a  Piece  Rate  or  Bonus. — We 
are  probably  well  within  limits  when  we  say  that  the  average 
workman  engaged  on  construction  work  under  the  wage  system  is 
capable  of  increasing  his  output  70%  if  given  sufficient  incentive 
to  do  so,  and  this  without  the  least  physical  injury  to  himself. 
When  it  is  desired  to  ascertain  how  much  work  men  are  capable 
of  doing,  one  of  the  best  plans  is  to  conduct  a  contest  between  two 
or  more  men,  or  two  or  more  groups  of  men,  a  substantial  prize 
being  offered  for  the  best  performance.  Such  a  contest  should  usu- 
ally extend  over  several  consecutive  days,  so  that  it  will  not  be  a 
mere  sprint,  but  a  fair  endurance  test. 

If  a  competitive  contest  to  disclose  the  workmen's  abilities  is  not 
practicable,  the  authors  assume  that  the  output  probably  can  be 
increased  60  to  70%  over  the  output  under  the  wage  system,  wher- 
ever the  output  depends  mainly  on  the  skill  and  strength  of  the 
workmen.  In  drilling  rock,  for  example,  if  the  average  output  of 
each  drill  is  60  lin.  ft.  under  the  wa.se  system,  then,  in  all  likeli- 
hood, it  can  be  increased  to  nearly  100  ft.  under  a  bonus  system. 
The  driller  who  receives  $3.00  a  day  under  the  wage  system  is  really 
earning  5  cts.  for  each  of  the  60  lin.  ft.  If  it  is  planned  that  he 
shall  increase  his  income  50%,  he  will  receive  $4.50  for  the  as- 
sumed 100  lin.  ft.  of  hole.  Hence  his  piece  rate  would  be  4^  cts. 
a  foot,  or  his  bonus  would  be  $1.50  on  40  lin.  ft.  (60  lin.  ft.  being 
taken  as  the  standard  minimum  performance),  which  is  equivalent 
to  a  bonus  of  3%  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  on  every  foot  in  excess  of  60  ft. 
to  be  added  to  a  daily  wage  of  $3.00.  At  first  sight  it  seems  that 
the  contractor  gains  only  1%  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  the  40  lin.  ft.  on 
which  a  bonus  is  paid,  or  only  %  ct.  per  lin.  ft.  on  the  entire 
100  ft.  The  fact  is  that  the  contractor  gains  much  more,  not  even 
considering  the  wages  of  the  driller's  helper,  for  the  daily  plant 
charges  on  the  drill  remain  almost  constant,  regardless  of  the  out- 
put. If  fuel,  fireman,  interest,  repairs,  depreciation,  foreman,  etc., 
are  $4.00  per  day  per  drill,  these  fixed  charges  amount  to  6.66  cts. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  hole  when  the  output  is  only  60  lin.  ft.  a  day,  as 
compared  with  4  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  when  the  otftput  is  100  ft.,  or  a 
saving  of  2.66  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  Wherever  a  plant  of  any  consider- 
able value  is  used,  it  is  clear  that  it  would  be  profitable  to  double 
the  pay  of  the  workmen  if  they  could  double  the  output  of  the 
plant,  for  the  unit  saving  in  plant  charges  alone  would  amount  to 


COST   KEEPING.  113 

a  handsome  profit.  This  is  upon  the  assumption  that  the  fuel  bill 
remains  practically  unchanged  by  the  increased  output,  and  it  sel- 
dom is  materially  affected  by  increased  output  on  contract  work. 

Benefits  of  the  Bonus  System.*— Strife  develops  the  best  that  is 
in  a  man,  whether  it  be  strength  of  muscle  or  the  power  of  the 
mysterious  marrow  of  the  skull. 

The  evolution  of  all  species  and  genera,  up  to  man  himself,  is 
based  upon  this  law,  yet  there  are  millions  of  misguided  men  who 
are  striving  to  abolish  strife.  They  show  more  pity  for  the  second 
best  in  the  race  than  praise  for  the  first.  They  seem  not  to  see 
that  in  the  industrial  race  even  the  loser  wins,  and  that  there  is  no 
such  thing  as  being  beaten  out  of  "place."  A  part  of  the  purse 
goes  to  everyone  that  enters. 

But  there  are  many  kinds  of  races,  and  many  entries  in  each. 
The  most  popular  race,  judged  by  the  number  of  entries,  is  the  slow 
race.  In  it  you  will  find  men  of  all  classes — clerks,  farmers,  brick 
masons,  draftsmen,  iron  workers,  and,  indeed,  the  great  majority 
of  men  working  for  wages.  The  one  who  can  make  the  job  last 
the  longest  wins.  He  wears  the  blue  ribbon,  and  is  proud  of  him- 
self in  a  sneaking  sort  of  fashion.  But  the  part  of  the  purse  for 
the  winner  in  this  race  is  no  greater  than  for  the  loser.  There  is 
merely  the  blue  ribbon  for  the  prize  winners. 

Entered  in  the  running  race  are  all  men  working  in  competi- 
tive businesses.  Here  are  the  merchants,  manufacturers,  contract- 
ors, etc. 

Then  there  is  the  trotting  race,  not  so  swift  nor  so  trying,  but  a 
contest  well  worth  watching.  Here  is  where  careful  training  counts. 
This  is  the  race  for  men  educated  in  the  profession  of  law,  medi- 
cine, architecture  and  engineering — each  in  his  class. 

What  marks  the  distinction  between  these  three  different  kinds 
of  runners?  Why  does  the  wageworker  go  slow?  Why  is  the  pro- 
fessional man  more  energetic?  Why  is  the  business  man  the  per- 
sonification of  energy?  The  answer  is  found  in  the  relative  freedom 
of  competition,  and  the  relative  size  of  the  prizes  to  be  won. 

The  wageworker  has,  from  time  immemorial,  striven  to  limit  com- 
petition. In  China  and  India  he  has  succeeded  to  perfection.  There 
he  has  developed  a  system  called  "caste,"  which  is  but  a  perfected 
form  of  our  English  and  American  "apprentice  system."  In  India 
a  man  belonging  to  a  certain  "caste"  will  swing  a  wet  blanket  over 
you  all  night  to  keep  you  cool ;  but  no  amount  of  money  would 
tempt  him  to  black  your  shoes  or  go  to  the  postofflce  for  your  mail. 
He  does  not  belong  to  the  "caste"  that  does  those  things.  Hence 
you  must  hire  ten  or  a  dozen  servants  if  you  expect  to  be  served 
in  all  your  wants.  "It  makes  work,"  don't  you  see?  It  has  the 
slow  runner  beaten  to  a  standstill. 

How  can  wae:eworkers  be  rescued  from  their  own  follies,  not 
merely  in  India,  but  in  America?  How  can  they  be  induced  to 
enter  races  for  the  swift,  where  the  swiftest  wins  most,  but  all  win 
more?  There  is  but  one,  just  one,  way  to  bring  this  end  about,  and 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  6.  1907. 


114  HANDBOOK    OF    COST   DATA. 

that  is  to  extend  the  contract  system  to  individuals  and  to  groups  of 
individuals.  When  men  are  paid  directly  in  proportion  to  what  they 
do,  then  they  DO. 

This  is  the  true  secret  of  the  economy  of  performing  public  work 
by  contract  instead  of  by  day  labor.  And  it  can  be  carried  a  step 
farther.  The  contractor  can  make  his  men  sub-contractors,  if  he 
will  exercise  a  little  ingenuity  and  patience  in  working  out  a  plan 
for  paying  them  by  the  piece. 

There  are  many  men  who  are  not  gifted  with  the  ability  to  man- 
age workmen  where  the  plain  wage  system  is  in  use,  but  who  would 
succeed  admirably  in  getting  a  big  output  from  men  under  a  bonus 
or  a  "piece-work"  system.  It  can  be  done  not  only  in  the  field  and 
factory,  but  in  the  office,  not  only  where  laborers  are  hired,  but 
where  engineers  are  hired.  It  is  being  done  with  great  success  in 
surveying  and  drafting — two  classes  of  work  where  the  difficulties 
of  applying  a  bonus  or  contract  system  are  very  great. 

When  you  are  told  that  the  bonus  system  cannot  be  applied  to 
some  particular  class  of  work,  because  of  its  unusual  nature,  place 
little  reliance  in  the  dictum  but  put  your  brains  at  work.  Let  others 
enter  the  race  ridden  by  the  jockey  Impossible,  if  they  will,  but  that 
jockey  never  bestrode  a  winner  since  time  began. 

Time  Cards  and  Time  Books. — Through  any  stationery  store  time 
books  can  be  bought  that  are  ruled  and  lettered  to  suit  most  classes 
of  contract  work.  The  timekeeper  enters  the  name  of  each  man 
and  assigns  him  a  number  in  the  book.  On  large  jobs  it  is  wise  also 
to  provide  a  brass  check  that  can  be  pinned  to  the  clothing  of  each 
workman,  so  that  his  number  is  visible  at  a  glance.  The  home 
addresses  of  common  laborers  are  seldom  entered  in  the  time 
books,  but  it  is  desirable  always  to  record  home  addresses  of  all 
men,  and  particularly  the  permanent  addresses  of  skilled  workmen 
and  foremen.  A  few  postal  cards  will  thus  enable  one  quickly  to 
gather  together  a  gang  of  skilled  men  for  a  new  job.  It  is  wise 
also  to  have  a  directory  book  for  entering  the  names  of  good  fore- 
men, whether  they  be  men  that  you  have  employed  or  not ;  and  a 
few  brief  remarks  concerning  each  man's  fitness  for  particular 
classes  of  work  shold  be  entered.  This  assists  also  in  identifying 
men  whose  names  have  slipped  the  memory. 

Time  books  are  very  often  ruled  so  that  the  job  the  men  are 
working  on  cannot  be  entered  opposite  each  man's  name.  It  is  nec- 
essary then  to  reserve  separate  pages  for  each  job.  Then  if  a  man 
does  several  different  kinds  of  work  on  one  job.  as  many  different 
lines  are  reserved  under  his  name  so  that  the  hours  and  fractions 
spent  by  him  on  each  kind  of  work  can  be  recorded.  In  that  case 
the  foreman  is  provided  with  a  time  book  from  which  the  time- 
keeper makes  abstracts  when  he  goes  the  rounds. 

In  order  to  avoid  disputes  on  pay  day,  I  devised  the  form  of 
card  shown  in  Fig.  12.  Each  workman  is  provided  with  one  of 
these  cards  which  he  keeps  until  pay  day.  This  card  was  devised 
for  work  on  which  pay  day  came  every  second  week.  The  rate  of 
wages  is  punched  with  a  conductor's  punch,  likewise  the  number 
of  hours  and  the  nearest  half  hour  of  each  day.  The  timekeeper  or 


COST   KEEPING. 


115 


foreman  punches  every  man's  card  at  the  end  of  the  day,  and  at 
the  same  time  enters  the  number  of  the  man  and  his  hours  in  the 
time  book.  If  any  dispute  arises  as  to  the  number  of  hours  worked 


•»«S 

* 

- 

CS 

CO 

•* 

U5 

O 

c- 

i 

C5 

0 
r-( 

•WZ 

as 

rt 

SS 

so 

•* 

U5 

0 

I- 

00 

05 

0 

•anm 

:* 

* 

C^ 

CO 

•* 

to 

0 

t- 

CO 

05 

0 
r-l 

I 

•pQAi 

x 

r 

cq 

CO 

•tf 

10 

CD 

t- 

X 

05 

0 

rH 

1   8 

I 

•B9UX 

* 

i-t 

d 

CO 

•^ 

tc 

O 

t- 

00 

05 

O 
rH 

!      § 

a 
w 

j! 

•noH 

* 

r-l 

w 

CO 

•# 

10 

CD 

c- 

00 

05 

0 
rH 

*    1 

a             R 

J 

•mis 

wt 

pH 

M 

CO 

Tf 

10 

CO 

t- 

CO 

05 

0 
rH 

§          8 

3                 O 

"3 

RGED. 

1 

a 

If 

r- 

• 

^ 

4 

U 

V 

I 

I 

A 
fj 

g 

1 

I 

i 

c 

? 

1 

I 

i 

> 

2 

0 

d 
• 

Jt 
\ 

I 

1 

c 

r- 

> 

| 

i 
b 
• 

S! 
j 

0 

P 

a 

H 

i 

s 

X 

t- 

I 

I 

j 

§ 

2 

3 

| 

» 

Q 

r 

3 
H 

3 

•»*s 

^ 

— 

d 

m 

•* 

10 

0 

t- 

X 

05 

0 
rH 

3 

•WI 

a? 

H 

(N 

CO 

T}« 

VO 

co 

t- 

00 

05 

O 
rH 

! 

•onqx 

x 

rH 

W 

CO 

«* 

w 

CD 

t- 

00 

05 

0 
rH 

3           | 

*P9^ 

Js 

T-( 

0 

CO 

•* 

10 

CD 

t- 

00 

05 

O 
rH 

8 

60 

•eonx 

S(? 

rH 

M 

CO 

•* 

kO 

CD 

t- 

00 

05 

0 

rH 

ri 

1 

•now 

a? 

H 

M 

« 

•* 

IO 

CO 

t- 

00 

05 

O 
rH 

fc 

I 

•ung 

x 

rH 

C? 

CO 

•* 

10 

CD 

t- 

00 

05 

2 

the  dispute  must  be  settled  then  and  there,  for  on  pay  day  no 
claims  for  extra  time  will  be  listened  to.  This  does  away  entirely 
with  pay  day  disputes,  which  is  a  very  satisfactory  feature.  The 


116  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

card  also  serves  to  check  the  timekeeper's  records.  Moreover,  it 
makes  "padding"  of  payrolls  more  difficult,  and  facilitates  detective 
work  if  "padding"  is  suspected.  The  card  also  serves  as  a  dis- 
charge slip  ;  for,  when  a  man  is  discharged,  the  foreman  punches 
the  hours  that  he  has  worked  and  he  also  punches  a  hole  through 
the  word  "discharged."  When  the  man  presents  the  card  at  the 
office  he  is  paid;  the  card  is  kept  as  a  voucher,  and  a  hole  is 
punched  through  the  word  "paid." 

Recording  Work  by  Minute  Hand  Observations. — It  has  often 
been  said  that  short  time  observations  prove  nothing  as  to  the 
efficiency  of  men  or  machines.  This  statement  has  been  exceedingly 
misleading  to  those  who  have  accepted  it  as  a  self-evident  truth. 
When  a  short  time  observation  does  not  include  the  common  delays 
incident  to  shifting  tools,  to  breakdowns,  and  the  like,  it  may  lead 
to  a  serious  underestimate  of  the  cost  of  work.  On  the  other  hand, 
when  the  so-called  short  time  observation  is  made  long  enough 
to  include  the  time  spent  in  necessary  rests,  in  moving  machines, 
in  repairs  to  plant,  and  the  like,  exceedingly  valuable  results  may 
be  obtained.  When  it  is  desired  to  find  whether  men  are  lazy, 
whether  a  foreman  knows  his  business,  whether  the  method  of  doing 
the  work  can  be  bettered,  or  whether  the  tool  or  machine  is  sus- 
ceptible of  improvement,  there  is  no  method  to  be  compared  with 
the  method  of  timing  work  with  the  minute  hand  of  a  watch.  More- 
over, where  it  is  desired  to  discover  the  effect  on  cost  of  varying 
the  length  of  haul,  of  varying  the  kind  of  rock  drilled,  and  the  like, 
timing  with  the  minute  hand  is  the  only  satisfactory  way  of  arriv- 
ing at  definite  conclusions. 

If  a  stop-watch  is  not  available,  an  ordinary  watch  with  a 
second  hand  will  serve,  and  in  many  classes  of  work  even  the 
second  hand  can  be  dispensed  with.  An  example  will  now  be  given 
to  illustrate  the  method  and  value  of  a  short  time  observation. 

Before  beginning  the  record,  set  the  minute  hand  so  that  it  points 
an  even  minute  when  the  second  hand  points  at  60.  Suppose  it  is 
desired  to  time  the  drilling  of  a  hole  in  a  seamy  mica-schist,  using 
a  steam  drill  mounted  on  a  tripod.  At  9:37  a.  m.  the  driller  is 
set  up  and  ready  to  begin  drilling  a  hole  and  exactly  30  seconds 
later  he  turns  on  the  steam  ;  then  we  begin  our  record : 

9  :37  :30     Start. 

9  :49  :20     Down. 

9  :51 :20  Start. 
10:00:40  Down. 
10:03:40  Start. 
10  :09  :40  Down. 
10:13:00  Start. 
10:14:40  Bit  sticks. 

10:24:40  After  hammering  the  drill  repeatedly,  the  driller  is  di- 
rected to.  break  up  some  cast  iron  and  throw  it  into  the 
drill  hole. 

10  : 32  : 30     Drilling  begins*  again. 
10  :45  :00     Hole  finished. 
11 :15  :10     New  hole  started. 


COST  KEEPING.  117 

It  will  be  seen  that  drilling  started  at  9:37:30,  and  that  at 
9  :49  :20  the  full  length  of  the  feed  screw  was  out,  and  that  to  drill 
farther  a  new  bit  had  to  be  inserted.  At  9:51:20  the  new  bit  was 
in  and  drilling  began  again,  after  a  delay  of  2  mins.  in  changing 
bits.  At  10:00:40  the  second  bit  was  down.  Each  successive  bit,  it 
should  be  stated,  is  usually  2  ft.  longer  than  its  predecessor.  At 
10:14:40  the  bit  sticks  in  the  hole  due  to  having  run  into  a  pocket 
of  rotten  rock.  The  observer  might  readily  have  predicted  this 
sticking  by  noting  the  increased  rapidity  of  penetration  ;  for  it  took 
nearly  12  mins.  to  drill  the  first  2  ft.  of  the  hole,  and  only  6  mins. 
to  drill  the  2  ft.  just  prior  to  the  sticking.  After  wasting  10  mins. 
abusing  the  drill  the  driller  finally  removed  the  bit  (at  the  direc- 
tion of  the  observer),  broke  up  a  piece  of  cast-iron  pipe  into  hazel 
nut  sizes,  and  threw  two  handfuls  of  the  iron  into  the  bottom  of  the 
hole.  Drilling  was  resumed  at  10  :32  :30,  and  the  last  2  ft.  were 
completed  at  10:45:00.  At  11:15:10  the  driller  started  another 
hole,  having  spent  more  than  30  mins.  shifting  the  tripod  and  drill. 

What  do  we  learn  from  this  observation?  First  that  the  driller 
was  slow  in  changing  bits ;  second,  that  he  was  very  slow  in  shift- 
ing his  tripod  ;  third,  that  the  driller  was  ignorant ;  fourth,  that  the 
foreman  was  equally  so ;  fifth,  that  fragments  of  cast  iron  com- 
pletely overcome  sticking  of  bits  in  this  rock. 

We  know  that  the  driller  was  slow,  because  other  similar  obser- 
vations have  proved  it  possible  to  change  short  bits  in  much  less 
time  than  3  mins.,  and,  since  the  driller  has  an  easy  time  of  it 
while  turning  the  crank,  he  can  work  rapidly  without  exhausting 
himself  when  it  comes  to  changing  bits  or  shifting  the  machine. 
We  know  that  both  driller  and  foreman  were  ignorant,  for  broken 
Iron  should  have  been  provided  ready  to  use  in  case  of  sticking  of 
the  bit.  We  conclude  that  it  will  pay  to  assign  a  man  to  measure 
up  the  footage  of  hole  drilled  by  each  driller  every  day,  and  to  offer 
each  driller  a  bonus  for  every  foot  of  hole  drilled  in  excess  of  a 
stipulated  minimum. 

The  foregoing  is  a  record  of  fact  and  not  of  theory.  On  a  large 
contract  job  I  secured  an  increase  of  45%  in  the  daily  footage  of 
each  drill  by  taking  just  such  observations  as  the  above. 

I  have  found  it  of  great  advantage  to  time  in  detail  the  work  oi 
cableways,  derricks,  steam  shovels,  concrete  mixers,  dinkey  locomo- 
tives, pile  drivers  and  other  machines  used  on  contract  work.  Even 
the  output  of  men  working  with  hand  tools  can  be  profitably  studied 
in  the  same  way.  The  number  of  shovelfuls  of  earth  may  be  timed 
under  different  conditions,  with  a  view  to  ascertaining  the  effect  of 
changed  conditions,  and  the  effect  of  using  larger  shovels.  How- 
ever, the  greatest  gains  from  minute-hand  timing  occur  when  it  is 
applied  to  machines  operated  by  power  rather  than  to  hand  work. 

It  is  desirable  in  nearly  all  cases  not  to  let  the  workmen  know 
that  they  are  being  timed.  When  men  are  working  in  the  open  air, 
an  observer  can  often  use  the  telescope  of  a  transit  or  a  pair  of 
neld  glasses  to  good  advantage,  u  shop  work,  or  underground, 
where  the  observer  mv&t.  be  near  tne  men,  a  convenient  way  of 
timing  any  detail  of  wovk  is  by  counting.  One  can  soon  learn  to 


118  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

count  with  regularity,  and  thus  dispense  with  a  second  or  minute 
hand.  Other  methods  of  ascertaining  the  time  of  doing  work  with- 
out being  observed  will  occur  to  anyone  who  gives  thought  to  the 
matter. 


SECTION   II. 
EARTH    EXCAVATION. 

Magnitude  of  the  Subject. — Probably  no  kind  of  engineering  work 
involves  as  many  varying  factors  as  earth  excavation.  Not  only  is 
there  a  wide  range  of  classes  of  earths  but  the  tools  for  excavation 
are  almost  as  varied  as  the  conditions  encountered.  Taken  as  a 
whole,  accurate  estimating  of  the  cost  of  earthwork  is  probably 
more  difficult  than  estimating  the  cost  of  any  other  item  of  con- 
struction discussed  in  this  book.  Having  already  written  one  book 
on  earthwork,  and  having  another  and  much  larger  treatise  in 
preparation,  I  shall  give  in  this  section  only  the  very  briefest  sum- 
mary of  some  of  the  commoner  methods  of  earth  excavation  and 
cost. 

In  other  sections  of  this  book  will  be  found  supplementary  data 
on  earthwork,  for  which  consult  the  -index  under  "Excavation, 
Earth." 

Earth  Measurement. — Earthwork  is  paid  for  by  the  cubic  yard, 
and  is  usually  measured  "in  place,"  that  is,  in  the  natural  bank 
or  pit  before  it  has  been  loosened.  The  price  paid  usually  includes 
the  excavating,  hauling  and  placing  the  earth  in  the  embankment, 
and  no  extra  price  is  paid  for  making  the  embankment — in  other 
words,  the  earth  is  paid  for  but  once.  Occasionally,  in  dike  work, 
in  building  reservoir  embankments,  and  wherever  it  is  very  difficult 
to  measure  the  earth  in  place,  it  is  specified  that  the  earth  shall  be 
measured  in  the  consolidated  embankment.  However,  unless  other- 
wise stated,  all  costs  given  in  this  book  refer  to  measurements  of 
earth  in  place. 

Many  specifications  for  railroad  work  contain  an  "overhaul 
clause,"  which  provides  that  for  all  earth  hauled  more  than  a  cer- 
tain specified  limit,  the  contractor  shall  be  paid  a  certain  amount 
per  cubic  yard,  usually  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft.  overhaul.  The 
specified  limit  of  "free  haul"  is  sometimes  1,000  ft.,  sometimes  500 
ft.  Even  in  case  of  an  overhaul,  no  additional  payment  is  made 
for  building  the  embankment,  but  only  for  the  overhaul. 

Earth  Shrinkage.— Earth  when  first  loosened  and  shoveled  into  a 
wagon  swells,  that  is,  it  occupies  more  space  than  it  did  "in  place"  ; 
but,  when  placed  in  an  embankment  and  rolled  or  pounded  down, 
it  shrinks,  and  this  shrinkage  is  often  so  great  that  the  earth  occu- 
pies less  space  in  the  embankment  than  it  did  "in  place."  The  fol- 
lowing is  a  summary,  based  upon  data  of  actual  tests  given  in  my 
book  on  earthwork: 

1.  Taking  extreme  cases,  earth  swells  when  first  loosened  with 

119 


120  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

a  shovel,  so  that  after  loosening  it  occupies  1  1/7  to  1%  times  as 
much  space  as  it  did  before  loosening ;  in  other  words,  loose  earth 
is  14%  to  50%  more  bulky  than  natural  bank  earth. 

2.  As  an  average,  we  may  say  that  clean  sand  and  gravel  swell 
1/7,  or  14%  to  15% ;    loam,  loamy  sand  or  gravel  swell  1/5,  or  20% ; 
dense  clay,  and  dense  mixtures  of  gravel  and  clay,  %  to  %,  or  33% 
to   50%,   ordinarily  about   35% ;    while  unusually   dense  gravel   and 
clay  banks  swell  50%. 

3.  Loose  earth  is  compacted  by  several  means ;   (a)  the  puddling 
action  of  water,    (b)    the  pounding  of  hoofs  and  wheels,    (c)    the 
jarring  and  compressive  action  of  rolling  artificially. 

4.  If   the   puddling  action   of  rains  is  the   only   factor,   a  loose 
mass  of  earth  will  shrink  slowly  back  to  its  original  volume,  but 
an  embankment  of  loose  earth  will  at  the  end  of  a  year  be  still 
about  1/12,  or  8%,  greater  than  the  cut  it  came  from. 

5.  If  the   embankment  is  made  with   small   one-horse  carts,   or 
wheel   scrapers,  at  the  end  of  the  work  it  will   occupy   5   to   10% 
less  space  than  the  cut  from  which  the  earth  was  taken,  and  in  sub- 
sequent years  will  shrink  about  2%   more,  often  less  than  2%. 

6.  If  the  embankment  is  made  with  wagons  or  dump  cars,  and 
made  rapidly  in   dry  weather  without  water,   it  will   shrink  about 
3c/o  to  10%   in  the  year  following  the  completion  of  the  work,  and 
very    little    in   subsequent  'years. 

7.  The  height  of  the  embankment  appears  to  have  little  effect 
on   its  subsequent   shrinkage. 

8.  By  the  proper  mixing  of  clay  or  loam  and  gravel,  followed 
by  sprinkling  and  rolling  in  thin  layers,  a  bank  can  be  made  weigh- 
ing 1%  times  as  much  as  loose  earth,  or  133  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft. 

9.  The  bottoms  of  certain  rivers,  banks  of  cemented  gravel,  and 
hardpan,   are   more   than   ordinarily    dense,    and  will   occupy   more 
space  in  the  fill  than  in  the  cut  unless  rolled. 

Kinds  of  Earth. — Earth  may  be  divided  into  three  classes  as  re- 
gards difficulty  of  excavation:  (1)  Easy  earth;  (2)  average  earth; 
and  (3)  tough  earth.  To  the  first  class  belong  loam,  sand,  and 
ordinary  gravel,  which  require  little  or  no  picking  to  loosen  ready 
for  shoveling.  To  the  second  class  belong  sands  and  gravels  im- 
pregnated with  an  amount  of  clay  or  loam  that  binds  the  particles 
together,  making  it  necessary  to  use  a  pick  or  a  plow  drawn  by  two 
horses  to  loosen  the  earth  before  shoveling.  To  the  third  class  be- 
long the  compact  clays,  the  hardened  crusts  of  old  roads,  and  all 
earths  so  hard  that  one  team  of  horses  can  pull  a  plow  through 
the  earth  only  with  greatest  difficulty,  but  that  two  teams  of  horses 
on  one  plow  can  loosen  with  comparative  ease. 

This  third  class  of  earth  passes  by  insensible  degrees  into  what 
Is  called  "hardpan."  Hardpan  commonly  means  a  very  compact 
clay,  or  mixture  of  gravel  or  boulders  with  clay.  Soft  shales  that 
can  be  plowed  with  a  rooter  plow  are  sometimes  called  hardpan. 
There  are  also  certain  gravels  cemented  with  an  iron  oxide  (iron 
rust)  which  are  called  hardpan. 

There  are  many  local  names  applied  to  different  kinds  of  earth. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  121 

"Adobe"  is  a  name  much  used  in  Texas,  Arizona,  California  and 
and  neighboring  states  to  denote  any  clay  of  which  mud  bricks, 
or  adobes,  might  be  made.  "Gumbo"  is  a  word  used  in  the  Mis- 
sissippi Valley  to  denote  a  black  loam  containing  so  much  clay  as  to 
be  exceedingly  sticky  when  wet.  "Marl"  is,  strictly  speaking,  a  mix- 
ture of  clay  and  pulverized  limestone,  but  the  term  is  often  applied 
to  clay  soils  containing  only  1%  to  2%  of  limestone  dust,  as,  for  ex- 
ample, the  greensand  marls  of  New  Jersey.  There  are  many  local 
deposits  of  disintegrated  minerals,  which,  when  soapy  in  texture, 
are  often  called  marl.  In  some  cases  these  deposits  are  so  greasy 
that,  when  saturated  with  water,  slides  and  cave-ins  occur  when  an 
attempt  is  made  to  excavate  them. 

Quicksand  is  a  term  applied  to  any  sand,  or  sandy  material, 
which  flows  like  molasses  when  the  sand  is  saturated  with  water. 

In  this  book  the  rules  for  estimating  costs,  unless  otherwise 
stated,  relate  to  "average  earth,"  as  above  defined. 

Definitions  of  Haul  and  Lead. — "Lead"  is  a  term  used  to  denote 
the  horizontal  distance  in  a  straight  line  from  the  center  of  mass 
of  the  pit  to  the  center  of  mass  of  the  dump.  The  pit,  in  this  case, 
refers  to  the  volume  of  earth  to  be  excavated,  and  the  dump  refers 
to  the  embankment.  The  "lead"  does  not  include  the  distance  actu- 
ally traveled,  including  turnouts,  etc.,  from  pit  to  dump  ;  this  actual 
distance  traveled  by  the  cars  or  wagons  is  called  the  "haul."  The 
"haul"  is  then  half  the  distance  traveled  by  a  car  or  wagon  in 
making  a  round  trip. 

Work  of  Teams. — A  "team,"  as  used  in  this  book,  means  a  pair 
of  horses  and  their  driver.  Even  where  the  word  driver  is  omitted 
in  speaking  of  the  cost  of  team  work,  the  wages  of  the  driver  are 
always  included  under  the  word  "team." 

A  good  average  team  is  capable  of  traveling  20  miles  in  10  hrs., 
going  10  miles  loaded  and  returning  10  miles  empty,  over  fairly 
hard  earth  roads.  If  the  team  is  traveling  constantly  over  soft 
ground,  15  miles  is  a  good  day's  work.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the 
team  is  traveling  over  good  gravel  or  macadam  roads,  or  paved 
streets,  it  is  possible  to  average  25  miles  per  10-hr,  day.  These 
rates  include  the  occasional  stops  made  for  rests,  etc.,  and  include 
the  climbing  of  an  occasional  hill. 

When  traveling  at  the  rate  of  2%  miles  an  hour,  which  is  the  or- 
dinary walking  gait  of  horses,  the  distance  covered  in  1  min.  is  220 
ft.  Over  good  hard  roads  a  team  may  trot  with  an  empty  wagon 
at  the  rate  of  5  miles  per  hr.,  and  thus  make  up  for  delays  in  load- 
ing and  unloading,  so  as  to  cover  the  full  20  miles  of  daily  work; 
but  over  soft  ground  a  team  should  not  trot. 

The  loads  that  a  team  can  haul  (in  addition  to  the  weight  of 
the  wagon)  over  different  kinds  of  roads  are  as  follows: 

Earth, 
Short  tons.       cu.  yds. 

Very  poor  earth  road 1.0  0.8 

Poor   earth    road 1.25  1.0 

Good  hard  earth  road 2.0  1.6 

Good    clean    macadam    road 3.0  2.4 

It  is  not  possible  to  haul  much  greater  loads  over  an  asphalt  or 


122  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

brick  pavement  than  over  a  first-class,  clean  macadam.  On  all 
the  kinds  of  roads  to  which  the  above  averages  apply,  there  may  be 
occasional  steep  grades  to  ascend,  and  occasional  bad  spots  to  pass 
over. 

The  pulling  power  of  a  horse  averages  about  one-tenth  of  his 
weight  when  exerted  steadily  for  10  hrs.  ;  that  is,  a  1,200-lb.  horse 
will  exert  an  average  pull  of  120  Ibs.  on  the  traces.  But  for  a  short 
space  of  time  the  horse  can  exert  a  pull  (if  he  has  a  good  foot- 
hold) equal  to  about  four- tenths  his  weight,  that  is,  four  times 
his  average  all-day  pull.  This  I  have  tested  with  teams,  not  only 
in  ascending  steep  grades  but  in  lifting  the  hammer  of  a  horse- 
operated  pile  driver. 

Where  teams  are  traveling  long  distances,  it  is  customary  to  have 
two  wagons  keep  together,  so  that  one  team  can  help  the  other  up 
a  steep  hill  by  acting  as  a  "snatch  team."  A  "snatch  team,"  or 
helping  team,  may  often  be  kept  busy  to  advantage  in  pulling  heav- 
ily loaded  teams  out  of  a  pit,  or  onto  a  soft  embankment,  or  up  a 
steep  grade.  Three-horse  snatch  teams  are  frequently  used.  A 
small  hoisting  engine  may  replace  a  snatch  team  to  advantage  in 
many  places.  By  laying  channel  irons  for  rails  up  a  steep  hill, 
and  having  a  hoisting  engine  at  the  top,  very  heavy  loads  can  be 
assisted  over  bad  roads.  In  this  case,  a  boy  mounted  on  a  pony  can 
drag  the  hoisting  rope  back  to  the  foot  of  the  hill  ready  for  the  next 
team.  Plank  roads  can  often  be  built  to  advantage  for  short  dis- 
tances up  steep  grades,  or  over  bad  spots. 

In  the  far  West  it  is  customary  for  three  or  more  teams  to  be 
hitched  to  a  train  of  two  or  more  wagons ;  and,  when  a  steep  hill 
is  to  be  ascended,  to  haul  one  wagon  up  at  a  time.  This  saves 
wages  of  drivers. 

In  the  last  section  of  this  book,  Miscellaneous  Costs,  will  be  found 
further  suggestions  on  hauling  with  teams,  also  costs  of  feeding 
and  maintaining  teams.  Consult  the  index  under  Hauling,  Teams. 

Cost  of  Plowing. — A  team  on  a  plow  will  loosen  500  cu.  yds.  of 
loam,  or  350  cu.  yds.  of  loamy  gravel,  or  250  cu.  yds.  of  fairly 
tough  clay,  per  10-hr,  day.  For  "average  earth,"  therefore  assume 
350  cu.  yds.  per  day  loosened  by  a  team  and  driver  and  one  man 
holding  plow.  With  wages  at  $3.50  for  team  and  driver,  and 
$1.50  for  laborer,  the  cost  of  plowing  average  earth  is  1%  cts.  per 
cu.  yd. 

In  plowing  very  tough  material  with  a  pick-pointed  plow,  four 
horses  and  three  men,  estimate  180  cu.  yds.  plowed  per  day  at  a 
cost  of  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

For  tough  material  there  has  recently  been  developed  a  "gang 
plow"  of  remarkable  efficiency.  It  consists  of  a  framework  mount- 
ed on  four  small  wheels,  and  equipped  with  five  rooters  or  plows. 
These  plows  can  be  quickly  set,  by  means  of  levers,  to  plow  or  cut 
to  any  desired  depth.  From  6  to  12  horses,  or  a  traction  engine, 
pull  the  gang  plow,  and  it  cuts  five  furrows  at  once.  This  gang 
plow  is  made  by  the  Petrolithic  Pavement  Co.,  Los  Angeles.  Calif. 

Cost  of  Picking  and  Shoveling. — When  wages  are  $1.50  per  .10-hr. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  123 

day,  the  cost  of  loosening  earth  with  a  pick  (instead  of  a  plow) 
ranges  from  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  for  very  easy  earth,  to  11  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  for  very  stiff  clay  or  cemented  gravel ;  for  "average  earth"  the 
cost  of  picking  is  about  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  of  loosening  with  a  pick  and  shoveling  into  wagons  is 
as  follows,  wages  being  15  cts.  per  hr. : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Easy  earth,  light  sand  or  loam 12  cts. 

Average   earth    15  cts. 

Tough   clay 20  cts. 

Hardpan    40  cts. 

The  amount  of  earth  that  a  man  can  load  with  a  shovel  varies 
with  the  character  of  the  earth,  the  way  it  has  been  loosened,  the 
size  and  shape  of  the  shovel,  etc.  If  a  man  is  shoveling  earth  from 
the  face  of  a  cut  that  has  been  undermined  and  broken  down  with 
picks,  he  can  readily  load  18  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day,  after  the  earth 
has  been  loosened.  If  he  is  shoveling  plowed  earth,  where  he  must 
use  more  force  in  driving  the  shovel  into  the  soil,  he  will  easily  load 
14  cu.  yds.  of  average  earth  in  10  hrs.  If  he  is  shoveling  loose 
earth  off  boards  upon  which  it  has  been  dumped,  he  can  load  25 
.cu.  yds.  in  10  hrs.,  but  it  is  not  wise  to  count  on  more  than  20 
cu.  yds.  even  under  good  foremanship. 

For  data  on  the  cost  of  trenching,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the 
sections  on  Sewers  and  on  Water-works.  Consult  the  index  under 
"Excavating,  Trenches." 

Cost  of  Trimming,  Rolling,  Etc. — After  earth  has  been  dumped 
from  carts  or  wagons,  a  man  will  spread  in  6-in.  layers  by  hand  75 
cu.  yds.  in  10  hrs.,  at  a  cost  of  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  A  leveling  scraper, 
or  road  machine,  will  spread  large  quantities  of  earth  for  %  ct.  to 
%  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  With  a  leveling  scraper  operated  by  a  team  and 
driver  and  a  helper,  I  have  had  500  cu.  yds.  spread  per  day.  A 
road  machine,  operated  by  6  horses  and  2  men,  will  spread  900  cu. 
yds.  in  10  hrs.  in  6-in.  layers,  earth  having  been  dumped  from 
patent  dump-wagons. 

A  man  can  thoroughly  tamp  25  cu.  yds.,  in  6-in.  layers,  per  10- 
hr,  day  at  6  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Embankments  can  be  consolidated  with 
horse-drawn  rollers  for  %  to  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages  of  a  team 
being  $o.50  a  day.  I  have  one  record  of  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  (at  the 
above  wages),  for  rolling  a  reservoir  embankment,  but  the  work 
was  not  well  handled. 

The  cost  of  sprinkling  embankments,  if  specified,  is  difficult  to 
estimate  because  of  the  vagueness  of  specifications.  However,  more 
than  8  cu.  ft.  of  water  per  cu.  yd.  of  earth,  is  seldom  required. 

On  a  large  embankment  three  sprinkling  carts,  each  drawn  by 
!  three  teams,  with  one  driver,  sprinkled  1,000  cu.  yds.  of  earth  per 
i  day  of  10  hrs.,  with  short  haul.  Such  carts  each  held  150  cu.  ft. 
j  of  water  weighing  4^  tons,  which  is  an  exceedingly  large  capacity. 
j  A  sprinkler  of  this  size  can  be  loaded  from  a  tank  in  15  mins.,  and 
i  emptied  in  the  same  length  of  time.  Knowing  the  length  of  haul 
I  anu  speed  of  team  the  cost  of  sprinkling  is  readily  determined.  In 


124  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

the  case  just  given  the  cost  was  2*4   cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  earth  foi 
sprinkling  and  about  5  cu.  ft.  of  water  per  cu.  yd.  were  used. 

From  several  careful  observations  the  writer  has  found  that  a 
gang  of  men  under  a  good  foreman  will  each  trim  the  sod  and 
humps  off  the  hard  surface  of  a  cut  to  the  depth  of  1  or  1%  ins. 
at  the  rate  of  200  sq.  ft.  or  22  sq.  yds.  per  hour,  at  a  cost  of  2/5  ct. 
per  sq.  yd. ;  and  where  there  was  no  sod  to  remove,  the  soil  being 
sandy  loam,  the  cost  was  one-half  as  much  or  %  ct.  per  sq.  yd. 
Massachusetts  contractors  bid  almost  uniformly  2y2  cts.  a  sq.  yd. 
for  "surfacing"  (wages  17  cts.  per  hour),  which  includes  rolling 
the  finished  surface  with  steam  roller. 

A  roadway,  including  ditches,  36  ft.  wide  and  a  mile  long,  has 
21,000  sq.  yds.  of  surface,  which  at  %  ct.  is  $140,  actual  cost  o* 
trimming.  If  the  total  excavation  in  a  mile  is  3,500  cu.  yds- 
(which  is  about  the  average  in  N.  Y.  State),  the  cost  of  trimming, 
distributed  over  this  3,500  cu.  yds.,  is  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  excava- 
tion, a  cost  much  greater  than  a  mere  guess  would  lead  one  to  sup- 
pose. 

I  have  directed  the  scraping  of  a  light  growth  of  weeds  and  grass 
off  the  4-ft.  shoulder  of  a  road  by  going  once  over  it  with  a  leveling 
scraper,  at  a  rate  of  200  sq.  yds.  per  hour,  or  ten  times  faster  than 
a  man  with  a  mattock  would  have  done  it ;  making  the  actual  cost 
about  %  ct.  per  sq.  yd.  where  the  team,  driver  and  helpers'  wages 
were  50  cts.  per  hour. 

Cost  of  Wheelbarrow  Work. — A  man  wheeling  a  barrow  over  run- 
plank  can  not  be  counted  on  to  travel  more  than  15  miles  per  10- 
hr,  day.  If  the  runway  is  level  a  load  of  300  Ibs.  or  more  may 
be  wheeled  in  a  barrow,  but  it  is  not  safe  to  count  upon  more 
than  250  Ibs.,  or  1/10  cu.  yd.  of  earth.  This  is  for  good  level  run- 
ways, but,  as  most  wheelbarrow  work  involves  ascending  steep 
grades,  estimate  1/14  to  1/15  cu.  yd.  per  barrow  load.  With  wages 
at  15  cts.  per  hr.,  the  cost  of  wheeling  earth  in  barrows  is,  there- 
fore, 5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  per  100  ft.  of  haul,  the  haul  being  the  dis- 
tance from  pit  to  dump.  If  the  runways  were  level,  and  the  men 
worked  hard,  the  cost  might  be  reduced  to  3  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100 
ft.  of  haul. 

The  cost  of  picking  and  loading  has  already  been  given,  and 
may  be  assumed  to  be  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  A  wheelbarrow  is 
dumped  in  about  %  min.,  which  is  equivalent  to  a  loss  of  nearly  4 
mins.  per  cu.  yd.,  where  15  barrow  loads  make  a  yard ;  and  this 
is  equivalent  to  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  for  dumping  the  barrows.  The 
time  lost  in  changing  barrows,  etc.,  may  easily  add  another  1  ct. 
per  cu.  yd.  The  rule  for  estimating  the  cost  of  loosening,  loading 
and  hauling  average  earth  in  barrows  is  as  follows  when  wages 
are  15  cts.  per  hr. : 

Rule  I. — To  a  fixed  cost  of  17  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  add  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
per  100  ft.  haul,  when  steep  ascents  must  be  made,  or  3%  cts. 
per  100  ft.  when  level. 

Cost  by  One- Horse  Carts.— Small  two-wheeled  carts  drawn  by 
one  horse  are  often  used  on  railway  work.  If  the  haul  is  level  or 
slightly  down  hill  and  over  a  well  compacted  embankment,  a  horse 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  125 

Will  pull  0.6  cu.  yd.  per  load;  but  over  poor  earth  roads  it  is  not 
safe  to  count  upon  more  than  0.4  cu.  yd.  per  load,  if  there  are  any 
steep  grades  to  ascend.  On  short  hauls  of  300  ft.  or  less,  one 
driver  can  tend  to  two  carts  by  leading  one  to  the  dump  while  the 
other  is  being  loaded.  A  gang  of  4  or  5  men  should  load  a  cart  with 
0.4  cu.  yd.  in  3  mins.,  and  it  takes  about  1  min.  to  dump  a  cart,  so 
that  4  mins.  of  cart  time  are  "lost"  every  round  trip.  If  the  wages 
of  a  horse  are  $1  per  10-hr,  day,  and  the  wages  of  a  driver  are 
$1.50  a  day,  the  wages  of  a  cart  and  half  a  driver  are  $1.75  a  day. 
The  4  mins.  "lost  time"  is  therefore  equivalent  to  3  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
The  cost  of  picking  and  loading  average  earth  is  about  15  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.,  as  previously  given.  A  dumpman  can  easily  dump  a  cart 
load  a  minute,  where  he  has  no  spreading  to  do ;  but  the  material 
is  seldom  delivered  fast  enough.  If  we  assume  150  cu.  yds.  deliv- 
ered to  him  in  carts  in  10  hrs.,  the  cost  is  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  for  dump- 
man's  wages.  Hence  the  total  fixed  cost  may  be  assumed  as  15  4- 
3  +  1  ct.,  or  19  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  If  the  cart  load  is  0.4  cu.  yd.,  and 
wages  are  as  above  given,  we  have  the  following  rule : 

Rule  II. — To  a  fixed  cost  of  19  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  add  %  ct.  per  cu. 
yd.  per  100  ft.  of  haul. 

If  the  material  is  plowed,  and  is  shoveled  easily,  the  fixed  cost 
may  become  14  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  instead  of  19  cts. 

If  the  haul  is  long,  one  driver  may  still  attend  to  two  carts  by 
taking  them  both  together  to  the  dump.  There  are  occasions,  how- 
ever, when  one  driver  attends  to  only  one  cart ;  in  such  cases  the 
cost  of  hauling  is  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft. 

In  cities,  where  the  carts  travel  over  hard  earth  or  gravel  roads, 
a  cart  carrying  %  cu.  yd.  may  be  used.  The  cost  of  hauling  is,  then, 
Va  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft.  haul,  wages  of  cart  and  driver  being 
25  cts.  per  hour. 

Cost  by  Wagons.— There  are  three  types  of  four-wheeled  wagons 
commonly  used  by  contractors:  (1)  The  slat-bottom  wagon;  (2) 
the  bottom-dump  wagon ;  and  ( 3 )  the  end-dump  wagon.  Any 
farmer's  wagon  can  be  made  into  a  slat-bottom  wagon  by  remov- 
ing the  wagon  box  and  replacing  it  with  "slats"  of  3  x  6-in.  sticks 
for  a  bottom,  and  2  x  12-in.,  or  2  x  16-in.,  planks  for  sides  and  ends. 
The  bottom-dump,  or  "patent  dump-wagon,"  has  a  bottom  consist- 
ing of  two  doors  that  swing  downward  in  dumping. 

The  end-dump  wagon  dumps  backward  like  a  two-wheeled  cart. 
The  best  makes  of  this  type  of  wagon  are  provided  with  a  geared 
device  by  which  the  dump-man  slides  the  wagon  box  bodily  back- 
ward over  the  axle  of  the  rear  wheels  until  it  tips  and  dumps  its 
load. 

The  loads  that  are  commonly  hauled  in  a  wagon  by  one  team  are 
given  on  page  121. 

To  reduce  the  lost  time  in  loading  wagons  a  common  expedient 
is  to  provide  extra  wagons  which  are  loaded  while  the  teams  are  on 
the  road  to  and  from  the  dump.  A  team  can  be  changed  from  an 
empty  wagon  to  a  loaded  wagon  in  1  to  1%  mins. 

Three  horses  should  be  used  on  each  wagon  far  oftener  than  they 


12C  HANDBOOK    OF    COST   DATA. 

are  used  on  contract  work,  as  nearly  50%  more  material  can  be 
hauled  per  load  than  with  two  horses.  In  the  far  West,  one  often 
sees  two  teams  (four  horses)  hitched  to  a  wagon,  even  on  short 
haul  work. 

One  man  aided  by  the  driver  can  dump  a  slat-bottom  wagon  hold- 
ing 0.8  cu.  yd.  in  1^  mins.,  at  a  cost  of  0.4  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
the  dumpman's  time  and  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  for  lost  time  of  team, 
wages  being  15  cts.  per  hr.  for  dumpman,  and  35  cts.  per  hr.  for 
the  team.  It  takes  3  mins.  for  these  men  to  dump  a  large  slat- 
bottom  wagon  holding  1^  cu.  yds.,  where  the  driver  removes  the 
seat  before  dumping  and  replaces  it  afterward.  So  that  in  either 
case  we  see  that  the  cost  of  dumping  is  about  1%  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
If  a  binder  chain  is  wound  around  the  wagon  box  to  hold  the  slats 
close  together  so  that  no  earth  will  spill  through  onto  a  street 
pavement,  it  takes  5  mins.  to  dump  the  wagon. 

The  time  required  to  dump  a  drop-bottom  wagon  is  practically 
nominal,  and  the  driver  dumps  his  own  wagon. 

It  takes  about  1  min.  for  the  dumpman  and  driver  to  dump  an 
end-dump  wagon. 

In  loading  wagons  there  are  usually  enough  men  provided  in  the 
pit  to  load  1  cu.  yd.  into  a  wagon  in  4  or  5  mins.  or  less.  This  is 
equivalent  to  2%  to  3  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  lost  team  time  in  the  pit, 
which,  added  to  the  lost  team  time  at  the  dump,  gives  us  about  4 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.  where  slat-bottom  wagons  are  used.  The  cost  of 
the  dumpman's  time  will  never  be  much  less  than  %  ct.  per  cu.  yd. ; 
and,  if  the  material  is  not  delivered  rapidly,  it  may  be  much  more. 
The  cost  of  excavating  and  loading  has  been  given  in  previous 
pages.  We  assume  this  cost  to  average  13  cts.  per  cu.  ^d.,  where 
the  earth  is  plowed,  and  add  5  cts.  for  lost  team  time  and  dump- 
ing, we  have  a  fixed  cost  of  18  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Then  the  cost  of 
hauling  will  depend  upon  the  size  of  the  load,  and,  assuming  wages 
of  team  at  35  cts.  per  hr.,  and  speed  of  travel  2y2  miles  an  hour 
While  actually  walking,  we  have  the  following  rule : 

Rule  III. — To  a  fixed  cost  of  18  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  add  y2  ct.  per  cu. 
yd.  per  100  ft.  haul  when  the  wagon  load  is  1  cu.  yd. 
For  other  wagon  loads  use  the  following: 

Per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft. 

Load  being  0.8  cu.  yd.,  add 0.66  ct. 

Load  being   1.0   cu.   yd.,   add 0.53  ct. 

Load  being  1.6  cu.   yd.,   add 0.33  ct. 

Load   being   2.0   cu.   yds.,   add 0.26  ct. 

Load  being   2.4   cu.   yds.,   add 0.22  ct 

In  round  numbers,  therefore,  for  a  load  of  1  cu.  yd.  we  must  add 
%  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft.  haul,  or  28  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  per  mile 
haul,  wages  of  team  being  35  cts.  per  hr. 

Cost  by  Drag  Scrapers.— A  drag  scraper,  or  slip  scraper,  is  a 
steel  scoop,  not  mounted  on  wheels,  for  scooping  up  and  transport- 
ing earth  short  distances,  and  is  drawn  by  a  team.  The  ordinary 
No  2  drag  scraper  weighs  100  Ibs.,  and  is  listed  in  catalogues  as 
holding  5  cu.  ft.  of  earth.  The  actual  average  load,  however,  is 
about  1-9  to  1-7  cu.  yd.  place  measure. 

In  working  drag  scrapers  on  short  leads  there  are  usually  three 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  127 


teams  traveling  in  a  circle  or  ellipse  of  150  ft.  circumference.  One 
man  loads  the  scrapers  in  the  pit  as  they  go  by,  and  each  driver 
dumps  his  own  scraper.  When  the  gang  is  working  properly,  the 
actual  speed  of  the  teams  is  2%  miles  an  hour,  or  220  ft.  per  min., 
while  actually  walking ;  and  the  "lost  time"  in  loading  and  dump- 
ing is  %  to  y2  min.  per  trip,  or,  say,  3y2  mins.  per  cu.  yd.,  which 
is  equivalent  to  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  lost  team  time  when  team 
wages  are  35  cts.  per  hr.  The  man  loading  can  readily  load  1,500 
scrapers  per  day,  or,  say,  180  cu.  yds.,  so  that  the  cost  of  load- 
ing is  about  %  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  The  cost  of  plowing  (see  page  122) 
will  average  1%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  As  above  stated,  the  teams  travel 
in  a  circle,  and,  no  matter  how  short  the  "lead,"  room  must  be 
allowed  for  turning  and  manoeuvering  the  teams ;  this  room  is 
approximately  50  ft.  at  each  end  of  the  haul,  so  that  we  have  100 
ft.  of  extra  travel,  or  nearly  %  min.  of  time  for  each  trip,  in 
addition  to  the  "lead."  This  %  min.  adds  another  2  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  Summing  up,  we  have-  the  following  fixed  cost,  exclusive  ot 
foreman's  wages: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Lost  team  time  loading  and  dumping 2      cts. 

Wages  of  man  loading %  cts. 

Plowing     1  y%  cts. 

Extra  travel  of  team  in  turning,  etc 2      cts. 

Total  fixed  cost 6  ^4  cts. 

If  the  average  load  is  1-7  cu.  yd.,  hauled  at  a  speed  of  220  ft. 
per  min.,  the  cost  of  hauling  is  4%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft.  of 
"lead."  Note  that  this  "lead"  is  measured  on  a  straight  line  from 
center  of  pit  to  center  of  dump.  The  rule,  then,  is  as  follows  for 
"average  earth"  when  team  wages  are  35  cts.  per  hr. : 

Rule  IV. — To  a  fixed  cost  0/6%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  add  4y2  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft.  of  "lead." 

This  is  approximately  equivalent  to  1  ct.  added  for  each  25  ft. 
of  "lead."  Thus,  if  the  "lead"  is  25  ft,  the  cost  of  drag  scraper 
work  is  6  %  +  1,  or  7%  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  of  foreman's  wages  is  ordinarily  about  %  ct.  per  cu. 
yd.,  and  wear  on  scrapers,  etc.,  will  add  another  %  ct.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  of  excavating  and  hauling  fairly  stiff  clay  may  easily 
be  30%  more  than  the  above  costs  for  "average  earth." 

Cost  by  Wheel  Scrapers. — The  wheel  scraper  is  a  development 
of  the  drag  scraper,  being  a  steel  scoop  low  hung  between  two 
wheels.  The  following  are  common  sizes  of  wheelers : 

Capacity. 

Weight,  Listed,      Actual  Struck 

Ibs.  cu.  ft.      Measure,  cu.  ft. 

No.    1     340.— 450  9—10  7%— 9 

No.    2     475—500  12—13  8% 

No.    2%     575  14  12 

No.    3     625—800  16—17  15y2 

The  "listed"  capacity  is  the  capacity  given  in  catalogs.  The 
"actual  struck  measure"  capacity  is  the  exact  contents  of  the  bowl 
when  level  full  of  loose  earth,  and  it  should  be  remembered  that 


128  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

about  one-fifth  of  20%  should  be  deducted  from  this  to  get  the 
actual  struck  capacity  of  earth  measured  "in  place"  before  loosen- 
ing. 

Large  wheelers,  even  in  light  soils,  and  small  wheelers  in  tough 
soils,  seldom  leave  the  pit  full  of  earth,  but  at  the  back  end  of  the 
bowl  there  is  usually  a  wedge-shaped  unfilled  space.  I  have  found 
the  average  load,  "place  measure,"  carried  by  wheelers  is  as 
follows : 

No.  1    1/5  cu.  yd. 

No.  2    %  cu.  yd. 

No.  2  %    %  cu  yd. 

No.  3    .' 4/10  cu.  yd. 

A  snatch  team,  to  assist  in  loading,  is  generally  used  with  a  No. 
2  wheeler,  and  always  with  a  No.  3  wheeler. 

On  long  hauls  it  is  advisable  to  have  men  with  shovels  to  heap 
the  bowi  full  of  earth,  using  a  front  gate  on  the  wheeler  to  prevent 
loss  of  material  in  transit. 

The  lightest  No.  1  wheelers  made  are  to  be  recommended  where 
leads  are  very  short  and  rises  steep,  that  is,  wherever  drag  scrapers 
are  ordinarily  used,  for  they  move  earth  more  economically  than 
drags.  Where  soil  is  very  stony,  or  full  of  roots,  drag  scrapers 
are  to  be  preferred,  since  they  are  more  easily  and  quickly  loaded 
under  such  conditions.  With  wheelers,  as  with  drag  scrapers,  add 
50  ft.  to  the  actual  "lead"  for  turning  and  maneuvering  the  teams, 
equivalent  to  half  -minute  of  team  time  each  trip.  Another  half 
minute  is  lost  in  loading  and  dumping. 

The  fixed  costs  for  the  three  common  sizes  of  wheelers  are  as 
follows  for  "average  earth,"  when  wages  are  15  cts.  per  hr.  for 
laborer  and  35  cts.  per  hr.  for  team  (with  driver)  : 

— Cents  per  cu.  yd. — 
No.  1.        No.  2.        No.  3. 

Lost  team  time  loading  and  dumping. ...      1.5  1.2  0.8 

Wages  of  man  loading   0.8  0.8  1.5 

Plowing     1.5  1.5  1.5 

Extra  travel  of  team  in  turning,  etc 1.5  1.2  0.7 

Snatch  team 1.5  1.5 

Wages  of  man  dumping 

Total,  cts.  per  cu.   yd 5.3  6.2  6.8 

Size  of  load  hauled,   cu.   yds 1/5  V±  4/10 

A  snatch  team  is  usually  used  with  No.  2  wheelers,  and  in  short- 
haul  work  there  is  usually  a  dump  man  also. 

In  easy  soils,  I  have  had  one  snatch  team  assist  in  loading  300 
cu.  yds.  per  day,  so  that  this  item  may  be  less  than  above 
estimated ;  and  under  the  same  conditions  another  %  ct.  per  cu. 
yd.  or  more  may  be  saved  in  wages  of  men  loading  and  dumping. 
There  are  usually  two  men  required  to  load  a  No.  3  wheeler,  which 
accounts  for  the  higher  cost  of  this  item  in  the  No.  3  column. 

The  cost  of  wheeler  work,  based  upon  the  foregoing  data,  is 
as  follows: 

p,ule    y. — To    a    fixed    cost    of    5%    c».    per    cu.    yd.    for   No.    I 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  129 

wheelers,  or  6*4  cts.  for  No.  2  wheelers,  or  6%  cts:  for  No.  3 
wheelers,  add  the  following  per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft.  of  "lead": 
2%  cts.  for  No.  1  wheelers;  or  2  1/5  cts.  for  No.  2  wheelers;  or  1% 
cts.  /or  No.  3  wheelers. 

The  cost  of  foreman's  wages  and  repair  of  wheelers  will  add 
about  1  ct.  more  per  cu.  yd. 

If  the  "lead"  is  50  ft.  and  No.  1  wheelers  are  used,  the  cost  is 
5}i  cts.  +  (1/2  X  2%  cts.),  or  6.7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  exclusive  of 
foreman's  wages. 

Cost  by  Fresno  Scrapers.— The  ordinary  four-horse  fresno 
scraper  has  a  bowl  13  ins.  high,  18  ins.  wide  and  5  ft.  long,  giving 
a  struck  measure  capacity  of  slightly  more  than  8  cu.  ft. ;  but  in 
almost  any  soil,  except  dry,  running  sand,  the  earth  will  heap  up 
6  or  8  ins.  above  the  top  of  the  bowl,  and  will  extend  quite  a 
distance  beyond  the  front  of  the  bowl.  One  carefully  measured 
fresno  load  of  clayey  earth  contained  19  cu.  ft.  of  loose  earth, 
which  compacted  to  16^  cu.  ft.  when  rammed  in  4-in.  layers  in  a 
box.  Several  other  large  loads  gave  almost  the  same  results  after 
being  hauled  100  ft.  over  a  level  road. 

Mr.  Geo.  J.  Specht  has  stated  that  on  a  down  hill  haul,  loads  will 
average  35  cu.  ft.  and  occasionally  run  as  high  as  44  cu.  ft.  How- 
ever, this  could  only  occur  with  light,  damp  soil  and  on  a  down  hill 
pull  where  much  material  could  be  drifted  ahead  of  the  fresno 
scraper.  I  have  never  measured  any  loads  of  that  size. 

On  level  hauls,  or  on  uphill  pulls,  it  is  not  ordinarily  safe  to 
count  on  more  than  %  cu.  yd.  (measured  in  cut)  per  load, 
although  under  favorable  conditions  the  average  load  may  be  25  to 
50  per  cent  greater,  while  under  unfavorable  conditions  it  may  be 
25  per  cent  less. 

If  the  delays  in  loading  and  dumping  are  excluded,  the  team  can 
be  counted  upon  to  travel  about  200  ft.  per  minute.  It  requires 
some  room  in  which  to  maneuver  scrapers  of  any  kind,  no  matter 
what  method  of  hauling  the  teams  is  adopted.  Hence  one  must  not 
measure  the  average  distance  in  a  straight  line  from  center  of 
the  cut  to  the  center  of  the  fill,  and  call  that  the  average  haul, 
for  that  is  the  average  "lead,"  which  is  considerably  shorter 
than  the  actual  haul. 

When  the  daily  wage  of  a  driver  is  ?1.50  and  that  of  each  of 
the  four  horses  is  $1,  a  total  of  $5.50  per  fresno,  the  following 
rule  will  give  the  average  cost  of  fresno  work,  not  including  plow- 
ing, trimming  or  supervision. 

Rule  VI. — To  a  fixed  cost  of  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  add  1%  cts.  per 
100  ft.  of  "lead." 

The  fixed  cost  of  5  cts.  includes  traveling  the  extra  distance  in 
loading,  etc.,  the  slower  speed  in  loading,  the  shifting  of  the  gang 
to  newly  plowed  ground,  etc.,  and  it  includes  1  ct.  for  plowing  the 
earth.  The  hauling  cost  of  1%  cts.  per  100  ft.  is  based  upon  a  trav- 
eling speed  of  200  ft.  per  minute  (when  not  delayed  by  loading, 
dumping,  etc.)  and  upon  the  assumption  that  the  average  load  is 


130  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

%  cu.  yd.,  Wages  of  four  horses  and  driver  being  $6  per  10-hr,  day. 
In  applying  the  rule  never  assume  a  "lead"  shorter  than  50  ft. 

"Lead"  in  Cu.  yds.  per 

feet.  f resno  per  day. 

50  120 

100  100 

150  87 

200  75 

250  67 

300  60 

350  55 

400  50 

I  have  never  measured  any  fresno  loads  that  had  been  hauled  as 
far  as  400  ft.,  and  I  doubt  very  much  whether  fresno  loads  hauled 
tnat  distance  would  average  as  much  as  %  cu.  yd.,  due  to  the  loss 
that  occurs  en  route. 

If  the  soil  is  not  of  a  kind  that  heaps  up  and  drifts  well  in  front 
of  the  fresno,  the  average  load  will  probably  not  exceed  9  cu.  ft. 
or  %  cu.  yd.,  particularly  on  long  hauls.  In  which  case  the  rule 
becomes  : 

Rule  VII. — To  a  fixed  cost  of  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  add  2%  cts.  for 
each  100  ft.  of  "lead." 

Then,  for  a  600-ft.  "lead"  the  cost  would  be  5  -f  (6  X  2%),  or  21 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.  This  checks  very  closely  with  Mr.  Walter  N.  Frick- 
stad's  data  for  a  600-ft.  haul  with  fresnos,  as  given  in  Engineer- 
ing-Contracting, Nov.  3,  1909. 

Based  upon  this  last  rule  the  cost  of  fresno  work  is  as  follows 
for  different  leads: 

"Lead"  in  Cts.  per  Cu.  yds.  per 

feet.  cu  yd.  fresno  per  day. 

50                                          5%  109 

100                                           7  86 

150                                           8^  70 

200  10  60 

250  11%  52 

300  13  46 

400  16  37 

500  19  31 

600  22  28 

Bear  in  mind  that  the  above  costs  do  not  include  cost  of  fore- 
man's wages,  which  ordinarily  ranges  from  %  to  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd. 
Dressing  roadbed  and  slopes  will  usually  cost  an  additional  %  ct. 
per  sq.  yd.  of  surface  trimmed. 

I  have,  assumed  a  10-hr,  working  day,  but  it  is  my 'opinion  that  it 
makes  little  difference  whether  the  day  is  8  or  10  hrs.  long,  for 
the  horses  can  be  "crowded"  harder  on  the  shorter  day,  and  thus 
cover  the  same  mileage  as  on  the  longer  day. 

I  have  assumed  that  each  fresno  is  loaded  as  well  as  dumped  by 
the  driver.  This  is  one  of  the  great  advantages  of  a  fresno  over  a 
drag  scraper.  However,  in  tough  soils  it  is  generally  wise  to 
have  one  man  with  each  string  of  fresnos  to  load  them. 

A  four-horse  fresno  scraper  weighs  about  275  Ibs.  A  rope  should 
be  tied  to  the  end  of  the  handle,  so  that  the  driver  can  jerk  the  rope 


E  ART  PI  EXCAVATION.  131 

and  right  the  bowl  when  he  gets  back  to  the  pit  and  is  ready  to 
load. 

The  four  horses  are  hitched  abreast.  The  two  outside  horses  have 
a  "jockey  stick,"  the  ends  of  which  are  tied  to  their  bits,  and  each 
horse's  bridle  is  fastened  to  the  adjoining  horse's  bridle  by  a  short 
strap  or  rawhide  string.  Each  of  the  two  reins  is  divided  into  two 
lines,  one  line  going  to  each  horse's  bridle,  one  of  the  lines  from 
each  rein  going  to  one  outside  horse,  and  the  other  line  to  the  sec- 
end  outside  horse  from  it.  Thus  the  left  hand  rein  pulls  the  left 
hand  outside  horse  and  the  right  hand  inside  horse,  these  two 
horses  guiding  the  other  two  horses  by  the  bit  straps.  The  right 
hand  rein  controls  the  other  two  horses. 

Due  to  the  fact  that  fresno  scrapers  can  ordinarily  be  loaded  by 
the  drivers,  it  is  not  necessary  to  work  several  fresnos  in  a  string. 
In  fact  when  building  an  embankment  from  two  ditches,  one  on  each 
side,  a  common  method  of  handling  the  fresnos  is  as  follows:  The 
driver  loads  the  fresno  in  the  ditch,  drives  up  the  embankment 
diagonally,  dumps  the  load  and  continues  right  across  the  embank- 
ment and  down  into  the  ditch  on  the  opposite  side,  where  he  loads 
again  after  turning  around,  and  returns.  When  working  in  this 
fashion,  some  foremen  require  all  the  fresnos  to  move  in  unison, 
so  that  a  glance  will  show  that  none  is  loafing.  When  handled 
thus,  however,  it  is  not  possible  to  plow  where  the  fresnos  are 
working,  so  some  time  is  always  lost  in  moving  the  fresno  gang 
to  newly  plowed  ground.  This  lost  time  has  been  allowed  for  in 
the  rule  for  cost  above  given. 

Fresno  work  is  cheaper  than  drag  scraper  work  under  almost 
every  condition  that  can  be  named. 

It  is  not  easy  to  fix  the  limit  of  economic  haul  with  fresnos  as 
compared  with  wheeled  scrapers,  principally  because  the  size  of  the 
fresno  load  varies  greatly  in  different  soils.  It  is  quite  commonly 
believed  in  California  that  for  hauls  beyond  200  to  250  ft.  the 
wheeled  scraper  is  preferable,  but  in  tough  soils  or  in  dry  sand 
the  fresno  loads  may  be  so  small  that  a  wheeler  can  compete  suc- 
cessfully on  shorter  hauls.  On  the  other  hand,  in  soft,  damp  soils 
that  heap  up  and  drift  well  in  front  of  a  fresno,  the  economic  haul 
may  considerably  exceed  300  ft. 

The  above  conclusions  are  based  upon  the  assumption  that  the 
wage  of  the  driver  equals  the  wage  of  two  horses.  Where  horse 
feed  is  cheap  and  wages  of  men  are  high,  it  is  clear  that  the  fresno 
shows  up  more  favorably,  for  it  is  one  of  the  characteristics  of 
fresno  work  that  there  are  many  horses  and  comparatively  few  men. 

In  solving  the  problem  of  economic  earthwork  in  any  individual 
case,  the  first  step  should  be  to  measure  a  number  of  average 
loads  of  earth  as  they  are  delivered  at  the  dump  by  fresnos  and  by 
wheelers.  Don't  measure  the  loads  in  the  ditch  or  pit,  but  on  the 
dump,  for  much  may  be  lost  in  transit.  Shovel  the  load  of  earth 
into  a  wooden  box  and  ram  it  in  4  to  6-in.  layers.  A  little  time 
spent  in  thus  measuring  the  loads  accurately  will  enable  a  close  esti- 
mate to  be  made  of  the  actual  yardage  moved  per  day  per  scraper 
of  each  class,  provided  a  boy  or  man  is  assigned  for  a  day  to  the 


132  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

task  of  tallying  every  load   moved  by  a  typical   fresno   gang  and 
by  a  typical  wheeler  gang. 

Considering  the  amount  of  money  that  is  usually  at  stake,  it  is 
remarkable  how  often  guesswork  prevails  where  a  little  time  spent 
in  measuring  a  few  loads  and  a  day's  tally  of  the  loads  would 
settle  the  matter  definitely.  Where  a  gang  is  moving  only  1,000  cu. 
yds.  daily,  1  ct.  saved  per  yard  means  $10  a  day.  Yet  even  the 
most  skilled  foreman  will  find  it  next'  to  impossible  to  ascertain  the 
difference  of  a  cent  a  yard  cost  between  a  fresno  gang  and  a 
wheeler  gang  merely  by  looking  at  them  work.  I  am  speaking  now 
of  work  by  these  two  types  of  scrapers  where  the  length  of  haul 
is  such  that  they  are  almost  on  a  parity  as  regards  cost.  Of 
course  there  are  hauls  where  there  can  be  no  doubt  at  all,  where  it 
is  either  the  fresno  "hands  down,"  or  where  it  is  the  wheeler  "hands 
down." 

Cost  by  Elevating  Graders. — An  elevation  grader  consists  essen- 
tially of  a  four-wheeled  truck  provided  with  a  plow  which  casts 
Its  furrow  upon  an  endless  belt,  which  elevates  the  material  and 
deposits  it  in  wagons  as  fast  as  they  are  driven  under  the  belt. 
For  successful  operation  there  must  be  few  boulders  or  roots  to  stop 
the  plow  of  the  machine ;  and  there  must  be  considerable  room 
in  which  to  turn  the  machine,  and  maneuver  the  teams  going 
and  coming,  and  the  ground  on  which  the  grader  is  working  must 
not  be  too  hilly.  The  machine  does  not  work  to  advantage  in  nar- 
row cuts,  due  to  lack  of  room  for  wagons  alongside.  The  machine 
is  adapted  to  loading  wagons  on  road  work,  but  is  especially  suit- 
able for  reservoir  work  and  the  like.  The  machine  is  used  in 
prairie  soils  for  digging  ditches  and  conveying  the  material  directly 
into  the  road,  but  the  material  must  afterward  be  leveled  with  a 
leveling  scraper  or  road  machine  ;  and  it  would  seem  better  prac- 
tice to  use  the  road  scraper  entirely  for  this  class  of  grading  with- 
out resort  to  the  elevating  grader  at  all.  Claims  have  been  made 
that  1,000  cu.  yds.  in  10  hrs.  are  loaded  by  the  grader.  Under 
very  favorable  conditions  this  may  be  done,  but  I  have  never  seen 
a  daily  average  of  more  than  500  cu.  yds.  place  measure  loaded  by 
a  grader  operating  in  easy  soil. 

A  grader  costs  about  $1,000,  and  is  hauled  either  by  10  or  12 
horses  or  by  a  25-hp.  traction  engine,  the  latter  being  usually  the 
more  economical  in  the  long  run.  It  requires  2  men  to  operate  the 
grader,  and,  where  horses  are  used,  2  or  3  men  to  drive  the 
horses.  Where  a  traction  engine  is  used,  2  men  operate  the 
grader,  1  engineman  operates  the  traction  engine,  and  it  is  often 
necessary  to  keep  a  team  busy  part  of  the  time  hauling  water  for 
the  engine,  if  water  is  not  supplied  by  gravity  or  by  pumps.  The 
traction  engine  burns  0.6  to  0.7  ton,  or  1,200  to  1,400  Ibs.,  per  10 
hrs.  To  furnish  steam  there  will  be  required  not  over  8  Ibs.  »of 
water  per  Ib.  of  coal,  or  0.7  X  8  =  5.6  tons  of  water  per  day.  The 
grader  travels  about  150  ft.  per  min.  when  hauled  by  an  engine, 
and  it  takes  1%  mins.  to  turn  around  at  each  end  of  its  run,  de- 
scribing a  circle  of  about  50  ft.  diameter  in  turning.  It  takes  about 
15  seconds  to  load  a  wagon  with  %  cu.  yd.  of  earth  measured  in 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  133 

place,  when  the  grader  is  traveling  150  ft.  per  min.,  so  that  the 
grader  travels  40  ft.  in  loading  a  %-yd.  wagon;  then  it  stops  for 
about  15  sees,  until  the  next  wagon  comes  up  under  the  belt.  If 
three-horse  patent  dump  wagons  are  used — and  no  other  kind 
should  be  used  with  elevating  graders — the  wagon  load  is  1*4 
cu.  yds.,  and  the  grader  travels  about  65  ft.  to  load  a  wagon. 

I  have  seen  700  two-horse  wagons,  holding  %  cu.  yd.  each, 
loaded  per  10-hr,  day;  and,  I  am  informed,  that  with  good  man- 
agement and  an  easy  soil,  700  wagons,  holding  more  than  1  cu.  yd. 
each,  can  be  loaded  per  10-hr,  day.  With  three-horse  wagons  the 
average  10-hr,  day's  output  on  the  Chicago  Drainage  Canal  was 
500  cu.  yds.  of  top  soil. 

Mr.  N.  Adelbert  Brown,  C.  E.,  of  Rochester,  informs  me  that  an 
elevating  grader  was  used  by  Thomas  Holihan,  in  grading  streets 
at  Canandaigua,  N.  Y.  The  streets  were  60  to  75  ft.  wide  be- 
tween property  lines,  and  36  ft.  between  curbs.  A  traction  engine 
was  used  to  haul  the  grader,  and  there  was  no  trouble  in  turning  the 
engine  and  grader  between  the  walk  lines,  which  was  easily  within 
50  ft.  of  space.  "The  efficiency  of  the  machine  was  not  tested  fully, 
due  to  a  lack  of  teams;  but,  when  teams  were  available,  50  wagon 
loads,  of  1%  cu.  yds.  each,  were  readily  loaded  in  an  hour.  The 
machine  was  satisfactory  in  stone  and  gravel  roads  and  stiff  clay, 
but  in  light  sand  in  some  cases  refused  to  elevate."  This  latter  is 
true,  however,  of  all  elevating  graders  in  any  dry  sand  that  will 
not  turn  a  furrow. 

Fred.  T.  Ley  &  Co.,  of  Springfield,  Mass.,  inform  me  that  ele- 
vating graders  were  used  by  them  on  electric  railway  work  in 
central  New  York  state,  both  with  traction  engines  and  with  horses. 
They  averaged  400  to  500  cu.  yds.  loaded  into  wagons  per  grader 
per  day. 

No  matter  how  short  the  lead,  a  team  hauling  earth  from  a  grader 
must  perform  a  large  percentage  of  waste  labor  following  the 
grader,  and  this  is  equivalent  to  adding  about  400  ft.  to  the  "lead." 
If  3  horses  and  a  driver  are  worth  $4.50  a  day,  and  the  load  is  1*4 
cu.  yds.,  the  cost  of  hauling  is  0.6  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100  ft.  of  haul ; 
so  that  the  waste  distance  traveled  (400  ft.  lead)  adds  2%  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  to  the  cost.  With  wages  of  single  horses  at  $1,  and  men  at 
$1.50,  the  fixed  cost  is  as  follows,  with  an  output  of  500  cu.  yds. 
per  10  hrs. : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Lost  team  time  (400  ft.  added  to  "lead") 2.5  cts. 

10  horses  on  grader  and  4  men 3.5 

5  men   on   dump    spreading 1.5     " 

Interest,   repairs  and  depreciation,   $5   per  day....    1.0     " 

Total     8.5  cts. 

The  rule  is: 

Rule  VIII. — To  a  fixed  cost  of  S1/^  cts.  add  6/10  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  per 
100  ft.  of  lead. 

It  will  take  6  three-horse  wagons  to  handle  the  500  cu.  yds.  per 
day  where  the  lead  is  500  ft. 

It  is  necessary  to  spread  the  earth  on  the  dump  to  prevent  stall- 


134  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

ing  of  the  dump  wagons,  but  by  using  a  leveling  scraper  the  cost 
of  this  item  can  be  reduced  to  1  ct.  or  less,  instead  of  the  \%  cts. 
above  given  for  hand  work. 

A  traction-engine  outfit  will  reduce  the  cost  of  operating  the 
grader  somewhat  below  the  above  given  figures,  thus : 

Per  day. 
%  ton  coal,  at  $3 $   2.00 

1  engineman     3.00 

2  grader   operators    5.00 

Interest,  repairs  and  depreciation  of  engine 3.50 

Total,   500  cu.  yds.,  at  2.7  cts $13.50 

This  2.7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  it  will  be  seen,  is  0.8  ct.  less  than  where 
10  horses  and  4  men  operate  the  grader. 

If  it  is  necessary  to  pump  water  by  hand  and  haul  it  far  for  the 
traction  engine,  the  cost  may  easily  be  increased  ya  ct.  per  cu.  yd., 
or  more. 

In  Engineering-Contracting,  April,  1906,  page  102,  etc.,  there  is  an 
article  by  Mr.  Daniel  J.  Hauer,  giving  costs  of  elevating  grader 
work  on  7  railroad  jobs.  The  limitations  of  the  grader  for  narrow 
thorough  cuts  are  well  shown.  The  average  cost  was  as  follows 
for  an  average  "lead"  of  800  ft.,  with  an  average  daily  output  of 
288  cu.  yds.  per  elevating  grader: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Loading $0.100 

Hauling    0.127 

Dumping  and  spreading   0.029 

Water   boy    0.002 

Foreman 0.010 

Total    $0.268 

The  wages  of  the  grader  operators  were  $1.50  per  10-hr,  day; 
laborers,  $1.50  ;  two-horse  team  and  driver,  $4.60  ;  three-horse  team 
and  driver,  $6.25.  The  $0.268  does  not  include  any  allowance  for 
interest,  repairs  and  depreciation.  This  is  probably  as  high  a  cost 
for  elevating  grader  work  as  will  be  likely  to  occur  with  the  same 
length  of  haul  and  the  same  rates  of  wages. 

Steam  Shovel  Data. — The  size  of  a  steam  shovel  is  usually 
denoted  by  the  capacity  of  the  dipper  in  cubic  yards  and  the  weight 
of  the  whole  machine  in  tons ;  both  should  be  given,  for  in  a  hard 
material  a  smaller  dipper  is  used  than  in  soft  material  when  work- 
ing with  the  same  steam  shovel.  The  following  are  some  of  the 
standard  sizes : 
Weight,  tons  35  45  55  65  75  90 


Dipper,   cu.   yds 1%         1  %         1%  2        2  %  3 

Coal  in  10  hrs.,  tons %  1         1%         1%  2         2% 

Water  in   10  hrs.,  gals 1,500     2,000     2,500     3,000     4,000     4,500 

The  price  of  shovels  is  approximately  $130  per  ton  for  the  larger 
sizes,  and  $160  per  ton  for  the  35-ton  size. 

A  shovel  of  any  size  is  so  designed  that,  when  digging  in  average 
earth,  it  can  average  at  least  3  dipperfuls  per  minute,  when  the 
dipper  arm  swings  only  90°.  Shovels  are  built  to  run  on  standard 
gage  track,  and  in  operating  a  shovel  it  is  customary  to  use  rails 
in  5-ft.  lengths,  so  that  the  shovel  cuts  5  ft.  into  a  face  before  it  is 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  135 

shifted  ahead.  The  time  required  to  shift  ahead  may  average  as 
low  as  3  mins.,  and  should  never  average  more  than  5  mins.,  but  on 
poorly  managed  work  I  have  often  seen  10  mins.  consumed  in  shift- 
ing the  shovel  ahead. 

"Traction  shovels"  weighing  26  tons,  or  less,  may  be  had,  and 
they  do  not  require  rails  to  run  upon,  but  are  provided  with  broad- 
tired  traction  wheels. 

Steam  shovels  of  small  size,  mounted  like  a  locomotive  crane  so 
that  they  can  swing  a  full  circle,  are  especially  adapted  for  loading 
wagons  in  confined  places. 

The  width  of  the  cut  or  "swath"  excavated  by  a  shovel  varies 
from  18  ft.  for  the  smallest  shovels  to  40  ft.  for  the  largest.  The 
height  of  the  face  of  the  cut  is  usually  15  to  30  ft.  In  tough 
material  the  face  of  the  cut  should  not  be  higher  than  the  dipper 
can  reach,  that  is,  14  to  20  ft.  Too  high  a  face  in  treacherous, 
sliding  material  is  to  be  avoided,  for  the  shovel  may  be  buried  by  a 
slide. 

The  height  of  the  face  of  the  cut  has  a  marked  influence  upon 
the  output  of  a  shovel.  If  the  face  is  only  6  ft.  high  and  18  ft. 
wide,  there  are  only  4  cu.  yds.  per  lineal  foot  of  cut,  or  20  cu.  yds. 
for  every  5  lin.  ft.  of  cut.  A  1-yd.  shovel  would  excavate  this  in, 
say,  10  mins. ;  then,  if  5  mins.  were  spent  moving  forward  for  the 
next  "bite,"  there  would  be  15  mins.  required  to  excavate  20  cu. 
yds.,  and  one-third  of  the  time  would  be  spent  in  shifting  the 
shovel.  Shallow  cuts  are  expensive  not  only  on  this  account,  but  be- 
cause a  full  dipper  cannot  be  averaged  when  the  height  of  the  face 
of  the  cut  becomes  much  less  than  one  and  a  half  or  two  times  the 
depth  of  the  bucket. 

In  addition  to  the  lost  time  of  shifting  the  shovel,  there  is  more 
or  less  lost  time  switching  cars  up  to  the  shovel.  On  "thorough 
cut"  work  this  lost  time  of  switching  is  greater  than  on  "side  cut" 
work.  A  "thorough  cut"  is  practically  a  huge  trench,  in  which  the 
shovel  is  working  at  the  face,  so  that  only  one  or  two  cars  can 
come  up  on  the  track  alongside  of  the  shovel,  the  car  track  being 
in  the  bottom  of  the  cut.  This  method  of  attack  should  be  avoided 
wherever  possible.  In  "side  cut"  work  a  full  train  of  cars  can 
come  alongside  the  shovel,  one  car  being  loaded  after  another  until 
the  train  is  loaded. 

There  are  frequently  conditions  that  make  it  cheaper  in  the  end 
to-  use  wagons  instead  of  cars  for  hauling  the  earth  away.  In 
such  cases  never  use  a  large  dipper,  for  so  much  earth  will  spill 
over  the  sides  of  the  wagon  as  to  block  the  road  and  delay  the 
movement  of  the  wagons,  even  when  a  snatch  team  is  used.  A 
1%-yd.  bucket  is  as  large  as  should  be  used  for  loading  wagons. 

Hauling  With  Dinkeys. — The  ordinary  "contractor's  locomotive," 
or  "dinkey,"  travels  on  a  track  of  3-ft.  gage.  The  smallest  size 
of  dinkey  commonly  used  weighs  8  short  tons,  and  is  listed  as 
having  a  tractive  pull  of  2,900  Ibs.  on  a  level  track.  Whether 
the  actual  tractive  capacity  is  exactly  2,900  I  do  not  know;  but 
it  must  be  approximately  that,  for  any  locomotive  can  exert  a  pull 
of  25%  of  the  weight  on  its  driving  wheels  even  on  clean  rails. 


136  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  loads  that  a  dinkey  can  pull,  however,  are  much  over-estimated 
in  catalogues,  due  to  too  low  rolling  resistances  assumed  for  cars. 
It  is  said  in  some  of  the  catalogues  that  the  resistance  to  traction 
is  6  y2  Ibs. .  per  short  ton.  This  rate  applies  only  to  the  best  of 
standard  gage  railway  tracks  with  heavy  rails,  well  ballasted,  and 
with  heavy  wheel  loads.  On  a  contractor's  narrow  gage,  light  rail 
track,  the  resistance  to  traction  is  probably  not  must  less  than  20 
to  40  Ibs.  per  ton,  and  at  the  point  where  the  cars  are  loaded  it  is 
doubtless  more,  due  to  the  dirt  on  the  rails.  It  requires  almost 
twice  as  great  a  pull  to  start  a  car  as  to  keep  it  in  motion. 

The  resistance  due  to  gravity  is  20  Ibs.  per  short  ton  per  1%  of 
grade ;  but,  of  course,  the  tractive  power  of  a  locomotive  falls  off 
20  Ibs.  for  every  ton  of  its  own  weight  for  each  1%  of  grade. 

Based  upon  these  data,  and  upon  the  assumption  that  the  resist- 
ance to  "traction  is  40  Ibs.  per  short  ton,  an  8-ton  dinkey  is  capable 
of  hauling  the  following  loads,  including  the  weight  of  the  cars : 

Total  tons. 

Level  track   70 

1%    grade    46 

2%    grade    33 

3%    grade    26 

4%    grade    21 

5%    grade    17 

6%    grade    14 

8%    grade    10 

Note. — On  a  poor  track  not  even  as  great  loads  as  the  above  can 
be  hauled. 

Due  to  the  accidents  that  frequently  occur  from  the  breaking 
in  two  of  trains  on  steep  grades,  and  from  the  running  away  of 
engines,  it  is  advisable  to  avoid  using  grades  of  more  than  6%. 

When  heavily  loaded,  a  dinkey  travels  5  miles  per  hr.  on  a 
straight  track ;  btit  when  lightly  loaded,  or  on  a  down  grade,  it 
may  run  9  miles  an  hour. 

The  following  are  the  average  struck  measure  capacities  of  the 
dump,  cars  made  by  one  firm  (variations  of  weight  of  several  hun- 
dred pounds  occur,  according  to  the  make)  : 

Capacity,    cu.    yds 1  1%  2  2  %  3 

Weight,    Ibs 1,700          2,000         2,300          2,800          3,500 

A  car  seldom  averages  its  struck  capacity  of  earth  measured 
"in  place,"  even  when  the  car  is  heaped  full  with  a  shovel ;  for  not 
only  are  there  vacant  places  in  the  corners  of  the  car,  but  the  loose 
earth  is  20%  to  30%  more  bulky  than  earth  "in  place." 

The  number  of  dinkeys  required  to  keep  a  shovel  busy  can  be 
estimated  from  the  data  given.  On  short  hauls  (1,000  ft.  or  less) 
one  very  often  sees  only  one  dinkey  serving  a  1%-yd.  shovel.  In 
such  cases  the  dinkey  is  not  heavily  loaded,  so  that  it  can  run  fast, 
and  by  having  enough  men  to  dump  a  train  of  6  cars  in  2  or  3  mins. 
a  fairly  good  daily  output  of  the  shovel  can  be  secured. 

In    dumping   the   cars,    estimate   on   the   basis    of   one    3-yd.    car 

dumped  by  each  man  in  1%  to  2  mins.     The  men  work  in  groups 

of  2  or  3  in  dumping  the  cars,  and  enough  men  are  usually  provided 

on  the  dump  to  dump  a  train  in  3  mins. 

When  two   or   more  dinkeys  are   serving   one   shorel,   and   long 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  137 

trains  (12  cars)  are  being  used,  it  would  seem  that  very  little  lost 
shovel  time  would  occur  due  to  switching  in  an  empty  train  ;  but, 
even  under  favorable  conditions,  I  find  that  \yz  to  2  mins.  per  train 
are  lost  in  switching.  This  is  another  reason  why  a  shovel  served 
by  only  one  dinkey  makes  so  good  a  showing  on  short-haul  work. 
Still  another  reason  is  that  at  the  time  the  shovel  is  shifting  for- 
ward, the  dinkey  can  often  make  its  round  trip  ;  and  on  shallow 
face  work  this  shifting  of  tne  shovel  occurs  frequently. 

The  method  of  using  a  hoisting  engine  and  cable  to  move  the 
cars  is  quite  common  in  railroad  work,  where  the  hauls  are  short, 
say  1,000  ft.  or  less.  The  track  is  laid  on  a  rather  steep  grade,  at 
least  3%  from  the  pit  to  the  dump,  and  the  cars  coast  down 
by  gravity  usually  in  trains  of  4  cars  holding  about  2  cu.  yds.  each. 
The  hoisting  engines  pull  the  cars  back  with  a  wire  rope.  *A  team 
of  horses  will  have  all  it  can  do  to  pull  a  train  of  4  such  cars 
even  on  a  slight  down  grade  to  the  dump.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
a  team  that  is  working  steadily  cannot  be  counted  on  to  pull  more 
than  two  cars  holding  3  cu.  yds.  each,  on  a  level  track  of  the 
kind  ordinarily  used  in  contract  work. 

The  3-ft.  gage  track  commonly  used  is  laid  with  rails  weighing 
16  to  40  Ibs.  per  yard  of  single  rail.  A  30  or  35-lb.  rail  makes  a 
track  that  is  not  easily  kinked  under  the  loads,  even  when  ties  are 
spaced  4  ft.  centers.  .A  6  X  6-in.  tie,  5  ft.  long,  is  the  best  size.  I 
have  tried  4  X  4-in.  ties,  but  they  are  easily  split  by  the  spikes,  and 
are  not  of  much  value  after  being  used  once ;  whereas  the  6  X  6-in. 
ties  can  be  laid  4  to  6  times.  After  the  rails  and  ties  are  delivered, 
and  the  roadway  graded,  such  a  track  can  be  laid  for  $100  per  mile, 
or  ?2  per  100  ft.,  when  wages  are  15  cts.  per  hr.  And  the  track 
can  be  torn  up  and  loaded  on  wagons  for  $1  per  100  ft.  ;  there  being 
1  ton  of  30-lb.  rails  and  375  ft.  B.  M.  of  6  X  6-in  X  5-ft.  ties  per 
100  ft.  of  track. 

In  railroad  work  it  is  usually  necessary  to  build  a  trestle  through 
which  the  cars  are  dumped  in  making  the  embankment.  The  trestles 
usually  consist  of  two  posts  per  bent,  the  posts  being  of  round 
timber,  capped  with  a  squared  stick,  and  sway  braced  with  round 
timber  saplings.  In  the  section  on  Timberwork  the  reader  will  find 
data  on  the  cost  of  trestlework. 

Summary  of  the  Cost  of  Steam  Shovel  Work.— As  above  stated, 
shovels  are  so  designed  that  about  3  dipperfuls  can  be  averaged  per 
minute  when  actually  loading  cars  ;  but  I  find  that  even  with  well 
arranged  tracks,  and  a  good  high  face,  the  necessary  delays  of  shift- 
ing the  shovel  ahead,  switching  the  trains,  moving  the  shovel  back 
to  start  a  new  swath,  etc.,  keep  the  shovel  idle  about  half  the  time. 
Occasionally,  under  exceptionally  favorable  conditions,  a  shovel  may 
average  6  or  6^  hrs.  of  actual  shoveling  per  10 -hr.  day. 

The  size  of  the  dippers,  as  listed  in  catalogues,  often  refers  to 
1  dippers  heaped  full  of  loose  earth.  I  find  that  the  actual  "place 
I  measure"  averages  about  30%  less  than  the  listed  capacity  of  a 
I  dipper,  for  not  every  dipper  goes  out  full,  and  even  if  it  does  the 
i  earth  is  not  as  compact  in  the  dipper  as  in  place. 


138  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

On  the  basis  of  3  dippers  loaded  per  minute  of  actual  work,  we 
have  the  following  for  dippers  of  different  sizes : 

Dipper. — Output  in  Cu.  Yds. — 

Nominal.  Actual  (average).  Steady  Shoveling. 

Yds.  Yds.  1 0  hrs.  5  hrs. 

1  0.7  1,260  630 
iya                        1.0                            1,800  900 

2  1.4  2,520  1,260 
2%                        1.7                            3,060                       1,530 

We  see  that  where  the  shovel  is  actually  shoveling  5  hrs.  out  of 
the  10  (and  this  is  a  good  average),  a  1-yd.  dipper  will  load  630 
cu.  yds.;  a  1%-yd.  dipper,  900  cu.  yds.;  a  2% -yd.  dipper,  1,530  cu. 
yds.  These  are  not  merely  theoretical  outputs,  for  I  have  monthly 
output  records  that  show  these  averages  for  each  10-hr,  shift. 
However,  the  track  arrangement  must  be  such  that  cars  are 
promptly  supplied  to  the  shovel,  if  any  such  average  as  900  cu.  yds. 
per  day  per  1%-yd.  dipper  is  to  be  maintained. 

Taking  the  1%-yd.  dipper  as  the  common  size,  we  may  say  that 
in  "average  earth,"  with  cars  promptly  supplied,  900  cu.  yds.  are  a 
fair  10-hr,  day's  work;  but  if  only  one  dinkey  is  used,  the  lost  time 
may  easily  be  increased  to  such  an  extent  that  650  cu.  yds.  become 
a  good  day's  work  in  "average  earth."  In  hardpan,  or  exceedingly 
tough  clay,  the  output  of  a  shovel  may  fall  to  about  half  the  out- 
put in  "average  earth"  ;  that  is,  450  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day  with  a 
1%-yd.  shovel. 

The  size  of  shovel  to  select  for  any  given  work  depends  upon  the 
yardage  of  earth  in  each  cut — not  upon  the  total  yardage  in  the 
contract.  On  very  light  cuts,  such  as  street  and  road  work,  cellars, 
etc.,  a  small  shovel  with  a  %  to  %-yd.  dipper  is  usually  most 
economic.  Use  a  small  26-ton  traction  shovel,  with  1-yd.  dipper  for 
small  railway  cuts,  where  moves  from  one  cut  to  another  will  be 
frequent.  Use  a  55  to  65-ton  shovel  with  1%  to  2 %-yd.  dipper 
where  cuts  are  heavy,  and  moves  not  very  frequent.  Use  a  75  to 
90-ton  shovel,  with  2%  to  3 %-yd.  dipper,  on  heavy  cuts,  where 
moves  are  infrequent.  Of  course  a  heavy  shovel  with  a  small  dipper 
is  necessary  in  hardpan  and  very  tough  material. 

The  cost  of  operating  a  55-ton  shovel  is  ordinarily  as  follows, 
assuming  22  days  worked  during  the  month,  and  6  months  worked 
during  the  year,  or  132  days  actually  worked  per  year: 

Per  Day 

Shovel   Crew:  Worked. 

1  engineman  on  shovel,  at  $125  per  mo $     5.70 

1  craneman  on  shovel,  at  $90  per  mo 4.10 

1  fireman  on  shovel,  at  $65  per  mo 3.00 

6  pitmen,  at  $1.75  per  10-hr,  day 10.50 

1  night  watchman,   at   $50  per  mo 2.30 

Total   shovel   crew    $  25.60 

Coal  for  shovel,  1*4   tons,  at  $4,  delivered $  &.00 

Water 3.00 

Oil    and   waste 2-50 

Interest  on  $7,200  shovel  at  6%  per  year  -f-  132  days 3.25 

Repairs  on  $7,200,  3%  per  mo.  -=-  22  days 10.00 

Depreciation  on  $7,200,  6%  per  year  -4-  132  days 3.25 

Total  steam  shovel  crew,  fuel,  repairs,  etc $  50.6Q 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  139 

Moving  and  housing   shovel  once  during  year,   say,    $500  -~ 

132  days 4.00 

Total   charges   on   shovel $  54.60 

Train  Crew: 

2  enginemen    (on  2  dinkeys),  at  $3 $  6.00 

2  trainmen,  at  $2 4.00 

6  dumpmen,    at    $1.75 10.50 

Total    train    crew $  20.50 

Coal  for  2  dinkeys,  0.6  ton,  at  $4 $  2.40 

Water     1.50 

Oil  and  waste 0.50 

Interest  on  $8,000   (2  dinkeys  and  24  cars),  at  6%  per  year 

^  132  days   3.65 

Repairs  on  $8,000,  at  1%%  per  mo.  H-  22  days 5.45 

Depreciation  on  $8.000.  at  8%  per  year  -h  132  days 4.85' 

Total  train  crew,  fuel,  repairs,  etc $  38.85 

Moving  and  housing  locomotives  and  cars  once  during  year, 

same  as  for   shovel 4.00 

Total    charges    of    locomotives    and    cars $  42.85 

Track  Crew  and  Track: 

6  men  grading  and  track  shifting,  at  $1.75 $  10.50 

Interest  on    $2,250    (rails    (35    Ibs.    per   yd.)    and   fastenings 

for  1  mile  of  track),  at  6%  -r-  132  days 1.00 

Depreciation  on  $2,250,  at  12%  -f-  132  days 2.00 

Interest   on    $750    (ties,    at   30    cts.    each,    2    miles   track),  at 

6%  -7-  132  days 0.35 

Depreciation  on  $750    (ties),  at  10%   per  mo.  -f-  22  days....        3.50 

Total  track  crew  and  track $  17.35 

Supervision,  Etc.: 

1/2   superintendent,  at  $150  per  mo $  3.50 

1  foreman,   at   $75    per   mo 3.50 

1  timekeeper,  at  $65  per  mo 3.00 

General  management,  office  expenses,  etc.,   6%  of  daily  pay- 
roll   4.00 

Total   supervision,   etc $   14.00 

Grand   total    $128.80 

Summarizing  we  have  the  following  daily  cost  and  cost  per  cu. 
yd.  when  the  daily  output  is  1,000  cu.  yds.  (or  22,000  cu.  yds.  per 
month)  : 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Per  day.  cts. 

Shovel  expenses   $  54.60  6.46 

Train    expenses    42.85  4.29 

Track    expenses     17.35  1.73 

Supervision,    etc 14.00  1.40 

Total   $128.80  12.88 

Tough    material    and    unfavorable    conditions    frequently    reduce 

the  daily  output  to  600  cu.  yds.,  and  run  the  cost  up  to  21  cts.  per 

cu.  yd. 

The  most  variable  of  the   four  main   items  of  daily   expense  is 

Track  Expense.     Often  a  large  crew  of  men  is  kept  busy  grading 

for  new  tracks,   although  it  is  rare  that  more  than   10   or   12  men 

are  thus  engaged  for  each  shovel  crew. 

The  estimated  percentages  for  repairs  and   depreciation   are  lib- 


140  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

eral,  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  repairs  increase  as  the 
machines  grow  older,  and  that  a  high  allowance  should  be  made 
for  depreciation  to  cover  obsolescence,  i.  e.,  the  "getting  out  of  date" 
or  behind  the  times. 

Depreciation  of  ties  is  especially  rapid  in  contract  work,  due  to 
the  destruction  that  occurs  from  frequent  track  shifting.  Depre- 
ciation of  rails  is  also  rapid,  due  to  their  becoming  kinked. 

The  foregoing  itemization  of  cost  should  be  taken  merely  to  repre- 
sent a  fairly  typical  example,  but  each  particular  case  will  have  its 
varying  conditions  that  must  be  considered. 

Where  temporary  trestles  must  be  built  to  carry  the  cars  out  over 
proposed  fills,  as  is  common  on  railway  work,  the  cost  of  the 
.trestles  must  be  added  to  the  above  figures.  The  cost  of  trestle- 
work  can  be  estimated  from  data  civen  in  the  section  on  Piling  and 
Timberwork,  bearing  in  mind,  however,  that  much  lighter  timbers 
can  be  used  for  dinkey  locomotives  and  trains  than  for  standard 
railway  tracks.  It  should  also  be  remembered  that  round  poles 
can  usually  be  secured  for  the  legs  or  posts  of  trestle  bents,  and 
that  each  bent  usually  has  only  two  legs.  The  squared  stringers, 
ties  and  caps  can  usually  be  recovered,  but  the  posts,  sills  and  sway 
braces  are  buried  permanently  in  the  fill. 

Cost  of  Digging  a  Well  or  Cesspool.* — Circular  wells  or  holes 
are  often  dug  for  water  supply  anl  for  cesspools  around  buildings. 

A  well  was  dug  on  Long  Island  in  a  clay  material  with  an  occa- 
sional boulder.  The  material  was  stiff  enough  to  stand  up  with- 
out shoring.  The  hole  was  8  ft.  in  diameter  and  24  ft.  deep.  For 
two  days  two  men  did  the  work,  but,  when  a  bucket  had  to  be  used, 
another  man  was  added  to  the  force.  A  three-legged  derrick,  with  a 
crank  on  it,  was  used  to  hoist  the  bucket  of  earth.  The  excavation 
was  made  entirely  with  picks  and  shovels.  There  were  1,305  cu.  ft. 
of  material  excavated,  or  about  48  cu.  yds.  A  10-hr,  day  was 
worked.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

2  men   2   days,  at   $1.50 $  6.00 

3  men  5  days,  at  $1.50 22.50 

Total $28.50 

This  gives  a  cost  of  60  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  excavating  and 
hoisting  the  material  and  dumping  it  on  the  ground  by  the  side  of 
the  hole.  This  cost  is  quite  reasonable  for  this  work. 

Cost  of  Trenching,  Cross- References.— Data  on  this  subject  will 
be  found  in  the  following  sections  of  this  book :  Waterworks, 
Sewers,  and  Miscellaneous  Costs.  Consult  the  index  under  Trenches. 

The  Cost  of  Backfilling  a  Trench  With  a  Scraper.f— Fig.  1  shows 
a  Doan  Ditching  Scraper  for  back  filling  trenches  or  ditches. 

To  backfill  a  trench,  a  rope  or  chain  about  20  ft.  long  is  fastened 
to  the  cable  chain  on  the  scraper,  and  a  team  is  hitched  on  to  the 
eid  of  the  rope.  The  team,  of  course,  works  on  one  side  of  the 
>  'ench.  The  scraper  weighs  only  75  Ibs.,  and  can  be  dragged  back 


*Enginering-Contracting,  Oct.   28,   1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  January,  1906,  p.  11. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  141 

oy  one  man,  although  some  contractors  prefer  to  have  two  men  on 
the  scraper,  especially  when  the  men  are  small. 

In  10  hrs.  a  team  and  driver  and  one  man  on  the  scraper  back- 
filled 400  lin.  ft.  of  trench  2  ft.  wide  by  7  ft.  deep.  This  is  more 
than  200  cu.  yds.  backfilled  at  a  cost  of  2y2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  With 
two  men  on  the  scraper,  and  working  very  hard,  as  much  as  700  lin. 
ft.  were  backfilled  in  a  day,  which  is  equivalent  to  less  than  2  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  In  this  case  no  tamping  was  required,  but,  even  where 
tamping  is  called  for,  a  scraper  is  much  cheaper  than  a  shovel  for 
backfilling. 

While  good  work  can  be  done  with  the  ordinary  drag  scraper,  it  is 
not  so  good  a  tool  for  backfilling  as  that  described  above,  for  three 
reasons :  First,  because  a  Doan  scraper  is  lighter ;  second,  be- 
cause a  drag  scraper  is  narrower ;  and  third,  because  a  drag 


Fig.  1.     Doan  Scraper. 

scraper  is  not  so  quickly  dumped.  The  Doan  scraper  is  made  of  oak, 
shod  with  steel  on  the  cutting  edge.  This  cutting  edge  is  4  ft.  long, 
which  means  a  good  wide  swath  cut  at  each  forward  pull.  In  addi- 
tion to  its  use  for  backfilling,  the  scraper  is  also  suited  for  use  in 
digging  ditches,  leveling  embankments,  etc.  The  scraper  is  made  by 
the  Sidney  Steel  Scraper  Co.,  of  Sidney,  Ohio. 

Prices  for  Drainage  Ditch  Work.*— The  following  figures  on  ditch 
construction  in  Minnesota  were  given  by  Mr.  George  A.  Ralph, 
State  Drainage  Engineer,  in  a  paper  before  the  Minnesota  Sur- 

* Engineering-Contracting,  July  10,   1907. 


142  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

veyors'  and  Engineers'  Society.  The  figures  are  the  average  prices 
and  are  based  on  contract  prices  for  work  on  which  Mr.  Ralph  was 
engineer;  they  cover  a  period  extending  from  1886  to  1906: 

Slip    scraper    work  :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Not   exceeding     6   ft  in   depth $0.10 

Not  exceeding  10  ft.   in  depth 012 

Not  exceeding  12   ft.   in  depth 0.14 

Elevating  grader  work 0.08 

Shovel  work,   2   to   6  ft.   deep 0.15 

Shovel  work,   2   to   10   ft.   deep 0  20 

Hayknife  work.    2   to   4   ft.   deep 0.12 

Hand  labor   in   timbered   swamps 0.15  to  0.20 

Good    dredge    work 0.08 

Dredge   work,    unfavorable   conditions 0.10  to  0.14 

Capstan    ditch,    plow   work 0.40  to  0.60 

Cost  of  Boring  Test  Holes  in  Earth.* — For  the  purpose  of  pros- 
pecting, testing  foundation  sites,  well  drilling,  etc.,  it  is  often  neces- 
sary to  bore  through  sand,  gravel,  clay,  etc.  There  are  four  com- 
mon methods  of  boring  in  earth :  ( 1 )  By  means  of  an  earth  auger  ; 
(2)  by  a  "churn  drill;  (3)  by  driving  a  pipe  and  washing  out  the 
earth  inside  the  pipe  with  the  aid  of  a  force  pump,  called  "wash 
boring";  and  (4)  by  post  hole  diggers  of  various  forms. 

Any  of  these  methods  (except  the  third)  may  be  used  either  with 
or  without  a  casing  pipe  to  preserve  the  sides  of  the  hole  from 
crumbling  in,  and  any  kind  of  power  may  be  used.  In  soil  that 
crumbles  readily  a  casing  pipe  is  always  necessary  where  the  hole 
must  be  sunk  to  any  considerable  depth ;  but  by  the  exercise  of  a 
little  ingenuity  it  is  often  possible  to  bore  even  in  dry  sand  with- 
out using  a  casing  pipe.  We  are  indebted  to  Mr.  J.  M.  Rudiger  for 
the  following  hint,  which  will  be  found  exceedingly  useful  in  boring 
in  sand  up  to  depths  of  about  30  feet:  Pour  one  or  more  barrels  of 
water  on  the  sand  at  the  site  of  the  proposed  bore  hole.  The  water 
will  pass  vertically  downward,  spreading  no  great  distance  laterally. 
In  the  sand  thus  made  damp,  an  earth  auger  may  be  used  to  bore 
without  any  caving  in  of  the  sides.  If  the  hole  is  to  be  used  as  a 
well,  lower  a  casing  pipe  into  it  after  water  has  been  struck. 

Cost  of  Hand  Auger  Prospecting. — Mr.  Charles  Catlett  is  author- 
ity for  the  following  methods  of  prospecting  for  deposits  of  hema- 
tite in  Virginia.  The  set  of  tools  consists  of  a  steel  auger  bit 
twisted  into  a  spiral  (4  turns)  2  ins.  diam.,  the  steel  of  the  bit 
being  ^4  in.  thick  and  13  ins.  long  and  provided  with  a  split  point. 
This  bit  is  welded  to  an  18-in.  length  of  1-in.  wrought  pipe  having 
a  screw  threaded  end.  Another  chopping  bit  for  use  in  hard  ma- 
terial is  made  of  1%-in.  octagon  steel  with  a  2-in.  cutting  edge,  and 
is  welded  to  a  length  of  1-in.  wrought  pipe.  As  many  lengths  of 
1-in.  wrought  pipe  are  provided  as  necessary,  with  screw  couplings. 
An  iron  handle,  2  ft.  long,  is  provided  with  a  central  eye  and  with 
a  set  screw  so  that  it  can  be  fastened  to  the  1-in.  pipe  at  any  place. 
A  10-ft.  length  of  1^4 -in.  pipe,  threaded  at  each  end  for  connection 
to  the  1-in.  pipe,  is  provided  for  use  in  giving  weight  to  the  pipe 
drill  rods  in  chm-ning.  The  other  tools  are:  A  sand  pump  of  1  or 
2  ft.  of  1-in.  pipe  with  a  leather  valve,  and  cord  for  lowering  it ; 


* Engineering-Contracting,  January,   1006,  p.   11. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  1-13 

two  pairs  of  pipe  tongs;  two  monkey  wrenches;  25-ft.  tape;  flat 
tile  ;  spring  balance  ;  oil  can  ;  water  bucket,  etc.  In  boring  through 
soft  material,  the  auger  is  rotated  by  two  men,  raised  every  few 
minutes,  scraped  clean,  and  the  handle  fastened  higher  up  on  the 
rods.  In  hardpan  or  rock  the  churn  bit  is  used,  and  the  sludge  is 
removed  either  with  the  auger  or  with  the  sand  pump.  The  greatest 
depth  penetrated  with  this  outfit  was  80  ft.  Up  to  a  depth  of 
25  ft.  two  men  suffice;  from  25  to  35  ft,  three  men;  35  to  50  ft., 
three  men,  the  third  man  standing  on  a  rough  timber  frame  15  or 
20  ft.  high,  so  that  the  pipe  need  not  be  un  jointed  when  raised. 
For  depths  of  50  ft.  more  the  pipe  is  un  jointed  when  raised.  The 
following  are  progress  records  on  eight  holes  : 


Through.  Ft. 

Sand  and   clay  ................................      2 

Yellow    clay    .................................      6 

Hematite   ore    ................................      5 

Clay   and   ore  .................................      3 

Total     ...................................    16 

Time  of  2  men.   1  0  hrs. 
fCost  per  ft,  18.7  ctsv 

HOLE    B. 

Through.  Ft. 

Yellow    clay    .................................    12 

Black  Hint  .................................. 

Yellow  clay   ..................................      2 

White    sand     ..................  ...............      1 

Sandstone     ...................................      2 

Total     .............  ......................    18 

Time.    2   men,   5   hrs. 
tCost  per  ft,   8.3  cts. 

HOLE   C. 

Through.  Ft. 

Sand    ........................................      1 

Shale     .......................................      4 

Yellow  clay  and  sand  ..........................      9 

Sandstone     ...................................      5 

Total   ....................................   19 

Time,  2  men.  8%  hrs. 
t  Cost  per  ft,  13.4  cts. 

HOLE   D. 

Through.  Ft. 

Yellow  clay  ..................................    11 

Solid  ore    ....................................      8 

Total     ...................................   2Q 

Time.   2   men.   6   hrs. 
t  Cost  per  ft,   6.9   cts. 

HOLE  E. 

Through.  Ft. 

Sand  and   gravel  ..............................      1 

Clay     ........................................    28 

Total     ...................................   29 

Time.    2   men.    5   hrs. 
t  Cost  per  ft.,   5   cts.  . 


t  Assuming  wages  at  15  cts.  per  hour. 


144  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

HOLE   F. 

Through.  Ft. 

Loose   slide 3 

Clay     7 

Shale   ore    6 

Wash   ore 24 

Total     40 

Time,  2  men,  11  hrs. ;  3  men,  4  hrs. 
t  Cost  per  ft.,   12.7  cts. 

HOLE   G. 

Through  Ft. 

Sand  and  drift*    19 

Clay    33 

Total     52 

Time.  2  men,  15  hrs.  :  3  men,  4  hrs. 
tCost  per  ft..  12.1  cts. 

HOLE    H. 

Through.  Ft. 

Sand  and  drift   12 

Clay 51 

Total    63 

Time,   2  men.   5  hrs.  :   3  men.  25  hrs. 
tCost  per   ft,    20.2   cts. 

*Sandstone  drift.     fAssuming  wages  at  15  cts.  per  hour. 

Cost  of  Wash  Borings  on  a  Canal  Survey. $ — Mr.  A.  W.  Saunders 
is  author  of  the  following: 

These  data  were  obtained  on  a  survey  of  95  miles,  covering  the 
operations  of  a  year.  The  line  ran  over  a  little  rough  country,  two 
rivers  and  a  lake.  The  land  was  not  "rocky,"  though  there  were 
some  stony  plots  of  course. 

The  equipment  was  complete  in  all  its  details,  thus  enabling  an 
economic  and  thorough  prosecution  of  the  work,  i.  e.,  making  test 
borings  to  locate  the  "rock  line"  or  elevation  of  the  rock  in  the 
earth,  on  a  survey  of  a  ship  canal. 

Two  parallel  lines  were  run  500  to  1,500  ft.  to  the  right  and  left 
of  the  main  line.  This  necessitated  a  systematic  and  constant  hustle 
to  prevent  a  stalling  of  the  work,  for  one  machine  often  was  on  one 
side  of  a  river  and  others  scattered  over  a  mile  of  ground. 

Fig.  2  is  the  Carpenter  wash  drill.  The  pump  is  to  the  left  and 
rear  of  the  hammer.  This  machine,  equipped  for  120  ft.  of  work 
with  pump,  500  ft.  of  1%-in.  water  pipe  and  all  necessary  acces- 
sories, will  now  cost  $200.  This  machine  is  readily  transported  by 
hand  through  swamps,  marshes  or  even  rivers;  and,  with  its  tool 
box,  makes  but  a  small  one-horse  load.  The  illustration  shows  a 
machine  rigged  to  put  down  deep  holes  (100  ft.).  Fig.  3  shows 
method  of  pulling  the  pipe. 

Two  2-oz.  sample  bottles  are  shown  (just  below  the  fore- 
man's knee).  The  notes  are  recorded  in  his  note  book  suitably 
ruled;  samples  of  the  borings  are  obtained,  the  bottles  labeled  and 
all  sent  into  the  office  where  the  whole  is  plotted;  the  notes  and 
samples  are  filed. 

^Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.    9,    1908. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION. 


145 


Fig.   2.     Wash  Drill. 


Fig.  3.      Pulling  Pipe. 


146 


HANDBOOK    OF    COST   DATA. 


Fig.  4  is  the  Sullivan  earth  drill.  Water  is  forced  through  the 
drill  rods  down  to  the  foot  or  "shoe"  of  the  casing  and  then  up 
In  the  casing  bringing  with  it  the  material  drilled  through,  a 
sample  of  which  is  thus  obtained  and  its  "condition"  noted.  This 


Fig.  4.     Earth  Drill. 

machine  is  not  as  easily  moved  as  the  other  and  trails  along  be- 
hind a  wagon.  It  will  cost  $300  completely  equipped  for  100  ft.  of 
work  with  500  ft.  of  1%-in.  water  pipe,  pump,  etc.  A  portable 
blacksmith  or  repair  shop,  12x12x8  ft,  equipped  with  pipe  work- 
ing tools,  forge,  etc.,  is  figured  in  with  the  cost  given  below. 

The  total  amount  of  work  in  one  year's  continuous  work  of  4 
crews  (increased  to  8  crews  for  5  months),  was  750  holes  aggregat- 
ing 33,711  ft.  exclusive  of  water.  The  cost  of  the  entire  outfit  (8 
machines  cpmplete,  repair  shop  and  tools)  was  considered  sunk  in 
the  enterprise.  The  total  cost  was  $21,862.12,  or  $230  per  mile  of 
survey,  or  64.9  cts.  per  ft.  of  boring,  divided  as  follows: 

Salaries  and  subsistence    $18,593.46 

Traveling  expenses    189.48 

Plant,   tools,   repairs    2,242.41 

Explosives    508.32 

Freight  and   express  charges    129.17 

Office   expenses 199.28 

$21,862.12 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  147 

This  includes  its  share  of  the  expense  of  the  chief  engineer,  assist- 
ant engineer  and  other  engineering  work,  as  well  as  the  plotting,  etc. 
The  actual  cost  of  all  borings,  exclusive  of  the  cost  of  the  plant,  re- 
pairs, superintending,  freight,  express,  traveling  and  incidentals, 
was  48.7  cts.  per  ft.  of  boring,  much  of  it  through  hard  compact 
material. 

The  scale  of  wages  was:  Assistant  engineer,  $150  per  month; 
superintendent,  $100  ;  assistant  superintendent,  $60  ;  foreman,  $45  ; 
laborers,  $30 ;  all  a  monthly  rate,  with  subsistence  furnished.  A 
teamster  with  a  team  received  $90  per  month  and  "found"  himself 
and  team.  A  regular  crew  consisted  of  a  working  foreman  and 
4  men. 

I  used  a  Carpenter  machine  on  the  Wachusett  Aqueduct,  Massa- 
chusetts, and  often  obtained  a  sample  of  earth  at  a  depth  of  240  ft. 
in  one-half  day. 

On  another  job  in  New  York  state,  a  Carpenter,  with  some  of 
my  Massachusetts  men,  was  17  days  on  one  hole,  including  lost  time 
by  reason  of  bad  weather,  breakages  and  2  Sundays ;  55  half- 
pound  sticks  of  dynamite  were  used  blasting  and  blowing  boulders 
out  of  the  way.  This  was  an  unusual  condition,  yet  I  quote  it, 
as  I  had  to  meet  it  and  overcome  it.  It  figures  in  with  the  cost. 

On  water  the  machines  are  set  up  on  rafts  17.5  x  24.5  ft.  composed 
of  timbers,  planks  and  oil  barrels  and  constructed  so  as  to  allow 
the  raft  to  be  moved  away  from  the  pipe  should  occasion  require. 

There  need  be  but  little  time  lost  during  the  winter.  Greater  care 
is  necessary,  however,  to  prevent  the  pumps  and  pipes  from  freezing 
at  night. 

Comparing  the  working  of  the  two  types  of  machines,  during  one- 
quarter  of  the  year  (3  months),  the  Carpenter  machine  drove  21 
holes  to  a  total  depth  of  1,501.6  ft.  at  a  total  labor  cost  of  $760.35, 
explosives  and  freight  $22.69,  which  is  equivalent  to  52.1  ct.  per  ft. 

The  Sullivan  machine  drove  22  holes  in  the  same  time  to  a  total 
depth  of  1,384.6  ft.  at  a  labor  cost  of  $687.04,  explosives  and  freight 
$32.48,  which  is  equivalent  to  51.9  ct.  per  ft. 

Comparing  these  two  same  machines  on  a  single  hole  each,  we 
have: 

Carpenter.  Sullivan. 

Loose   material    0.0  to  42.6       0.0  to  53.3 

Hard    packed    42.6  to  72.0     52.3  to  74.5 

Rock    72.0  to  73.8     74.5  to  75.8 

Time  boring    (including  1   rainy  day) ....    3.85  days       4.25  days 

Cost   per    foot    43.7  cts  45.8  cts 

Dynamite    (40%) 3.5  Ibs.  5      Ibs. 

Electric  exploders 7  5 

Time  removing  drill  rod 9  mins.  13  mins. 

Time  removing  casing 39  mins.  30  mins. 

Other  comparisons  might  show  advantage  to  the  other  machine. 

As  our  business  was  to  locate  the  rock,  I  caused  the  men  to  drill 
into  and  blast  upon  it,  thus  making  sure  of  it.  The  rock  drills  come 
along  later,  but  are  not  subjects  of  this  article. 

Neither  of  these  machines  is  adapted  to  drilling  in  rock.  They 
can  drive  the  casing  to  the  rock  and  no  further. 


148  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Wash  Drill  Borings  on  a  Canal  Survey.* — In  surveying 
in  1897-1900  the  several  possible  routes  for  the  proposed  ship 
canal  or  deep  waterway  connecting  the  Great  Lakes  with  Atlantic 
tide  waters  the  character  of  the  excavation  was  sought  by  making 
25  diamond  drill  borings  and  some  hundreds  of  wash 
drill  borings  along  the  various  routes.  In  the  following 
paragraphs  we  summarize  from  the  scattered  data  in  the  report  of 
the  Board  of  Engineers  such  facts  as  are  given  regarding  the 
methods  and  costs  of  making  the  wash  borings.  These  figures  are 
not  so  complete  in  detail  as  might  be  wished,  but,  with  the  omis- 
sions kept  in  mind,  should  prove  a  reasonably  good  guide  for  engi- 
neers about  to  undertake  similar  work.  In  presenting  the  records 
we  shall  take  up  the  several  routes  separately.  First,  however, 
some  of  the  features  common  to  the  work  as  a  whole  will  be  men- 
tioned. 

Organization. — The  organization  of  the  boring  parties  on  the 
several  routes  varied  somewhat.  Usually,  however,  they  comprised 
for  each  route  a  superintendent  having  charge  of  all  the  boring 
gangs  and  one  or  more  boring  gangs  composed  of  a  foreman,  three 
or  four  laborers,  and  a  teamster  with  team  and  wagon.  The 
wages  paid  are  not  given  in  the  report,  but  for  similarly  organized 
gangs  for  diamond  drill  work  they  were  as  follows :  Superintendent, 
$125  per  month;  foreman,  $100  per  month;  laborers,  $55  per 
month;  teamster  with  team  and  wagon,  $75  to  $90  per  month. 
It  is  fair  to  assume,  since  the  time  and  location  of  the  borings  were 
the  same  and  the  work  was  done  for  the  same  employer,  that  about 
the  same  wages  were  paid  to  the  wash  boring  gangs. 

Method  of  Borings.— The  boring  process  was  the  usual  one  of  the 
method,  but  the  outfits  used  varied  considerably.  Whatever  the  out- 
fit the  process  consisted  in  alternately  "driving  casing"  and  "drill- 
ing" until  "bottom"  was  reached.  Where  obstructions  were  en- 
countered that  could  not  be  passed  by  drilling,  they  were  removed 
by  pulling  the  drill  rod  and  lifting  the  casing  3  or  4  ft.  and  then 
firing  a  stick  or  two  of  dynamite  at  the  bottom  of  the  hole. 

Routes. — In  making  the  surveys,  two  routes  were  considered  for 
getting  from  Lake  Erie  to  Lake  Ontario.  One  was  from  Tonawanda 
via  Lockport  to  Olcott  and  the  other  was  from  Lasalle  below 
Tonawanda  to  Lewiston,  both  on  the  Niagara  River.  Two  routes 
were  also  considered  for  getting  from  Lake  Ontario  to  the  Hudson 
River.  One  route  was  from  Oswego  via  the  Oswego  River,  Oneida 
Lake  and  the  Mdhawk  Valley  to  Norman's  Kill  on  the  Hudson,  and 
the  other  was  along  the  St.  Lawrence  River  to  Lake  St.  Francis, 
then  up  Lake  Champlain  and  across  country  to  the  Hudson  River. 

Tonawanda-Olcott  and  Lasalle-Lewiston  Routes. — The  borings  for 
these  routes  were  taken  on  sections  1,500  ft.  apart  and  were  carried 
to  rock  or  to  a  depth  below  tne  bottom  of  the  proposed  30-ft.  chan- 
nel. On  the  Tonawanda-Olcott  route  the  materials  penetrated  were 
sand  and  gravel  and  sand,  clay  and  sand,  hard  clay  and  hardpanr 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  March  27,  1907. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  149 

and  on  the  Lasalle-Lewiston  route  they  were  sand,  gravel,  clay  and 
hardpan.  The  force  maKing  the  borings  consisted  of  one  superin- 
tendent and  three  boring  parties,  each  composed  of  a  foreman, 
three  laborers  and  a  teamster  with  a  team  to  haul  water  and  move 
the  machines  from  hole  to  hole.  In  all  404  holes  were  bored  to  an 
aggregate  depth  of  9,624  ft.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 
Item.  Total.  Per  foot. 

Salaries     $5,552.11     $0.5769 

Traveling   expenses    123.92       0.0128 

Plant    649.05        0.0673 

Explosives    . 223.87        0.0232 

Freight  and  express    0.70        

Office   expenses    . .  .• 33.00       0.0034 

$6,582.65      $0.6863 

These  figures  do  not  include  the  cost  of  surveys  locating  the 
bore  holes,  but  they  do  include  the  total  cost  of  the  plants  which 
was  considered  sunk  when  the  work  was  completed. 

Oswego-Mohawk  Route,  Western  Division. — The  borings  on  the 
Western  Division  of  the  Oswego-Mohawk  route  extended  from  Os- 
wego  to  Rome  and  comprised  the  work  in  Peter  Scott's  swamp, 
Oneida  Lake  and  Oswego  River  and  Oswego  Harbor.  For  the 
Oswego  river  and  harbor  work  the  machines  were  mounted  on  small 
flatboats  with  open  wells  at  the  center.  The  work  on  Oneida  Lake 
was  done  through  the  ice.  In  all  750  holes  were  bored  to  an  aggre- 
gate depth  of  33,711  ft.  and  including  the  depth  in  water.  The 
cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Total.       Per  foot 

Salaries $19,645.96     $0.5827 

Traveling   expenses    219.75       0.0065 

Plant 3,035.00       0.0900 

Explosives 508.32       0.0091 

Freight  and  express 203.77       0.0065 

Office   expenses    199.28       0.0059 

Total     $23,812.08     $0.7007 

Oswego-Mohawk    Route,    Eastern    Division. — The   work   on   this 

route  comprised  290  soundings  by  hand  with  a  steel  rod  and  1,562 

actual  borings,   amounting  together  to    55,521   ft.   aggregate   depth. 

As   indicating   the   character   of   the  boring   the  following  table   is 

given : 

Earth   ...    7,611 

Sand    20,706 

Clay    9,880 

Blue  clay 177 

Gravel    2,815 

Shale 161 

Hardpan    100 

Quicksand   1,529 

Sand  and  gravel 2,728 

Sand  and  clay   3,176 

Clay  and  gravel    760 

Sand  and  shale   262 

Clay  and  shale    902 

Gravel  and  stone    105 

Gravel  and  boulder    177 

Hardpan  and  boulder    87 

Hardpan  and  stone    36 

Sand  and   cobble    ...  63 


150  'HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Gravel  and  shale    292 

Sand,   gravel  and  stone    77 

Sand,    loam   and   mud 900 

Sand,  clay  and  gravel   .  .  .  . 1,843 

Gravel  and  cobble 91 

Mud    417 

Rock    626 

Total  penetration,   ft 55,521 

Four  types  of  machines  were  used  on  the  work,  two  being  manu- 
facturers machines,  one  a  Pierce  well  boring  machine  and  one  a 
Sullivan  wash  drill,  and  two  being  home-made  affairs.  The  first 
of  these  latter  consisted  of  a  simple  tripod,  with  a  pulley  at  the 
apex  and  a  rope  passing  over  the  pulley  and  attached  alternately 
to  a  wooden  maul  for  driving  casing  and  to  the  drill  rod.  The  sec- 
ond of  these  home-made  devices  was  more  elaborate.  It  consisted  of 
a  frame  like  a  small  pile  driver,  that  is,  two  leads  with  back  braces 
mounted  on  base  timbers.  The  leads  were  15  ft.  high  and  the  dis- 
tance between  the  bottoms  of  the  leads  and  back  braces  was  4  ft. 
The  base  extended  2  ft.  in  front  of  the  leads.  A  pulley  between  the 
leads  at  the  top  and  one  set  in  brackets  in  front  of  it  provided  for 
handling  the  hammer  and  the  drill  rods.  The  hammer  was  of  iron, 
with  a  hollow  in  the  bottom  for  a  wooden  cushion.  In  operation 
the  machine  was  guyed  by  two  wire  ropes.  It  could  be  loaded  onto 
a  two-horse  wagon  in  15  minutes  and  unloaded  and  set  up  in  the 
same  length  of  time. 

The  boring  gangs  each  consisted  of  a  foreman,  three  or  four 
laborers  and  a  teamster  and  double  team.  A  superintendent  of 
borings  had  charge  of  all  the  gangs.  The  borings  varied  from  a 
few  feet  to  190  ft.  in  depth.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as 
follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Salaries $26,470.80         $0.4769 

Traveling   expenses 687.62  0.0124 

Plant,    repairs   and   tools 2,287.03  0.0412 

Explosives    182.20  0.0033 

Freight   and   express 131.56  0.0027 

Office   expenses    398.08  0.0054 

Total     $30,057.29          $0.5419 

Champion  Route,  Ogdensburg  to  Lake  St.  Francis. — The  borings 
along  this  route  were  made  partly  on  land  and  partly  in  water* 
using  a  Sullivan  machine.  The  division  was  as  follows : 

Item.  No.  holes.     Ft.  depth. 

Sand  borings 148  7,052 

Water  borings   151  2,123 

Total    - 299  9^175 

The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Salaries     $6,103.12  $0.6552 

Traveling  expenses 438.37  0.0477 

Plant,    repairs,    tools 830.92  0.0905 

Explosives 319.38  0.0347 

Freight    and    express 72.54  0.0078 

Office   expenses    54.54  0.0059 

Total     $7,818.87         $0.8418 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  151 

Champlain  Route,  Hudson  River  Division. — This  line  of  borings 
began  in  Lake  Champlain  at  Port  Henry  and  ran  to  Whitehall, 
thence  across  country  to  Fort  Edward  on  the  Hudson  River  and 
thence  down  the  river  to  the  State  Dam  at  Troy.  From  Troy  to 
Fort  Edward  one  party  consisting  of  a  foreman,  three  laborers  and 
a  teamster  and  2  horses  made  the  borings  on  land,  and  one  party 
consisting  of  a  foreman  and  three  laborers  made  the  borings  in  the 
river.  At  Fort  Edward  the  river  party  was  transferred  to  land, 
giving  two  land  parties  to  Whitehall.  For  the  river  work  a 
catamaran  was  used  since  it  could  be  taken  apart  and  carried 
around  dams.  On  Lake  Champlain  the  borings  were  made  through 
the  ice.  As  most  of  the  work  was  done  in  cold  weather  it  was 
necessary  to  house  the  machine  to  keep  the  pumps  and  water 
swivel  from  freezing.  A  small  shanty  was  built  on  runners  and 
hauled  from  hole  to  hole.  It  had  trap  doors  in  the  floor  and  roof 
and  contained  a  stove.  With  this  arrangement  boring  was  carried 
on  successfully  at  — 30°  F.  The  materials  penetrated  on  Lake 
Champlain  were  silt  and  sand  and  boring  was  very  easy  as  is  indi- 
cated by  the  fact  that  20,169  lin.  ft.  of  borings  were  made  for 
$2,268,  or  11.24  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  The  itemized  cost  of  the  borings 
as  a  whole  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Salaries    $6,288.23  $0.1083 

Traveling   expenses    156.49  0.0027 

Plant,    repairs,    tools 561.27  0.0097 

Explosives 40.74  0.0007 

Freight  and  express 50.40  0.0008 

Office   expenses    74.12  0.0013 

Total     $7,171.25          $0.1235 

The  total  aggregate  depth  of  hole  was  57,991  lin.  ft. 

Hudson  River  Survey,  Hudson  to  Troy,  N.  Y. — The  borings  along 
this  line  were  made  with  an  outfit  mounted  on  a  catamaran  and 
on  scows ;  silt,  clay,  coarse  and  fine  sand,  gravel  and  boulders 
were  the  materials  penetrated.  A  2%-in.  casing  and  "B  drill  rods,1 
with  X-bits  were  used.  The  drilling  gang  consisted  of  one  foreman 
and  three  laborers.  For  removing  obstructions  40%  Atlas  powder 
was  used,  from  one-half  stick  to  two  sticks  for  a  charge.  To  get 
some  of  the  holes  below  the  depth  required  for  a  30-ft.  channel 
or  to  rock  required  from  10  to  30  shots.  In  all  1,385  borings  were 
made  to  an  aggregate  depth  of  28,965  ft.  The  cost  of  the  work 
was  as  follows: 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Salaries   $5,652.57  $0.1951 

Traveling   expenses    299.89  0.0104 

Plant,    repairs,    tools 1,105.62  0.0381 

Explosives     105.98  0.0037 

Freight   and   express 68.63  0.0023 

Office   expenses    39.71  0.0011 


Total    $7,272.40          $0.2507 


152  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Boring  Test  Holes.* — In  making  test  borings  most  ma- 
chines use  water  to  wash  up  the  material  or  to  make  the  drilling 
easier,  hence  these  borings  are  called  "wash  borings."  The  water 
changes  some  earths  materially,  softening  some  and  washing  away 
fine  sands.  For  this  reason  wash  borings  are  not  always  satisfac- 
tory, where  samples  of  the  earth  are  desired.  A  machine  that  will  do 
this  work  without  water,  and,  at  the  same  time,  takes  a  core,  is  of 
great  value  to  engineers  and  contractors. 

Fig.  5  shows  a  light,  inexpensive  and  portable  machine  that  will 
do  this  work  quite  cheaply.  Its  operation  is  simple,  and  the  general 
principle  is  as  follows : 

The  drilling  is  done  with  one  of  several  tools — adapted  to  the 
particular  kind  of  material  being  drilled — attached  to  the  drilling 
rod.  The  tool  and  rod  are  operated  inside  the  casing  by  the  men 
oil  the  platform,  who  raise  and  drop  them  like  a  "churn"  drill. 
The  men  on  the  ground  rotate  the  casing,  which  has  a  sharp  cut- 
ting shoe  on  the  lower  end.  The  casing,  with  its  burden  of  plat- 
form and  men,  thus  keeps  cutting  and  sinking  into  the  ground 
several  inches  ahead  of  the  tool.  A  horse  may  be  substituted  for 
the  men  who  rotate  the  casing. 

The  material  which  enters  the  casing  is  drilled  and  forced  into  a 
sand  pump  at  the  same  time.  The  pump  is  occasionally  lifted  out 
of  the  casing,  emptied  and  the  contents  noted.  Any  material  can 
be  penetrated  until  the  solid  bed  rock  is  reached.  An  accurate  core 
Is  obtained,  and  the  exact  nature  of  the  ground  drilled  is  readily 
shown. 

Four-inch  pipe  is  generally  used,  with  a  special  coupling  that 
makes  a  perfectly  flush  joint ;  that  is,  all  of  the  couplings  have  the 
same  outside  diameter  as  the  pipe,  which  makes  it  very  easy  either 
to  sink  or  remove/  this  casing.  Instead  of  the  4-in.  pipe  or  casing, 
3-in.  or  even  2^ -in.  casing  can  be  used  if  desired,  and  it  will  make 
more  rapid  work,  but  of  course  would  give  a  smaller  core. 

After  the  hole  is  finished,  the  pipe  is  easily  withdrawn  because 
the'  casing,  having  been  constantly  rotated,  is  always  loose,  both 
while  sinking  and  removing. 

In  estimating  the  cost  of  operating  this  drill  there  is  little  else 
to  be  calculated  besides  the  labor,  as  the  repairs  constitute  a  small 
part  of  the  operating  expense.  Of  the  laborers  employed,  one  must 
be  a  foreman  or  driller,  another  an  ordinary  pipeman,  and  the  bal- 
ance of  the  crew  common  laborers.  When  the  casing  or  piping  with 
its  platform  is  rotated  by  a  horse,  instead  of  the  men  on  the  ground, 
it  effects  quite  a  saving  in  the  cost  by  dispensing  with  three  or 
four  men.  If  the  ground  does  not  contain  heavy  boulders,  and  the 
holes  are  not  over  35  of  40  ft.  deep,  six  men  will  be  sufficient,  or 
three  or  four  men  and  a  horse ;  the  cost  of  this  crew  will  gener- 
ally be  not  more  than  $15.00  per  day. 

With  the  4-in.  size  hole  50  ft.  of  hole  per  day  have  been  drilled 
at  a  cost  of  30  cts.  per  foot.  Twenty-five  to  thirty  feet  of  hole  per 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  29,  1908. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION. 


Fig.  5.     Hand  Drill. 


154  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

day    will    be    averaged    through    hard    cemented    gravel    containing 
boulders. 

Mr.  Thos.  G.  Ryan  used  one  of  these  drills  on  Long  Island  put- 
ting down  a  number  of  holes  through  sand  and  gravel,  with  occa- 
sional strata  of  clay,  and  in  some  cases  encountering  large  boulders. 
About  40  test  borings  were  made,  each  hole  averaging  59^  ft,  the 
total  lineal  feet  drilled  being  2,454.  The  time  consumed  in  this 
work  was  73  days,  working  9  hrs.  per  day.  The  cost  given  below 
includes  the  drilling,  drawing  the  casing,  and  moving  and  setting 
up  drill,  thus  covering  a  number  of  removals  over  a  considerable 
perrod  of  time. 

The  total  cost  of  the  work  was : 

1  foreman  73   days,  at  $4.00 $292.00 

1  pipeman  73  days,  at  $3.00 219.00 

3  laborers  73  days,  at  $1.50  each 328.50 

1  horse  73  days,  at  $1.00 73.00 

Depreciation,  interest,  renewals  and  incidentals..     81.76 

Total  cost   $994.26 

The  average  work  done  each  day  was  33.6  ft,  which  gives  the 
following  unit  cost: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Foreman $0.119 

Pipeman    0.089 

Laborer 0.134 

Horse    0.030 

Interest,  repairs,  deprec.,  etc 0.033 

Total    $0~405 

The  machine  is  the  Empire  Hand  Drill,  made  by  the  New  York 
Engineering  Co.,  2  Rector  St.,  New  York  City. 

In  this  article*  we  give  the  work  of  a  hand  drill  used  for 
prospecting  in  Colombia,  South  America.  The  drill  was  an  Empire 
Hand  Drill,  manufactured  by  the  New  York  Engineering  Co.  of 
New  York.  The  work  was  done  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  Clar- 
ence R.  Snow,  during  the  autumn  of  1908. 

The  work  was  done  with  native  peons  or  Indians,  who  had  never 
seen  machinery  of  any  kind  before.  The  country  in  which  the  holes 
were  being  sunk  was  covered  with  forest,  the  bush  and  under- 
growth in  many  places  being  very  heavy.  To  move  the  drill 
from  hole  to  hole  a  narrow  path  was  cut  through  the  undergrowth 
6  or  7  ft.  high.  A  small  flat  bottom  boat  was  used  to  carry  the 
drill  across  the  river,  there  being  consumed  about  half  an  hour  to 
do  this.  As  there  are  no  roads  in  Colombia  it  would  be  almost 
impossible  to  work  a  steam  drill,  owing  to  the  difficulty  of  moving 
it  from  place  to  place. 

Four  men  were  used  to  turn  the  casing,  and  four  men  did  the 
drilling,  an  additional  man  being  used  for  cutting  trails.  The  en- 
tire crew  was  used  to  draw  the  casing  and  move  the  drill  from 
hole  to  hole.  The  following  is  a  record  of  seven  days'  work. 

First  Day. — Carried  outfit  across  river  in  boat  and  began  hole 
No.  1.  Made  14  ft.  in  top  soil  and  11  ft.  in  gravel  by  5  p.  m. 


• Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  6,  1909. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  155 

Second  Day. — Finished  hole  No.  1,  2%  ft.  more  to  bed  rock,  total 
27  Yz  ft.  Pulled  casing  and  began  hole  No.  2,  100  ft.  distant  before 
noon,  and  sunk  the  hole  17  ft.  deep  to  bed  rock  before  4  p.  m. 
Pulled  casing  and  moved  to  hole  No.  3,  drilling  9  ft.  in  overburden. 

Third  Day. — Finished  hole  No.  3,  24  ft.  deep.  Pulled  casing  and 
started  hole  No.  3  by  2  p.  m.  Passed  through  12  ft.  of  over- 
burden and  10  ft.  of  sand  and  gravel  by  5  p.  m. 

Fourth  Day. — Finished  hole  No.  4,  which  was  28  ft.  deep  to  bed 
rock.  Pulled  casing,  cut  trail  and  moved  to  hole  No.  5,  300  ft. 
northeast  of  hole  No.  4,  and  started  new  hole  by  noon.  After  drill- 
ing 17  ft.  through  overburden  an  old  buried  tree  was  struck,  but  the 
drill  went  through  it  easily.  By  5  p.  m.  22  ft.  were  made  in  this 
hole. 

Fifth  Day. — Finished jhole  No.  5,  28  ft,  and  after  pulling  casing 
began  hole  No.  6.  Got  down  14  ft.  in  overburden  and  9  ft.  in  gravel 
by  5  p.  m. 

Sixth  Day. — Finished  hole  No.  6,  going  down  9  ft.  more  to  bed 
rock.  Moved  outfit  across  the  river  and  about  a  mile  up  the 
river,  and  at  2  :45  started  hole  No.  7.  Made  6  ft.  in  overburden  and 
9  ft.  in  gravel  by  5  p.  m. 

Seventh  Day. — Finished  hole  No.  7,  29  ft.,  to  bed  rock,  and  moved 
60  ft.  north  and  sunK  hole  No.  8,  22  ft.,  to  rock.  Started  hole 
No.  9,  50  ft.  north,  and  made  6  ft.  in  top  soil  by  5  p.  m. 

Thus  in  seven  days  of  drilling  213%  ft.  were  drilled,  an  average 
of  30%  ft.  per  day.  It  will  be  noticed  that  as  the  men  became  ac- 
customed to  the  work,  they  improved  a  little  each  day. 

With  the  Empire  drill  an  auger  drill  spoon  is  used  that  will  cut 
through  hard  soils,  roots  and  sunken  logs  and  easily  penetrates 
gravel.  It  picks  up  any  material  and  brings  it  as  a  core  to  the 
surface  with  a  minimum  amount  of  disturbance  of  the  material  as 
It  actually  lies  in  the  ground.  Water,  as  a  rule,  is  not  used  to  assist 
in  drilling,  so  the  auger  will  pick  up  the  finest  particles  of  gold. 
If  it  is  desired  to  use  water  in  drilling  it  can  be  done.  The  casing 
is  pulled  by  levers  with  a  very  simple  device. 

With  wages  at  $1  per  day  for  the  men  the  expenses  were  about 
$10  per  day,  allowing  $1  for  incidentals,  the  cost  per  foot  was  about 
33  cts.  With  standard  wages  the  cost  per  lin.  ft.  would  have 
been  about  47  cts. 

Cost  of  Testing  for  Bridge  Foundations.*— Mr.  F.  H.  Bainbridge 
is  author  of  the  following: 

This  article  is  confined  to  bridge  foundations,  although  much  of 
what  follows  is  also  applicable  to  foundations  for  buildings  and 
hydraulic  structures  and  preliminary  examination  for  tunnel  con- 
struction. 

Two  methods  of  testing  only  are  effective,  an  open  pit  or  well  for 
shallow  foundations  and  the  core  drill  for  deep  foundations.  Sound- 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  25,  1908,  reprint  from  "Mine  and 
Quarry." 


156  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ing  with  gas  pipe  or  rods  in  shallow  foundations  and  the  com- 
mon well  drill  in  deep  foundations  are  not  satisfactory.  Fig.  6 
shows  two  cross-sections  of  a  stream  at  the  same  point,  the  dotted 
line  being  the  line  of  supposed  ledge  rock  as  determined  by  a  well 
drill  operating  a  chopping  bit ;  and  the  full  line,  the  correct  loca- 
tion of  the  ledge  rock,  determined  with  a  Sullivan  "HN"  diamond 
core  drill. 

In  general  two  sets  of  borings  should  be  made  for  an  important 
bridge  crossing ;  the  first  set,  a  number  of  borings  on  the  center 
line  of  the  proposed  location,  to  determine  whether  the  site  is  a 
favorable  one,  and,  if  favorable,  to  determine  by  approximate  esti- 
mate the  most  economical  location  of  the  piers  and  the  length  of  the 
spans.  In  a  general  way  it  may  be  assumed  that  the  economical 
relation  is  reached  when  the  cost  of  the  substructure  equals  the 
cost  of  the  superstructure  ;  but  inasmuch  ais  the  cost  of  the  super- 
structure can  be  determined  with  considerable  accuracy,  while  the 
cost  of  the  substructure  is  involved  in  great  uncertainty,  the  length 
of  the  spans  selected  should  exceed  that  of  the  apparent  econom- 
ical relation.  The  length  of  spans  chosen  may  also  be  influenced  by 
other  than  economical  considerations,  such  as  government  require- 
ments, or  the  liability  of  ice  to  gorge  against  the  bridge. 

Having  made  a  tentative  location  of  the  piers,  borings  should  be 
made  at  each  pier,  and  in  the  case  of  pneumatic  or  open  dredged 
caisson  foundations,  one  boring  snould  be  put  down  at  each  of  the 
four  corners  of  the  caisson. 

The  preliminary  borings  may  often  be  dispensed  with  when  there 
are  well  records  on  both  sides  of  the  river  in  the  vicinity.  These 
well  records  can  almost  always  be  found  in  the  various  state  geo- 
logical reports,  which  can  be  had  at  any  public  library  in  the  state. 
In  case  of  the  borings  at  Pierre,  South  Dakota,  to  be  described  later, 
the  well  records  were  so  good  that  borings  to  determine  the  length 
of  the  spans  were  not  necessary. 

In  cases  where  pile  foundations  are  feasible  and  the  river  bottom 
is  firm  enough  to  lay  concrete  on,  no  borings  are  necessary,  the  re- 
quired length  of  piling  being  best  determined  by  driving  experi- 
mental piles ;  but  where  the  river  bottom  is  soft,  as  it  is  in  most 
streams  with  a  sluggish  or  reversing  current,  borings  should  be 
made,  the  softer  material  being  taken  out  dry  with  a  sawtooth  bit. 
This  is  feasible  in  the  hardest  clay  or  the  softer  shales  and  gives  a 
perfect  knowledge  of  the  material  encountered.  Unless  dry  cores 
are  taken  when  feasible,  a  hard  clay  in  every  way  suitable  for  a 
foundation  may  be  overlooked  and  provision  made  for  carrying  the 
foundation  farther  down  than  necessary. 

In  pneumatic  work  an  accurate  set  of  borings  with  a  core  drill 
Is  of  incalculable  value.  These  advantages  are : 

1st.  The  final  location  of  the  caisson  can  be  accurately  deter- 
mined and  cut  stone  and  timber  ordered  without  any  waste  or  delay 
waiting  for  material  for  which  no  provision  had  been  made. 

2d.  The  contractor  in  bidding  on  the  work  knows  exactly  what 
material  is  to  be  encountered,  and  will  make  a  lower  bid  when  there 


EARTH  EXCAVATION. 


157 


158  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Is  no  uncertainty.  The  difference  in  cost  between  handling  in  a 
caisson  material  which  can  be  taken  out  through  the  blow  pipe  and 
material  which  must  be  locked  out  in  buckets  is  very  great. 

3d.  The  piers  can  be  located  in  the  most  economical  position. 
Often  a  change  of  a  few  feet  in  locating  a  pier  may  make  a  differ- 
ence in  cost  of  tens  of  thousands  of  dollars. 

4th.  Much  can  be  learned  as  to  the  character  of  the  foundation 
that  cannot  be  learned  from  the  interior  of  the  caisson.  In  lime- 
stone formations  subterranean  caverns  are  common,  and  in  both 
lime  and  sandstone  formations  overhanging  subterranean  cliffs  are 
found.  The  existence  of  these  can  be  determined  with  the  drill, 
but  cannot  be  learned  from  the  interior  of  the  caisson. 

Nearly  the  whole  North  American  continent  north  of  the  Ohio 
River  and  east  of  the  Missouri  River  has  at  various  periods  been 
covered  with  glacial  drift ;  in  fact,  the  Ohio  and  Missouri  Rivers 
were  formed  by  glacial  action.  Below  the  recent  alluvial  deposits 
In  a  riverbed  in  this  district  will  be  found  glacial  deposits  of  sand, 
gravel,  clay,  till,  or  boulders,  sometimes  all  together  in  a  hetero- 
geneous mass.  The  extreme  determined  movement  of  the  greatest 
glacial  sheet  was  1,500  miles.  Boulders  of  granite  from  Canada 
and  Minnesota  were  carried  as  far  as  Kansas  and  Missouri.  One 
of  the  boulders  in  the  river  bed  is  therefore  liable  to  be  mistaken. 
for  ledge  rock.  Usually  the  character  of  the  ledge  rock  can  be 
learned  from  state  surveys  and  samples  secured  from  the  outcrops, 
which  are  located  in  these  surveys.  When  a  core  is  obtained  which 
can  be  identified  as  the  same  as  ledge  rock  it  may  or  may  not  be  the 
actual  ledge.  If  the  core  is  granite  or  some  older  formation  than 
the  ledge  rock,  it  is  certain  that  a  boulder  has  been  reached. 
More  recent  rocks  sometimes  exist  as  pockets  in  earlier  forma- 
tions, so  that  a  mere  difference  in  the  character  of  the  rock  from 
the  bed  rock  is  not  conclusive  evidence  that  bed  rock  has  not  been 
reached.  When  such  a  condition  is  liable  to  be  found  in  any 
locality  it  will  usually  be  mentioned  in  the  state  geological  surveys. 
Boulders  of  granite  and  other  hard  rocks  must  be  removed  by 
placing  sticks  of  dynamite  at  the  bottom  of  the  stand-pipe,  with- 
drawing the  pipe,  and  exploding  with  an  electric  battery.  Boulders 
of  softer  rock  can  be  cut  up  with  the  chopping  bits  and  the  casing 
driven  through  them.  As  boulders  are  usually  separated  by  a 
matrix  of  sand  or  clay,  the  drop  of  the  rods  and  the  wash  will 
show  them  as  boulders  and  not  bedrock  in  most  cases,  though  this  is 
not  always  conclusive,  as  pockets  sometimes  filled  with  sand  are 
common  in  limestone  ledges. 

No  definite  rules  can  be  given  to  cover  all  cases,  and  it  is  best, 
especially  where  there  is  any  uncertainty,  to  put  down  a  hole  at 
each  of  the  four  corners  of  a  pier.  Where  the  drill  strikes  first 
rotten  or  sap  rock,  gradually  increasing  in  hardness  until  known 
ledge  rock  is  reached,  this  is  conclusive  evidence  of  bed  rock.  It 
is  best  to  take  out  very  soft,  rotten  rock  with  a  saw  tooth  bit 
working  dry. 

Drill  tests  for  foundations  of  the  Chicago  and  Northwestern  Rail- 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  159 


way  bridge  across  the  Missouri  River  at  Pierre,  South  Dakota, 
were  begun  in  December,  1905.  The  drill  used  was  a  Sullivan  Ma- 
chinery Company's  "HN"  diamond  drill,  operating  2-in.  core  bits ; 
4 14 -in.  stand-pipe  and  3-in.  casing,  both  with  flush  joints,  were 
used.  Borings  at  the  sites  of  the  river  piers  were  made  from  the 
ice.  In  general  four  holes  were  put  down  at  the  site  of  each 
pier.  On  diagonally  opposite  corners  holes  were  put  down  to 
about  90  ft.  below  low  water,  and  on  the  other  two  corners  to 
60  ft.  below  low  water.  Thirty-three  holes  in  all  were  put  down, 
aggregating  a  length  below  the  river  bed  or  ground  level  of  2,379 
ft.,  of  which  1,456  ft.  was  in  sand,  gravel,  and  boulders,  and  823 
ft.  in  shale,  with  occasional  small  lenticular  pieces  of  limestone. 
On  the  east  or  left  bank  heavy  beds  of  glacial  drifts  were  encoun- 
tered and  there  was  some  difficulty  in  putting  down  stand-pipe  and 
casing.  The  boulders  were  broken  up  with  dynamite.  In  shale, 
saw  tooth  bits  were  used  entirely,  the  bortz  bit  being  used  only  in 
the  limestone  pockets. 

The  work  of  setting  up  the  drill  was  started  December  5,  1905, 
and  the  first  boring  started  December  8,  1905,  with  one  shift  work- 
ing 10  hours.  On  January  17,  1906,  a  second  shift  working  10 
hours  was  put  on. 

Shale  was  found  practically  level  over  the  entire  cross-section 
at  42  ft.  below  water.  There  was  apprehension  upon  encountering 
an  underground  flow  of  water  in  the  upper  strata  of  the  shale, 
but  in  no  case  was  this  more  than  a  few  feet  below  the  top  of 
the  shale. 

Caissons  for  the  permanent  piers  penetrated  the  shale  from  4 
to-  6  ft.  and  the  material  encountered  was  accurately  described 
in  the  record  of  the  borings.  The  cost  of  the  drilling,  including  10 
per  cent  for  depreciation  of  plant  and  tools,  was  about  $2,400, 
or  about  $1  per  ft. 

In  1908  the  Northwestern  Railway  began  tests  to  locate  suitable 
foundations  for  a  new  bridge  over  the  Mississippi  River  at  Clinton, 
Iowa.  The  same  apparatus,  tools,  piping,  etc.,  were  used  at  Pierre, 
but  the  manner  of  working  and  the  materials  encountered  were 
essentially  different.  These  borings  were  started  in  April,  and 
it  became  necessary  to  mount  the  drill  on  a  scow.  The  scow  was 
15  ft.  wide,  32  ft.  long  on  the  bottom  and  3 7.  ft.  long  on  top,  with 
a  draft  of  16  ins.  when  loaded.  Experience  in  rough  water  showed 
that  a  scow  10  ft.  longer  on  top  with  somewhat  more  rake  to 
the  ends  would  have  been  more  serviceable.  The  tripod  consisted 
of  three  pieces  of  Douglas  fir,  5x8  ins.  and  32  ft.  long.  An  8-in. 
wrought  iron  pipe  near  the  center  of  the  scow,  bolted  with  a  pipe 
flange  to  the  bottom  of  the  scow,  made  a  well  for  passing  the 
stand-pipe,  4%  ins.  in  diameter,  and  the  casing,  3  ins.  in  diameter. 

The  materials  encountered  were  in  order  as  follows :  Recent 
alluvial  sands,  glacial  drift  of  gravel,  sand  and  boulders,  a  shale 
consisting  of  sand  with  a  clay  matrix,  and  finally  limestone  bed 
rock.  The  upper  stratum  of  bed  rock  was  identified  by  fossils  and 
general  appearance  as  belonging  to  the  Gower  stage  of  the  Niagara 


160  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

series  of  Silurian  rocks.  This  overlaid  conformably  rock  of  the 
Delaware  stage  of  the  same  series.  In  the  middle  of  the  river  the 
Gower  rock  and  nearly  50  ft.  of  the  Delaware  rock  had  been  en- 
tirely eroded.  Great  care  was  taken  to  ascertain  the  possible 
existence  of  subterranean  pockets  or  overhanging  cliffs  in  the  rock. 
Only  two  of  these  pockets  were  found,  however,  both  in  the  same 
boring,  and  these  were  only  1  and  6  ins.  in  depth.  Both  were 
filled  with  sand,  consisting  of  about  equal  parts  of  quartz  and 
dolomite  sand.  Some  of  the  borings  were  carried  down  30  to  40 
ft.  into  the  bed  rock  to  determine  the  possible  existence  of  these 
subterranean  pockets. 

All  the  boulders  encountered  were  such  as  could  easily  be  broken 
with  the  chopping  bit,  and  no  dynamite  was  found  necessary.  To 
determine  the  consistency  of  the  shale,  cores  were  taken  out  with 
saw  tooth  bits  working  dry,  showing  perfectly  the  consistency  of 
the  material.  The  saw  tooth  bit  or  the  chopping  bit  working  with 
the  pump  gave  no  idea  of  what  this  material  was,  and  without  the 
expediency  of  the  dry  core  an  excellent  foundation  would  have 
been  overlooked,  and  a  foundation  sought  30  ft.  lower.  It  is  in- 
tended to  use  pneumatic  caissons  in  all  the  piers  except  the  shore 
piers. 

Borings  in  the  limestone  were  made  with  a  bortz  bit  when  the 
water  was  still,  and  with  the  chopping  bit  taking  occasional  cores 
with  the  saw  tooth  bits.  Fully  95  per  cent  of  the  boring  in  the 
limestone  was  made  with  the  bortz  bit.  The  work  of  mounting 
the  drill  was  started  April  2  and  the  first  hole  begun  April  7.  The 
work  was  finished  June  6,  working  one  shift  of  10  hrs.  per  day. 

The  aggregate  length  of  casing  put  down  was  692  ft.  The 
aggregate  length  of  casing  driven  through  hard  material  was  406.5 
ft.  The  aggregate  length  of  borings  in  shale  was  86  ft.,  and  in 
limestone  226  ft.  The  cost  was  as  follows: 

Labor $    456.16 

Coal 124.41 

Depreciation  of  bortz,  estimated. 200.00 

Scow    287.24 

Depreciation  on  tools,  pipe,  etc 200.00 


$1,267.81 

The  scow  still  has  a  value  which  is  somewhat  uncertain.  Omit- 
ting this  credit,  the  cost  amounted  to  $1.83  per  ft. 

Costs  of  Making  Test  Borings,  III.,  Etc.* — Despite  the  wide  use 
of  test  borings  few  engineers  or  contractors  seem  to  have  taken 
the  trouble  to  amass  data  on  the  cost  of  making  them,  at  least 
few  such  data  can  be  found  in  print.  The  records  which  we  give 
here  are  from  scattered  sources  and  are  less  complete  than  could 
be  wished,  but  in  default  of  better,  they  are  of  interest. 

The  several  prices  of  work  of  which  costs  are  given  were  done 
with  a  No.  80  Pierce  tubular  well  and  test  boring  rig.  This  machine 
consists  of  a  base  on  which  sets  four  uprights  serving  as  guides  for 
the  driving  hammers  and  the  pipe.  In  operation  the  base  is  set  up 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  26.  1906. 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  16J 

level  and  the  hammer  is  set  on  it.  The  four  guides  are  then  fas- 
tened in  position.  The  whole  machine  is  then  laid  over  sidewise  on 
the  ground,  the  head  casting  is  placed  and  the  hoisting  cable  is  con- 
nected up.  The  assembled  machine  is  then  lifted  to  a  vertical  posi- 
tion and  is  ready  for  work.  The  first  section  of  pipe  with  the  steel 
cutting  shoe  attached  is  then  put  in  position  by  raising  the  ham- 
mer and  attaching  the  pipe  guide  clamps.  The  pipe  is  then  driven 
by  raising  and  dropping  the  hammer  exactly  as  in  driving  a  pile. 
The  pipe  being  driven,  the  upper  part  of  the  machine  is  slid  rear- 
ward on  the  base  so  as  to  clear  the  pipe  and  a  2-in.  discharge  tee 
is  screwed  to  the  tap  of  the  pipe.  The  drill  with  water  discharge 
holes  near  the  bottom  and  the  hollow  drill  rod  are  inserted  in  the 
pipe  and  the  top  of  the  drill  rod  is  connected  by  hose  to  a  hand 
pump.  One  man  then  pumps  water  down  the  hollow  drill  rod  while 
another  churns  the  drill  up  and  down  to  chip  and  loosen  the  mate- 
rial which  is  carried  upward  through  the  annular  space  between 
pipe  and  rod  and  discharged  into  a  pail  so  that  samples  can  be 
taken.  A  second  joint  of  pipe  is  then  screwed  on  and  driven  and 
the  drilling  and  working  out  process  is  repeated.  In  this  way  by 
alternate  drilling  and  driving  the  boring  is  carried  to  the  required 
depth.  The  next  step  is  to  take  out  the  pipe  so  that  it  can  be  used 
for  a  second  hole;  this  is  accomplished  by  means  of  a  screw  jack 
apparatus.  With  the  No.  80  machine  a  2-in.  pipe  in  5  ft.  sections 
is  used.  The  limit  of  drilling  of  this  rig  is  considered  to  be  about 
125  ft,  for  deeper  holes  a  heavier  rig  is  employed. 

Illinois  and  Desplaines  Rivers  Survey. — In  making  surveys,  plans 
and  estimates  for  a  14-ft.  waterway  from  Lockport,  111.,  by  the 
Desplaines,  Illinois  and  Mississippi  rivers  to  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  test 
borings  were  made  along  the  route.  From  the  official  report  of  this 
work  submitted  to  the  U.  S.  Government  and  from  additional  data 
sent  us  by  Mr.  J.  W.  Woerman,  of  Peoria,  111.,  who  was  Assistant 
Engineer  in  charge  of  the  work  from  Lockport,  111.,  to  the  mouth 
of  the  Illinois  River,  we  have  prepared  the  following  description  of 
the  test  boring  work. 

On  one  of  the  quarter  boats  a  well  was  cut  through  the  rake  at 
one  end  through  which  to  operate  the  boring  machine.  A  lOx  10-in. 
x  32  ft.  spud  was  provided  at  each  corner  of  the  boat  to  hold  it 
fast  while  drilling.  An  office  and  living  quarters  for  the  crew  and 
a  blacksmith  shop  were  installed  on  the  boat.  The  machine  used  to 
make  the  borings  was  a  "Pierce  test  boring  rig  No.  80."  It  con- 
sisted essentially  of  a  2-in.  outer  pipe,  or  casing,  and  %-in.  inner 
pipe  or  drill,  with  arrangements  for  forcing  them  into  the  ground. 
Water  was  forced  down  the  smaller  pipe,  and  came  up  again  be- 
tween the  two  pipes,  carrying  with  it,  in  suspension,  the  material 
from  the  bottom  of  the  river.  The  casing  was  made  of  extra  strong 
wrought  iron  pipe,  screwed  together  in  5-ft.  lengths  as  it  was 
driven  down  by  a  200-lb.  hammer.  The  hammer  had  a  maximum 
fall  of  8  ft.,  and  was  kept  in  line  over  the  casing  by  four  iron 
guides.  It  was  raised  with  a  small  hand  winch.  The  drill  was 
made  of  light  wrought  iron  pipe,  to  the  top  of  which  was  attached 
a  1^-in.  hose  connected  with  a  steam  deck  pump  on  the  towboat 


162  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

A  hand  pump,  furnished  with  the  boring  machine,  was  used  only 
when  it  was  necessary  to  send  the  towboat  away  from  the  boring 
boat.  The  drill  was  churned  up  and  down  by  hand,  when  the 
outer  casing  was  not  being  driven,  and  the  material  which  came  up 
between  the  two  pipes  escaped  through  a  tee  connection  at  the  top 
of  the  large  pipe.  Samples  were  taken  frequently  by  catching  por- 
tions of  this  mixture  in  pails  and  allowing  it  to  settle.  In  order  ta 
make  the  casing  drive  easily  the  drill  was  kept  from  3  to  5  ft.  in 
advance  of  the  casing,  and  any  change  in  material  was  noted  as  the 
drill  entered  it. 

The  borings  were  made  in  or  near  the  channel,  to  a  depth  of 
about  30  ft.  below  low  water.  This  was  done  because,  when  the 
boring  boat  was  anchored  and  the  machine  was  in  operation,  it  cost 
but  very  little  more  to  go  30  ft.  than  to  stop  at  the  proposed  depth 
of  14  ft.,  and  the  additional  information  may  prove  valuable  at 
some  future  time.  As  a  rule  the  borings  were  spaced  about  half 
a  mile  apart,  but  if  rock  was  encountered,  or  if  there  was  any 
other  decided  change  in  the  character  of  the  bottom,  the  holes  were 
placed  close  enough  together  to  define  the  limits  of  the  material. 
The  work  of  making  borings  in  the  river  bed  was  completed  on  July 
2,  1904,  and  the  party  disbanded. 

The  materials  penetrated  were  mud,  sand,  gravel,  clay,  shells, 
soapstone,  coal  and  various  mixtures  of  the  above  materials.  When 
the  boring  reached  bed  rock  it  was  necessary  to  stop.  Bed  rock 
was  not  struck  very  often,  however,  and  when  it  was,  additional  bor- 
ings were  made  in  the  vicinity  to  be  sure  that  the  drill  was  not  in 
a  boulder  instead. 

The  boring  party  consisted  of  ten  men  who  were  furnished  with 
quarters  and  subsistence  which  cost  about  $15  per  month  per  man. 
The  wages  paid  the  members  of  the  party  were  as  follows: 

Rate 
4  per  month. 

1  civil  engineer  in  charge ..$125.00 

1  pilot    75.00 

1  steam   engineer    75.00 

1  fireman    50.00 

1  cook    50.00 

1  blacksmith    45.00 

1  night  watchman    35.00 

3  laborers,    at    $35.00 105.00 

10^  men    $560.00 

In  addition  to  the  above  wages  there  were  also  charged  against 
the  work  various  other  expenses  as  indicated  in  the  following  para- 
graph from  the  official  report : 

"The  cost  of  subsistence,  while  the  men  were  on  the  quarter 
boats,  has  been  charged  to  the  various  parties,  according  to  the 
number  of  men  in  each  party.  When  parties  boai'ded  away  from 
the  quarter  boats,  the  amounts  of  their  board  bills  were  charged 
directly  to  that  branch  of  the  work  upon  which  they  were  then 
engaged.  The  cost  of  the  construction  and  equipment  of  the  quarter 
boats,  the  cost  of  instruments,  tools,  office  furniture,  etc.,  was  also 
charged  pro  rata  to  the  various  branches  of  the  work.  This  was 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  163 

done  in  order  to  make  the  total  cost  agree  with  the  actual  amount 
expended  on  the  survey,  but  as  this  is  not  done  usually,  it  should 
be  taken  into  account  in  making  comparisons  with  the  cost  of 
any  other  surveys.  These  items  amounted  to  about  $18,000,  or 
more  than  one-tenth  of  the  total  amount  expended.  These  articles 
are  all  in  good  condition  and  will  give  good  service  for  many  years 
to  come.  The  cost  figures  given  also  include  a  portion  of  the  ex- 
penses of  the  Chicago  office,  as  well  as  all  expenses  connected  with 
the  Peoria  office." 

With  all  the  above  charges  included  the  cost  of  making  test  bor- 
ings on  this  survey  was : 

Total    cost     $7,797.00 

Cost,    per    hole 13.70 

Cost,  per  lin.  ft.  of  hole 0.62 

Erie  R.  R. — A  record  of  four  weeks'  work,  Nov.  7  to  Nov.  28, 
inclusive,  on  the  Erie  R.  R.,  gives  the  following  figures: 

Superintendent,    18    half   days,   at   $5 $  45.00 

Foreman,   19  days,  at  $2.50 47.50 

Laborers,    41    days,    at    $2.00 82.00 

Total $174.50 

The  total  d,_,th  of  hole  bored  was  699.1  ft.  The  labor  cost  of 
making  the  borings  was,  therefore,  24.9  cts.  per  lineal  foot  of  hole. 
The  holes  were  bored  through  sandy  red  clay. 

New  York  Central  &  Hudson  River  R.  R. — Two  test  borings  were 
made  90  ft.  deep  in  one  day  in  February,  1905,  for  some  work 
being  done  by  the  New  York  Central  &  Hudson  River  R.  R.  The 
borings  were  made  in  one  case  through  3  ft.  of  frozen  ground  and 
in  the  other  case  through  3  ft.  of  ice,  moving  the  machine  600  ft. 
from  one  hole  to  the  other.  Both  borings  were  made  in  one  day 
at  a  total  labor  cost  of  $5  or  2^  cts.  per  lineal  foot  of  hole. 

Cost  of  Test  Borings  with  Wood  Augers.*— Mr.  A.  C.  D. 
Blanchard  is  author  of  the  following: 

The  borings  enumerated  below  were  made  in  the  city  of  Toronto 
during  the  last  year  in  order  to  find  the  character  of  the  soil  to 
a  depth  of  from  30  to  70  ft.  These  borings  were  made  in  connec- 
tion with  several  works  which  were  about  to  be  built,  and  were 
taken  in  different  parts  of  the  city.  The  ground  met  with  con- 
sisted chiefly  of  blue  clay,  although  seven  borings  were  made  in 
wet,  sandy  clay,  and  four  were  made  in  filled  ground.  The  aver- 
age length  of  holes  is  shown  for  each  locality.  The  borings  were 
all  made  with  a  1%-in.  carpenter's  machine  auger,  welded  to  the 
end  of  a  %-in.  pipe.  The  %-in.  pipe  was  cut  in  sections  6  ft.  long, 
and  each  length  was  added  as  it  became  necessary. 

In  the  process  of  boring  the  auger  was  turned  by  two  or  three 
men  with  Stillson  wrenches,  at  the  surface.  The  heavier  clay  re- 
quired three  men  to  turn  the  auger.  After  the  auger  had  bored 
from  8  to  12  ins.  It  had  to  be  removed  from  the  hole  and  cleaned 

*A  paper  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  11,  1909.  reprinted 
from  "The  Canadian  Engineer." 


104  HANDBOOK    OF    COST   DATA. 

and  then  replaced  in  the  hole,  and  continued  for  another  auger 
length.  Considerable  time  was  thus  lost  in  having  to  remove  the 
auger  and  getting  it  back  to  its  position  again,  especially  after  the 
hole  became  quite  deep.  Samples  were  taken  from  each  boring 
and  bottled. 

The  force  consisted  of  one  recorder  and  three  laborers  each  at 
$2  a  day.  The  work  was  done  at  all  seasons  of  the  year,  and  no 
time  was  lost  by  any  of  the  men.  The  cost  of  blacksmith  work 
and  teaming  amounted  to  about  5  per  cent  of  the  total  cost,  and 
the  cost  of  material,  such  as  augers,  wrenches  and  iron  pipe, 
amounted  to  about  10  per  cent.  The  following  is  a  statement  of 
the  itemized  cost  of  the  work : 

( 1 )   HEAVY  BLUE  CLAY  :   1 0  INS.  OF  RED  CLAY  ON  TOP. 

Number    of   holes 28 

Total    depth,    ft 709 

Average  depth  of  hole,  ft 25.3 

Cost.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor $199  $0.281 

Materials  and  blacksmith 34  0.048 


Total     $233  $0.329 

(2)        MADE    GROUND. 

Number  of  holes 4 

Total  depth,  ft 90 

Average  depth  of  hole,  ft 22.5 

Cost.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor    $44  $0.488 

Materials   and    blacksmith 5  0.066 

Total     $   49  $0.554 

(3)       FINE,    RUNNING,    CLAYEY    SAND. 

Number  of  holes 36 

Total  depth,   ft 1,163 

Average  depth  of  hole,  ft 32.3 

Cost.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor     $293  $0.252 

Materials  and  blacksmith 43  0.037 

Total $336  $0~2~89 

(4)       HEAVY    CLAY. 

Number  of  holes 7 

Total  depth,  ft 152 

Average  depth  of  hole,  ft 21.7 

Cost.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor    $48  $0.315 

Materials   and   blacksmith 9  0.059 

Total $   57  $0.347 

(5)       HEAVY    BLUE    CLAY. 

Number  of  holes 5 

Total   depth,    ft 160 

Average  depth  of  holes 32 

Cost.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor    $40  $0.250 

Materials   and    blacksmith 6  0.038 

Total     $   46  $0728? 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  165 

Cost  of  Drilling  Test  Holes  with'  a  Well  Driller.*— This  drilling 
was  done  with  a  Star  drilling  machine  (well  drilling  type)  to  test 
the  site 'of  a  double  track,  steel  trestle  for  concrete  pedestal  foun- 
dations. Seven  holes  were  put  down  for  a  total  depth  of  190  ft. 
through  clay  and  gravel  to  solid  rock.  The  average  depth  of  soil 
was  23  ft.  and  the  average  penetration  into  rock  was  4  ft.  The 
actual  time  consumed  in  drilling  and  moving  from  one  hole,  to 
another  was  11%  days  and  the  total  distance  over  which  the  drill 
was  moved  was  730  ft.  The  average  time  per  foot  of  hole  drilled, 
including  moving,  was  30  mins.  The  contractor  furnished  the  drill 
and  labor  at  cost  plus  10  per  cent  on  labor,  and  his  bill  was  as 
follows : 

Rate. 

Driller,    liya    days $3.50 

Helper,    11%    days 1.75 

Teaming,    2.1   days 4.00 

Labor,   10   days 1.75 

Use  of  drill,  11  ya   days 2.00 

Coal,   45   bushels 08 

4%-in.    casing,    54%    ft 35 

Teaming  1  day  for  other  parties 

10%  for  supt.  and  use  of  tools  as  above 

Total $144.64 

The  above  cost  does  not  include  any  charge  for  inspection,  as  the 
regular  inspector  for  the  railroad  company  had  to  be  on  the  ground 
to  watch  other  work  and  could  easily  keep  track  of  the  drilling. 
For  the  above  information  we  are  indebted  to  H.  M.  Chapin, 
Resident  Engineer,  F.  &  C.  R.  R. 

Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling,  Cross- References.— The  foregoing  data 
relate  to  costs  of  test  borings  through  earth.  For  similar  test  bor- 
ings in  rock,  see  the  section  on  Rock  Excavation,  under  Diamond 
Drilling. 

Cost  of  Sinking  a  Well. f— Mr.  Daniel  J.  Hauer  is  author  of  the 
following : 

The  well   was   driven  in  a  rolling  country,  where  rock  does  not 

i  occur.      The   materials   through   which   it  was  sunk  were   stiff   red 

clay  and  sand.     A  tidewater  marsh  adjoining  the  site  of  the  well 

furnished  a  poor  quality  of  water  to  start  the  sinking  of  the  drill, 

the  hydi-aulic  method  being  used.     All  remarks  made  by  the  writer 

;  will   be  regarding  driven   wells.     The  distinction  being  made  from 

open  wells,  large  enough  for  a  man  to  enter. 

These   machines  are  generally  mounted   on  wheels,   with  a  mast 
i  on  one   end.     This  mast  is  jointed   about   6   ft.   from  the   base,   so 
1  as  to  admit  of  it  being  lowered  on  to  the  bed  of  the  machine,  when 
it  is  necessary  to  move  from  one  job  to  another.     When  the  ma- 
chine is  in  use  the  mast  is  upright  and  is  guyed  and  held  in  place 
by  two  brace  rods  or  timbers  bolted  to   it  near  the  top.      The  bit 
used  on  such  a  machine  is  solid  and  "the  string  of  tools"  consisted 
•  of    rods,    one   end    being   a   socket   and    the    other    a   bolt   end,    all 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.   4.   1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  May  23,  1906. 


166  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

threaded.  The  top  piece  has  a  "rope  socket"  on  the  upper  end,  used 
to  attach  it  to  the  machine.  With  such  a  well  boring  apparatus,  the 
hole  must  be  cleaned  when  a  depth  of  from  2  ft.  to  5  ft.  has  been 
obtained.  This  necessitates  removing  the  boring  tools  and  pumping 
out  the  debris  or  "sludge"  with  a  sand  pump,  all  of  which  con- 
sumes a  large  amount  of  time,  especially  if  the  well  is  driven  to 
a  depth  greater  than  100  ft.  The  hydraulic  method  of  driving 
wells  obviates  the  use  of  the  sand  pump,  and  in  wells  of  any  depth, 
through  soft  material,  is  preferable  to  the  other  method. 

Driven  wells  are  usually  from  6  ins.  to  16  ins.  In  diameter.  A 
hole  less  than  6  ins.  cannot  be  driven  to  any  great  depth  as  the 
tools  would  have  to  be  so  light  as  to  run  grave  chances  of  break- 
ing them.  Fifteen  and  sixteen-inch  holes  are  the  maximum  at 
present,  owing  to  the  fact  that  these  seem  to  be  the  sizes  of  the 
pipes  for  casing,  that  are  made  economically  and  are  easily  placed 
in  the  well.  Many  manufacturing  plants  are  using  twelve  and 
fourteen-inch  wella 

When  the  hydraulic  method  is  used  a  square  pyramidal  derrick 
from  40  ft.  to  70  ft.  in  height  is  erected.  Timber  is  used  for  these 
structures  by  well  drilling  contractors,  but  the  writer  sees  no 
reason  why  a  tower,  modeled  after  those  used  by  prospectors  in 
taking  ore  drillings,  and  made  of  steel,  could  not  be  used  and 
taken  down  after  each  job  and  moved  to  a  new  site.  Of  course, 
the  timber  can  be  used  more  than  once,  but  each  time  some  of  it 
is  used  up  and  all  of  it  has  to  be  renewed  after  several  jobs.  The 
life  of  a  steel  derrick,  if  kept  painted,  would  be  many  years,  and 
only  the  bolts  would  have  to  be  renewed  from  time  to  time.  The 
tools  differ  somewhat  from  those  previously  described.  The  bit 
is  hollow,  with  a  hole  just  above  the  cutting  point  on  either  side 
to  allow  the  jet  of  water  to  enter  the  well.  Instead  of  rods,  pipes 
are  used,  and  the  rope  socket  has  an  attachment  to  which  is 
fastened  the  hose,  run  from  the  pump  to  the  drilling  column. 

The  well  In  this  case  was  8  ins.  in  diameter.  The  derrick  was 
50  ft.  high.  The  first  deck  was  20  ft.,  while  the  three  upper  decks 
were  each  10  ft.  The  head  blocks  carried  a  sheave.  On  one  side 
of  the  derrick  was  a  ladder.  On  the  other  side  was  fastened  the 
windlass  and  gearing.  The  corner  posts  of  the  derrick  were  4x6 
in.  timbers,  while  the  braces  were  2x8  in.  and  l-x!2  In.  planks; 
the  head  blocks  were  4x6.  Twenty-five  hundred  feet  board  meas- 
ure of  timber  was  used  for  the  derrick  and  about  500  ft  for  a  tool 
house  and  other  needs.  The  outfit  consisted  of  the  following:  An 
upright  boiler  and  engine  on  separate  bases,  a  steam  duplex  pump, 
two  hand  pumps,  windlass  and  gearing,  two  hammers  for  driving 
well  casing,  ropes  and  blocks,  drill  points,  hard  rubber  hose, 
wrenches  of  various  kinds,  pipe  cutters  and  dies,  and  various  small 
tools.  Several  tents  for  the  workmen  to  live  in  while  driving  the 
well,  and  bedding  and  cooking  utensils  were  also  included  in  the 
outfit.  The  approximate  value  of  this  outfit,  when  new,  was  $2,000. 
Allowing  25  per. cent  per  year  for  interest  and  depreciation,  and 
considering  100  work  days  as  covering  a  season's  work  for  an  out- 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  167 

fit,  we  have  a  daily  plant  charge  of  $5.00.  This  is  small  consid- 
ering the  hard  usage  the  plant  undergoes.  The  boiler  has  all  kinds 
cf  water  used  in  it,  which  quickly  injures  the  tubes.  The  pumps 
also  fare  roughly  from  the  pumping  of  water  saturated  with  the 
debris  from  the  well,  the  water  being  used  over  and  over  again. 
The  continual  handling  of  the  pipe  soon  wears  out  the  threads, 
necessitating  cutting  and  making  new  threads,  and  so  it  is  with 
other  details  of  the  outfit,  all  of  which  quickly  takes  money  for 
renewals  and  repairs.  As  a  large  percentage  of  wells  are  driven 
in  inaccessible  parts  of  the  country,  a  well  driving  contractor  must 
carry  with  him  every  tool  that  any  emergency  may  demand. 

In  the  work  which  the  writer  is  describing  five  days  were  con- 
sumed by  two  men  in  erecting  the  derrick  and  setting  up  the  plant. 
Then   a   length   of   12-in.    pipe   was    sunk   to   protect  the   mouth   of 
the  well,  after  which  the  well  driving  commenced.     As  stated  above, 
water  to  start  the  work  was  used  from  an  adjoining  swamp.     The 
first   day's   driving   resulted   in    a   depth    of   over    50    ft.    and   gave 
enough  water  to   continue  the  work.      The  average  depth  obtained 
each  day   of   actual   driving   was   20   ft.,    but   the  average   for   the 
total   time  consumed  in  working  on  the  well  was  a  fraction  over 
I  11  ft.     The  well  was  sunk  to  a  depth  of  339 y2   ft,  when  sufficient 
water  was  obtained  to  fulfil  the  terms  of  the  contract.     At  260  ft. 
;  a  stratum  of  sand  was  struck  and  the  well  was  cased  up  and  tested, 
i  but  as  the  vein  of  sand  was  not  over  3  ft,  it  did  not  give  sufficient 
i  water  and  the  driving  was  continued.     At  a  depth  of  318  ft.   sand 
was  again  encountered,   and  again   the  well  was  cased  up  and  the 
strainer  put  in   place   and   the   well   tested,    the  strainer   being   lo- 
cated at  the  depth  given  above.     No  effort  was  made  to  obtain  the 
depth  of  this  stratum  of  water  bearing  sand. 

Seventeen  days  were  consumed  in  driving  the  well,  and  five  days 
.  in  casing  up,  placing  the  strainer  and  testing.     One  day  sufficed  to 
dismantle  the  plant  and  haul  it  away.     As  the  outfit  was  on  the 
i.  road    two    days,    two    additional    days    are    included    in    the    plant 
i:  charge.     Three  and   one-half   tons  of  coal  were  used,   there   being 
a  daily  consumption  of  320  Ibs.     The  cost  of  this,  including  haul- 
ing, was  $5.25. 

The  crew  consisted  of  one  experienced  drill  driver,  who  acted  as 
foreman  when  the  contractor  was  absent,   and  two  laborers,  both 
of  whom  had  had  some  experience  in  driving  artesian  wells.     The 
derrick  was   built  and   the   machinery  placed   by   the  foreman  and 
'one    laborer,    the   second   laborer    coming   on    the    work   only   after 
i'the  well  driving  began.     At  all  critical  stages  of  the  work  a  member 
of  the  contracting  firm  took  charge  of  the  forces  and  worked  with 
I  the   rest    of   the   crew,    doing  whatever   came   to   hand.      In   all   he 
!  worked   in  this  manner   seven   days.      In   the   record  of   cost  given 
an  allowance  of  $3.50  is  made  for  each  of  these  days'  work.     The 
rates    of   wages   or    their    equivalent    for    the    other   men   were    as 
Hows : 

Well  driver    $2.75 

Laborers 2.00 

The  wages  were  paid  weekly  and  included  board  ;  but  the  figures 


« 


168  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

given  show  the  daily  cost  for  ten  hours'  work  to  the  contractor, 
made  up  from  a  season's  employment.  All  of  the  men  were  paid 
full  time,  and  frequently  were  called  to  make  over-time  without 
additional  pay.  Well  driving  can  be  done  during  wet  weather 
without  serious  inconvenience  to  the  men,  as  they  seldom  stop 
except  in  steady  downpours  of  rain.  This  is  made  possible  by  only 
a  few  men  being  employed ;  with  a  large  number,  a  few  become 
dissatisfied  and  the  whole  force  is  stopped. 

The  itemized  cost  of  the  well,  for  both  labor  and  materials,  except 
the  strainer,  was  as  follows: 

La  &  or: 

Erecting  derrick  and  machinery $  23.75 

Driving  well   and   casing 170.75 

Pumping  and  testing  well 12.25 

Tearing  down  derrick,   etc 6.75 

Total  labor    ?213.50 

Materials: 

3  %   tons  of  coal,  at  $5.25 $18.37 

Pipe  casing,   340  ft.,  at   $0.86 292.40 

Outer  casing    (second  hand) 10.00 

Derrick  timber,   3,000  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $25.00 75.00 

Total  materials   $395.77 

Miscellaneous: 

Transportation  charges $100.00 

Plant  rental,   30  days,  at  $5.00.... 150.00 

Superintendence   and   general   expenses 50.00 


Total    miscellaneous $300.00 


Grand  total   $909.27 

The  transportation  charge  is  for  both  freight  by  train  and  haul- 
ing by  wagons  to  and  from  the  job,  and  is  a  little  higher  than  usual. 
The  figures  giving  a  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  well  are  as  follows: 

Labor $0.63 

Materials 1.16 

Miscellaneous     0. 88 

Total    i $2.67 

It  is  of  interest  to  note  that  the  cost  of  fuel,  which  is  high 
ton,  amounts  to  a  fraction  over  5  cts.  per  foot  of  driven  well,  whicl 
is   a  comparatively    small   cost.     The  full   charge  is  made  agaim 
this  job  for  the  derrick  timber,  although  some  of  it  had  been  us 
previously  and  all  of  it  was  hauled  away  to  be  used  on  another  jol 
The  boiler  was  fired  by  the  man  attending  to  the  pumps  or  els 
the  man  running  the  windlass.    The  consumption  of  coal  might 
been  reduced  somewhat  by  the  boiler  having  a  cheap  house  ov< 
It  and  the  steam  pipes  being  covered.     On   a  single  job   like  tl 
but  little  saving  would  be  shown,  but  in  a  year  or  two  the  addi- 
tional cost  would  be  more  than  saved.    With  a  small  boiler  a  hous 
could  be  constructed  readily  in  sections  and  moved  from  job  to  jol 
The   steam   pipes   could   also   be   lagged   and   handled   in   the   sanu 
manner.      The    writer    feels   confident    that    these   are   details   wel 


EARTH  EXCAVATION.  16!) 

Worth  considering  not  only  in  well  driving,  but  also  on  much  other 
construction  work. 

The  contractor  doing  this  work  owns  three  such  outfits,  and  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  three  or  four  men  can  operate  each  plant, 
he  states  that  it  is  exceedingly  difficult  to  obtain  men  to  put  in 
charge  of  a  plant ;  men  who  can  be  relied  upon  to  face  any  crisis 
in  the  work  and  handle  it  without  a  money  loss.  For  these  reasons 
he  seldom  runs  but  two  machines,  as  he  can  give  these  his  per- 
sonal attention  and  only  keeps  the  third  plant  for  an  emergency. 
That  is,  to  take  a  job  from  an  old  customer,  that  may  go  to  a  com- 
petitor, or  land  new  work  that  is  exceedingly  desirable.  Margins 
are  so  close  that  a  single  mistake  of  judgment  may  use  up  the 
entire  profit  of  a  job. 

After  pumping  this  well,  the  sinking  of  which  has  just  been  de- 

!  scribed,  for  24  hours  the  flow  was  tested  and  found  to  be  66  gallons 
per    minute.      The   water    level    had   only   been    reduced   20    ft.    by 

|  this  pumping.     The  strainer  was  placed  340  ft.  below  the  level  of 

1  the  ground,  the  elevation  of  the  latter  being  5   ft.  above  mean  low 

i  tide.      The   strainer  used  was  made   from  a  piece   of  pipe  plugged 
at  one  end  and  punched  with  holes,  the  dimensions  of  which  were 

j  y2  in.  x  %  in. 

The  placing  of  the  strainer  and  the  variety  of  strainer  used  is 
a  matter  of  vast  importance  and  every  detail  regarding  it  should  be 
specifically  stated  in  a  contract  for  a  driven  well.  All  too  fre- 
quently this  is  not  done,  and  the  entire  matter  is  left  in  the  hands 
of  the  contractor,  who  only  sees  that  the  well  comes  up  to  the 

j  required  tests  and  that  a  strainer  is  properly  placed  in  the  well. 

f  The  kind  he  will  use  will  be  the  style  he  is  accustomed  to,  which 
may  not  be  suitable  for  the  well  in  question. 

Strainers,  of  which  there  are  a  number  of  styles  patented  and 
used,  may  be  classed  as  either  fine  or  coarse.  The  majority  of  the 
older  patents  are  for  fine  strainers,  that  is,  the  openings  are  made 
so  small  as  to  admit  of  water  entering  the  pipe  and  yet  stop  the 
finest  sand.  The  slots  are  cut  larger  on  the  inside  than  on  the 
outside  of  the  pipe,  so  as  to  allow  any  grains  of  sand  that  may 
enter  the  opening  to  go  into  the  strainer  and  not  clog  the  hole. 
The  openings  in  fine  strainers  are  less  than  1/50  in.  in  size.  It  is 
evident  that  with  little  corrosion  or  rust  these  holes  will  become 
closed  and  the  entire  well  rendered  useless.  In  the  coarse  strainers 
this  will  neither  happen  as  often  or  as  soon,  hence  they  are  pref- 
erable. The  main  objection  to  this  class  of  strainers  is  that  they 
will  gradually  fill  with  sand  and  thus  stop  the  flow.  This  can  be 
obviated.  If  the  grains  of  sand  were  of  equal  size  in  water  bear- 
ing sand,  we  would  only  need  to  have  openings  of  such  a  size  as 
to  not  admit  the  grains  and  the  difficulty  would  be  solved,  but  as 
a  rule  the  grains  of  water  bearing  sand  not  only  vary  greatly  in 
size,  but  also  contain  some  gravel. 

When  gravel  is  not  carried  by  the  sand  some  should  be  placed 
around  the  strainer  by  artificial  means.  Then  the  well  should  be 
pumped  at  a  rapid  rate  for  such  a  length  of  time  as  may  be  neces- 


170  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

sary  to  draw  in  aH  the  fine  sand  that  may  ultimately  be  disturbed 
by  the  velocity  of  the  water.  When  this  is  done  and  the  sand 
cleaned  out  of  the  well,  and  the  coarse  strainer  properly  placed,  no 
trouble  should  occur  from  this  source.  At  times  it  may  be  found 
necessary  to  use  air  pressure  to  agitate  the  fine  sand,  as  the  pump- 
ing is  going  on,  so  as  to  facilitate  the  drawing  in  of  the  fine  par- 
ticles. Trouble  will  only  occur  when  the  inflow  of  water  is  of  such 
velocity  as  to  carry  the  fine  fluid  with  it. 

These  operations  are  rather  costly  and  it  cannot  be  expected  that 
the  contractor  will  do  them,  unless  they  have  been  previously  speci- 
fied, so  that  his  price  is  made  to  cover  them.  The  engineer  should 
see  to  this.  Many  wells  that  have  to  be  reworked  only  needed  these 
things  done  when  they  were  driven.  The  costs  that  have  been  given 
do  not  include  any  work  of  this  nature. 

(For  further  data  on  well  driving,  see  the  index  under  Wells.) 
References  and  Cross- References  on  Earthwork. — For  cost  data 
on  dredging,  hydraulicking  earth,  and  costs  by  many  other  methods 
of  excavation,  the  reader  is  referred  to  my  book  on  earthwork. 
In  various  sections  of  this  book  will  be  found  other  data  on  earth- 
work costs,  for  which  consult  the  index  under  "Excavation,  Earth." 

'  . 


. 

• 
• 

SECTION  III. 

I  :..  • 

ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING  AND  CRUSHING. 

Weight  and  Voids. — Civil  engineers  commonly  measure  rock  ex- 
cavation by  the  cubic  yard  in  place  before  loosening,  whereas  min- 
ing engineers  generally  use  the  ton  of  2,000  pounds  as  the  unit  of 
rock  and  ore  measurement.  In  view  of  this  fact  it  would  be  well 
were  the  specific  gravity  of  the  rock  given  by  every  engineer  who 
publishes  data  ori  any  particular  kind  of  rock  excavation  or  mining. 
Then,  too,  it  often  happens  that  broken  rock  is  purchased  by  the 
ton  even  for  civil  engineering  work,  or  by  the  cord  of  loosely  piled 

i    rubble   for   architectural    work,    thus    emphasizing   the    importance 

of  stating  not  only  the  specific  gravity  but  the  percentage  of  voids. 

The  specific   gravity   of   any  material   is  the  quotient  found  by 

dividing  its  weight  by  the  weight  of  an  equal  bulk  of  water.    Water, 

therefore,  has  a  specific  gravity  of   1 ;   a  cubic  foot  of  any  sub- 

|  stance  like  granite,  having  a  specific  gravity  of  2.65,  weighs  2.65 
times  as  much  as  a  cubic  foot  of  water.  A  cubic  foot  of  water 
weighs  62.355  Ibs.,  or  practically  62.4  Ibs. ;  hence  a  cubic  foot  of 
solid  granite  weighs,  62.4  X  2.65  =  165.3  Ibs. 

When  any  rock  is  crushed  or  broken  into  fragments  of  tolerably 

|    uniform  size  it  increases  in  bulk,  and  is  found  to  have  35%  to  55% 

I  voids  or  inter-spaces,  depending  upon  the  uniformity  of  the  frag- 
ments and  their  angularity.  Rounded  .fragments,  like  pebbles,  pack 
more  closely  together  than  sharp-edged  or  angular  fragments.  A 

,  tumbler  full  of  bird  shot  has  about  36%  voids,  and  it  is  possible 
to  hand-pack  marbles  of  uniform  size  so  that  the  voids  are  only 
26%.  Obviously,  if  small  fragments  of  stone  are  mixed  with  large 
fragments,  the  voids  are  reduced.  Pit  sand  ordinarily  has  35%  to 

i  40%  voids.  Hard  broken  stone  from  a  rock  crusher  has  about 
35%  voids  If  all  sizes  are  mixed  and  slightly  shaken  down  in  a 
box ;  whereas,  If  it  is  screened  into  several  sizes,  each  size  has  about 
45%  to  48%  voids. 

A  soft  and  friable  rock  like  shale  breaks  into  fragments  having 
a  great  range  in  size,  from  large  chunks  down  to'  dust ;  and,  as  a 
consequence,  such  soft  broken  rocks  have  a  much  lower  percentage 
of  voids  than  the  tougher  rocks. 

The  following  table  shows  the  swelling  of  rock  upon  breaking: 

Voids.  30%       35%       40%       45%       50%       55% 

Cu.  yds.  broken  rock  from 

1  cu.   yd.   solid   rock 1.43        1.54        1.67       1.82        2.00       2.22 

171 


172  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Hard  rock  when  blasted  out  in  large  chunks  and  thrown  into 
cars  or  skips  may  ordinarily  be  assumed  to  have  from  40%  to  45% 
voids,  hence  1  cu.  yd.  of  hard  solid  rock  ordinarily  makes  1.67 
to  1.82  cu.  yds.  of  broken  or  crushed  rock. 

Voids  in  Broken  Stone  and  Gravel. — The  percentage  of  voids  in 
loose,  broken  stone  depends  upon  the  character  of  the  stone,  upon 
whether  it  is  broken  by  hand  or  in  a  crusher  (probably  also  on 
the  kind  of  crusher),  and  upon  whether  it  is  screened  into  different 
sizes,  or  the  run  of  the  crusher  Is  taken. 

Pure  quartz  weighs  165  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.,  hence  broken  quartz  hav- 
ing 40%  voids  weighs  165  X  60%,  or  99  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  Few  gravels 
are  entirely  quartz,  and  many  contain  stone  having  a  greater  spe- 
cific gravity  like  some  traps,  or  a  less  specific  gravity  like  some 
shales  and  sandstones. 

TABLE  I. — SPECIFIC  GRAVITY  OF  STONE. 
(Condensed  from  Merrill's  "Stones  for  Building.") 

Trap,  Boston,    Mass 2.78 

"      Duluth,     Minn 2.80   to  3.00 

"      Jersey   City,    N.   J 3.03 

"      Staten  Island,   N.    Y 2.86 

Gneiss,   Madison  Ave.,   N.   Y 2.92 

Granite,  New    London,    Conn 2.66 

Greenwich,    Conn 2.84 

Vinalhaven,    Me 2.66 

Quincy,    Mass 2.66 

Barre,    Vt 2.65 

Limestone,  Joliet,    111 2.56 

Quincy,    111 2.51  to  2.57 

(Oolitic)   Bedford,  Ind 2.25   to  2.45 

Marquette,    Mich 2.34 

Glens  Falls,   N.   Y 2.70 

Lake   Champlain,    N.    Y 2.75 

Sandstone,  Portland,    Conn 2.f 


Haverstraw,    N.     Y... 2.13 

Medina,     N.    Y 2.41 


Potsdam,    N.    Y. '.  '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.    2.GO 
(grit)     Berea,    0 2.12 

The  weight  of  a  cubic  foot  of  loose  gravel  or  stone  is  therefore 
no  accurate  index  of  the  percentage  of  voids  unless  the  specific 
gravity  Is  known. 

Tables  I  and  II  show  specific  gravities  of  different  minerals  and 
rocks,  and  weights  of  broken  stone  corresponding  to  different  per- 
centages of  voids. 

It  is  rare  that  a  gravel  has  less  than  30  %  or  more  than  45% 
voids.  If  the  pebbles  vary  considerably  in  size,  so  that  the  small 
fit  In  between  the  large,  the  voids  may  be  as  low  as  30%  ;  but  if  the 
pebbles  are  tolerably  uniform  the  voids  will  approach  45%. 

Broken    stone,    being1   angular,    does    not    compact    so    readily    as 
gravel,    and   shows  a   higher   percentage   of  voids   when    the   frag- 
ments are  uniform  in  size  and  shoveled  loosely  into  a  box  ;  but  the 
voids,  even  then,  seldom  exceed   52%. 
• 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         173 


TABLE    II. — SPECIFIC    GRAVITY    OF    COMMON  MINERALS 
AND  ROCKS. 

Apatite 2.92 — 3.25 

Basalt    3.01 

Calcite,    CaCO3    2.5  —2.73 

Cassiterite,    SnO2     6.4  —7.1 

Cerrusite,     PbCo3     6.46—6.48 

Chalcopyrite,    CuFeS2     . . .  1 4.1  — 4.3 

Coal,    anthracite     1.3  — 1.84 

Coal,    bituminous     1.2  — 1.5 

Diabase     2.6  — 3.03 

Diorite     2.92 

Dolomite,    CaMg  (CO3)2    2.8—2.9 

Feldspar     2.44 — 2.78 

Felsite     2.65 

Galena,    PbS    7.25 — 7.77 

Garnet     3.15 — 4.31 

Gneiss 2.62—2.92 

Granite     2.55—2.86 

Gypsum     2.3  — 3.28 

Halite    (salt),   NaCl    2.1  —2.56 

Hematite,    Fe2O3    4.5  — 5.3 

Hornblende    3.05 — 3.47 

Limonite,    Fe3O4  (OH)6 3.6—4.0 

Limestone    2.35 — 2.97 

Magnetite,    Fe3O4     4.9  — 5.2 

Marble 2.08—2.85 

Mica 2.75 — 3.1 

Mica    Schist     , 2.5  —2.9 

Olivine 3.33 — 3.5 

Porphyry 2.5  — 2.6 

Pyrite,    FeS2 4.83—5.2 

Quartz,    SiO2    2.5  —2.8 

Quartzite 2.6—2.7 

Sandstone , 2.0  — 2.78 

Medina     2.4 

Ohio 2.2 

Slaty     1.82 

Shale 2.4—2.8 

Slate     2.5  — 2.8 

Sphalerite,    ZnS    3.0  — 4.2 

Stibnite,    Sb2S3 4.5  — 4.6 

Syenite    2.27 — 2.65 

Talc 2.56 — 2.8 

Trap 2.6  — 3.0 


174 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


TABLE  III. 

Weight  in 

Weight  in 

Weight  in  Lbs.  per  cu, 

yd.  when 

Specific 
Gravity. 

Lbs.  per 
cu.  ft. 

Lbs.  per 
cu.  yd. 

30% 

35% 

Voids  are 

40% 

45% 

50% 

1.0 

62.355 

1,684 

1,178 

1,094 

1,010 

926 

842 

2.0 

124.7 

3,367 

2,357 

2,187 

2,020 

1,852 

1,6£4 

2,1 

130.9 

3.536 

2.475 

2,298 

2,121 

1,945 

1,768 

2.2 

137.2 

3.704 

2.593 

2.408 

2.222 

2,037 

1,852 

2.3 

143.4 

3,872 

2,711 

2,517 

2,323 

2,130 

1,936 

2.4 

149.7 

4,041 

2,828 

2,626 

2,424 

2,222 

2,020 

2.5 

155.9 

4,209 

2,946 

2,736 

2,525 

2,315 

2,105 

2.6 

162.1 

4,377 

3,064 

2,845 

2,626 

2,408 

2,189 

2.7 

168.4 

4,546 

3,182 

2,955 

2,727 

2,500 

2,273 

2.8 

174.6 

4,714 

3,300 

3,064 

2,828 

2,593 

2,357 

2.9 

180.9 

4,882 

3,418 

3,174 

2,929 

2,685 

2,441 

3.0 

187.1 

5,051 

3,536 

3,283 

3,030 

2,778 

2,526 

3.1 

193.3 

5,219 

3,653 

3,392 

3,131 

2,871 

2,609 

3.2 

199.5 

5,388 

3,771 

3,502 

3,232 

2,963 

2,694 

3.3 

205.8 

5,556 

3,889 

3,611 

3,333 

3,056 

2,778 

3.4 

212.0 

5,724 

4,007 

3,721 

3,434 

3,148 

2,862 

3.5 

218.3 

5,893 

4,125 

3,830 

3,535 

3,241 

2,947 

TABLE  IV. — VOIDS  IN  LOOSE  BROKEN  STONE. 
Per  cent 


Authority.  Voids. 

Sabin    49.0 

Sabin     44.0 

Wm.    M.    Black 46.5 

J.    J.    R.    Croes 47.5 


Wm.    M.     Hall 48.0 

Wm.     M.     Hall 50.0 


Wm. 


Fuller 47.6 


Geo.    A.     Kimball . 


49.5 


to     2Mj 


Remarks. 

Limestone,  crusher  run  after  screen- 
ing out    %-in.   and  under. 
Limestone   (1  part  screenings  mixed 

with    6   parts    broken    stone). 
Screened    and    washed.    2    ins.    and 

under. 

Gneiss,    after    screening    out    ^4 -in. 
and   under. 

S.    B.    Newberry 47.0      Chiefly   about   egg   size. 

H.    P.    Boardman 39  to  42   Chicago    limestone,     crusher    run. 

H.   P.    Boardman 4  8  to  5  2  Chicago      limestone,    screened      into 

sizes. 
Green  River  limestone,  2y2  ins.  and 

smaller,    dust    screened    out. 
Hudson    River    trap,     2^2     ins.    and 

smaller,    dust  screened  out. 
New   Jersey    trap,    crusher   run,    1/6 

to  2.1  in. 
Roxbury    conglomerate, 

ins. 

Limestone,    ^   to  3  ins. 
Limestone,   2-in.  size. 
Limestone,    IVj-in.   size. 
Stone,    1.6   to   2.4   ins. 
Stone,   0.8  to  1.6  in. 
Stone,    0.4   to   0.8   in. 
Bluestone,    89%    being 

ins. 
Bluestone,    90%    being    1/6    to 

in. 

Trap,  hard,   1  to  2y2   ins. 
Trap,   hard,    %    to   1   in. 
Trap,  hard,  0  to  2^   ins. 
Trap,   soft,    %    to   2  ins. 
Canton,  111. 
Buffalo      limestone,      crusher      run, 

dust  in. 
Crushed    cobblestone,    screened    into 

sizes. 
Crushed  limestone  in  sizes. 


Myron 
W.    H. 
W.    H 
Feret 
Feret 
Feret 
A      \V 


s. 


_    Falk 48.0 

Henby 43.0 

Henby 46.0 

53.4 

51.7 

52.1 

Dow 45.3 


to 


A.    W.    Dow 45.3 


2% 
Itt 


Taylor 
Taylor 
Taylor 
Taylor 
G.  W. 
Emile 


and 
and 
and 
and 


Thompson 
Thompson 
Thompson 
Thompson 
Chandler  ......      40.0 

Low    ..........      39.0 


54.5 
54.5 
45.0 
51.2 


C.    M.    Saville  ........      46.0 


I.   O.    Baker  ..........  43  to  47 

A      N     Johnson  .......  41  to  51  Crushed  limestone  in  sizes. 

W.    E.  -McClintock  ____      47.0      Crushed    trap. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.          175 


The  following  records  of  actual  tests  will  indicate  the  range  of 
void  percentages : 

Prof.  S.  B.  Newberry  gives  the  voids  in  Sandusky  Bay  gravel, 
&  to  %-in.  size,  as  being  42.4%  voids;  }4  to  1/20-in.  size,  35.9% 
voids. 

Mr.  William  M.  Hall,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  gives  the  following  tests 
on  mixtures  of  Green  River,  Ky.,  blue  limestone  and  Ohio  River 
washed  gravel : 

Stone.  Gravel.  Voids  in  Mixture. 

100%  with  0%  48% 


80 
70 


50 
0 


30 

40 

50 

100 


35 


The  stone  passed  a  2^ -in.  screen  and  the  dust  was  removed  by  a 
fine  screen.  The  gravel  passed  a  1%-in.  screen. 

The  voids  in  mixtures  of  Hudson  River  trap  rock  and  clean 
gravel,  of  the  sizes  just  given  for  the  Kentucky  materials,  were  as 
follows : 

Trap.  Gravel.  ,  Voids  in  Mixture. 

100%  with  0%    '  50% 

38^4 


60 

50 

0 


40 

50 

100 


36 
35 


Mr.  H.  von  Schon  gives  tests  on  a  gravel  having  34.1%  voids  as 
follows : 

Per  cent. 

Retained  on  1-in.    ring    10.70 

Retained  on   %-in.    ring    23.65 

Retained  on  No.    4    sieve 8.70 

Retained  on  No.    10    sieve 17.14 

Retained  on  No.    20    sieve    21.76 

Retained  on  No.    30   sieve    6.49 

Retained  on  No.    40   sieve    5.96 

Passed  No.  40   sieve    5.59 

Passed  1  %-in.     ring     100.00 

Feret  gives  the  following  results  of  tests  on  mixtures  of  different 
sizes  of  pebbles,  and  mixtures  of  different  sizes  of  stone  (the  stone 
and  pebbles  were  not  mixed  together)  : 

Voids  in 

1.6"        0.8"  Round        Broken 

0.8"        0.4"  Pebbles.       Stone. 

0  0 


Passing    a    ring    of.. 

Held  by  a   ring 

Parts     . 


2.4" 
1.6" 
1 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 

1 

4 
1 

1 


40.0% 

38.8 

41.7 

35.8 

35.6 

37.9 

35.5 

34.5 

36.6 

38.1 

34.1 


53.4% 

51.7 

52.1 

50.5 

47.1 

49.5 

47.8 

49.2 

49.4 

48.6 


17G 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Mr.  A.  W.  Dow  gives  the  following  tests  on  mixtures  of  broken 
stone  and  gravel  at  Washington,  D.  C. : 


— Parts  of  Broken  Bluestone — 
Granolithic          Coarse      Average 
(92%  '    (89%  (90% 

being  being          being 

3/10  to  %")      %to2^,")    ^to2") 

1  

1 
1 


— Parts  of  Gravel — 


Average 

(90% 

being 

1/6  toiy.") 


Small 
(90% 

being  Voids. 

%  to  %")  Percent. 

45.3 

45.3 

39.5 

29.3 

1  35.5 

1  36.7 


Taylor  and  Thompson  give  the  following : 


Ref. 
No. 


Stone. 


Size. 


2%"tol' 
l"to  W 


Hard  trap 

Hard  trap 

Hard  trap  2^"toO 

Soft  trap  2"to%" 

Soft  trap  %"to%" 

Gravel  2y2"toy2' 


54.5 
54.5 
45.0 
51.2 
51.2 
36.5 


c  CS-S 

ftp 

-  w  c»fi 

«g; 

i§° 


14.5 
11.9 
14.3 
12.5 


«-  s  «-. 


35.7 
44.6 
43.1 
27.4 


g§i 

°«s 

1 

.     W 

fc£ 
dHO,>» 

S3 

OH 

S^ 

el 

19.2 

20.5 

20.8 

17.8 

4 

23.9 

11.5 

43.7 
42.8 
30.6 
40.6 
35.9 
28.2 


The  stone  was  thrown  into  a  measuring  box  and  measured,  then 
rammed  in  6-in.  layers.  The  variation  in  the  last  column  for  Nos. 
4  and  5  was  due  to  the  breaking  of  the  trap  under  the  rammer. 
No.  3  was  "crusher  run"  containing  44.4%  of  No.  1,  33.3%  of  No.  2, 
and  22%  of  screenings  from  %-in.  down  to  dust.  Nos.  1,  2  and  3 
were  crushed  in  a  gyratory  crusher  ;  Nos.  4  and  5,  in  a  jaw  crusher. 

Mr.  George  W.  Rafter  gives  the  voids  in  clean  limestone,  broken 
(by  hand?)  to  pass  a  2% -in.  ring,  as  43%  after  being  "slightly 
shaken,"  and  37^2%  after  being  rammed. 

Mr.  Desmond  FitzGerald  states  that  broken  stone  dropped  12  ft. 
into  a  car  measured  7%  less  in  volume  after  the  fall. 

As  originally  pointed  out  in  my  "Rock  Excavation,"  I  have  found 
that  a  wagon  load  of  broken  stone  measures  10%  less  in  volume 
after  it  has  traveled  a  short  distance,  due  to  the  shaking  down.  In 
buying  broken  stone  by  the  cubic  yard  it  is  well  to  bear  this  fact 
in  mind. 

Percentages  of  voids  in  sand  are  given  in  the  section  on  Con- 
crete. Consult  the  index  under  "Sand,  Voids." 

Sizes  and  Weight  of  Crushed  Trap.— Mr.  William  E.  McClintock 
gives  the  following  data  relative  to  Massachusetts  trap  rock :  The 
rock  weighs  180.7  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  solid,  or  4,879  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd. 
solid,  being  very  heavy.  The  crushed  trap  of  the  Mass.  Broken 
Stone  Co.,  at  Salem,  weighs  2,586  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  has  47% 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         177 

voids.  A  rotary  screen  is  used  10  ft.  long,  40  ins.  diameter,  with 
three  sections  3  Ms  ft.,  3  ft.  and  3  ft.  long  respectively,  having  cir- 
cular holes  V2-in.,  iy2  ins.  and  3  ins.  diameter.  A  bin  holding  29 
cu.  yds.  was  used  to  measure  the  Mj-in.  screenings  which  were  after- 
ward weighed  and  found  to  average  2,605  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  A  box 
holding  1  cu.  yd.  was  packed  full  with  wet  screenings  which 
weighed  only  2.480  Ibs.  The  same  box  Hacked  full  of  the  same 
kind  of  screenings  dry  was  found  to  hold  2,690  Ibs.  A  bin  holding 
90  cu.  yds.  of  the  1%-in.  stone  averaged  2,423  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.;  and 
a  bin  of  the  same  size  full  of  3-in.  stone,  averaged  2,522  Ibs.  per 
cu.  yd.  This  3-in.  stone  was  again  measured  in  cars,  and  found 
to  average  2,531  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd. 

To  determine  the  percentages  of  the  different  sizes,  19  cu.  yds. 
of  broken  stone  were  measured  and  found  to  run  as  follows : 

Per  cent. 

i/a-in.   trap     13.24 

1  i/>-in.   trap 23.89 

3-in.   trap     62.87 

Total     100.00 

The  tailings  over  3  ins.   in  size  were  re-crushed. 

Weight  and  Voids  of  Crushed  Limestone.* — In  1906  the  State 
Highway  Commission  of  Illinois  had  a  series  of  tests  made  at  the 
state  stone  crushing  plants  at  Menard  and  Joliet  to  determine  what 
should  be  called  a  cubic  yard  of  crushed  stone.  The  results  of 
these  tests  are  given  by  Mr.  A.  N.  Johnson,  State  Engineer.  In 
making  the  tests  both  cars  and  wagons  were  loaded  in  different 
ways  and  hauled  different  distances.  The  contents  of  each  car  or 
wagon  were  carefully  measured  and  weighed,  and  on  arrival  at 
destination  again  measured,  so  that  the  variation  in  the  density 
of  the  load  due  to  method  of  loading,  to  size  of  material  and  to 
settlement,  was  determined.  From  the  results  of  these  tests  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  average  weight  of  the  wagon  loads  of  limestone, 
including  all  sizes,  was,  at  the  start,  very  nearly  2,400  Ibs.  per 
cubic  yard,  varying  somewhat  according  to  the  method  of  loading, 
and  that  the  weignt  of  a  cubic  yard  in  a  wagon  after  it  had  been 
hauled  a  distance  of  one-half  mile  was  a  little  over  2,600  Ibs. 
Also,  that  the  weight  of  a  cubic  yard  of  stone,  as  loaded  in  the 
cars,  is  but  a  few  pounds  over  2,400  and  after  settlement  2,600  Ibs. 
As  the  weight  of  a  cubic  yard  depends  very  considerably  on  the 
method  of  loading  the  car  or  wagon,  and  also  as  to  the  amount 
of  settlement  due  to  the  length  and  character  of  the  haul,  the  de- 
termination of  what  shall  be  the  weight  of  a  cubic  yard  is  some- 
what arbitrary.  In  view  of  the  results  of  these  tests,  the  State 
Highway  Commission  has  adopted  2,500  Ibs.  as  the  weight  of  a 
cubic  yard  of  crushed  limestone  at  both  the  Menard  and  Joliet 
crushers. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Apr.  3  and  10,  1907. 


178  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

In  the  following  tabulation  is  shown  the  weight  per  cubic  yard 
of  crushed  limestone  in  carload  lots  and  per  cent  of  settlement  in 
transportation,  the  haul  in  each  instance  being  about  150  miles: 

Weight  in 

Size  Method  pounds  per  cubic          Per  cent 

in  inches.          of  loading.  yard  when  shipped,     of  settlement. 

Screenings,    15    ft.    drop 2,500  9.5 

••                       "  2,509  12.5 

2,530  9.8 

3                 Wheelbarrows 2.476  3.4 

2,320  8.2 

15    ft.   drop 2,528  9.5 

Screenings,        8     ft.   drop 2,520  0.0 

2,520 

2,730  8.3 

2,610  12.5 

2,680  8.3 

1%                     "               2,570  1.4 

2,210  13.9 

2,360  8.7 

2,300  13.6 

2,180  7.4 

"                       "               2,200  9.7 

2,250  7.7 

3                       " 2,520  3.8 

2,440  3.4 

2,500  5.0 

2,380  12.9 

2,300  3.7 

2,400  0.0 

2,290  9.0 

2,270  7.4 

2.275  9.2 

2,240  11.1 

2,260  10.5 

2,470 

To  determine  the  effect  of  manner  of  loading,  other  experi- 
ments were  made.  In  some  experiments  a  box  measuring  2.8  cu.  ft. 
was  used.  No  difference  in  the  results,  however,  due  to  the  size  of 
the  box  could  be  detected.  In  every  instance  the  voids  were  de- 
termined by  weighing  the  amount  of  water  added  to  fill  the  box. 
The  tabulation  is  as  follows: 

Method  of  Per  cent 

Size.  Loading.                                              of  Voids. 

3       in.  20-ft.     drop     41.8 

3        in.  15-ft     drop     46.8 

3       in.  15-ft.     drop     47.2 

3       in.  shovels     48.7 

1  Ms   in.  20-ft.    drop     42.5 

1  %   in.  15-ft.    drop     468 

1  Yy   in.  15-ft.     drop     46.8 

1 V2   in.  shovels     50.5 

%   in.  20-ft.     drop     39.4 

%   in.  15-ft.     drop 42.7 

>.  15-ft.     drop     41.5 

i.  15-ft.     drop     41.8 

i.  shovels     45.2 

n.  shovels     44.  $ 

i.  .    shovels     41. 01 

i.  shovels     40.  ft 

i.  shovels , , 41.0; 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         17v 

Settlement  of  Crushed  Stone  in  Wagons.*— The  tests,  the  results 
of  which  are  shown  below,  were  made  by  the  Illinois  Highway  Com- 
mission to  determine  the  settlement  of  crushed  stone  in  wagon  loads 
for  different  hauls.  The  road  over  which  the  tests  were  made 
is  a  macadam  road,  not  particularly  smooth,  but  might  be  consid- 
ered as  an  average  road  surface.  The  wagon  used  was  one  with 
a  dump  bottom  supported  by  chains,  which  were  drawn  as  tight  as 
possible,  so  as  to  reduce  the  sag  to  a  minimum.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  about  50  per  cent  of  the  settlement  occurs  within  the  first  100 
ft.,  and  75  per  cent  of  the  settlement  in  the  first  200  ft.  Almost  all 
of  the  settlement  occurs  during  the  first  half  mile,  as  the  tests 
showed  practically  no  additional  settlement  for  distances  beyond. 

Some  of  the  wagons  were  loaded  from  the  ground  with  shovels, 
others  were  loaded  from  bins,  the  stone  having  a  15-ft.  drop,  which 
compacted  the  stone  a  little  more  than  where  loaded  with  shovels 
so  that  there  was  somewhat  less  settlement.  But  at  the  end  of  a 
half  mile  the  density  was  practically  the  same,  whatever  the 
method  of  loading.  The  density  at  the  beginning  and  at  the  end 
of  the  haul  can  be  compared  by  the  weight  of  a  given  volume  of 
crushed  stone.  For  convenience,  the  weight  of  a  cubic  yard  of  the 
material  at  the  beginning  of  the  haul  and  at  the  end  was  computed 
from  the  known  contents  of  a  wagon. 

Table  V  shows  the  per  cent  of  settlement  of  crushed  limestone 
in  wagon  loads  at  the  end  of  different  lengths  of  hauls: 

Weight  of  Crushed  Stone  in  Wagons  and  Cars. —  In  Engineering- 
Contracting,  Aug.  5,  1908,  are  given  in  detail  the  results  of  some 
very  careful  tests  made  by  Prof.  Ira  O.  Baker  on  the  voids  in 
broken  limestone  of  various  sizes  and  after  various  drops  and 
lengths  of  haul  in  wagons  and  cars.  The  following  is  a  very  brief 
summary  of  the  results. 

The  following  were  the  weights  of  broken  stone  per  cubic  yard 
in  wagons  and  in  cars,  both  at  the  crusher  and  after  hauling  a  given 
distance : 

Wagon  Loads.  Car  Loads. 

After  a 
haul  of  *fa  After 

mile  a  haul  of 

Location  of  Size  Wt.  at         or         Wt.  at     75  miles 

quarry.  of  stone.  crusher,    more,     crusher,  or  more. 

Joliet %  in.  Scr.  2303     *     2533          2659          2905 

Joliet %  in  Scr.  2652          2882 

Joliet 2in.-%in.  2315          2480          2386          2592 

Joliet 2ta.-%in.  2296          2516 

Joliet 3  ,u.~2  in.  2361          2553 

Chester %  in.  Scr.  2442          2797          2546          2850 

Chester 2  in.-%  in.  2344          2582 

Chester 3  in. -2  in.  2367          2569          2348          2545 

Kankakee.  ...  %  in.  Scr.  2430          2697 

Kankakee l%in.-%4n.  2325          2546 

;  Kankakee 2%  in.- %  in.  2260          2390 

The  limestone  came  from  Chester,  Joliet  and  Kankakee,  111.,  the 
specific  gravity  being  2.57,  2.71  and  2.61  respectively.  There  was 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  April   24.   1907. 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


t-'O                r-' 

±     Wl 

0 
00 

to 

X 

en 

O 

cc 

t^ 

o 

00 

t— 

0 
0 
CO 

CO 

0    10 

o  -r 

CO    •* 

(M           OO    1C    »C    rH    O 

Tt<           CO    O    OS    O    TH 
CO           CO    1C    1C    CO    1C 

0] 

01 

01 

(01 

<M 

Cl 

<M    iM 

(M          <M    Ol    C<1    C<I    (M 

,c 

0  3       'H 

.5? 

—  <     O 

00 

X) 

o 

IQ 

10 

o 

0   0 

1C         CO    O    O    O    1C 

1C 

0 

CO 

1C    t- 

O          t-    CO    t-    t-    CO 

1* 

10 

o 

-f 

CO 

CO 

CO          CO    CO    Tt<    C--1    CO 

DQ 

c-i 

01 

01 

01 

01 

01 

IM   <M 

<M~      c^  <M"  IM*  <M"  IM" 

- 

6 

1C 

CO 

• 

co       1-1     ;     ;  co 

beotKxi 

l-H'g 

T-! 

ci 

I 

•'• 

H 

ci       o     •    ••  oi     * 

1-1 

1-1 

. 

1C 

vffl^ 

1C 

co 

01 

*& 

1C 

0  1 

CO           rH    0    <T.    CO    r-J 

'  a 

i-J 

oi 

^ 

oi 

^ 

OS 

ic  t>: 

IM         O    CO    r»<    Ol    t-- 

o 

^ 

^ 

CO 

•*   1C 

;           ;   0   CO      ;   00 

_t- 

d 

0 

: 

00 

1C    CO 

•  ic  r}5     -co 

i 

.§ 

r-l 

eo  t- 

•  o  co     •  oo 

0 

o 

oo 

1C   1C 

.    1C    **        -CO 

a)50 

r-i 

iH 

!i 

^0 

1C 

^ 

I 

OS 

CO    CO 

;          ;  o  co     ;  oo 

1 

•2S 

OS 

0 

1C    1C 

'.              .    10    •*        •    CO 

« 

1-1 

ctio 

01 

<M 

,- 

CO    CO 

;          ;  oo  iH      ;  ic 

K^ 

• 

' 

OS 

c: 

^ 

1C   1C 

._,;_.;     .to 

JH 

O 

t> 

0 

£ 

»• 

<M 

O 

t^ 

OS    OO 

;          ;  ic  oo      ;  ic 

.    TJ!    oq       -CO 

I 

c" 

1-3° 

to 

co 

01 

t^  ^-1 

;          ;  01  co      ;  co 

^ 

|H 

S 

06 

OS 

co 

co  -^ 

.    ^    (M        -1C 

^3 

oj 

o 

co 

c 

CO 

co  ic 

•              ^    1C    1C        |    O 

~ 

H 

L- 

10 

1C 

esi  co 

•    CO    O        -1C 

B 

o 

o 

-*-> 

g 

a 
o 

a 

o 

-3 

a 

c 

a 

4 

a 
o 

£> 

T3 

a 
p 

'S 

a    • 
o    • 

;-    1/2 

•0-3 

a  a  a    !    ." 
o  o  o    .    . 

tlemer 

<D  ^ 

£ 

d 

d 

d 

d 

4J 

<H 

-M  > 

O        «H  <w  £    o    O 

« 

8* 

<H 

O 

1C 

10 

1C 

1.O 

SM 

^       ic  ic  io  -C  X! 

If}               .        j        j    ^    r^ 

o 

1 

0 

t/2 

M 

C/2 

•    • 

1 

to 

iJO 

bJO 

bJO 

r*  _d 



<D 

£ 

c 
'S 

'S 

C 

'S 

'5 

'o 
c 

'o 
c 

r^      *J 

(j     0 

2  .S 

O             

c     .c  ,3  ,c;  ^:  ^3 

S 

H 

S 

<D 

S 

0) 

•^       o   o   o   o   o 

«    .S  .S  .2  .S  .S 

ra 

1 

rJl 

w 

1 

^ 

r-i 

^ 

^^ 

ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         181 


no  very  rriarked  variation  in  the  voids  for  different  sizes  of  stone, 
the  range  being  from  43%  for  the  1%  to  2% -in.  size  of  stone  to 
47%  for  screenings  %  in.  and  less. 

When  broken  stone  was  shoveled  or  dropped  into  a  wagon,  and 
hauled,  it  settled  about  4%  during  the  first  100  ft.  of  haul,  and 
about  4%  more  during  the  next  half  mile,  a  total  of  8%,  beyond 
which  there  was  no  settlement.  Screenings  settled  more,  about  6% 
In  the  first  100  ft.,  and  a  total  of  12%  at  the  end  of  a  half-mile 
haul.  A  75-mile  haul  in  railway  cars  caused  no  more  settlement 
than  a  half-mile  haul  in  wagons. 

The  Per  Cent  of  Voids  in  Railway  Embankment.* — One  of  the 
editors  of  this  paper,  some  years  ago,  built  a  section  of  a  railroad 
in  the  South  where  many  of  the  embankments  were  made  from 
borrow  pits,  the  material  being  solid  rock.  These  pits  were  not 
cross-sectioned,  and  the  specifications  stated  that  when  excava- 
tion was  measured  in  embankment,  that  it  should  be  considered  that 
one  yard  of  solid  rock  in  place  would  make  1.75  cu.  yds.  in  em- 
bankment. The  editor  protested  against  this,  believing  he  was 
being  deprived  of  from  15  to  20%  of  his  yardage,  but  as  he  could 
show  no  authentic  records  to  disprove  the  engineer's  claim,  he  was 
paid  on  the  basis  given  in  specification. 

We  are  able  to  give  an  example  when  it  was  possible  to  obtain 
the  exact  yardage  taken  from  the  cut,  and  the  amount  it  made  in 
the  fill.  At  Boulder,  Colo.,  in  1882,  a  cut  of  3,600  cu.  yds.  made  an 
embankment  of  5,340  cu.  yds.,  which  is  a  ratio  of  1  to  1.51. 

In  blasting  rock  for  excavation  on  railroads,  the  mass  comes 
out  in  pieces  of  all  sizes,  and  as  they  are  placed  in  the  embank- 
ment voids  of  considerable  size  are  made  between  the  pieces.  If  the 
excavated  rock  has  a  layer  of  overlying  earth  that  has  not  been 
stripped  off  before  the  rock  is  blasted,  much  of  this  earth,  and  the 
rock  that  is  ground  up  fine,  go  to  fill  up  these  voids,  making  the 
embankment  more  compact  than  where  there  is  no-  dirt  excavated 
in  connection  with  the  rock.  The  result  is  that  rock  by  itself 
"swells"  more  than  it  does  when  excavated  in  connection  with 
earth  and  loose  rock. 

The  writer's  experience  is  that  with  solid  rock  first  stripped  and 
then  excavated,  the  example  given  at  Boulder  is  a  fair  average ; 
but,  with  rock  excavated  where  the  solid  rock  is  excavated  in  con- 
nection with  loose  rock  and  earth,  this  ratio  of  expansion  is  too 
high.  For  the  last  named  excavation  1  to  1.4  is  about  the  proper 
ratio. 

Voids  in  Rock  Blasted  Under  Water.f^-Mr.  E.  C.  Bowen  is  author 
of  the  following : 

In  Dredge  Section  2  of  the  Ashtabula  Dock  Extension,  Lake 
Shore  &  Michigan  Southern  Ry.,  which  has  just  been  finished  by  the 
Lake  Erie  Dredging  Co.  of  Buffalo,  the  rock  dredged  was  paid 
for  by  place  measurement,  there  being  62,869  cu.  yds.  of  rock  so 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   25,   1907. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  6,  1907. 


182  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

measured  in  this  section.  This  was  determined  by  careful  sounding? 
taken  6  ft.  apart  on  ranges  which  were  parallel  lines  spaced  6  ft. 
apart,  both  before  and  after  dredging.  The  material  dredged  was 
shale  rock  which  had  been  drilled  and  blasted,  and  which,  after 
being  dumped  into  scows,  averaged  about  25  Ibs.  per  piece,  in  size. 

Payments  were  made  monthly  and  it  was  found  impracticable  to 
make  place  measurements  each  -month  on  account  of  the  largj 
amount  of  floating  plant  engaged  on  the  dock  extension,  which  was 
in  the  way,  and  the  often  rough  condition  of  Lake  Erie.  It  was, 
therefore,  decided  to  measure  the  material  in  scows  and  take  a 
certain  per  cent  of  this  as  place  measure  until  the  final  estimate 
when  the  total  amount  of  material  in  this  section  would  be  deter- 
mined by  soundings  taken  before  and  after  dredging.  The  sum  of 
all  partial  payments  previously  made  would  then  be  subtracted 
from  the  above  total,  giving  the  amount  of  the  final  estimate. 

The  total  amount  dredged  as  measured  in  scows  was  103,537 
cu.  yds.  The  amount  of  voids  in  the  rock  was,  therefore,  39.3 
per  cent.  Excavation  was.  paid  for  6  ins.  below  the  required  grade 
and  no  excavation  was  found  by  the  soundings  to  have  been  car- 
ried below  this  level,  which  was  21.5  ft.  below  lake  level. 

A  large  amount  of  this  material  was  used  below  water  for  filling 
the  cribs  forming  the  substructure  of  the  docks  and  it  was  found 
to  pack  down  very  solidly.  When  exposed  to  air,  however,  it  disin- 
tegrates rapidly. 

Measurement  of  Rock.— Rock  excavation  is  commonly  measured 
in  place  before  loosening,  and  paid  for  by  the  cubic  yard  of  actual 
excavation ;  but,  in  sewer  work  and  in  tunnel  work,  if  the  con- 
tractor excavates  beyond  certain  "neat  lines"  shown  in  the  blue- 
prints, no  payment  is  made,  unless  the  specifications  explicitly 
provide  for  payment  for  excavation  beyond  these  "neat  lines."  In 
trench  work,  for  example,  a  contractor  often  has  to  excavate  from 
6  to  18  ins.  below  the  grade  shown  in  the  blue-print,  because  it 
costs  less  to  do  so  than  to  work  too  close  to  the  grade  and  after- 
ward break  off  projecting  knobs  with  a  bull-point  or  otherwise.  The 
same  is  true  of  shallow  excavation,  or  skimming  work,  in  road 
construction  and  the  like. 

The  amount  of  rock  taken  out  beyond  the  "neat  lines"  is  called 
the  "overbreak."  For  percentages  of  "overbreak"  in  tunnel  work 
consult  the  index  under  Tunnels. 

In  examining  specifications  care  should  also  be  taken  to  note 
whether  mention  is  made  of  rock  slips  or  falls ;  for  it  often  hap- 
pens that  after  blasting  to  the  neat  lines  a  huge  slide  of  rock  occurs, 
possibly  filling  the  entire  excavation.  Who  is  to  stand  the  cost  of 
removing  this  slide?  If  it  is  prescribed  that  the  contractor  shall, 
then  he  should  study  the  dip  of  the  rock  and  its  character  with  this 
question  of  sliding  in  mind. 

A  perch  of  masonry  is  commonly  taken  as  being  25  cu.  ft.  (or 
nearly  1  cu.  yd.),  but  the  original  perch  was  a  wall  12  ins.  high, 
18  ins.  wide,  and  a  rod  (16%  ft.)  long,  making  24%  cu.  ft.  In 
Certain  localities  the  "perch"  is  taken  as  being  only  22  cu.  ft,  but  in 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.          188 

most  places  in  this  co-untry  a  perch  is  only  16  %  cu.  ft.  These  facts 
the  contractor  should  know,  for  he  must  often  deal  with  quarrymen 
who  will  not  sell  rock  by  the  cubic  yard. 

In  some  localities  stone  for  building  is  sold  by  the  cord.  Sedi- 
mentary rock  quarried  in  slabs  that  are  corded  up  carefully  by  hand 
may  have  30%  or  less  voids,  which  makes  it  evident  that  a  con- 
tractor in  buying  rock  by  the  cord  should  be  careful  to  prescribe 
that  it  be  packed  closely  and  not  dumped  in  piles  helter  skelter 
before  measurement.  In  buying  rock  by  the  "cord"  there  is  another 
precaution  to  be  taken,  and  that  is  to  specify  how  many  cubic  feet 
constitute  a  cord.  A  cord  of  wood  is  4  X  4  X  8  —  128  cu.  ft.,  but  a 
"cord"  of  stone  is  often  1X4X8  =  32  cu.  ft.  Rock  is  often  pur- 
chased by  the  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.  ;  but  to  avoid  lawsuits  it  is  wise 
to  define  the  word  "ton"  in  any  written  or  verbal  contract,  for  a  ton 
means  2,240  Ibs.  in  some  localities. 

If  crushed  stone  for  macadam  or  ballast  is  purchased  by  the 
cubic  yard  measured  loose,  the  precaution  of  stating  where  the 
measurement  is  to  be  made  should  always  be  taken.  I  have  made 
measurements  of  wagon  loads  of  broken  stone  after  loading  from 
chutes  at  the  bins,  and  again  after  traveling  for  half  a  mile  or 
more.  A  surprising  shaking  down,  or  settlement,  always  takes 
place,  ordinarily  making  a  reduction  in  volume  of  10%.  I  an- 
nounced these  results  in  1901,  and  recent  experimenters  have  con- 
firmed this  percentage  very  closely. 

There  is  another  caution  to  be  taken  in  examining  specifications 
and  in  buying  stone  for  concrete.  Note  whether  or  not  the  specifi- 
cation requires  that  the  largest  permissible  stone  shall  pass*  in 
every  direction  through  a  ring  of,  say,  2%  ins.  diameter.  I  have 
italicized  the  words  "in  every  direction"  because  few  engineers 
realize  and  few  contractors  stop  to  think  that  this  virtually  means 
the  use  of  a  much  smaller  opening  in  the  screen  than  the  one 
specified,  in  this  case  smaller  than  2%  ins.  In  screening  stone  in 
a  rotary  screen,  long  narrow  fragments  will  drop  through  a  2%  -in. 
hole,  yet  many  of  these  fragments  will  not  pass  "in  every  direc- 
tion" through  a  2% -in.  hole.  On  this  account,  small  though  the 
matter  seems,  I  once  had  more  than  1,000  cu.  yds.  of  stone  re- 
jected by  an  inspector  who  found  that  he  could  not  pass  through 
a  ring  some,  of  the  long  fragments  when  laid  crosswise. 

There  are  two  ways  of  designating  the  sizes  of  stone  after 
screening.  One  is  to  designate  the  stone  according  to  the  diameter 
of  the  screen  hole  through  which  it  has  passed  ;  in  this  case  stone 
that  has  passed  a  2%-in.  hole  is  called  "two  and  a  half  inch  stone." 
Another,  and  very  common  way,  is  to  take  the  diameter  of  the 
screen  hole  through  which  the  stone  did  not  pass,  add  it  to  the 
diameter  of  the  screen  hole  through  which  the  stone  did  pass,  divide 
this  sum  by  two,  and  call  this  average  diameter  the  size  of  the 
stone.  Suppose,  for  example,  that  a  stone  crusher  were  provided 
with  a  rotary  screen  having  three  sections  of  perforated  metal, 
the  holes  in  the  first  section  being  %-in.  diameter,  the  holes  in  the 
second  section  1^-in.  and  in  the  third  section  2^  -in.  Then  the 


184  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

average  size  of  the  stone  that  passes  the  %-in.  holes  is  %-in.  stone 
(assuming  it  to  run  from  dust  to  %-in.).  The  average  size  of  the 
stone  that  passes  the  iy2-in.  holes  but  does  not  pass  the  %-in.  holes, 
is  ( 1  %  +  %  )  -7-  2,  or  1%-in.,  and  it  may  be  called  1%-in.  stone.  In 
like  manner  the  stone  between  1%-in.  and  2 %-in.  may  be  called 
2-in.  stone.  This  rule  is  not  followed  strictly  by  the  manufac- 
turers of  crushed  stone,  so  it  is  always  necessary  to  inquire  exactly 
what  they  mean  when  they  speak  of  stone  of  a  certain  size.  Thus 
the  Rockland  Lake  Trap  Co.  have  the  following  schedule  of  com- 
mercial sizes: 

Diameter  of  holes  in  screen,  inches.. 4%  3*4  2%  11/16  % 
Commercial  sizes  of  stone,  inches ....3%  2y2  1  %  %  % 

Therefore,  when  "2  %-in,  stone"  is  ordered  from  this  company, 
they  ship  a  product  that  ranges  from  2%  ins.  to  3%  ins.  in  size — 
indeed,  some  of  the  stone  fragments  are  even  larger  than  3V4  ins. 
in  certain  directions,  for,  as  above  stated,  a  long,  narrow  stone  may 
pass  through  a  screen. 

Kinds  of  Hand  Drills. — Drilling  holes  in  rock  by  hand  may  be 
effected  in  three  ways:  (1)  By  a  rotary  drill  or  auger;  (2)  by  a 
churn-drill;  (3)  by  a  hammer-drill,  or  "jumper"  drill,  struck  with 
a  hammer.  A  rock  auger  operated  by  hand  is  used  only  in  very 
soft  rock  or  coal. 

A  churn-drill,  as  its  name  implies,  is  raised  and  allowed  to 
drop,  or  is  hurled  against  the  rock.  For  shallow  holes  of  small 
diameter  it  is  necessary  to  give  a  churn-drill  additional  weight, 
which  is  done  by  welding  a  ball  of  wrought  iron  to  the  center  of 
the  drill  shank,  making  a  ball-drill.  A  ball-drill  is  usually  pro- 
vided with  a  cutting  bit  at  each  end,  and  is  operated  by  one  man. 
For  deep  drilling,  that  is,  for  holes  more  than  about  2%  or  3  ft. 
deep,  an  ordinary  churn-drill  is  used,  operated  by  one  man  for 
shallow  work,  two  men  for  deeper  work,  and  three  or  even  four 
men  for  very  deep  holes  where  the  weight  of  metal  becomes  con- 
siderable. 

The  churn-drill  in  the  hands  of  a  skilled  driller  is  the  most 
effective  type  of  hand  drill  for  vertical  holes;  and  a  little  theory 
is  not  without  its  practical  value  in  seeking  the  reason  for  the 
effectiveness  of  the  churn-drill.  Much  of  the  energy  of  the  blow 
of  a  hammer  is  lost  in  the  form  of  heat  at  the  head  of  the  drill. 
This  loss  does  not  occur  with  the  churn-drill.  It  takes  some  skill  to 
start  a  hole  with  a  ball-drill  and  to  keep  it  plumb  ;  but  the  time 
spent  in  acquiring  this  skill  is  repaid  many  times  over  if  quarry 
operations  with  hand  drills  are  to  be  moderately  extensive. 

The  effect  of  the  size  of  the  hole  upon  the  speed  of  drilling  ap- 
pears never  to  have  been  carefully  determined.  One  authority 
says  that  to  double  the  diameter  of  the  hole  decreases  the  speed 
of  drilling  by  one-half.  Another  authority  thinks  that  doubling  the 
diameter  divides  the  speed  by  four.  According  to  the  first  authority, 
if  a  man  could  drill  12  ft.  of  1-in.  hole  in  a  shift,  he  could  drill  only 
6  ft.  of  2-in.  hole  in  a  shift.  According  to  the  second  authority,  only 
3  ft.  of  2-in.  hole  could  be  drilled  per  shift. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         185 

Cost  of  Hammer  Drilling.— The  diameter  of  the  hole,  the  angle  at 
which  the  hole  is  driven  and  the  presence  or  absence  of  water  in  the 
hole,  all  affect  the  cost  of  drilling  by  hand.  The  method  of  drilling 
with  hammer-drills  or  with  churn-drills  is  also  an  important  factor 
in  the  cost.  Obviously  the  character  of  the  rock  is  the  most  im- 
portant factor  ;  but  unfortunately  very  few  reliable  records  of  cost 
of  drilling  in  different  kinds  of  rock  are  to  be  found.  From  some 
observations  on  hammer  drilling  with  a  1%-in.  starting  bit  I  have 
found  that  where  one  man  is  holding  the  drill  vertically  and  two 
men  are  striking,  the  rate  of  drilling  a  6-ft.  hole  is  as  follows : 

Ft.  in  Cost  per  ft, 

10  hrs.  cts. 

Granite    7  75 

Trap     (basalt)      11  48 

Limestone     16  33 

The  cost  is  based  upon  a  wage  rate  of  $1.75  per  9-hr,  day  per 
man  ;  and  does  not  include  the  cost  of  sharpening  drills,  which  may 
be  taken  at  5  to  8  cts.  per  ft.  more. 

I  have  found  that  a  man  drilling  plug  and  feather  holes  in  gran-  - 
ite,  each  hole  being  %-in.  diam.  by  2y2  ins.  deep,  will  average  one 
hole  in  5  mins.,  including  the  time  of  cleaning  out  holes,  the  driller 
striking  about"  200  blows  in  drilling  the  hole.  No  water  is  used 
in  drilling  these  shallow  holes,  for  the  dust  is  readily  and  quickly 
cleaned  out  with  a  little  wooden  spoon.  In  8  hrs.  of  steady  work 
about  100  holes  can  be  drilled,  which  is  about  21  ft.  of  %-in.  hole. 
But  in  plug  and  feather  work  part  of  the  time  is  spent  in  select- 
ing rock,  driving  the  plugs,  etc.,  so  that  50  or  60  holes  drilled  and 
plugged  and  feathered  are  generally  counted  a  fair  day's  work. 

I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  John  B.  Hobson  for  the  following  data  of 
hammer  drilling  in  a  British  Columbia  mine :  Rock  was  augite 
diorite  and  firm  red.  porphyry  ;  starting  bit,  1%  ins.;  finishing  bit, 
1^4  ins.;  %-in.  steel;  holes,  6  ft.  deep;  8-lb.  hammer.  Two  miners 
(one  holding  drill  and  one  striking)  averaged  14.8  ft.  per  10-hr, 
shift.  With  wages  at  $2  a  day  the  cost  was  nearly  28  cts.  per  ft. 
of  hole. 

Mr.  Frank  Nicholson  states  that  in  mining  chalcopyrite  in  mag- 
nesian  limestone  at  St.  Genevieve,  Mo.,  a  day's  work  for  a  striker 
and  a  holder  was  12  ft.  of  hole  drilled.  The  drills  had  Ii4-in. 
starting  bits,  %-in.  octagon  steel  being  used. 

In  excavating  hard  porphyry  for  the  rock-fill  dam  at  Otay,  Cal., 
Mr.  W.  S.  Russell  states  that  a  good  day's  work  for  three  men 
drilling  (one  holding  and  two  striking)  was  6  to  8  ft.  of  hole,  cost- 
ing about  80  cts.  per  ft.  of  hole  drilled.  The  holes  were  drilled  20  ft. 
deep  vertically  and  sprung.  This  was  an  unusual  depth  of  hole  for 
hammer  drilling,  and  accounts  for  the  high  cost  per  foot.  It  shows 
also  how  uneconomic  is  hammer  drilling  in  deep  vertical  holes  com- 
pared with  churn  drilling. 

In  driving  a  small  (3x4% -ft)  tunnel  through  tough  sandstone 
one  driller  averaged  4  to  5  holes,  each  1%  ft.  deep,  per  8-hr,  shift, 
using  %-in.  bit  for  the  starter;  and,  upon  cleaning  up,  the  advance 


1*3  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

was  1  ft.  per  shift  for  one  man.     Each  hole  was  charged  with  half 
a  stick  of  75%   dynamite. 

Cost  of  Hand  Drilling  in  Granite.*— Mr.  George  C.  McFarlane  is 
authority  for  the  following  data  on  work  done  by  him  for  Grand 
Trunk  Pacific  R.  R.,  in  Canada  : 

Steam  drills  were  used  in  all  the  large  cuts,  while  in  the  smaller 
cuts  hand  drills  were  used.  With  hand  drills,  holes  as  deep  as  30  ft. 
were  put  down.  Steel  1  in.  in  diameter  was  used  to  make  the  drills, 
which  were  gaged  to  1%  in.  This  size  dnll  was  used  for  the 
entire  depth  of  the  hole.  The  hand  drillers  worked  3  men  in  a 
.gang.  In  starting  the  hole,  and  until  it  reached  a  depth  of  about 
6  ft.,  2  men  did  the  striking  and  one  man  held  the  drill.  In 
drilling  holes  to  a  greater  depth  all  three  men  used  striking  hammer, 
the  rebound  and  jumping  of  the  drill  turning  it  enough  to  keep  the 
hole  fairly  round.  The  rocks  encountered  on  this  work  are  hard 
granite,  traps  and  diabase  of  the  Laurentian  and  Huronian  system. 

Hand  drillers,  when  working  by  the  day,  were  paid  $2.25  for 
10  hrs.,  but,  when  paid  per  foot  drilled,  received  45  cts.  This  price 
per  foot  does  not  include  sharpening  or  carrying  steel  to  the  shop. 
In  drilling  block  holes,  every  hole  less  than  1  ft.  in  depth  was 
counted  as  being  a  foot. 

The  following  are  some  records  of  hand  drilling : 

One  gang  of  three  men,  in  drilling  10  to  14-ft.  holes  in  dark  horn- 
blende, averaged  29  ft.  per  day. 

In  drilling  red  granite,  20  ft.  is  about  the  average  per  day. 

In  trap  and  diabase  rock,   18  to  19  ft.  is  an  average  day's  work. 

In  drilling  block  holes,  a  less  number  of  feet  is  drilled  per  day. 
A  record  for  six  days  for  one  gang  on  block-hole  work  was :  Mon- 
day, 1  hole  36  ins.  deep;  1  hole  45  ins.  deep;  8  holes  from  5  to 
12  ins.  deep;  total  driven,  11  ft.  7  in.  Tuesday,  1  hole  22  ins.; 
1  hole  18  ins.;  4  holes  6  to  9  ins.  ;  total,  5  ft.  -11  ins.  Wednesday, 
1  hole  36  ins.  ;  1  hole  22  ins.  ;  1  hole  17  ins. ;  5  holes  6  to  12  ins.  ; 
total,  9  ft.  9  ins.  On  Thursday  the  drilling  done  was  for  holes  to 
square  up  bottom  of  cut,  there  being  5  in  all;  1  hole  was  68  ins.; 
1  hole  50  ins.  ;  1  hole  24  ins.  ;  1  hole  40  ins.  ;  1  hole  28  ins.  ;  total, 
17  ft.  6  ins.  On  Friday.  11  holes  from  6  to  16  ins.  were  driven. 
Saturday,  1  hole  44  ins.  ;  1  hole  30  ins.  ;  and  7  holes  from  6  to  9 
ins.;  total,  10  ft.  3  ins.  This  gives  a  total  of  62  ft.  8  ins.  in  49 
holes,  or  an  average  depth  of  about  15  ins. 

For  sharpening  the  steel  a  blacksmith  and  a  helper  were  em- 
ployed, and  a  "nipper"  to  carry  the  steel  back  and  forth  from  the 
cut  and  shop.  For  sharpening  the  steel  for  5  gangs  cf  drillers,  who 
put  down  2,142  ft.  in  a  month,  we  have  the  following  cost: 

Blacksmith,    25    days   at    $3.50 $  87.50 

Helper,    24    days    at    $2.00 48.00 

Nipper,    24    days    at    $2.00 48.00 

12    sacks   coal    12.00 


Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  27,  1907. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         187 

This  means  an  average  cost  of  sharpening  per  lin.  ft.  of  hole 
drilled  of  about  9  cts. 

This  gives  us  a  total  cost  of  drilling  and  sharpening  drills  for 
the  examples  given  as  follows : 

Dark  hornblende  (deep  holes)    29  ft.  drilled  per  day — 

Drilling,    per    ft $0.23 

Sharpening,    per    ft 0.09 

Total,    per    ft $0.32 

Red  granite   (deep  holes),  20  ft.  drilled  per  day — 

Drilling,    per   ft $0.34 

Sharpening,  per  ft 0.09 



Total,     per    ft $0.42 

Red  granite    (shallow  block  holes),  10  ft.   3  in.  drilled  per  day — 

Drilling,    per   ft $0.65 

Sharpening,    per   ft 0.09 

Total,    per    ft $0.74 

Trap  and  diasbase   (deep  holes),   18  to  19  ft.  drilled  per  day — 
Drilling,    per   ft.    . $0.35 


Sharpening,    per   ft. 


Total,    per    ft .- $0.44 

Average  of   5    gangs,    18   ft.   drilled  each,  day — 

Drilling,    per    ft $0.37 

Sharpening,  per  ft 0.09 

Total ..$0.46 

This  gives  an  average  of   19   ft.   at  a  cost  of  47   cts.   per  lin.   ft. 
or    drilling    and    sharpening    steel.      This    includes    both    deep    and 
shallow  holes. 

Cost  of  Churn  Drilling.— I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  W.  M.  Douglass,  of 
the  firm  of  Douglass  Bros.,  contractors,  for  the  following  data  on 
drilling  with  churn-drills,  for  railroad  work  in  western  Ohio.  Three 
drillers  were  used  for  putting  down  the  first  18  ft.  of  hole  in  blue 
sandstone  the  first  day  (10  hrs. ),  and  four  men  were  used  for 
putting  down  the  last  12  ft.  of  hole,  so  that  it  required  70  hrs.  of 
labor  at  15  cts.  per  hr.,  or  $10.50,  for  a  30-ft.  hole,  making  the 
cost  35  cts.  per  ft.  In  brown  sandstone  it  required  70  to  80  hrs. 
labor  to  put  down  30  ft.  The  drill  holes  were  2%  ins.  at  top  and 
1  Vj  ins.  at  bottom.  Drilling  with  steam  drills  in  this  same  stone, 
holes  20  ft.  deep,  cost  12  cts.  per  ft.,  including  everything  except 
interest,  depreciation  and  drill  sharpening.  The  cost  of  hand  drilling 
agrees  very  closely  with  my  own  records  of  similar  work  in 
Pennsylvania. 

Trautwine  gives  the  following  rates  of  drilling  3-ft.  vertical  holes, 
starting  with  a  1%-in.  bit,  one  man  drilling  with  a  churn-drill,  shift 
10  hrs.  long: 

Solid    quartz     4      ft.  in  10  hrs. 

Tough     hornblende r,      ft.  in  10  hrs. 

Granite    or    gneiss    7.5  ft.  in  10  hrs. 

Limestone     8.5  ft.  in  10  hrs. 

Sandstone 9.5  ft.  in  10  hrs. 

It  should  be  observed  that  the  holes  in  this  case  are  shallow 
(3  ft.),  and  the  diameter  (1%  ins.)  is  large  for  such  shallow  holes. 


188  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

indicating  that  Trau twine's  data  applied  to  rock  excavation  where 
black  powder  was  used. 

Sizes  of  Air  Drills. — The  size  of  an  air  drill  is  denoted  by  the 
inner  diameter  of  its  air  or  steam  cylinder;  thus  a  3^4 -in.  air  drill 
is  one  having  a  cylinder  3*4  ins.  diam. 

The  smallest  sizes,  2% -in.  drill,  is  called  a  "baby  drill,"  or  a 
one-man  drill — the  latter  name  being  given  to  the  drill  because  it 
can  readily  be  moved  about  and  set  up  by  one  man.  For  narrow 
work  in  mines  the  baby  drill  is  adapted.  It  is  also  used  for  drilling 
plug  and  feather  holes,  and  might  often  be  used  profitably  for  shal- 
low cuts  and  trenches.  The  most  commonly  used  sizes  for  general 
contract  work,  tunneling  and  mining  are  the  3% -in.  and  the  3 14 -in. 
drills.  The  drill  is  churned  back  and  forth  in  the  hole  by  com- 
pressed air  or  steam  power,  and  after  each  stroke  it  is  mechanically 
turned  a  fraction  of  a  circle.  The  drill  is  fed  forward  by  hand,  a 
crank  at  the  end  of  a  feed-screw  being  used  for  this  purpose.  A 
longer  drill  is  inserted  every  2  ft.  in  depth  of  hole,  for  2  ft.  is  the 
limit  of  feed  of  the  ordinary  feed-screw  used. 

Data  as  to  Rock  Drills.— Table  VI  gives  approximately  the  princi- 
pal data  regarding  air  drills. 

Test  of  Air  Consumption  at  the  Rose  Deep  Mine. — A  6-hour  run 
at  the  Rose  Deep  Mine,  South  Africa,  showed  the  following  results 
for  31  drills:  The  compressed  air  averaged  70  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  and 
each  3 14 -in.  drill  consumed  81  cu.  ft.  of  free  air  per  minute,  includ- 
ing all  leakage  of  pipes  (there  was  less  leakage  than  is  common  in 
mines).  Each  driU  required  43  Ibs.  of  coal  per  hour,  to  supply  this 
compressed  air;  and  each  3.4  Ibs.  of  coal  developed  1  hp.  per  hr., 
by  the  indicator  on  the  steam  engine,  evaporating  6.74  Ibs.  of  water 
from  212°  F.  The  average  horsepower  of  the  compressor  engine 
was  12.7  I.  H.  P.  per  drill ;  but  all  the  drillers  were  trying  to  make 
a  record,  and  accomplished  in  6  hrs.  an  amount  of  drilling  that  ordi- 
narily took  8  hrs.  The  power  plant  was  a  vertical  King-Reidle 
Compound  Steam  and  Double  Stage  Compressor,  with  two  boiler 
of  the  horizontal  return  tubular  type. 

Tables  of  Air  Consumption  in  Catalogues.— Table  VII  is  given  in 
the  catalogue  of  one  of  the  well-known  drill  manufacturers,  and  is 
said  to  be  based  upon  actual  tests  of  single  drills  running  continu- 
ously without  stops  for  changing  bits,  etc. 

TABLE  VII. — CUBIC  FEET  OF  FREE  AIR  PER  MINUTE  REQUIRED  TO  RUN 
A  ONE-DRILL  PLANT. 


Gauge 
pres- 

2 

2^4 

—  i 
2% 

Jiarr 

2% 

eter 
3 

OL  jjiin  i^yiu 
3%  3  3/163% 

iuer- 
31/2 

3% 

4% 

5 

sy2 

sure. 

in. 

in. 

in. 

in. 

in. 

in.  in.  in. 

in. 

in. 

in. 

in. 

in. 

60 

50 

60 

68 

82 

90 

95   97  100 

108 

113 

130 

150 

164 

70 

56 

68 

77 

93 

102 

108  110  113 

124 

129 

147 

170 

181 

80 

63 

76 

86 

104 

114 

120  123  127 

131 

143 

164 

190 

207 

90 

70 

84 

95 

115 

126 

133  136  141 

152 

159 

182 

210 

230 

100 

77 

92 

104 

126 

138 

146  149  154 

166 

174 

199 

240 

252 

When  more  than  one  drill  is  to  be  supplied  from  the  same  air 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         180 


3 


COt-       <M       •*       r-l 


*   W    5 


o  in  in      o     in  us 
co  <M  co      cq      e-i  M- 


a«? 

eo«o      o      -+i 


vjfxOO         ffi 


rH       10010       10       OO 
i-K&OO        OO        lO»n 

co  IH  i?q      oo      el  ««- 


o     -*  10     o      6  O 


1000       O       IOO 

cr>  <£>  i—      N      e^a  m 

CXI  r-i  <M        OO        CM  *»• 


ooo      o      oo 


.        *  a; 

' 


'-       ^ 


|||ft3ll|||ljl|p|S|l|j|lll| 


*>  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

compressor    the    manufacturers    advise    multiplying    the    quantities 
given  in  Table  VII  by  the  factors  siren  in  Table  VIII. 

TABLE  VIII. 

Number  of  drills 1     2         5         10        15         20         30        40        70 

Multiply     value      in 

Table    V    by 1     1.8     4.1        7.1        9.5     11.7     15.8     21.4     33.2 

Tables  similar  to  these  are  given  by  other  manufacturers.  In 
answer  to  letters  of  inquiry  I  have  been  informed  that  such  tables 
are  "based  upon  experience  in  a  large  number  of  mines." 

The  actual  drilling  time,  that  is,  the  time  when  the  drill  is  actu- 
ally striking  blows,  is  seldom  over  70%,  and  often  not  more  than 
40%  of  the  length  of  the  shift.  Knowing  the  conditions  of  work, 
the  reader  will  be  able  (with  the  aid  of  data  given  subsequently) 
to  predict  approximately  the  per  cent,  of  actual  drilling  time.  Then, 
if  there  are  more  than,  say,  10  drills,  he  can  multiply  the  air 
consumption  of  one  drill  (when  actually  drilling)  by  the  per- 
centage of  drilling  time  in  the  shift,  and  the  product  will  be  the 
average  air  consumption  of  each  drill.  If  there  are  less  than  about 
10  drills  it  will  not  be  safe  to  figure  so  closely,  because  the  fewer 
the  drills  operated  from  one  compressor,  the  more  likely  is  it  that 
all  or  nearly  all  of  them  will  be  using  air  at  the  same  time.  The 
larger  the  number  of  drills,  on  the  other  hand,  the  more  certain 
it  is  that  some  will  be  changing  bits  while  others  are  drilling,  and 
thus  draw  a  steady,  average  amount  of  air  from  the  compressor. 

Steam  Consumption. — When  steam  is  piped  directly  from  the 
boiler  into  a  drill,  practically  the  same  number  of  cubic  feet  of 
steam  are  consumed  as  of  cubic  feet  of  compressed  air.  We  may 
assume  that  a  cubic  foot  of  steam  will  do  practically  the  same 
work  in  a  drill  as  a  cubic  foot  of  compressed  air  at  the  same 
pressure,  because  neither  the  steam  nor  the  air  acts  to  any  great 
extent  expansively  in  a  drill  cylinder,  due  to  the  late  cut  off.  This 
being  so,  0.21  Ib.  of  steam  is  equivalent  to  6  cu.  ft.  of  free  air,  or 
1  Ib.  of  steam  is  equivalent  to  nearly  30  cu.  ft.  of  free  air,  or 
1  cu.  ft.  of  free  air  is  equivalent  to  0.035  Ibs.  steam — all  at  the 
same  pressure  of  75  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  If  a  drill  consumes  at  the  rate 
of  100  cu.  ft.  of  free  air  per  min.,  it  will  consume  6,000  cu.  ft. 
of  free  air  in  an  hour.  If  it  were  using  steam  in  its 
cylinder  instead  of  air  (at  75  Ibs.  pressure),  it  would,  therefore, 
consume  6,000X0.035  =  240  Ibs.  of  steam  (at  75  Ibs.  pressure)  in 
an  hour. 

When  coal  is  burned  under  a  boiler  a  large  percentage  of  its  heat 
passes  up  the  chimney  in  the  gases  and  is  lost ;  and  in  addition  to 
this  loss  the  boiler  itself  radiates  heat  constantly.  The  greater  part 
of  the  loss  occurs  in  the  heat  that  goes  up  the  chimney.  In  large, 
well-designed  boilers,  properly  protected  by  asbestos  or  similar 
covering,  the  coal  burned  will  develop  steam  to  about  80%  of  the 
full  heat  value  of  the  fuel ;  the  efficiency  of  the  boiler  and  furnace 
is  then  80%.  In  locomotive  boilers,  where  forced  draft  is  used, 
firing  not  of  the  best  and  boiler  exposed  to  moving  air,  the  efficiency 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         191 

is  often  as  low  as  45%.  The  efficiency  of  a  good  boiler  of  moderate 
size  (100  ho. ),  well  housed,  is  ordinarily  about  75%.  A  small 
(20  hp.)  boiler  exposed  to  the  wind  has  an  efficiency  of  about  60% 
when  not  forced.  If  a  small  boiler  is  used  to  run  one  drill,  the 
boiler  must  always  have  up  enough  steam  to  keep  the  drill  running 
at  nearly  full  capacity ;  but  when  the  drill  is  stopped,  during  the 
changing  of  bits,  moving,  etc.,  there  is  a  waste  of  steam,  because 
the  period  of  stoppage  is  not  long  enough  to  permit  the  fireman  to 
make  any  material  change  in  the  firing  and  in  the  draft. 

When  a  %-in.  drill  is  operated  by  steam  from  a  small  boiler, 
about  600  Ibs.  of  coal  are  ordinarily  required  per  10-hr,  shift.  But 
if  a  number  of  drills  are  supplied  from  a  large,  well  lagged  boiler, 
through  steam  pipes  that  are  also  lagged  with  asbestos  covering,  it 
is  possible  to  cut  down  the  coal  consumption  to  300  Ibs.  or  less  per 
drill  per  10  hrs. 

Gasoline  Air  Compressors. — Where  not  more  than  three  or  four 
drills  are  to  be  operated,  probably  no  power  can  equal  compressed 
air  generated  by  gasoline.  One  pint  of  gasoline  per  hour  per 
brake  horsepower  (B.  HP.)  of  gasoline  engine  may  be  counted  upon 
as  the  average  consumption.  It  will  require  about  12  hp.  to  com- 
press air  for  each  drill  (3^4-in.  size)  ;  hence  12  pints,  or  1%  gals., 
of  gasoline  will  be  required  per  hour  per  drill  while  actually  drilling. 
Since  gasoline  air  compressors  are  self-regulating,  when  the  drill  is 
not  using  air  very  little  gasoline  is  burned  by  the  gasoline  engine 
driving  the  compressor.  If  the  drill  is  actually  drilling  two-thirds 
of  the  working  shift,  we  may  safely  count  upon  using  about  1  gal. 
of  gasoline  per  hour  of  shift  per  drill,  or  8  gals,  per  shift  of  8  hrs. 
long.  If  gasoline  is  worth  15  cts.  per  gal.,  delivered  at  the  engine, 
one  drill  consumes  only  $1.20  worth  of  gasoline  per  shift  of  8  hrs. 
A  gasoline  compressor  possesses  other  very  important  economic  ad- 
vantages over  a  small  steam-driven  plant.  First,  there  is  the  saving 
in  wages  of  firemen  ;  for,  once  started,  a  gasoline  engine  runs  itself. 
Second,  there  is  the  saving  in  hauling  or  pumping  of  water  and 
the  hauling  of  fuel.  Third,  the  cost  of  gasoline  is  often  less  than  the 
cost  of  coal  for  operating  a  small  plant. 

Percentage  of  Lost  Time  In  Drilling.— In  operating  machines  of 
any  kind  the  percentage  of  lost  time  is  a  factor  that  should  receive 
the  most  careful  consideration.  The  most  serious  loss  of  time  in 
machine  drilling  is  the  time  lost  in  changing  bits  and  pumping  out 
the  hole;  for,  with  a  2-ft.  feed  screw  (which  is  the  ordinary 
length),  a  new  drill  must  be  inserted  for  every  2  ft.  of  hole  drilled. 
It  takes  from  4  to  16  mmutes  to  drill  2  ft.  of  hole,  counting  the 
actual  time  that  the  drill  is  striking,  and  it  ordinarily  takes  from 
2  to  5  minutes  to  change  bits  and  pump  out  the  hole.  I  have  often 
timed  the  work,  however,  where  9  minutes  were  spent  in  drilling, 
followed  by  9  minutes  lost  by  lazy  drillers  in  changing  bits.  Count- 
ing no  other  time  losses,  then,  half  the  available  time  was  lost  in 
the  operation  of  changing  bits.  When  shallow  holes  (6  ft.  or  less), 
are  to  be  drilled,  the  drill  steel  is  light,  and  there  is  often  little 


192  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

or  no  sludge  pumping  to  be  done.  In  such  cases  it  is  possible  for 
the  driller  and  his  helper  to  change  bits  in  1  minute,  or  even  less 
when  they  are  rushing  the  work.  So  far  as  the  changing  of  bits  is 
concerned,  men  should  be  made  to  work  with  a  vim.  When  men 
have  to  exercise  their  muscles  incessantly  for  8  or  10  hrs.  there  is 
reason  in  taking  a  slow,  steady  gait,  but  in  machine  work,  muscu- 
lar exercise  is  intermittent,  and  should  be  vigorous. 

Next  in  importance  to  the  time  lost  in  changing  bits  is  the  time 
lost  in  shifting  the  machine  from  hole  to  hole.  To  move  a  tripod 
from  one  hole  to  the  next  and  set  up  again  ready  to  drill  seldom 
consumes  less  than  7  minutes,  even  when  the  two  men  are  working 
rapidly,  when  the  distance  to  move  is  short,  and  when  the  rock 
floor  is  level  and  soft.  When,  however,  the  rock  floor  is  irregular 
and  hard,  requiring  the  vigorous  use  of  gad  and  pick,  not  only  in 
making  holes  for  the  tripod  leg  points  to  rest  in,  but  requiring,  also, 
some  little  time  in  squaring  up  a  face  for  the  bit  to  strike  upon,  the 
two  men  may  consume  from  30  to  45  minutes,  shifting  the  machine 
and  setting  up,  if  they  work  deliberately.  In  such  cases  it  is  ad- 
visable to  have  laborers  working  ahead  of  the  drillers  preparing  the 
face  of  the  rock,  leveling  the  site  of  the  hole,  removing  loose  rock, 
etc.  One  can  see  clearly  what  a  grreat  saving  in  time  may  thereby 
be  effected;  yet,  this  simple  expedient  is  seldom  adopted;  but  the 
driller  and  his  helper  are  usually  left  to  themselves  in  preparing 
the  ground  for  each  new  set  up.  Excluding  the  time  required  to 
change  bits  for  the  new  hole,  we  may  say  that  two  men  can  ordi- 
narily make  a  new  set  up  with  a  tripod  in  12  to  15  minutes,  if  they 
work  rapidly. 

Rule  for  Estimating  Feet  Drilled  Per  Shift.— We  are  now  pos- 
sessed of  sufficient  data  to  enable  us  to  formulate  a  rule  whereby 
the  number  of  feet  drilled  per  shift,  under  given  conditions,  may  be 
predicted.  I  will  not  go  into  the  method  that  I  used  in  deducing 
the  following  rule,  which  is  strictly  correct,  for  the  method  is  one 
of  simple  arithmetic.  The  rule  is: 

To  find  the  number  of  feet  of  hole  drilled  per  shift  divide  the  total 
number  of  working  minutes  in  the  shift  by  the  sum  of  the  following 
Quantities:  The  number  of  minutes  of  actual  drilling  required  to 
drill  one  foot  of  hole,  plus  the  average  number  of  minutes  required 
to  change  bits  divided  by  the  length  of  the  feed  screw  in  feet,  plus 
the  average  number  of  minutes  required  to  shift  the  machine  from 
hole  to  hole  divided  by  the  depth  of  the  hole  in  feet. 

Suppose,  for  example,  the  shift  is  10  hrs.  long,  that  is,  600  mins. ; 
that  it  requires  5  mins.  to  drill  1  ft.  of  the  rock ;  that  it  requires 
4  mins.  to  change  bits  and  clean  hole ;  that  the  feed  screw  is  2  *t. 
long;  that  the  machine  can  be  shifted  from  hole  to  hole  in  16  mini*  ; 
and  that  each  hole  is  8  ft.  deep.  Then  according  to  the  rule  M '» 

4       16 

have:     The  number  of  feet  of  hole  per  shift  is  600-=-  (5  -\ -j ) 

2          R 
which   is  equivalent  to  600 -=- 9,   or   66%  ft.  drilled  per   10-hr,   shift. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.          193 

For  those  who  can  use  simple  algebraic  formulas  the  above  rule 
is  much  more  compactly  expressed  in  the  following  formula  : 

B 


m       s 
r-{  ---  h  — 
f       D 

N  =  number  of  feet  drilled  per  shift. 

S  —  length  of  working  time  of  shift  in  minutes  =  600  for  a  10-hr. 
shift  when  no  time  is  lost  by  blasts,  breakdowns,  etc. 

r  =  number  of  minutes  of  actual  drilling  required  to  drill  1  ft. 
of  the  rock. 

m  —  number  of  minutes  required  to  crank  up,  change  drills,  pump 
out  hole  and  crank  down. 

m  —  3  to  4  mins.  ordinarily. 

f  =  length  of  feed  screw,  in  feet,  ranging  from  1%  ft.  in  "baby" 
drills  to  21/2  ft.  in  largest  drills,  but  ordinarily  2  ft. 

s  =  number  of  minutes  required  to  shift  machine  from  one  hole 
to  the  next,  including  the  time  of  chipping  and  starting  the  new 
hole,  but  not  including  the  time  of  cranking  up  and  cranking  down. 
s  ranges  from  5  mins.  for  very  rapid  shifting  on  level  rock,  to  40 
mins.  for  very  slow  shifting  on  irregular  rock. 

D  =  depth  of  hole  in  feet. 

Even  a  casual  study  of  the  foregoing  formula,  or  rule,  must  im- 
pres  the  practical  man  with  the  importance  of  the  lost  time  elements 
in  machine  drilling  ;  consequently  of  the  value  of  timing  the  opera- 
tion of  changing  bits  and  moving  machines  when  the  men  do  not 
know  that  they  are  being  timed.  Another  feature  that  stands  out 
strikingly  is  the  reduced  output  of  a  drill  working  in  a  shallow 
hole.  Let  the  reader  solve  a  fe.w  problems,  assuming  first  an  aver- 
age depth  of  hole  of  16  ft.  and  finally  an  average  depth  of  only  2  ft. 
(such  as  occurs  often  in  the  skimming  work  in  road  building), 
and  he  will  never  make  the  blunder  of  the  contractor  who  "bid  the 
same  price  for  rock  excavation  on  the  2-ft.  deepening  of  the  Erie 
Canal  as  had  been  bid  for  the  3  6  -ft.  excavation  on  the  Chicago 
Canal. 

If  we  assume  that  the  shift  is  10  hrs.  long;  that  the  rate  of  drill- 
ing is  1  ft.  in  5  mins.  ;  that  it  takes  4  mins.  to  change  bits  and 
pump  out  the  hole  at  each  change  of  bits  ;  that  the  feed  screw  is  2 
ft.  long;  and  that  it  takes  15  mins.  to  shift  from  one  hole  to  the 
next  ;  by  applying  the  rule  we  obtain  the  following  results  : 

Depth  of  hole,  ft  ........    1  2  3  5          10          15          20 

Feet  drilled  in  10  hrs  .....  27          41          50          60          70          75          80 

When  drillers  are  lazy  they  may  readily  consume  8  mins.  in 
changing  bits  and  pumping  out  the  hole  each  time.  With  all  condi- 
tions the  same  as  before,  excepting  that  8  mins.  are  consumed  in 
changing  bits,  we  have  the  following  results: 

Depth    of    hole,    ft  ......    1  2  3  5          10          15          20 

Feet  drilled  in  10  hrs  .....  25          36          43          50          57          60          62 

It  will  be  seen  that  in  deep  hole  drilling  20%  decreased  efficiency 
results  from  just  a  little  laziness  in  changing  bits,  under  the  condi- 


194  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

tions  assumed ;  and  in  softer  rocks  the  percentage  of  decreased 
efficiency  is  much  greater.  Where  the  holes  are  shallow  the  time 
involved  in  shifting  from  one  hole  to  the  next  becomes  an  important 
factor.  Assuming  that  the  conditions  are  the  same  as  in  the  first 
instance,  except  that  30  mins.  are  consumed  in  shifting  from  one 
hole  to  the  next,  then  we  have  the  following  results: 

Depth  of  hole,   ft 1  2  3  5          10          15          20 

Feet  drilled  in  10  hrs 16          27          35         46          60          67          70 

Rates  of  Drilling  in  Different  Rocks — Unfortunately  no  published 
record  exists  showing  rates  of  drilling  in  different  kinds  of  rock 
with  given  air  or  steam  pressures  and  given  sizes  of  drill  bits.  Such 
scattering  records  as  are  to  be  found  merely  give  the  feet  of  hole 
drilled  per  shift.  From  data  obtained  by  observation  I  have  com- 
piled the  following  table  for  drilling  with  3% -in.  machines  using 
air  or  steam  at  70  Ibs.  pressure,  starting  bit  about  2%  ins.  and  fin- 
ishing bit  about  1  %  ins. : 

Time  to  drill  1  ft. 

Soft  sandstones,   limestones,   etc 3  mins. 

Medium,   ditto    4  mins. 

Hard  granites,   hard  sandstones,   etc 5  mins 

Very  hard  traps,    granites,    etc 6  to  8  mins. 

Very  soft  shales,  and  other  rocks  that  make  sludge 

rapidly  and  when  a  water  jet  is  not  used 8  to  10  mins. 

That  the  inexperienced  reader  may  have  a  good  general  conception 
of  what  constitutes  a  day's  work  under  ordinary  conditions  the  fol- 
lowing summary  may  be  of  benefit :  In  drilling  vertical  holes,  with 
the  drill  on  a  tripod,  the  holes  being  from  10  to  20  ft.  deep,  shift 
10  hrs.  long,  I  have  found  that  in  the  hard  "granite"  of  the  Adiron- 
dack Mountains,  New  York,  48  ft.  is  a  fair  10-hr,  day's  work.  In 
the  granites  of  Maine  and  Massachusetts  45  to  50  ft.  is  a  day's 
work.  In  New  York  City,  where  the  rock  is  mica  schist,  deep  holes 
are  drilled  at  the  rate  of  60  to  70  ft.  per  10-hr,  shift  by  men  willing 
to  work,  but  40  to  50  is  nearer  the  average  of  union  drillers.  In  the 
very  hard  trap  rock  of  the  Hudson  River  40  ft.  is  considered  a  fair 
day's  work.  In  the  soft  red  sandstone  of  northern  New  Jersey  90  ft. 
are  readily  drilled  per  day  wherever  the  rock  is  not  so  seamy  as  to 
cause  lost  time  by  the  sticking'  of  the  bit ;  in  fact,  I  have  records 
showing  110  ft.  per  10-hr,  shift  in  this  rock.  In  the  hard  lime- 
stone near  Rochester  my  records  show  about  70  ft.  per  10-hr,  shift. 
In  the  limestone  on  the  Chicago  Drainage  Canal  70  to  80  ft.  was  a 
10-hr,  day's  work.  In  the  hard  syenite  of  Douglass  Island,  in  open 
pit  work,  and  where  it  is  difficult  to  make  set-ups,  36  ft.  was 
the  average  per  10-hr,  day.  In  the  granites  encountered  in  grading 
for  the  Grand  Trunk  Pacific  R.  R.  in  Canada,  only  30  ft.  were 
averaged  per  drill  per  day.  In  the  limestone  near  Windmill  Point, 
Ontario,  3% -in.  drills  average  75  ft.  a  day  (holes  18  ft.  deep)  ; 
2% -in.  drills,  60  ft.  a  day,  and  "baby"  drills,  37  ft.  a  day. 

The  foregoing  examples  all  apply  to  comparatively  deep  vertical 
holes,  in  open  excavation.  In  tunnel  work  there  is  no  reason  why  a 
drill  should  not  do  about  the  same  work  per  shift,  were  there  no 
delays  in  timbering,  mucking,  waiting  for  gases  to  clear,  etc.  Svlch 
delays,  however,  often  reduce  the  drill  footage  very  much. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         195 

Cost  of  Sharpening  Bits. — One  blacksmith  (with  a  helper)  will 
sharpen  about  140  bits  a  day,  and  under  ordinary  conditions  Will 
keep  5  to  7  drills  supplied  with  sharp  bits.  On  average  rock  a  bit 
must  be  sharpened  for  every  2  ft.  hole ;  in  very  soft  rock  a  bit  for 
every  4  ft.,  and  in  very  hard  rock  a  bit  for  every  l1/^  ft.  of  hole. 
On  small  jobs  it  is  often  necessary  to  have  a  blacksmith,  even 
chough  there  is  only  one  drill  at  work.  In  such  cases,  however,  the 
blacksmith  should  be  kept  busy  with  other  work. 

Cost  of  Drill  Repairs — Mr.  Thomas  Dennis,  agent  of  the  Adven- 
ture Consolidated  Copper  Co.,  Hancock,  Mich.,  has  kindly  furnished 
the  following  data  of  the  average  monthly  cost  of  keeping  a  drill 
in  repair : 

Supplies  for  repairs   $   1.31 

Machinist    labor    8.45 

Blacksmith   labor    1.60 

Total  repair  charge  per  month $11.36 

The  number  of  drills  in  the  shop  at  any  one  time  is  about  15%  of 
the  total  number.  This  low  cost  is  based  upon  work  where  a  large 
number  of  drills  are  used  and  well  handled  by  the  users. 

I- am  indebted  to  Mr.  Josiah  Bond,  mining  engineer,  for  the  state- 
ment that  the  cost  of  repairs  averages  50  cts.  per  drill  per  shift 
in  mines  where  a  few  drills  are  operated  and  renewal  parts  pur- 
chased from  the  manufacturers.  In  open  cut  work  my  experience  is 
that  75  cts.  per  drill  per  shift  is  a  fair  allowance  for  renewals  and 
repairs.  In  the  gold  mines  of  South  Africa,  where  each  drill  works 
two  shifts  r»er  day.  the  cost  of  drill  repairs  is  $300  per  drill  per 
year;  while  the  first  cost  of  a  3^4-in.  drill  with  bar  is  $185,  accord- 
ing to  a  recent  report  of  the  Government  Mine  Inspector. 

Mr.  Josiah  Bond,  General  Manager  American  Copper  Mining  Co., 
Somerville,  N.  J.,  wrote  me  as  follows: 

"As  to  the  matter  of  drill  repairs,  I  can  give  you  only  a  few 
figures.  In  using  drills  for  years,  I  find  I  have  accurate  figures  for 
drill  repairs  for  only  three  years.  These  place  the  repairs  per  drill 
at  $102.00,  $100.50  and  $93.76  per  year.  My  opinion  is  that  a  drill 
used  night  and  day  for  a  year  is  sufficiently  worn  to  make  it  good 
business  to  throw  it  away ;  though  if  a  drill  is  used  by  only  one 
man,  and  he  is  made  responsible  for  its  condition,  I  think  the  life  of 
a  drill  is  at  least  three  years  (one  shift).  Of  course,  studs  and 
side  rods  will  have  to  be  replaced  occasionally,  and  other  small  re- 
pairs must  be  made.  A  well-made  heavy  bar  or  column  should  out- 
last four  drills,  and  arms  are  probably  strong  enough  to  kill  three 
drills.  And  the  drill  itself  is  the  weak  part ;  as  soon  as  the  cylinder 
and  piston  are  enough  worn  to  make  a  day's  work  only  80  ft. 
instead  of  120,  or  even  100  ft.,  it  is  clear  that  you  are  losing  money 
by  keeping  it  at  work.  I  have  always  wanted  two  idle  drills  and 
one  idle  column  and  arm,  etc.,  for  five  working  drills.  From  my 
practice,  which  has  been  a  pretty  hard  one,  developing  with  low- 
priced  labor,  I  should  estimate  a  stoping  drill  to  cost,  including  re- 
pairs and  its  own  life,  about  50  cts.  per  shift. 

"Where  an  operation  is  large  enough  to  warrant  the  erection  of  a 


m  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

machine  shop,  sufficiently  equipped  to  make  all  parts  of  drills,  this 
cost  can  probably  be  cut  in  two  ;  and  in  old  mines,  even  without 
this,  where  the  work  is  more  regular,  a  saving  can  be  made,  be- 
cause breakages  do  not  occur  so  often.  My  practice  has  been 
without  the  luxury  of  a  good  shop,  and  all  repairs  are  purchased, 
with  the  exception  of  a  few  of  the  simple  parts,  like  side  rods,  etc. 

"Much  depends  on  the  care  given  a  drill,  and  the  rock  to  be  drilled 
makes  a  great  difference  also,  but  the  above  figures  are,  I  should 
hope,  outside  prices ;  but  in  my  work,  drills  have  always  been  a 
secondary  consideration." 

The  following  table  gives  the  cost  of  repairing  25  drills  for  11 
months  in  1905,  at  the  Wabana  Iron  Mines,  Nova  Scotia:* 

Total  Amt.  per  drill 

Month  of  repairs.  per  month. 

January    $      68.32  $2.86 

February     85.53  3.576 

March     165.10  6.007 

April     33.92  1.21 

May     46.98  1.86 

June     49.41  1.98 

July     110.89  4.49 

August    316.81  13.50 

September     140.62  5.20 

October     259.60  10.66 

November    204.75  7.80 


Total   and  av $1,481.93  $5.40 

In  addition  to  this  add  $1.75  per  day  for  labor  or  7  cts.  per  drill 
per  day,  or  $2  per  month,  making  a  total  of  $7.40  per  drill  per 
month. 

The  average  cost  of  repairs  was  $5.40  per  month  per  drill  (drills 
worked  one  shift  only  each  day),  not  including  the  cost  of  labor 
of  repairing.  It  takes  all  of  one  man's  time,  at  $1.75  per  day,  keep- 
ing the  drills  in  repair,  or  practically  $2.00  per  month  per  drill. 
The  parts  used  in  making  repairs  are  all  bought  of  the  manufac- 
turers. We  see  that  the  total  cost  of  drill  repairs  has  been  about 
$7.40  per  drill  per  month,  or  30  cts.  per  drill  per  10-hr,  day,  which 
is  a  very  moderate  cost,  and  speaks  well  not  only  for  the  make  of 
the  drills,  but  for  the  care  given  to  them. 

Cost  of  Operating  Drills.— When  operating  a  single  C3i4-in.)  drill 
supplied  by  steam  from  a  small  portable  boiler,  I  find  the  cost  is 
usually  as  follows  for  a  10-hr,  shift: 

1  drill  runner ?   3.00 

1  drill   helper    1- <  5 

1  fireman     V H/; 

660  Ibs.  of  coal   (0.3  ton  at  $3) 90 

Water,    if    hauled,    say '  5 

Hauling  and  sharpening  30  bits    (incl.   new  steel)    at  4  cts..      1.20 
Repairs  to  drill  and  hose  renewals 75 

Total  per  10  hrs $10.35 

The  foregoing  is  merely  an  example,  based,  however,  upon  sev- 
eral different  jobs;  but  in  each  case  the  accessibility  of  a  black- 
smith, the  nearness  to  water,  the  price  of  coal  delivered  at  the 

*See  Engineering-Contracting,  February  1.  1906,  p.  42. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         197 

boiler,  etc.,  must  be  determined  before  an  accurate  estimate  can  be 
made.  If  4  drills,  for  example,  are  to  be  operated  from  the  same 
boiler,  the  fuel  bill  will  be  somewhat  reduced  even  if  the  pipes  are 
not  covered  with  asbestos,  and  of  course  the  wages  of  the  fireman 
will  be  distributed  over  4  drills.  It  will  then  pay  to  have  a  black- 
smith at  hand.  If  10  or  more  drills  are  run  by  steam  from  a  central 
boiler,  and  if  the  main  pipes  are  lagged,  the  fuel  should  not  much 
exceed  300  Ibs.  per  drill  per  10-hr,  shift.  By  the  rules  previously 
given  a  fairly  close  estimate  can  be  made  of  the  number  of  feet  of 
hole  that  each  drill  should  average.  If  60  ft.,  for  example,  are  to 
be  a  fair  day's  work  in  limestone  or  sandstone,  we  have  $10.35  -f- 
60  —  17  cts.  per  ft.  as  the  cost,  exclusive  of  superintendence,  plant 
installation  and  plant  rental. 

If  a  central  compressor  or  steam  plant  supplies  power  for,  say,  15 
drills,  we  may  estimate  the  cost  of  operating  each  drill  as  follows : 

1  drill   runner    $3.00 

I  drill  helper    1.75 

1-15   fireman  at   $2.25 15 

1-15  compressor  man  at  $3 20 

300  Ibs.  coal    (water  nominal)    at   $3   ton 45 

Sharpening  bits,  30  at  3  cts 90. 

Repairs    to    drill,    hose,    etc 75 

Total  for  60   ft.   of  hole  at  12   cts $7.20 

If  the  cost  of  each  drill  and  1/15  part  of  the  compressor  plant  is 
$1,400,  and  if  15%  of  this  is  assumed  as  the  annual  fixed  charge, 
we  have  $210  to  be  divided  by  the  number  of  working  shifts  per 
annum.  This  ordinarily  gives  about  $1  per  drill  per  shift,  or  1% 
cts.  per  ft.  of  hole  drilled. 

In  my  book  "Rock  Excavation — Methods  and  Cost"  will  be  found 
detailed  data  on  the  cost  of  drilling  blast-holes  with  well-drillers  of 
the  "Cyclone"  type.  The  holes  were  3  ins.  diam.  X  24  ft.  deep  in 
sandstone  and  cost  12%  cts.  per  ft.  to  drill.  Other  data  on  drilling 
with  well  drillers  will  be  found  in  this  handbook,  page  253. 

Piece  Rate  and  Bonus  System  in  Drilling.— The  original  "hole 
contract  system"  was  a  piece  rate  system,  whereby  the  driller  was 
paid  for  his  work  according  to  the  number  of  lineal  feet  of  hole 
drilled.  I  have  modified  the  original  system  by  paying  the  drillers 
a  daily  wage  plus  a  bonus  for  each  lineal  foot  in  excess  of  a  stjpu- 
lated  minimum.  See  Section  I  of  this  book. 

Cost  of  Loading  by  Hand. — Where  a  laborer  has  merely  to  pick 
up  and  cast  one-man  stone  into  a  jaw  crusher,  I  have  had  men 
average  34  cu.  yds.  of  loose  stone  handled  per  man  per  10-hr,  shift, 
which  is  equivalent  to  about  20  cu.  yds.  of  solid  rock.  This,  I  be- 
lieve, marks  the  maximum  that  may  be  done,  day  in  and  day  out,  by 
a  good  worker,  where  the  stone  has  scarcely  to  be  lifted  off  the  floor 
to  toss  it  into  the  jaws.  Every  stone,  however,  was  handled  and 
not  shoved  or  slid  into  the  crusher. 

On  the  Chicago  Canal  the  average  output  per  man  per  10-hr, 
shift  was  about  7  cu.  yds.  loaded  into  dump  cars,  and  this  included 
some  sledging.  The  average  per  man  loading  into  the  low  skips 
used  on  the  cableways,  involving  very  little  sledging,  was  about 


108  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

10  cu.  yds.  of  solid  rock  per  man  per  10-hr,  shift.  The  best  day's 
record  was  16.6  cu.  yds.  per  man  loading  into  skips.  In  loading 
cars  about  5  men  out  of  the  force  of  36  loaders  were  kept  busy 
sledging  the  rock  ;  but  with  the  cableways  not  only  was  it  easier 
to  roll  large  rocks'  into  the  skips  (or  "scale  pans"),  but  very  large 
rocks  were  lifted  with  grab  hooks  and  chains  and  carried  to  the 
dump  without  sledging. 

In  loading  wagons  with  stone  readily  lifted  by  one  man,  the 
wagon  having  high  sides,  I  have  found  that  a  man  will  readily 
average  10  cu.  yds.  solid,  which  is  equivalent  to  17  cu.  yds.  loose 
measure  per  day  of  10  hrs.  The  same  man  will  throw  the  stone  out 
of  the  wagon  twice  as  fast  as  he  will  load  it,  and  this  does  not 
mean  dumping  the  wagon,  but  handling  each  stone  separately.  In 
loading  a  wagon  having  a  stone-rack,  and  no  sides,  two  men,  pass- 
ing stone  up  to  the  driver,  who  cords  the  stone  on  the  rack,  will 
load  1  cu.  yd.  solid  stone  in  13  mins.  when  working  rapidly,  but 
this  is  too  high  an  average  to  be  maintained  steadily  for  a 
full  day.  A.  driver  will  unload  1  cu.  yd.  solid  (or  1.7  cu.  yd.  loose) 
from  such  a  stone-rack,  by  rolling  the  stone  off,  in  7  mins.  if  he 
hurries,  but  he  may  take  20  mins.  if  he  loafs.  A  man  will  readily 
load  a  wheelbarrow  with  stone  already  sledged  and  ready  for  the 
crusher  at  the  rate  of  12  cu.  yds,  solid  (or  21  cu.  yds.  loose)  in 
10  hrs. 

Cost  of  Handling  Crushed  Stone. — In-  handling  stone  after  it  has 
been  crushed  to  2%-in.  size,  or  smaller,  a  shovel  is  used,  and  the 
output  of  a  man  depends  very  largely  upon  whether  he  is  shoveling 
stone  that  lies  upon  smooth  boards  or  upon  the  ground.  I  have 
often  had  6  good  shovelers  unload  a  canal  boat  holding  120  cu.  yds. 
loose  measure  of  crushed  trap  rock  (2-in.  size)  in  9  hrs.,  but  after 
breaking  through  to  the  floor  the  shoveling  was  comparatively  easy  ; 
this  is  20  cu.  yds.  loose  (or  12  cu.  yds.  solid)  per  man  per  day 
shoveled  into  skips.  In  shoveling  from  flat  cars  into  wagons  the 
same  rate  can  be  attained,  but  in  shoveling  from  a  hopper-bottom 
car,  where  there  is  at  no  time  a  smooth  floor  along  which  to  force 
the  shovel,  an  output  of  14  cu.  yds.  loose  measure  (or  8  cu.  yds. 
solid)  is  a  fair  10-hr,  day's  work.  In  shoveling  broken  stone  off  the 
ground  into  wagons  it  is  not  safe  to  count  upon  much  more  than 
12  cu.  yds.  loose  measure  (or  7  cu.  yds.  solid)  per  man 
per  10  hrs.  A  careful  manager  will,  if  possible,  pro- 
vide a  smooth  platform,  preferably  faced  with  sheet  iron,  upon 
which  to  dump  any  stone  that  is  to  be  re-handled  by  shovelers. 
Small  stone,  %  in.  or  less  in  diameter,  is  easily  penetrated  by  a 
shovel  and  need  not  be  dumped  upon  a  platform.  A  clamshell 
bucket  operated  by  a  locomotive  crane,  or  derrick,  is  doubtless 
the  most  economic  method  of  loading  broken  stone  from  cars  or 
stock  piles,  where  the  quantity  to  be  handled  warrants  the  in- 
stallation. 

Cost  of   Unloading    Broken   Stone  With  a  Clamshell    Bucket.*—^ 


•Knoineering-Contracting,    Oct.    3,    1906. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         199 

novel  expedient  for  increasing  the  power  of  a  derrick  was  prac- 
ticed recently  in  an  extensive  piece  of  concrete  work  involving  the 
unloading  of  broken  stone  from  vessels  into  wagons.  The  work  in 
question  was  retaining  wall  work  on  track  improvements  on  the 
New  York  Central  &  Hudson  River  R.  R.,  at  Ossining,  N.  Y. 
Scows  brought  broken  stone  to  an  adjacent  wharf  and  the  plan  was 
to  unload  the  stone  into  wagons,  using  a  stiff  leg  derrick  equipped 
with  a  clamshell  bucket.  The  derrick  at  hand  was  an  ordinary 
affair,  with  10  x  10-in.  mast,  8  x  8-in.  stiff  legs,  and  a  40-ft.  boom, 
operated  by  a  5  x  10-in.  National  double  drum  hoisting  engine, 
capable  of  handling  a  3,000-lb.  load  with  the  ordinary  single  line 
rigging.  As  the  clamshell  weighed  2,500  Ibs.  empty  and  fully  4,700 
Ibs.  when  loaded  with  broken  stone,  some  expedient  was  necessary 
to  carry  out  the  plan.  The  problem  was  finally  worked  out  as 
follows : 

The  bucket  was  suspended  from  the  boom  by  a  chain  of  just  suffi- 
cient length  to  allow  it  to  open  and  close.  The  end  of  the  hoisting 
line  was  also  fastened  to  the  end  of  the  boom  and  run  over  a  single 
block  attached  to  the  closing  wheel  on  the  bucket,  then  through 
the  sheave  of  the  boom  and  thence  to  the  engine  drum,  making  a 
double  line  which  gave  the  engine  sufficient  power.  The  loss  of 
speed  resulting  was  of  little  moment.  The  stone  was  unloaded 
directly  into  wagons  so  that  the  hoisting  distance  was  very  small, 
and  the  time  consumed  in  swinging  was  greater  than  the  time  nec- 
essary to  hoist.  The  result  was  that  there  was  practically  no  re- 
duction of  speed  of  operation.  The  hoisting  was  done,  of  course,  by 
raising  and  lowering  the  boom,  using  the  second  drum  of  the 
engine. 

The  derrick  was  operated  by  an  engineman  and  a  helper  and 
handled  regularly  100  cu.  yds.  per  day.  In  addition  to  the  derrick 
work  there  were  24  hrs.  labor  on  a  500  cu.  yd.  boat  load  cleaning 
out  the  stone  that  could  not  be  reached  by  the  bucket.  The  labor 
cost  of  unloading  vessels  into  wagons,  using  the  apparatus  de- 
scribed, can  then  be  itemized  as  follows: 

One  engineman,   at  $2.50 2.5  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

One    helper,    at    $1.50 1.5  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Labor,  cleaning 0.7  ct.     per  cu.  yd. 

Total  labor  cost 4.7  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  fuel  would  not  add  more  than  1%  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  making  a 
total  of  about  5%  cts.,  to  which  should  be  added  cost  of  erecting 
and  removing  the  plant,  and  plant  maintenance. 

The  total  cost  of  the  derrick  fitted  as  described  was  $1,500.  The 
work  in  connection  with  which  the  derrick  was  used  is  being  done 
;by  Ford  &  Waldo,  Engineers  and  Contractors,  Park  Row  Building, 
New  York,  N.  Y..  and  the  double  line  rigging  was  devised  by  them. 

Unloading  Scows  With  a  Clamshell. — In  building  the  masonry 
i  anchorage  for  the  Manhattan  Bridge,  Mr.  Gustav  Kaufman  used  a 
1%  cu.  yd.  Hay  ward  clamshell  bucket  operated  by  a  50-hp.  electric 
| motor,  and  unloaded  600  cu.  yds  of  broken  stone  per  day  from  scows, 
jln  addition  to  the  operator  of  the  clamshell  bucket,  about  8  men 


200        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

were  kept  busy  trimming  up  the  stone  in  the  scow  not  handled  by 
the  bucket.  The  clamshell  bucket  dumped  into  a  10  cu.  yd.  hopper 
provided  with  a  shaking  chute  which  fed  the  stone  onto  a  Robins 
belt  conveyor.  Careful  timing  showed  that  the  bucket  made  11/9 
scoops  per  minute,  averaging  0.9  cu.  yd.  per  scoop.  Tests  showed 
that  it  required  20  hp.  while  loading,  42  hp.  while  lifting,  42  hp. 
while  swinging  loaded,  and  20  hp.  while  swinging  back  empty.  But 
if  we  assume  a  constant  average  expenditure  of  30  hp.,  we  have 
about  24  kw.,  or  240  kw.  hrs.  per  day.  Based  upon  these  data  we 
would  have  the  following  approximate  cost: 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Per  day.         Cts. 

1  operator $   3.00  $0.5 

240  K.-  W.  hrs.  electricity  at  4  cts 9.60  1.6 

8  laborers  at   $1.75 14.00  2.4 


Total     $26.60  4.5 

Another  %  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  would  cover  the  plant  interest  and 
maintenance. 

Cost  of  Handling  Broken  Stone  With  a  Derrick. — Where  crushed 
stone  must  be  handled  with  a  derrick,  as  in  unloading  boats,  I  have 
found  the  following  to  be  about  the  best  that  can  be  done  per  day : 

Per  day. 
6  shovelers,  at   $1.50 $   9.00 

1  hooker  on    1.50 

2  tagmen    (swinging   the   boom) 3.00 

1  dumpman     1.50 

1  water   boy    1.00 

1  team   on  derrick    3.50 

1  foreman    3.00 


120  cu.  yds.    (loose)   at  19  cts.  = $22.50 

It  commonly  costs  about  25  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  (loose  measure)  to 
unload  a  boat  of  broken  stone  using  skips  holding  18  cu.  ft.  each, 
and  a  team  on  the  derrick  for  raising  them.  Where  any  great 
amount  of  such  work  is  to  be  done,  however,  a  hoisting  engine  and  a 
derrick  provided  with  a  bull-wheel  should  be  used.  The  follow- 
ing shows  the  cost  of  unloading  flat  cars  containing  broken  stone 
(2-in.  size),  using  a  derrick  with  a  bull-wheel  for  "slewing"  the 
boom: 

5  shovelers,    at    $1.50    $  7.50 

1  dumpman     1.50 

1  engineman     2.50 

Va   ton  coal  at  $3 1.50 

100  cu.  yds.    (loose)   at  13  cts.  = $13.00 

In  this  case  a  stiff-leg  derrick,  40-ft  boom,  with  a  bull-wheel, 
operated  by  a  double  cylinder  (7x10)  engine,  handled  self-right- 
ing steel  buckets  holding  20  cu.  ft.  each.  Water  for  the  engine 
was  delivered  in  a  pipe.  The  engineman  was  the  foreman. 

In  neither  of  the  two  cases  just  cited  is  the  cost  of  installing  the 
derrick   included,   nor  is  the  interest  and  depreciation   of  plant  in-  -\ 
eluded.     It   takes  6  men  and  a  foreman  one  day  to  dismantle  and  , 
move  a  stiff-leg  derrick  a  short  distance   (100  or  200  ft.),  and  one  , 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         201 

more  day  to  set  it  up  again,  or  $26  for  the  two  days'  work.  This 
includes  moving  the  engine  and  the  stones  used  to  hold  the  stiff  legs 
down;  and  it  applies  to  a  slow  gang  of  workmen. 

A  guy  derrick  with  a  50  or  60-ft.  boom  swung  by  a  bull-wheel 
and  a  hoisting  engine  will  often  prove  the  cheapest  device  for  load- 
ing cars  with  blasted  rock.  If  the  derrick  is  handling  skips  loaded 
with  stone,  the  following  is  a  fair  average  of  the  time  elements  in 
handling  each  skip  load : 

Changing  from  empty  to  loaded  skip   35  sees. 

Swinging   (half  circle)    20  sees. 

Dumping  skip   15  sees. 

Swing  back    20 


Total   90  sees. 

If  there  were  no  delays,  it  would  be  possible  to  handle  400  skip 
loads  in  10  hrs.  Usually,  however,  the  loaders  will  cause  more  or 
less  delay,  so  that  it  is  safer  to  count  upon  what  they  will  average 
rather  than  upon  what  the  derrick  can  do.  One  derrick  cannot  serve 
a  very  long  face,  and  the  number  of  men  that  can  be  worked  to  ad- 
vantage in  a  given  space  is  always  limited ;  hence  I  repeat  that 
with  a  good  derrick  provided  with  a  bull-wheel  the  derrick  can 
ordinarily  handle  more  stone  than  can  be  delivered  to  it  by  the 
men.  The  economic  size  of  the  skip  load  is  entirely  dependent  upon 
the  size  of  the  hoisting  engine,  but  a  common  size  skip  measures 
5  x  6  ft.  x  14  ins.  deep.  Where  much  work  is  to  be  done  a  con- 
tractor should  never  try  to  get  along  with  a  derrick  not  provided 
witfra  bull-wheel  for  "slewing"  the  boom,  for  the  wages  of  two  tag- 
men  would  soon  pay  for  a  new  outfit. 

Cost  of  Loading  Blasted  Rock  With  Steam  Shovels.— A  contractor 
who  has  never  had   experience  In  handling  hard  rock  with  steam 
shovels  is  almost  certain  to  overestimate  the  probable  output  of  a 
shovel    loading    rock.      This    is    due    very    largely    to    the    common 
tendency  to  think  of  all  rock  as  being  a  material  that  differs  only  to 
moderate  degree  in  hardness.     On  the  Chicago  Drainage  Canal,  two 
i    55-ton    shovels,    each    working    two    10-hr,    shifts    a    day    for    four 
|   months,   averaged   296    cu.   yds.   per   shovel  per  shift  of   solid  rock 
(limestone)    loaded   into   cars,    although   it   is   stated   that  one   day 
1  one  of  the  shovels  loaded  600  cu.  yds.  of  rock  in  10  hrs.     The  lime- 
stone on  the  Chicago  Canal  did  not  break  up  into  small  pieces  upon 
blasting    (a   condition    that   is   essential    to   economic    steam   shovel 
>  work  in  rock),  but  it  came  out  in  large  chunks,  much  of  which  had 
]  to  be  lifted  with  chains,  instead  of  being  scooped  up  by  the  dipper. 
•  When   each   separate   rock   must   be   "chained   out"   in   this  way,   a 
i  steam   shovel   is   really   no   better   than   a   derrick,   and   is,    in   fact, 
not  so  good. 

On  a   large  contract  near  New  York  City,   where   the  rock  is  a 

tough  mica  schist  that  breaks  out  in  large  chunks  even  with  close 

spacing  of  holes,  a  65-ton  shovel  with  a  2*4-cu.  yd.  dipper  averaged 

jj  for   several  weeks  about  280   cu.   yds.   of  solid  rock  loaded  in  cars. 

j;  Part  of  this  rock  was  loaded  with  the  dipper  and  part  was  chained. 

On  the  Jerome  Park  Reservoir  excavation  in  New  York  City  the 

I 


-><>•_>  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

rock  is  also  a  tough  mica  schist  that  blasts  out  in  slabs  even  with 
heavy  blasting.  I  am  informed  by  Mr.  R.  C.  Hunt,  manager  for 
Mr.  John  B.  McDonald,  contractor,  that  their  70-ton  shovels  loaded 
only  300  cu.  yds.  of  solid  rock  per  10-hr,  shift.  Mr.  Hunt  says: 

"This  was  in  the  gneiss  rock  (mica  schist)  of  this  vicinity.  The 
fibrous  nature  of  Manhattan  and  adjacent  rocks  causes  it  to  break 
in  such  large  and  awkward  shapes  that  the  shovel  cannot  do  itself 
justice.  I  therefore  abandoned  the  use  of  shovels  in  the  rock  cuts 
and  find  that  I  can  handle  the  rock  with  derricks  more  eco- 
nomically." 

In  thorough  cut  work  on  the  Wabash  Railroad,  one  42-ton  shovel 
loaded  240  cu.  yds.  of  sandstone  (solid  measure)  into  dump  cars 
in  10  hrs.,  as  an  average  of  a  year's  work;  but  about  10%  of  the 
working  time  was  lost  in  breakdowns,  etc. 

In  shale,  or  any  friable  rock  that  breaks  up  into  pieces  which 
readily  enter  the  dipper,  the  output  of  a  steam  shovel  is  far  greater 
than  in  hard  rock  such  as  we  have  been  citing.  Through  the  kind- 
ness of  Mr.  George  Nauman,  assistant  engineer,  Pennsylvania  Rail- 
road, I  am  able  to  give  the  output  of  several  shovels  working 
more  than  a  year,  in  shale  near  Enola,  Pa.  Each  shovel  worked 
two  10-hr,  shifts  per  day,  six  days  in  the  week.  In  cut  No.  1 
there  were  nearly  2,000,000  cu.  yds.,  of  which  85%  was  rock.  Of 
this  rock  a  little  was  very  hard  limestone,  some  was  blue  shale 
nearly  as  hard,  and  most  of  it  was  red  shale,  somewhat  softer.  Ex- 
cluding the  first  two  months,  the  average  output  of  each  shovel 
.per  month  of  doubt-shift  work  was  nearly  31,000  cu.  yds.,  equivalent 
to  15,500  cu.  yds.  single-shift  work.  There  were,  on  an  average, 
four  shovels  at  work,  averaging  60  tons  weight  per  shovel.  The 
best  month's  output  was  47,300  cu.  yds.  per  shovel  in  August,  1903, 
and  the  poorest  month  (after  work  was  well  started)  was  20,800 
cu.  yds.  per  shovel  in  February,  1904,  working  double  shifts. 

For  costs  of  operating  a  steam  shovel  see  the  section  on  Earth 
Excavation. 

Cost  of  Handling  in  Carts  and  Wagons. — Since  a  cubic  yard  of 
loose  broken  stone  weighs  about  as  much  as  a  cubic  yard  of  earth 
measured  in  place ;  and  since,  ordinarily,  1  cu.  yd.  of  solid  rock 
becomes  1.7  cu.  yds.  when  broken,  we  may  say  that  a  team  will 
haul  about  60%  as  many  cubic  yards  of  solid  rock  per  day  as  of 
earth.  In  other  words,  if  the  roads  are  such  that  1  cu.  yd.  of  packed 
(not  loose)  earth  would  make  a  fair  wagon  load  for  two  horses, 
then  O.G  cu.  yd.  of  solid  rock  would  be  a  fair  load.  On  page  121 
the  sizes  of  loads  of  earth  that  teams  can  haul  are  discussed,  and  it 
is  only  necessary  to  multiply  the  earth  load  as  given  there  by 
6/10  (or  60%)  to  find  the  equivalent  load  of  solid  rock. 

Open -Cut  Excavation. — This  includes  all  rock  excavation  in  open 
cuts  (except  trenches),  where  no  special  care  is  used  to  quarry  the 
stone  in  certain  sizes  for  masonry,  but  where  explosives  are  used 
freely  to  break  out  the  rock  in  sizes  that  can  be  handled  with  the 
appliances  available. 

Spacing    Holes    in    Open-Cut    Excavation. — A   common   rule   is   to 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         '203 

place  the  row  of  vertical  drill  holes  a  distance  back  from  the  face 
equal  to  the  depth  of  the  drill  hole,  and  to  place  the  drill  holes 
a  distance  apart  in  the  row  equal  to  their  depth.  Another  rule  is  to 
place  the  row  of  holes  back  from  the  face  a  distance  equal  to  three- 
fourths  their  depth,  and  the  same  distance  apart  in  the  row.  In 
stratified  rock  of  medium  hardness  these  rules  may  be  followed  in 
making  the  first  experiments,  but  they  will  lead  to  serious  error  if 
applied  to  dense  granitic  rocks.  In  the  limestone  on  the  Chicago 
Canal,  not  much  of  which  was  loaded  with  steam  shovels,  the  holes 
were  usually  12  ft.  deep  and  placed  in  rows  about  8  ft.  back  of  the 
face  and  8  ft.  apart.  These  holes  were  charged  with  40%  dyna- 
mite. In  a  railway  cut  through  sandstone  the  holes  were  20  ft. 
deep,  18  ft.  back  from  the  face  and  14  ft.  apart  in  the  row.  These 
holes  were  "sprung"  three  times,  and  each  hole  charged  with  200 
Ibs.  of  black  powder.  In  granite  quarried  for  rubble  for  dam  work, 
I  have  had  to  place  the  holes  4  %  to  5  ft.  back  of  the  face  and  the 
same  distance  apart,  the  holes  being  12  ft.  deep,  about  2  Ibs.  of 
60%  dynamite  being  charged  in  each  hole.  On  railway  work  in  the 
Rocky  Mountains  about  the  same  spacing  was  found  necessary  in 
granitic  rock  that  was  to  be  broken  up  into  chunks  that  a  steam 
shovel  could  handle.  In  pit  mining  at  the  Treadwell  Mine,  Alaska, 
ihe  holes  are  drilled  12  ft.  deep,  in  rows  2^  ft.  apart,  the  holes 
being  6  ft.  apart  in  each  row  and  staggered.  This  requires  drilling 
1.7  ft.  of  hole  per  cu.  yd. 

It  is  obviously  impossible  to  lay  down  any  hard  and  fast  rule  for 
the  spacing  of  drill  holes.  In  stratified  rock  that  is  friable,  and  in 
traps  that  are  full  of  natural  joints  and  seams,  it  is  often  possible 
to  space  the  holes  a  distance  apart  somewhat  greater  than  their 
depth,  and  still  break  the  rock  to  comparatively  small  sizes  upon 
blasting.  In  tough  granite,  gneiss,  syenite  and  in  trap  where 
joints  are  few  and  far  between,  the  holes  may  have  to  be  spaced  3 
to  8  ft.  apart,  regardless  of  their  depth,  for  with  wider  spacing  the 
blocks  of  stone  thrown  down  by  blasting  will  be  too  large  to 
handle  with  ordinary  appliances.  The  mica  schist,  or  gneiss,  of 
Manhattan  Island  is  a  good  example  of  rock  that  requires  close 
spacing  of  holes  regardless  of  depth.  I  have  seen  holes  in  it  20  ft. 
deep  and  only  4  ft.  apart. 

The  effect  of  spacing  of  holes  upon  the  cost  of  excavation  is  best 
shown  by  tabulation  of  the  feet  of  hole  drilled  per  cubic  yard  exca- 
vated, as  shown  below : 

Distance    apart 

of  holes,  ft..    1  1.5        2  2.5        3  3.5        4  4.5        5 

Cu.  yds.  per  ft. 

of   hole 04        .08        .15        .23        .33        .45        .59        .75        .93 

Ft.   of  hole  per 

cu.    yd 27.0      12.0        G.8        4.3        3.0        2.2        1.7        1.33      1.08 

Distance    apart 

of  holes,  ft..    6  7  8  9         10         12         14         16         18 

Cu.  yds.  per  ft. 

of    hole     1.33      1.80      2.37      3.00      3.70      5.32      7.25      9.52   12.05 

Ft.   of  hole  per 

CU.     yd 75        .56        .42        .33        .27        .19        .14        .11        .08 


204        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

Since  in  shallow  excavations  the  holes  can  seldom  be  much 
further  apart  than  1  to  1%  times  their  depth,  we  see  that  the 
cost  of  drilling  per  cubic  yard  increases  very  rapidly  the  shallower 
the  excavation.  Thus  an  excavation  2  ft.  deep,  with  holes  2  ft. 
apart,  requires  4.3  ft.  of.  drill  hole  per  cubic  yard,  as  against  0.42 
ft.  of  hole  per  cu.  yd.  in  a  deeper  excavation  where  drill  holes  are 
8  ft.  apart.  Failure  to  consider  this  fact  ruined  one  contractor  on 
the  Erie  Canal  deepening,  where  rock  excavation  was  only  2  ft. 
deep.  Furthermore,  the  cost  of  drilling  a  foot  of  hole  is  much 
increased  where  frequent  shifting  of  the  drill  tripod  is  necessary. 

By  observing  carefully  the  appearance  of  rocks  in  different  locali- 
ties it  is  possible  in  a  short  time  to  become  tolerably  proficient  in 
the  art  of  estimating  the  probable  distance  apart  that  holes  must 
be  drilled  for  the  best  effect  with  given  charges  of  given  kind  of 
explosive ;  and  with  this  end  in  view  a  young  man  should  avail 
himself  of  every  opportunity  of  studying  prevailing  practice  in 
spacing  drill  holes  in  different  localities. 

Cost  of  Excavating .  Sandstone  and  Shale. — In  excavating  shales 
and  sandstones  of  the  coal  measures  of  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Vir- 
ginia, etc.,  I  find  that  holes  are  usually  20  to  24  ft.  deep,  and 
spaced  12  to  18  ft.  apart.  On  an  average  we  may  say  that  for 
every  cubic  yard  of  solid  rock  there  is  0.1  lin.  ft.  of  drill  hole,  when 
cuts  are  very  wide,  covering  large  areas  of  ground ;  but  in  thorough 
cuts  for  railroads  it  is  not  safe  to  count  upon  much  less  than  0.2 
ft.  of  drill  hole  per  cu.  yd.  The  holes  are  almost  invariably 
"sprung"  with  40%  dynamite  to  create  chambers  at  the  bottom  of 
the  holes,  and  then  charged  with  black  powder.  As  low  as  1/50  Ib. 
of  dynamite  per  cu.  yd.  may  be  used  for  springing  holes  in  shale, 
and  as  high  as  %  Ib.  per  cu.  yd.  in  sandstone  that  is  to  be  very 
heavily  loaded.  I  should  put  the  average  at  1/20  Ib.  of  dynamite 
per  cu.  yd.  of  shale,  and  1/10  Ib.  per  cu.  yd.  of  sandstone.  In  gran- 
ite %  Ib.  per  cu.  yd.  is  common.  A  very  common  charge  is 
8  kegs  (200  Ibs.)  of  black  powder  per  hole,  or  about  1  Ib.  per  cu. 
yd.  in  side  cuts,  and  1%  to  2  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  in  thorough  cuts, 
although  as  high  as  3  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  have  been  used  in  thorough 
cuts  in  sandstone  where  special  effort  was  made  to  break  up  the 
rock  to  small  sizes  for  steam  shovel  work.  The  drilling  of  the 
deep  holes  costs  not  far  from  40  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  where  drilling  is 
done  by  hand  with  wages  at  15  cts.  an  hour,  and  it  may  be  as  low 
as  12  cts.  a  lin.  ft.  if  well  drillers  are  used.  Soda  powder  costs 
about  5  cts.  per  Ib.,  and  40%  dynamite  12  cts.  per  Ib.  We  have, 
therefore,  the  following: 

Cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Drilling  1/10  ft.  to  2/10  ft.  at  40  cts 4.0  to     8.0 

Dynamite  1/20   Ib.   to    1/10   Ib 0.6  to     1.2 

Powder,  1  Ib.  to  2  Ibs 5.0  to  10.0 

Total    for   loosening   the   rock 96  to  19.2 

The  rock  is  commonly  loaded  with  steam  shovels,  and  it  is  not 
safe  to  count  upon  more  than  500  cu.  yds.  of  shale,  or  250  cu.  yds. 
of  sandstone  per  shovel  per  10-hr,  shift. 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.          205 

Summary  of  Open  Cut  Data. — The  two  cost  items  that  the  inex- 
perienced man  should  seek  first  to  inform  himself  upon,  are:  (1) 
The  number  of  feet  of  hole  drilled  per  cubic  yard  in  difterent  kinds 
of  rock;  and  (2)  the  number  of  pounds  of  explosive  required  per 
cu.  yd.  under  varying  conditions.  Below  I  have  given  a  sum- 
mary of  these  items  as  applying  to  open  cut  work  discussed  in 
this  book :  the  table  does  not  apply  to  trenching,  tunneling  or  other 
narrow  work.  Two  examples  are  given  for  sandstones  and  two  for 
shales,  such  as  occur  in  the  coal  measures  of  Pennsylvania.  In  a 
thorough  cut  on  railroad  work,  we  have  conditions  that  approach 
trench  work,  requiring  more  feet  of  hole  and  more  powder  than  in 
open  side  cuts ;  hence  the  difference  between  Examples  5  and 
6,  7  and  8.  It  will  be  observed  that  the  large  amount  of  drilling 
in  Example  2  is  due  to  the  shallowness  of  the  face  or  lift,  and  in 
Examples  9  to  12  it  is  due  to  the  toughness  of  the  rock. 

I  shall  greatly  appreciate  further  contributions  of  similar  data 
from  my  readers,  for  use  in  future  editions.  The  greater  the 
number  of  records,  such  a3  those  in  this  table,  the  better  will  read- 
ers be  able  to  judge  the  range  and  the  average  for  each  class  of 
rock. 

Per     Cubic     Yard. 

£  ~        «          5 

s         s        a     I.-    I      °2 

"S  «M-M  ^  aj  'g 

°l  *          o|       Vl        II 

A  •£  CL  *»>* 


HH 

g 

1      £ 

ta 

,Q 

UH 

Kind  of  Rock. 

Q 

h      d 

3 

1.   .. 

12 

.40        ... 

.75 

40% 

Limestone,    Chicago    Canal. 

2.  .  . 

6 

1.00 

.7 

40% 

Limestone,    for   crushing. 

3.  .. 

20 

... 

.37 

50% 

Limestone,    for    cement. 

4.  .  . 

IB 

.43 

26 

50% 

Limestone    (holes    sprung). 

5... 

20 

.10        1.0 

.1 

40% 

Sandstone,    side   cut. 

6... 

20 

.20        2.0 

.2 

40% 

Sandstone,    thorough    cut. 

7..  . 

24 

.08          .7 

.03 

40% 

Shale,    soft,    side   cut. 

8..  . 

24 

.20        1.5 

.10 

40% 

Shale,    hard,    thorough   cut. 

9... 

16 

1.36 

.20 

60% 

Granite,   for  rubble. 

10..  . 

12 

1.33 

.60 

40% 

Gneiss,   New  York   City. 

11.  .  . 

14 

.63 

.50 

40% 

Gneiss,   New  York   City. 

12.  .. 

12 

1.70.       ... 

.67 

40% 

Syenite,    Treadwell   mine. 

13.  .  . 

12i/2 

.32 

.44 

52% 

Magnetic   iron    ore. 

14.  .. 

14 

.35 

.20 

75% 

Trap,   seamy. 

15.  .  . 

16 

1.00 

.70 

40% 

Trap,  massive. 

16... 

25 

.10 

.80 

50% 

Granite,    Grand   Trunk    Pa- 

cific   (hales    sprung,    half 

the   dynamite  being  used 

in   springing). 

By  applying  the  preceding  data  as  to  unit  costs  of  drilling, 
blasting,  loading  and  hauling,  it  will  be  seen  that  rock  excavation 
in  open  cuts  ranges  from  about  $0.50  to  $1.50  per  cu.  yd.,  the  lower 
price  being  for  shales  and  sandstones  and  the  higher  price  for  cer- 


206  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

tain  granites  and  traps  where  holes  are  close  spaced.  It  is  a  very 
common  assumption  that  rock  can  be  profitably  excavated  in  open 
cuts  at  a  contract  price  of  $1  per  cu.  yd.,  but  it  will  be  seen  that 
each  case  requires  special  study. 

Cost  of  Excavating  Gneiss,  New  York  City.— I  am  indebted  to 
Mr.  John  J.  Hopper,  civil  engineer  and  contractor,  for  the  follow- 
ing data.  The  work  involved  the  excavation  of  29,295  cu.  yds.  of 
gneiss  (or  mica  schist)  at  One  Hundred  and  Twenty-seventh  street, 
New  YOIK  City.  The  drilling  of  the  main  holes  was  done  with 
four  3  Ms -in.  Inger  oil  steam  drills,  and  two  "baby  drills"  were  used 
for  drilling  block  holes.  The  average  height  of  the  lifts  was  12  to 
15  ft.,  and  the  cut  ranged  from  2  to  63  ft.  deep.  Hand  drillers  and 
sledgers  received  $2  per  10-hr,  day ;  laborers  handling  stone  and 
loading  wagons  received.  $1.50  ;  one  of  the  machine  drillers  re- 
ceived $3,  and  the  rest  of  the  drillers  received  $2.75  a  day.  The 
baby  drills  were  used  only  on  the  largest  pieces  thrown  down  by 
the  blast ;  the  ordinary  sized  stone  from  the  blast  was  broken 
up  by  hand-drilled  holes  and  by  sledges  to  sizes  suitable  for  build- 
ing rubble  foundation  walls.  A  good  deal  of  the  stone  was  piled 
up  during  the  winter  until  it  could  be  sold.  The  drilling  part  of  the 
plant  cost  $1,800;  the  boilers,  derricks,  hoists,  etc.,  cost  $1,080; 
40%  dynamite,  costing  20  cts.  per  lb.,  was  used.  There  were  18,433 
lin.  ft.  of  main  holes  drilled  (not  including  block  holes)  in  exca- 
vating 29,295  cu.  yds.  of  solid  rock.  The  total  cost  of  the  work, 
including  the  plant,  cartage,  sledging,  etc.,  was  $52,635.  The  item- 
ized cost  was  as  follows : 

Cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Foremen  and  timekeepers 8.0 

Engineers  and   drillers    10.9 

Sledgers 38.3 

Derrickmen   and   helpers    9.6 

Labor,    loading,    etc 24.7 

Hand   drillers 11.7 

Blacksmith  and  helper    5.3 

Hauling  away  in  wagons    40.5 

Explosives     9.8 

Coal,   coke,   oil,    etc 6.0 

Repairs  to   drills    1.0 

Repairs  to   boilers,   derricks,   etc 1.2 

Total   per  cu.   yd $1.67 

Mr.  Hopper  informs  me  that  in  sound  rock  where  20-ft.  holes 
could  be  drilled,  a  drill  would  average  70  ft.  in  10  hrs.  ;  but  in 
snallow  drilling  the  drills  would  frequently  not  average  over 
25  ft.  each. 

This  is  about  as  high  a  cost  as  need  occur  in  open  cut  rock  work 
of  any  kind,  when  wages  are  as  above  given. 

See  the  section  on  Railways  for  cost  of  excavating  gneiss  for  the 
New  York  Subway. 

Cost  of  Gneiss  Excavation  for  Dams. — Mr.  J.  Waldo  Smith  is 
authority  for  the  statement  that  on  several  dam  jobs  done  under 
his  direction,  near  New  York  City,  it  had  cost  the  contractors  $1.65 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.          207 

per  cu.  yd.  to  excavate  gneiss  in  open  cuts,  when  wages  of  com- 
mon laborers  were  $1.65  cts.  per  10-hr,  day.  At  Catena  it  had  cost 
the  contractors  $3.50  per  cu.  yd.  to  excavate  gneiss  in  the  founda- 
tion for  the  dam,  where  no  blasting  was  allowed.  At  Boontown, 
N.  J.,  under  similar  conditions,  it  had  cost  $3.30  per  cu.  yd. 

Summary  of  Costs  on  Chicago  Canal.  —  The  summary  in  Table 
X  has  been  compiled  by  Mr.  W.  G.  Potter.  Common  laborers  in 
all  cases  receiving  $1.50  for  10  hrs.  work,  all  delays  of  1  hr.  or 
more  being  docked.  Wages  paid  the  other  classes  of  men  are  given 
in  my  "Rock  Excavation."  The  tabulated  costs  do  not  include  shop 
repairs,  but  do  include  field  repairs.  The  drilling  item  appears  not 
to  include  the  cost  of  drill  sharpening.  Plant  interest  and  depreci- 
ation are  not  included  either  —  a  very  important  item  where  such 
expensive  machines  are  used.  Explosives  include  caps  and  dyna- 
mite, 12  ets.  per  Ib.  for  the  40%  dynamite  being  assumed  to  cover 
the  cost  of  explosives.  General  expenses  include  superintendence, 
watchmen  and  incidentals. 

TABLE  X.  —  COST  IN  CENTS  PER  Cu.  YD.    (SOLID). 


bo  w        X  .,-„  9 

A         *->        x       <r>  ft      3        o         £         3          o 
UQHOkUkQ  EH 

Brown    Cantilever    .....  3.9  4.1  8.0  3.2  1.0  3.6  14.6  0.0  38.3 

Ladgerwood    Cableway.  .3.7  3.8  8.4  2.7  1.0  3.6  15.6  0.0  38.8 
Hullett-McMyler  Der- 

rick    ................  3.9  4.0  7.4  2.5  1.8  5.3  18.3  0.0-  43.2 

Hullett    Conveyor  .....    4.1  3.7  8.5  3.8  1.2  6.2  21.4  0.0  48.9 

Car    Hoist    No.     1  ......  3.7  3.9  9.1  2.7  0.8  3.1  24.8  5.1  53.1 

Car  Hotst  No.    2  .......  3.9  3.6  8.9  3.2  0.9  1.2-22.9  2.3  47.1 

Car  Hoist  No.   3  .......  4.0  5.010.7  3.1  1.2  1.2  26.4  4.8  56.5 

The  descriptions  of  each  of  the  foregoing  machines  and  methods 
of  excavating  and  transporting  the  rock  (limestone)  are  given 
in  my  book  on  "Rock  Excavation."  The  detailed  cost  of  chan- 
neling per  square  foot  is  also  given  there. 

Trenching  in  Rock.  —  This  is  a  subject  upon  which  practically 
nothing  has  ever  been  written.  In  consequence  there  is  probably  no 
class  of  rock  work  that  is  so  often  mismanaged  ;  and,  as  a  further 
consequence  of  the  prevailing  ignorance,  engineers'  estimates  of 
cost  are  often  far  too  low  and  occasionally  as  far  too  high.  In  city 
specifications  for  sewer  trenching  in  rock  it  is  customary  to  pay 
the  contractor  only  for  rock  excavated  within  specified  "neat 
lines."  If  he  excavates  beyond  the  "neat  lines"  he  does  so  at  his 
own  expense.  In  sewer  work  the  most  common  practice  is  to 
specify  that  payment  will  be  made  for  a  trench  12  ins.  wider  than 
the  outside  diameter  of  the  sewer  pipe,  and  6  ins.  deeper  than  the 
bottom  of  the  pipe  when  the  pipe  is  laid  to  grade.  The  most  ra- 
tional specification  that  I  have  seen  for  general  use  in  rock  trench- 
ing is  as  follows:  "All  trenches  in  rock  excavation  will  be  esti- 


208        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

mated  2  ft.  wider  than  the  external  diameter  of  the  pipe  and  6  ins. 
below  the  sewer  grade." 

Different  rocks  vary  greatly  in  the  way  the  sides  and  bottom 
shear  off  upon  blasting.  The  sides  of  trenches  in  soft  rocks  can 
be  cut  off  clean  when  the  blast  holes  are  properly  loaded ;  but 
tough  granites,  traps,  etc.,  leave  jagged  walls,  ( generally  involving 
excavation  beyond  the  "neat  lines"  specified. 

In  excavating  thin  bedded,  horizontally  stratified  rocks  the  drill 
holes  seldom  need  to  go  much,  if  any,  below  the  neat  lines  ;  that  is, 
6  ins.  below  the  bottom  of  the  pipe.  But  in  excavating  thick 
bedded  and  tough  limestones  and  the  like,  it  is  generally  necessary 
to  drill  12  ins.  below  the  bottom  of  the  pipe.  In  tough  granites, 
traps,  etc.,  it  is  often  necessary  to  drill  at  least  18  ins.  below  grade 
in  order  to  leave  no  knobs  or  projections  after  blasting  that  would 
require  breaking  off  with  bull  points  and  sledges.  Obviously  the 
shallower  the  trench  the  greater  is  the  importance  of  making  due 
allowance  for  this  extra  drilling. 

The  common  practice  in  placing  drill  holes  is  to  put  down  holes 
in  pairs,  one  hole  on  each  side  of  the  proposed  trench ;  and,  if  the 
trench  is  wide,  one  or  more  holes  are  drilled  between  these  two 
side  holes.  However,  it  is  not  always  necessary  to  drill  the  two 
holes  (one  on  each  side)  ;  but  in  narrow  trench  work,  such  as  for 
a  12-in.  water  pipe,  one  hole  in  the  middle  of  the  trench  will  usu- 
ally Drove  sufficient  if  it  is  made  of  large  enough  diameter  to  hold 
a  heavy  charge  of  dynamite.  For  example,  in  trenching  for  a 
12-in.  water  pipe  in  New  Jersey  trap  rock,  holes  were  drilled  in  the 
center  of  the,  trench,  6  ft.  deep,  and  2  ft.  apart.  The  result  was  a 
great  saving  in  the  cost  of  drilling  per  cubic  yard. 

Cost  of  Drilling  and  Blasting  in  Trenches. — Next  to  tunneling 
there  is  no  class  of  rock  excavation  requiring  so  much  drilling 
per  cubic  yard  as  does  trench  excavation.  In  granites,  if  shallow 
holes  are  drilled  by  hand,  the  holes  are  frequently  spaced  not  more 
than  1%  ft.  apart.  If  in  a  very  narrow  trench  1V2  ft.  wide  two 
holes  are  drilled  in  a  row,  one  on  each  side  of  the  trench,  and  if  the 
rows  are  iy2  ft.  apart,  we  have  two  holes  drilled  in  a  square  IMs  ft. 
on  a  side ;  that  is,  for  every  2 14  cu.  ft.  of  rock  we  must  drill  2  ft. 
of  hole,  or  24  ft.  of  drill  hole  per  cu.  yd.  If  the  cost  of  drilling  is 
25  cts.  a  foot,  we  have  $0.25X24  —  $6  per  cu.  yd.  as  the  cost 
of  drilling  alone.  It  is  seldom,  however,  that  such  narrow  trench- 
ing is  done.  Trenches  for  small  pipes  are  usually  2  %  to  3  ft.  wide ; 
two  holes  are  usually  drilled  in  a  row,  and  rows  are  usually  about 
3  ft.  apart.  A  trench  3  ft.  wide  with  two  holes  in  a  row,  and 
rows  3  ft.  apart,  requires  6  ft.  of  drilling  per  cubic  yard.  With 
drilling  costing  50  cts.  per  ft.,  as  it  often  does  where  hand  drills  are 
used  in  granite,  the  cost  is  then  $3  per  cu.  yd.  for  drilling  alone. 
Unless  the  job  is  too  small  to  pay  for  installing  a  plant,  hand 
drilling  should  never  be  used  in  trench  work,  because  the  drilling 
forms  such  a  very  large  part  of  the  cost. 

In  a  trench  6  ft.  wide  in  hard  New  Jersey  trap  rock  three  holes 
were  drilled  in  a  row,  one  close  to  each  side  and  one  in  the  middle, 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.          209 

and  the  rows  were  3  ft.  apart,  thus  requiring  4%  ft.  of  drill  hole 
per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation.  The  drilling  was  done  with  steam  drills 
at  a  cost  of  30  cts.  per  lin.  ft.,  for  the  holes  were  only  ±%  ft. 
deep,  the  rock  was  hard,  and  the  men  slow,  about  35  ft.  being  the 
day's  work  per  drill.  The  contractor  had  to  drill  1%  ft.  below 
grade  in  this  rock  to  insure  having  no  projecting  knobs  of  rock. 
While  it  cost  $1.35  per  cu.  yd.  to  drill  the  3V2  ft.  for  which  pay- 
ment was  made,  to  this  must  be  added  nearly  30%,  or  $0.40  per 
cu.  yd.,  to  cover  the  cost  of  drilling  the  extra  1  ft.  for  which  no 
payment  was  received,  making  the  total  cost  of  drilling  $1.75  per 
cu.  yd.  of  pay  material.  About  2  Ibs.  of  40%  dynamite  were 
charged  in  each  hole,  making  about  2.6  Ibs.  of  dynamite  per  cu.  yd. 
of  pay  material.  The  explosives  thus  added  another  $0.40  per 
cu.  yd.,  making  a  total  of  $2.15  per  cu.  yd.  for  drilling  and 
blasting. 

In  the  same  trap  rock,  where  the  trench  was  8  ft.  wide  and  12 
ft.  deep,  there  were  three  holes  in  a  row  and  rows  were  4  ft.  apart, 
requiring  2.53  ft.  of  hole  per  cu.  yd.  of  pay  excavation,  plus  0.21  ft. 
of  hole  per  cu.  yd.  of  pay  material  to  cover  the  cost  of  drilling  the 
last  1  ft.  of  hole  below  the  "neat  line."  Each  drill  averaged  45  ft. 
of  hole  in  10  hrs.,  and  the  cost  was  23  cts.  per  ft.  of  hole;  hence 
$0.23  X  2.74  =  $0.63  per  cu.  yd.  was  the  cost  of  drilling.  About  4 
Ibs.  of  40%  dynamite  were  charged  in  each  hole,  or  1.1  Ibs.  per 
cu.  yd.  of  pay  material,  making  the  total  cost  80  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
drilling  and  blasting.  A  comparison  of  this  cost  of  80  cts.  with  the 
$2.15  above  given  brings  out  strikingly  the  fact  that  each  problem 
of  trench  work  must  be  considered  in  detail  by  itself. 

In  a  city  where  the  contractor  must  fire  comparatively  small 
shots  in  order  to  avoid  accidents  to  buildings  and  suits  for  dam- 
ages arising  from  "disturbing  the  peace,"  it  is  seldom  possible  to 
space  the  holes  more  than  3  or  at  most  4  ft.  apart.  In  trenching 
in  soft  sandstone  in  Newark,  N.  J.,  where  the  trench  was  14  ft. 
wide  and  10  ft.  deep,  there  were  five  holes  in  a  row  (the  distance 
between  holes  being  3%  ft.)  and  rows  were  4  ft.  apart,  making  2.4 
ft.  of  hole  per  cu.  yd.  Each  hole  was  charged  with  4.12  Ibs.  of 
40%  dynamite,  making  practically  1  Ib.  per  cu.  yd.  About  half 
the  dynamite  was  charged  at  the  bottom  of  each  hole,  then  tamp- 
ing was  put  in,  and  the  other  half  was  charged  up  to  about  2%  ft. 
below  the  mouth  of  the  hole.  Each  steam  drill  averaged  90  ft.  of 
hole  per  10  hrs..  making  the  cost  of  drilling:  10  cts,  per  ft.  of 
hole,  or  24  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Including  the  cost  of  dynamite  and  the 
placing  of  timbers  over  each  blast,  the  cost  of  drilling  and  blasting 
was  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  This  is  probably  as  low  a  cost  for  break- 
ing rock  in  a  wide  trench  as  can  be  counted  upon  under  favorable 
conditions.  In  this  rock  there  was  no  necessity  of  drilling  below 
grade. 

The  cost  of  throwing  rock  out  of  shallow  trenches  or  of  loading 
it  into  buckets  to  be  raised  by  the  engine  of  a  derrick,  a  locomotive 
crane  or  a  cableway,  is  somewhat  greater  than  the  cost  of  handling 
rock  in  open  cuts.  A  fair  day's  work  for  one  man  is  6  cu.  yds. 


210  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

of  rock  handled,  when  there  is  little  sledging ;  but  the  output  may 
be  only  4  cu.  yds.  where  there  is  a  large  amount  of  sledging  to  be 
done. 

If  cableways  or  derricks  are  used  for  hoisting  the  rock,  bear  in 
mind  that  they  will  be  idle  most  of  the  time,  for  the  drilling  limits 
the  output.  With  a  given  number  of  drill?  to  a  cable  way,  estimate 
the  number  of  cubic  yards  of  TOCK  that  the  drills  will  break  per  day 
and  divide  this  yardage  into  the  daily  cost  of  operating  the  cable- 
way.  Thus,  in  a  trench  6  ft.  wide,  if  the  holes  are  3  ft.  apart,  each 
cubic  yard  of  rock  requires  41/-.  ft.  of  hole,  and  each  drill  will  break 
13%  cu.  yds.  per  day  where  60  ft.  of  hole  is  a  day's  work.  With 
four  drills  per  cableway  the  daily  output  is  4  X  13%  =  53%  cu.  yds. 
The  cableway  would  be  capable  of  handling  several  times  this  out- 
put were  it  not  limited  by  the  drilling.  Notwithstanding  that  all 
this  seems  self-evident,  I  .have  known  more  than  one  contractor  to 
overlook  the  fact  that  the  cost  of  handling  rock  from  trenches  is 
very  much  greater  than  in  open  cuts  where  holes  are  farther  apart 
and  where  a  few  drills  can  keep  a  cableway  busy. 

I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  F.  I.  Winslow  for  the  following  data  on 
trench  work  in  Boston,  Mass. :  For  house  sewer  trenches,  con- 
tractors are  allowed  3  ft.  width,  and  trenches  for  water  pipe  (16 
ins.  or  less),  2%  ft.  width.  The  rock  is  granite,  and  the  drill  holes 
are  usually  3  ft.  apart  drilled  along  the  center  of  the  trench,  but 
staggered  a  little  off  center.  On  small  jobs  hammer  drills  are  used, 
one  man  holding  and  two  striking.  For  a  hole  10  ft.  deep  the 
starting  bit  is  2%  ins.  and  the  finishing  bit  is  1*4  ins.  diam.  A 
drilling  gang  of  three  men  averages  8  to  10  ft.  of  hole  in  10  hrs., 
although  in  very  soft  rock  20  ft.  may  be  drilled  in  10  hrs.  In  a 
trench  10  ft.  deep,  the  rock  is  usually  excavated  in  two  5-ft. 
benches,  but  some  contractors  drill  the  full  10  ft.  and  take  it  out 
in  one  10-ft.  bench.  Forcite  containing  75%  nitroglycerin  is  com- 
monly used,  l/2  to  3  sticks  being  charged  in  a  hole.  Force  account 
records  for  granite  trenching,  on  jobs  of  less  than  100  c_u.  yds. 
each,  show  that  the  average  cost  during  the  past  15  years  has  been 
$3.80  per  cu.  yd.,  including  excavating  and  piling  up  the  rock  along- 
side the  trench.  The  wages  paid  hand-drillers  were  $1.75  per  10-hr. 
day;  and  to  laborers,  $1.40  per  day. 

I  am  indebted  to  the  Harrison  Construction  Co.,  of  Newark, 
N.  J.,  for  the  following  information :  In  a  sandstone  trench  about 
6  ft.  wide  the  holes  were  spaced  about  3  ft.  apart,  thus  requiring 
4V6  ft.  of  hole  per  cu.  yd.  In  seamy  rock,  shallow  holes  4  to  6  ft. 
deep  were  drilled,  and  from  2  to  3  sticks  of  50%  dynamite  were 
charged,  each  stick  being  1%  X  8  ins.  This  is  equivalent  to  0.55 
Ib.  per  cu.  yd.  Where  the  rock  was  solid,  the  holes  were  drilled  8 
to  10  ft.  deep  and  the  dynamite  charge  doubled. 

Consult  the  sections  on  Water  Works  and  on  Sewers  for  further 
data  on  trenching. 

Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Trap.— The  following  data  relate 
to  quarrying  New  Jersey  trap  rock  and  crushing  it  in  gyratory 
crushers.  The  quarry  face  was  12  to  18  ft.  high.  The  output  of 
the  following  gang  was  200  cu.  yds.  of  crushed  stone  per  10-hr. 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.          211 

day,  each  cubic  yard  of  crusher  run  product  weighing  2,700  Ibs., 
no  piece  being  more  than  2  ins.  diameter.  The  weight  of  a  solid 
cubic  yard  of  this  trap  was  4,500  Ibs.,  so  that  the  voids  in  the 
crushed  stone  were  40%.  Drill  holes  were  spaced  about  5  ft.  apart. 

Per  day.  Per  cu.  yd. 

3  drillers  at  $2.75    $     8.25  $0.041 

3  helpers  at  $1.75 5.25  0.026 

10  men    barring    out    and    sledging 15.00  0.075 

14  men    loading   carts 21.00  0.105 

4  cart   horses    6.00  0.030 

2  cart   drivers 3.00  0.015 

2  men  dumping  carts  and  feeding  crusher...  3.00  0.015 

1  fireman  for   drill   boiler 2.50  0.013 

1  engineman  for  crusher   3.00  0.015 

1  blacksmith    3.00  0.015 

1  blacksmith   helper        2.00  0.010 

1  foreman    5.00  0.025 

2  tons  coal  at  $3.50 7.00  0  035 

150  Ibs.   40%   dynamite  at  15   cts 22.50  0.113 


Total    $106.50  $0.533 

Interest,  depreciation  and  repairs  would  add  about  $8  or  $10  more 
per  day,  or  4  to  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  making  a  total  of  about  58  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  There  was  no  earth  stripping. 

The  stone  was  loaded  into  one-horse  dump  carts,  the  driver  tak- 
ing one  cart  to  the  crusher  while  the  other  cart  was  being  loaded. 
The  haul  was  100  ft.  The  carts  were  dumped  into  an  inclined  chute 
feeding  into  a  No.  5  Gates  gyratory  crusher.  The  stone  was  ele- 
vated by  a  bucket  elevator  and  screened.  All  stone  larger  than 
2 -in.  was  returned  through  a  chute  to  a  small  No.  3  Gates  crusher 
to  be  re-crushed. 

I  should  add  that  the  trap  rock  was  much  seamed,  so  that  upon 
blasting  it  was  broken  into  tolerably  small  chunks,  so  that  the 
cost  of  sledging  was  not  high  considering  the  small  size  of  the 
crusher. 

Cost  of  Crushing  at  Newton,  Mass. — A.  F.  Noyes,  City  Engineer 
of  Newton,  Mass.,  gives  the  following  cost  data  for  the  year  1891, 
on  four  jobs  of  crushing  stone  and  cobbles  for  macadam.  On  jobs 
A  and  B  the  stone  was  quarried  and  crushed  ;  on  jobs  C  and  D 
cobblestones  were  crushed.  A  9  X  15-in.  Farrel-Marsondon  crusher 
was  used,  stone  being  fed  in  by  two  laborers.  A  rotary  screen 
having  %,  1  and  2% -in.  openings  delivered  the  stone  into  bins  hav- 
ing four  compartments,  the  last  receiving  the  "tailings"  which  had 
failed  to  pass  through  the  screen.  The  broken  stone  was  measured 
in  carts  as  they  left  the  bin,  but  several  cart  loads  were  weighed, 
giving  the  following  weights  per  cubic  foot  of  broken  stone : 

Size 

y2-in.        1-in          2  %  -ins.  Tailings. 
Lbs.         Lbs.  Lbs.  Lbs. 

Greenish  trap   rock,   "A" 95.8          84.3          88.3          91.0 

Conglomerate,    "B"    101.0          87.7          94.4          

Cobblestones,    "C"    and   "D" 102.5          98.0          99.6          

A  one-horse  cant  held  26  to  28  cu.  ft.  (average  1  cu.  yd.)'  of 
broken  stone;  a  two-horse  cart.  40  to  42  cu.  ft.,  at  the  crusher. 


212 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Hours    run 

A. 
412 

B. 

144 

C. 
101 

D. 

198 

Short   tons  per  hour  

9  0 

11  2 

15  7 

12  1 

Cu.  yds.  per  hour   

.    7  7 

8  9 

11  8 

9  0 

Per  cent  of  tailings 

31  8 

29  3 

17  5 

20  5 

Per  cent  of  2%-in.  stone  ;. 
Per  cent  of  1-in.  stone  

.51.3 
.10.2 

51.9 

57.0 

55.1 

Per  cent  of  %-in    stone  or  dust 

6  7 

18  8 

25  5 

23  4 

nh 

Explosives,  coal  for  drill  and  repairs 

A. 

.$0.084 

B. 

$0.018 

C. 

D. 

Labor    steam    drilling  

.    0.092 

Labor   hand   drilling    

0.249 

Sharpening   tools    

.    0  069 

0  023 

Sledging  stone  for  crusher 

0  279 

0  420 

Loading    carts 

0  098 

0  127 



$0  144 

Carting  to   crusher    

.    0.072 

0  062 

$0  314* 

0  098 

Feeding    crusher 

0  053 

0  053 

0  033 

0  065 

Engineer  of  crusher 

0  031 

0  038 

0  029 

0  036 

Coal  for  crusher    ... 

.    0  079 

0  050 

0  047 

0  044 

Repairs  to   crusher    

.    0  041 

0  Oil 

Moving    portable    crusher 

0  023 

0  019 

Watchman    ($175    a   day  )  

0  053 

0  022 

0  030 

Total  cost  per  cu.  yd $0.898 

Total  cost  per  short  ton 0.745 


$1.116      $0.445      $0.44} 
0.885        0.330        0.372 


"Loading  and  hauling  in  wheelbarrows. 

NOTE. — "A"  was  trap  rock ;  "B"  was  conglomerate  rock ;  "C" 
and  "D"  were  trap  and  granite  cobblestones.  Common  laborers  on 
jobs  "A"  and  "D"  were  paid  $1.75  Der  9-hr,  day:  on  jobs  "B"  and 
"C,"  $1.50  per  9-hr,  day ;  two-horse  cart  and  driver,  $5  per  day ; 
blacksmith.  $2.50 :  engineer  on  crusher.  $2  on  job  "A,"  $2.25  on 
"B."  $2.00  on  "C."  $2.50  on  "D" ;  steam  driller  received  $3,  and 
helper  $1.75  a  day;  foreman,  $3  a  day.  Coal  was  $5.25  per  short 
ton.  Forcite  powder  11%  cts.  per  Ib. 

Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Quartzite. — Mr.  W.  G.  Kirchoffer 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  cost  of  quarrying  and  crushing 
quartzite  for  macadam,  in  1903,  at  Baraboo,  Wis.  The  plant  was  a 
municipal  plant  operated  by  day  labor,  and  the  costs  were  some- 
what, higher  than  under  contract  work.  The  crusher  was  a  No.  3 
Austin  jaw  crusher,  12  x  16-in.  opening.  Three  sizes  of  screen  holes 
In  the  rotary  screen  were  used:  %-in.,  1%-in.  and  2% -in.  The 
first  cost  of  the  plant  was  as  follows,  in  1901 : 


Crusher    .  . . 

Bins    

Steam  drill 
Small  tools 


900 
108 
218 
108 


The  output  of  the  crusher  by  years  has  been : 

Year— 

1901.      1902. 
Total  output,  cu.  yds 1,920     3,700 


$1,334 


1903. 
4,883 

88 


In 


Days  worked    47 

Output  per  day,  cu.  yds 41 

the  year  1901,  about  10%   of  the  stone  was  screened  out  anc 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.          213 

thrown  away.  The  wages  paid  per  10-hr,  day  were:  Laborers, 
$1.50  ;  quarrymen,  $1.75  ;  drill-runner,  $2  ;  engineman  and  engine, 
$3.50.  The  stone  was  measured  in  wagons  built  to  hold  just  iya 
cu.  yds.,  by  weight,  3,900  Ibs.,  and  the  following  costs  for  1903  are 
based  upon  wagon  measurement  of  the  stone : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Quarry  rent $0.0207 

Labor  quarrying,  including  foreman 0.3200 

Labor    crushing    0.1980 

Tools     0.0148 

Dies  for  crusher    0.0636 

Dynamite  (60%  at  25  cts.  per  lb.),  caps  and  fuse 0.0910 

Rent  of  engine  and  wages  of  engineman 0.0635 

Fuel  for  engine,   $4.60  per  ton. 0.0477 

Oil  and  waste : 0.0033 

Hauling  water  and  supplies   0.0499 

Supplies     0.0137 

Superintendent  of  crusher    • 0.0476 

Depreciation  of  plant 0.0736 

Total    $1.0074 

The  cost  of  hauling  2%  miles  to  the  street  was  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
wages  of  team  and  driver  being  $3  a  day. 

The  cost  of  the  macadam  pavement,  including  stone,  hauling, 
grading,  spreading  stone,  claying  and  rolling,  has  been  a  little  less 
than  50  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  The  macadam  was  8  ins.  thick  at  the 
center  and  6  ins.  at  the  gutters,  measured  after  rolling. 

Cost   of  Quarrying   and   Crushing    Limestone  for   Macadam.— The 

cost  of  operating  a  small  quarry,  and  crushing  with  a  portable  or 
semi-portable  crusher  is  obviously  much  higher  than  where  a  large 
plant  is  used.  For  some  time  to  come  the  greater  part  of  road- 
metal  crushing  will  be  done  with  small  plants,  under  conditions 
such  as  I  am  about  to  describe,  and  at  costs  not  far  differing  from 
those  that  will  be  given. 

In  quarrying  limestone,  where  the  face  of  the  quarry  was  only 
5  to  6  ft.  high,  and  where  the  amount  of  stripping  was  small, 
one  steam  drill  was  used.  This  drill  received  its  steam  from  the 
same  boiler  that  supplied  the  crusher  engine.  The  drill  averaged 
60  ft.  of  hole  drilled  per  10-hr,  day,  but  was  poorly  handled  and 
frequently  laid  off  for  repairs.  The  cost  of  quarrying  and  crushing 
was  as  follows: 

Quarry. 

1  driller    $  2.50 

1  helper    - 1.50 

1  man    stripping    1.50 

4  men    quarrying    6.00 

1  blacksmith     2.50 

%  ton  coal  at  $3 1.00 

Repairs  to  drill 60 

Hose,  drill  steel  and  interest  on  plant 90 

24  Ibs.    dynamite    3.60 

Total    .  ..$20.10 


?14  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 


Crusher. 

1  engineman     $   2.50 

2  men  feeding  crusher    3.50 

6  men  wheeling 9.00 

1  bin   man    1.50 

1  genei'al   foreman    3.00 

%  ton  coal  at  $3 1.00 

1  gallon    oil    25 

Repairs    to   crusher    1.50 

Repairs  to  engine  and  boiler   1.00 

Interest  on  plant    1.00 


Total     $24.25 

Summary — • 

Per  day.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Quarrying     $20.10          $0.34 

Crushing     24.25  0.41 


Total  for  60  cu.  yds $43.85          $0.75 

The  "4  men  quarrying"  barred  out  and  sledged  the  stone  to  sizes 
that  would  enter  a  9  x  16  in.  jaw  crusher.  The  "6  men  wheeling" 
delivered  the  stone  in  wheelbarrows  to  the  crusher  platform,  the 
run  plank  being  never  longer  than  150  ft.  Two  men  fed  the  stone 
into  the  crusher,  and  a  binman  helped  load  the  wagons  from  the 
bin,  and  kept  tally  of  the  loads.  The  stone  was  measured  loose 
in  the  wagons,  and  it  was  found  that  the  average  load  was  1% 
cu.  yds.,  weighing  2,400  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  There  were  40  wagon  loads, 
or  60  cu.  yds.  crushed  per  10-hr,  day,  although  on  some  days  as 
high  as  75  cu.  yds.  were  crushed.  The  stone  was  screened  through 
a  rotary  screen,  9  ft.  long,  having  three  sizes  of  openings,  %-in., 
lM.-in.  and  2V2-in.  The  output  was  16%  of  the  smallest  size,  24% 
of  the  middle  size,  and  60%  of  tne  large  size.  All  tailings  over 
2%  ins.  in  size  were  re-crushed. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  interest  on  the  plant  is  quite  an  im- 
portant item.  This  is  due  to  the  fact  that,  year  in  and  year  out, 
a  quarrying  and  crushing  plant  for  roadwork  seldom  averages 
more  than  100  days  actually  worked  per  year,  and  the  total  charge 
for  interest  must  be  distributed  over  these  100  days,  and  not  over 
300  days  as  is  so  commonly  and  erroneously  done. 

The  cost  of  stripping  the  earth  off  the  rock  is  often  considerably 
in  excess  of  the  above  given  cost,  and  each  case  must  be  estimated 
separately.  Quarry  rental  or  royalty  is  usually  not  in  excess  of 
5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  frequently  much  less. 

The  dynamite  used  was  40%,  and  the  cost  of  electric  exploders 
is  included  in  the  cost  given.  Where  a  higher  quarry  face  is  used 
the  cost  of  drilling  and  the  cost  of  explosives  per  cu.  yd.  is  less. 
Exclusive  of  quarry  rent  and  heavy  stripping  costs,  a  road  con- 
tractor should  be  able  to  quarry  and  crush  limestone  or  sandstone 
for  not  more  than  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  62  cts.  per  ton  of  2,000  Ibs., 
wages  and  conditions  being  as  above  given. 

The  labor  cost  of  erecting  bins  and  installing  a  9x16  jaw 
crusher,  elevator,  etc.,  averages  about  $75,  including  hauling  the 
plant  two  or  three  miles,  and  dismantling  the  plant  when  work  is 
finished. 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         215 

The  first  cost  of  a  quarrying,  crushing  and  macadam  road  build- 
ing plant  is  given  in  following  paragraph. 

Price  of  Road  Building  Plant.— The  following  gives  the  first  cost 
of  a  typical  portable  plant  for  quarrying  and  crushing  rock,  grad- 
ing, hauling  and  building  a  macadam  road : 

Crusher   Plant — 

1  .law  crusher    (9x15  in.),   with  rotary  screen.  .$1,100 

Portable  bins   200 

Engine  to   drive  crusher    (15   HP.) . 200 

Boiler  on  wheels   (20  HP.) 600 

Total  crusher  plant    $2,100 

Quarry  Plant — 

2  steam  drills  at   $250 $    500 

Steam  pipe,  waterpipe,  etc 150 

Quarry  and   blacksmith   tools 150 

Steam  boiler    (15   HP.)     400 


Total    quarry    plant     $1,200 

Road   Plant — 
6    dumo    waerons    for  hauling   stone   at    $125....$    750 

6   dump  wagons  for   grading  at   $125 750 

2   leveling  scrapers  at  $100 200 

12  wheel  scrapers  at  $50 600 

12   drag   scrapers,    shovels,    picks,    etc 150 

1  steam    roller    2,500 

2  sprinkling  wagons  at   $300 600 

Gasolene  pump  and  portable  water  tank 500 

Total    road    plant    $5,850 

Grand    total     $9,150 

Cost  of  Jaw  Crusher  Renewals. — Mr.  Thomas  Aitken  gives  the 
following  data  as  to  costs  in  England,  for  a  9  x  16-in.  jaw  crusher 
(Baxter)  whose  first  cost  complete  was  $1,500.  The  crusher  aver- 
aged 66  long  tons  of  trap  per  10-hr,  day. 

Life  First  Cost  per 

in  tons  cost  of  long  ton, 

crushed.  part.  cents. 

Upper  jaws    (reversible) 8,000  $11  0.13 

Lower    jaws     (reversible) 4,000                     11  0.26 

Top  rotary  screen  (plates  *4   in.).. 24, 000                    30  0.12 

Lower  rotary  screens   48,000                    23  0.04 

Elevator  belt    (5   ply;    26   ft.    long), 

plates,    etc 32,000                    60  0.18 

Elevator    buckets    (25) 8,000                    10  0.12 

Toggles  and  bearings,  etc 8,000                    14  0.16 

Total     1.01 

This  crusher  has  a  capacity  of  80  tons  (of  2,240  Ibs.)  per  day, 
is  mounted  on  wheels,  and  has  two  short  rotary  screens  (one  above 
the  other)  mounted  on  the  same  framework  with  the  crusher 
itself,  and  it  carries  a  very  small  bin,  also  on  the  same  frame. 
The  machine  is  entirely  self-contained,  and  thus  is  readily  portable 
Our  American  practice  is  to  have  large  separate  bins  (sometimes 
on  wheels),  and  consequently  a  much  longer  elevator.  While  the 
first  cost  of  our  American  crushers  of  the  same  size  is  also  about 
$1,500  complete,  our  repair  parts  will  average  nearly  double  the 
cost  given  by  Mr.  Aitken  for  English  conditions. 


21«  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Aitken  states  that  1  hp.  (nominal)  for  each  ton  crushed  per  hour 
will  drive  the  Baxter  crusher,  but  it  is  noteworthy  that  he  gives 
a  coal  consumption  of  720  Ibs.  per  day,  which  indicates  far  more 
than  8  hp. 

Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Limestone,  Missouri.* — Mr.  Cur- 
tis Hill  gives  the  following  relative  to  work  done  by  contract  in 
1908  for  the  Missouri  Highway  Department.  The  stone  was  a 
hard,  bluish  gray  limestone.  Two  quarries  were  opened  up  near 
the  road,  and  a  total  of  13,000  cu.  yds.  of  crushed  stone  produced. 
Quarrying —  Cost  per  cu  yd. 

Foreman   and  timekeeper,   at $0.40  $0.056 

Drillers   (hand),  at 17y2  .018 

Drillers    (steam),   at 17%  .031 

Laborers,   at    17  y2  .224 

Teams,    at    35      .  .021 

Powder,    Ibs.    at     .10  .059 

Caps,  at    10  .002 

Fuse,    ft.,    at 01  

Watchman,    at    15  .017 

Water  boy,  at 10  .012 

Quarry   rent,   at .030 

Total  quarrying    $0.472 

Crushing-^ 

Foreman   and   timekeeper    40  .064 

Laborers 17%  •      .121 

Engine   and   engineman    40  .067 

Watchman    15  .007 

Total   crushing $0.259 

Grand   total    $0.731 

This  does  not  include  plant  interest,  repairs  and  depreciation,  nor 
insurance  of  men. 

The  stone  was  screened  through  three  sizes  of  hole,  %,  1%  and 
3-in. 

The  crusher  was  a  portable  jaw  crusher,  and  its  output  was 
65  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day. 

The  organization  was  about  as  follows: 
1  quarry   foreman. 
1  steam  driller. 
1  hand  driller   (%   time). 
8  laborers,    quarry. 
1  team    (.y2    time). 
1  water  boy. 
1  watchman. 
1  crusher   foreman. 
4  laborers    at    crusher. 
1  engineman    on    crusher. 

Cost  of  Crushing  and  Hauling  Cobblestones.t— Mr.  W.  A.  Gillette 
is  author  of  the  following: 

It  may  be  of  interest  to  builders  of  macadam  roads  or  crushers 


^Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  4,  1909. 
t Engineering-Contracting,  April   28.   1909. 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.          217 

of  stone  to  know  how  cheaply  the  work  can  be  done  with  a  good 
small  plant  and  when  the  supervision  of  the  plant  is  intelligently 
administered.  My  experience  in  the  above  class  of  work  leads  me 
to  believe  that  few  plants  of  a  capacity  similar  to  the  one  which 
shows  the  output  I  will  give  below  are  giving  such  satisfactory 
results.  The  plant  in  question  is  owned  by  the  City  of  Ventura, 
Cal.,  and  the  rock  is  used  in  the  construction  of  petrolithic 
macadam. 

The  engineering  of  the  entire  work  has  been  done  by  J.  B. 
Waud,  and  Mr.  James  M.  Montgomery  is  the  contractor.  Mr. 
Montgomery  has  an  exceptionally  fine  lot  of  stock,  and  the  or- 
ganization of  his  work  is  about  as  near  perfection  as  it  could  be. 

While  looking  over  the  work  at  Ventura  the  writer  took  occasion 
to  make  an  inquiry  regarding  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  for  stone 
delivered  on  the  street.  This  question  was  brought  about  from 
the  fact  that  the  work  was  being  done  at  an  exceptionally  low  cost, 
and  it  was  hard  to  understand  just  why  the  cost  was  so  much 
less  than  that  of  other  similar  construction. 

I  was  told  that  the  cost  of  the  rock  delivered  on  the  street 
was  something  less  than  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  It  hardly  seemed 
possible,  when  it  was  known  that  the  average  haul  from  the 
crusher  to  the  work  was  about  a  mile,  while  the  tough  cobbles 
which  are  being  crushed  are  gathered  on  the  ocean  beach  and 
hauled  in  1%-cu.  yd.  dump  wagons  to  the  crusher,  a  distance  of 
about  1,500  ft.,  two  teams  with  two  wagons  and  drivers  being  used 
for  this  purpose. 

Eight  laborers  are  used  to  load  the  cobbles  into  the  wagons ; 
three  men  and  the  foreman  do  the  work  at  the  crusher  and  bins. 
The  power  to  operate  the  crusher  is  electricity. 

Five  teams  and  drivers  with  dump  wagons  holding  2  cu.  yds. 
each  haul  the  crushed  stone  to  the  streets. 

On  this  particular  day  all  of  the  crushed  stone  was  hauled 
,%  mile  and  the  screenings  were  hauled  1*4  mileo.  The  wagons 
were  heaped  up  so  that  they  reached  the  street  more  than  full.  A 
good  part  of  this  haul  was  over  very  rough  roads,  so  the  Tock  was 
well  settled  in  the  wagon  boxes. 

The  wages  paid  are  as  follows : 

Two-horse  team,  wagon  and  driver,  $4.50  for  9  hrs. 
(    Foreman,   $4  per  day. 

Laborers,   $2   per  day. 

The  following  is  an  itemized  statement  of  the  9-hr,  day's  work : 

One  foreman,  at  $4.00  per  day $   4.00 

Eleven  laborers,  at  $2.00  per  day 22.00 

Two  teams  hauling  cobbles  to  crusher,  at  $4.50  per  day 9.00 

Five  teams  hauling  crushed  stone  to  street,  at  $4.50  per  day.  .    22.50 

Electric  power,  67  kw.  hours,   at  3  cts 2.00 

Engine    oil    1.00 

Total    $60.50 

The  total  output  for  a  large  day's  run  was  132  cu.  yds.,  as  meas- 
ured in  the  wagon  boxes  at  a  cost  of  $60.50,  or  45.8  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 


•218  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

delivered  on  the  street,  exclusive  of  plant  interest  and  depreciation. 
The  plant  cost  $3,000.  It  consists  of  a  No.  3  Austin  gyratory 
crusher,  having  two  8Msx24-in.  openings,  driven  by  an  electric 
motor. 

Where  the  rock  was  crushed  so  that  all  of  it  would  pass  through 
a  2-in.  ring  the  average  output  was  90  cu.  yds.  per  9-hr,  day,  or 
67  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  labor,  hauling  and  power. 

The  cost  of  interest  and  maintenance  of  plant  is  not  included. 

Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Crushing  Trap,  and  Ballasting,  D.,  L.  & 
W.  Ry.* — Mr.  Lincoln  Bush  is  author  of  the  following: 

Early  in  1905  the  D.  L.  &  W.  Ry.  Co.  acquired  by  purchase  near 
Boonton,  N.  J.,  a  granite  quarry  and  crusher  plant,  together  with 
other  equipment  in  the  way  of  cars,  machinery,  etc.,  that  were 
utilized  by  a  contractor  in  connection  with  the  construction  of  a 
large  masonry  dam  for  a  reservoir.  This  work  having  been  com- 
pleted by  the  contractor,  the  Lackawanna  Railroad  Company  ac- 
quired about  3  miles  of  railroad  running  from  its  main  line  to  the 
quarry  plant,  together  with  about  56  acres  of  ground,  tracks  at 
Crusher  plant,  etc.  In  adapting  this  plant  to  our  use  and  re- 
arranging the  tracks  and  crusher  layout  to  meet  our  requirements, 
we  expended  at  the  outstart  $21,904.33,  and  sold  from  the  con- 
tractor's outfit  certain  equipment  not  required  by  us,  which  sale 
netted  us  $18,159.31,  making  the  net  cost  to  us  of  the  quarry  and 
plant  at  the  time  we  started  operating  the  crusher  $26,245.02. 

The  material  obtained  from  this  crusher  plant  is  a  very  good 
quality  of  New  Jersey  granite,  weighing  2,795  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  of 
crushed  stone. 

The  quarry  was  well  opened  up  when  we  acquired  it  from  the 
contractor,  and  the  face  of  the  quarry  has  a  depth  of  from  20  to 
60  ft.  and  a  length  of  about  2,200  ft.  The  stripping  on  top  of  the 
quarry  will  average  about  2%  ft. 

The  crusher  machinery  was  manufactured  by  the  Allis-Chalmers 
Co.,  and  consists  of  one  No.  8  and  one  No.  6  crusher,  with  a  large 
bucket  conveyor  for  conveying  the  broken  stone  from  the  crusher  to 
the  screens.  There  is  one  large  48-in.  diameter  screen,  consisting 
of  three  sections,  each  4  ft.  in  length,  with  ringings  from  %  in.  to 
2  y%  ins.  in  diameter  and  a  dust  jacket  for  separating  the  ma- 
terials. Materials  which  pass  through  the  %-in.  ringing  are  not 
used  for  track  ballast.  The  ballast  product  is  conveyed  on  a 
Robins  belt  conveyor  and  deposited  into  a  system  of  bins ;  the 
finer  material  and  dust  pass  directly  over  the  dust  jacket  into  the 
dust  bin. 

The  percentage  of  fine  materials,  i.  e.,  dust  and  ^-in.  stuff,  runs 
from  12%  to  14%  of  the  total  output. 

The  grades  of  tracks  at  the  crusher  plant  are  so  arranged  as  to 
handle  the  cars  after  being  placed  by  gravity. 

There  is  a  powder  magazine  located  on  the  property  which  has 
a  storage  capacity  for  about  10  tons  of  powder  and  explosives 

*Enginetring-Contracting,  March  24,   1909. 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         219 

There  is  also  a  water  system  for  the  boilers  and  a  sprinkling  plant 
to  keep   down  the  dust. 

The  maximum  grade  of  the  track  connecting  our  main  line  with 
the  quarry  is  3  %  ascending  to  the  quarry,  and  in  handling  our  bal- 
last we  have  been  utilizing  a  locomotive  which  will  handle  14  empty 
Rodger  ballast  cars  up  this  3%  grade. 

The  larger  part  of  the  stone  is  handled  from  the  quarry  to  the 
crusher  plant  by  means  of  a  derrick  system,  the  face  of  the 
quarry  being  located  quite  close  to  the  crusher  plant.  We  have 
Bin  use  6  large  derricks  with  90-ft.  masts,  which,  with  6  hoisting 
engines  operated  in  connection  with  the  derrick  system,  handle  the 
:i stone  in  large  stone  boxes.  The  stone  is  quarried  from  the  top  of 
the  face  by  a  stepping  system. 

To  pass  into  the  No.  6  crusher  the  stone  has  to  be  broken  up  in 
.sizes  from  16-in.  to  20-in.  The  breaking  of  the  material  is  done 
jwith  a  system  of  block  hole  drills,  placing  holes  from  6  ins.  to 
S12  ins.  apart,  depending  upon  the  size  of  the  stone  to  be  broken. 
jWe  use  from  3  to  6  block  hole  drills  per  day  in  breaking  up  the 
jiarger  stone  and  some  of  the  smaller  stones  are  sledged  instead  of 
being  block  holed. 

In  addition  to  the  derrick  system  at  this  plant  we  also  have  a 
car  system,  by  means  of  which  cars  are  loaded  with  stone  from 
the  quarry  are  dropped  by  gravity  to  the  crusher.  These  cars 
have  from  12  to  16  cu.  yds.  capacity,  and  when  the  cars  reach 
the  crusher  plants  are  dumped  by  one  of  the  derricks.  The  bot- 
tom of  these  cars  is  constructed  of  wood  and  metal,  with  a  chain 
attached,  and  the  false  bottom  of  the  car  is  picked  up  on  one  end 
by  the  derrick,  and  the  stone  dumped  by  this  means  without  manual 
handling.  After  the  cars  have  been  dumped  at  the  crusher  they 
are  returned  to  the  quarry  by  a  haulage  system,  operated  by  a 
hoisting  engine.  The  stripping  from  the  top  of  the  quarry  is  dis- 
posed of  by  piling  it  back  from  the  face  of  the  quarry. 

In  operating  the  quarry  and  crusher  we  have  employed  an  aver- 
age of  125  men,  including  rock  men,  drill  men,  engineers,  me- 
chanical men  and  laborers  required  at  the  quarry  and  crusher.  We 
employ  two  blacksmiths  for  handling  the  drill  work  and  a  pipefitter 
for  taking  care  of  the  steam-pipe  system  and  steam  drills.  One 
mechanical  foreman  with  the  necessary  help  has  charge  of  the 
crushing  plant  and  one  general  foreman  has  charge  of  the  quarry. 
One  engineer  handles  the  engine  in  the  crusher  plant  and  one  fire- 
man does  the  firing. 

We  utilize  a  150-hp.  boiler  for  generating  steam  for  the  drills, 
and  in  addition  to  this  we  have  two  150-hp.  boilers  for  furnishing 
the  balance  of  power  for  the  derricks  and  at  the  crushers. 

We  started,  operating  the  quarry  and  crusher  plant  in  May,  1905. 
The  plant  was  shut  down  on  January  15,  1906,  and  operations  re- 
sumed in  March,  1906.  The  detailed  statements  of  the  cost  of 
quarrying  and  crushing  stone  at  this  plant  have  been  carefully  kept 
and  are  reliable  as  to  the  cost  as  well  as  to  output.  The  cost 
includes  the  quarrying  and  crushing,  and  includes  the  material 
|  loaded  on  cars  at  the  bins. 


220        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

The  costs  were  as  follows: 

w  03  .    .  'd    -  "B^ 

Month  o  *v  o^oj  "ggj  °fc-S 

and  Year.  ^  g^  £§£          ££o  £-|| 

3  >  oo  1,2  o| 

o  <  o-2         u  o0^ 

May,     1905 6,637  246  46.2  8.9  55.1 

June,     1905     7,048  271  50.6  7.6  58.2 

July,    1905    6,267  241  55.9  6.6  62.5 

August,     1905....  8,722  323  51.1  5.3  56.4 

September,     1905.  7,017  270  55.2  6.6  61.8 

October,     1905...  6,321  243  56  7.2  63.2 

November,    1905.  6,219  235  47.9  5.8  65.1 

December,     1905.  5,882  249  57.5  7.6  53.7 

January,    1906...  3,233  269  39.2  6.3  45.5 

April,    1906     7,516  301  51.5  6.7  66 

May,    1906    11,594  429  40  5  50 

June,     1906     10,622  409  47  5  52 

July,    1906    10,894  436  45.5  6  52.5 

August,     1906 10,183  377  49  6  55 

Average    307  49  6.5  55.5 

The  average  cost  for  the  four  months  of  May  to  August,  1906 
was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Quarrying :  cts. 

Labor     38.4 

Supplies     6.6 

Total    quarrying    45.0 

Crushing : 

Labor     3.5 

Supplies 2.5 

Total    crushing    6.0 

Grand   total    51.0 

These  costs  do  not  include  interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,  but 
do  include  all  other  items,  even  to  current  repairs. 

We  have  used  the  crushed  stone  from  this  plant  at  various 
points  along  our  line  on  the  Morris  and  Essex  Divisions,  and  during 
the  present  season  we  put  on  a  ballast  gang  for  ballasting  a  4*6- 
mile  section  of  double  track  located  between  Hopatcong  and 
Wharton,  N.  J. 

In  handling  the  ballast  on  this  41/2-mile  section  we  had  an  aver- 
age of  31  laborers  at  14  cts.  per  hour  per  hay  of  10  hrs.  and  one 
foreman  at  $75  per  month.  In  addition  to  the  regular  ballast  gang 
we  had  8  section  laborers  on  the  4% -mile  section  that  were  em- 
ployed in  digging  out,  changing  ties,  placing  drain  tile  and  filling 
for  changes  in  alignment  and  easement  curves. 

The  amount  of  ballast  used  on  the  4% -mile  section  of  double 
track  was  28,458  cu.  yds.,  or  an  average  of  6,324  cu.  yds.  per  mile 
of  double  track.  The  average  distance  which  the  ballast  was 
hauled  from  the  crusher  to  the  section  ballasted  was  13  miles. 
On  the  4  1/2  -mile  section  of  track  ballasted  there  was  a  total  length 
of  curve  line  of  1.56  miles  and  a  total  length  of  tangent 


ROCK   EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         221 

of  2.94  miles.  We  used  in  this  work  24  Rodger  ballast 
cars,  and  in  figuring  the  cost  of  transportation  the  cars  were  placed 
at  a  value  of  $600  each.  Our  records  show  a  cost  of  5^j  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.,  covering  transportation  charges,  interest  on  the  Rodger- 
ballast  cars  valued  at  $600  each  at  5%,  plus  interest  at  5%  on  the 
net  investment  of  the  quarry  and  crusher  plant.  The  cost  for 
quarrying,  crushing  and  loading  cars  at  the  crushing  plant  was 
55  cts.  per  cu.  yd. ;  the  cost  of  placing  ballast  under  track,  includ- 
ing lining,  surfacing  and  dressing,  was  20%  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
making  a  total  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  the  ballast  in  the  track  of 
81  cts.  for  the  4^-mile  section  above  described. 

On  the  west  end  of  our  Buffalo  Division  we  have  an  accurate  rec- 
6rd  of  the  cost  of  27,120  cu.  yds.  of  crushed  limestone  ballast  put 
in  on  a  stretch  of  double  track  during  the  season  of  1906.  For  this 
work  we  purchased  the  crushed  stone  delivered 'to  us  in  our  own 
Rodger  ballast  cars  at  an  average  cost  of  $0.6017  per  cu.  yd.,  and 
received  an  average  of  222  cu.  yds.  per  day,  the  quarry  being  lo- 
cated on  our  own  lines.  Thirty  Rodger  ballast  cars  were  used 
for  this  work  and  the  average  haul  was  13.4  miles.  The  ringing 
used  in  preparing  this  ballast  was  from  %  in.  to  2%  ins.  diameter 
and  the  stone  weighed  2,410  Ibs.  to  the  yard.  As  above  stated,  we 
received  on  an  average  222  cu.  yds.  per  day,  and  a  larger  quantity 
per  day  would  have  reduced  the  cost  per  yard  somewhat.  In  com- 
paring this  cost  with  the  cost  of  ballasting  with  materials  obtained 
from  the  Boonton  crusher  plant,  it  will  be  noted  that  the  ballast 
on  cars  from  the  Boonton  plant  cost  practically  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
less  than  the  material  used  on  the  Buffalo  Division.  The  work 
on  the  Buffalo  Division  cost  a  total  of  88.1  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  in  track, 
which  cost  incluued  t,ie  material,  engine  service,  labor,  tie  renewals 
and  spacing,  and  interest  on  ballast  car  equipment. 

Cost  of  Quarrying,  Crushing  and  Ballasting,  and  Life  of  Ballast.* 

— From  tests  of  trap  and  other  rocks,  it  is  seen  that  a  material 
saving  can  be  effected  by  the  use  of  trap  for  ballast  purposes. 
Less  stone  will  be  required  to  maintain  the  track,  and  it  can  be 
used  in  smaller  sizes,  as  its  higher  percentage  of  hardness  and 
toughness  will  insure  less  breaking  under  traffic  and  tamping. 
Figures  taken  from  comparison  of  line  and  surface  in  trap  with 
that  in  stone  whose  quality  is  about  the  same  as  limestone,  show 
that  line  and  surface  cost  approximately  $20  less  per  mile  in  trap 
than  in  limestone. 

Cost  of  Plant. — From  published  figures,  the  cost  of  building  a 
plant  of  1,000  tons  daily  capacity,  and  its  cost  of  operation  to 
quarry,  is  as  follows : 

Capacity,    1,000    tons    daily 300,000  tons  annually 

900  cu.   yds.   trap  per   10-hr,   day 270,000  cu.  yds.  annually 

Crushers,    4,    250-ton    Farrel,    at    $1,250 $   5,000 

Engines,    4,    60-hp.,    14x12,    at    $500 2,000 

Foundations     100 

Belting,   13-in.,  200  ft.,  at  $2.75 550 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  1,  1909,  abstract  of  a  report  to 
the  Am.  Ry.  Eng.  and  Mn.  of  Way  Assoc. 


222  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Boilers,    2,    200-hp.    and    setting 7,5( 

Steam   fittings    4,OC 

Boiler    house 2,5C 

Engine   house    1,50 

Stack     2,OC 

Scales,    60-ft,    including   foundations  and   timber 1,22 

Bins     6C 

Elevators  with  »latforms,   4,  at  $1,500    (for  tailings) 6,0t 

Pump   for  water   supply,    5,500    gals,   per  hour 2C 

Tank,   50,000   gals 1,20 

Steam  drills,  with  tripods  connecting  hose,  20,  at  $215 4,90 

Screens,  rotary,  54-in.,   4,   at  $950 3,80 

Small  tools,  forges,  bars,  wedges,  hammers,  etc 1,20 

Derrick,    small    stiff    leg 15 


Total $44,42 

Contingencies,    8%    3,55 

$7 

Land,   50  acres,  at   $150  per  acre 7^50 

Cable  railway  and  dump  cars  for  haul  to  crusher,  this  being 

a  varying  item  as  quarry  is  worked 5,00 


Total  cost  of  quarry    $60,47 

COST  OF  OPERATION  OF  QUARRY  PLANT. 
Capacity,   270,000  Cu.  Yds.   Per  Annum. 

18  drillers,  at   $3  per   day,    300   days $   16,201 

18  helpers,   at   $1.75   per  day,    300    days 9,45 

3  blacksmiths,  at  $3  per  day,   300  days 2,70i 

50  bar  sledgers,  at  31.75  per  day,   300  days 26.251 

60  car  loaders,  at  $1.75  per  day,  300  days'. 31,50, 

8  crusher  men,  at  $1.75  per  day  ,300  days 4,20 

1  quarry  boss,  at  $5  per  day,  300  days.  . '. 1,50 

1  fireman,  at  $2.50  per  day,   300  days...  . 75 

1  engineer,  at  $3  per  day,  300  days 90 

4  bin   men,  at   $1.75   per  day,    300   days 2,10: 

1  scale  man,  at  $2   per  day,   300  days 60 

1   carpenter,   at   $3   per   day,    300   days .  90 

10  laborers,  at  $1.75  per  day,   300  days 5,25i 

1  clerk,   at   $750  per   year. 75 

Fuel,    2,700   tons  of  coal,   at   $2.70 7,29: 

Oil,    waste,    etc 50 

Dynamite,   .7  Ib.  per  cu.  yd.,  270.000  cu.  yds. — 189,000  Ibs., 

at   15   cts 

Drill  reoairs — 

1  machinist,    at    $4 

1  helper,    at    $2.50 

Supplies  at  $1.25  per  month  per  drill 

Blacksmiths    included    above 


Total     $141,41 

4%   on  first  cost  of  plant $2,418 

10%    depreciation   on  machinery,   except   crushers..    2,160 

16% %    depreciation   on   crushers 833 

— 5,41- 

$146^2": 

Contingencies,    8%    ll,75i 

$158,57:: 
This  shows  a  cost  per  yard  of  59  cts. 

With  this  figure,  the  estimated  saving  shown  from  the  use  o; 
trap  rock  (Gabbro)  over  limestone  now  used,  from  Martinsburij 
quarry,  on  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  Railroad,  in  a  16-mile  section, 
double  track,  or  32  miles  of  single  track,  based  on  changing  th( 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         223 

entire  ballast  in  a  five-year  period,  and  using  2,200  cu.  yds.  of  trap 

rock  per  mile,  8-in.  under  the  tie,  would  be  as  follows: 

febbro- 

Quarrying     $0.60 

Placing    in    track .15 

Average  haul,   18  miles,  at  .001 02 

Total  estimated  cost  per  cu.  yd $0.77 

Limestone — 

Quarrying     .«. $0.5» 

Screenings,   33% 18 

Placing    in    track 15 

Average  haul,    98   miles,   at  .001 10 

Total  actual  cost  per  cu.  yd $0.98 

SUMMARY. 

Limestone,    14,080   cu.   yds.,   at  98   cts $13,798.40 

Sabbro,    14,080    cu.    yds.,    at   77    cts 10,841.60 

Saving   per  year  during   ballasting,    due   to   use   of 

trap  rock $   2,956.80 

As  to  saving  in  maintenance  300  cu.  yds.  of  trap  rock  per  mile 
per  year  will  maintain  track  as  efficiently  as  400  cu.  yds.  of  lime- 
stone. 

J2  miles  single  track  X  400  cu.  yds.  limestone  X  98  cts $12,544 

32  miles  single  track  X   300  cu.  yds.  trap  rock  X  77  cts 7,392 

Saving  per  year  due  to  use  of  trap  rock  after  track  is 

fully    ballasted    $  5,152 

Saving  in  line  and  surface,   32  miles,  at  $20 640 

Total  saving  per  year  after  track  is  fully  ballasted $  5,792 

The  saving  in  maintenance  labor  during  ballasting  would  be : 

1st    year 

2d  year,      6.4   miles   X    $20 $128 

3d  year,    12.8   miles   X      20 256 

4th  year,   19.2  miles  X     20 384 

5th  year,  25.6  miles  X     20 512 

Total    five    years    labor     saving     during     ballasting 

(maintenance)     $   1,280.00 

Five  years  savins  in  first  cost,  due  to  use  of  trap  rock.  .    14,784.00 


Total  five  years  saving  during  ballasting $16,064.00 

Average   saving  per  year   during  ballasting 3,212.80 

Saving   per   year   after   fifth   year 5,792.00 

These  figures  give  an  idea  of  the  savings  which  may  be  effected 
by  going  into  such  questions  thoroughly,  and  getting  accurate  data. 
Such  comparisons  may  be  worked  up  for  stone,  gravel  and  cinder, 
and  estimate  made  which  will  show  a  railroad  management  how  far 
they  are  justified  in  going  into  such  economies. 

[There  is  clearly  an  error  in  the  assumption  that  it  will  take 
anything  like  300  or  400  cu.  yds.  of  stone  yearly  to  maintain  a 
mile  of  ballasted  track.  See  the  section  on  Railways  for  cost  of 
maintenance  of  way.] 

Cost  of  Crushing  with  City  Plant,    Boston. —  In  Engineering -Con- 
tracting, Aug.  11,  1909,  is  a  long  abstract  from  the  Metcalf  &  Eddy 
freport  to   the  Boston  Finance   Commission,   of  which  the  following 
Is  only  a  meager   abstract : 
I  The    crusher    plant    occupies    an    area    of    570,000    sq.    ft.,    pur- 


224  HANDBOOK   OF    COST  DATA. 

chased  in   1882  for   $30,000  and  having  an  assessed  value  in  1! 
of    $79,800.      The   tract   is   used   in  part  for   other   than   quarry 
and  crushing  purposes.     The  plant  consists  mainly  of  a  30  x  13 
Farrel   crusher,   a  72  x  16-in.  Atlas  engine,  a   66-in.  x  17-ft.   tubu 
boiler,  the  usual  elevators,  bins,  extra  parts  and  tools,  and  of  th 
large  and  one  baby  steam  drills.     The  estimated  cost  of  the  pi 
Was    $16,653;     interest  was   calculated  at   4%    and   depreciation 
6.75%    annually,    which   gives   an  amount   of    $1,791,    which   in 
costs  following  was  applied  on   a  monthly  basis.  "*The   charge 
steam  drills  is  based  on  a  rental  of  50  cts.  per  working  day. 

Force  Employed. — The  force  employed,  with  wages,  was  in  g 
eral  as  follows : 

Labor  at  Ledge :  Per  day. 

1  sub-foreman,    at    $3.50 $     3.50 

1  blacksmith,    at    $3 3.00 

1  blacksmith's   helper,    at    $2.25 2.25 

3  steam  drillers,  at  $2.25 6.75 

3  steam  drillers'  helpers,  at  $2.25 6.75 

10  stone  breakers,  at  $2.25 22.50 

5  hand   drillers,   at    $2.25 11.25 

1  powderman,    at    $2.25 2.25 

9  loaders,    at    $2.25 20.25 


Total $  78.50 

Labor  at  Crusher: 

1  engineer,    at    $3.50 $  3.50 

1  fireman,    at    $3.25 3.25 

1  weigher,     at    $3.50 350 

1  oiler,    at   $2.25 2.25 

3  feeders,    at    $2.25 6.75 

1  pitman,    at    $2.25 2.25 

Total $  21.50 

Teaming : 

6  single    teams,    at   $3.50 $  21.00 


Total     $121.00 

The  force  consisted  largely  of  men  who  were  in  some  deg 
skilled  in  rock  work.  The  majority  of  the  men  were  young  and 
were  vigorous  and  skijled  to  such  an  extent  that  the  force  a; 
whole  was  skillful  and  efficient.  There  was  a  marked  lack 
interest  on  the  part  of  some  of  the  employes,  which  undoubte 
had  its  effect  in  reducing  the  amount  of  work  done  considera 
below  the  amount  which  would  be  done  under  contract  conditio; 
on  the  other  hand  it  should  be  stated  that  some  of  the  men  t< 
a  lively  interest  in  the  work  and  did  their  full  duty. 

In  this  connection  it  should  be  noted  that  the  capacity  of  the  b 
being  only  about  400  tons,  they  were  sufficient  only  for  about  : 
days  output  of  the  crusher  as  it  was  operated.  The  normal  cap 
Ity  of  the  crusher  is  claimed  by  the  manufacturers  to  be  ab< 
250  tons  per  day,  while  the  maximum  output  for  any  one  c 
during  this  test  was  225  tons. 

During  three  weeks  in  July,  three  drills  were  operated,  but  t 
was  found  to  be  inadvisable  becavise  the  force  of  laborers  v 
unable  to  handle  the  rock  as  fast  as  it  was  blown  out. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.  22:; 

The  duration  of  this  test  was  from  May  28  to  September  10,  1908, 

inclusive.      The   work   accomplished   during   the   test   may   be  sum- 
marized as  follows: 

Work   Done: 

Stripping  removed    (a  large  part  of  the   stripping  had 
been    done   prior    to    the   beginning   of    this   test   and 

is   not    included    herein) 384  tons 

Holes   drilled    (2%-in.    diameter)    by   steam   drill 4,160.1  ft. 

•Unbroken  stone  on  hand  at  beginning  of  test none 

Unbroken    stone    on    hand    at   expiration    of    test    (esti- 
mated)       200  tons 

Broken  stone  ready  for  crusher  at  expiration  of  test .  .      none 

Broken  stone  on  hand  at  expiration  of  test none 

Total   output   of   crushed   stone   during   test: 

Dust    1,970  tons   (22%) 

Stone     6,983  tons   (78%) 

Total     8,953  tons 

Total  Cost 

Labor:  cost.        per  ton. 

Supervision    (foreman)  : 

Quarrying  and   breaking,    90%...: $    253.58  $0.028 

Crushing,    10%     28.17  0.003 

Buildings 93.36  0.010 

Installing    drilling    plant 77.21  0.009 

Removing  and  storing  drilling  plant 18.00  0.002 

Operating     drills     453.95  0.051 

Furnishing  steam  for  operating  steam  drills 114.16  0.013 

Cleaning  rock  for  drills  and  moving  same 100.66  0.011 

Blacksmith  on  ledge  tools  and  pipe  fittings 382.57  0.043 

Blasting    and    care    of    explosives 182.29  0.020 

Breaking    stone 1,362.42  0.152 

Hand   drilling    (block  holes) 515.55  0.058 

wading   stone    1,010.87  0.113 

Removing    and    loading    stripping 124.00  0.014 

Weighing  stone    181.57  0.020 

Weighing    stripping    19.67  0.002 

"eeding  crusher 331.61  0.037 

Crusher   operation    (engineer,   fireman,   oiler   and 

Pitman)      539.74  0.060 

rusher    repairs    55.54  0.006 

Absent   with  pay    27.58  0.003 

Holidays     705.75  0.079 

Teaming: 

Buildings     4.50  0.001 

Drilling   plant    3.00  0.000 

lauling  stone  to  crusher 929.28  0.104 

Hauling   stripping    111.47  0.012 

Hauling  product  to  pile 281.15  0.031 

Total   labor  and  teaming $7,907.65  $0.882 

Material,  Rental,  Interest  and  Depreciation:  Cost  per  ton 

Ledge    Rock :  Cost,     on  output. 

Blacksmith's  coal,    1.32    tons $         5.54  $0.001 

Jattery    repairs    4.86  0.001 

Dynamite,    75%,    1V2    in.,    1,060    Ibs 214.60  0.024 

Dynamite,    75%,    1^4    in.,       641    Ibs 129.80  0.015 

Dynamite,    fiO%,    1V4    in.,       356    Ibs 63.22  0.007 

ilack  powder,    6    Ibs 0.66  

Connecting  wire,  50  ft 0.28  

Electric  fuses.  389  : 

8  ft.  long,      49      2.13  

10  ft.  long,     19     0.92  

12  ft.   long,   257     13.67  0.005 

14    ft.    long,       64 3.71  


226  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Material,  Rental,  Interest  and  Depreciation  (Cont'd):     Cost  per  t 
Ledge  Rock :  Cost,      on  outpui 

Cotton   fuse,    3,522   ft 10.15 

Percussion    caps,    1,183 8.88 

Stone  dust  for  tamping  holes,   3   tons 3.00 

Cylinder   oil,    20   gals 6.32 

Machine   oil,    40    gals 0.64           0.0 

Waste,    22    Ibs 1.65 

Steaming   coal,    30   tons    126.11           00 

Rental  of  small  tools  (at  $0.05  per  man  per  day) 
1,815    man    days     (excluding    blacksmith    and 

helper)    at    $0.05 90.75           o.O 

Rental    and    repairs    of    steam    drills    (including 

piping,  hose,   etc.),  153  drill  days,  at  $0.50 76.50           no 

Buildings     38.51           u.o 

Crusher : 

Steaming  coal,  30  tons 126.10           0  OJi 

Cylinder  oil,    14  V2    gals 5.28 

Machine   oil,    126    gals 22.17           O.qJ 

Waste,    51    Ibs .' .  . 3.81 

Sal   soda,    48    Ibs 0.36 

Rosin,    1   Ib 0.04           0  ( : 

Belt    lacing,    300    ft 4.50 

Sheet  steel   (11%  ins.  by  1&  ins.),  14  ft 6.00           u.« 

Crusher   plates    (two    new,    over    half   worn),   at 

$211.80,    less    50% 105.90           O.C 

Rubber  belting  installed   (new),  $89.12,  less  90%  8.91           O.I! 
Rental    on    small    tools    (at    $0.05    per    man    per 
day),   250  man  days    (exclusive  engineer,  fire- 
man,  oiler  and  weigher),   at  $0.05 12.50           0.11 

Interest   and   depreciation   on    plant,    three   mos., 

at    $149.25     447.75           O.JO 

Adjusting    scales 4.76           O.jl 

Total   material,   rental,   etc $1,550.51         $0.  • 

Labor    and    teaming    7,907.65  O.L' 

*Total   charged    to    output $9,458.16         $].  < 

Permanent  repairs :     Repairs  to  scales 68.44  0.  8 

Total   cost   of   test $9,526.60 

*Does  not  include  estimated  cost  of  stripping  done  prior  to  - 
ginning  of  test,  amounting  to  $223.83,  and  does  not  include  cost-1 
quarrying  200  tons  of  stone  remaining  unbroken  at  end  of  tt 
amounting  to  $50. 

The  report  states  that  large  stone  contractors  in  the  vicinity 
Boston  sell  stone  f.  o.  b.  cars  at  about  one-half  the  above  gi 
cost  with  city  forces.  Yet  this  test  was  made  with  the  full  un< 
standing  that  it  was  to  be  a  crucial  test  of  the  city  forces. 

Data  on   Jaw   Crushers. — The  size  of  jaw  crushers  is  comnu 
denoted  by  the  size  of  opening  through  which  the  stone  passes  to  " 
jaws.     A   9  x  15-in.   crusher  is  one   having  an   opening   9   ins.  \  I- 
by  15  ins.  long;  which  is  the  common  size  for  portable  plants, 
move   such  a   crusher   a   few   miles   from   one   location    to   anot 
set    up    the   bins,    etc.,    preparatory    to    crushing,    costs   about   |E, 
according  to  the  author's  experience.     The  main  part  of  this    - 
consists    in    tearing   down    and    rebuilding    the   bins,    mounting  i( 
rotary  screen  and  adjusting  the  bucket  elevator.     There  are  sev 
makes   of   portable   bins   on  wheels  now   in   the   market,   and   •> 


"D"   Gates  gyratory  crusher  : 

Size 

Weight 

HP.  for 

Diameter 

of  each 

of 

Tons 

crusher, 

at  top 

receiving 

crusher, 

per  hr.  to 

elevator 

out  to  out. 

opening. 

Ibs. 

2  1/2  -in.  size. 

and  screen. 

3  ft.       6  ins. 

5X18  ins. 

5,500 

4  to       8 

8  to     10 

3  ft.     10  ins. 

6  X  21  ins. 

8,000 

6  to     12 

12   to     15 

4  ft.        6  ins. 

7  X  22  ins. 

14,000 

10  to     20 

20  to     25 

6  ft.        8  ins. 

8X27  ins. 

21,000 

15  to     30 

25   to     30 

7  ft.     10  ins. 

10  X  30  ins, 

30,000 

25  to     40 

30  to     40 

8  ft.       7  ins. 

11  X  36  ins. 

42,000 

30  to     60 

40  to     60 

10  ft.        8  ins. 

14  X  45   ins. 

63,000 

75   to   125 

75   to   125 

11  ft. 

18  X  63   ins. 

94,000 

125   to  200 

100   to   150 

ROCK  EXCAl'ATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         221 

these  the  cost  of  moving  should  be  much  reduced.  A  large  bin 
capacity,  however,  is  desirable  to  "tide  over"  any  irregularities  in 
the  hauling  and  in  the  operation  of  the  crusher  itself.  Bins  should 
always  be  used  to  save  the  cost  of  shoveling  the  broken  stone  into 
wagons. 

Data  on  Gyratory  Crusher. — The  gyratory  crusher  is  now  largely 
used  on  large  permanent  plants.  The  following  are  the  sizes  of  the 
style 


Size. 

No. 

i 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

?ya 

8 

The  output  is  given  in  tons  of  2,000  Ibs.  per  hour  of  rock  crushed 
to  pass  a  2^ -in  ring. 

In  the  section  on  Concrete  will  be  found  the  cost  of  crushing  with 
a  No.  7  Gates  crusher  for  a  retaining  wall  on  the  Chicago  Canal. 
The  first  cost  of  the  crusher  was  $12,000.  Its  output  averaged  210 
cu.  yds.  per  10  hr.  day.  The  crusher  was  capable  of  a  much  greater 
output,  for  we  have  already  recorded  a  200  cu.  yd.  daily  output  with 
a  No.  5  Gates  (see  page  — ),  which  is  itself  not  a  big  record. 

In  large  crushing  plants  the  general  practice  is  to  have  one  large 
gyratory  crusher  that  receives  the  big  chunks  of  rock,  and  a  smaller 
gyratory,  or  a  jaw,  crusher  that  re-crushes  all  that  does  not  pass 
through  a  2  Ms  or  3  in.  screen. 

The  following  data  of  output  were  published  in  Engineering- 
Contracting,  July  21,  1909,  and  relate  to  limestone. 

The  Lake  Shore  Stone  Co.,  Belgium,  Wis.,  have  a  plant  consist- 
ing of  a  No.  9  Gates  crusher  and  a  No.  6  Austin,  and  their  average 
output  of  all  sizes  of  stone  up  to  2%  ins.  is  600  cu.  yds.  per  10  hrs., 
with  a  maximum  output  of  750  cu.  yds.  The  stone  is  fed  to  the 
crusher  from  a  hopper  by  one  man.  Stone  is  delivered  to  the  hop- 
per by  cars,  44  menacing  engaged  in  loading  these  cars.  The  stone 
is  a  very  hard  dolomitic  limestone. 

The  Elk  Cement  &  Lime  Co.,  Petoskey,  Mich.,  have  a  plant  of  one 
No.  5  Austin  and  a  No.  3  Gates.  They  break  450  tons  per  10  hr. 
day,  the  maximum  output  being  500  cu.  yds.  Two  men  feed  the 
crusher.  No  crushed  stone  is  larger  than  2*&  ins.,  hard  limestone. 

Holmes  and  Kunneke,  Columbus,  O.,  run  a  No.  3  Austin.  The 
output  is  80  to  120  cu.  yds.  per  10  hr.  day,  no  stone  being  over  2 
ins.  in  size.  Two  men  feed  the  crusher.  The  rock  is  hard  lime- 
stone. 

A  No.  8  Gates  gyratory  crusher  having  a  hopper  11  ft.  in  diame- 
ter, operating  at  a  speed  of  140  gyrations  per  minute,  and  having  a 
total  weight  of  45  tons,  was  installed  in  1896  at  the  quarries  of  the 


228  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Pittsburg  Limestone  Co.,  Newcastle,  Pa.  Mr.  Geo.  W.  Johnson, 
president  of  the  company,  states  that  in  14  mos.  the  output  was 
556,000  long  tons  of  limestone  crushed  for  blast  furnaces.  The  best 
month's  work  was  47,472  tons  in  August,  1896,  the  average  of  the 
14  mos.  being  slightly  less  than  40,000  tons  per  month.  During  the 
14  mos.  only  14  days  were  lost.  The  best  day's  work  was  2,250  long 
tons  in  10  hrs.  I  have  been  unable  to  secure  a  statement  as  to  the 
size  of  the  broken  stone,  but  stone  crushed  for  a  blast  furnace  is 
larger  than  for  macadam,  ballast  or  concrete,  usually  being  about 
6  ins.  diameter. 

Cost  of  Breaking  Stone  by  Hand. — I  have  found  that  in  breaking 
limestone,  a  good  10  hrs.  work  for  a  skilled  man  is  3  cu.  yds.  broken 
to  2 -in.  sizes,  but  2  cu.  yds.  are  all  that  an  inexperienced  man  can 
break. 

Aitken  states  that  in  England  a  good  hand-breaker  can  produce 
3  to  4  cu.  yds.  of  ordinary  macadam  per  day  "out  of  such  material 
as  flints,  the  harder  limestones,  field  stones  and  river  gravel."  He 
says  that  2  to  2^  cu.  yds.  of  brittle  whinstone,  or  %  to  1%  cu. 
yds.  of  basalt,  granite  and  the  tougher  kinds  of  whinstone,  consti- 
tute a  good  day's  work. 

In  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  15,  1909,  the  results  are  given 
of  a  test  (in  England)  with  different  kinds  of  hammers  used  to 
break  quartzite.  It  was  found  that  chisel  hammers  produced  28% 
less  fines  (under  1%  in.  size)  than  round  hammers,  the  percentage 
of  fines  with  the  chisel  hammers  being  only  5  %  %  of  the  total  of 
500  tons  broken,  as  compared  with  lVz%  with  round  hammers. 

Diamond  Drilling. — For  determining  the  nature  of  bridge  founda- 
tions, the  character  of  proposed  canal  or  railway  excavations  and 
for  prospecting  for  mineral  deposits,  the  diamond  drill  is  an  in- 
valuable machine.  The  bit  of  a  diamond  drill  consists  of  a  number 
of  diamonds  mounted  on  the  end  of  a  hollow  tube.  This  bit  is  rotat- 
ed by  hand,  steam,  air  or  electric  power,  while  at  the  same  time 
wafer  is  pumped  down  the  hollow  drill  rods  and  passes  up  outside  of 
the  rods,  carrying  away  the  rock  dust  made  by  the  grinding  of  the 
diamonds  against  the  rock.  The  bit  cuts  an  annular  channel,  leav- 
ing a  core  of  rock  inside  the  core  barrel.  When  the  drill  has  pene- 
trated the  rock  a  distance  of  6  to  10  ft,  the  drill  rods  are  raised 
and  the  act  of  raising  them  breaks  off  the  rock  core,  which  is 
brought  to  the  surface  in  the  core  barrel  and  kept  for  examination. 

The  diamonds  are  preferably  black  diamonds,  known  in  the  trade 
as  "carbons"  :  but  where  the  rock  is  soft,  white  diamonds,  known 
as  "bortz,"  may  be  used.  Sometimes  both  kinds  are  used  in  one  bit. 
A  bit  usually  has  6  to  8  carbons  weighing  1  to  1%  carats  each. 
Small  stones  are  not  economical  because  after  a  carbon  has  been 
worn  down  so  that  it  weighs  less  than  about  %  carat  it  cannot  be 
reset.  In  selecting  carbons  reject  those  showing  a  cokey  structure, 
also  those  having  thin,  sharp  edges.  Carbons  having  straight  edges 
with  sides  forming  an  obtuse  angle  of  95°  to  140°  are  most  dur- 
able. The  cleavage  should  be  tested  with  a  pair  of  hand  pincers. 
Old  stones  that  have  been  used  are  to  be  preferred  since  a  poor 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         229 

stone  will  break  in  use,  and  no  test  is  so  satisfactory  as  the  test 
of  usage.  The  carbons  selected  for  a  bit  should  be  quite  uniform 
in  size. 

When  diamond  drilling  was  first  introduced  into  this  country  it 
was  predicted  that  it  would  be  used  exclusively  for  drilling  blast 
holes,  and  in  fact  diamond  drills  were  used  on  the  Sutro  tunnel  for 
a  while,  and  in  sinking  one  or  two  shafts  by  the  "long  hole"  method, 
which  involved  drilling  holes  several  hundred  feet  deep,  filling  them 
with  sand,  then  removing  the  sand  for  about  8  ft.,  charging  with 
powder,  firing,  and  so  on.  The  development  of  machine  drills  using 
steel  bits  and  the  steady  rise  in  price  of  carbons  have  together 
shown  these  early  predictions  to  have  been  fathered  by  hope  rather 
than  by  reason. 

The  following  cost  data  on  diamond  drilling  have  been  abstract- 
ed from  my  book  on  "Rock  Excavation"  : 

The  sizes  of  holes  and  cores  are  as  follows: 

Hole,    diam.   in   ins ....1%  1%  2  2%      3  9/18 

Core,    diam.    in    ins 15/16     1  3/16     1  7/16     2          2% 

Price  of  Diamonds. — In  1873  the  price  of  carbons  per  carat  was 
$8  to  $12.  I  am  indebted  to  the  Standard  Diamond  Drill  Co.,  of 
Chicago,  and  to  the  Yawger-Lexow  Co.,  of  New  York,  for  the  fol- 
lowing statements  as  to  the  average  cost  of  carbons  per  carat  from 
1895  to  1903: 
1895.  1896.  1897.  1898.  1899.  1900.  1901.  1902. 

$36          $50  $60  $55          $50  $45  $50 

$18.50      $28          $35.50          $35.50          $36          $51.50          $48.50          $47 

It  will  be  noted  that  these  firms  do  not  agree  very  closely  as  to 
prices  prior  to  th«  year  1900.  The  American  Diamond  Rock  Drill 
Co.,  of  New  York,  quoted  $52  per  carat  for  best  selected  carbons 
and  $16  per  carat  for  best  selected  borts  in  November,  1902. 

There  is  no  import  duty  on  carbons  in  the  United  States,  Canada 
or  Mexico. 

Water  Required. — In  boring  a  2-in.  hole  where  the  progress  is 
abtfut  10  ft.  per  10-hr,  shift,  from  100  to  125  gals,  of  water  are 
required  to  wash  out  the  sludge  formed  in  drilling,  provided  the 
water  is  used  but  once.  In  cases  where  the  water  is  expensive  it 
is  customary  to  collect  the  return  water  in  a  settling  tank  and  use 
it  over  and  over ;  and,  unless  a  large  amount  of  water  escapes 
through  crevices,  30  or  40  gals,  per  shift  will  be  consumed  by  evap- 
oration and  leakage. 

Price  of  Diamond  Drills. — A  hand  power  drill  that  can  be  used 
to  bore  a  1%-in.  hole  (giving  a  15-16-in.  core)  up  to  a  depth  of  350 
ft.  ;  or  a  2%-in.  hole  (giving  a  2-in.  core)  up  to  a  depth  of  250  ft, 
will  cost  approximately  $850  f.  o.  b.  New  York  or  Chicago.  This 
includes  300  ft.  of  pipe,  6  carats  of  carbons,  all  tools,  etc.,  neces- 
sary. The  machine  alone  weighs  330  Ibs.,  and  can  be  divided  into 
packages  weighing  40  Ibs.  ;  but  the  whole  outfit  packed  for  shipment 
weighs  2,800  Ibs.  If  it  is  desired  to  run  this  drill  by  horse  power, 
$60  additional  will  purchase  the  horse  power  equipment.  A  hand 
power  plant  capable  of  drilling  50  per  cent  deeper  than  the  above 
costs  about  $1,400. 


230  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

A  steam  power  plant  that  can  be  used  to  bore  a  1%-in.  hole  800 
ft.  deep,  or  a  2%-in.  hole  (2-in.  core)  500  ft.  deep,  costs  about 
$2,400,  including  the  8  hp.  boiler  on  wheels ;  the  drill  itself  cost- 
ing $1,100,  the  boiler  $400;  1  set  of  carbons  (9  carats),  $450,  and 
the  balance  for  sundries.  The  drill  itself  weighs  600  Ibs.,  but  the 
full  outfit  packed  for  shipping  weighs  10,000  Ibs. 

A  steam  power  plant  that  can  be  used  to  bore  a  1%-in.  hole  1,500 
feet,  or  a  2%-in.  hole  1,000  feet,  can  be  purchased  for  $4,600;  of 
which  $2,400  is  for  the  drill,  $500  for  the  15  hp.  boiler  on  wheels, 
$600  for  12  carats  of  carbons  and  the  balance  for  rods  and  sun- 
dries. This  outfit  weighs  20,000  Ibs. 

Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in  Virginia.— There  is  a  great  deal  to 
be  found  in  print  relative  to  the  cost  of  diamond  drilling,  but  un- 
fortunately the  records  as  published  are  in  such  form  as  to  be  of  far 
less  value  than  they  should  be.  By  this  I  mean  that  any  record 
of  any  kind  of  drilling  to  be  of  great  value  should  give :  (1 )  The 
rate  of  penetrating  a  given  kind  of  rock  when  the  drill  is  actually 
cutting ;  ( 2 )  the  speed,  power  and  weight  of  the  machine ;  ( 3 )  the 
time  lost  in  raising  the  drill  to  change  bits,  remove  cores,  or  the 
like ;  ( 4 )  the  time  required  to  shift  from  one  hole  to  the  next ; 
( 5 )  the  average  time  lost  in  repairs,  breakdowns,  etc. ;  ( 6 ) 
the  diameter  and  depth  of  hole;  (7)  the  time  consumed  in  driving 
and  pulling  casing.  No  record  in  print  contains  all  these  factors. 
Strangely  enough,  one  of  the  earliest  printed  accounts  contains  more 
of  these  factors  than  any  subsequent  record.  I  refer  to  an  admir- 
able paper  by  O.  J.  Heinrich,  in  Trans.  Am.  Inst.  Min.,  Eng.,  1874, 
from  which  I  have  abstracted  the  following: 

The  diamond  drill  crew  consisted  of  three  men,  two  to  run  the 
drill  and  one  to  help  raise  the  drill  rods,  beside  a  foreman.  The 
shift  was  12  hrs.  long,  and  the  following  was  tne  cost  of  operating  a 
shift : 

Foreman,    or  boring   master $2.50 

Mechanic,    or   engineer    2.00 

Assistant     1.50 

Laborer    1.00 

Total  labor   $7.00 

The  coal  consumed  was  10  Ibs.  per  hp.  per  hr.  For  holes  up 
to  1,000  ft.  deep  an  8-hp.  engine  was  used,  the  drill  rods  weighing 
4,500  Ibs. ;  but  up  to  a  1,500-ft.  hole  a  12  hp.  engine  was  used,  with 
rods  weighing  7.000  Ibs.  The  drill  had  a  2-in.  bit,  on  which  were 
mounted  never  less  than  12  carbons,  better  16.  The  drill  rods  were 
raised  after  every  l\i  ft.  of  drilling.  The  drilling  was  done  in  Ches- 
terfield county,  Va.,  prospecting  for  coal,  in  1873.  The  cost  of  ope- 
rating per  shift  is  given  as  follows: 

Labor     $   6.50 

1/3  ton  coal  at   $3 1.00 

Oil 0.50 

Diamonds   and    repairs    1 1-00 

Interest    and   depreciation    1.92 

Total  per  day $20.92 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         231 

The  orice    of    carbons   was    $10    cer   kt.      Rates   of   wages   were 
also   much  lower   then,   and  it  should  be   noted  that  the  allowance 
for  interest  and  depreciation  is  too  low  for-  a  plant  costing  $7,200, 
as  it  is  stated  this  8  hp.   plant  cost. 
Depth  of  hole  in  earth  and  rock  ..........    419  850  1,142 

Depth  bored  in  rock   ....................    396  826  1,118 

No.   of  12-hr,   shifts  actually   boring  ......    13.88          44.41          59.29 

No.  of  12-hr,  shifts  raising  rods  ..........    15.87          59.34        116.46 

No.    of    12-hr,    shifts   incidentals  ..........      3.25          15.25          68.25 

No.  of  12-hr,   shifts  total  ................    33.00        119.00        224.00 

Ft.   progress  per  hr.   while  boring  ........      2.37  1.55  1.57* 

Ft.   progress  per  hr.,   average  ............    0.998          0.578          0.308 

Cost  of  labor,  per  ft  ....................    $0.36          $0.59          $1.02 

Cost  of  fuel    ($3   ton)    per   ft  .............    $0.53          $0.14          $0.17 

Cost  of  all  other  items,  incl.  materials  and 

blacksmithing    ........................    $1.29          $1.43          $2.05 

Interest     ...............................    $0.16          $0.27          $0.38 

Total  cost  per  f  t.  .  .  .....................    $1.86          $2.43          $3.62 

From  the  data  given  by  Mr.  Heinrich  I  have  prepared  the  fol- 
lowing formulas  to  be  used  in  computing  the  number  of  hours  re- 
quired to  drill  a  hole  of  given  depth. 

Let 

T  =  Total  number  of  minutes  required  to  bore  the  hole. 
n  =  total  depth  of  hole  in  feet. 

I    =  length  of  each  coupling  rod  =10  ft.  in  this  case. 
t    =  the  number  of  minutes  required  to  bore  1   ft.  of  the  hole.     In 

the    formation   given    by    Heinrich    t  =  19    mins.    per    ft.    of 

hole  up  to  a  depth  of  300  ft.,  to  which  add  5  mins.  per  ft. 

for  each  100  ft.  of  increased  depth. 
r    =  time   in  minutes  required  to  raise  and  lower  the   rods  includ- 

ing 2  mins.  to  uncouple  and  couple  up. 

r=7   mins.    for   hole   up   to    300    ft  plus   %    min.   for   each 

additional  100  ft. 
s    =  number   of   lengths   of   coupling  rod. 

The  time  consumed  in  actual  boring  in  feet  is  obviously  nt.  The 
time  consumed  in  raising  and  lowering  the  drill  rods  is  the  sum 
of  an  arithmetical  series  in  which  s  =  the  number  of  terms  and 
r  =  the  common  difference;  hence  the  sum  is  %s  (2r+[s  —  1])  r, 


which  reduces  to  -  .    The  total  time  is  therefore  : 
2 

(1  +  s) 
T  =  nt  +  s  •  --  r 

2 
n 

S=:  — 
I 

n  (l  +  n) 
T  =  nt-\ 


2  I* 
If  1  =  10 

n  (10  +  n) 

r 


200 
n2r 

=  nt-\  ---  ,  nearly. 
200 


232  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

For  holes  of  the  following  depths  we  have 

Ft.  Ft.  Ft. 

n                        =        400  .                                  800  1,200 

t    (minutes)   =          24  44  64 

r    (minutes)   =71/3  8  2/3  10 

T  (minutes)   =   14,300  63,000  148,800 

T  (hours)        =         240  1,050  2,480 

On  Heinrich's  work  about  10%  more  time  than  the  above  was 
required  to  cover  losses  from  delays  arising  from  various  causes. 
The  point  that  is  strikingly  brought  out  by  Heinrich's  records  is 
the  rapid  falling  off  in  the  rate  of  speed  of  drilling  each  foot  of 
hole  with  increased  depth.  The  cause  is  obvious,  however,  for  the 
longer  the  line  of  drill  rods  the  greater  the  friction  of  the  rods  upon 
the  sides  of  the  drill  hole,  and  consequently  the  slower  their  revo- 
lution with  an  engine  of  limited  horse  power.  The  increased  weight 
of  the  rods  with  increased  depth  also  reduced  the  rate  of  speed  with 
which  they  are  hoisted  by  the  engine ;  and  this  is  a  very  important 
factor  in  adding  to  the  labor  and  fuel  cost  of  drilling  deep  holes. 
Heinrich's  estimates  of  the  time  required  to  drill  holes,  including  all 
10%  allowances  for  delays,  are  as  follows: 

400-ft.   hole    288  hours 

800-ft.    hole    960  hours 

1,200-ft.    hole 2,616  hours 

It  will  be  observed  that  these  times  check  fairly  well  with  the 
times  obtained  by  applying  the  formula  that  I  have  given ;  but  it 
should  be  added  that  the  constants  in  the  formula  need  further  veri- 
fication by  other  observers.  The  material  penetrated  in  the  800-ft. 
hole  was : 

Hard  silicious  sandstone    210  ft. 

Medium  ,silicious    sandstone    262  ft. 

Argillaceous  .sandstone  and  slate 237  ft. 

Limestone    18  ft. 

•   Total    827  ft. 

Heinrich's  estimates  of  time,  and  my  own  formula  based  thereon, 
assume  a  uniform  sandstone  throughout  in  the  three  holes.  Had 
the  rock  been  uniform  throughout,  the  cost  would  have  been : 

400-ft.   hole,   at   $1.26 $    504 

800-ft.   hole,   at     2.10 1,680 

1,200-ft.   hole,   at     4.00 4,800 

Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in  Lehigh  Valley. — Mr.  L.  A.  Riley  is 
authority  for  the  following  work  done  in  1876:  Two  machines  be- 
longing to  the  Lehigh  Valley  Coal  Co.  were  used.  A  No.  2  drill 
with  16  hp.  boiler  and  1,000  ft.  of  2-in.  rod  cost  $3.000.  \r>iich 
with  diamonds,  etc.,  came  to  $5,000 ;  the  weight  being  3,500  Ibs. 
Carbons  cost  $9  per  carat,  and  borts  cost  $11.  Five  diamonds 
weighing  18  carats  were  used  per  bit,  drilling  a  2-in.  hole  and 
bringing  u»  a  1^-in.  core.  There  were  24  holes,  aggregating 
9,902  ft,  the  deepest  being  900  ft.  The  average  rate  of  drill*ng 
these  holes  was  19  ft.  per  day  per  machine,  at  an  average  cost  of 
$2.22  per  ft.  The  rock  was  a  very  hard  sandstone  and  conglom- 
erate. The  force  on  each  drill  was  one  foreman,  one  engineer  a*** 
one  fireman.  The  average  cost  per  ft.  of  hole  was : 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         233 

Labor   $1.15 

Diamonds   66 

Supplies  and  repairs    41 


Total    $2.22 

The  cost  of  the  900-ft.  hole  (the  deepest)  was  $1.95  per  ft., 
which  indicates  that  with  a  powerful  (16  hp.)  engine  there  is  no 
such  great  increase  in  cost  per  ft.  with  increased  depth  as  Heinrich 
found  with  an  8  hp.  engine.  The  16-hp.  plant  used  by  Riley  was 
capable  of  drilling  a  2,000-ft.  hole.  Note  especially  that  both 
Riley  and  Heinrich  paid  less  than  $10  a  carat  for  carbons  and  that 
Riley  does  not  say  what  proportion  of  carbons  to  borts  were  used. 
Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  on  Croton  Aqueduct. — Mr.  J.  P.  Carson, 
gives  the  following: 

Fourteen  holes,  total,  2,084  ft.  were  drilled  in  the  year  1895. 

Actual  days  worked    : 189  days 

Moving  drill 15  days 

Idle    18  days 

Holidays  and  Sundays   39  days 


Total    261  days 

Daily  progress.  Cost 

Feet.  per  ft. 

847  ft.  hard  gneiss 11     to  12  $3.97 

814  ft.   decomposed  gneiss 23.1     to  28  1.15 

572  ft.  clay,  gravel  and  boulders 6.7  to     9  4.07 

351  ft.  clay  and  gravel 25  ..... 


2,084ft.  Average 10.2  $2.91 

Crew,    1    foreman   at    $125    mo. ;    1   assistant  foreman   at   $70 ;    4 
men  at   $65. 

Wages,   8.1  mos. $3,785 

Team  moving 80 

66.7   tons  coal    (189   days)    360 

Supplies,    Diamond    Drill    Co 472 

Foundry    291 

Lumber,  rope,   etc 53 

Interest  on  $6,000  plant  at  12%  8.1  mos 486 

Renewing  diamonds    250 

Diamond  bit  lost    300 


Total,  204  days  $6,077 

Average  per  day  $29.79 

Average  per  ft $  2.91 

Note  that  the  item  of  interest  is  evidently  intended  to  include  de- 
preciation, but,  if  so,  it  is  altogether  too  low. 

Cost  of  Hand  Diamond  Drilling  in  Arizona.— Mr.  J.  B.  Lippincott 
gives  the  following  data  on  diamond  drilling  at  the  Gila  River  Dam 
site,  Arizona,  in  1899.  The  machinery  was  in  two  distinct  parts,  (1) 
the  ha'nd  pile  driver  for  sinking  casing  pipe  to  bed  rock;  (2)  the 
diamond  drill.  The  hammer,  made  by  the  Pierce  Well  Co.,  120 
Liberty  street,  New  York,  is  in  sections,  so  that  its  weight  can  be 
varied  up  to  190  pounds;  it  is  raised  by  a  hand  winch,  and  tripped 
by  nippers;  maximum  drop  11%  ft.  A  tool-steel  head  is  screwed 
into  the  top  of  the  pipe  and  receives  the  blow.  The  pipe  is  Sy2, 
•  2%  and  2  in.,  extra  heavy,  screw  pipe,  5  ft.  sections,  with  extra 
heavy  couplings,  which  have  beveled  edges.  When  the  casing  has 
•reached  bed  rock,  the  sand  inside  is  removed  by  using  a  chopping 


234        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

bit  and  a  water  jet.  The  bit  is  screwed  to  a  %-in.  pipe  through 
which  water  is  pumped  by  a  hand  pump,  the  water  passing  out 
through  holes  in  the  bit,  thus  bringing  the  sand  to  the  top  of  the 
casing.  In  this  manner  a  casing  pipe  130  ft.  deep  can  be  cleaned  of 
sand  and  gravel.  If  a  boulder  is  struck,  after  the  diamond  drill  has 
penetrated  it,  four  or  five  sticks  of  dynamite  are  lowered  and  dis- 
charged, shattering  the  boulder  so  that  the  casing  can  be  driven 
down. 

The  diamond  drill  was  made  by  the  American  Diamond  Rock  Drill 
Co.,  New  York  City.  One  inch  core  bits  were  usually  employed. 
The  drill  was  operated  by  hand  power,  six  men  being  employed  on 
this  work  as  well  as  on  driving  the  casing.  The  drill  will  penetrate 
200  ft.  into  rock,  and  will  make  6  to  8  ft.  per  day  in  hard  rock 
and  10  to  15  ft.  per  day  in  soft  rock.  The  plant  complete  costs 
$1,000,  including  two  diamond  bits  worth  $200  each,  set  with  six  1- 
carat  diamonds  each.  Two  machines  were  used.  The  pipe  cost 
$600  and  freight,  $100. 

Cost  of  operation  per  month,  foreman $150 

6   laborers  at   $1.50   for   28   days 234 

1    cook 45 

$       429 
240  rations  at   60   cts 144 

Total  labor  for   one   month    $573 

Total  repairs,  pipe  and  lumber  for  one  party  for  10  months.  .$  500 

Team,   feed,  etc 350 

Moving    670 

Sundry  incidentals    430 

Supervision 350 

Total  supplies,  etc.,  for  10  mos $2,300 

Total  labor,   10  mos 5,730 

Total $8,030 

Total  number  of  feet   sunk 3,254 

Cost  per  ft $     2.46 

52  holes,  cost  per  hole    $154.42 

Total  Depths  Penetrated. 

Earth,  ft.  Rock,  ft.  Total,  ft. 

The    Buttes     1,621.2  196.0  1,817.2 

Queen    Creek    357.8  55.6  413.4 

Riverside    729.8  40.2  770.0 

Dykes     80.0  0.0  80.0 

San  Carlos    143.2  30.4  173.6 


2,932.0  322.2  3,254.2 

A  month's  time  of  one  party  was  lost  due  to  continual  breaking 
of  the  casing  pipe  under  the  hammer.  Note  that  90%  of  the' drill- 
ing did  not  involve  the  use  of  diamonds  but  consisted  in  driving 
through  the  earth  covering  overlying  the  rock.  This  is  characteris- 
tic, however,  of  testing  dam  sites. 

Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in  Pennsylvania.*— Mr.  E.  E.  White  is 
author  of  the  following: 


*  Engineering-Contracting,   Apr.    21,    1909,    reprinted   from    "Engi- 
neering and  Mining  Journal." 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         235 

The  following  notes  on  progress  and  cost  of  drilling  in  the  coal 
measures  of  Greene  county,  Pa.,  were  taken  from  April  20,  to  July 
13,  1908.  I  was  on  the  ground  practically  all  of  the  time,  represent- 
ing the  company  who  had  optioned  the  coal,  and  so  had  a  chance  to 
obtain  correct  figures  on  the  progress  of  drilling.  The  costs  are  not 
as  accurate,  but  are  essentially  correct. 

The  cost  of  superintendence  and  carbons  is  estimated.  The  super- 
intendent, C.  C.  Hoover,  of  the  Birdsboro  Steel  Foundry  &  Machine 
Co.,  which  concern  took  the  contract  for  drilling,  was  on  the  ground 
only  one  day.  As  he  was  looking  after  about  half  a  dozen  other 
drills,  the  estimated  cost  for  superintendence  is  liberal.  The  cost 
for  carbons  would  have  been  much  less  but  for  the  fact  that  2}4 
carats  were  broken  at  a  depth  of  21  ft.  in  the  first  hole,  probably 
by  a  piece  of  steel  in  the  hole.  This  bore  was  abandoned  and  an- 
other started  2  ft.  away. 

The  drill  only  worked  a  day  shift,  and  was  run  by  two  men,  the 
drillman,  H.  N.  Wighaman,  and  a  fireman.  Bits  were  set  in  the 
company's  shop,  not  in  the  field.  The  hours  in  the  progress  table 
refer  to  the  drill,  that  is,  to  two  men,  except  in  the  case  of  hours 
setting  bits. 

The  drill  had  a  hydraulic  feed  and  a  double-core  barrel,  taking 
a  2^ -in.  core.  The  outfit,  with  one  good  diamond  bit,  is  furnished 
by  the  Birdsboro  Steel  Foundry  &  Machine  Co.,  of  Birdsboro,  Pa., 
for  about  $3,500. 

Considerable  trouble  was  experienced  with  the  boiler  on  the  first 
two  holes,  which  was  accountable  for  a  large  part  of  the  hours'  de- 
lay on  these  holes,  shown  by  the  progress  table.  The  boiler  was  of 
the  upright  type,  set  behind  the  machine  on  the  heavy  wagon  frame. 
There  were  no  stay  bolts,  and  the  flues  frequently  had  to  be  rolled 
every  three  or  four  days  after  the  first  week,  and  finally  were  rolled 
every  day  for  three  days  in  succession.  After  stay  bolts  were  put 
in,  the  flues  were  not  rolled  again  on  the  job.  Except  for  the 
boiler  and  a  troublesome  donkey  pump  which  supplied  the  water 
tank,  the  outfit  was  excellent.  The  delay  on  the  last  hole  was  most- 
ly waiting  for  water,  which  had  to  be  pumped  a  little  over  a  quarter 
of  a  mile. 

The  expense  of  pumping  on  the  last  hole  is  not  included,  as  it  was 
borne  by  the  owners  of  the  coal.  The  contract  read  that  water 
should  be  furnished  within  100  ft.  of  each  hole.  The  cost  of  moving 
on  and  off  the  ground  is  not  included,  as  it  would  be  variable,  ac- 
cording to  the  distance  and  means  of  transportation.  The  distance 
moved  between  holes  averaged  about  a  mile  by  road.  It  was  open 
country  with  good  roads,  so  that  moving  was  not  expensive. 

The  core  obtained  was  practically  complete,  both  of  rock  and 
coal.  The  surface  was  from  6  to  19  ft.  deep,  averaging  9  ft.  9 
ins.  It  was  clay,  with  no  boulders,  and  was  drilled  out  with  a  mud 
bit. 

The  table  showing  rates  of  drilling  in  different  kinds  of  rock  is 
the  average  of  many  observations  on  the  five  holes.  The  rate  is. 


236 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


of  course,  dependent  largely  upon  the  drillman  and  how  much  pres> 
sure  he  cares  to  put  upon   the  bit. 

Both  cost  and  progress  tables  are  from  the  time  the  drill  reached 
the  ground  until  ready  to  leave : 

BITS   USED. 

Estimated 

Distance  Carbon 

Drilled.  Wear. 

Mud-bit     48  ft.  7  in. 

Diamond    bit    No.     1     (carbons    broken 

by   steel?)     2  %  carats 

Diamond  bit  No.   2    (hole  No.    1) 369  ft.  8  in.  %  carat 

Diamond  bit  No.   3    (hole  No.   2) 339  ft.  0  in.  i/o  carat 

Diamond  bit  No.   4    (holes  Nos.    3,   4)..    500  ft.  1  in.  %  carat 

Diamond  bit  No.   5    (hole  No.   5) 562ft.  Sin.  %  carat 

1,820ft.  0  in.  4 ^4  carats 

RATF,  OF  BORING. 

Ft.  per  Hour 
Kind  of  Rock.  Actual  Cutting. 

Shale     7.05 

Fire  clay ' 7.10 

Limestone     7.20 

Sandstone    9.35 

Coal     15.15 

COST  TABLR. 

Cost.  Cost  per  ft. 

Drillman    $    307.70  $0.169 

Fireman     192.31  0.106 

Blank    bits 5.00  0.003 

Setting    bits     10.00  0.005 

Carbons    (4^4    carats,   at   $90) 382.50  0.210 

Fuel    (1,050  bus.   coal) 67.17  0.037 

Oil  and  waste    11.00  0.006 

Repairs    24.85  0.014 

Moving    36.00  0.020 

Superintendence 200.00  0.110 

Total    working    cost $1,236.53  $0.680 

Depreciation    of   outfit    (20%    on    $2,000    for 

3   mos.*)     100.00  0.055 

Total  costs  exclusive  of  freight  and  haul- 
ing on  drill  and  wages  and  expenses 
of  drillmen  to  and  from  Greene 

county     $1,336.53  $0.735 


*The  outfit  exclusive  of  the  bit  is  worth  about  $2,000. 

Table  XI   shows  the  time  and  progress  of  drilling. 

Mr.  Hoover,  of  the  Birdsboro  Steel  Foundry  &  Machine  Co.,  makes 
the  total  cost  $1.13  per  foot,  but  I  think  that  figure  must  be  rather 
high.  Four  holes  put  down  by  the  same  company  in  Raleigh  coun- 
ty, West  Virginia,  are  said  to  have  cost  $2.90  per  foot. 

Consumption  of  Diamonds  in  Diamond  Drilling,  Tennessee. — The 
cost  of  carbons  and  borts  consumed  in  boring  39  underground  holes 
at  the  Burra  Burra  and  London  mines,  Ducktown,  Tenn.,  is  shown 
in  Table  XII.  The  holes  were  drilled  in  1907  with  two  Sullivan  ma- 
chines of  the  "S"  type,  and  all  but  three  holes,  aggregating  284  ft., 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING    ETC. 


C  £    o  oo  co 

ctf  bo   o  <M'  c-j 

&  ra    eg  co  t- 

•3  §3  °°.  N  ^ 
" 


us  us  us 

Oq  W  IT- 
US  <*J  rH 
O  <NI  ^ 


~     '      00    US    O     i 
O  o      SO    t-    CO 

w|  ">  .     I 


I 


CJ    IO    CO     I   OO    rH    Iffl 


.  o  o  I  o  us  o  I  us 

j2«  o  o  o  I  o  ^  o  I  evj 

O  <-;  00  o'  rH  j  ,_;  <N'  O  i  CO 

hH>_  US  Tf<  CO  t-  <O  CO  i    CD 


PH 

J. 

Pi     5^'  " 

T 

Tj 

oo 

ir 

c^ 

55 

>    0 

s  o 

i- 
s 

0    US    ^                      {H 

«o  o  os              ,2 

§    SI  E 

n        *  ~ 

•     -1 

•  vr 
) 

!  06 

CO 

0 

a 

5    « 
>    CC 

>    0 

>  (M 

a- 

L- 

r" 

°< 

^co              2 

id 

| 

;   ;   ;         £ 

H 

ft 

•       •       •                   92 

-t 

p 

* 

^j 

ft      •       •                  3 

o> 

be 

^ 

w 

be        *           >» 

>o 

^j 

.S        •            » 

o 

a 

o 

^ 

w 

I      to      *  * 

b. 

lowering 

| 
^ 

b; 

moving, 

S      «     s  to 

JH            "^            "°    -2 

t     S     ^§ 

St.*   s  H, 

_c 

"^ 

(H 

i 

a 

1^1   «| 

Oil 

•3  S  1^8  1 

w  3  ^    S  as  -n 

S    o  3     £  -£   d     ,-j 


o 
2   £   £     EH 


11 

HH        f^j 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


O5             rt<             IO             O 
;_,                                       O              CO              <M              O5 

0>.j         oo          oo          t-         ^         o 

PlQ               rH                CO               <M                <3>               10 

K 
r- 
«£ 
P- 

•£  O             0              0             O             O             0 

e 
** 

^•t-*         id         ^          ^'         ^         tA 
CO     10      -^o     •*  t-      <^<-«*<     r$<oo-«ti 

3[l(         rH         COCO         CO  iH         COM         COCO         CO 
g  ^       rH    i         rH             iH             CO             O    1 

J 
oc 

rH 

"n                   co  •*        us       ^  <o        co 

0             S         OOi           »o         000           CO 

o      S    ^^     ^    ^s     ^ 

01 

« 

a 

3    s   ""^    ^     ^    ^ 

1  - 

» 
w 

^ 

• 

g 

i                    loo 

g 

10 

0 

6 

"Oj                                     ^4J                                   -tg-*                ^ 

i 

i 

c 

CH 

d         <_,        cd  d                     «»        oo 

O             S         M<^           ^         ^^           W' 

i 

£ 

0 
GO 

^                             5^           **"         NrH              rt 
ft              tj          rH                   4-.          ^ 

d       t-cn         <S       »g         g 

§             5           BBrf           5          »,§           5 

i 

: 

i 
i 

fc 

u        oi;b       o^b       ce 
«      MM       «      WO       ° 

E 

1 

% 

M 

^        ^        ^      •  .*        ^        Jd 

CC  rt             CO             CO             ^O             tO             ^O 

?. 

ffl 

C   2               LO               t—               IA               O                C<1 

O  05              lO              rH              ^              CO 

^ 

^o       -       «       - 

c 
t 

i!         o         •*         us                     co 

.1  J 

rQ 

c 
c 
c 

c 

s  •      3      £      S      S      S 
'^.S      ^      *      *«              *» 

c 

c 
c 

T 

_J             t-             CO             00             t-             O 

ea         co         T».         te         co         ;* 

-(->             T><             IO             t-             rH             OO 

g       •» 

c 

c 

I 

ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         239 

were  horizontal  across  the  formation.  The  core  was  15/16  in.  diam- 
eter and  the  holes  iya  ins.  in  diameter. 

The  highest  cost  per  foot  was  $3.66,  in  a  horizontal  hole  started 
in  the  footwall  and  drilled  to  a  depth  of  only  8  ft,  consuming 
1.61/64  k.  of  $15  borts.  Executing  this  hole,  which  penetrated  very 
hard  blue  quartz,  the  highest  cost  for  a  hole  drilled  with  borts  was 
$0.8338  per  ft.  This  hole  was  drilled  in  the  footwall  of  the  Burra 
Burra  mine  to  a  depth  of  52  ft.,  37  ft.  being  in  hard  silicious  vein 
material  and  15  ft.  in  country  rock;  2.57/64  k.  of  $15  borts  were 
consumed  in  boring  it. 

The  lowest  cost  per  foot  was  $0.0321,  and  was  obtained  from  a 
horizontal  hole  bored  to  a  depth  of  190  ft.  in  the  hanging  wall  of 
the  Burra  Burra  mine.  This  hole  penetrated  10  ft.  of  vein  ma- 
terial at  its  mouth,  and  the  remainder  cut  through  soft  mica  schist 
so  thinly  foliated  that  there  were  but  few  pieces  of  core  recovered 
more  than  %  in.  thick.  The  stone  consumption  was  only  39/64  k. 
of  $10  borts. 

Cost  Using  Carbons.— The  highest  cost  of  a  hole  drilled  with  car- 
bons was  $1.155  per  ft.  This  hole  was  drilled  in  the  footwall  of 
the  London  mine  to  a  depth  of  9"  ft  and  penetrated  22  ft.  of  vein 
and  70  ft.  of  country  rock.  The  loss  in  stones  was  1%  k.  at  $85. 
The  lowest  cost  with  carbons  was  $0.0718  per  ft.,  from  a  hole  in  the 
footwall  of  the  London  mine  which  penetrated  30  ft.  of  vein  and 
44  ft.  of  country  rock.  The  stone  consumption  for  the  hole  was 
1/16  k.,  at  $85. 

Cost  Using  Borts. — The  stone  consumption  given  in  the  tables 
does  not  take  into  account  the  loss  from  scrap  borts  in  the  drilling. 
This  loss  was:  4.58/64  k.  at  $15,  $73.59;  5.57/64  k.  at  $10,  $58.90; 
total,  10.51/64  k.,  $i<$2.49.  The  above  amount  distributed  to  the 
2,948  ft.  drilled  wholly  and  in  part  with  bo.-ts  gives  an  additional 
cost  of  about  4%  cts.  per  ft.  for  holes  drilled  with  these  stones. 
There  was  no  loss  in  carbon  scrap,  this  loss  occurring  usually  when 
the  stones  have  worn  too  small  to  be  utilized  in  a  bit. 

Summarizing  and  leaving  out  of  the  calculations  those  holes 
where  both  borts  and  carbons  were  used,  the  costs  with  borts  were 
for  2,7ol  ft.  drilled,  «687.12,  or  the  cost  per  foot,  $0.247.  The  addi- 
tional loss  for  scrap,  which  amo*  d  to  $0.045  per  ft,  brings  the 
cost  up  to  $0.292  per  ft.  This  is  considerably  less  than  the  carbon 
cost  of  $0.5090,  given  in  the  table. 

Adaptability  of  Each  Stone. — Borts  may  be  profitably  used  in 
drilling  soft  ground,  but  in  hard  material  they  are  useless,  as  the 
stones,  all  of  which  contain  flaws,  will  shatter  when  encountering 
hard  rock.  It  is  doubtful  if  borts  could  have  been  used  with 
cheaper  results  in  drilling  the  840  ft.  that  were  drilled  with  carbons. 
Some  of  this  ground  they  would  not  have  cut  without  great  waste. 
Where  part  carbon  and  part  borts  were  used,  the  carbons  were  sub- 
stituted for  the  borts  when  it  was  found  that  the  borts  would 
not  stand  the  work. 

In  some  formations,  where  there  are  strata  or  zones  of  varying 
degrees  of  hardness,  bits  set  with  carbons  might  alternately  be 


240        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

used  with  those  set  with  borts,  but  the  bits  could  not  very  well  be 
set  in  advance  owing  to  the  varying  gage  of  the  hole. 

Cost  of  Diamond  Drilling  in  British  Columbia.* — Mr.  Frederick 
Keffer  is  author  of  the  following: 

Two  years  ago  I  contributed  to  the  Institute  a  paper  on  the  re- 
sults of  diamond  drilling  as  carried  on  at  the  mines  of  the  British 
Columbia  Copper  Company,  Limited  during  1905.  That  paper  gave 
some  details  as  to  costs,  and  the  period  covered  was  but  Sl/2 
months.  Since  that  year  drilling  has  been  carried  on  more  or  less 
continuously  in  the  mines  of  the  company,  and  the  results  of  this 
work,  so  far  as  progress  and  costs  are  concerned,  are  given  in  detail 
in  the  following  tables. 

Table  XIII  gives  the  monthly  results  of  work  as  well  as  the  year- 
ly totals.  It  is,  of  course,  important  to  know  the  general  character 
of  the  rock  drilled  in  order  to  institute  comparisons  with  other 
localities.  In  the  narrow  limits  of  this  table  it  is  not  possible  to 
give  details  as  to  rocks,  but  as  nearly  as  possible  the  rocks  com- 
prise diorites,  compact  garnetites  and  certain  very  hard  and  silicious 
eruptives  occurring  in  Summit  camp.  The  medium  hard  rocks  in- 
clude all  ores,  and,  in  Deadwood  camp,  much  of  the  greenstone  coun- 
try. The  soft  rocks  are  the  limestones  porphyries  and  serpentines. 
Of  all  rocks  drilled  the  garnetites  proved  much  the  most  severe  in 
diamond  consumption,  as  is  illustrated  by  the  work  from  May  to 
August,  1907,  which  was  mainly  conducted  in  garnetite  with  some 
silicious  limestones. 

Eight  hours  constitute  a  shift  underground,  and  nine  hours  on  the 
surface.  On  Sundays  no  work  is  done  apart  from  repairs  to  ma- 
chinery. In  May,  1906,  the  labor  was  contracted  as  an  experiment, 
but  was  abandoned  as  being  unsatisfactory. 

The  employes  were,  normally,  a  runner  and  a  setter.  Extra  help 
was  required  at  times  for  blasting  places  for  good  set  ups,  for  laying 
pipe  lines,  moving  plant,  etc.  In  August,  1907,  two  shifts  were  em- 
ployed. In  June  and  July  of  that  year  the  increase  in  labor  costs  is 
mainly  on  account  of  the  long  pipe  lines  required. 

The  power  consumed  is  taken  as  being  equivalent  to  that  re- 
quired for  a  3}4  -in.  machine  drill,  that  is  to  say,  about  20  hp. 
When  drilling  at  a  mine,  where  for  example  15  machines  are  used  on 
each  shift,  the  diamond  drill  is  charged  with  1/31  of  the  total 
power  costs — it  being  in  this  instance  run  on  one  shift  only. 

Where  steam  power  is  used  either  directly  or  through  a  steam 
driven  air  compressor,  the  costs  are  much  increased.  Where,  as  in 
some  cases,  an  isolated  24-hp.  boiler  was  used,  the  power  costs  are 
still  higher,  as  an  engineer  has  to  be  provided  as  well  as  a  team 
to  haul  wood. 

Tools,  repairs,  etc.,  include  these  items  as  well  as  all  small  mis- 
cellaneous expenses.  The  increasing  cost  of  diamonds  ($80  per 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908  ;  abstract  of  a  paper  be- 
fore the  Canadian  Mining  Institute,  with  additional  data  furnished 
by  the  author. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         241 


I 

>  <B 


jo 


d  K 


•jnoq  Sui 


rHCOTfCOiH     I   COlOC-OlrtOlOOS        CO 


a 

1 

£ 

[  -sotoq  jo 

H 

^  'sanoq 

M 

h 

•039 


«O  CO  «O  CO  «O  «O  CO  CO        CO 


I  T}<        OO  rH  »H  <M  CO  t«  IO  t-        rt< 


^§ 

'&A 


TH      -OOC^OOOfM 


COrftt-tO     -OOCOCOCOOO 


M9U      O^      SUI 

-AOUI    sanojj 


co  co  co  oo  oo  CD  «o  co      e<i 

OS  iH  l-l  O  O  i-H  C<l  W         Tfi 


h- t- OS  OO  t- CO  OS  CO         O5     i    ^ 
rH  LO  t-  SO  (M  Ift  CO  <M        <M        CO 


•  G-w-rt-rrr  TT\     m        COr^lACO      *OO5LOt>-^     iCOOSt^-OrHCOt^-CO         CO         fO         -M.^ 
_?_i""?     ™       OOOC-      •  CO  C<J  OS  10  Tt<         t- 10  CO  00  00  CO  00  O         "-I 


jo 


199J 

•sgjoq 


^-  s     w 
5T3    £ 


S3  .'"""'^j-^OT'-'S   ^3^  ^^S^S    3   -g    .s0^^^" 

.r  'iJvjfS**  r^  r     or  r  ^  ^  >;  «  >;     ^    "°     H     ^<JWj§OO 


242  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

carat  in  1907  as  compared  with  $60  in  1906)  added  materially  to 
cost  per  foot  in  1907. 

The  carats  used  per  foot  were  0.572/64,  or  in  more  intelligible 
decimals,  .00893  carats,  so  that  one  carat  on  the  average  drilled 
111.9  ft.  All  holes  over  30  degrees  dip  are  classed  as  vertical,  and 
ft.  per  hr.  in  horizontal  holes  is  about  15%  greater  than  in  vertical 
ones.  The  average  depth  of  holes  is  81.3  ft.,  and  diameter  of  cores 
is  15/16  ins. 

In  comparing  these  costs  with  contractors'  prices,  it  must  be 
borne  in  mind  that  contractors  usually  require  air  (or  steam)  and 
water  to  be  piped  to  the  work,  and  the  mine  must  in  addition  furnish 
the  air  and  water  free  of  charge.  In  the  present  cost  sheets  all 
these  items  are  charged  against  costs  of  drilling. 

The  drill  runner  set  and  was  responsible  for  the  diamonds.  He 
was  paid  a  salary  of  $175  per  month,  while  two  helpers,  during  the 
period  of  time  given,  received  $3.50  per  day.  Since  the  decline  in 
the  price  of  copper,  helpers  are  only  paid  $3.30  per  shift.  The  com- 
pressor men  receive  $4  per  day. 

Wood  for  fuel  costs  $3.50  to  $5  per  cord,  according  to  locality. 
Electric  power  costs  $33  to  $40  per  hp.  per  year. 

The  drilling  was  done  with  a  "Beauty  Drill,"  of  the  Bullock  type, 
made  by  the  Sullivan  Mchy.  Co.,  of  Chicago.  The  machine  has  been 
in  service  three  years  and  is  in  excellent  condition.  The  catalog 
price  of  the  drill  is  $1,500,  with  its  equipment,  including  2  bits 
ready  for  carbons,  but  not  including  carbons.  The  shipping  weight 
is  1,160  Ibs.  It  will  drill  to  a  depth  of  800  ft,  making  a  hole 
1  9/16  ins.  diam.  and  giving  15/16  in.  core. 

The  following  were  the  unit  costs  in  1906  and  in  1907,  also  in 
Itfarch,  1907,  when  the  lowest  unit  cost  was  secured: 

Cost  in  1906   (3,002  Ft.  Drilled). 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Labor $0.786 

Power     0.205 

Repairs,    oil.    etc 0.109 

Carats    (2856/64,    cost    $1,728) 0.576 

Total     $1.676 

Cost  in  1907  (3,667  Ft.  Drilled). 

Per  lin  ft. 

Labor     $0.71 5 

Power     0.280 

Repairs,    oil,    etc 0.1 00 

Carats    (3047/64,    cost    $2,323) 0.633 

Total $1~728 

Cost,  in  March.   1907   (540  Ft.  Drilled). 

Per  lin  ft. 

Labor     $0.492 

Power     0.099 

Repairs,    etc 0.049 

Carats    (237/64,    cost   $219) 0.405 

Total $1.045 

Mr.  Keffer  estimates  16%  per  year  will  cover  the  interest  and  de- 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         243 

preciation,  or  $240  per  year  to  be  added  to  the  costs  above  given,  or 
about  8  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  hole  when  3,000  ft.  are  drilled  per  year. 

Costs  of  Calyx  Core  and  Diamond  Drill  Borings,  Nova  Scotia.* — 
To  further  the  interests  of  the  mining  industry  in  Nova  Scotia  the 
Department  of  Mines  of  that  province  has  since  1900  owned  and 
operated  a  number  of  core  drills  for  prospecting  purposes.  In  the 
report  of  the  department  for  1908  there  are  given  a  summary  of 
the  depths  of  holes  bored  and  the  cost  of  the  work  for  each  year 
from  1900  to  1908,  inclusive,  and  also  the  itemized  cost  of  the  work 
done  during  1908.  The  following  data  are  compiled  from  these 
records. 

During  1908  the  department  had  5  drills  in  operation,  2  of  the 
Sullivan  diamond  pattern  and  3  of  the  Calyx  shot  type.  The  work 
of  these  drills  is  given  as  follows: 

Drill  No.  5. — This  was  a  steam  Calyx  drill,  producing  a  6-in. 
core;  its  work  comprised  two  holes  in  the  Cape  Breton  coal  meas- 
ures, one  769%  ft.  deep  and  one  1,170  ft.  11  ins.  deep. 

The  first  hole,  769%  ft.  deep,  was  through  sandstone,  shale  and 
coal.  Work  was  begun  Jan.  15,  1908,  and  the  hole  was  finished 
March  21,  1908.  The  average  fate  of  drilling  was  0.6  ft.  of  hole  per 
hour;  the  maximum  rate  was  3  ft.  of  hole  per  hour.  The  boring 
was  done  with  a  double  shift.  The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows. 
Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor  including  truckage $    664  $0.862 

Management    241  0.313 

Coal     171  0.222 

Light,    oil,   waste,   etc 7  0.009 

Shot     56  0.072 

Gravel 3  0.004 

Lumber,    etc 30  0.040 

Casing  pipe   5  0.006 

Totals    . $1,177  $1.528 

The  second  hole,  1,170  ft.  11  ins.  deep,  was,  like  the  first,  through 
sandstone,  shale  and  coal.  Work  was  begun  March  30,  1908,  and 
the  hole  was  finished  July  11,  1908.  The  average  rate  of  drilling 
was  0.58  ft.  per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  3  ft.  per  hour 
through  sandstone.  The  boring  was  done  with  a  double  shift.  The 
cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor  including   truckage $    995  $0.849 

Management    331  0.282 

Coal 200  0.171 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 0.007 

Shot    .  68  0.058 

Gravel    0.004 

Lumber    15  0.013 

Casing  pipe 14  0.012 

Short  bits  and  core  barrels 168 

Totals $1,804  $1.539 

Drill    No.    2. — This    was    a    steam    diamond    drill,    producing    a 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  July  28,   1909. 


244  HANDBOOK   OF    COST  DATA. 

15/16-in.  core;  its  work  comprised  6  holes  In  the  Nova  Scotia  coal 
measures,  1  at  Merigomish,  Picton  County,  and  5  near  New 
Glasgow. 

At  Merigomish  the  hole  was  through  red  and  gray  sandstone  and 
shale  and  was  536  ft.  deep,  Work  was  commenced  Sept.  18  and 
the  hole  was  finished  Oct.  30,  1907.  The  average  rate  of  drilling 
was  1.46  ft.  per  hour,  and  the  maximum  rate  was  4  ft.  8  ins.  per 
hour  in  gray  sandstone.  The  boring  was  done  with  a  single  shift. 
The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows: 

Item.                                                              Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,   including  freight  and  truckage..?  133  $0.248 

Management    245  0.457 

Fuel 11  0.021 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 1  0.002 

Carbon    wear    5  0.009 

Lumber     2    •  0.004 

Core  lifters  and  bits   13  0.024 

Totals    $410  $0.765 

Details  of  the  drilling  of  only  4  of  the  holes  sunk  at  New  Glas- 
gow are  given.  The  rock  penetrated  was  gray  sandstone  and  shale 
and  black  shale,  with  frequent  hard  bands. 

Hole  No.  1,  909  ft.  deep,  was  begun  Dec.  9,  1907,  and  finished 
Feb.  14,  1908,  boring  single  shift.  The  average  rate  of  drilling  was 
1.4  ft.  per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  5  ft.  in  one  hour  in 
hard  gray  standstone.  The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows : 

Item.                                                          Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,    including  freight    $131  $0.144 

Management,   336  0.369 

Coal     36  0.040 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 6  0.007 

Carbon  wear   2  0.002 

Lumber 17  0.019 

Casing,    pump,    pipe,    etc 33  0.036 

Core   lifters   and   bits 21  0.023 

Totals    $582  -$0.640 

Hole  No.  2,  842  ft.  deep,  was  begun  March  4  and  finished  May  30, 
1908,  working  single  shift.  The  average  rate  of  drilling  was  1.2  ft. 
per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  3  ft.  6  ins.  per  hour  in  gray 
shale.  The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows : 

Item.                                                              Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,    including   freight $130  $0.154 

Management    364  0.431 

Fuel   30  0.036 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 55  0.065 

Steel   shot 4  0.004 

Blank  bits,  core  lifters,  shells,  etc 32  0.038 

Repairs  to   engine    0.023 

Totals $635  $0.751 

Hole  No.  3,  646  ft.  deep,  was  begun  June  11  and  finished  Aug.  4, 
1908,  working  a  single  shift.  The  average  rate  of  drilling  was 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         245 

1.4  ft.  per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  5  ft.  per  hour  in  coal. 

The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows: 

Item.                                                                   Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor $   80  $0.124 

Management    249  0.385 

Fuel    21  0.032 

Oil,  waste,  etc 9  0.014 

Carbon  wear   20  0.031 

Core  lifters,   bits,   core  shells 13  0.020 


Totals    $392  $0.606 

Hole  No.  4,  500  ft.  deep,  was  begun  Aug.  11  and  finished  Sept.  19, 
1908,  working  a  single  shift.  The  average  rate  of  drilling  was 
1.5  ft.  per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  5  ft.  in  one  hour  in 
gray  sandstone.  The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,  including  truckage $   67  $0.134 

Management    180  0.360 

Fuel 15  0.030 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 4  0.008 

Carbon    wear     31  0.062 

Black  bits,   core  lifters,   steel   shoes 15  0.030 

Totals    $312  $0.624 

Drill  No.  S. — This  drill  was  a  hand  diamond  drill,  producing  a 
15/16-in.  core,  and  its  work  consisted  of  boring  6  holes  in  sandstone, 
shale  and  limestone  to  develop  a  limestone  suitable  for  the  manu- 
facture of  cement.  The  holes  were  of  the  following  depths: 

No.   1    65  ft.     8  ins. 

No.   2    30  ft.      1  in. 

No.   3    31  ft.     0  ins. 

No    4        44  ft.      6  ins.       ^ 

No.   5    36  ft.      8  ins. 

No.   6    .  36  ft.     0  ins. 


Total 243  ft.   11  ns. 

The  aggregate  cost  of  the  6  holes  was  as  follows: 

Item.                                                                   Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor     $219  $0.857 

Management    130  0.532 

Freight    and    truckage 12  0.049 

Casing  pipe    16  0.068 

Carbon  wear 123  0.504 

Totals    $500  $2.007 

This  same  drill  was  employed  to  sink  one  hole  in  the  coal  meas- 
ures, as  follows:  The  hole  was  134y2  ft.  deep,  through  shale  and 
sandstone;  work  was  begun  July  22  and  the  hole  was  finished 
Aug.  12,  1908,  working  a  single  shift.  The  average  rate  of  drilling 
was  0.74  ft.  per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  1  ft.  3  ins.  in  one 
hour.  The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows : 

Item  Total.  Per  ft. 

LabOT $107  $0.798 

Management    50 

Light,   oil,   waste,   etc 0.55  0.004 

Carbon    wear    61 

Freight,  truckage,  repairs,  etc 36 

Totals     .  $254  $1.887 


24G  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Drill  No.  5. — This  drill  was  a  steam  Calyx  drill,  producing  a  6-in 
core.  It  was  employed  in  putting  down  four  holes  in  the  Cape 
Breton  coal  measures,  a?  follows: 

Hole  No.  1  was  begun  Feb.  27  and  finished  April  13,  1908,  work- 
ing double  shift.  The  average  rate  of  progress  was  2%  ft.  per  hour 
and  the  maximum  rate  was  e1/^  ft.  in  one  hour.  The  hole  was  424^ 
ft.  deep  and  its  cost  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,  including  freight  and  truckage...     $294  $0.691 

Management    150  0.353 

Coal    35  0.083 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 6  0.014 

Shot     : 18  0.042 

Gravel 3  0.007 

Lumber    45  0.106 

Totals    $551  $1.296 

Hole  No.  2,  208 y2  ft.  deep,  was  begun  May  20  and  was  finished 
May  30,  1908.  The  average  rate  of  drilling  was  1  ft.  per  hour  and 
the  maximum  rate  was  5%  ft.  per  hour.  A  double  shift  was  worked. 
The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,  including  freight  and  truckage...     $127  $0.612 

Management    33  0.158 

Fuel 15  0.072 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 2  0.009 

Shot 10  0.048 

Gravel    1  0.005 

Lumber     12  0.058 

Casing    5  0.024 

Totals    $205  $0.986 

Hole  No.  3,  367  ft.  deep,  was  begun  June  4  and  finished  June  27, 

1908,  working  double  shift.  The  average  rate  of  drifting  was 
0.9  ft.  per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  8  ft.  in  one  hour  with 
cutters.  The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows: 

Item.                                                                 Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,  including  freight  and  truckage...     $272  $0.741 

Management    75  0.204 

Fuel    21  0.057 

Light,   oil,  waste,   etc 5  0.013 

Shot     27  0.073 

Lumber    8  0.022 

Shot  bits   7  0.019 

Totals    $415  $1.129 

Hole  No.  4,  502  ft.  deep,  was  begun  on  July  8  and  was  finished 
on  July  29.  1908.  working:  double  shift.  The  average  rate  of 
drilling  was  1.2  ft.  per  hour  and  the  maximum  rate  was  8  ft. 
in  one  hour  with  shot.  The  cost  of  the  hole  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  ft. 

Labor,  including  truckage $251  $0.500 

Management    72  0.143 

Fuel    22  0.043 

Light,  oil,  waste,  etc 4  0.008 

Shot    15  0.029 

Lumber    7  0.012 

Pumping   water    80  0.159 

Shot  barrels  used 15  0.029 

Totals    $466  $024 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         247 

In  presenting  these  results  we  have  computed  and  added  the 
columns  of  costs  per  foot  drilled.  The  report  says : 

The  average  cost  per  foot  for  boring  by  drills  was  $1.06.  The 
cost  per  foot  for  all  boring  by  diamond  drills  was  80*6  cents,  and 
by  Calyx  drills  $1.34.  The  carbon  cost  per  foot  in  boring  by 
diamond  drills  was  $0.077,  and  the  shot-cost  per  foot  by  Calyx 
drills,  $0.056.  These  costs  compared  with  last  year's  results  were 
as  follows : 

1907.  1908.  Inc.  or  Dec. 

Cost  per  foot  for  all  boring .$1.23  $1.06  Dec.      17c 

Cost  per  foot  for  ail  Calyx  boring 1.71  1J34  Dec.      31c 

Cost  per  foot  for  ail  diamond  boring.  .     .73  .845  Inc.       lie 

Shot-cost  per  foot  boring  by  Calyx  drills     .047  .056  Inc.    .009c 

Carbon  cost  per  foot  boring  by  diamond     .0129  .077  Inc.    .041c 

Cost  of  Core  Drilling  With  a  Well  Driller.*— In  this  article  we  give 
the  cost  of  drilling  holes  through  rock  with  a  well-drilling  machine. 
Holes  Nos.  1  and  2  were  holes  from  which  cores  were  taken,  being 
put  down  through  limestone  at  Paris,  Ky.,  for  the  Blue  Grass 
Mining  and  Development  Co.  For  these  two  holes  a  Cyclone  steam 
four-core  drill,  class  E  1,  was  used,  taking  a  3% -in.  core.  This 
drill  will  take  cores  of  2%,  3%  and  4^  ins.,  to  a  depth  of  300  ft. 
It  is  the  lightest  four-core  drill  made  by  the  Cyclone  Co.,  of 
Orrville,  Ohio.  Equipped  ready  for  work,  it  is  sold  for  less 
than  $1,000,  but  for  our  purpose  of  estimating  depreciation  and 
interest  on  the  machine  we  will  consider  the  price  as  $1,000,  as 
this  figure  will  cover  the  freight  and  other  incidental  expenses  of 
buying  the  machine.  This  machine  can  be  operated  by  a  drill 
runner  and  one  assistant. 

Hole  No.  1. — This  hole  was  entirely  in  limestone  and  was  drilled 
to  a  depth  of  104  ft.  in  50  hrs.  actual  time  of  running  the  machine; 
the  average  rate  of  drilling  per  hour  was  2  ft.  1  in.  The  men 
worked  more  than  50  hrs.,  the  actual  time  they  worked  being 
charged  against  the  hole.  The  cost  was: 

Moving  drill $  3.50 

Coal    4.85 

Water     3.00 

Driller,    60  hrs.  @  $0.56 30.00 

Helper,    66   hrs.  @  $0.15 9.90 

Supplies,  shot  and  bits 5.00 

.Depreciation,      repairs     and     interest     per     day 

assumed  at  $1.50 9.00 


$64.25 
This  gives  a  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  hole  for  each  item  as  follows : 

Moving  drill.  .  .  .' $0.03 

Coal 05 

Water     03 

Labor     38 

Supplies     05 

Depreciation,  repairs  and  interest 08 

Total     $0.62 

Hole   No.    2. — This   hole  was   158   ft.    through   limestone,    80    hrs. 


"^Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  9,  1908. 


248  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

being   consumed    in    drilling    it.      This   meant   a    rate   per   hour    of 
about  2  ft.     The  total  cost  .of  the  hole  was  as  follows : 

Moving  drill $   3.75 

Coal    ' 6.00 

Water 4.00 

Supplies,   shot  and  bits 10.00 

Driller,    80   hrs.  @  $0.50.  .. 4000 

Helper,    88  hrs.  @  $0.15 13.20 

Depreciation,      repairs     and     interest,     per     day 

assumed  at  $1.50 12.00 

Total     $88.95 

This  gives  a  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  hole  for  each  item  as  follows : 

Moving  drill $0.02 

Coal    04 

Water     03 

Labor     34 

Supplies     06 

Depreciation,  repairs  and  interest 08 

Total    $0.57 

Holes  Nos.  4  and  5  were  drilled  with  cable  tools,  a  No.  4 
Cyclone  drill  being  used  for  putting  down  a  5-in.  hole.  The  work 
was  done  near  Arritts,  Va.,  for  the  Low  Moor  Iron  Co.  The  No.  4 
drill  is  a  standard  well-drilling  machine,  and  will  sink  a  hole  to  a 
depth  of  500  ft.  It  has  an  8-hp.  boiler  and  a  7-hp.  engine,  mounted 
on  traction  wheels,  weighing  in  all  over  6,000  Ibs.  This  machine  can 
also  be  rigged  to  take  cores.  Depreciation,  repairs  and  interest  on 
it  per  day  will  be  about  the  same  as  for  the  other  drill.  Two  men 
operate  it. 

Hole  No.  3. — This  hole  was  drilled  through  the  following 
materials : 

Ft. 

Clay 7 

Shale    113 

Cap   rock    (disintegrated) 8 

Sandstone     14 

Total    142 

The  time  consumed  in  drilling  this  was  32  hrs.,  making  a  rate  of 
4  ft.  5  ins.  per  hour.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Coal    $  4.00 

Water     2.40 

Driller,    40   hrs.  @  $0.20 8.00 

Helper,   40   hrs.  @  $0.15 6.00 

Depreciation,     repairs     and     interest     per     day, 

assumed  at   $1.50 6.00 

Total     $26.40 

This  includes  moving  the  machine.  The  cost  per  lineal  ft.  for 
each  item  was : 

Coal    $0.03 

Water     02 

Labor   10 

Depreciation,  repairs  and  interest 04 

Total     .  $0.19 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         249 

Hole  No.  4. — This  hole  was  67  ft.  deep,  being  drilled  through  the 
following  materials: 

Ft. 

Shale   25 

Cap    rock 2 

Ore     10 

Sandstone 16 

Flint    : 9 

Total 67 

Thirteen  hours  were  consumed  in  drilling  this  hole,  making  a 
rate  of  progress  of  5  ft.  and  1  in.  per  hour.  The  cost  of  the  work 
was: 

Coal    $   1.00 

Water     30 

Driller,    20   hrs.  &  $0.20 " 4.00 

Helper,   20  hrs.  @  $0.15 3.00 

Depreciation,  repairs  and  interest,  per  day  $1.50     3.00 

Total $11.30 

This  gives  a  detail  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  the  following : 

Coal    '. $0.015 

Water     0.005 

Labor   0.100 

Depreciation,  repairs  and  interest 0.040 

Total     $0.160 

All  these  holes,  it  will  be  noticed,  were  through  soft  rock,  but 
the  costs  for  the  work  are  very  reasonable. 

Cost  of  Diamond  Drill  and  Wash  Borings  Near  New  York  City.*— 
Mr.  F.  Lavis  is  author  of  the  following. — The  following  costs  of 
making  diamond  drill  borings  were  obtained  on  work  in  New  York 
City  in  the  fall  of  1905.  The  work  was  started  in  October  and  ran 
through  to  the  early  part  of  January,  there  being  more  or  less 
delay  during  the  latter  part  of  the  work  (on  the  diamond  borings) 
due  to  snow  and  ice. 

The  average  depth  of  the  holes  was  about  40  ft.,  partly  in  earth 
and  partly  in  rock,  the  depth  of  the  latter  below  the  surface 
varying  from  2  to  25  ft.,  and  it  being  generally  overlaid  by  more  or 
less  fine  sand.  A  2y2-in.  wrought  iron  pipe  casing  was  sunk  to 
the  rock  by  a  separate  crew  by  the  wash  method  and  firmly  seated 
thereon.  A  1*4 -in.  core  was  obtained  of  the  rock  and  samples  of 
the  washings  were  taken  and  preserved  in  glass  jars.  The  rock  was 
the  ordinary  New  York  gneiss  and  mica  schist,  which  affords  easy 
drilling  where  seams  are  not  encountered  which  tend  the  drill  off 
line  and  bind  the  bit. 

The  crew  of  the  wash  machine  consisted  of  1  foreman  at  $3  per 
day  and  of  3  laborers  ac  $2  per  day.  A  proportion  of  the  superin- 
tendence, water  supply,  watchman,  etc.,  was  also  charged  to  this 
part  of  the  work.  This  crew  sank  all  the  casings  to  the  rock  ready 
for  the  diamond  machine,  the  work  occupying  about  15  working 
days. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  9.  1907. 


250  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Power  for  the  diamond  drill  was  furnished  by  a  small  upright 
boiler  and  much  time  was  wasted  in  shifting  the  boiler  and  drill 
apparatus  from  one  hole  to  another ;  had  these  been  both  mounted 
on  wheels  the  expense  for  drilling  would  have  been  cut  down  at 
least  10  per  cent  and  probably  more.  After  the  first  two  moves 
had  been  made  an  extra  laborer  (sometimes  two)  was  put  on 
during  the  time  of  moving  at  $2  a  day,  with  the  result  that  the 
time  was  cut  down  half,  from  12  to  16  hours'  actual  working  time 
to  6  or  8. 

A  superintendent,  who  also  set  all  the  diamonds,  devoted  about 
half  his  time  to  the  work  and  was  paid  $100  per  month,  and  $100 
per  month  rent  was  paid  for  the  use  of  the  diamond  drilling 
machine.  The  boiler  and  wash  boring  outfit  were  on  hand,  having 
been  used  previously,  and  no  cost  is  included  for  their  use.  The 
costs  do  include  an  allowance  for  all  pipe  used,  cost  of  fuel  and 
other  materials  and  of  repairs  to  diamond  machine  on  completion 
of  work,  and  new  grate  bars  for  the  boiler. 

The  pay-roll  was  as  follows: 

1   Superintendent   (%   time) $100.00  per  month 

Rent   of  machine 100.00  per  month 

1  Foreman     3.50  per  day 

1  Rigger     2. 25  per  day 

2  Laborers     2.20  per  day 

1  Night    watchman : 1.50  per  day 

1  Inspector  of  city  water  department 3.00  per  day 

Water  was  obtained  from  the  city  hydrants  and  cost  about  $25 
for  permits,  etc.,  besides  the  $3  oer  day  for  the  inspector. 

The  costs  shown  below  are  considered  quite  low  (at  least  $1 
per  ft.  less  than  usual),  this  being  due  to  a  large  extent  to  the 
very  small  abrasion  of  the  diamonds.  This  latter  is  a  most  impor- 
tant matter  and  the  favorable  results  in  this  case,  the  loss  in 
some  holes  being  as  little  as  %  carat,  and  seldom  over  %,  was 
due  to  the  fact  that  stones  were  available  which  had  been  pre- 
viously used  (and  therefore  tested),  and  that  the  superintendent 
who  set  the  stones  was  an  expert  at  this  work.  With  diamonds  at 
$60  per  carat,  the  importance  of  properly  selected  stones,  skilful 
setting  and  manipulation  is  apparent. 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  the  cost: 

WASH  BORINGS,  206.8  LIN.  Ft. 

Per 
Total,     lin.  ft. 

Labor    $    276.92      $1.34 

Engineering    35.00       0.17 

Total $    311.92     $1.51 

DIAMOND  DRILL  BORINGS,  460.9  LIN.  FT. 

Pei- 
Total.     lin.  ft. 

Labor.  $1,888.73      $4.09 

Engineering    315.00       0.69 

Total  .  ..$2,203.73      $4.78 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         251 

DIAMOND  DRILL  AND  WASH  BORINGS.  667.7  LIN.  FT. 

Per 
Total,     lin.  ft. 

Labor     $2,165.65     $3.25 

Engineering    350.00       0.52 

Total     $2,515.65     $3.77 

Rock  Excavating  Using  Well  Drillers.*— Mr.  R.  M.  Hulbert  is 
author  of  the  following. — The  quarries  of  the  Atlas  Portland  Cement 
Company  at  Northampton,  Pa.,  are  two  in  number  and  are  situated 
close  to  the  works  of  the  company.  No.  1  quarry  is  the  nearest  to 
the  works  and  is  1,600  to  1,800  ft.  long  on  the  face.  No.  2  quarry 
is  at  a  distance  of  a  mile  or  so  from  the  works  and  is  approximately 
1,000  ft.  long  on  the  face.  These  faces  range  from  42  to  100  ft.  in 
height. 

The  rock  was  formerly  excavated  by  benches,  i.  e.,  steam  or 
compressed  air  rock  drills  were  used  for  drilling  holes  20  ft.  deep 
which  were  charged  with  dynamite  and  blasted.  The  dislodged 
rock  was  cleaned  up  by  hand  labor  after  which  the  drills  were 
again  set  up  and  the  process  repeated.  In  this  way  the  face  of 
the  quarry  was  removed  by  three  benches,  all  material  being  carried 
away  in  standard  gage  freight  cars  running  on  tracks  laid  on  the 
bottom  bench,  or  floor  of  the  quarry. 

The  drills  used  for  this  part  of  the  work  were  ordinary  com- 
pressed air  rock  drills  capable  of  drilling  holes  20  ft.  in  depth 
with  a  bottom  diameter  of  2%  ins.  It  was  thought  that  by. drilling 
holes  below  grade  and  blasting  larger  quantities  of  rock  at  a 
time,  the  cost  of  handling  the  excavated  material  would  be 
materially  reduced,  all  hand  labor  being  practically  eliminated  and 
the  rock  removed  by  steam  shovels  running  on  railroad  tracks  on 
the  floor  of  the  quarry.  It  was  therefore  decided  to  introduce  well 
drills  for  this  work  in  place  of  the  rock  drills  formerly  used  and  the 
results  achieved  have  more  than  warranted  the  change. 

The  character  of  the  rock,  however,  makes  the  work  of  drilling 
with  well  drills  of  an  exceedingly  difficult  nature  as  this  limestone 
is  not  only  hard  and  tough  but  is  honeycombed  with  seams  running 
at  every  conceivable  angle.  In  spite  of  this  handicap  the  drills 
are  averaging  approximately  1%  ft.  per  hour 'taking  into  considera- 
tion all  delays  due  to  blasting,  sharpening  steels  and  for  other 
purposes.  There  are  seven  drills  actually  engaged  on  the  work 
and  these  are  not  only  able  to  keep  four  steam  shovels  busy  in 
the  two  quarries,  but  have  drilled  many  holes  ahead.  As  a  general 
rule,  however,  it  has  been  found  that  drilling  holes  ahead  does  not 
always  pay  as  the  magnitude  of  the  blasts  often  throws  some  of 
the  holes  out  of  plumb  and  discretion  has  to  be  exercised  in 
planning  ahead  on  this  part  of  the  work.  The  drills  were  manu- 
factured iDy  the  Star  Drilling  Machine  Co.  of  Akron,  Ohio. 

It  sometimes  happens  that  well  drilling  machines  cannot  be 
used  to  advantage,  and  an  instance  of  this  is  to  be  found  in  the 
case  of  quarry  No.  2  of  the  Atlas  plant.  Here  the  entrance  to  the 
quarry  consists  of  a  narrow  opening  with  high  vertical  faces  on 


* Engineering-Contracting,  June  5,   1907. 


252  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

each  side.  It  would  be  obviously  impracticable  to  widen  this 
opening  by  means  of  heavy  blasts  as  by  so  doing  there  would  be 
danger  of  closing  up  the  opening,  it  being  a  singular  fact  that  in 
blasts  of  this  character,  the  material  at  the  base  of  the  hole  is 
blown  outward  to  a  considerable  distance,  while  that  at  the  top 
settles  down  vertically  and  is  scarcely  thrown  out  at  all.  In  the 
case  of  quarry  No.  2  of  the  Atlas  plant,  the  narrow  entrance  is 
being  widened  by  the  bench  method,  eight  compressed  air  rock 
drills  being  used.  As  soon  as  the  face  is  moved  back  far  enough, 
however,  well  drills  will  be  substituted  and  the  holes  drilled  to 
grade. 

At  both  quarries  the  holes  are  drilled  at  a  distance  of  20  ft.  from 
the  face  and  approximately  18  ft.  apart,  it  being  the  customary 
practice  to  space  these  holes  by  moving  the  machine  a  distance 
forward  equal  to  its  own  length,  which  in  this  case  is  about  18  ft 
In  No.  1  quarry  there  are  two  well  drilling  machines,  operating  on 
compressed  air  and  working  in  two  shifts  of  10  to  13  hrs.  each. 
Besides  these  there  are  the  eight  compressed  air  rock  drills  engaged 
in  opening  up  the  entrance  by  the  bench  method.  In  No.  2  quarry 
there  are  five  well  drills  operated  by  steam  generated  in  a  135-hp. 
central  boiler  plant.  The  steam  pressure  is  maintained  at  110  Ibs. 
except  when  blasting  occurs,  at  which  times  it  is  lowered  to  35 
Ibs.,  as  it  was  found  that  the  detonation  of  a  heavy  blast  tended  to 
"start"  the  tubes  in  the  boiler  if  the  pressure  was  not  reduced. 
A  3-in.  steam  line  leads  from  the  boiler  plant  to  the  drills,  but  this 
line  can  also  be  used  for  compressed  air  if  desired  and,  in  fact, 
compressed  air  is  used  to  operate  the  drills  during  the  night  shift. 
Of  course,  it  is  impossible  to  install  a  very  high  class  steam 
plant  for  this  work  owing  to  the  fact  that  there  is  no  element  of 
permanency  in  the  installation.  The  plant  has  already  been  moved 
twice  and  will  probably  have  to  be  moved  again  within  the  next 
twelve  months.  In  spite  of  this  fact,  however,  very  good  economy 
is  obtained,  care  being  taken  to  thoroughly  lag  the  steam  lines  which 
are,  in  no  case,  more  than  300  ft.  in  length. 

The  depth  of  holes  in  this  quarry  ranges  from  45  to  85  ft.,  the 
diameter  being  5  ins.,  and  it  is  the  usual  practice  where  holes  are 
only  45  ft.  deep,  to  drill  them  with  one  bit,  the  wearing  away  of  the 
gage  being  in  about  the  -ight  proportion  to  the  depth  of  hole  to  do 
away  with  the  need  of  changing  steels.  In  the  deeper  holes,  bits  are 
changed  at  regular  intervals  until  the  last  35  ft.  is  reached  when 
one  bit  is  used  to  the  bottom.  As  a  general  rule,  however,  it  might 
be  said  that  drills  are  sharpened  every  10  ft. 

The  very  difficult  nature  of  the  ground  and  the  fact  that  frequent 
stops  have  to  be  made  to  straighten  holes  and  during  blasting, 
makes  the  average  of  1%  ft.  per  hour,  taking  into  consideration 
all  delays,  a  very  good  one.  But  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
real  element  of  economy  is  not  so  much  in  the  speed  of  drilling 
as  in  the  greater  efficiency  in  blasting,  more  rock  being  displaced 
by  blasting  holes  drilled  below  grade  than  by  successive  lifts  of 
20  tor.  25  ft.  In  working-  in  these  benches  each  bench  has  to  be 
cleaned  off  by  hand  labor,  except  the  final  one  at  grade  which 
may  be  cleaned  off  by  steam  shovels. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,  QUARRYING,  ETC.         253 

Cost  of  An  Artesian  Well.* — Mr.  Wm.  G.  Fargo,  consulting  engi- 
neer, of  Jackson,  Mich.,  has  furnished  us  with  the  following  data 
regarding  the  cost  of  an  artesian  well: 

The  well  was  sunk  at  the  Lansing,  Mich.,  sub-station  of  the 
Commonwealth  Power  Co.  It  was  3  ins.  in  diameter  and  107  ft. 
deep.  Of  this  depth  50  ft.  was  through  soft  material  and  57  ft. 
through  rock.  This  meant  that  only  50  ft.  needed  sheathing,  which 
was  done  by  50  ft.  of  3-in.  pipe  at  a  cost  of  32  cts.  per  foot,  making 
a  total  cost  for  pipe  of  $16. 

The  well  drilling:  machine,  a  small  one.  was  hired  for  the  work, 
60  cts.  per  hour  being  paid  for  the  use  of  the  machine  and  the 
services  of  the  man  to  run  it.  One  laborer  assisted  this  man  in 
drilling  the  well.  Record  was  not  kept  of  the  fuel  used. 

The  cost  was  as  follows : 

71  hours'  use  of  machine  at  $0.60 $42.60 

69  hours'  labor  at  $0.20 13.80 

58  ft.  3-in.  pipe  at  $0.32 16.00 

Total     $72.40 

This  gives  a  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  well  of  67.6  cts. 

For  other  data  on  the  methods  and  costs  of  sinking  wells  see 
the  index  under  "Well  Drilling." 

Cost  of  Drilling  Limestone  With  Well  Driller,  For  a  Quarry.f— 
There  has  been  some  demand  in  large  blasting  work  for  a  well 
drilling  machine  operated  by  electric  power  instead  of  by  the  usual 
boiler  and  engine.  Where  blasting  operations  are  conducted  within 
city  limits  some  inconvenience  and  a  large  item  of  expense  are  rep- 
resented in  providing  a  licensed  engineer,  as  required  by  law,  for 
each  separate  steam  driven  machine.  There  is  also  economy  in 
generating  all  power  at  a  central  plant  In  some  locations  also 
it  is  impossible  to  use  a  boiler.  To  meet  these  difficulties  some 
contractors  have  operated  a  number  of  drillers  from  one  centrally 
located  steam  or  compressed  air  plant,  carrying  pipes  to  the 
several  machines.  These  last  plans,  however,  involve  the  constant 
relaying  of  steam  or  air  lines  with  bother  and  loss  of  power  from 
condensations,  leakage,  etc.  To  obviate  these  and  other  disad- 
vantages connected  with  the  steam  machine  as  used  hi  certain 
classes  of  work,  the  Keystone  Quarry  Drill  Co.,  Beaver  Falls,  Pa., 
has  designed  an  electric  driven  machine  and  one  of  these  has  now 
been  at  work  for  some  time  in  the  Belleville,  111.,  quarries  of  James 
&  A.  C.  O'Laughlin,  of  Chicago,  111.  The  following  data  relate  to 
this  machine  and  its  work : 

The  machine  is  equipped  with  a  ,10-ho.  specially  geared  motor 
placed  over  the  rear  truck  and  belted  to  the  drilling  mechanism, 
which  is  back  geared  and  balanced  so  as -to  run  lightly  and  smoothly. 
The  controller  box  is  located  at  the  front  of  the  machine  close  to  the 
driller's  hand.  The  drilling  tools  comprise  a  stem  weighing  about 
1..000  Ibs.,  a  drill  bit  weighing  150  Ibs.,  and  a  rope  socket  weighing 
about  50  Ibs.,  or  about  1.200  Ibs.  together.  The  bit  cuts  a  5%-in. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  ADril  8.  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  July  21,  1909. 


254        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

hole  and  the  stem  is  3%  ins.  in  diameter  and  22  ft.  long.  As  the 
stroke  is  from  30  to  36  ins.,  a  blow  of  from  3,000  to  3,500  ft.  Ibs.  is 
obtained  at  each  stroke.  The  machine  is  built  with  gear  hoist, 
capacity  500  ft.,  or  with  friction  hoist,  capacity  350  ft.  The  makers 
consider  the  latter  style  of  machine  probably  the  best  for  quarry 
and  rock  cut  work  where  the  tools  are  being  constantly  raised  and 
lowered  as  in  tamping  a  charge,  and  where  the  holes  will  rarely 
exceed  150  ft.  in  depth.  This  machine  is  made  with  a  traction 
attachment  for  self  propulsion  if  desired ;  while  it  is  impracticable 
to  move  the  machine  over  great  distances  by  this  means,  on  account 
of  carrying  along  the  electric  feed  wires,  for  short  moves  from  hole 
to  hole  or  from  one  side  of  the  quarry  to  the  other  it  has  been 
found  to  be  of  great  advantage. 

In  operating  at  the  full  speed  of  the  motor  the  tools  make  about 
60  strokes  per  minute.  As  the  hole  becomes  deeper  or  clogged  with 
cuttings,  before  sand  pumping,  the  rapidity  of  the  stroke  is  grad- 
ually reduced  to  say  50  strokes  per  minute  in  order  that  the  cutting 
bit  may  deliver  its  blow  with  best  effect.  This  change  of  speed  is 
produced  by  reducing  the  speed  of  the  motor. 

Besides  doing  the  drilling  this  machine  is  used  for  loading  the 
holes.  For  this  service  the  regular  drilling  bit  is  removed  and  in  its 
place  a  wooden  rammer  is  placed  on  the  drill  stem.  From  5  to  8 
sticks  of  dynamite  having  been  dropped  into  the  hole  the  drilling 
tool  is  lowered  after  them,  forcing  them  to  the  bottom.  The  tools 
are  then  withdrawn  and  the  operation  repeated  until  all  the  charge 
is  placed.  The  placing  of  the  firing  cap  and  wires  and  the  tamping 
are  done  by  hand. 

At  the  James  &  A.  C.  O'Laughlin  quarry  limestone  is  being 
drilled,  and  blasted  for  crushed  stone.  The  machine  was  furnished 
by  the  makers  on  the  guarantee  to  drill  to  a  depth  of  60  ft,  at  the 
rate  of  40  ft.  per  10-hour  day,  or  4  ft.  per  hour.  In  the  tests 
made  on  delivery  of  the  machine  the  following  records  were  ob- 
tained: The  machine  was  set  up  on  June  5  at  5  o'clock  and  ran  for 
1  hour,  drilling  9  ft.  of  hole.  From  the  following  Monday  morning 
until  Friday  forenoon,  something  over  4  days,  working  10  hours  a 
day,  four  66  ft.  holes  or  264  ft.  of  hole  were  drilled.  In  the  follow- 
ing week  four  holes  105  ft.  deep  or  420  zc.  of  hole  were  drilled. 
These  figures  are  furnished  by  the  Keystone  Quarry  Drill  Co.  In 
a  letter  to  us  the  James  &  A.  C.  O'Laughlin  Co.  state  that  in  actual 
work  the  machine  is  averaging  40  ft.  of  5%-in.  hole  per  10-hour 
day,  and  is  giving  good  satisfaction.  The  daily  operating  expenses 
are  as  follows : 

One  drill  runner  at  $2.50 $2.50 

One  helper  at   $2 2.00 

Cost   of  electric   current 2.00 

Oil,  drill  sharpening,  etc 1.50 

Total  per  day $8.00 

This  gives  a  cost  per  foot  of  hole  drilled  of  20  cts. 

In  a  blast  of  four  5%-in.  holes  66  ft.  deep,  the  charge  consisted  of 

5,500  Ibs.   of  dynamite  packed  solidly  in  the  holes  to  within  25  ft. 

of  the  top  and  then  tamped  with  screenings.     The  quarry  manager 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         255 

estimated  that  20,000  cu.  yds.  of  stone  were  thrown  down  by  this 
blast.  The  breast  was  105  ft.  hisrh,  and,  as  will  be  seen,  the  holes 
were  put  down  only  about  half  way.  In  recent  work  the  holes  have 
been  drilled  the  full  depth  of  the  breast. 

Cost  of  Drilling  Rock  With  a  Well  Drilling  Machine.*— The  fol- 
lowing is  a  record  of  some  holes  drilled,  and  the  cost  of  drilling 
them,  at  Mussellshell  and  Roundup,  Montana,  for  the  Republic  Coal 
Co.  of  Chicago,  111. 

The  work  was  done  with  a  No.  2  Cyclone  drill,  manufactured  by 
the  Cyclone  Drill  Co.,  of  Orrville,  Ohio.  The  machine  was  equipped 
with  hollow  rod  tools.  This  machine  is  meant  to  drill  holes  from 
500  to  700  ft.  deep ;  it  is  equipped  with  a  7-hp.  engine  run  with 
gasoline.  Holes  from  23  ft.  to  517  ft.  were  drilled.  The  bits  used 
were  2%  ins.  Two  men,  the  drill  runner  and  a  helper,  were  em- 
ployed on  the  machine.  The  work  was  done  in  prospecting.  The 
record  of  each  hole  is  given  in  the  table. 

RECORD  OP  HOLES  DRILLED. 

Average  drilled 
Hole  No.  Depth.  per  shift.  Material. 

1  391ft.  7  in.  39  ft.  1  in  Shale  and   sandstone. 

2  293  ft.  36  ft.  7  in.  Shale  and  sandstone. 

3  284ft.  47  ft.  4  in.  Shale  and  sandstone. 

4  347  ft.  49  ft.  7  in.  Shale  and  sandstone. 

5  103  ft.  51  ft.  6  in.  Shale  and   sandstone. 

6  297  ft.  42  ft.  5  in.  Shale  and  sandstone 

7  36  ft.  6  in.  52  ft.  Soil  and  gravel. 

8  23  ft.  11  in.  32  ft.  Soil,  gravel,  shale. 

9  51  ft.  8  in.  47  ft.  8  in.  Soil,  gravel,  shale. 

10  27  ft.  3  in.  33  ft.  Soil,  gravel,  shale. 

11  53ft.  5  in.  30ft.  Soil,  gravel,  shale. 

12  517  ft  36  ft.  11  in.  Shale  and  sandstone, 

13  463  ft.  57  ft.  5  in.  Shale  and  sandstone. 


Total...  2, 885  ft.  4  in.  41  ft.  10  in. 

In  all,  69  days  were  worked,  making  the  average  nearly  42  ft. 
drilled  per  10  Ib.  shift,  as  shown  in  the  table. 

The  cost  of  the  work  is  shown  below.  A  two  horse  team  was 
used  to  haul  water  and  other  supplies.  The  machine  used  4  gals, 
of  gasoline  per  day.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  cost  of  the  team 
was  nearly  50  per  cent  of  the  total  cost. 

Drill  Runner,  69  days  @  $2.50 $172.50 

Helper,    69   days  @  $2.00 138.00 

Team,    69   days  @  $4.00 276.00 

276  gals,  gasoline  @  12  cents 33.12 

Total     $619.62 

This  gives  a  cost  of  21^  cents  per  ft.  of  hole.  To  this  should  be 
added  an  allowance  for  plant  and  superintendence.  It  will  be 
noticed  that  some  of  the  holes  are  very  shallow,  thus  necessitating 
frequent  moves  of  the  machine. 

Cost  of  Drilling  Copper  Ore  With  Well  Drillers.t— The  following 
costs  on  drilling  and  blasting,  and  the  methods  of  mining  copper  ore 
with  a  steam  shovel  at  the  Copper  Flat  Mines  in  Nevada,  are 
abstracted  from  "Mines  and  Minerals." 

* Engineering-Contracting,  -Nov.  18,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  9,   1908. 


256  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  ore  lies  in  a  flat,  and  is  estimated  to  be  more  than  200  ft.  in 
depth,  the  ore  occurring  in  a  porphyry.  It  is  capped  with  earth  and 
rock  to  a  depth  of  about  87  ft.  This  stripping  and  the  ore  are 
worked  in  trenches  50  ft.  deep. 

Cost  of  Drilling. — The  holes  are  put  down  by  two  Keystone  No.  5 
traction  drills,  owned  by  the  mining  company  and  kept  continually 
at  work  drilling  to  loosen  ground  for  the  steam  shovels.  The 
Keystone  No.  5  machine  is  built  specially  for  mineral  prospecting 
and  mine  work,  it  being  the  largest  machine  made  by  the  Keystone 
Driller  Co.,  of  Beaver  Falls,  Pa.  The  boiler  is  mounted  on  the 
same  trucks  with  the  engine,  and  the  machine  is  propelled  on 
traction  wheels.  The  engine  is  14-hp.  The  derrick  is  34  ft.  high. 
The  machine  weighs  16,000  Ibs.  and  costs,  without  tools  or  equip- 
ment, $1,375.  This  machine  will  drill  holes  from  1,000  to  1,200  ft. 
deep. 

The  drills  use  a  5% -in.  bit  which  gives  a  hole  about  Qy2  ins. 
in  diameter,  and  the  holes  are  put  down  to  a  depth  of  about  60 
ft.  The  holes  are  spaced  on  35-ft.  centers  and  are  back  from  the 
breast  of  the  bench  40  ft.  This  is  the  usual  spacing;  however, 
where  hard  masses  of  tough  carbonate  ores  are  encountered,  holes 
are  about  15  ft.  apart  and  15  ft.  from  the  breast.  Each  machine 
requires  a  driller,  who  is  paid  $4  per  day,  and  an  assistant,  who  is 
paid  $3  per  day.  Nine-hour  shifts  are  worked.  A  60-ft.  hole  is  put 
down  in  two  shifts,  or  18  hrs.,  thus  3  ft.  and  5  ins.  of  hole  is  drilled 
per  hour.  For  each  hole  the  boiler  burns  1%  cords  of  wood,  costing 
$6  per  cord.  The  cost  of  drilling  one  60  ft.  hole  is  as  follows: 

Driller,    2    days $   8.00 

Assistant,   2   days 6.00 

Fuel 10.00 

Oil  and  waste 0.55 

Extra  parts,   repairs,  renewals 2.15 

Rope  wear  per  hole 3.50 

Estimated  interest  and  depreciation 2.00 


Total     $32.20 

This  gives  a  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  hole  as  follows : 

Per 
lin.  ft. 

Labor $0.23 

Fuel    0.17 

Oil   and   waste 0.01 

Repairs  and   renewals 0.04 

Rope    wear 0.05 

Interest  and  depreciation 0.03 

Total     $0.53 

Cost  of  Blasting.- — In  blasting  any  material  the  amount  of  ex- 
plosives used  naturally  varies  with  the  location  and  depth  of  holes 
and  with  the  hardness  of  the  materials.  However,  the  average 
amount  of  explosives  used  in  this  work  was  obtained,  and  was  as 
follows:  The  holes  were  sprung  with  two  50-lb.  boxes  of  40  per 
cent  dynamite,  costing  $15.40  for  100  Ibs.  Then  the  hole  was 
reamed  out,  and  from  20  to  30  kegs  of  black  powder  were  used  in 
the  blast,  the  average  being  25  kegs  or  625  Ibs.,  costing  $2.25  per 
keg.  This  gave  a  total  cost  for  explosives  of  $71.65. 


ROCK  EXCAVATION,   QUARRYING,  ETC.         257 

Assuming  that  a  block,  35x40x60  ft.,  is  broken  by  the  hole,  we 
have  a  total  of  3,111  cu.  yds.  of  material  moved  by  the  black  powder 
per  cu.  yd.  of  material,  or  0.23  Ibs.  of  explosives  per  cu.  yd.  for 
both  springing  and  blasting.  This  is  a  very  small  amount  of 
powder  to  be  used  for  rock  blasting.  The  total  cost  per  cu.  yd. 
for  drilling  and  blasting  was : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Drilling    $0.010 

Blasting    0.023 

Total    10.033 

This  cost  of  3%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  is  very  low  for  the  hard  material. 
On  the  other  hand,  for  the  earth  capping  this  cost  is  a  little  high  ; 
however,  the  cost  given  is  an  average  for  the  two  materials. 

Steam  Shovel  Work. — Three  9 5-ton -and  one  70-ton  Bucyrus  steam 
shovels  are  used  to  load  the  blasted  material.  The  dippers  are 
equipped  with  manganese  steel  teeth,  the  repairs  on  them  being 
very  light.  The  shovels  load  the  stripping  into  two  wayside  dump 
cars  of  3^4  cu.  yds.  capacity.  The  trains  are  pulled  by  45-ton 
locomotives.  Ten  cars  make  up  a  train. 

The  ore  is  loaded  into  50-ton  bottom-dump  cars  for  direct  trans- 
portation to  the  concentrator.  The  ore  is  hauled  by  the  railroad 
company  and  not  by  the  mining  company.  Exact  records  of  the 
cost  of  the  steam  shovel  work  ar§  not  available,  but  the  work  done 
by  them  in  the  first  six  months  shows  that  the  cost  is  much  less 
than  other  methods  in  vogue  in  that  part  of  the  west,  the  saving 
being  enough  to  make  profitable  the  mining  of  low  grade  ores  with 
this  method,  when  it  is  not  possible  to  make  a  profit  on  higher 
grade  ores  with  other  methods. 

Cost  of  Tunneling,  Shaft  Sinking  and  Mining,  Cross- References.— 
Data  on  these  subjects  will  be  found  in  the  following  sections  of  this 
book :  Railways,  and  Sewers.  Consult  the  index  under  "Tunnels," 
"Shafts."  Consult  Gillette's  "Rock  Excavation." 

Cost  of  Subaqueous  Rock  Excavation. — On  jobs  of  size  sufficient 
to  warrant  the  installation  of  a  good  plant,  the  cost  of  drilling, 
blasting  and  dredging  rock  of  the  consistency  of  hard  limestone 
averages  about  $2.50  per  cu.  yd.,  although  I  have  records  of  work 
where  the  actual  cost  (including  plant  repairs,  interest,  and  depre- 
ciation), was  less  than  $2  per  cu.  yd.  For  discussion  of  methods 
and  for  cost  records,  see  my  book  on  "Rock  Excavation." 

Costs  of  Chamber  Blasting. — By  this  method,  one  or  more  small 
tunnels  are  driven  into  the  face  of  a  rock  hill  that  is  to  be  quarried. 
Generally  such  a  tunnel  runs  in  not  more  than  50  ft.,  and  then  it 
branches  right  and  left,  forming  a  T.  Heavy  charges  of  black 
powder  or  of  Judson  are  placed  in  the  branches  of  T,  and  fired. 
As  much  as  350,000  tons  of  rock  have  thus  been  shattered  at  one 
blast.  Costs  as  low  as  3%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  (solid)  are  on  record 
for  breaking  rock  "in  this  way.  See  Gillettes'  "Rock  Excavation." 

A  similar  method  has  often  been  used  on  a  smaller  scale  for 
blasting  hardpan  that  was  so  full  of  boulders  as  to  make  drilling 
very  expensive. 


SECTION  IV. 
ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,  WALKS,  ETC. 

Definitions. — Asphalt  Pavements. — In  the  broad  sense  of  the 
term,  an  asphalt  pavement  is  any  pavement  composed  of  mineral 
particles  cemented  together  with  asphalt.  This  definition  includes 
ordinary  asphalt  pavement,  Bitulithic,  Petrolithic,  etc.,  as  well  as 
"oiled  roads"  of  the  California  type,  also  "asphalt,  macadam."  All 
these,  in  reality,  are  specjes  of  asphalt  pavement.  Asphalt  pave- 
ment, however,  is  a  term  generally  used  in  a  narrower  sense,  and 
applies  usually  -to  a  class  of  pavement  (sometimes  called  "sheet 
asphalt"  to  distinguish  it  from  "asphalt  block"  pavement),  the  wear- 
ing coat  of  which  is  composed  of  sand,  limestone  dust  and  asphalt, 
mixed  hot  in  a  mechanical  mixer,  laid  upon  a  "binder  course"  and 
rolled.  The  "binder  course,"  or  "binder"  is  usually  a  thin  layer  of 
finely  broken  stone  mixed  hot  with  asphalt,  spread  upon  a  concrete 
base  and  rolled.  However,  it  is  frequently  the  practice  to  use  only 
a  "naphtha  binder,"  which  is  merely  a  coat  of  what  might  be  called 
an  asphalt  paint  applied  with  brushes  to  the  surface  of  the  con- 
crete base.  In  either  case,  the  object  of  the  "binder"  is  to  prevent 
the  asphalt  wearing  surface  from  creeping  along  or  peeling  away 
from  the  concrete  base. 

"Lake  asphalt"  is  an  asphalt  obtained  from  Trinidad  Lake,  or 
other  similar  deposit. 

A  "rock  asphalt  pavement"  is  one  made  of  rock  which  is  found 
in  deposits  that  are  impregnated  with  asphalt. 

An  "asphalt  block  pavement"  is  made  of  blocks  or  bricks,  com- 
posed of  graded  sizes  of  broken  stone,  sandstone  dust  mixed  with 
asphalt,  and  compacted  in  a  block  machine  under  great  pressure. 
The  standard  size  for  blocks  is  3x5x12  ins.  (See  Peckham's 
"Solid  Bitumens,"  p.  310.) 

Barrel. — The  most  common  size  of  barrel  in  which  asphaltic  oil 
is  shipped  holds  42  gals.  The  standard  size  of  tar  barrel  appears  to 
be  52  gals. 

Base. — The  artificial  foundation  on  which  the  "wearing  coat" 
of  a  pavement  rests.  The  most  commonly  used  base  is  concrete, 
generally  6  ins.  thick.  The  word  base  is  preferable  to  the  word 
foundation. 

Belgian  Block  Pavement. — A  stone  block  pavement,  the  stones 
being  rectangular  in  shape  and  of  a  size  about  3x6x10  ins., 
although  varying  more  or  less,  except  in  the  matter  of  thickness 
which  is  usually  6  ins.  Granite  and  sandstone  are  about  the  only 

258 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  259 

kinds  of  stone  used  in  America,  although  trap  was  formerly  used 
to  a  considerable  extent. 

Berm. — The  "shoulder"  or  "wing"  of  earth  between  the  edge  of 
the  paved  part  of  a  country  road  and  the  edge  of  the  ditch. 

Binder. — A  term  used  in  several  senses :  ( 1 )  The  screenings,  or 
soil,  used  to  bind  a  macadam  road  together;  (2)  the  "binder  coat" 
between  a  concrete  base  on  an  asphalt  wearing  surface  (see 
Asphalt  Pavement)  ;  (3)  any  bituminous  material  used  to  bind  min- 
eral fragments  together. 

Bitulithic  Pavement. — A  wearing  coat  composed  of  broken  stone, 
sand,  stone  dust  and  a  bituminous  cement,  usually  asphalt,  mixed  in 
a  machine,  and  laid  upon  a  base  of  concrete  or  other  material. 

Bitumen. — No  generally  accepted  definition  of  this  term  exists. 
Peckham's  "Solid  Bitumens,"  p.  80,  contains  the  following:  "Bi- 
tumen, a  generic  term  including  substances  occurring  in  nature,  in 
outflows  or  springs,  and  in  veins,  as  natural  inflammable  gas,  fluid 
petroleum,  viscous  maltha  and  solid  asphaltum  and  asphaltite.  It 
also  occurs  saturating  and  mixed  with  limestones,  sandstones,  sand 
or  earthy  matter.  These  mixtures  are  called  asphalte."  Asphalt, 
pitch,  tar,  etc.,  are  commonly  included  in  the  generic  term  bitumen. 

Blind. — A  surfacing  of  screenings  or  gravel  on  a  macadam  road. 

Blind  Drain. — A  trench  filled  with  broken  stone. 

Block  Pavement. — A  pavement  made  of  stone,  brick,  wood,  or 
asphalt  blocks.  Vitrified  bricks  of  large  size  ( 3  %,  x  8  %  x  4  'ins. )  are 
called  "blocks,"  to  distinguish  them  from  bricks  of  a  smaller  size 
(2%  x  8%  x4  ins). 

Bottoming. — The  base  of  a  Telford  pavement,  consisting  of 
large  stones  set  on  edge  forming  a  rough  pavement.  On  this  "bot- 
toming" is  laid  the  macadam  wearing  coat,  the  whole  forming  a 
Telford  pavement  or  road. 

Box  Culvert. — A  small  culvert  with  an  opening  of  rectangular 
shape.  Originally  such  culverts  had  rubble  masonry  sidewalls  for 
the  sides,  cobble  pavement  for  the  bottom  and  slabs  of  stone 
("coverstones"),  resting  on  the  sidewalls,  for  the  top.  Box  culverts 
are  now  made  entirely  of  concrete,  as  a  rule. 

Booi. The  unit  of  measure  of  mixed  ingredients  for  an  asphalt 

pavement  is  commonly  the  "box"  of  9  cu.  ft.  The  amount  of 
compression  of  the  mixture  used  to  make  an  asphalt  wearing  coat  is 
variously  estimated  at  1/6  to  %.  Hence  a  9-cu.  ft.  "box"  of  mix- 
ture will  yield  7%  to  6  cu.  ft.  of  compacted  wearing  coat,  which 
will  make  5  to  4  sq.  yds.  of  wearing  coat  2  ins.  thick — 5  sq.  yds. 
if  the  shrinkage  is  only  16%%  ;  4  sq.  yds.  if  the  shrinkage  is  83%% 
under  the  roller. 

Brick. — Vitrified  paving  brick  are  made  of  selected  clay  or  shale 
burned  so  as  to  produce  an  exceedingly  hard  and  tough  brick. 

Broken  Stone. — Stone  that  has  passed  through  a  rock  crusher  (or 
has  been  broken  to  small  size  with  hammers),  also  called  "crushed 
stone."  When  it  has  not  been  screened  into  different  sizes,  it  is 
called  "run  of  crusher,"  or  "crusher  run."  The  smallest  size,  gen- 
erally y2  or  %  down  to  dust,  is  called  "screenings."  Sometimes  «. 


2GO        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

macadam  road  is  called  a  "broken  stone  road,"  but  the  term  ma- 
cadam is  preferable.  Broken  stone  is  sometimes  called  "ballast," 
which  is  only  objectionable  because  of  possible  confusion  with  the 
ballast  of  a  railway  track. 

Catch-Water. — A  broad,  shallow  paved  ditch  across  a  road  built 
on  a  steep  grade,  for  the  purpose  of  diverting  surface  water  to  side 
ditches.  In  climates  where  snow  accumulates,  giving  a  sharp 
crown  to  a  road  does  not  serve  sufficiently  well  to  divert  the  melting 
snow  to  the  side  ditches.  Hence  the  use  of  catch-waters  on  steep 
grades  where  melted  snow  would  follow  the  wheel  tracks  down  the 
center  of  the  road  and  do  damage  to  its  surface  if  not  diverted  at 
short  intervals. 

Cement  Curb. — A  curb  made  of  concrete  faced  on  the  front  and 
top  with  cement  mortar. 

Cement  Walk. — A  footway,  or  walk,  having  a  concrete  base  and  a 
cement  mortar  wearing  coat. 

Coal  Tar. — See  Tar. 

Cobblestone  Pavement. — A  pavement  of  rounded  cobbles.  Seldom 
used  except  for  paving  gutters. 

Corduroy. — A  crude  road  made  of  split  or  round  logs  (usually 
about  6  ins.  diameter)  laid  side  by  side,  not  unlike  railway  ties 
spaced  so  close  as  to  touch  one  another.  For  a  cheap  road  over 
marshy  ground,  the  corduroy  road  is  often  used  in  a  timbered 
country. 

Cover  Stone  — See  Box  Culvert. 

Creosoted  Wood  Block.— ^Dried  timber  blocks  impregnated  with  oil 
of  creosote  (dead  oil  of  tar),  16  to  20  Ibs.  of  oil  per  cu.  ft.  of  tim- 
ber. Creosote  weighs  8.8  Ibs.  per  gal. 

Crossing. — A  footwalk  across  a  street,  usually  made  of  stone 
slabs. 

Crown. — The  arch  or  camber  of  the  surface  of  a  road  or  street ; 
the  transverse  profile  of  a  roadway. 

Crushed  Stone. — See  Broken  Stone. 

Crusher  Run. — See  Broken  Stone. 

Culvert. — A  waterway  under  a  roadway.     See  Box  Culvert. 

Curb. — A  miniature  retaining  wall  at  the  outside  of  a  sidewalk 
and  forming  one  side  of  the  gutter ;  an  edge  stone. 

Cushion. — A  thin  layer  of  sand  or  screenings  under  the  wearing 
coat  of  blocks  (stone,  brick,  etc.). 

Cushion  Coat. — A  coat  of  %-in.  of  asphaltic  mixture  upon  which 
the  wearing  or  surface  coat  of  an  asphalt  pavement  is  laid.  Now 
replaced  by  the  "binder  coat."  See  Asphalt  Pavement. 

Flagging,  or  Flag  Stone. — A  thin  slab  of  stone  for  a  crosswalk 
or  sidewalk. 

Foundation. — The  base  (usually  of  concrete)  which  supports  the 
wearing  coat  of  a  pavement ;  also  cinders,  gravel,  broken  stone, 
or  the  like,  under  a  cement  walk.  It  is  preferable  to  use  the  word 
base  when  speaking  of  the  concrete  foundation  of  a  pavement. 

Gage. — The  "track"  of  wagon  wheels,  measured  from  center  to 
center  of  the  tires ;  usually  4  ft.  8  ins.  to  5  ft. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  261 

Gallon. — The  U.  S.  gallon  contains  231  cu.  ins.  =  0.13368  cu.  ft 
A  cu.  ft.  contains  7.48  gals.  A  gallon  of  water  weighs  8.34  Ibs. ; 
or  1  Ib.  of  water  =  0.12  gals.  See  Barrel. 

Grade. — The  rate  of  per  cent,  of  rise  or  fall  of  the  longitudinal 
profile  of  a  road.  A  1%  grade  means  a  rise  of  1  ft.  vertical  in  100 
ft.  horizontal.  Grade  is  also  a  verb,  meaning  to  excavate  or  fill  to 
grade  lines. 

Grader. — A  "road  machine"  having  a  steel  blade  for  leveling, 
scraping  or  "drifting"  earth.  The  word  "grader"  is  also  applied  to 
an  "elevating  grader,"  a  machine  having  a  plow  that  casts  the 
earth  upon  an  endless  belt  which  elevates  the  earth  into  a  wagon 
traveling  alongside,  or  deposits  it  in  an  embankment  alongside. 

Granolithic  Walk. — A  cement  walk  whose  surface  coat  contains 
finely  broken  stone. 

Great  Square. — An  area  of  10,000  sq.  ft.  (or  100  "squares"), 
sometimes  used  as  the  unit  of  street  sweeping.  It  is  preferable  to 
retain  the  old  unit  of  1,000  sq.  yds.  for  that  purpose,  since  the  sq. 
yd.  is  the  unit  of  first  cost  of  pavements. 

Grout. — A  flowing  mortar,  either  of  pure  cement  and  water,  or  of 
cement,  sand  and  water.  Commonly  used  for  filling  the  joints  of 
brick  pavement ;  also,  in  some  places,  for  filling  joints  of  Belgian 
block  pavement. 

Grub. — To  remove  roots  and  stumps. 

Guard  Rail. — A  fence  along  an  embankment,  or  a  bridge,  to  pre- 
vent vehicles  from  running  over  its  edge. 

Halwood  Block. — A  paving  brick  made  of  "mica  shale,"  clay  and 
sand  ;  size,  3x4x9  ins. 

Hand  Rail. — Same  as  Guard  Rail. 

Hassam  Pavement. — A  concrete  pavement  made  by  grouting 
broken  stone  with  Portland  cement  mortar  and  rolling  with  a  steam 
roller. 

Hot  Stuff. — The  hot  mixture  of  sand,  stone  dust  and  asphalt,  used 
for  making  an  asphalt  pavement. 

Leveler. — A  machine  somewhat  similar  to  a  "road  machine,"  but 
much  smaller ;  used  for  leveling  earth  subgrades,  also  for  leveling 
or  spreading  the  broken  stone  for  a  macadam  road. 

Macadam. — A  pavement  made  of  graded  sizes  of  broken  stone 
held  together  by  the  mineral  colloids  of  the  stone.  This  "mineral 
glue  or  jelly,"  as  the  colloids  may  be  called,  is  not  visible,  and  its 
binding  action  was  not  recognized  until  the  recent  investigations  of 
Cushman,  Chemist  of  the  Office  of  Public  Roads,  U.  S.  Dept,  of 
Agriculture. 

Asphalt  macadam  is  a  macadam  in  which  the  binder  is  asphalt. 
Ditto,  tar  macadam. 

Mastic. — A  mixture  of  bituminous  limestone  and  refined  asphalt, 
formerly  much  used  for  sidewalks. 

Metal. — The  broken  stone  used  for  macadam  ;  often  called  "road 
metal."  Perhaps  a  better  term  is  ballast.  At  least  it  is  no  more 
ambiguous. 


262  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Mile. — 5,280  ft,  1,760  lin.  yds.  A  mile  long  and  10  ft.  wide  con- 
tains 5,866%  sq.  yds.  =  1.21212+  acres.  A  mile  long  and  16  ft. 
wide  contains  9,386.7  sq.  yds. 

1  mile  long  x  10  ft.  wide  x  1  in.     deep  =      162.96     cu.  yds. 
1  mile  long  x  10  ft.  wide  x  6  ins.  deep  =      977.76     cu.  yds. 
1  mile  long  x  16  ft.  wide  x  1  in.     deep  =      260.737  cu.  yds. 
1  mile  long  x  16  ft.  wide  x  4  ins.  deep  =  1,042.95     cu.  yds. 
1  mile  long  x  16  ft.  wide  x  6  ins  deep  =  1,564.42     cu.  yds. 
Oiled  Road. — An  earth  road  sprinkled  with  asphaltic  oil  so  as  to 
form  a  crust  of  mineral  matter  bound  together  with  asphalt.     This 
is  the   "surface  oiled  road"   originally  developed   in   California,  but 
greatly    improved    in    recent    years    by    mechanical    mixing    of    the 
asphaltic  oil  with  the  soil  to  a  depth  of  several  inches  and  com- 
pacting with  a  rolling  tamper. 

Pavement. — A  floor-like  covering  built  upon  the  soil  to  form  a 
firm,  unyielding  roadway  for  wheeled  vehicles  and  animals. 

This  definition  includes  any  artificial  highway  covering  built  upon 
an  earth  subgrade,  from  the  cheapest  "gravel  road"  to  the  most 
expensive  granite  block  pavement.  English  engineers  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  not  calling  macadam  a  pavement,  but,  as  macadam 
performs  every  function  that  any  pavement  performs,  there  is  no 
logical  reason  for  excluding  it  from  the  list  of  pavements. 
Every  pavement  has  three  functions  to  perform : 

(1)  Distributing  concentrated  wheel  loads  over  the  earth   sub- 
grade. 

(2)  Roofing  the  earth  subgrade  so  as  to  prevent  its  saturation 
with  water. 

(3)  Giving  a  hard,  clean,  smooth  (but  not  slippery)  surface  that 
reduces  rolling  friction. 

Pavements  generally  consist  of  two  parts,  (1)  a  "base"  whioh 
performs  the  function  of  distributing  the  wheel  load,  and  (2)  a 
wearing  coat  which  sheds  rain  and  provides  a  durable,  smooth 
surface.  The  wearing  coats  commonly  used  for  road  and  street 
pavements  may  be  divided  into  6  types: 

Type  1.  Granular  minerals  bound  with  mineral  glue  (or  mineral 
jelly). 

Type  2.     Granular  mineral  bound  with  bitumen. 

Type  3.     Granular  mineral  bound  with  Portland  cement. 

Type  4.     Stone  blocks. 

Type  5.     Wooden  blocks. 

Type  6.     Brick. 

By  the  term  "granular  mineral"  we  mean  fragments  of  mineral 
matter  of  any  size  from  dust  up  to  fragments  as  large  as  hens' 
eggs,  or  even  larger,  whether  the  fragments  have  been  produced 
artificially  by  crushing  or  pulverizing,  or  by  the  forces  of  nature. 

By  the  term  "mineral  glue"  we  mean  the  "colloids"  which  Gush- 
man  has  proved  to  be  the  cementing  element  of  rock  dust,  which 
causes  macadam  to  bind,  and  to  which  the  "sticky"  properties  of 
clay  are  attributable. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  263 

Type  1  includes : 

(a)  Sand-clay  roads. 

(b)  Gravel  roads. 

(c)  Shell  roads. 

(d)  Macadam. 
Type  2  includes : 

(a)  Oiled  roads. 

(b)  Tar  macadam,  or  tar  concrete. 

(c)  Asphalt  macadam,  or  asphalt  concrete. 

(d)  Asphalt  pavement,    (1)   sheet  and   (2)   block. 

(e)  Bitulithic  pavement. 

(f)  Petrolithic  pavement. 
Type  3  includes: 

(a)  Concrete. 

(b)  Macadam  grouted  with  cement  (Hassam  pavement). 
Types  4,  5  and  6  are  self  explanatory. 

Pavers. — Men  who  lay  paving  blocks ;  also  the  blocks  themselves, 
particularly  the  small  size  paving  bricks  (2%x8^x4  ins.),  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  large  size  called  "blocks"  (3*4x8^x4  ins.). 

Paving  Cement. — A  mixture  of  asphalt  tar  and  still  wax. 

Petrolithic  Pavement. — A  pavement  made  of  mineral  matter 
(soil,  broken  stone  or  the  like)  mixed  with  a  bituminous  binder 
(asphaltic  oil  or  tar)  and  compacted  into  a  uniformly  dense  mass 
with  a  rolling  tamper  (a  roller  provided  with  projecting  tampers, 
feet  or  "spuds").  Where  the  traffic  is  light,  natural  soil  is  ploughed 
up,  pulverized  and  mixed  with  asphaltic  oil,  using  a  road  machine 
and  a  "cultivator"  for  mixing.  Then  it  is  tamped  so  as  to  form  a 
pavement  4  to  8  ins.  thick.  Where  the  traffic  is  heavier,  the  pave- 
ment base  is  made  of  the  natural  soil  as  just  described,  but  a  wear- 
ing coat  is  provided,  consisting  of  broken  stone  or  gravel  of  graded 
sizes  mixed  with  the  bituminous  binder  and  tamped  so  as  to  form 
a  layer  2  to  4  ins.  thick.  This  is  often  called  Petrolithic  macadam. 

Pitch. — Any  tar  or  asphalt,  or  mixtures  of  the  same,  may  be 
called  pitch.  The  term  is  not  definite.  See  Peckham's  "Solid 
Bitumens." 

Profile. — The  line  of  intersection  of  a  vertical  plane  with  the 
earth's  surface  ;  ordinarily  applied  to  the  longitudinal  profile  of  the 
ground  over  which  a  road  is  to  be  built.  The  transverse  profile  is 
the  cross-section. 

Ravel. — When  the  stones  of  a  macadam  road  are  displaced  by 
traffic,  it  is  said  to  "ravel." 

Right  of  Way. — The  land  owned  by  the  public  for  highway  pur- 
poses. 

Road. — In  America  the  term  road  is  applied  only  to  country  high- 
ways. In  England  it  is  applied  also  to  city  streets. 

Road  Machine. — See  Grader. 

Road  Oil. — A  bituminous  (generally  asphaltic)  oil  for  sprinkling 
on  a  road  to  lay  the  dust. 

Run  of  Crusher. — See  Broken  Stone. 

Roller. — The  ordinary  steam   roller  is  a  10   to   15-ton  locomotive 


264        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

with  broad-tired  wheels.  A  corrugated  roller  is  generally  a  horse- 
drawn  roller  having  several  rolling  discs  on  the  same  axle,  discs 
of  large  and  small  diameter  alternating  so  as  to  produce  a  "corru- 
gated" appearance.  This  type  of  roller  is  supposed  to  be  more 
effective  than  a  smooth  roller  for  compacting  earth  embankments. 
A  tamping  roller,  or  rolling  tamper,  is  a  roller  having  projecting 
tampers  (or  feet,  or  "spuds")  which  penetrate  the  loosened  earth 
and  begin  compacting  it  from  the  bottom  up. 

Sand  Cushion. — A  thin  layer  of  sand  underneath  a  brick  or  block 
pavement.  See  Cushion. 

Scarify. — To  pick  up  or  loosen  old  macadam  preparatory  to  resur- 
facing it. 

Screenings. — The  fine  product  of  a  rock  crusher,  usually  from  dust 
up  to  l/2  to  %  in.  in  size.  See  Broken  Stone. 

Shaping. — The  process  of  giving  the  final  finishing  to  a  subgrade, 
including  the  rolling  of  the  subgrade. 

Shoulder. — See  Berm. 

Slope  Stake. — A  stake  set  to  mark  the  toe  of  a  "fill"  (embank- 
ment) or  the  top  outer  edge  of  a  "cut"  (excavation). 

Spreader. — See  Leveler.  A  "spreader  wagon"  is  a  dump  wagon 
designed  to  discharge  its  load  in  a  layer  of  uniform  thickness. 

Square. — 100  sq.  ft.  ;  a  unit  of  area  occasionally  used  in  meas- 
uring pavements,  but  one  not  to  be  recommended  now  that  the 
sq.  yd.  ( 9  sq.  ft. )  is  the  common  unit.  See  Great  Square.  * 

Subgrade. — The  graded  surface  of  the  soil  upon  which  a  pave- 
ment rests. 

Tar. — Coal  tar  is  a  by-product  in  the  manufacture  of  coal  gas  or 
coke.  See  Barrel. 

Tarvia. — A  refined  tar  especially  made  for  road  use. 

Telford. — A  pavement  consisting  of  a  base,  or  "bottoming,"  of 
large  stones  set  on  edge,  supporting  a  wearing  coat  of  ordinary 
macadam.  See  Macadam. 

Thank.  You,  Ma'am. — A  catch-water.     See  Catch- Water. 

Ton. — Unless  otherwise  stated,  the  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.  is  used  in  this 
book.  The  "gross  ton"  of  2,240  Ibs.  is  not  ordinarily  used  in 
America  as  a  unit  for  broken  stone,  asphalt,  or,  indeed,  for  any  road 
or  street  material. 

Tractive  Resistance. — The  frictional  resistance  that  a  load  on 
wheels  offers. 

Wearing  Coat. — The  surface  layer  or  coat  of  a  pavement.  See 
Pavement. 

Wings. — See    Berm. 

Wood    Block. — See    Creosoted    Block. 

Vitrified  Brick. — See  Brick. 

Yard. — When  the  word  yard  is  used  in  reference  to  a  pavement, 
the  square  yard  (9  sq.  ft.)  is  usually  meant.  The  lineal  yard  is 
never  used  in  America  as  a  unit  for  road  or  street  work. 

Water  Table. — A  horizontal  slab  of  concrete  or  stone  forming 
the  floor  of  a  gutter  next  to  a  curb. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS,  265 

Cross- References  to  Excavation  and  Rock  Crushing. — Since  the 
principal  items  of  cost  of  excavating  earth  and  rock  are  often  much 
the  same,  whether  for  a  road  or  for  a  railway,  I  have  given  most  of 
the  data  on  excavation  in  the  Earth  Excavation  and  Embankment 
Section  and  in  the  Rock  Excavation  Section  of  this  book. 

The  cost  of  crushing  rock  for  macadam,  concrete,  or  other  pur- 
poses, is  also  given  in  the  Rock  Excavation  Section.  Some  examples 
of  the  cost  of  grading  roads  will  be  found,  however,  in  this  Road 
and  Street  Section.  See  page  332. 

Units  Used  in  Measuring  Macadam.— Due  to  the  fact  that  ma- 
cadam is  measured  in  various  ways  by  different  engineers,  there 
has  been  much  confusion  in  recording  costs.  The  following  are 
some  of  the  different  units  that  engineers  have  used: 

(1)  Cu.  yd.  of  consolidated  macadam,  measured  in  finished  road. 

(2)  Cu.   yd.    of  loose   stone,    including   screenings,   measured   in 
wagons. 

(3)  Cu.  yd.  of  loose  stone,  measured,  on  the  road,   but  not  in- 
cluding screenings  or  binder. 

(4)  Sq.  yd.  of  consolidated  macadam. 

(5)  Sq.  yd.  of  loose  stone  (sometimes  excluding  screenings). 

(6)  Ton   (usually  2,000  Ibs.,  but  sometimes  2,240  Ibs.)    of  stone 
used   to   make   the   macadam,    usually   including   the    screenings  or 
binder,  but  not  always. 

In  view  of  the  great  uncertainty  as  to  what  may  be  meant  by  the 
expression  "cubic  yard  of  macadam"  or  "cubic  yard  of  stone,"  every 
writer  should  be  careful  to  tell  exactly  what  he  means. 

Of  the  various  units  above  mentioned,  I  prefer  the  first — the  cubic 
yard  of  completed  macadam. 

However,  the  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.  is  often  a  convenient  unit  for 
measuring  the  material  in  a  macadam  road,  and  is  also  likely  to  be 
used  extensively.  When  the  ton  is  used  as  the  unit,  care  should 
be  taken  to  give  the  weight  of  the  loose  broKen  stone  per  cubic 
yard,  so  that  conversions  can  be  made. 

Since  loose  broken  stone  consolidates  about  10%  when  hauled  a 
short  distance  in  a  wagon  or  car,  care  should  be  taken  to  state 
where  the  measurement  of  volume  was  made. 

Macadam  roads  vary  so  greatly  in  thickness,  that  it  is  particular- 
ly desirable  to  use  the  cubic  yard  of  consolidated  macadam  as  the 
unit,  instead  of  the  square  yard ;  but  the  thickness  of  the  macadam, 
after  compacting,  should  always  be  stated,  for  the  per  cent  of 
screenings,  or  binder,  varies  with  the  thickness,  and  the  amount  of 
rolling  is  less  per  cubic  yard  for  thick  macadam  than  for  thin 
macadam. 

Items  of  Cost  of  Macadam.— The  following  are  all  the  items  usu- 
ally involved  in  macadam  construction  done  by  a  contractor: 

Materials : 

Broken  stone    (coarse). 
Screenings,  or  binder. 
Freight  on  stone  and   screenings. 
Water  for  sprinkling. 


266  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Labor : 

Loading  stone  and  screenings  into  wagons. 

Hauling  stone  and  screenings. 

Spreading  stone   (coarse). 

Spreading  screenings,  or  binder. 

Rolling. 

Sprinkling. 

Foreman. 
General  Expense: 

Superintendent,    watchman,    waterboy,    timekeeper,    and   clerks, 

insurance  of  workmen,  etc. 
Supplies  and   Plant: 

Coal  for  roller. 

Oil  and  waste  for  roller. 

Interest,  depreciation  and  repairs  on  roller. 

Interest,  depreciation  and  repairs  on  wagons. 

Interest,  depreciation  and  repairs  on  small  tools. 
In  the  foregoing  summary,  it  is  assumed  that  the  broken  stone 
and  screenings  are  either  purchased,  or  that,  if  quarried  and  crushed 
by  the  contractor  himself,  the  cost  of  quarrying  and  crushing  is  kept 
entirely  separate  from  the  cost  of  building  the  macadam.  The 
reader  will  find  costs  of  quarrying  and  crushing  in  the  section  on 
Rock  Excavation  and  Quarrying. 

It  is  also  assumed  that  the  grading,  including  preparing  the  sub- 
grade,  is  likewise  kept  separately,  for  to  do  otherwise  leads  to  great 
confusion,  as  the  yardage  and  cost  of  grading  have  no  relation  what- 
soever to  the  yardage  of  macadam  and  its  cost. 

While  the  size  of  each  particular  job  should  be  recorded,  stating 
length,  width  and  thickness  of  the  compacted  macadam,  writers 
only  confuse  their  records  by  giving  total  costs  of  each  of  the  above 
items.  What  a  reader  desires  is  unit  costs,  that  is  the  cost  of  each 
item  in  terms  of  the  cubic  yard  of  compacted  macadam  as  the  unit. 
Then,  if  the  writer  has  stated  the  total  number  of  cubic  yards  in- 
volved, it  is  a  simple  matter  of  multiplication  to  arrive  at  total  costs, 
should  anyone  desire  totals. 

Quantity  of  Stone  and  Binder  Required  for  Macadam. — About  ten 
years  ago  I  called  attention  to  an  error  that  had  been  copied  in  text 
books  from  a  very  early  day  down  to  the  present,  namely  the  state- 
ment that  a  layer  of  loose  stone  6  ins.  thick  can  be  compacted  under 
a  roller  till  it  is  4  ins.  thick.  No  such  compression  is  possible,  but 
it  often  happens  that  the  stone  is  driven  1  to  2  ins.  into  the  sub- 
grade.  On  a  hard  earth  subgrade,  it  never  requires  more  than  1.3 
cu.  yds.  of  coarse  loose  stone  (exclusive  of  the  screenings  or  binder) 
to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  rolled  or  compacted  stone,  and  where  the  stone 
is  very  tough  the  "compression"  is  even  less. 

The  percentage  of  binder  or  screenings  required  to  fill  the  voids 
in  the  rolled  stone  varies  somewhat  with  the  thickness  of  the 
macadam.  To  ascertain  the  thickness  of  the  coat  of  screenings  nec- 
essary to  fill  the  voids  in  the  rolled  stone,  divide  the  thickness  of  the 
rolled  stone  by  4  and  add  %  inch.  Thus,  for  a  6-in.  macadam  road. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  2C7 

there  will  be  required  ( 6  -=-  4 )  +  %  =  1  5/6  ins.  "of  screenings.  This 
is  equivalent  to  0.3  cu.  yd.  of  screenings  per  cu.  yd.  of  macadam. 
Therefore,  to  make  a  cubic  yard  of  finished  6-in.  macadam  re- 
quires 1.3  cu.  yds.  of  coarse  stone  and  0.3  cu.  yd.  of  screenings,  or 
1.6  cu.  yds.  measured  in  the  wagons  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  compacted 
macadam.  Stated  differently: 

7.8  ins.  of  loose  stone  (%  to  2y2-in.)  will  roll  to  6  ins. 

1.8  ins.  of  screenings  (less  than  %-in)  will  fill  voids. 

9.6  ins.  of  loose  stone  and  screenings  will  make  6  ins.  of  macadam. 

If  the  stone  weighs  2,400  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.,  we  need  1.56  short  tons 
pf  coarse  stone  and  0.36  short  ton  of  screenings,  a  total  of  1.92  tons 
required  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  finished  macadam.  If  the  stone  is  a 
heavy  trap  rock,  weighing  2,700  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.,  we  need  1.75  short 
tons  of  coarse  stone  and  0.41  short  ton  of  screenings,  a  total  of  2.16 
tons  per  cu.  yd.  of  finished  macadam.  This  estimate,  based  upon 
my  own  records,  checks  very  well  with  records  published  by  the 
Massachusetts  Highway  Commission. 

On  2.6  miles  of  6-in.  New  York  State  macadam,  1,600  cu.  yds. 
of  screenings  were  required  to  bind  4,000  cu.  yds.  of  macadam  rolled 
in  place.  This  is  equivalent  to  0.4  cu.  yd.  of  screenings  per  cu.  yd. 
of  macadam,  or  a  depth  of  2.4  ins.  of  loose  screenings  to  bind  the 
6  ins.  of  rolled  macadam.  This  large  amount  was  due  to  the  specifi- 
cation requirement  that  a  "wearing  coat"  of  screenings  be  left  on 
the  road. 

The  contractor  is  cautioned  against  careless  examination  of  road 
specifications,  for  many  engineers  require  the  contractor  to  grade  the 
subgrade  exactly  to  grade  and  then  put  on  enough  stone  to  bring 
the  finished  macadam  up  to  the  established  road  grade.  This  causes 
the  contractor  to  lose  all  stone  that  is  driven  into  the  subgrade  by 
the  roller,  which  in  sand,  or  in  soft  wet  clay,  may  amount  to  2  ins. 
or  more  of  loose  stone. 

Some  specifications  also  foolishly  require  a  %-in.  "wearing  coat" 
of  screenings  to  be  left  on  the  finished  road,  and  this  also  amounts 
to  a  good  many  cubic  yards  of  wasted  material  in  a  mile. 

The  roadmaker  will  do  well  to  carry  in  mind  the  following  data: 
A  bed  1  in.  thick,  10  ft.  wide  and  a  mile  long,  contains  163  cu.  yds. 
.1  bed  6  ins.  thick,  16  ft.  wide  and  a  mile  long,  contains  1,56%  cu.  yds. 

Few  rocks  are  soft  enough  to. yield  a  sufficiently  large  percentage 
of  screenings  to  bind  the  macadam ;  in  which  case  screenings  must 
be  imported,  unless  the  specifications  permit  the  use  of  loam,  sand, 
or  clay. 

Macadam  roads  are  usually  made  4  to  6  ins.  thick  after  rolling, 
and  12  to  16  ft.  wide.  I  have  often  urged  the  more  common  use  of 
single  track  macadam  roads,  8  ft.  wide,  with  turnouts  (16  ft.  wide) 
located  every  few  hundred  feet  apart. 

Cost  of  Loading  Stone  From  Cars  Into  Wagons.— A  good  work- 
man, shoveling  stone  from  a  flat  car  into  a  wagon,  will  load  20  cu. 
yds.  (loose  measure)  per '-10-hr,  day,  giving  a  cost  of  7y2  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  when  wages  are  $1.50. 


268        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

Where  the  amount  to  be  handled  warrants  the  use  of  a  derrick, 
and  clamshell  bucket,  a  much  lower  cost  can  be  attained.  Consult 
the  section  on  Rock  Excavation  for  details  of  cost  of  loading  broken 
stone.  (See  page  197,  etc.) 

Cost  of  Loading  Stone  From  Bins  Into  Wagons. — If  the  broken 
stone  is  to  be  hauled  direct  from  the  crusher,  bins  should  always  be 
erected  to  receive  the  broken  stone.  The  bottom  of  the  bin  should 
have  a  slope  of  not  less  than  1  to  1,  and  should  be  lined  with  sheet 
iron.  If  the  slope  is  flat,  say  iy2  to  1,  a  wagon  cannot  be  loaded 
in  much  less  than  7  mins.,  and  then  a  potato-hook  or  hoe  must  be 
used  to  keep  the  stone  moving.  But,  with  a  1  to  1  slope,  the  stone 
runs  freely,  and  a  wagon  can  be  loaded  with  iy2  cu.  yds.  in  2  mins. 
or  less. 

Usually  one  man  operates  the  bin  gates  and  assists  the  driver 
in  trimming  the  load  on  the  wagon.  Hence  the  unit  cost  of  loading 
from  bins  is  the  wages  of  the  bin  man  divided  by  the  total  number 
of  cubic  yards  crushed  daily.  If  his  wages  are  $1.50  and  the  crusher 
output  is  65  cu.  yds.,  the  cost  of  loading  from  the  bins  is  2.3  cts. 
per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  Hauling  Stone  In  Wagons. — When  wagons  are  loaded  from 
cars,  it  is  not  economic  to  have  more  than  4  men  shoveling  into  a 
wagon.  These  men  will  load  a  cubic  yard  of  broken  stone  in  about 
6  or  7  mins.,  if  working  briskly.  If  a  team  (with  driver)  receives 
$3.50  per  10-hr,  day,  each  minute  of  team  time  costs  0.6  ct.  ;  hence 
the  lost  team  time  while  loading  amounts  to  about  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
If  the  loading  is  done  from  bins,  the  lost  team  time  is  about  1% 
min.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  less  than  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  lost  team  time  at  the  dump  is  5  mins.  for  a  load  of  1%  cu.  yds., 
or  more  than  3  mins.  per  cu.  yd.,  if  slat-bottom  dump  wagons  are 
used,  costing  nearly  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  team  time  lost  dumping. 
In  dumping  from  a  slat-bottom  wagon,  dump  the  load  in  3  small 
piles,  to  reduce  the  labor  of  spreading. 

Up-to-date  contractors  are  now  using  bottom  dump  wagons  ex- 
tensively on  roadwork.  In  dumping  stone  from  such  a  wagon,  fasten 
a  chain  around  the  body  of  the  wagon  so  that  the  bottom  doors  can 
open  only  6  ins.  when  the  load  is  dumped,  and  keep  the  team 
traveling  while  dumping,  so  as  to  spread  the  load  as  much  as  pos- 
sible. When  such  wagons  are  used,  there  is  practically  no  lost  team 
time  dumping. 

Special  "spreader  wagons"  are  frequently  used,  and,  in  that  case 
also,  there  is  practically  no  lost  team  time  dumping  the  load. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  lost  team  constitutes  a  fixed  cost  per  cu. 
yd.,  which  may  range  from  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  where  loading  is  done 
from  bins  and  unloading  from  bottom  dump  wagons,  to  7  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.,  where  wagons  are  loaded  from  cars  and  where  slat  bottom 
wagons  are  used.  For  subsequent  illustration,  we  shall  assume 
4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  lost  team  time,  wages  of  team  being  $3.50 
per  10-hr,  day. 

As  ll/2'  cu.  yds.,  or  1.9  tons,  is  a  common  load  of  broken  stone 
hauled  over  earth  roads,  and  as  a  common  speed  is  2  y2  miles  per  hr., 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  269 

or  220  ft.  per  min.,  the  cost  of  hauling  is  28  cts.  per  load  per  mile, 
or  19  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  per  mile,  measured  one  way  from  the  point 
of  loading  to  the  point  of  dumping  (wagon  returning  empty),  team 
wages  being  $':.f>0  per  10-hr,  day.  To  this  must  be  added  the  fixed 
cost  of  lost  team  time,  above  given  at  1  to  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

If  the  earth  roads  are  level  and  in  good  condition,  a  load  of  2 
cu.  yds.  may  be  hauled. 

If  the  haul  is  over  a  good  macadam  road,  3  cu.  yds.,  or  3.7  tons 
may  be  hauled,  but  it  often  happens  that  specifications  foolishly  pro- 
hibit any  hauling  over  macadam  before  the  rolling  has  been  com- 
pleted, in  which  case  the  contractor  must  usually  begin  construc- 
tion at  a  point  faf  from  his  stone  supply  and  build  the  road  back 
toward  the  stone  supply,  thus  hauling  over  earth  the  entire  distance, 
and  doubling  the  cost  of  hauling. 

In  estimating  the  average  length  of  haul  on  roadwork,  bear  in 
mind  that  the  haul  is  never  constant,  and  that  at  times  the  work 
will  be  too  great  for  5  teams,  for  example,  but  not  enough  to  keep 
6  teams  fully  busy.  After  estimating  the  cost  by  the  above  rules, 
for  the  actual  average  haul,  I  consider  it  fair  to  add  about  15%  to 
cover  the  added  cost  due  to  variable  haul,  and  the  added  cost  of 
team  time  due  to  delays  at  the  crusher. 

For  discussion  of  the  general  subject  of  hauling,  including  trac- 
tion engine  hauling,  see  the  last  section  of  this  book. 

Cost  of  Spreading  Stone  By  Hand.— When  the  stone  is  dumped 
in  comparatively  small  piles  on  the  subgrade,  one  man  will  spread  25 
cu.  yds.  of  the  coarse  broken  stone  in  10  hrs.,  at  a  cost  of  6  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  when  wages  are  $1.50.  This  is  my  own  record  (12  years  ago) 
for  several  thousand  yards  of  stone  delivered  in  slat-bottom  wagons. 
Subsequently  I  developed  the  method  of  machine  spreading,  described 
hereafter,  which  greatly  reduced  the  cost. 

The  following  records  confirm  my  own,  all  being  recorded  In  re- 
cent issues  (1907  to  1909)  of  Engineering-Contracting. 

Mr.  Curtis  Hill  states  that  each  man  averaged  28  cu.  yds.  per 
day,  in  Missouri. 

Mr.  A.  N.  Johnson  states  that  spreading  44,000  cu.  yds.  cost  8  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  He  gives  the  wages  on  about  half  the  jobs,  indicating 
an  average  of  about  $2.00  a  day  for  the  whole  work,  which  would 
mean  that  25  cu.  yds.  were  spread  per  man  per  day. 

Mr.  W.  W.  Crosby  gives  records  for  negro  labor  in  Maryland, 
showing  an  average  of  22  cu.  yds.  per  man  per  day  ;  wages  were 
$1.00  for  10  hrs. 

The  foregoing  show  what  may  be  accomplished  with  energetic 
workmen,  but  there  are  numerous  instances  where  the  cost  of  spread- 
ing has  been  three  times  as  high.  For  example,  Mr.  John  McNeal 
states  that  the  average  cost  was  2y2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  spreading 
stone  by  city  day  labor  on  14,000  sq.  yds.,  in  Easton,  Pa.,  the  mac- 
adam being  6  ins.  thick  after  rolling.  This  is  equivalent  to  15  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  consolidated  macadam,  or  24  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  loose 
stone;  and,  as  wages  were  $2.00  per  10-hr,  day,  each  man  spread 
only  a  little  more  than  8  cu.  yds.  of  loose  stone  per  day. 


270 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


However,  a  high  cost  of  spreading  is  not  of  itself  evidence  ot 
inefficiency.  It  frequently  happens  that  engineers  foolishly  require 
all  stone  to  be  dumped  upon  platforms  alongside  the  road,  whence 
it  is  shoveled  onto  the  road.  In  such  cases,  a  man  will  not  shovel 
and  spread  more  than  about  12  cu.  yds.  per  day. 

According  to  the  common  method  of  building  a  macadam  road,  the 
coarse  stone  is  dumped  in  piles  upon  the  subgrade,  and  spread  with 
shovels  and  rakes.  The  screenings,  however,  are  dumped  in  piles  on 
the  earth  shoulders,  and  not  on  the  subgrade.  Then  they  are 
shoveled  onto  the  coarser  stone  after  it  has  been  spread  and  well 
packed  by  rolling.  This  shoveling  and  spreading  of  the  screenings 
costs  much  more  per  cubic  yard  of  screenings  than  it  costs  to  spread 
the  coarse  stone.  A  man  will  spread  about  10  cu.  yds.  of  screen- 
ings per  10-hr,  day,  making  the  cost  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  when  wages 
are  $1.50.  Screenings  cannot  be  spread  with  a  leveler. 

Cost  of  Spreading  Stone  With  a  Leveler  or  Grader.— Twelve  years 
ago  I  hit  upon  the  idea  of  using  a  grader  for  spreading  broken 
stone.  The  "grader,"  or  "leveler,"  as  it  has  been  recently  called, 
was  of  the  type  shown  in  Fig.  1,  excepting  that  the  rooters  or  teeth 


Fig.    1.  Leveler  for  Spreading  Stone. 


Fig.  2.     Leveler  for  Spreading  Stone. 


were  removed,  as  they  are  useful  only  in  loosening  hard  earth  on  a 
subgrade  that  is  being  leveled.     Fig.  2  shows  another  "leveler." 

A  "leveler"  is  a  light  machine  having  a  steel  blade  about  5  ft.  long, 
mounted  in  a  frame,  and  capable  of  being  raised  or  lowered.  One 
team  pulls  the  machine,  and  a  man  operates  it,  thus  making  the  cost 
of  operation  $5.00  per  10-hr,  day  when  team  and  driver  are  $3.50  and 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  271 

operator  $1.50.  At  these  wages  it  costs  only  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  to 
spread  the  coarse  broken  stone,  for  50  cu.  yds.  can  readily  be  spread 
per  hour  from  small  piles  dumped  on  the  subgrade.  However,  the 
spreading  thus  done  by  the  "leveler"  is  not  as  true  to  surface  as  is 
necessary  before  rolling,  so  the  layer  of  stone  must  be  gone  over 
by  a  man  using  a  potato-hook  for  a  rake.  This  final  haiid  leveling 
adds  another  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  making  the  total  cost  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
for  spreading  the  coarse  stone.  The  screenings  cannot  be  spread 
satisfactorily  with  the  machine,  but  they  constitute  only  a  small 
percentage  of  the  macadam. 

I  have  known  contractors  who  have  attempted  to  improve  on  this 
method  by  using  a  large  "road  machine,"  but  never  'with  as  satis- 
factory results.  The  four  to  six  horses  on  a  road  machine  add  un- 
necessarily to  the  cost  for  this  light  work  of  spreading  stone.  More- 
over, a  road  machine  is  not  turned  around  so  easily  and  quickly,  and 
the  turning  around  is  apt  to  tear  up  the  subgrade. 

Due  to  the  speed  at  which  a  leveler  works,  it  is  unnecessary  to 
have  a  team  constantly  hitched  to  it.  I  prefer  to  unhitch  a  team 
from  the  sprinkler  wagon  at  intervals  during  the  day,  for  a  few 
minutes  at  a  time,  and  hitch  it  to  the  leveler. 

For  the  best  results  at  the  lowest  cost,  dump  the  broken  stone  on 
the  subgrade  in  as  small  piles  as  possible.  Never  dump  the  stone 
on  the  earth  shoulders  at  the  side  of  the  road. 

There  are  now  several  firms  who  make  these  "levelers,"  among 
them  being:  C.  N.  Carpenter  Supply  Co.,  Canton,  Ohio;  The  Baker 
Mfg.  Co.,  725  Fisher  Bldg.,  Chicago;  The  Ohio  Road  Mchy.  Co., 
Oberlin,  Ohio. 

Cost  of  Rolling. — Based  upon  my  own  records  of  cost  of  main- 
taining and  operating  steam  rollers  (10-ton),  which  now  extend  over 
a  period  of  13  years,  the  following  is  the  cost  per  day  actually 
worked  : 

Per  day. 

Engineman $3.50 

0.35  ton   (700  Ibs.)   coal  at  $4   delivered 1.40 

Oil,  etc f 0.25 

800  gals.    (3}4  tons)   water  pumped  and  hauled  1  mile 1.00 

Interest,   6%  of  $2,500  -=-  100  days 1.50 

Current  repairs,  and  renewals,  5%  of  $2,500-4-100  days 1.25 

Depreciation     (life    25    yrs.  ;     sinking    fund,     3%     compound), 

2.75%  of  $2,5004-100  days 0.70 

Total $9.60 

It  will  be  noted  that  I  have  assumed  only  100  days  per  annum 
actually  worked  by  a  roller.  In  the  northern  half  of  America  the 
road  building  season  is  not  long  enough  to  permit  working  much 
more  than  this;  but  it  will  sometimes  happen  that  work  is  started 
early  enough  to  enable  at  least  120  days  to  be  worked,  after  de- 
ducting time  lost  on  account  of  rains,  etc. 

Further  data  on  depreciation  and  repairs  of  rollers  will  be  found 
in  subsequent  pages. 

Having  established  an  approximate  cost  of  $10  per  day  worked. 


272        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

for  operating  and  maintaining  a  roller,  the  next  step  is  to  determine 
the  fair  average  yardage  of  macadam  compacted  per  day.  A  roller 
can  be  counted  upon  to  compact  all  the  stone  crushed  by  a  9x1 6 -in. 
jaw  crusher,  where  the  crusher  is  working  on  hard  quarry  stone  and 
averaging  about  65  cu.  yds.  of  loose  broken  stone  and  screenings 
per  10  hr..  day.  These  65  cu.  yds.  of  loose  stone  will  make  40  cu. 
yds.  of  compacted  macadam,  or  240  sq.  yds.  of  macadam  6  ins. 
thick.  Hence  the  cost  of  rolling  is  about  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  loose 
stone  (including  screenings),  or  25  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  compacted 
macadam,  or  4^4  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  compacted  macadam  6  ins.  thick. 
This  cost  includes  the  ordinary  steam  rolling  given  to  the  subgrade 
before  spreading  the  broken  stone. 

If  the  subgrade  is  very  compact,  or  if  new  macadam  is  being  laid 
on  old  macadam,  a  roller  is  capable  of  consolidating  50%  more 
than  the  above  given  amount.  On  the  ordinary  soil,  even  after 
rolling  it  with  a  corrugated  roller  or  a  steam  roller,  the  broken 
stone  does  not  come  to  rest  quickly  under  rolling,  but  waves  under 
the  roller  for  a  long  time.  If  the  subgrade  has  been  tamped  with  a 
rolling  tamper,  however,  the  average  soil  is  so  compacted  that  the 
broken  stone  is  not  driven  into  it,  and  the  amount  of  steam  rolling 
of  the  macadam  is  very  greatly  reduced. 

One  of  my  records  shows  that  in  72  working  days  of  8  hrs.  each, 
a  10-ton  roller  compacted  4,000  cu.  yds.  (24,000  sq.  yds.)  of  6-in. 
macadam,  the  subgrade  being  a  compact  gravelly  soil.  This  is 
equivalent  to  55  cu.  yds.  of  compact  macadam,  or  330  sq.  yds.,  per 
8  hr.  day,  or  nearly  7  cu.  yds.  or  42  sq.  yds.  per  hr.  This  is  a  rapid 
rate,  but  is  still  far  below  the  rate  that  I  secured  in  resurfacing 
an  old  macadam  that  had  been  thoroughly  broken  up  with  picks, 
namely,  300  sq.  yds.  per  hr.,  details  of  which  are  given  on  page  288. 

In  rolling  6-in.  macadam  at  Hudson,  N.  Y.,  Mr.  H.  K.  Bishop 
found  that  60  cu.  yds.  of  compacted  macadam,  or  360  sq.  yds.,  was 
the  average  8-hr,  day's  work  of  a  10-ton  roller,  which  is  equivalent 
to  45  sq.  yds.  per  hr. 

Mr.  F.  G.  Cudworth  states  that  in  resurfacing  an  old  macadam, 
3.9  ins.  of  loose  trap  rock  and  2.1  ins.  of  screenings  were  spread 
and  rolled,  the  10-ton  roller  averaging  472  sq.  yds.  per  10  hr.  day. 

Mr.  W.  C.  Foster  states  that,  in  resurfacing  an  old  macadam,  a 
12-ton  roller  averaged  314  sq.  yds.  of  6-in.  macadam  per  10  hr.  day. 

The  three  following  records  are  taken  from  recent  issues  of 
Engineering-Contracting. 

Mr.  Curtis  Hill  states  that  in  building  a  new  7-in.  macadam  road 
in  Missouri,  65  cu.  yds.  of  loose  stone  (the  full  output  of  the 
crusher)  were  rolled  per  day. 

Mr.  John.  McNeal  states  that  in  building  new  6-in.  macadam 
streets  at  Easton,  Pa.,  a  12-ton  roller  averaged  200  sq.  yds.  per 
day,  although  on  one  street  the  average  was  270  sq.  yds.  per  day. 
The  work  was  done  by  day  labor,  which  accounts  for  the  low  aver- 
age. 

Mr.  W.   W.   Crosby  states  that  in  building  a  new  6-in.  macadam 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  273 

road  in  Maryland,  300  sq.  yds.  were  rolled  per  day  of  10  hrs.,  less 
than  0.2  ton  of  coal  being  used  by  the  roller. 

If  macadam  is  to  be  of  thickness  greater  than  6  ins.  (measured 
after  rolling) ,  it  is  usually  built  in  two  layers.  It  is  evident  that 
the  top  layer  will  require  less  rolling  than  the  lower  layer. 

Cost  of  Sprinkling. — The  amount  of  water  used  per  cubic  yard  of 
macadam  is  exceedingly  variable,  depending  largely  upon  the  near- 
ness of  the  water  supply  and  the  whim  of  the  inspector.  If  the  haul 
for  the  water  is  short,  it  is  usually  economy  to  use  an  abundance  of 
water,  for  water  washes  the  screenings  into  the  voids  of  the  coarse 
stone  ("puddles"),  and  reduces  the  amount  of  rolling  necessary  to 
jar  the  screenings  into  the  voids.  I  have  used  as  low  as  30  gals, 
per  cu.  yd.  of  compacted  6-in.  macadam,  which  is  equivalent  to  5 
gals,  per  sq.  yd.  ;  and  I  have  used  as  high  as  120  gals,  per  cu.  yd., 
or  20  grals  per  sq.  yd.  of  6-in.  macadam.  It  is  usually  safe  to  esti- 
mate on  not  more  than  10  gals,  per  sq.  yd.  of  6-in.  macadam,  or  60 
gals,  per  cu.  yd.  of  compacted  macadam. 

The  following  records  are  taken  from  recent  issues  of  Engineering- 
Contracting. 

Mr.  A.  L.  Valentine  states  that  in  building  a  6-in.  macadam  road 
near  Seattle,  9.3  gals,  were  used  per  sq.  yd.  Mr.  W.  W.  Crosby  states 
that  20  gals,  per  sq.  yd.  were  used  on  a  6-in.  macadam  road  in 
Maryland. 

Mr.  John  McNeal  states  that,  in  one  case,  16.8  gals,  were  used 
per  sq.  yd.  of  6-in.  macadam,  and  that,  in  another  case,  16  gals, 
were  used  per  sq.  yd.  of  10-in.  macadam  street. 

In  road  building  it  is  usually  necessary  to  pump  the  water  by 
hand,  or  with  a  small  gasolene  pump,  from  a  creek,  river  or  well. 
In  10  hrs.  one  man,  with  a  hand  pump,  will  raise  7,500  gals,  of 
water  to  a  height  of  16  ft.  into  a  tank  from  which  it  can  be  drawn 
off  into  the  sprinkling  wagon.  Hence  by  working  3  hrs.  a  day,  a 
man  can  furnish  2,400  gals,  of  water  for  240  sq.  yds.  of  6-in.  mac- 
adam. If  wages  are  15  cts.  per  hr.,  the  cost  of  pumping  to  a  height 
of  16  ft.  is  1-50  ct.  per  gallon,  or  1-5  ct.  (one-fifth  cent)  per  sq. 
yd.  of  6-in.  pavement  where  10  gals,  are  used  per  sq.  yd.,  or  a  trifle 
more  than  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  of  macadam. 

On  ordinary  roads,  unless  there  is^a  very  steep  pull  from  the  creek 
or  river  bed,  a  sprinkling  wagon  holding  450  gals,  (or  1.9  tons)  of 
water  can  readily  be  hauled  by  a  team.  The  team  time  required  to 
load  the  sprinkler  from  a  tank  and  discharge  its  contents  on  the 
road  is  ordinarily  about  20  mins.,  costing  12  cts.  for  the  450  gals, 
when  team  is  $3.50  per  10-hr,  day.  With  a  traveling  speed  of  2% 
miles  per  hr.,  the  cost  of  hauling  is  28  cts.  per  tank  (450  gals.)  per 
mile  of  haul  from  water  supply  to  point  of  delivery. 

Hence,  to  a  fixed  cost  of  12  cts.  per  tank  (for  team  item  loading 
and  discharging  the  water),  add  28  cts.  per  tank  per  mile  of  haul. 

With  a  haul  of  1  mile  the  cost  is,  therefore,  40  cts.  per  tank  of 
450  gals.,  or  less  than  1-10  ct.  (one-tenth  cent)  per  gallon.  If  10 
gals,  are  used  per  sq.  yd.  of  6-in.  macadam,  the  cost  of  hauling 


274 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


water  the  first  mile  is,  therefore,  1  ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  or  6  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  of  compacted  macadam ;  and  each  subsequent  mile  costs  4  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  macadam. 

It  generally  happens,  however,  that  when  the  haul  is  a  mile,  or 
less,  a  sprinkling  wagon  is  kept  going  continuously,  regardless  of 
the  amount  of  water  used.  In  that  case,  if  wages  of  team  and 
driver  are  $3.50  per  10-hr,  day,  and  interest,  depreciation  and  re- 
pairs of  the  sprinkling  wagon  are  $0.50  per  day,  the  daily  cost  of 
$4.00  must  be  'divided  by  the  amount  of  macadam  compacted  by 
the  roller,  or  40  cu.  yds.,  making  a  cost  of  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  1.7 
cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  6 -in.  macadam,  regardless  of  how  short  the  haul 
is. 

In  California,  where  the  hauls  for  water  are  apt  to  be  long,  it  is 
not  unusual  to  see  tank  wagons  holding  900  gals,  or  more,  hauled 
by  six  horses.  See  page  322. 

Summary  of  Cost  of  Macadam. — Based  upon  the  foregoing  rates 
of  wages,  etc.,  the  following  summary,  Table  I,  is  given : 

TABLE  I. — COST  OF  MACADAM. 


Item.                                                                           ( 
1     1.3  cu.   yds.    (1.62    tons)    coarse   stone   f. 

o.   h.   rft  rs  at    SO.  7  5  

Per 

lu.  yd. 

&0.975 

0.225 
1.000 
0.108 

Per 

sq.  yd. 
(6-in.). 

$0.163 

0.037 
0.167 
0  018 

Per 

ton 
(2,000 
Ibs..) 

$0.488 

0.112 
0.500 
0.054 
0.032 
0.160 
0.039 
0.022 
0.125 
0.050 

0.025 
0.044 
0.656 

2 

3 
4 
5 
6 

7 
8 
9 
10 
11 

12 
13 

0.3  cu.  yds.    (0.38  tons)    screenings,  f.   o. 
b    cars  at  $  0  7  5  

2  tons  (1.6  cu.  yds.)  freight  at  $0.50  
1.6  cu.  yds.  loaded  into  wagons  at  $0.08.  . 

1.6  cu.  yds.  lost  team  time  loading  at  $0.04 
1.6  cu.  yds.  hauled  (1  mile)   at  $0.20. 
1.3  cu.  yds.  spread  by  hand  at  $0.06. 
0.3  cu.  yds.   spread  by  hand  at  $0.15. 
Rolling,    $10  -=-  40    cu.    yds.    macadam. 
Sprinkling,  $4^-40  cu.  yds.  macadam. 
Foreman,    %    of   $4.00  -f-  40    cu.    yds.    ma- 
cadam 

0.064 
0.320 
0.078 
0.045 
0.250 
0.100 

0.050 
0.088 
0.112 

0.011 
0.053 
0.013 
0.008 
0.042 
0.017 

0.008 
0.015 
0.017 

Night   watchman      ($1.50),      water      boy 
($0.75),   and    V2    of  timekeeper    (  %    of 
$250)-    $350  —  40   cu    yds    .    . 

General    supervision,    office    expense,    in- 
surance,  etc.,   at  8%  of  items  4   to   12 
inclusive    

Grand  total    $3.415     $0.569     $1.707 

The  cost  per  cu.  yd.  relates  to  a  cubic  yard  of  macadam  packed  in 
place,  and  not  per  cu.  yd.  of  loose  stone. 

The  cost  per  sq.  yd.  is  for  macadam  6  ins.  thick  after  rolling,  and 
is,  therefore,  exactly  one-sixth  of  the  cost  per  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  per  ton  is  for  a  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.  of  stone  having  a  speci- 
fic gravity  of  2.7,  weighing  4,546  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  solid  (or  2,500  Ibs. 
per  cu.  yd.  loose  broken  stone  having  45%  voids)  and  assuming  that 
the  completed  macadam  weighs  4,000  Ibs.  (2  tons)  per  cu.  yd.  of 
completed  macadam,  which  is  equivalent  to  a  macadam  having  only 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  275 

a  little  more  than  10%  voids  after  rolling  and  binding.  Codrington 
states,  in  the  Encyclopedia  Brittanica,  that  a  piece  of  old  macadam 
contained  only  5%  voids,  as  determined  by  careful  weighing. 

In  considering  each  item,  refer  to  the  previous  discussion. 

If  the  stone  is  quarried  near  the  road,  item  3  (freight)  will  not 
exist ;  and  item  4  (loading  wagons)  will  be  reduced  to  1  ct.  per  cu. 
yd.  of  macadam;  also  item  5  (lost  team  time)  will  be  reduced. 

If  the  haul  is  2  miles,  item  6  will  be  exactly  doubled ;  on  the  other 
hand,  if  the  hauling  can  be  done  over  a  macadam  road,  this  cost 
per  mile  can  be  cut  in  two,  and  it  can  be  still  further  reduced  if  a 
traction  engine  is  used. 

If  the  coarse  stone  is  spread  with  a  "leveler,"  as  it  always  should 
be,  item  7  (spreading)  will  be  exactly  one- third  as  much  as  given; 
but  item  8  will  not  be  affected. 

If  the  subgrade  is  naturally  hard,  or  has  been  compacted  with  a 
rolling  tamper  having  projected  teeth  or  tampers,  item  9  (rolling) 
may  be  reduced  30%  or  more. 

If  the  haul  of  water  for  sprinkling  is  less  than  a  mile,  or  if  the 
sprinkler  is  not  kept  constantly  busy,  item  10  can  be  materially 
reduced. 

Item  11  (foreman)  is  given  on  the  basis  of  half  the  foreman's 
time  being  charged  to  the  macadam,  the  other  half  being  charged 
to  grading ;  and  the  same  being  true  of  the  timekeeper's  time  in 
item  12. 

Item  13  (general  supervision,  etc.)  is  rated  at  8%  of  all  costs, 
except  the  cost  of  broken  stone  delivered  on  cars,  for  it  is  here  as- 
sumed that  the  stone  is  purchased. 

If  wages  of  laborers  and  teams  are  greater  than  $1.50  and  $3.50 
per  10-hr,  day,  the  above  costs  should  be  increased  in  direct  ratio 
to  the  increased  wage. 

Estimating  the  Cost  of  Macadam,  New  York  State.*— For  esti- 
mating a  fair  bidding  price  on  the  macadam  used  in  New  York 
State  road  construction,  Mr.  Henry  A.  Van  Alstyne,  has  prepared 
the  following  data: 

The  actual  cost  of  the  crushed  stone  in  bins  is  estimated  at  85 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  measured  loose.  The  cost  of  hauling  this  stone  from 
the  bins  to  the  road  is  estimated  at  35  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  (loose  meas- 
use)  per  mile  of  haul.  The  cost  of  spreading,  rolling  and  sprinkling 
the  broken  stone  is  estimated  at  30  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  loose  measure. 

It  is  estimated  that  it  takes  1%  cu.  yd.  of  stone  to  make  1  cu. 
yd.  of  stone  compacted  under  the  roller ;  and  that  it  takes  %  cu. 
yd.  of  screenings  to  bind  this  stone.  Hence  in  estimating  the  cost 
of  a  cubic  yard  of  loose  broken  stone  we  have : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Crushed    stone   in   bins    $0.85 

Hauling,    1%    miles  at   $0.35 0.60 

Spreading,   rolling,    etc 0.3o 

Total    (loose  measure)    •  •  $1.75 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  1,  1906. 


276  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Based  upon  this  method  we  have  the  following  table  of  the  cost 
of  broken   stone  or  screenings  placed  in  the  road  : 

Haul,  miles. 


. 

1.85 
1.95 
2.05 
2.20 
2.30 
2.40 
2.50 
2.60 

2-70 
2.80 
2.90 
3.00 
3.10 


Then  the  cost  of  a  cubic  yard  of  solid  macadam  is  estimated  as 
follows,  assuming  a  haul  of  1  %  miles  : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

macadam. 
1.33  cu.  yds.  broken  stone  at  $1.75  ...........    $233 

0.5  cu.  yds.  screenings  at  $1.75  .............  ...  0.88 


Total .    S3  21 

Add  20%  for  profit ; o!64 


Contract  price   $3.85 

This  is  practically   $3.90,   and   it   is  so   entered   in   the  following 
table : 


Contract 

Price  for  Macadam  with 

Screenings  Binder. 

Price  per  sq.  yd. 

Haul, 
miles. 

Price  per 
cu.  yd. 

per  inch  of 
thickness. 
Cts. 

1% 

.     $3.90 

10.8 

2 

4.10 

11.4 

2% 

4.30 

12.0 

2  V 

4.50 

12.5 

2% 

4.70 

13.1 

3 

4.90 

13.6 

11 

5.10 
5.25 

14.1 
14.6 

3% 

5.45 

15.1 

4 

5.65 

15.7 

4^4 

5.85 

16.2 

4y2 

6.05 

16.8 

4% 

6.25 

17.3 

5 

6.45 

17.9 

The  above  is  based  upon  the  use  of  stone  screenings  for  the  bind- 
er, as  required  for  the  middle  and  top  course  of  macadam,  which 
are  usually  3  ins.  thick  (2  ins.  middle  course  and  1  in.  top  course). 
But  for  the  bottom  course,  which  is  usually  3  ins.  thick,  the  specifi- 
cations permit  the  use  of  sand  as  a  binder  instead  of  screenings. 
This  sand  is  estimated  at  $1  per  cu.  yd.,  loose  measure,  including 
loading,  hauling,  spreading,  profit,  etc.,  or  83  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  without 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  277 

the  20%  profit.     Hence,   for  a  haul  of  1%   miles,  we  have  the  fol- 
lowing for  the  bottom  course: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

macadam. 

1.33  cu.  yds.  broken  stone  at  ?1.75 $2.33 

0.5  cu.  yds.  sand  filler  at  $0.83 . » 0.42 


Total    $2.75 

Add  20%   profit    0.55 


Contract  price   .  .  . $3.30 

Based  upon  this  method  of  calculation  we  have  the  following  as 
the  cost  of  the  bottom  course  for  different  lengths  of  haul : 
Contract   Price   for  Macadam    With  Sand  Binder. 

Price  per  sq.  yd. 

per  inch  of 

Haul,  Price  per  thickness. 

Miles.  cu.  yd.  Cts. 

1%  $3.35  9.3 

2  3.50  9.7 
2%  3.65  10.1 
2y2  3.80  10.5 
2%  3.95  10.9 

3  4.10  11.4 
3^4  4.20  11.6 
3y2  4.35  12.0 
3%  4.50  j    *  .  ;  12.5 

4  4.65  12.9 
4^4  4.80  13.3 
4V2  4.95  13.8 
4%  5.05  14.0 
o  5.20  14.4 

The  foregoing  data  are  based  upon  the  assumption  that  loose 
broken  stone  costs  85  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  in  the  crusher  bins.  If  the 
stone  is  delivered  on  cars  the  cost  often  is  higher,  and  to  this  cost 
must  also  be  added  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  loose  stone  for  shoveling 
the  stone  from  the  cars  into  wagons. 

The  rates  of  wages  paid  by  contractors  in  New  York  State  road- 
work  are  usually  $1.50  per  8-hour  day  for  common  laborers,  and  $4 
to  $4.50  per  day  for  team  and  driver. 

Prices  Allowed  for  Extra  Work  on  New  York  State  Roads.*— A 
good  many  of  our  readers  will  be  interested  in  two  features  of  the 
latest  specifications  for  macadam  and  gravel  roads  built  by  the 
State  of  New  York.  One  feature  is  the  method  adopted  to  prevent 
unbalancing  of  bids,  and  the  other  feature  is  the  specifying  of  unit 
prices  which  the  contractor  must  accept  for  extra  work. 

The  State  Engineer's  estimate  of  the  quantities  of  every  kind  of 
work  specified  is  given  in  detail,  but  the  contractor  is  required  to 
bid  a  lump  sum  for  the  road  complete.  This,  of  course,  prevents 
unbalancing  of  bids.  Then,  to  avoid  disputes  or  law  suits  in  case 
any  or  all  of  the  quantities  are  increased  or  diminished  the  follow- 
ing clause  is  inserted  in  the  contract : 

"And  in  consideration  of  the  acceptance  of  the  foregoing  pro- 
posal we  hereby  agree  to  accept  the  following  named  unit  prices 

*  Engineer  ing-Contracting,  Aug.  1,  1906. 


278  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

(Table  II)  for  any  increase  or  deduction  which  may  be  made  by 
the  State  Engineer  for  changes  made  under  the  provisions  of  the 
specifications  for  said  improvement." 

It  should  be  added  that  for  ordinary  conditions  the  State  Engineer 
estimates  a  minimum  price  of  macadam  with  a  sand  binder  (bot- 
tom course)  at  $3.25  per  cu.  yd.  ;  and  for  the  other  courses  (mid- 
dle and  top),  $3.90  per  cu.  yd.  including  binder. 

Very  complete  specifications  for  this  road  work  have  been  pre- 
pared by  Henry  A.  Van  Alstyne,  State  Engineer,  Albany,  N.  Y. 
Engineers  engaged  in  road  construction  will  find  much  valuable  in- 
formation embodied  in  these  specifications. 

Macadam  Road  Prices  in  Massachusetts.* — Some  interesting  data 
in  the  construction  of  macadam  roads  in  Massachusetts  are  given 
in  a  recent  bulletin  prepared  by  Austin  B.  Fletcher,  secretary  Massa- 
chusetts Highway  Commission,  and  issued  by  the  U.  S.  Office  of  Pub- 
lic Roads.  According  to  this  the  average  costs  (by  contract)  to  the 
state  of  Massachusetts  of  broken  stone  in  place  on  state  highways 
constructed  in  1906  were  as  follows:  For  a  road  made  of  imported 
stone  (trap  rock),  6  in.  deep  at  center  and  4  in.  deep  at  sides,  the 
cost  per  ton  in  place  was  $1.956  ;  the  cost  per  square  yard  in  place 
was  $0.6245  and  the  cost  per  mile  was  $5,496.  One  ton  of  stone 
made  3.13  sq.  yds.  of  macadam.  For  a  road  made  of  imported  stone 
(trap  rock)  4  ins.  deep  throughout,  the  cost  per  ton  in  place  was 
$2.025  ;  the  cost  per  square  yard  in  place  was  $0.5393  and  the  cost 
per  mile  was  $4,746.  One  ton  of  stone  made  3.76  sq.  yds.  of  mac- 
adam. For  a  road  made  of  local  stone  6  ins.  deep  at  center  and  4 
ins.  deep  at  sides,  the  cost  per- ton  in  place  was  $1.396  ;  the  cost  per 
square  yard  in  place  was  $0.4201  and  the  cost  per  mile  was  $3.696. 
One  ton  of  stone  made  3.32  sq.  yds.  of  macadam.  For  a  road  made 
of  local  stone  4  ins.  deep  throughout,  the  cost  per  ton  in  place  was 
$1.583  ;  the  cost  per  square  yard  in  place  was  $0.3*931  and  the  cost 
per  mile  was  $3,459.  One  ton  of  broken  stone  made  4.03  sq.  yds.  of 
macadam.  The  above  costs  per  mile  are  equated  on  the  basis  of  a 
road  15  ft.  wide.  The  average  contract  prices  for  the  several  con- 
struction items  exclusive  of  macadam  were  as  follows : 

Excavation   per   cu.   yd.    $0.435 

Borrow  per  cu.   yd 0.562 

Ledge  excavation  per  cu.  yd 1.78 

Cement  concrete  masonry,  cu.  yd 8.85 

Shaping  road  for  broken  stone  per  sq.  yd 0.028 

Vitrified  18-in.  clay  pipe,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 1.57 

Vitrified  12-in.  clay  pipe,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 0.766 

Vitrified  10-in.  clay  pipe,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 0.643 

Vitrified  8-in.  clay  pipe,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 0.570 

Iron  water  pipe,  12  in.,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 2.20 

Iron  water  pipe,  18  in.,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 3.75 

Stone  filling  for  V  drains,  in  place,  per  cu.  yd..  .    0.827 

Guard  rail,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 0.277 

Catch    basins,    in    place    (including    catch    basin 

frames  and  grates) ,    each    35.74 

Setting  stone  bounds 1.85 

The  pric^  for.  cement  concrete  masonry  does  not  include  the  ce- 
*  Engineering-Contracting,   Oct.    16,    19£~ 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,  WALKS.        2"  9 


TABLE  II. — PRICES  FOR  ROAD  WORK. 

The  following  are  unit  prices  for  the  items  named,  in  place,  com- 
plete : 
Excavation  of  earth,  or  embankment  rolled  in  place,  per  cu.  yd.?  0.40 

Excavation  of  rock,  per  cu.  yd 1.26 

Second-class    Portland    cement    concrete,    in    place      complete 

( 1 :  2 1/2  :  5 ) ,  per  cu.  yd 8.00 

Third-class  Portland  cement  concrete,  or  third-class  masonry, 

in  Portland  cement  mortar,  in  place  complete   ( 1 :  3  :  6 ) ,  per 

cu.  yd 6.00 

Third-class  masonry  laid  dry,  in  place  complete  (rubble),  per 

cu.  yd 3.50 

Pointing  old  masonry,  per  sq.  yd 0.20 

Rip-rap,  in  place  complete,  per  cu.  yd 1.50 

Telford  base,  in  place  complete   (6-in.   to  8-in.  thick),  per  sq. 

yd 0.75 

Stone  paving,  in  place  complete   (8-in.  thick),  per  sq.  yd....  0.75 

Cobble  gutters,  in  place  complete,  per  sq.  yd 0.50 

6-in.  stone  flagging,  in  place  complete  (for  covering  box  cul- 
verts), per  sq.  ft 0.30 

Expanded   metal,    6-in.    mesh    (or   3 — 16-in.)    gauge,   in   place 

complete,     per  sq.  ft 0.10 

Guard  rail,  in  place  complete   (posts  7-ft.  long,  8  e  to  e),  per 

lin.  ft . . . . . 0.20 

Rustic  guard  rail,  in  place  complete,  per  lin.  ft 0.15 

Bridge  rail,   in  place  complete,  per  lin.  ft 0.50 

1^-in.  pipe  rail,  in  place  complete  (for  masonry  bridges),  per 

lin.    ft 1.00 

12-in.  cast  iron  pipe,  laid  in  place  complete,  per  lin.  ft 2.50 

18-in.  cast  iron  pipe,  laid  in  place  complete,  per  lin.  ft 3.50 

6-in.  vitrified  pipe,  laid  in  place  complete,  per  lin.  ft 0.30 

12-in.  vitrified  pipe,  laid  in  place  confplete,  per  lin.  ft 0.60 

18-in.  vitrified  pipe,  laid  in  place  complete,  per  lin.  ft 1.10 

24-in.  vitrified  pipe,  laid  in  place  complete,  per  lin  ft 2.00 

30-in.  vitrified  pipe,  laid  in  place  complete,  per  lin.  ft 3.75 

Relaying  old  pipe  found  in  road,  per  lin.  ft 0.15 

Steel  beams,  channels  and  structural  shapes,  spikes  and  nails 

and  cast  iron,  per  Ib 0.05 

Oak  timber  and  plank,  in  place  complete,  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M. .  .  40.00 
Hemlock  timber  and  plank,   in  place  complete,    per   1,000   ft. 

B.    M ....7. ......I 30.00 

Yellow  pine  timber  and  plank,  in  place  complete,  per  1,000  ft. 

B.  M 40.00 

Guide  boards,   each 6.00 

Road  signs,  each 4.00 

Prices  for  the  Following  Items  to  Be  Inserted  by  Bidder. 

Broken  stone  macadam  of  the  kind  prescribed  in  these  specifi- 
cations, for  bottom  course,  including  filler,  and  rolled  in 
place  complete,  per  cu.  yd • 

Broken  stone  macadam  of  the  kind  prescribed  in  these  specifi- 
cations, for  middle  course,  including  binder,  and  rolled  in 
place  complete,  per  cu.  yd 

Broken  stone  macadam  of  the  kind  prescribed  in  these  specifi- 
cations, for  top  course,  including  binder,  and.  rolled  in 
place  complete,  per  cu.  yd — -~~ 

%-in.  broken  stone  of  the  kind  prescribed  in  these  specifica- 
tions, in  piles,  loose  measurement,  per  cu.  yd • — -- 

Gravel  or  shale,  rolled  in  place,  per  cu.  yd 


'?80  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ment  or  the  steel  reinforcement,  which  may  be  estimated  at  about 
$3  additional.  The  average  wages  per  9-hour  day  for  part  of  1906 
and  for  an  8-hour  day  for  the  remainder  of  the  year  were  as  fol- 
lows : 

Ordinary  labor    $1.75  to  $2.00 

Crusher  and  roller  engineers 3.00  to     3.50 

Foreman    3.00  to     5.00 

1-horse  wagon  and   driver    3.00  to     4.00 

2-horse  wagon  and  driver    4.50  to     5.50 

Contract  Prices  for  Road  Work  in  Massachusetts.* — The  following 
averages  of  contract  prices  on  state  road  work  during  1907  have 
been  taken  from  the  15th  annual  report  of  the  Massachusetts  High- 
way Commission.  The  prices  are  the  averages  for  64  contracts: 

Excavation,  all  kinds,  per  cu.  yd $0.52 

Borrow,    per    cu.    yd 0.64 

Ledge  rock  excavation,  per  cu.  yd 1.95 


Concrete  masonry,  per  cu.  yd. 


Shaping,  per  sq.  yd 0.03 

Broken   stone,   local,   per  ton,   in  place 1.64 

Broken   stone,   traprock,   per  ton,   in  place......    2.20 

Pipe  culverts,  per  lin.  ft. : 

12-in.  vitrified  clay,  in  place : .    0.80 

18-in.   vitrified   clay,   in  place    1.66 

12-in  iron,  in  place 2.34 

18-in.  iron,  in  place 3.57 

Fencing,  per  lin.  ft 0.30 

Ledge  excavation  covers  only  such  ledge  rock  as  requires  blast- 
ing for  its  removal,  and  boulders  of  %  cu.  yd.  or  more  in  volume. 
Concrete  masonry  is  composed  of  1  part  Portland  cement,  2  parts 
sand  and  5  parts  broken  stone  t>r  gravel.  For  the  pipe  culverts  noth- 
ing but  selected  fine  material,  free  from  large  stone,  shall  be  placed 
under  and  about  the  pipe,  and  all  material  under  and  about  the  pipe 
shall  be  tamped  in  place  by  a  thin  tamping  bar.  Fencing  consists  of 
chestnut  or  cedar  posts  not  less  than  6  ins.  in  diameter  spaced  8  ft. 
apart  and  set  3  ft.  in  the  ground  and  3%  ft.  above.  The  top  rail  is 
4  ins.  square  and  the  side  rail  of  2x6-in.  spruce. 

Wages  in  Massachusetts  in  1907,  per  8-hour  day,  were  about  as 
follows:  Common  labor,  $1.75  to  $2.25;  team  with  driver,  $4.50  to 
$5. 

Per  Cent  of  Engineering  for  Road  Construction-!— During  1905  and 
1006  there  were  built  in  New  Castle  County,  Delaware,  7.48  miles  of 
macadam  road  and  2.9  miles  of  gravel  road.  The  per  cent  of  engi- 
neering expenses  on  these  roads  varied  from  2  per  cent  to  3.7  per 
cent,  the  average  being  2.2  per  cent. 

In  Madison  County,  Tennessee,  24*4  miles  of  macadam  roads  were 
built  at  a  cost  of  $115,681.71.  The  cost  of  engineering,  superintend- 
ence and  surveys  was  $7,016.35,  or  about  6  per  cent  of  the  total 
amount  expended. 

In  Pennsylvania  the  average  cost  of  inspection  on  roads  built 
for  the  State  Highway  Department  has  been  3  per  cent  of  the  cost 

*  Engineering-Contracting,   Aug.    26,    1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   23,  1908,  and  Apr.   28,  1909. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  281 

of  the  road  and, the  average  of  engineering  expenses  has  been  2 
per  cent,  or  a  total  of  5%. 

In  New  Jersey,  during  1908,  a  total  of  146  miles  macadam  and 
gravel  roads  were  built.  Engineering  and  inspection  averaged  about 
5.7%,  of  which  3.2%  was  for  engineering  and  2.5%  for  supervisor's 
salary,  the  supervisor  being  appointed  by  each  county  to  oversee 
and  direct  the  work. 

Cost  of  Macadam  Roads,  New  Jersey. — The  following  is  a  very 
brief  summary  of  a  table  of  quantities  and  bidding  prices  for  47 
different  macadam,  gravel  and  Telford  roads,  which  was  given 
in  Engineering-Contracting,  April  28,  1909.  There  were  146  miles  of 
these  New  Jersey  state  roads  built  In  1908,  the  following  being 
about  the  average  cost  of  a  macadam  road  6  ins.  thick  (after 
rolling)  and  14  ft.  wide: 

Per  mile. 

8,210  sq.  yds.  macadam  at  65  cts $5,337 

4,100  cu.  yds.  earth  excav.  at  34  cts 1,394 

Engineering  (3.2%)    214 

Supervisor's  salary    ( 2.5  %  )    167 


Total    $7,112 

About  as  many  roads  were  built  8  ins.  thick  as  6  ins.,  at  an  added 
cost  of  about  20  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  the  8-in.  roads. 

Cost  of  a  Limestone  Macadam  Road,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. — The  following 
data  apply  to  a  limestone  macadam  road  6  ins.  thick  and  12  ft.  wide, 
built  by  contract  near  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  in  1898.  The  earth  was  a 
tough  clay  and  ditches  nearly  3  ft.  deep  were  dug  along  both  sides 
of  the  road.  The  cost  of  digging  the  ditches  was  nearly  half  th» 
total  cost  of  grading.  The  following  was  the  cost  of  one  mile  of 
grading,  including  ditching  and  surfacing,  in  comparatively  level 
country,  the  amount  of  excavation  being  about  4,600  cu.  yds.  (the 
graded  road  was  22  ft.  wide  between  ditches)  : 

Labor   at   $1.50   per    10-hr,    day $    670 

Teams  at  $3.50  per  10-hr,  day 226 

Foreman  at   $2.50   per   10-hr,   day 97 

Waterboy  at  $1.00  per  10-hr,  day 17 

Total  per  mile   $1,010 

This  is  equivalent  to  about  22  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

There  were  stretches  of  this  road  where  ditches  already  existed, 
and  the  only  grading  required  was  to  plow  up  the  old  surface,  shape 
the  trench  to  receive  the  macadam,  and  make  the  earth  shoulders 

5  ft.  wide  on  each  side  of  the  macadam.     Such  stretches  of  grading 
cost  $320  a  mile. 

The  macadam  was  6  ins.  thick  after  rolling  and  12  ft.  wide.  It 
was  laid  in  two  courses:  (1)  a  foundation  course  of  1%  to  2^ -in. 
limestone,  4  ins.  thick  after  rolling;  and  (2)  a  top  course  of  %  to 
1^4 -in.  limestone,  2  ins.  thick  after  rolling.  Both  courses 
were  bound  with  limestone  screenings.  As  an  average  of  3% 
miles  of  road,  it  was  found  that  loose  stone  spread  to  a  depth  of 

6  ins.  was  rolled  down  with  a  10-ton  roller  to  an  apparent  thickness 
of  4  ins.,  but  without  doubt  about  1  in.   of  stone  was  pushed  into 
the  subgrade  and  lost  so  far  as  the  final  measurement  was  con- 


282        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

cerned.  It  therefore  took  1%  cu.  yds.  of  loose  (1%  to  2% -in.)  stone 
(measured  in  cars  or  wagons)  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  rolled  founda- 
tion course.  For  the  top  course  it  took  a  thickness  of  2.8  ins.  of 
loose  (%  to  li/i-in.)  stone  to  give  the  required  2-in.  thick- 
ness after  rolling.  This  indicates  also  a  further  pushing  of  the 
foundation  stone  into  the  clay  below,  for  all  measurements  of  thick- 
ness were  made  with  a  level,  and  not.  by  digging  holes  through 
the  finished  macadam.  The  average  of  these  two  courses  was  1.46 
cu.  yds.  of  loose  stone  (not  including  screenings)  to  make  1  cu.  yd. 
of  rolled  stone,  but  it  took  a  trifle  over  ^  cu.  yd.  of  limestone 
screenings  (from  size  of  dust  up  to  ^-in.)  to  bind  each  cubic  yard 
of  rolled  macadam.  We  have,  therefore : 

Loose  stone    1.46  cu.  yds. 

Screenings    0.34  cu.  yd. 

Total 1.80  cu.  yds. 

This  means  that  it  required  1.8  cu.  yds.  of  screenings  and  loose 
stone  (measured  in  wagons)  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  rolled  macadam. 
The  cost  of  each  cubic  yard  of  macadam  was  as  follows : 

Stone  and  screenings,  f.  o.  b.,  1.8  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.70 $1.26 

Freight,  25  cts.  ton,  1.8  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.28 0.50 

Unloading  cars  into  wagons,  1.8  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.11 0.20 

Hauling   %   mile,   1.8  cu.  yds.,  at   $0.28 0.50 

Spreading,   1.8  cu.  yds.,   at   $0.08 0.14 

Sprinkling    0.19 

Rolling,  including  rolling  subgrade 0.24 

Total  per  cu.  yd.  of  macadam $3.03 

Laborers  received  $1.50,  and  teams  (with  drivers)  $3.50  per 
10-hr,  day. 

Cost  of  a  Sandstone  and  Trap  Macadam,  Rochester,  N.  Y — Near 
Rochester,  N.  Y.,  a  macadam  road  16  ft.  wide  and  6  ins.  thick  was 
built  by  contract,  on  a  sandy  soil.  The  bottom  4  ins.  of  the  ma- 
cadam were  of  sandstone  bound  with  limestone  screenings.  The  top 
2  ins.  were  of  trap  rock  bound  with  limestone  screenings.  The  sand- 
stone was  fieldstone  obtained  mostly  from  old  stone  fences  near 
the  road.  Wages  of  common  laborers  were  15  cts.  an  hour;  teams, 
35  cts. 

The  cost  of  sandstone  crushed  and  delivered  on  the  road  was  as 
follows  per  cubic  yard  measured  in  the  wagons : 

Cu.  yd. 

Paid  farmers  for  fences $0.10 

Loading,  hauling  %   mile,  and  crushing 0.80 

Hauling     1  mile  and  spreading 0.35 

Total $1.25 

The  limestone  screenings,  used  as  a  binder,  were  imported  on 
canal  boats,  and  delivered  on  the  road  cost  as  follows  per  cubic 
vard  measured  in  the  wagons: 

Cu.  yd. 

Screenings  delivered  on  boats   $1.50 

Unloading  into  wagons  with  derrick 0.25 

Hauling  2  miles 0.30 

Spreading  on  road   u-1!> 

Total    .  .".$2.25 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  283 

The  cost   of  the  trap   rock  was  the  same  as  for  the  limestone 
screenings.     The  cost  of  the  4-in.  sandstone  base  was  as  follows: 

Cu.  yd. 
1.4   cu.   yds.   sandstone,   at   $1.25 $1.75 

)cu.  yd.   limestone  screenings,  at  $2.25 0.75 
lling  and  sprinkling 0.08 


Rol 


Total   (measured  in  place) $2.58 

The  cost  of  the  2 -in.  trap  wearing  coat  was  as  follows: 

1.4  cu.  yds.  trap,  at  $2.25 $3.15 

Vs   cu.  yd.   screenings,  at  $2.25 0.75 

Rolling  and  sprinkling 0.52 


Total  (measured  in  place) $4.42 

The  10-ton  roller  pushed  much  of  the  stone  into  the  sandy  sub- 
grade,  which  accounts  in  part  for  the  fact  that  it  took  1.4  cu.  yds. 
of  loose  stone  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  rolled  macadam.  No  very  accu- 
rate record  was  kept  of  the  amount  of  screenings  used,  but  the 
amount  stated  is  not  far  from  correct.  It  will  be  noted  that  rolling 
the  4-in.  lower  course  cost  only  8  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  as  compared  with 
52  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  the  2 -in.  top  course.  This  is  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  lower  course  was  hastily  rolled.  Strictly  speaking  these 
two  courses  should  not  be  treated  separately  in  discussing  the  cost 
of  rolling.  The  cost  of  rolling  and  sprinkling  the  two  courses  tvas 
24  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  Experimental  Macadam  Roads,  Illinois.*— Mr.  A.  N.  John- 
son gives  the  following  regarding  12  experimental  macadam  roads 
(13.76  miles)  built  in  Illinois  in  1907  and  1908.  The  work  .was 
done  by  day  labor.  Each  road  was  made  12  ft.  wide,  and  two 
layers  of  loose  broken  stone  were  laid  to  an  aggregate  depth  of 
about  10  ins.,  which  would  be  equivalent  to  a  little  more  than  6  ins. 
of  compacted  macadam.  Limestone,  weighing  about  2,500  Itas.  per 
cu.  yd.,  was  used,  costing  about  $1.25  per  cu.  yd.  on  cars  at  the 
destination.  The  cost  of  44,000  cu.  yds.  of  loose  broken  stone  was 
as  follows  per  cubic  yard  (loose  measure)  : 

Per  cu.  yd.     Per 
Labor.        .  (loose).       cent. 

Unloading  stone  from  car    $0.10  10.1 

Hauling   stone    0.32  34.0 

Spreading  stone    0.08  8.5 

Rolling  and  sprinkling   0.11 

Total   labor  on  stone $0.61  64.1 

Excavation  of  earth   0.12  12.4 

Shaping  roadbed 0.08 

Trimming   shoulders 0.05  5.3 

Supt.,   watchman   and   incidentals 0.09  9.9 

Total   labor    $0.95  100.0 

Stone,  f.  o.  b.  cars,  say 1-25 

Grand  total   ?2.20 

It  is  not  stated  whether  interest  and  depreciation  of  steam 
roller  are  included,  but  apparently  not.  Average  rates  of  wages  are 
not  given  for  these  44,000  cu.  yds.,  but  wages  on  8  different  jobs  in 


^Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   18,  1908. 


284  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

1908    (involving  25,000   cu.   yds.   of   stone)    are  given,   and  average 
$2.10  per  day  ;    team   (with  driver)  averaged  $4-20. 

The  1%-in.  size  stone  was  used  for  the  bottom  layer,  and  the 
3-in.  stone,  bonded  with  screenings,  was  used  for  the  top  layer,  re- 
versing the  usual  practice. 

Irregular  shipments  of  stone  and  bad  weather  caused  delays  that 
added  considerably  to  the  cost. 

If  the  above  given  costs  per  cu.  yd.  of  stone  (loose  measure) 
be  multiplied  by  0.3,  the  approximate  cost  per  sq.  yd.  will  be 
obtained. 

The  shaping  of  roadbed  averaged  2.4  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  ma- 
cadam, although  on  one  job  it  cost  only  1.8  cts.  although  the  wages 
were  $2.50  a  day. 

The  trimming  of  shoulders  cost  1.5  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  macadam. 

The  total  cost  per  mile  of  macadam  road,  12  ft.  wide,  10  Ins. 
thick  before  compacting  (about  5  ins.  afterward),  was  about  $5,90U, 
the  haul  of  stone  averaging  1  to  1%  miles. 

Data  on  Depreciation  and  Repairs  of  Steam  Road  Rollers.* — 
Steam  road  rollers  were  first  built  in  England  about  1865,  and  it  is 
to  England  that  we  naturally  look  for  the  most  complete  records  of 
the  cost  of  repairs  and  the  life  of  these  machines. 

The  English  author,  Thomas  Aitken,  has  kept  careful  records  for 
a.  period  of  more  than  20  years,  and  his  data  are  especially  valu- 
able not  only  to  English  but  to  American  road  builders. 

Aitken  gives  the  following  table  of  first  cost  of  English  rollers : 

15-ton    roller,    single    cylinder $2,300 

12-ton   roller,    single    cylinder 2,000 

10-ton   roller,    single   cylinder 1,875 

Aitken  puts  the  life  of  a  roller  at  not  less  than  25  years.  He 
estimates  8,000  tons  of  stone  consolidated  by  a  15-ton  roller  each 
year. 

Aitken  gives  the  following  cost  of  repairs  on  a  15-ton  roller,  which 
he  regards  as  typical : 

"Up  to  the  fourteenth  year  the  repairs  were  comparatively 
trifling,  with  the  exception  of  a  pair  of  new  driving  wheels  and  re- 
pairing the  fire-box  and  tubes,  etc.  These  latter,  and  including 
sundry  repairs,  amounted,  on  an  average,  to  $55  per  annum.  It  was 
then  found  necessary  to  have  a  new  fire-box  and  general  overhaul 
of  all  the  working  parts.  This  cost  $850,  and  the  engine  should,  it 
is  anticipated,  be  capable,  with  ordinary  repairs,  to  run  for  a  period 
equal  to  a  life  of  25  years  at  least." 

Aitken  puts  the  total  cost  of  renewals  and  repairs  of  a  $2,300 
roller  at  $105  a  year  during  a  life  of  25  years,  which  is  nearly  5  per 
cent  of  the  first  cost  each  year.  To  this  must  be  added  a  percent- 
age to  cover  depreciation,  that  is  to  provide  a  sinking  fund  suffi- 
cient to  buy  a  new  roller  at  the  end  of  25  years.  If  such  a  sinking 
fund  draws  3  per  cent  compound  interest,  it  requires  that  about  2.75 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  April  7,   1909. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  285 

per  cent  of  the  first  cost  of  the  roller  be  set  aside  annually  to 
amount  to  the  full  first  cost  of  the  roller  in  25  years.  This  2.75 
per  cent  depreciation  fund  allowance  if  added  to  the  5  per  cent  for 
repairs  and  renewals,  gives  a  total  of  nearly  8  per  cent  per  annum. 

Aitken  says  that  this  is  equivalent  to  83  cts.  per  working  day. 
Since  8  per  cent  of  $2,300  is  $184,  if  we  divide  the  $184  by  $0.83, 
we  find  that  Aitken  apparently  figures  on  221  working  days  in  the 
year,  which  is  almost  double  the  number  of  days  commonly  worked 
by  a  roller  in  the  northern  part  of  the  United  States.  (See  Engi- 
neering-Contracting, May  23,  1906,  July  3,  1907  (p.  7),  June  10, 
1908  (p.  358),  for  data  as  to  the  number  of  days  worked  in  Massa- 
chusetts, and  the  cost  of  roller  repairs.)  Aitkin  says  that  his  esti- 
mate relates  to  a  roller  used  in  macadam  repair  work,  "practically 
in  steam  all  the  year,  except  when  under  repairs  or  stopped  by 
frost  during  winter  months." 

There  is  a  seeming  discrepancy  in  his  figures,  for  he  rates  a  15- 
ton  roller  as  capable  of  compacting  at  least  64  tons  of  macadam 
per  day  of  9  hours,  if  not  interfered  with  by  traffic.  Elsewhere  he 
estimates  the  "useful  effect  of  one  roller  at  8,000  tons  of  macadam 
per  annum,"  from  which  it  would  appear  that  less  than  150  full 
days  would  be  worked,  or  that  delays  due  to  traffic  would  cause  a 
serious  loss  of  time. 

The  writer's  experience  is  that  75  tons  of  macadam  can  be  com- 
pacted per  10-hour  day,  and  that  a  contractor  can  usually  count  on 
about  100  to  110  days'  actual  work,  which  gives  a  total  of  some 
8,000  tons  (including  screenings)  compacted  each  season  by  a 
10-ton  roller. 

Regarding  the  repairing  of  the  driving  wheels,  Aitken  says: 

"The  renewal  of  the  driving  and  front  wheels,  especially  the 
former,  is  an  expensive  item,  and  what  was  considered  at  one  time 
impracticable  can  now  be  carried  out,  that  is,  plating  the  worn-out 
rims.  This  results  in  considerable  saving,  and  the  wear  of  the  metal 
forming  the  rims  is  considerably  less  than  in  the  original  wheels. 
It  should  be  stated,  however,  that  the  wheels  for  renewal  of  rims 
should  not  be  worn  too  thin,  as,  in  such  cases,  the  renewal  is  not 
so  satisfactory.  The  process  is  to  fit  steel  plates  on  the  old  rims 
and  rivet  the  two  together,  and,  apart  from  a  few  of  these  becom- 
ing loose,  which  can  be  remedied  by  counter-sunk  bolts,  the  arrange- 
ment is  in  every  way  successful.  The  gripe  or  'bite'  of  these  steel- 
plated  wheels  is  as  good  as  that  of  the  original  cast-iron  ones,  and 
the  wear  is  much  more  uniform." 

Aitken  goes  on  to  state  that  the  wear  of  these  steel-plated  rims 
is  0.02  in.  for  every  1,000  tons  of  macadam  consolidated,  and  that 
the  cost  of  repairing  the  driving  wheels  by  this  method  is  $200  as 
against  $250  for  a  complete  set  of  new  wheels,  and  that  "experi- 
ence shows  that  the  life  of  those  renewed  with  steel  plates  is 
nearly  doubled." 

There  seems  to  be  enough  merit  in  this  method  of  repairing  the 
driving  wheels  to  warrant  the  manufacturer's  making  them  with 
removable  steel  plate  rims  in  the  first  place.  If  the  plates  were  of 


280  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

manganese   steel    the    life   would   probably   be   three   to   four    times 
as  long  as  when  made  of  ordinary  steel. 

Aitken  states  the  cast-iron  driving  wheels  of  a  15-ton  roller  lasted 
7  years,  during  which  time  they  consolidated  60,000  tons  of 
macadam. 

Cost  of  Road  Roller  Repairs  in  Massachusetts  During  1908.*— The 
Massachusetts  Highway  Commission  had  under  its  control  18  steam 
road  rollers.  The  rollers  were  used  1,126 14  days  on  town  work,  in 
32  different  towns.  They  were  also  used  557%  days  on  state  high- 
way repair  work,  on  65  different  roads  ;  290  days  by  towns  contract- 
ing for  the  building  of  state  roads,  including  the  small  town  roads  ; 
162  days  by  private  contractors  on  state  highway  contracts,  and 
one  roller  was  used  eight  days  at  the  State  Farm  at  Bridgewater. 
The  total  number  of  days'  work  during  the  year  was  2,144— an 
average  of  119  days  for  each  roller.  The  total  cost  of  such  main- 
tenance for  the  year  was  $2,046.  Of  this  amount  $1,000  was  paid 
for  practically  rebuilding  one  of  the  rollers  which  had  been  in  active 
use  since  1896  ;  and  $1,046  was  expended  for  the  ordinary  repairs. 
Including  the  expense  of  supervision  and  inspection  of  the  rollers, 
the  average  cost  of  such  ordinary  repairs  during  1908  was  90.8  cts. 
per  day  for  each  roller  in  use.  A  comparison  of  the  above  figures 
with  those  of  the  years  1906  and  1907  is  given  below: 

1906.          1907.          1908. 

Number   of   rollers 16  16  18 

Total  days  worked   1,719V,      1,808         2,144 

Av.  days  per  roller 107y2         113  119 

Av.  cost  ordinary  repairs  per  roller  day. ?0.98&      $0.99%      $0.90  4/5 

In  Engineering-Contracting,  May  23,  1906,  it  is  stated  the  Massa- 
chusetts Highway  Commission  had  16  rollers  during  1905,  that  they 
averaged  90.3  days  worked  per  roller,  and  that  the  cost  of  ordinary 
repairs  was  $1.12  per  roller  per  day  worked. 

Cost  of  Scarifying  Macadam  By  Hand.— Mr.  Thomas  Aitken  is 
authority  for  the  following  English  data: 

When  a  macadam  surface  is  to  be  picked,  or  scarified,  by  hand, 
soak  the  crust  with  water  to  soften  it,  unless  it  is  the  intention  to 
screen  the  old  materials.  The  depth  to  which  the  macadam  is  loos- 
ened by  picks  is  usually  about  2%  ins.  One  man  will  loosen  at  the 
following  rate  per  day : 

Sq.  yds. 

Soft  macadam  33 

Hard  macadam   20 

Very  hard  (steam  rolled)   macadam 12  to  15 

Cost  of  Scarifying  With  a  Machine.— A  scarifier  is  a  heavy  har- 
row for  ripping  up  old  macadam  preparatory  to  resurfacing  it.  See 
Fig.  3. 

A  scarifier  is  pulled  by  a  steam  roller,  and  it  usually  requires  two 
men  to  operate  the  scarifier.  According  to  Thomas  Aitken,  a  scari- 
fier with  3  teeth,  spaced  6  ins.  apart,  will  break  up  old  macadam 


Engineerino-Contracfina.  May  5,  1909. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS. 


287 


to  a  depth  of  4  ins.  at  the  rate  of  3,000  sq.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day,  if 
not  interrupted  by  traffic.  He  gives  one  record  of  650  cu.  yds.  per 
hr.,  scarified  to  a  depth  of  3  ins.,  using  a  15-ton  roller  to  pull  it 
But,  allowing  for  interruptions  from  traffic  that  ordinarily  occur  on 
a  country  road,  he  gives  1,500  to  2,000  sq.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day. 

He  states  that  each  set  of  teeth  will  scarify  only  150  sq.  yds. 
before  requiring  sharpening,  and  that  it  costs  15  to  30  cts.  to 
sharpen  the  set  of  3  teeth,  at  which  rate  it  costs  0.1  to  0.2  ct.  per  sq. 
yd.  for  sharpening  the  teeth.  This  would  give  a  cost  of  $3  to  $6 
per  day  for  sharpening  teeth  where  3,000  sq.  yds.  are  scarified  daily. 

The  following  paragraph  gives  some  American  data. 

Cost  of  Scarifying  Macadam,  Rhode  Island.* — In  breaking  up  the 
crust  of  an  old  macadam  road  preparatory  to  mixing  it  with  tar  or 
asphaltic  oil,  a  scarifier  drawn  by  a  steam  roller  is  cheaper  than  the 
use  of  "picks"  in  the  rear  wheels  of  the  roller. 


Fig.   3.     Scarifier. 

This  is  well  illustrated  by  the  following  costs  of  scarifying  which 
ive  been  furnished  to   us  by  Mr.   Arthur  H.   Blanchard,  assistant 
engineer  of  the  State  Board  of  Public  Roads,  Providence,  R.  I. 

An  old  macadam  road  at  Tiverton,  R.  I.,  was  scarified  to  a  depth 
of  3  or  4  ins.  at  a  cost  of  0.7  ct.  per  sq.  yd.  The  steam  roller  and 
scarifier  were  rented.  The  price  paid  for  the  steam  roller,  including 
fuel  and  wages  of  engineman,  was  $10  per  day  of  10  hours,  which 
is  a  reasonable  price.  The  price  paid  for  the  use  of  the  scarifier 
was  $5  a  day,  which  is  reasonable  when  due  allowance  is  made  for 
the  cost  of  sharpening  its  teeth.  Two  laborers,  at  $2.50  each  per 


* Engineering-Contracting:  Oct.  28,  .1908. 


288        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

10-hour  day,   operated  the  scarifier.     Therefore  the  daily  cost  was 

as  follows: 

Per  day. 

Roller,    including   engineman $10.00 

Scarifier : 5.00 

2  laborers,  at  $2.50 5.00 

Total    $20.00 

The  average  10-hr,  day's  work  was  2,738  sq.  yds.  scarified,  hence 
the  cost  per  square  yard  was: 

Cts.,  per  sq.  yd. 

Roller,  including  engineman $0.36 

Scarifier    0.18 

Laborers 0.18 

Total    $0.72 

It  may  be  well  to  add  that  the  practice  of  using  "picks"  in  the 
rear  wheels  of  a  steam  roller  is  not  to  be  commended,  for  the  re- 
sulting shocks  to  the  whole  machine,  and  particularly  to  the  boiler, 
are  injurious.  Boiler  tubes  quickly  become  loosened  and  leak 
badly  under  this  severe  service,  if  the  picks  are  used  in  the  roller 
for  a  considerable  length  of  time. 

Cost  of  Resurfacing  Old  Limestone  Macadam. — The  data  were 
taken  from  my  time  books  and  can  be  relied  upon  as  being  well 
within  the  probable  cost  of  similar  work  done  by  contract  under 
a  good  foreman.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  operating  the 
roller  is  estimated  at  $10  per  day.  This  includes  interest  and  de- 
preciation, as  well  as  fuel  and  engineman's  wages. 

The  road  was  worn  unevenly,  but  as  it  still  had  sufficient  metal 
left,  very  little  new  metal  was  added. 

The  roller  used  was  a  12-ton  Buffalo  Pitts,  provided  with  steel 
picks  on  the  rear  wheels.  It  required  80  hours  of  rolling  with  the 
picks  in  to  break  up  the  crust  of  a  surface  19,400  sq.  yds.  in  area, 
2,400  sq.  yds.  being  loosened  per  10-hr,  day.  The  crust  was  ex- 
ceedingly hard  and  at  times  the  picks  rode  upon  the  surface  with- 
out sinking  in,  so  that  a  lighter  roller  would  probably  have  been  far 
less  efficient.  In  fact  a  10-ton  roller  had  been  used  a  few  years 
previous  for  the  same  purpose  at  more  than  double  the  expense  per 
sq.  yd.,  I  am  told.  The  picks  simply  open  up  cracks  in  the  crust  to  a 
depth  of  about  4  ins.  and  it  is  necessary  to  follow  the  roller  with  a 
gang  of  laborers  using  hand  picks  to  complete  the  loosening  process. 
The  labor  of  loosening  and  spreading  anew  the  metal  was  1,880  man- 
hours,  or  a  trifle  more  than  10  sq.  yds.  per  man-hour.  About  60% 
of  this  time  was  spent  in  picking  and  40%  in  respreading  with 
shovels  and  potato  hooks. 

After  the  material  had  been  respread,  a  short  section  was 
drenched  with  a  sprinkling  cart,  water  being  put  on  in  such  abun- 
dance that  when  the  roller  came  upon  the  metal,  the  screenings 
which  had  settled  to  the  bottom  in  the  spreading  process  were 
floated  up  into  the  interstices.  The  roller  and  sprinkling  cart  were 
engaged  only  63  hours  in  this  process,  3,000  sq.  yds.  being  rolled  per 
10-hr,  day  ;  an  exceptionally  fast  rate.  The  rapidity  of  rolling  was 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  289 

due  to  four  factors :  1.  The  great  abundance  of  water  used,  the 
water  haul  being  very  short.  2.  The  unyielding  foundation  (Tel- 
ford)  beneath.  3.  The  abundance  of  screenings  and  fine  dust,  the 
road  not  having  been  swept  for  some  time.  4.  The  great  weight  of 
the  roller,  which  was  run  at  a  high  rate  of  speed.  I  am  not  pre- 
pared to  say  that  longer  rolling  would  not  have  secured  a  harder 
surface,  but  I  doubt  very  much  whether  it  would.  The  metal,  I 
should  add,  was  hard  limestone.  .  Summing  up  we  find  the  cost 
of  resurfacing  this  road  per  sq.  yd.  to  have  been  as  follows: 

Cts.,  per  sq.  yd. 

Picking  with  roller,  at  $1  per  hour 0.40 

Picking  by  hand  labor  at  20  cts.  per  hour 1.20 

Respreading  by  hand  labor,  at  20  cts.  per  hour.  .  . .  0.80 

Rolling  with  roller,  at  $1   per  hour 0.33 

Sprinkling  with  cart,  at  40  cts.  per  hour 0.13 

Foreman,  143  hours,  at  30  cts.,  for  19,400  sq.  yds..  0.44 

Total     3.30 

At  this  rate  a  macadam  road  16  ft.  wide  can  be  resurfaced  for 
little  more  than  $300  a  mile.  The  frequency  with  which  such  re- 
surfacing is  necessary  will,  of  course,  depend  upon  several  factors, 
chief  of  which  are  the  amount  of  traffic  and  the  quality  of  road 
metal.  I  should  say  that  five  years  would  not  be  far  from  the 
average  for  a  country  road  built  of  hard  limestone.  Unless  the 
road  has  had  an  excess  of  metal  used  in  its  construction,  new 
metal  should  be  added  at  the  time  of  resurfacing  to  replace  that 
worn  out. 

I  am  unable  to  see  how  any  system  of  continuous  repair,  with  its 
puttering  work  here  and  there,  can  be  as  economical  as  work  done 
in  the  manner  above  described.  I  would  not  be  understood,  however, 
as  favoring  an  entire  neglect  of  the  road  between  repair  periods.  At 
times  of  heavy  rains  and  snows,  ditches  and  culverts  need  atten- 
tion and  there  should  be  someone  whose  duty  it  is  to  look  after  such 
matters.  What  I  do  question  is  the  economy  of  having  a  man  con- 
tinuously at  work  putting  in  patches  upon  the  road. 

Low  as  the  above  costs  are,  much  lower  costs  are  attainable,  using 
a  scarifier,  as  previously  described,  or  using  a  harrow,  as  described 
In  the  next  paragraph. 

Cost  of  Repairing  Sandstone  Macadam,  Albion,  N.  Y — Using  the 
method  that  I  am  about  to  describe,  Mr.  P.  J.  Stock  succeeded  in 
picking,  resurfacing  and  rolling  a  stretch  of  sandstone  macadam 
18  ft.  wide  by  1,000  ft.  long  in  two  10-hr,  days;  one  day  in  spiking 
up  the  old  surface  with  the  picks  in  the  steam  roller  and  one  day 
in  rerolling.  As  the  surface  was  loosened  to  a  depth  of  about  4  ins., 
it  will  be  seen  that  over  200  cu.  yds.,  or  1,800  sq.  yds.,  of  macadam 
were  compacted  by  the  15-ton  roller  h?  10  hrs.  The  point  to  which 
I  wish  to  call  attention  is  not  so  much  the  extraordinary  rapidity 
of  the  rolling  as  the  very  ingenious  method  devised  by  Mr.  Stock  for 
completing  the  loosening  of  the  macadam  after  cracking 'it  up  with 
i  the  roller  spikes.  For  this  purpose  Mr.  Stock  built  a  heavy  harrow, 


290 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


similar  to  those  used  on  farms,  Fig.  4,  showing  its  detail  design. 
By  turning  the  harrow  upside  down  it  rides  on  the  runners  shown  in 
the  figure,  and  is  thus  transported  when  not  in  use.  A  heavy  team 
of  horses  is  used  to  drag  the  sharp-pointed  harrow  over  the  ma- 
cadam after  it  has  been  loosened  as  much  as  possible  with  the 
spikes  of  the  steam  roller.  The  spikes  in  the  harrow  not  only  corn- 


Side      Elevcx+ion. 
Fig.  4.     Harrow  for  Scarifying. 


plete  the  breaking-up  of  the  crust  as  well  as  could  be  done  by  men 
using  picks,  but  in  addition  the  spikes  spread  the  loosened  stone, 
filling  up  all  low  places. 

The  total  cost  of  resurfacing  was : 

Cts.,  per  sq.  yd. 

Roller  and  engineer  at  $1  per  hour  picking 0.5 

Roller  and  engineer  at  $1  per  hour  re-rolling 0.5 

Sprinkling,  with  cart,  40  cts.  an  hour   (1  day) 0.2 

Harrowing,  team  and  driver  30  cts.  an  hr.   (2  days)    0.3 

Total    1.5 

At  this  rate  a  macadam  road  16  ft.  wide  and  a  mile  long  can  be 
resurfaced  for  less  than   $140.     The  cost  of  resurfacing  has,  there- 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.,  291 

fore,  been  only  $30  per  mile  per  annum,  since  resurfacing  has  been 
necessary  only  once  every  5  yrs. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  picking  (with  roller)  and  harrow- 
ing was  0.8  ct.  per  sq.  yd. 

In  addition  to  the  labor  item  there  were  some  75  cu.  yds.  of 
stone  furnished,  which  it  was  estimated  would  bring  the  road  up  to 
its  original  crown.  The  stone  cost  about  $60,  delivered,  and  was 
spread  by  two  men  in  two  days  at  a  cost  of  $6.  By  using  a  "leveler" 
the  item  of  spreading  could  have  been  reduced  to  $1.50. 

For  new  materials  we  have,  therefore,  a  trifle  over  $60  per  mile 
per  annum,  making  a  total  of  about  $90  per  mile  per  annum  for 
labor  and  material  for  resurfacing  a  Medina  sandstone  road.  Of 
course,  the  loss  of  material  by  wear  was  not  accurately  measured, 
but  it  was  less  rather  than  more  than  the  amount  put  on  for 
repairs.  At  this  rate,  the  annual  vertical  wear  was  about  0.2-in. 
over  the  whole  surface. 

This  was  a  main  traveled  street,  where  farmers'  teams  enter  the 
village. 

Cost  of  Resurfacing  Macadam  and  Data  on  Compression  of 
Broken  Stone. — Mr.  F.  G.  Cudworth  gives  the  following  data.  An 
old  macadam  road  was  resurfaced  with  trap  rock  to  the  depth  of  3 
ins.  after  rolling  with  a  10-ton  steam  roller.  It  required  3.9  ins.  .of 
loose  trap  and  2.1  ins.  of  screenings  to  make  the  3  ins.  of  compacted 
macadam,  according  to  Mr.  Cudworth,  but  there  must  have  been  an 
error  in  his  estimate  of  the  final  thickness  of  the  resurfacing  (and 
it  is  a  very  easy  matter  to-  err  in  measuring  rolled  macadam). 
Possibly  he  did  not  measure  the  thickness  of  loose  screenings  left 
on  the  macadam,  for  2.1  ins.  of  screenings  is  more  than  sufficient 
to  fill  the  voids  in  3  ins.  of  compacted  stone.  The  steam  roller  aver- 
aged 472  sq.  yds.  or  40  cu.  yds.  of  macadam  per  10  hrs.,  at  a  cost 
of  2%  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  rolling  and  sprinkling.  The  cost  of  rolling 
.  and  sprinkling  was  distributed  as  follows,  and  it  should  be  noted 
that  it  does  not  include  any  allowance  for  rent  of  roller.  On  the 
other  hand  it  is  rare  that  a  fireman  is  employed  in  addition  to  the 
engineman,  and  it  is  not  always  that  the  full  wages  of  a  night 
watchman  are  charged  to  the  roller : 

Engineman   $   3.00 

Fireman 1.50 

Coal  and  oil 4.00 

Sprinkler    3.00 

Watchman     1.50     , 

Total  per  day $13.00 

The  total  cost  of  resurfacing  was  as  follows,  not  including  cost 
of  stone : 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Scraping  and  sweeping   2.00 

Picking  up  old  surface 1.50 

Spreading  stone    2.00 

Rolling  and  sprinkling 2.77 

Total  per  sq.  yd 8.27 

As  will  be  seen  by  comparison  with  data  previously  given,  this 


292        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

cost  of  8.27  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  is  inordinately  high,  and  shows  both  lack 
of  good  management  and  of  knowledge  of  how  to  do  such  work 
economically. 

Mr.  W.  C.  Foster  gives  the  following  data :  It  was  found  that 
7.38  ins.  of  loose  trap  rock  on  an  old  macadam  pavement  were 
rolled  down  to  a  thickness  of  6  ins.  under  a  12-ton  roller,  a  ratio 
of  1^4  cu.  yds.  of  loose  stone  to  1  cu.  yd.  rolled.  It  was  found  in 
another  case  that  5.67  ins.  of  loose  trap  were  rolled  down  to  4  ins., 
a  ratio  1.42  to  1.  The  stone  in  both  cases  was  trap,  1%  to  2^4-in. 
size.  It  was  found  that  1  cu.  yd.  of  blue  limestone  screenings,  suf- 
ficient to  cover  the  rolled  trap  to  a  depth  of  1.7  ins.  over  21  sq.  yds., 
was  sufficient  to  bind  21  sq.  yds.  of  4-in.  or  6-in.  macadam.  The 
loose  stone  and  the  screenings  were  measured  in  cars.  I  do  not 
think  that  5.67  ins.  of  loose  trap  can  possibly  be  rolled  down  to 
4  ins.,  furthermore  I  am  sure  that  it  takes  more  screenings  to 
bind  a  6-in.  macadam  than  a  4-in.  macadam.  Mr.  Foster  says  that 
in  this  work  a  12-ton  roller  averaged  314  sq.  yds.,  or  52  cu.  yds.,  of 
6-in.  macadam  per  10-hr,  day. 

Cost  of  Repairing  Macadam  in  Ireland.  —In  Engineering-Contract- 
ing, Sept.  2,  1908,  there  is  an  excellent  article  on  the  methods  of 
scarifying  and  rolling  macadam  roads  in  Ireland,  also  some  costs,  by 
Mr.  E.  A.  Hackett.  A  brief  abstract  of  the  costs  is  as  follows : 

Common  laborers,  per  day ?0.52 

Foremen,  per  week 6.00 

One  horse  cart  and  driver,  per  day 1.25 

Engineman  on   roller,   per  day 1.25 

Flagman  and  timekeeper,  per  day 0.87 

Coal  costs  $5.50  per  long  ton  at  the  railway  station,  and  a  15-ton 
roller  consumes  one-third  ton  per  day. 

Mr.  Hackett  states  that  in  Tipperary  county  there  are  1,500 
miles  of  macadam  roads,  of  which  300  miles  are  main  roads.  The 
population  is  90,000,  and  the  area  of  the  county  is  1,000  sq.  miles. 
The  traffic  is  not  severe,  practically  all  in  one  horse  carts  carrying 
loads  of  1  to  1  %  tons  on  a  pair  of  wheels. 

From  his  data  it  can  be"  deduced  that  the  cost  of  repairing  a 
macadam  road  16  ft.  wide  is  about  $260  per  mile  per  annum,  there 
being  0.12  cu.  yd.  of  broken  stone  used  per  sq.  yd.  of  road  for  each 
resurfacing  every  five  years,  which  is  equivalent  to  1,120  cu.  yds.  of 
stone  per  mile  every  five  years,  or  224  cu.  yds.  per  mile  per  annum. 
Since  the  steam  roller  averaged  about  50  cu.  yds.  of  loose  stone 
compacted  per  day,  it  is  a  simple  matter  to  estimate  the  cost  of 
such  repairs  under  American  conditions  as  to  wages. 

All  the  stone  was  quarried  and  broken  by  hand,  and  the  following 
was  the  cost  per  cu.  yd.  loose  measure,  wages  being  as  above  given: 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Surface  damage  to  quarries $0.04 

g uarrying  and  breaking 0.46 
auling    0.15 

Spreading,  watering  and  sweeping 0.12 

Recarting  stones,  removing  scarified  materials.  ...    0.10 

Rolling   0.17 

Contingencies  and  profit 0.10 

Total     .  11.14 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  293 

It  is  noteworthy  that,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  wages  were  about 
one-third  what  they  are  in  America,  the  unit  cost  of  this  work  is 
almost  as  great  as  it  is  in  America. 

Mr.  Hackett  is  strongly  in  favor  of  this  intermittent  system  of 
repairs,  instead  of  the  old  continuous  or  "patching  system."  He  is 
also  in  favor  of  a  15-ton  roller,  and  states  that  it  will  do  50%  more 
work  than  a  10-ton  roller,  due  to  its  wider  tires. 

Cost  of  Maintaining  Macadam  Roads,  Massachusetts. — The  an- 
nual reports  of  the  Massachusetts  Highway  Commission  show  that 
the  cost  of  "ordinary  repairs"  of  macadam  roads,  whose  age  ranges 
from  1  to  15  years,  averages  about  $100  per  mile  per  year,  excluding 
the  cost  of  resurfacing.  A  small  per  cent  of  the  macadam  roads  are 
now  being  resurfaced  annually,  this  work  being  classed  as  ex- 
traordinary repairs.  From  data  thus  far  obtained  it  is  estimated 
that  the  maximum  cost  of  all  repairs — ordinary  and  extraordinary — 
will  not  exceed  $200  per  mile,  unless  the  destruction  occasioned  by 
automobiles  shall  materially  increase  the  cost  of  maintenance.  The 
standard  Massachusetts  road  is  macadamized  15  ft.  wide. 

Cost  of  Repairing  Macadam  in  Massachusetts. — Che  repairing  on 
550  miles  of  macadam  roads  averaged  less  than  $100  per  mile  for 
the  year  1904,  although  the  first  of  these  roads  was  10  years  old. 
But  this  does  not  include  any  general  resurfacing. 

In  the  report  for  1902  data  on  the  cost  of  repairing  three  heavily 
traveled  roads  leading  into  cities  are  given. 


Road. 

Leicester 
West  Fit 
Beverly 

None  of  these  roads  had  been  repaired  since  the  day  it  was  built. 
The  Leicester  road  leads  into  Worcester,  and  is  much  more  heavily 
traveled  than  ordinary  country  roads. 

During  1905  the  commission  caused  to  be  repaired  580.7  miles  of 
roads,  the  average  cost  being  $96.07  per  mile. 

A  total  of  IS1/^  miles  of  road  was  resurfaced  with  broken  stone; 
the  cost  of  doing  this  is  shown  in  the  table  below. 

In  Table  III  it  is  assumed  that  a  cubic  yard  of  stone  weighs  1*4 
tons,  and  that  the  loose  broken  stone  shrinks  33  per  cent  under  the 
compacting  force  of  the  roller. 

The  high  rate  of  wear  shown  in  Auburn  and  Hadley  is  due  to 
strengthening  the  road,  when  resurfacing,  by  an  increased  depth  of 
broken  stone ;  the  high  rate  of  wear  in  Quincy  and  Chelsea  is  due 
to  heavy  traffic ;  in  Sturbridge,  to  a  poor  grade  of  stone  used  in 
i  the  original  construction.  In  the  case  of  Marion  and  Rochester, 
the  original  road  was  macadamized  by  those  towns  in  1896.  In 
Haaiey,  $932  was  used  for  side  drains  and  in  strengthening  the  road. 


Age, 
yrs. 
6 

Length. 
3,150 

Width. 

24 

Per  sq. 
yd.  per 
year,  cts. 
5.17 

Tons 
stone  per 
sq.  yd. 
per  yr. 
.03 

Cost 
per  ton 
in  place. 
$1  70 

chburg..   7 

2,200 
2,150 

15 

18 

5.15 
5.20 

.023 
.03 

2.23 
1.80 

294  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

TABLE  III.  —  COSTS  OF  RESURFACING  14  MACADAM  ROADS  DURING  1905. 


•5  ««  "S-          .Sc 

o  ^  ftft  BJ  w  o 

*  S      S-S3      *«        SH 

£  $       2*§        «~         °K 

Town  or  City.  ^  W^H          oj  g  w  ft 

i    I  I  IB  S  ji 

Auburn*    ........   '95-6-7  10,168  15  .03  5.62  $149 

Chicopeef    .......    '97-8-9  3,550  15  .02  4.40  2.04 

Chelseat    ........   '01  3,053  24  .11  18.32  1  60 

Beverlyt   .........   '95  3,025  18  .01  3.22  2.09 

Great  Barringtonf  '94-6  9,368  15  .01  247  2  24 

Hadleyt    .........   '94  2,788  15  .04  9.29  l'?8 

Marion*  ..........    '93  782  15  .01  2.98  1.75 

North   Adamsj...   '94-6  9,000  15  .01  2.90  2.09 

Pittsfleldt   .......   '94-8  6,842  15  .01  2.31  2.14 

Sturbridge*     ......    '97  3,094  15  .03  4.85  1.50 

Quincyf    .........   '99  2,606  30  .03  7.09  2.20 

Rochester*    ......    '03  3,345  15  .02  4.17  1.75 

Townsendt     .....   '96-7-8  3,700  15  .01  3.31  1.91 

Westportt  •  ......  '94  3,015  18  .02  5.19  2.35 

•Local  stone  used. 

tTrap  rock  used. 

Cost  of  Calcium  Chloride  as  a  Dust  Preventative.*—  During:  the 
summer  of  1907,  the  U.  S.  Office  of  Public  Roads  undertook  a  series 
of  tests  to  determine  the  value  of  calcium  chloride  as  a  dust  pre- 
ventative.  These  tests  were  made  on  the  portion  of  the  macadam 
driveway  in  the  Agricultural  Department  Grounds,  in  Washington, 
D.  C. 

The  roadway  on  which  the  test  was  made  is  built  of  trap  rock, 
held  in  position  by  a  soft  limestone  binder.  The  screenings  of  this 
binder  pulverized  rapidly  under  traffic,  forming  a  light  dust  which 
passing  vehicles  continually  raised  into  the  air.  It  was  then  car- 
tied  away  by  the  wind.  In  this  way  the  road  was  becoming 
stripped  of  its  binding  material. 

In  preparation  for  the  treatment  all  dust,  and  dirt  were  scraped 
from  the  surface  of  the  roadway.  A  solution  was  prepared  by 
mixing  300  Ibs.  of  commercial  calcium  chloride  (granular,  contain- 
ing 75  per  cent  calcium  chloride  and  25  per  cent  moisture)  with 
300  gals,  of  water  in  an  ordinary  street  sprinkler,  care  being  taken 
to  agitate  the  liquid  thoroughly  before  applying  it  to  insure  a 
Uniform  solution.  It  was  then  applied  from  one  sprinkling  head,  and 
the  sprinkler  passed  slowly  back  and  forth  over  the  road  to  facilitate 
the  complete  absorption  of  the  solution.  Each  application  con- 
sisted of  600  gals,  over  an  area  of  1,582  sq.  yds.,  or  0.38  per  sq.  yd. 

The  first  application  was  made  July  13,  1907,  followed  by  a  similar 
Jne  July  15,  to  increase  the  efficacy  of  the  treatment.  The  effect 
of  the  first  two  treatments  was  marked.  No  auxiliary  sprinkling 
Was  necessary  for  some  time,  the  light  rains  falling  at  intervals 

•  Engineering-Contracting,  July  1,   1903. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  295 

supplying  all  the  moisture  required.  The  untreated  portions  of  the 
driveway  lying  parallel  to  12th  and  14th  streets,  were  sprinkled  daily 
and  vehicles  raised  a  perceptible  dust,  although  the  traffic  over  these 
wings  was  much  less  heavy  than  that  on  the  treated  portions. 

During  this  time  the  appearance  of  the  roadway  varied  per- 
ceptibly in  color  according  to  the  moisture  in  the  road  surface, 
ranging  from  a  light  gray  when  dry  to  a  peculiar  grayish  brown 
when  moist.  The  brown  shades  were  deepest  over  the  portions  trav- 
ersed by  the  wheels  of  vehicles.  The  texture  of  the  road  surface 
was  completely  changed  after  the  application  of  the  calcium  chloride. 
Before  treatment,  raveling  was  excessive  in  spots  and  the  whole 
surface  "seemed  loosely  knit  together.  After  the  application  on 
July  15  this  condition  changed  and  the  road  surface  became  smooth, 
compact  and  resilient. 

The  third  treatment  was  given  Aug.  3,  as  certain  points  exposed  to 
the  most  severe  wear  were  showing  signs  of  raveling.  The  phe- 
nomena following  this  treatment  were  not  unlike  those  attending  the 
first  set  of  applicatiohs  and  repeated  themselves  as  later  applications 
were  made,  though  no  further  treatments  were  given  until  the  con- 
dition of  the  roadway  seemed  to  demand  it.  Such  auxiliary  sprink- 
ling a?  was  necessary  consisted  in  the  application  of  about  0.2  gal. 
of  water  per  square  yard  at  a  time. 

The  accompanying  table  shows  the  cost  of  applications.  The 
calcium  was  donated  by  a  manufacturing  chemical  company  of 
Baltimore,  Md.,  and  is  charged  at  the  rate  of  $16  per  ton,  f.  o.  b. 
cars  at  Baltimore.  A  freight  charge  of  13  cts.  per  hundredweight 
is  added  to  place  the  material  on  the  ground.  This  makes  the  total 
cost  of  the  calcium  chloride  $18.60  per  ton. 

Total.     Per  sq.  yd. 

600  Ibs.  calcium  chloride $5.586          $0.00352 

3  men,    1  %    hours , 0.675  .00042 

1  horse  sprinkling  wagon,   1%  hours 0.525  .00033 

Total    (1,582   sq.   yds.) $6.~786          $0.00427 

Total  cost  of  five  applications  was  $33.90,  or  $0.0235  per  square 
yard.  Labor  was  paid  15  cts.  per  hour  and  35  cts.  per  hour  was 
paid  for  the  sprinkling  wagon. 

The  specific  gravity  of  these  solutions  ranged  from  1.053  to  1.060. 
Some  variation  was  unavoidable,  as  the  calcium  chloride  in  some  of 
the  barrels  had  absorbed  a  large  amount  of  moisture  from  the 
atmosphere.  In  such  cases  the  actual  percentage  of  the  chemical  to 
300  Ibs.  was  less  than  where  little  or  no  moisture  had  been 
absorbed. 

At  the  time  of  the  last  application  several  hundred  pounds  of  the 
salt  remained  unused.  This  was  divided  as  nearly  as  possible  into 
two  parts,  to  be  applied  to  the  two  wings  of  the  driveway  lying 
parallel  to  12th  and  14th  streets.  The  east  wing  received  a  treat- 
ment of  0.28  gal.  per  sq.  yd.  of  a  solution  the  specific  gravity  of 
which  was  1.145  and  the  west  wing  a  similar  application  of  a  solu- 
tion having  a  specific  gravity  of  1.121.  No  further  sprinkling  was 


296  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

found  necessary  for  the  remainder  of  the  season  upon  \hese  branches 
of  the  main  driveway. 

Cost  of  Tarring  Macadam,  Michigan.* — Mr.  Charles  R.  Wright- 
man  gives  the  following  relative  to  16,620  sq.  yds.  of  work  done  in 
Eouth  Haven,  Mich. 

The  local  gas  company  furnished  the  tar.  The  plant  consisted  of 
a  roofer's  tar  kettle  which  held  about  150  gals,  of  tar;  six  gal- 
vanized sprinkling  cans,  each  of  which  held  14  quarts;  the 
sprinklers-  were  removed  and  a  flat  spout  with  %-in.  opening  6  ins. 
long,  put  in  place  of  the  sprinklers ;  one  dozen  fiber  stable  brooms. 

The  kettle  was  set  up  about  midway  in  the  first  block  of  Center 
street,  which  was  a  new  macadam  street,  50  ft.  wide,  from  which 
travel  had  been  excluded,  and  which  had  been  allowed  ten  days 
to  dry. 

Two  barrels  of  tar  were  placed  in  the  kettle  and  brought  to  the 
boiling  point,  then  it  was  drawn  into  the  sprinklers,  Fig.  5,  two 
of  which  were  carried  by  each  of  three  men  and  poured  with  a 


Fig.  5.     Tar  Spreader  and  Curb  Protector. 

sweeping  motion  from  side  to  side,  each  man  covering  about  one- 
third  of  the  width  of  the  street,  thus  carrying  a  straight  face  of  tar 
up  the  street.  Working  on  the  tarred  surface  and  closely  following 
the  sprinklers,  was  a  man  with  a  fiber  broom  who  smoothed  out  the 
thick  spots  and  rubbed  the  tar  in  wherever  dust  or  depression  pre- 
vented a  good  contact.  Immediately  following,  came  two  men,  who 
with  scoops,  uniformly  covered  the  tar  with  limestone  screenings  or 
"crushed  stone  sand"  to  the  depth  of  from  %  in.  to  %  in.,  which 
was  then  immediately  rolled  with  a  10-ton  steam  roller  (weight  not 
essential),  and  the  street  then  thrown  open  to  traffic. 

The  results  of  this  work  are  that  the  street  Is  free  from  stone 
dust  and  is  dry  in  an  incredibly  short  time  after  rains,  and  I  have 

• Engineering-Contracting,  May   8,   1907. 


ROADS,   PArEMENTS,    WALKS.  297 

noticed  that  snow  melts  and  runs  off  much  faster  than  it  does  on 
brick  streets  and  that  a  few  hours  of  thaw  clears  the  street  so  there 
is  nothing  to  freeze  when  night  and  a  lower  temperature  conies  on. 
We  now  treat  the  macadam  before  throwing  it  open  to  traffic,  as  we 
found  on  Dyckman  avenue,  which  had  been  in  use  about  three 
months,  that  the  mud  and  dirt  interfered  seriously  and  we  did  not 
get  as  good  adhesions  on  this  etreet.  In  this  case  the  surface  was 
first  swept  clean  with  steel  brooms  and  all  spots  of  scale  or  drop- 
pings, scraped  off  with  a  scraper  made  by  straightening  the  shank 
of  a  garden  hoe  until  the  blade  was  in  line  with  the  handle.  While 
it  was  a  decided  improvement  to  this  street,  the  results  were  not 
as  satisfactory  as  on  the  new  surfaces,  and,  if  possible,  I  would 
break  up  and  remetal  a  street  before  applying  tar. 

In  heating,  we  found  it  best  to  put  tar  into  the  kettle  with  buckets 
about  as  fast  as  it  was  drawn  off  into  the  spreading  cans,  thus  doing 
away  with  the  necessity  of  spreaders  waiting  for  "hot  stuff."  The 
kettle  should  be  on  wheels  so  that  it  could  be  moved  without 
drawing  off  'the  tar  and  extinguishing  the  fires,  as  was  necessary 
with  the  kettle  which  we  used. 

On  about  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  the  work,  torpedo  sand  was  used  for 
surfacing  in  place  of  limestone  screenings.  The  results  were  favor- 
able but  not  as  satisfactory  as  when  screenings  were  used,  it  being 
found  that  it  was  very  hard  to  get  the  sand  dry  enough  properly 
to  take  up  the  free  tar  ;  but  I  believe  if  good,  sharp  torpedo  sand, 
free  from  moisture,  could  be  obtained,  the  results  would  be  satis- 
factory. 

The  unrefined  tar  which  was  used  on  this  work  is  a  very  active 
irritant  and  will  draw  a  blister  in  short  order.  In  order  to  obviate 
this,  men  handling  'tar  should  keep  their  hands  and  faces  well 
smeared  with  fresh  lard.  On  the  above  work,  we  used  about 
15  Ibs. 

In  order  to  keep  from  smearing  the  curb  stone  with  tar,  I  had 
made  two  sheet  iron  guards,  Fig.  5,  taking  a  piece  of  heavy  gal- 
vanized iron,  16  ins.  wide  and  8  ft.  long,  bent  in  the  middle  to  a 
right  angle  and  provided  with  a  strap  handle  on  top.  This  was  laid 
on  the  curb  with  one  leg  of  the  angle  perpendicular  and  against 
the  face  of  the  curb,  the  other  lying  on  and  projecting  over  the  top. 
The  spreaders  moved  it  along  each  time  a  can  full  of  tar  was 
spread.  This  eliminated  the  unsightly  splotches. 

Some  judgment  has  to  be  exercised  on  the  work  of  spreading  tar. 
Apply  more  where  the  surface  is  open  or  not  "puttied,"  and  less 
where  surface  is  hard  and  close.  Good  intelligent  men  should  be 
employed  as  spreaders  as  much  of  the  economy  in  tar  is  dependent 
on  them.  Too  much  screenings  is  preferable  to  too  little,  and,  after 
rolling,  the  surplus  may  be  swept  up  and  used  again. 

A  close  watch  must  be  kept  on  the  kettle  as  unrefined  tar  is 
highly  inflammable,  and,  after  it  starts  to  boil,  will  climb  over  the 
top  of  the  kettle  very  quickly.  In  case  of  fire,  sand  should  be 
thrown  into  the  kettle  until  the  fire  is  smothered. 


208  HANDBOOK   OP    COST  DATA. 

The  gang  was  as  follows  per  day  of   10  hrs. : 

Per  day. 

1  kettleman    (acts  as  foreman) $  2.25 

2  barrel  men,   at   $2.25 4.50 

3  men  sprinkling  tar,   at  $2.25 6.75 

1  man   brooming  tar,  at   $1.75 1.75 

2  men   spreading  screenings,    at    $1.75 3.50 

1  team  hauling  tar  and  screenings 3.50 

Total     $22.25 

The  team  hauled  tar,  wood  and  screenings  and  moved  kettle  from 
place  to  place.  At  times  it  became  necessary  to  put  on  an  extra 
team  to  keep  the  work  supplied  with  screenings,  but  ordinarily  one 
team  took  care  of  the  whole  work. 

This  gang  averaged  about  1,500  sq.  yds.  (700  gals,  tar)  per  day, 
and  the  cost  was  as  follows  : 

Labor:  Per  sq.  yd. 

Kettleman     $0.0015 

Barrelmen   0.0030 

Men  sprinkling  tar 0.0045 

Man  brooming  tar 0.0012 

Men    spreading    screenings 0.0023 

Team 0.0023 

Total  labor   $0.0148 

Materials: 

0.466  gals,   tar,   at   3   cts $0.0140 

0.0175  cu.  yd.  screenings,  at  90  cts 0.0158 


Total    materials     $0.0298 

Grand   total    $0.0446 

In  addition  to  the  above,  the  city  roller  was  used  a  total  of 
15  hrs.,  and,  if  we  assume  $1  per  hr.  for  the  roller,  the  cost  of 
rolling  was  less  than  0.1  ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  which,  added  to  the  above 
4.5  cts.,  gives  a  total  of  4.6  cts. 

With  a  portable  kettle,  a  saving  of  20  per  cent  on  labor  would 
have  been  effected,  by  doing  away  with  the  time  lost  by  all  hands 
in  moving  the  kettle. 

Being  so  well  pleased  with  tar  on  macadam,  Mayor  C.  E.  Abell 
authorized  an  experiment  on  clay.  Accordingly,  Chambers  street, 
which  is  a  porous  yellow  clay  street,  having  a  width  of  40  ft.  be- 
tween wood  curbs,  was  shaped  up  with  a  road  grader,  making  a 
crown  of  about  20  ins.  and  rolled  with  the  10-ton  steam  roller.  Tar 
and  screenings  were  applied  in  the  same  manner  as  on  the  macadam 
streets,  and  the  results  have  been  surprising.  This  street,  which  has 
been  practically  impassable  every  spring  and  fall,  is  now  perfectly 
dry  and  smooth,  and  a  passerby  would  suppose  it  was  macadamized. 
In  two  or  three  places  where  light,  uncompacted  dust  was  on  the 
surface,  the  tar  and  stone  covering  has  been  broken,  but  otherwise 
it  is  in  perfect  condition,  shedding  the  water  nicely,  and  bids  fair 
to  be  a  good  hard  road  for  some  time.  The  cost  of  the  tar  and  stone 
was  practically  the  same  as  on  macadam,  but  in  doing  this  work,  we 
have  learned  that  the  preparation  is  the  essential  point.  The  yoad 
should  be  shaped  and  carefully  smoothed  by  rolling  and  wetting 
until  no  loose  or  dry  powdered  clay  remains ;  and,  just  the  reverse 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  299 

from  macadam  which  must  be  perfectly  dry,  the  clay  should  be 
slightly  moist,  as  the  hot  tar  on  dry,  powdered  clay  rolls  up  into 
minute  balls  and  does  not  spread  out  as  it  should  in  a  film  or  sheet. 
In  every  Instance,  the  tar  should  be  as  near  the  boiling  point  as 
possible,  when  applied  to  the  street. 

Cost  of  Tarring  Macadam,  Massachusetts.* — The  following  data 
relate  to  some  experimental  road  treatments  made  last  year  by 
the  Metropolitan  Park  Commission  on  roadways  at  Revere  Beach 
Parkway,  Massachusetts.  The  experiments  were  made  with  a  spe- 
cially prepared  coal  tar  known  as  Tarvia,  and  a  total  length  of 
3  %  miles  of  roadway  was  treated  with  this  material,  the  work  being 
done  by  day  labor  under  the  supervision  of  the  Engineering  Depart- 
ment of  the  commission.  The  work  was  begun  Aug.  25,  1906,  and 
was  completed  Sept.  29,  a  total  of  67,434  sq.  yds.  of  roadway  having 
been  treated  at  a  cost  of  $4,494. 

The  force  employed  consisted  of  one  foreman  and  seven  laborers. 
A  street  sweeper,  a  sand  sprinkler,  a  double  team  and  one  steam 
roller  were  used  in  the  work. 

The  Tarvia  was  delivered  in  tank  wagons,  and  the  cost  of  hauling 
same  was  paid  by  the  commission.  The  same  men  were  used  for 
the  various  operations  of  cleaning  the  road,  spreading  the  Tarvia 
and  covering  with  screenings.  The  detailed  costs  of  the  work  are 
given  by  Mr.  John  R.  Rablin  as  follows: 

Materials:  Per  sq.  yd. 

Tarvia,   0.4   gals .- $0.0262 

Stone  screenings,    0.015   tons 0.0184 

Total  materials    $0.0446 

Labor: 

Preparing   roadway    $0.0086 

Applying  Tarvia    0.0057 

Applying   screenings 0.0062 

Rolling    0.0047 


Total     $0.0252 

Grand    total    $0.0698 

Thus  a  new  smooth  surface  was  formed  over  the  bare  stone,  which 
seems  to  be  holding  well ;  the  dust  nuisance  was  abated,  and  in 
time  of  wet  weather  the  roadways  were  entirely  free  from  mud. 
Regarding  the  permanency  of  the  results  obtained  Mr.  Rablin  writes 
us  that  the  work  which  was  done  last  fall  has  proved  very  satis- 
factory, and  the  commission  is  now  treating  other  roads.  In  a  sub- 
sequent issue  if  Engineering-Contracting  (Dec.  18,  1907),  Mr.  Rablin 
states  that  about  half  of  the  above  yardage  was  treated  again  with 
Tarvia,  due  to  the  fact  that  it  had  begun  to  show  signs  of  wear. 

In  1907,  about  90,000  additional  sq.  yds.  of  roadway  were  treated 
with  Tarvia,  the  average  cost  being  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Tarvia,  0.45   gal $0.0316 

Stone   screenings,   0.016   tons 0.0219 

Labor    .  ...    0.0196 


Total     $0.07.°,! 

> Engineering-Contracting,  June  12,   1907. 


300  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DAT. I. 

The  organization  and  wages  were  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

1   foreman     $   2.75 

1  double  team    (2   horses  and  driver) 5.00 

1  single  team    (1  horse  and  driver) 3.50 

7  laborers  cleaning  road,  at  $2 14.00 

5  laborers  spreading  tar,   at  $2 10.00 

3  laborers   spreading   screenings,   at   $2 6.00 

Total     $41.25 

1   steam  roller,   assumed  at 10.00 

Total     $51.25 

I  have  assumed  the  $10  daily  rate  for  the  steam  roller  (includ- 
ing coal,  engineman,  etc.),  for  Mr.  Rablin  does  not  state  its  rate. 

Since  the  average  cost  of  labor  was  1.96  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  we  infer 
that  about  2,600  sq.  yds.  were  treated  per  day,  for  $51. 25  -=-$0.0196 
=  2610.  If  this  inference  is  correct,  we  have  the  following  item- 
ized cost  of  the  labor : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Foreman     $0.0011 

Teams,    sweeping,   sprinkling  sand,   etc. 0.0033 

Laborers    cleaning    road 0.0053 

Laborers  spreading  tar 0.0038 

Laborers   spreading  screenings 0.0023 

Rolling    0.0038 

Total $0.0196 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  above  contains  no  item  for  cost  of  heating 
the  tar  nor  for  hauling  it. 

Cost  of  Tarring  Macadam,  Jackson,  Tenn.*— Mr.  Logan  Waller 
Page,  Director,  Office  of  Public  Roads,  gives  the  following  data  of 
work  done  under  Mr.  Samuel  Lancaster's  direction. 

The  macadam  streets  in  the  business  center  of  Jackson  were 
built  originally  of  the  hard  silicious  rock  known  as  novaculite. 
About  May,  1905,  after  fifteen  years  of  wear  repair  of  these  -streets 
became  necessary. 

The  old  surface  was  first  swept  clean  with  a  horse  sweeper.  This 
was  done  because  tar  will  not  penetrate  a  road  surface  which  is 
covered  with  dust  and  loose  materials. 

Next,  the  surface  was  loosened  by  means  of  spikes  placed  in  the 
wheels  of  a  10-ton  steam  roller,  the  street  reshaped,  and  new 
material  added  where  needed. 

The  road  was  then  sprinkled,  rolled,  bonded  and  finished  to  form 
a  hard,  compact,  even  surface,  and  allowed  to  dry  thoroughly  before 
either  tar  or  oil  was  applied,  for  these  substances  cannot  penetrate 
a  moist  road  surface.  The  best  results  are  obtained  when  the  work 
is  done  in  hot,  dry  weather,  and  accordingly  the  tar  was  first 
applied  in  August. 

Other  sections  of  streets  and  roads  were  built  of  new  material; 
entirely  and  according  to  well-known  principles  of  macadam  con- 
struction, but  no  tar  or  oil  was  put  on  them  until  after  they  hau 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  July  4,   1906. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  301 

been  subjected  to  traffic.  Sections  of  country  roads  which  had  been 
built  for  periods  of  from  one  to  two  years  were  also  treated  with 
tar  and  oil. 

The  tar  used  was  a  by-product  from  the  manufacture  of  coke 
and  was  practically  free  from  moisture.  It  was  received  at  the 
railway  station  in  standard  steel  tanks  of  about  8,000  gals,  capac- 
ity. A  portable  boiler  was  connected  with  the  steam  coils  of  these 
tank  cars  to  heat  the  tar  and  keep  it  hot,  thus  saving  time  in 
bringing  it  to  the  temperature  desired  for  spreading  on  the  road. 
It  was  then  taken  from  the  tank  cars  and  poured  into  a  cylindrical 
tank  wagon  of  500  gals,  capacity  by  means  of  a  hand-lever  pump. 
This  portable  tank  had  a  small  fire  box  under  one  end  with  a  flue 
running  directly  beneath  the  tank  to  a  smokestack  at  the  other  end. 
A  fire  was  kept  in  the  fire-box  and  the  tar  brought  to  a  temperature 
which  generally  reached  210°  P.,  but  when  placed  on  the  road  it 
was  reduced  to  a  temperature  of  from  160°  to  190°  F.  The  hottest 
tar  produced  the  best  results. 

A  horizontal  pipe  with  an  adjustable,  longitudinal  slot,  attached 
to  the  rear  of  the  wagon  and  extending  down  close  to  the  surface 
of  the  road,  was  first  used  to  spread  the  tar,  but  this  became 
clogged  and  did  not  give  an  even  flow.  It  was  therefore  abandoned, 
and  in  place  of  it  a  piece  of  four-ply  1^-in.  rubber  Jiose  was  at- 
tached to  the  wagon.  This  hose  had  a  nozzle  of  1-in.  pipe,  slightly 
flattened  at  the  end  to  produce  a  broad  stream,  and  was 'provided 
with  a  valve  for  controlling  the  flow.  The  tar  was  spread  with  this 
hose  over  a  radius  of  about  15  ft.  of  road  surface. 

Laborers,  with  street  cleaners'  brooms  of  bamboo  fiber,  followed 
the  tank  and  swept  the  surplus  tar  ahead.  They  spread  it  as  evenly 
and  quickly  as  possible,  and  in  a  layer  only  thick  enough  to  cover 
the  surface.  One  side  of  the  street  was  finished  at  a  time,  and  bar- 
ricades placed  to  keep  off  the  traffic  until  the  tar  had  had  time  to 
soak  into  the  surface.  The  time  allowed  for  this  process  wa.s 
varied  from  a  few  hours  to  several  days.  From  the  results  ob- 
tained it  can  be  stated  that,  under  a  hot  sun,  with  the  road  surface 
thoroughly  compact,  clean,  and  dry,  and  with  the  tar  heated  almost 
to  the  boiling  point  and  applied  as  described  above,  the  road  will 
absorb  practically  all  of  it  in  eight  or  ten  hours. 

A  light  coat  of  clean  sand,  screenings,  or  the  clean  particles  swept 
from  the  surface  of  the  road,  may  then  be  spread  as  evenly  as 
possible  and  rolled  in  with  a  steam  roller.  These  different  top 
layers  were  applied  to  various  sections,  and  in  one  case  the  road 
was  left  to  dry  without  spreading  anything  except  the  hot  tar.  In 
another  instance  sand  was  applied  to  the  tar  within  two  hours, 
which  resulted  in  the  absorption  of  the  tar  by  the  sand  and  lessened 
its  penetration  of  the  road  surface.  It  was  necessary  to  remove  this 
sand-tar  mixture,  which  peeled  up  under  traffic.  A  sufficient  amount 
of  tar,  however,  had  penetrated  the  surface  of  the  road  to  make  it 
waterproof,  and  after  more  than  seven  months  of  service  this  section 
of  street  is  in  good  condition. 

In  spreading  the  coat  of  material  for  drying  the  surface  of  the 


302        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

road  and  absorbing  the  surplus  tar,  only  enough  should  be  used  to 
cover  it  lightly,  as,  after  rolling,  this  surplus  material  will  be  washed 
or  blown  away,  or  it  may  be  removed  with  street  sweepers  and  the 
surface  left  smooth  and  clean.. 

After  more  than  seven  months,  including  the  winter  season  of 
1905-6,  the  tarred  streets  and  roads  are  still  in  excellent  condition. 
They  are  hard,  smooth  and  resemble  asphalt,  except  that  they  show 
a  more  gritty  surface.  The  tar  forms  a  part  of  the  surface  proper 
and  is  in  perfect  bond  with  the  macadam.  Sections  cut  from  the 
streets  show  that  the  tar  has  penetrated  from  1  to  2  inches,  and  the 
fine  black  lines  seen  in  the  interstices  between  the  individual  stones 
show  that  the  mechanical  bond  has  been  reinforced  by  the  pene- 
tration of  the  tar.  The  tar  is  a  matrix  into  which  the  stones  of  the 
surface  are  set,  forming  a  conglomerate  or  concrete.  A  second 
coating  applied  a  year  after  the  first  would  require  much  less  tar 
than  the  first,  as  the  interstices  of  the  rock  would  then  be  filled 
with  tar. 

On  five  different  sections,  having  a  total  of  13,235  sq.  yds.,  the 
average  cost  of  the  labor  was  about  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Labor,  sweeping,  at  $1.25  per  10-hr,  day $0.0014 

Filling   tank,    heating   tar,    and    hauling    to    the 

road    0.0012 

Labor,  applying  tar 0.0030 

Labor,  applying  sand  or  screenings 0.0030 

Total    labor    $0.0086 

The  total  labor  was,  therefore,  less  than  1  ct.  per  sq.  yd.  Negro 
labor  was  used,  at  $1.25  for  10  hrs.,  and  teams  were  paid  $3  per 
day.  The  average  quantity  of  tar  was  0.45  gal.  per  sq.  yd.  The 
labor  cost  of  heating,  hauling  and  applying  the  tar  was  0.42  ct. 
per  sq.  yd.,  as  above  given,  or  practically  1  ct  per  gal.  of  tar,  ex- 
clusive of  the  labor  of  sweeping  and  of  applying  sand ;  but,  includ- 
ing those  two  items  of  labor,  the  labor  cost  was  practically  2  cts. 
per  gal.  of  tar. 

Cost  of  Oiling  Macadam,  Jackson,  Tenn.*— Mr.  Logan  Waller 
Page  gives  the  following.  (For  comparative  data  on  tarring  ma- 
cadam  at  the  same  place  and  time,  see  page  300.) 

Seven  tank  cars  of  oil,  given  by  some  Texas  and  Louisiana  com- 
panies, were  used  at  Jackson.  It  varied  in  quality  from  a  light, 
crude  oil  to  a  heavy,  viscous  residue  from  the  refineries.  Over  7 
miles  of  country  road  and  several  city  streets  were  treated. 

At  first,  some  of  the  lighter  crude  oils  were  applied  with  the 
same  tank  wagon  that  was  used  for  the  tar.  Hose  and  broomd 
were  used  to  spread  the  oil,  and  practically  the  same  process  was 
followed  as  with  the  tar.  The  oil  soaked  into  the  macadam  very 
quickly  and  left  no  coating  on  top.  It  caused  the  light  covering 
of  sand  which  was  applied  to  pack  down  and  gave  the  road  a  darK 
color. 

^Engineering-Contracting,  July  4,  1906. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  303 

It  was  soon  noticed  that  the  preliminary  sweeping  was  unneces- 
sary, as  the  roads  were  practically  free  from  dust,  and  oil  and 
would  penetrate  the  surface.  The  removal  of  detritus  was  a  loss  to 
the  road,  which  had  to  be  replaced  by  sand  to  prevent  excessive 
wear  on  the  stone.  It  was  later  found  that  it  was  much  cheaper  to 
use  an  ordinary  street  sprinkler  than  the  tank  wagon,  and  in  this 
case  spreading  the  oil  with  brooms  was  unnecessary. 

The  crude  oil  was  used  cold,  and  the  cost  of  applying  it  with  the 
different  methods  used  is  given  below. 

On  a  city  street  8,266  sq.  yds.  were  treated  at  the  rate  of  0.48 
of  a  gal.  of  oil  per  sq.  yd.  with  the  use  of  the  tank  wagon  and 
hose.  The  cost  of  labor  per  square  yard  was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Sweeping    street     $0.0011 

Filling  tank  and  hauling 0.0008 

Oiling    street    0.0024 

Spreading    sand     0.0014 

Total     $0.0057 

On   a  country  road   2,000   gals,   were    spread,    covering   5,206    sq. 

yds.,  at  a  rate  of  0.38  of  a  gal.  per  sq.  yd.     The  average  haul  was 

1  mile.     Only  the  manure  was  removed  before  oiling.     The  cost  of 

labor  averaged  $0.0033  per  sq.  yd. 

It  took  9  men  30  mins.  to  spread  500  gals.,  or  one  tank  load,  and 

the  18-ft.  road  was  covered  at  the  rate  of   1,860   ft.  per  hour.     It 

took  28  mins.  to  fill  the  tank  with  oil. 

With  an  ordinary  street  sprinkler,  one  man  and  team  spread  one 

load   of   600    gals,    of   oil    in    15    mins.      The    sprinkler   thus   spread 

600   gals,   in   one-half  the  time  that  it  took  9  men,   with  the  tank 

wagon,  to  spread  500  gals. 

The  heavy  residual  oils  were  so  thick  when  cold  that  they  would 
not  run  through  a  2-in.  fire  hose  attached  to  the  rear  of  the  tank 
wagon,  and  it  was  necessary  to  pump  the  oil  upon  the  road.  The 
pump  with  which  the  tank  was  charged  was  used  for  this  operation. 
Only  one  tank  wagon  (500  gals.)  of  the  heavy  oil  was  applied  cold. 
It  formed  a  thick,  sticky  mass  on  the  top  of  the  road  that  rolled 
about  under  pressure  and  seemed  to  have  an  unlimited  capacity  for 
absorbing  the  sand  which  was  spread  upon  it.  The  street  had  to 
be  cleared  of  the  greater  part  of  this  mass  of  oil  and  sand  within 
a  short  time. 

After  this  experience  the  oil  was  heated  In  the  tank  car  by 
steam,  and  better  results  followed.  It  still  ran  slowly  through  the 
hose  and  nozzle,  and  it  was  found  cheaper  to  take  off  the  hose  and 
allow  the  oil  to  flow  from  the  outlet  of  the  tank  wagon  directly 
upon  the  road,  where  the  men  swept  it  over  the  surface  with 
brooms.  An  air  pump  was  tried,  to  increase  the  flow  of  the  tank 
wagon  by  pressure,  but  the  tank  was  not  tight  enough  to  prevent 
the  escape  of  air,  and  this  experiment  was  unsuccessful. 

Twenty-four  hours  after  the  application  of  the  residual  oil  it  was 
covered  with  sand  or  limestone  screenings,  and  in  four  days  it  was 


304  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

firm  enough  to  bear  traffic  without  showing  any  wheel  tracks.     It 
shed  the  water  well  in  a  violent  rain  storm. 

The  following  was  the  labor  cost  per  square  yard  of  putting 
residual  oil  on  city  streets  with  the  use  of  the  tank  wagon.  Ap- 
proximately 0.71  gal.  of  oil  was  used  per  square  yard: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Sweeping    street    $0.0010 

Heating,  loading  and  hauling 0.0017 

Oiling    street    0.0029 

Spreading  sand 0.0022 

Total     $0.0078 

Excellent  results  can  be  secured  by  the  use  of  this  heavy  residual 
oil  if  it  can  be  applied  to  the  surface  of  the  road  at  a  tempera- 
ture approaching  the  boiling  point. 

The  medium  grade  of  oil,  which  was  tried  next,  is  classed  by  the 
refiners  as  "steamer  oil."  It  was  heavy  enough  to  leave  a  slight 
coating  on  the  surface,  which  made  a  very  compact  covering  with 
the  dust  of  the  road.  Only  the  heavy  matter  was  removed  from  the 
surface  of  the  road  before  applying  the  oil.  It  was  heated  by 
steam  in  the  car,  but  was  not  hot  when  it  reached  the  road.  It 
was  not  safe  to  build  a  fire  in  the  tank  wagon,  and  the  best  road 
surface  was  obtained  where  the  oil  was  at  the  highest  temperature. 
Some  method  of  heating  the  oil  safely  on  the  road  would  greatly 
improve  the  result.  This  could  be  accomplished  with  a  steam  trac- 
tion engine  having  steam  coils  connected  with  the  tank,  the  engine 
hauling  and  heating  the  tank  while  spreading  the  oil.  Most  of 
this  oil  was  applied  with  the  street  sprinkler,  and  it  sprayed  readily 
when  hot. 

In  applying  the  greater  part  of  the  oil  on  the  country  roads  the 
following  men  and  equipment  were  used : 

Per  day. 

1  foreman   $  2.00 

6  laborers,  at   $1.25 7.50 

1  tank    wagon     3.00 

1  street  sprinkler    3.00 

2  firemen,  at  $1.50 3.00 

1  ton   coal    4.00 

Total $22.50 

This  force  spread  3  tank  wagons  and  3  sprinkler  tank  loads,  or 
3,300  gals,  per  day,  making  the  cost  0.7  ct.  per  gal.  The  6  laborers 
(negroes)  pumped  the  oil  at  the  car  and  worked  on  the  road,  It 
will  be  noted  that  it  required  about  0.6  Ib.  coal  to  heat  1  gal.  of  oil. 
No  sweeping  was  done  on  the  country  roads  except  to  remove 
manure  and  to  spread  the  oil  where  it  was  inclined  to  puddle.  No 
sand  or  other  material  was  applied  to  the  road  after  oiling. 

More  than  seven  months  have  now  elapsed  since  the  work  was 
done.  The  light  crude  oil  has  produced  little  if  any  permanent  re- 
sults. The  roads  where  it  was  applied  are  but  slightly  changed, 
and  some  dust  arises  on  them  from  traffic.  The  only  apparent  re- 
sult is  a  slightly  darker  color  on  the  "shoulders"  of  the  road,  and 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  305 

but  little  difference  can  be  noticed  between  this  and  other  sections 
of  the  road  which  were  not  treated.  This  oil  was  too  volatile  for 
the  purpose,  and  where  it  has  to  be  shipped  for  any  distance  does 
not  justify  the  expense  of  using  it. 

The  medium  "steamer  oil"  from  Texas  has  given  good  results. 
There  is  a  thin  surface  coat  of  dust  packed  down  that  protects  the 
stone  from  the  grind  and  pounding  of  traffic.  This  effect  is  very 
noticeable  in  driving  over  it.  The  harsh  grinding  noise  of  the 
wheels,  which  is  pronounced  on  the  novaculite  surface,  disappears 
at  once,  and  there  is  decided  relief  in  driving  upon  it.  It  is  prac- 
tically noiseless.  This  coating  is  perhaps  one-eighth  of  an  inch 
thick,  and  is  not  a  concrete,  but  compacted  dust,  which  is  made 
to  cohere  by  the  oil  with  which  it  is  saturated.  This  road  does  not 
wash  or  "pick  up,"  and  the  wear  on  the  rock  is  much  decreased. 

Cost  of  Oiled  Earth  Street,  Arkansas.*— Mr.  Frank  H.  Wright 
gives  the  following: 

The  street  in  question  (Helena,  Ark.)  was  about  700  ft.  long  and 
was  oiled  for  a  width  of  40  ft.  The  soil  was  a  soluble  yellow  clay, 
and  in  heavy  rainstorms  there  had  always  been  much  washing  of 
the  gutters  and  in  the  wagon  tracks  on  the  crown. 

Preparatory  to  oiling,  the  street  was  thoroughly  plowed  twice 
for  a  width  of  40  ft,  the  amount  used  for  traffic,  a  small-pointed 
Avery  plow  with  a  steel  beam  being  used.  After  plowing,  a  disc 
harrow  was  thoroughly  applied,  after  which  a  toothed  harrow  was 
used  until  the  street  was  like  ashes.  One  team  with  a  driver- 
was  used  in  this  preliminary  work,  but  a  shaker  was  used  with  the 
plow.  The  plowing  and  harrowing  consumed  about  two  days. 

The  oil  was  brought  to  the  street  by  a  team  carrying  three  5  2 -gal. 
barrels.  To  get  the  oil  from  the  tank  car  a  small  lever  pump  was 
bolted  to  the  floor  timber  of  the  car  at  the  side  of  the  tank,  and  a 
connection  made  to  the  inside  of  the  tank  by  a  siphon  made  of  2-in. 
wrought  iron  pipe  and  fittings.  The  driver  with  one  man  to  pump 
was  able  to  leave  the  street,  go  to  the  car  and  fill  the  three  barrels 
and  return  exactly  in  30  mins. 

In  applying  the  oil,  a  strip  about  15  ft.  wide  was  taken  on  each 
side  of  the  street,  the  street  not  being  closed  to  traffic,  and  three 
men,  each  equipped  with  a  2-gal.  sprinkling  can,  with  the  spra^ 
removed,  poured  the  oil  on  the  pulverized  surface.  Each  man  worked 
hi  his  own  section,  about  20  ft.  long,  the  driver  filling  the  sprinkler? 
by  pumping  from  the  barrels  with  a  tin  oil  pump. 

A  load  of  coarse  sand  was  dropped  about  every  50  ft.  on  the 
oiled  strip,  and,  during  the  absence  of  the  wagon  in  refilling  the  bar- 
rels, this  sand  was  spread  by  the  men  in  the  same  manner  that  sand 
Is  applied  over  a  newly  grouted  brick  pavement. 

After  one  side  had  been  oiled  and  sanded,  a  strip  on  the  other 
side  was  treated  in  a  like  manner,  and  the  center  strip  was  again 
plowed  and  harrowed,  having  become  compacted  by  traffic.  After 
the  center  strip  had  been  treated  the  whole  strip  was  gone  over 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   21,  1906. 


306        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

with  a  toothed  harrow,   and  was  then  oiled  and   sanded  a  second 
time,  but  was  not  harrowed  again. 

The  work  was  done  in  the  first  week  of  July  and  until  recently 
there  had  been  comparatively  little  dust  and  no  mud,  nor  had  there 
been  any  more  washing  where  formerly  it  was  excessive  after  a  hard 
rain.  There  have  been  several  hard  rains  this  summer,  one  coming 
soon  after  the  street  was  treated. 

In  applying  the  oil  it  took  the  three  men  exactly  one  hour  to 
dispose  of  the  three  52-gal.  barrels  of  oil  over  a  surface  of  15  ft.  x 
100  ft.,  or  1,500  sq.  ft.  One  man  scattered  with  a  shovel  one  wagon- 
load  of  sand  (about  24  cu.  ft.)  over  an  area  of  50  ft.  x  60  ft.,  or 
3,000  sq.  ft,  in  15  mins. 

The_  gang  was  as  follows : 

Per  day. 

1  foreman,    at    $1.50 $   1.50 

2  teams,    at    $3.00 6.00 

3  labqrers,  at   $1.25 3.75 

Total     ?11.25 

It  took  this  gang  3*4  days  to  oil  3,110  sq.  yds.,  the  cost  being  as 
follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Laborers,  at  $1.25  per  day $0.0054 

Teams,  at  $3.00  per  day 0.0068 

Foreman,  at  $1.50  per  day O.Q017 


Total    labor $0.0130 

0.8       gals,   oil,   at   3   cts 0.0241 

0.011  loads   (24  cu.  ft.)   sand  at  75  cts 0.0084 


Grand  total $0.0463 

Since  a  team  and  driver  and  one  man  to  pump  the  oil  could  pump 
and  deliver  6  bbls.,  or  312  gals,  per  hr.,  this  item  of  cost  was  0.14 
ct.  per  gal.  Since  it  took  3  men  2  hrs.  to  spread  the  6  bbls.,  or  312 
gals.,  the  cost  of  spreading  the  oil  was  0.24  ct.  per  gal.,  making  a 
total  of  0.38  ct.  per  gal.,  even  with  this  crude  way  of  spreading  the 
oil  with  2-gal.  sprinkling  cans. 

Cost  of  Oiling  Macadam,  New  York  State.*— Mr.  Arnold  G.  Chap- 
man gives  the  following  description  of  oiling  certain  New  York 
state  roads  in  1906. 

•  An  ordinary  600-gal.  steel  tank  on  wheels  was  equipped  with 
an  "oil  distributor"  or  sprinkler  of  the  kind  that  has  been  devel- 
oped in  California  for  distributing  heavy  oils.  The  characteristic 
features  of  this  type  of  sprinkler  are  that  the  oil  is  distributed 
directly  downward  upon  the  road  surface  and  that  the  width  of 
the  application  may  be  regulated  from  18  ins.  to  6  ft.,  as  can  also 
the  amount  of  oil  applied,  by  the  manipulation  of  levers  by  the  op- 
erator, who  sits  in  the  rear  of  the  tank.  From  his  position  the 
operator  can  adapt  the  flow  of  oil  both  as  to  quantity  and  width, 
as  the  condition  of  the  road  may  demand. 

To  unload  the  oil  from  the  6,000-gal.  U.  T.  L.  cars,   in  which  it 


* Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  307 

was  received,  a  diaphragm  pump  was  used,  fastened  to  the  dome 
of  the  car.  By  means  of  an  iron  chute  the  oil  was  conveyed  from 
the  pump  to  the  sprinkler  tank.  This  method  was  rather  cumber- 
some and  unhandy  and  entailed  the  loss  of  too  much  time  in  setting 
up  the  pump  and  in  unloading  the  oil,  but  it  was  the  best  and 
cheapest  available  at  that  time.  However,  it  can  be  greatly  im- 
proved upon  when  the  oiling  is  undertaken  on  more  than  an  ex- 
perimental basis. 

The  oil  used  was  that  known  as  the  Raglan  oil,  obtained  through 
the  Standard  Oil  Co.,  from  their  wells  at  Salt  Lick,  Ky.,  at  a  cost 
of  4.78  cts.  per  gal.,  f.  o.  b.  at  the  various  places  where  used.  This 
is  a  crude  oil,  being  black  and  heavy,  due  to  the  presence  of  asphalt, 
of  which  the  producers  claim  a  30%  to  35%  base.  When  cold,  the 
flow  of  oil  is  slow  and  sluggish,  but  when  warm  it  flows  with  a 
reasonable  degree  of  rapidity. 

On  the  several  sections  of  road  treated  the  methods  of  applica- 
tion varied,  some  being  sanded,  others  swept,  and  some  treated,  as 
left  by  the  traffic.  While  the  oil  was  being  applied,  traffic  was  not 
suspended,  but  the  people  chose  the  sides  of  the  road  not  oiled,  for 
a  few  days  until  the  oil  had  been  taken  up  by  the  surface  and  did 
not  have  a  tendency  to  adhere  to  the  vehicle  tires  and  to  be  thrown 
upon  the  garments  of  the  people  riding  or  on  vehicles.  From  ob- 
servation during  the  experiments  it  was  noted  that  the  best  results 
were  obtained  when  the  surface  of  the  road  was  warm  and  dry 
and  the  day  was  also  clear  and  warm. 

About  18,700  gals,  were  applied  to  8  different  macadam  and 
gravel  roads,  having  an  aggregate  of  13%  miles,  having  an  aggre- 
gate width  of  10  ft.,  making  an  average  of  about  1,400  gals,  per 
mile,  or  nearly  0.24  gals,  per  sq.  yd.  The  average  haul  was  1% 
miles. 

Ordinarily  the  gang  was  one  team  (with  driver)  and  one  laborer 
to  pump  oil  and  to  operate  the  levers  of  the  oil  distributor  when 
sprinkling.  The  average  labor  cost  per  gallon  was  as  follows,  team 
receiving  $4  per  8-hr,  day,  and  laborer,  $1.75  : 

Per  gal. 

0.006  hr.  team,    at    $0.50 $0.0030 

0.007   hr.   laborer,  at   $0.22 0.0015 


Total     $0.0045 

To  this  cost  of  approximately   %  ct.  per  gal.  should  be  added  the 
cost  of  supervision,  and  of  plant  charges. 

The   average  cost  per  sq.   yd.   was  as  follows    (excluding   super- 
vision) : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

0.24  gal.  oil,  at  4.78  cts $0.0115 

Labor,  0.24  gals,  spread,  at  0.45  ct 0.0011 

Total    $0.0126 

At  1%   cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  a  mile  of  road  10  ft.  wide  was  oiled  for 
$75, "not  including  supervision  nor  plant  charges. 

One  stretch  of  gravel  road  2.1  miles  long  and  8  ft.  wide  was  oiled 


308        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

with  3,400   gals,   in   2   days  at  the  following  cost,   although  the  oil 
was  hauled  an  average  of  2  ^  miles  : 


0.0048  hrs.   team,   at    $0.50  ....................  $0.0024 

0.0048  hrs.   pumpman,  at   $0.22  ................    0.0010 

Total     .......................  /  ..........  $0.0034 

The  cost  per  sq.  yd.  was  : 

Per  sq.  yd. 
0  26   gal.  oil,  at  4.78  cts  .......................  $0.0124 

Labor,    0.26   gal.    spread,   at   0.34   ct  ............    0.0009 

Total    ..................................  $0.0133 

The  item  of  supervision  (including  traveling  expense)  is  given  in 
none  of  the  above  summaries  of  cost,  for  it  was  exceedingly  high 
(about  0.6  ct.  per  gal.,  or  twice  what  the  actual  spreading  cost), 
due  to  the  fact  that  a  state  engineer  accompanied  the  gang  and 
traveled  from  road  to  road  at  an  expense  that  would  not  ordi- 
narily be  called  for  except  in  cases  of  experimental  work  like  this. 
Cost  of  Oiling  Macadam,  Kansas  City,  Mo.*—  Mr.  W.  H.  Dunn 
gives  the  following  relative  to  oiling  375,400  sq.  yds.  of  park  roads 
(macadam)  in  1907.  During  the  year  most  of  the  roads  were 
given  two  treatments  of  residuum  oil  from  the  Kansas  field.  The 
price  of  the  oil  was  77  cts.  per  bbl.  of  42  gals.,  or  1.84  cts.  per  gal. 
The  first  treatment  with  oil,  during  May,  June  and  July,  cost  as 
follows  : 

Per  sq.  yd. 
0.32  gal.   oil,  at  1.S4  cts  .......................  $0.0059 

Labor  and   screenings  ........................    0.0089 

Total     ..................................  $0.0148 

This  is  a  trifle  less  than  ll/2  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

The  second  oiling  was  done  in  August,  September  and  November, 
covering  260,000  sq.  yds.  in  addition  to  the  375,400  that  had  been 
oiled  in  the  early  summer,  and  the  cost  was  as  follows  : 

Per  sq.  yd. 
0.25   gal.   oil,   at   1.74    cts  ......................  $0.0044 

Supplies,    repairs   and   screenings  ..............    0.0008 

Labor     .................  .  ...................    0.0030 


Total     $0.0082 

The  limestone  screenings  formed  a  considerable  part  of  the  cost 
of  the  first  oiling,  but  a  very  small  part  of  the  cost  of  the  second 
oiling.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  two  oilings  cost  about  2%  cts.  per 
«q.  yd.  for  keeping  down  the  dust  during  the  year.  No  sprinkling 
TitJi  water  was  necessary  after  a  road  had  once  been  oiled.  Dur- 
ing the  previous  year,  the  cost  of  sprinkling  585,000  sq.  yds.  (in- 
cluding asphalt  and  creosoted  blocks)  with  water  had  been  2.4  cts. 
per  sq.  yd. 

The  methods  of  unloading  the  oil,  preparing  roadway,  spreading, 
were  as  follows : 

Two  steel  receiving  tanks,  of  8,000  gals,  capacity,  were  erected  a'. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.   22,    1908. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  309 

a  total  cost  of  $741.99,  connected  with  a  4-in.  pipe-line  from  re- 
ceiving tank  to  the  side  track,  permitting  of  unloading  tank  cars  by 
gravity,  the  receiving  tanks  being  also  established  at  such  an  ele- 
vation as  to  permit  loading  the  sprinkling  carts  by  gravity  from  the 
receiving  tanks.  Two  portable  boilers  were  purchased  at  $67.50 
each,  for  the  purpose  of  heating  the  oil  in  tanks  and  in  sprinkling 
carts.  When  the  macadam  was  absolutely  dry  and  hard,  the  entire 
surface  of  the  roadway  was  swept  clean  of  dirt  and  screenings. 
The  sweepings  were  left  along  the  edge  of  the  gutter  for  protection 
to  the  cement  work,  then  the  oil  was  applied  from  the  sprinkling- 
'carts.  To  the  regular  sprinkling-carts  was  attached  a  tin  trough, 
perforated  with  ^-in.  holes,  to  obtain  an  even  distribution  of  the  oil. 
The  entire  surface  of  the  roadway  was  then  flooded  with  oil  and 
thoroughly  broomed  in,  after  which  the  sweepings  from  the  gutter, 
with  sufficient  limestone  screenings  to  form  a  slight  dressing,  were 
cast  over  the  oil  and  thoroughly  rolled  with  a  steam  roller. 

The  organization  of  the  gang  used  in  applying  the  oil  was  simply 
teams  for  ordinary  city  sprinkling  wagons,  usually  from  three  to 
four  teams,  depending  on  the  length  of  haul  from  the  distributing 
plant,  and  from  eight  to  ten  ordinary  laborers  about  equally  divided 
between  sweeping  the  screenings  to  the  gutters  ahead  of  the  oiling 
and  spreading  the  oil  with  brooms  and  casting  the  sweepings  back 
over  the  oil  after  it  was  spread. 

Cost  of  Tar  Macadam,  Massachusetts.*— Mr.  Arthur  H.  Blanch- 
ard  gives  data  upon  which  the  following  is  based,  relative  to  experi- 
mental work  done  by  the  Massachusetts  Highway  Commission  in 
1908. 

Three  methods  of  construction  were  used,  which  may  be  termed 
(1)  the  mixing  method,  (2)  the  grouting  or  penetration  method, 
and  (3)  the  Gladwell  system. 

By  the  Mixing  Method. — With  the  exception  of  the  addition  of 
tar,  the  method  of  construction  used  was  similar  to  that  employed 
in  the  building  of  an  ordinary  macadam  road. 

After  the  subgrade  had  been  thoroughly  rolled,  the  No.  1  broken 
stone  (varying  in  size  from  1*4  to  2y2  ins.  in  their  longest  dimen- 
sions) was  spread  to  a  depth  of  6  ins.  and  rolled  to  4  ins. 

[Note. — While  the  statement  is  made  that  a  6-in.  layer  was  rolled 
to  4  ins.,  no  such  compression  as  this  is  possible.] 

Tar,  which  had  been  heated  in  an  ordinary  tar  kettle  to  the 
boiling  point,  was  then  sprinkled  on  the  rolled  surface  by  means 
of  dippers. 

The  No.  2  stone  (varying  in  size  from  %  to  1%  ins.  in  their 
longest  dimensions)  was  next  deposited  on  dumping  boards  and 
thoroughly  mixed  with  hot  tar  with  the  aid  of  rakes  and  shovels. 
This  mixture  was  applied  on  the  No.  1  course  to  a  depth  of  3  ins. 
and  rolled  to  2  ins. 

A  thin  coat  of  dust,  which  would  pass  through  %-in.  mesh  was 
then  spread  on  the  surface  and  then  rolled  into  the  No.  2  course 


'Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   7,   1908. 


310        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

to  fill  up  the  voids  and   to   provide  a   smooth   surface.      The  work 
was  carried  on  only  when  the  broken  stone  was  dry. 

The  stone  was  granite  and  hornblende  schist.  The  work  was 
done  in  May. 

Tar  from  the  Providence  Gas  Works,  and  having  a  specific  grav- 
ity of  1.25,  was  used,  and  its  cost  delivered  on  the  road  was: 

Per  bbl. 

52   gals,   tar    $2.75 

Freight,    26   miles 0.62 

Haul,  averaging  2,000  ft 013 

Barrel    0.75 

Total $4.25 

Deducting    rebate    of    $0.75    per    bbl.    and    adding 
return  freight  of  $0.19,  net   deduction .0.55 

52  gals.,  at   7.4   cts $3.70 

About  the  same  number  of  square  yards  of  6-in.  tar-macadam 
road  was  built  per  10  hr.  day  as  is  built  of  ordinary  macadam, 
namely,  233  sq.  yds.,  using  a  10-ton  steam  roller  and  the  ordinary 
macadam  gang  with  the  following  extra  men : 

Per  day. 

2  tar  men,  at  $1.75 $3.50 

3  laborers  mixing  and  placing,  at  $1.50 4.50 

Total  extra  labor,  233  sq.  yds.,  at  3.5  cts $8.00 

Therefore,  the  added  cost  of  this  6-in.  tar  macadam  over  ordi- 
nary 6-in.  macadam  was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Extra  labor    (as  above  given) $0.035 

Fuel   for   melting   tar  and   interest   and   depreci- 
ation   of   tools 0.005 

!%•   gals,   tar,   at   7.4   cts.,   delivered 0.093 

Total     $0.133 

Deduct   saving  of  water  cart  for  sprinkling    ($4 

per    day) 0.013 

Net  increased  cost  due  to  use  of  tar $0.120 

On  another  stretch  of  road  built  the  previous  year,  1.15  gals,  of 
tar  were  used  per  sq.  yd.,  but  the  cost  per  gallon  was  greater  due 
to  the  fact  that  the  barrels  were  not  returned.  The  tar  in  that 
case  was  hauled  6%  miles  at  a  cost  of  50  cts.  per  bbl.  of  tar  for 
hauling. 

The  difference  in  cost  of  the  tar-macadam  without  the  tar  on 
the  No.  1  course  and  with  that  tar  (about  1/5  gal.  per  square  yard) 
spread  on  the  No.  1  course,  was  not  appreciable.  It  is  believed  that 
the  painting  of  the  No.  1  course  with  tar  is  not  necessary.  In 
common  with  all  methods  of  construction,  with  the  single  excep- 
tion of  the  Gladwell  system,  it  is  necessary,  in  order  to  secure  a 
maximum  penetration  of  the  broken  stone  by  the  tar,  and  adequate 
incorporation  of  the  tar  in  the  macadam,  to  allow  the  No.  2  course 
to  remain  without  rolling  and  sanding  for  from  1  to  3  days,  depend- 
ing on  the  climatic  conditions.  It  was  found  to  be  inadvisable  to 
roll  the  tarred  surface  during  the  warm  part  of  the  day,  as  there 
was  a  tendency  for  the  No.  2  course  to  shift  if  the  tar  was  soft. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  311 

Tarvia-macadam  constructed  by  the  mixing  method  appeared  to 
be  a  fac-simile  of  the  tar-macadam  made  with  tar  distilled  for  3 
hours  on  the  road.  It  is  believed  that  it  is  primarily  a  question  of 
economics  whether  it  is  preferable  to  take  gas-house  coal-tar  direct 
from  the  work  and  distill  it  on  the  road,  or  purchase  distilled  coal- 
tar,  in  the  form  of  Tarvia,  for  example.  It  should  be  borne  in 
mind,  also,  that  tar  distilled  at  permanent  works  will  give  a  more 
uniform  product. 

By  the  Grouting  Method. — The  macadam  was  constructed  by 
spreading  6  ins.  of  clean,  dry  No.  1  rock  on  the  rolled  subgrade  and 
rolling  the  same  to  4  ins.  On  the  No.  1  course  was  then  spread 
2%  to  3  ins.  of  clean,  dry  No.  2  rock,  which  was  lightly  rolled.  The 
tar,  which  had  been  heated  in  the  regular  tar  kettles,  was  next 
poured  on  the  surface  of  the  No.  2  course  and  allowed  to  pene- 
trate. The  depth  of  penetration  varied  from  1  to  2%  Ins.,  de- 
pending on  the  size  of  the  stone  comprising  the  upper  course  and 
the  amount  of  rolling  the  surface  had  received.  Trap  rock  chip 
screenings  were  then  spread  to  a  depth  of  %  to  %  in.  and  thor- 
oughly rolled. 

In  the  construction  of  the  tar-macadam  by  the  grouting  or  pene- 
tration method,  the  tar  was  spread  over  the  surface  by  dippers. 
This  method  was  very  unsatisfactory,  an  unequal  application  being 
the  result.  In  order  to  procure  an  efficient  road,  more  tar  was 
applied  in  patching,  the  original  application  of  1.25  gallons  being 
thus  increased  to  1.87  gallons.  If  this  method  is  to  be  used,  pour- 
ing pots  with  fan-shaped  spouts,  or  a  fan-nozzle  connected  with  a 
hose  from  a  tank-wagon,  should  be  used,  or  preferably  a  spreading 
machine  similar  to  the  Laissailly  or  Aitken.  Even  with  a  machine 
of  the  most  approved  type,  and  with  the  stone  heated  either  be- 
fore or  after  deposition,  it  is  doubtful  if  the  tar-macadam  surface 
thus  constructed  would  be  as  uniformly  bound  together  as  when 
laid  by  the  mixing  method.  The  average  rate  of  progress  tarring 
this  section  was  389  sq.  yds.  per  day,  with  two  tar  men  ami  one 
common  laborer.  The  cost  was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

1.87  gals,  tar  delivered,  at  7.4  cts $0.138 

Labor  (2  tar  men  and  1  laborer) 0.013 

Fuel  and  plant  interest,  etc 0.005 

Total $0.156 

Deduct  saving  water  sprinkling 0.013 

Total    extra    cost    $0.143 

This  14.3  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  is  to  be  added  to  the  cost  of  ordinary  6- 
in.  macadam. 

The  grouting  method  is  particularly  applicable  to  the  resurfac- 
ing of  old  macadam,  which  can  first  be  loosened  to  a  depth  of  3  or 
4  ins.,  with  a  scarifier  (at  a  cost  of  0.7  ct.  per  sq.  yd.)  and  then 
grouted  with  about  1%  gals,  per  sq.  yd.  and  rolled. 

By  the  Gladwell  System. — In  the  construction  of  tar-macadam 
by  the  Gladwell  system,  the  bituminous  mastic,  consisting  of  tar 
and  stone  chips  varying  in  size  from  .  %  to  %  in.  in  their  longest 


312  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

dimensions,  was  mixed  in  a  regular  mortar  box.  This  mixture  was 
spread  to  a  depth  of  %  in.  on  the  No.  1  course  of  stone,  and  the 
No.  2  course  of  broken  stone  was  then  laid  upon  it.  A  coating  of 
tar  was  spread  on  the  surface,  and,  after  screenings  had  been 
applied,  the  section  was  thoroughly  rolled  with  a  steam  roller.  The 
upward  penetration  of  the  tar  was  not  measurable,  and  the  sur- 
face coat  did  not  penetrate  more  than  1%  in.  In  order  to  procure 
satisfactory  results,  it  will  be  necessary  to  have  the  No.  1  course 
so  thoroughly  compacted  as  to  hold  a  semi-fluid  mixture ;  the  stone 
composing  the  No.  2  course  should  be  larger  than  that  generally 
used,  and  should  be  well  heated,  and,  finally,  it  will  be  necessary  to 
use  a  light  asphalt  roller  in  order  to  draw  the  fluid  mixture  gradu- 
ally to  the  surface,  and  not  attempt  to  crush  the  No.  2  course  into 
the  binder.  Under  no  circumstances  is  it  believed  that  the  method 
will  prove  as  efficacious  or  economical  as  either  the  mixing  or  pene- 
tration methods  of  construction.  The  rate  of  progress  of  this  class 
of  work  was  slow,  and  would  average  156  sq.  yds.  per  day.  The 
labor  item  was  high,  two  tar  men  and  four  common  laborers  being 
required,  making  the  labor  cost  $0.06  per  square  yard.  The  tar, 
1  gallon  per  square  yard  in  the  mastic  and  1.25  gallons  on  the  sur- 
face, cost  $0.167  per  square  yard.  Summarizing  we  have  the  fol- 
lowing cost : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

2.25  gals,  tar,  at  7.4  cts . $0.167 

Labor   (2  tar  men  and  4  laborers) 0.061 

Fuel  and  plant  interest,  etc 0.005 

Total     $0.233 

Deduct  saving  water  sprinkling 0.013 

Total  extra  cost $0.220 

This  22  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  must  be  added  to  the  cost  of  ordinary 
6-in.  macadam. 

Cost  of  Tar  Macadam,  Duluth,  Minn. — Mr.  K  K.  Coe  gives  the 
following:  Duluth  began  laying  tar  macadam  in  1902,  and  it  in- 
creased so  rapidly  in  popularity  that  90%  of  the  total  pavement 
laid  in  1906  was  tar  macadam  (71,500  sq.  yds.).  The  pavement  is  8 
ins.  thick,  consisting  of  a  tar  grouted  macadam  base  6  ins.  thick, 
covered  with  2  ins.  of  tar  macadam  that  has  been  mixed  in  a  ma- 
chine. This  6-in.  base  is  composed  of  crushed  rock  %  to  2^ -in. 
in  size,  and  is  rolled  with  a  steam  roller.  Then  hot  tar  is  spread 
over  the  base,  1  gal.  per  sq.  yd.,  by  means  of  large  sprinkling 
cans,  the  spout  of  the  can  being  flared  and  measuring  *X>x8  ins. 
This  tar  is  drawn  from  a  tank  wagon,  and  is  spread  immediately 
in  advance  of  the  spreading  of  the  2-in.  wearing  coat  of  tar  mac- 
adam (or  tar  concrete).  This  wearing  coat  is  mixed  in  a  port- 
able mixing  plant  owned  by  the  city.  The  plant  has  a  capacity 
of  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  2-in.  wearing  coat  per  day  ;  its  shipping  weight 
is  18  tons  and  it  is  easily  hauled  to  any  part  of  the  city  by  a 
steam  roller.  The  plant  was  built  by  the  Toledo  Construction  & 
Supply  Co.  of  Detroit,  and  cost  the  city  $10,300.  It  is  rented  to 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  313 

the  contractors  at  $20  a  day,  straight  time,  the  city  furnishing 
the  engineman.  As  many  as  1,300  sq.  yds.  of  2-in.  wearing  coat 
have  been  mixed  by  this  plant  in  a  day. 

The  stone  for  the  wearing  coat  is  first  heated  in  this  plant  to  175° 
to  200°  F.,  which  is  the  same  temperature  that  the  tar  receives. 

The  stone  is  graded  in  size  to  reduce  the  voids  to  about  7%. 
When  the  voids  are  filled,  however,  and  the  stone  coated  with  tar, 
the  particles  of  stone  are  separated,  so  that  11%  by  bulk  of  tar 
is  necessary.  The  following  is  one  of  the  successful  batches: 

344  Ibs.  stone  passing  1%-in.  screen  and  caught  on     1-in. 

152  Ibs.  stone  passing       1-in.  screen  and  caught  on  %-in. 

175  Ibs.  stone  passing     %-in.  screen  and  caught  on  %-in. 

275  Ibs.  stone  passing     %-in.  screen  and  includ.  fine  dust. 

54  Ibs.  tar. 


1,020  Ibs.  total. 

Usually  6  or  7  batches  of  800  Ibs.  make  a  wagonload,  bottom 
dump  wagons  being  used. 

Plant  foremen  are  tempted  to  use  an  excess  of '  tar,  to  make  a 
batch  appear  mixed  before  it  really  is,  and  thus  make  a  bigger 
day's  run. 

Tar  from  the  Duluth  tar  plant  is  used  ;  it  is  a  by-product  of  the 
coke  ovens  and  is  very  uniform. 

The  liquid  tar  for  the  base  is  hauled  in  steel  tank  wagons,  which 
are  provided  with  small  furnaces  to  keep  the  tar  melted. 

The  mixed  material  for  the  2-in.  wearing  coat  is  dumped  from 
the  dump  wagons  onto  a  sectional  platform,  shoveled  to  place,  raked 
out  smooth,  and  immediately  rolled  with  a  15-ton  roller.  This 
course  is  2  ins.  thick  after  rolling.  When  rolled  smooth  and  com- 
pact, a  flush  coat  of  tar  (5  Ibs.  per  sq.  yd.)  is  spread,  to  seal  all 
surface  voids.  Formerly  a  "squeegee"  (like  a  rubber  window 
cleaner)  was  used  for  this  flush  coat  spreading,  but  it  was  found 
preferable  to  use  a  special  cart  mounted  on  two  small  wheels  and 
with  a  box  18  ins.  square  x  12  ins.  deep.  Behind  the  cart  is  a 
piece  of  heavy  rubber  belting  set  on  edge,  8  ins.  wide  and  3  ft.  long, 
bent  to  an  arc  of  60°.  Some  7  gals,  of  fluid  tar  are  poured  into  the 
box,  in  the  bottom  of  which  is  a  1-in.  hole,  with  a  tapering  iron 
plug  which  is  operated  by  a  lever  from  the  drawbar,  so  that  the 
man  who  draws  the  cart  can  manipulate  the  plug  and  deliver  a 
small  amount  of  tar  directly  in  front  of  the  rubber  belt,  or 
'"squeegee." 

Finally  the  surface  is  covered  with  a  thin  layer  of  hot  rock, 
beech  nut  size,  and  rolled. 

The  following  are  the  materials  required  per  sq.  yd.  of  2-in.  wear- 
ing coat  and  6-in.  base:  0.3  cu.  yd.  crushed  rock  and  screenings 
and  3  to  3V£  gals,  tar,  including  waste. 

The  average  contract  price  in  1906  was  $1.23  per  sq.  yd.,  which 
includes  everything  but  grading,  and  includes  a  5-yr.  guarantee. 


314  HANDBOOK   OF    COST   DATA. 

The  gang  required  to  mix  and  lay  the  2-in.  wearing  coat  is  as 
follows : 

Plant  Force: 
I  foreman. 
1  engineman. 
1  fireman. 
1  mixer  man. 
1  weigh  man. 

1  feeder. 

3  to  6  shovelers  (according  to  location  of  pile  of  stone). 

2  teams  hauling  tar. 
1  watchman. 

Street  Force: 
1  foreman. 

3  men  spreading  tar  binder  on  base. 
8  shovelers. 

3  rakers. 

1  engineman   on   steam  roller. 

1  tar  heater. 

1  man  on  squeegee  cart. 

2  men   spreading  surface  screenings. 
1  watchman. 

1  water  boy. 

3  to  6  teams  according  to  length  of  haul. 

Cost  of  Asphalt  Macadam,  Redlands,  Calif. — Mr.  C.  C.  Brown  gives 
the  following:  During  1906,  the  city  of  Redlands,  Calif.,  built  6 
miles  (100,000  sq.  yds.)  of  asphalt  macadam  at  a  cost  of  60  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.,  by  contract.  The  city  owns  a  crushing  plant,  and  sells 
the  rock  to  the  contractor  at  $1  per  ton,  f.  o.  b.  cars.  It  is  hauled 
5  miles  by  rail.  It  requires  1^4  cu.  yds.  of  crushed  rock  (meas- 
ured in  the  cars  after  the  5 -mile  haul)  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  the 
finished  pavement,  including  the  sand  and  the  asphalt. 

The  crushed  granite  is  spread  in  two  layers,  the  bottom  layer 
composed  of  stones  l1/^  to  3  ins.  in  size,  the  top  layer,  %  to  l^ 
ins.  It  is  then  filled  with  granite  screenings.  Each  course  is  rolled, 
water  being  freely  used  while  the  screenings  are  being  rolled  in. 
As  soon  as  the  water  dries  out,  heavy  asphaltic  oil  (75%  asphalt) 
at  a  temperature  of  150°  F.,  is  sprinkled  over  the  macadam,  about 
2  gals,  per  sq.  yd.,  or  even  more.  Excavations  of  the  macadam 
show  that  the  oil  has  penetrated  %  to  %  the  way  down.  The 
street  is  then  thrown  open,  and  several  weeks  of  traffic  iron  it  out 
into  a  smooth  pavement.  If  any  ruts  appear  broken  stone  (  V>  to 
1  in.)  is  placed  on  the  macadam  and  covered  with  the  asphaltic  oil. 

The  asphaltic  oil,  or  liquid  asphalt,  is  applied  from  a  tank  wagon 
hauled  by  4  horses.  The  tank  is  equipped  with  a  "Glover  oiler" 
(now  known  as  a  petrolithic  oiler,  made  by  the  Petrolithic  Pave- 
ment Co.  of  Los  Angeles,  Calif.).  The  "oiler,"  or  "distributor,"  is 
a  cylinder  having  a  series  of  openings,  "the  flow  being  nicely  con- 
trolled by  a  set  of  levers  manipulated  by  a  man  on  the  wagon. 
who  regulates  the  flow  according  to  the  speed  of  the  team." 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,  WALKS. 


Four  tanks,  of  800  gals,  each,  or  3,200  gals.,  are  distributed  per  day 
of  8  hrs.,  when  the  haul  is  two  miles'  each  way.  The  heating  is 
done  at  the  unloading  tank  by  steam,  which  is  also  used  to  facili- 
tate unloading  the  tank  car. 

The  oil  costs  $1  per  40-gal.  barrel,  including  the  freight,  which 
is  33  cts.  per  bbl. 

Cost  of  Petrolithic  Macadam.— Mr.  J.  C.  Black,  in  an  article  in 
the  California  Journal  of  Technology,  Oct.  8,  1908  (reprinted  in 
Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  11,  1908),  gave  the  following:  I 
have  inserted  an  illustration  of  the  rolling  tamper  and  the  gang 
plow,  and  have  assumed  wages  and  prices. 

Petrolithic  pavement  originated  in  southern  California  some  eight 
years  ago,  and  since  that  time  has  given  such  great  satisfaction  that 
it  is  now  to  be  found  in  many  parts  of  the  United  States,  and  is 
even  securing  a  foothold  in  foreign  countries. 

Petrolithic  pavement  consists  of  a  compacted  mass  of  earth, 
crushed  rock  or  gravel  and  asphaltic  oil,  although,  since  the  lighter 
oils  in  which  asphaltum  is  dissolved  do  not  remain  permanently  in 
the  pavement,  but  disappear  (mainly  by  evaporation)  within  a 
few  months  after  its  completion,  we  may  properly  call  it  a  mixture 
of  earth,  rock  and  asphalt.  The  rock  is  intended  to  act  as  a 
wearing  coat,  and  hence  is  kept  mainly  near  the  surface.  How- 
ever, it  is  not  the  composition,  but  the  manner  in  which  it  is 
treated,  that  constitutes  the  most  important  and  characteristic  fea- 
ture of  a  petrolithic  pavement,  for  this  Is  the  only  method  in 
which  the  entire  material  of  the  street  is  tamped  into  a  compact 
mass  of  uniform  density. 

After  the  road  has  been  brought  approximately  to  grade  and  is 
properly  crowned,  the  surface  is  broken  to  a  depth  of  6  to  9  ins., 
by  plowing  or  otherwise,  and  then  pulverized  by  farm  cultivators 
and  harrows  or  other  machinery.  The  application  of  water,  often 
in  quantities  amounting  to  several  gallons  to  the  square  yard  of 
surface  covered,  usually  greatly  expedites  the  pulverization. 

After  the  ground  is  reduced  to  a  sufficiently  fine  condition,  oil  is 
applied  at  the  rate  of  three-fourths  of  one  gallon  to  each  square 
yard  of  surface  and  is  cultivated  in.  Another  application  of  oil 
equal  to  the  first  is  then  made  and  cultivated,  after  which  the 
ground  is  plowed  6  ins.  deep,  a  gang  plow,  Fig.  6,  generally  being 
most  satisfactory  for  this  work.  The  plowing  should  be  such  as 
will  thoroughly  turn  the  furrow,  and  It  will  generally  bring  to  the 
surface  a  small  amount  of  soil  which  has  been  untouched  by  the 
oil.  A  slight  amount  of  cultivating  or  harrowing  serves  to  work 
out  the  ridges  left  by  the  plow,  and  the  third  application  of  oil, 
amounting  to  one  gallon  to  the  yard,  is  then  made  and  culti- 
vated in. 

After  this  it  is  advisable  to  put  on  the  road  grader,  and  it  is  the 
writer's  experience  that  a  liberal  use  of  it  Is  effort  well  spent. 
It  will  be  observed  that  up  to  the  present  stage  all  the  work  on  the 
road  has  been  done  along  longitudinal  lines — applying  the  oil  and 
plowing  must  of  necessity  be  so  carried  on,  and  while  cultivating 


310 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


and  harrowing  may  be  done  zig-zag  fashion,  it  is  generally  more 
satisfactory  to  work  in  a  straight  line.  While  this  work  results  in 
a  fairly  uniform  mixture  of  soil  and  oil,  there  Is  a  certain  tendency 
toward  the  formation  of  streaks,  and  it  is  in  the  correction  of  this 
that  the  great  benefit  of  the  road  grader  as  a  mixing  device 


Fig.    6.     Petrolithic    Gang    Plow. 

becomes  apparent.  The  soil  is  in  a  very  loose  and  finely  divided 
condition,  so  that  with  the  grader  blade  «et  at  an  angle,  a  deep  cut 
may  be  made,  and  by  thus  shifting  the  material  from  side  to  side 
a  number  of  times,  the  streaks  may  be  entirely  removed. 

The  road  is  now  brought  back  to  grade,  and  a  petrolithic  rolling 
tamper,   Fig.    7,   is  set  to   work.      This  tamper   consists  of  a   roller 


Fig.   7.     Petrolithic  Rolling  Tamper. 


about  3  ft.  in  diameter,  the  surface  of  which  is  studded  with  iron 
teeth  or  feet  9  ins.  long  and  terminating  in  a  slightly  rounded  sur- 
face of  about  4  sq.  ins.  area.  The  total  weight  of  the  machine  is 
between  4,800  Ibs.  and  5,000  Ibs.,  and  as  there  are  10  or  11  ft.  in  a 
row,  the  weight  on  each  is  approximately  450  Ibs.,  or  over  100  Ibs. 
to  the  square  inch  of  surface.  The  device  is  patented,  and  is  for 
sale  by  the  Petrolithic  Pavement  Co.  of  Los  Angeles.  It  is  drawn 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  317 

by  four  horses,  from  four  to  six  being  required,  according  to  con- 
ditions. As  it  passes  over  the  loose  material  of  the  street,  the  feet 
sink  to  a  depth  of  6  or  8  ins.,  and  being  flat  ended  each  one  leaves 
a  small,  compact  mass  of  earth  and  oil  at  the  place  it  struck. 
In  order  to  secure  uniform  results  and  prevent  the  too  rapid  tamp- 
ing, a  cultivator  must  be  used  in  connection  with  the  tamper.  The 
cultivator  should  be  adjusted  at  first  to  work  to  approximately  the 
same  depth  as  the  tamper,  but  after  two  or  three  trips  over  the 
ground,  should  be  raised  a  notch.  After  this  it  should  be  raised 
from  time  to  time,  but  never  more  than  a  single  notch  at  a  setting, 
and  care  should  always  be  taken  to  avoid  too  great  haste  and  con- 
sequent imperfect  tamping.  It  will  be  observed  that  this  process 
builds  the  pavement  "from  the  bottom  up,"  so  to  speak,  thereby 
producing  a  dense  mass  for  the  full  thickness. 

When  the  road  has  been  tamped  so  that  2  or  3  ins.  of  loose  ma- 
terial remain  on  the  surface,  the  tamper  should  be  taken  off  and 
the  surface  smoothed  with  a  road  grader  or  drag.  After  this,  a  2 
or  3-in.  layer  of  1^-in.  gravel  or  crushed  rock  should  be  spread 
upon  the  road  and  cultivated  so  as  to  mix  it  with  the  earth.  The 
rock  may  be  spread  by  hand,  in  which  case,  dumping  should  begin 
at  the  end  of  the  road  where  the  wagons  arrive,  so  that  they  may 
travel  over  it  instead  of  over  the  loose  earth,  or  it  may  be  dumped 
in  a  single  line  down  the  center  of  the  road,  and  then  spread  with 
the  grader.  In  point  of  cost,  one  method  offers  little  advantage 
over  the  others.  The  hand  spreading  usually  gives  more  uniform 
results. 

After  the  rock  is  spread  and  cultivated,  the  last  coat  of  oil, 
amounting  to  one  gallon  to  the  square  yard,  is  applied,  and  the 
ground  again  cultivated.  It  should  then  be  plowed  as  deeply  as 
possible  without  disturbing  the  tamping  already  done.  A  few 
trips  of  the  cultivator  will  smooth  out  the  surface,  and  the  tamper 
may  again  be  set  to  work.  When  only  a  small  amount  of  loose 
material  (say  an  inch)  remains,  the  cultivator  may  be  taken  off 
altogether,  and  the  surface  given  a  light  treatment  with  a  grader 
or  drag  before  the  tamper  finishes  its  work. 

A  smooth  roller  will  improve  the  appearance  of  the  newly  com- 
pleted road,  but  will  add  little  to  its  efficiency  or  durability. 

The  use  of  water  from  time  to  time  during  the  work  is  a  neces- 
sity, but  because  of  varying  conditions  of  weather  and  variety  of 
soils,  fixed  rules  for  its  use  are  impossible.  In  general  it  will  be 
found  that  sandy  soils  must  be  kept  wet  from  start  to  finish  of 
work,  while  clay  or  adobe  requires  comparatively  'little  water,  and 
that  mainly  during  the  tamping  process.  If  too  much  water  is 
used  on  soil  of  this  nature,  the  almost  inevitable  result  will  be 
clogging  of  machinery  and  consequent  delays.  For  applying  water, 
the  oil  wagons  will  be  found  entirely  satisfactory. 

It  is  needless  to  remark  that  the  details  of  building  a  petrolithic 
pavement  may  be  varied  considerably,  and  that  good  results  can  be 
obtained  in  several  ways.  In  fact,  as  in  many  other  lines,  there  are 
no  two  pieces  of  work  which  can  be  conducted  in  exactly  the  same 


318  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

manner.  Some  of  those  who  have  been  most  successful  with  this 
form  of  construction  prefer  to  put  the  rock  on  the  road  before  any 
tamping  has  been  done.  This  is  cultivated,  and  after  the  final  coat 
of  oil  has  been  applied  is  plowed  under.  It  might  be  thought  that 
this  would  result  in  the  rock  being  distributed  through  so  great 
a  thickness  of  soil  that  its  value  as  a  wearing  surface  would  be 
lost,  but  the  fact  is  that  even  when  plowed  under  as  much  as  6  ins. 
the  cultivation  rapidly  brings  it  to  the  top.  If  it  is  attempted  to 
mix  it  with  too  small  a  quantity  of  soil,  a  large  amount  of  rock  will 
remain  loose  on  the  surface,  and  must  be  removed  entirely  from  the 
street. 

Most  of  the  older  petrolithic  roads  of  southern  California  were 
built  without  the  use  of  any  rock  or  gravel,  and  the  satisfaction 
they  have  given  proves  that  where  the  price  of  rock  is  high  and 
the  keeping  down  of  expenses  imperative  an  excellent  pavement 
may  be  built  of  nothing  but  the  natural  material  of  the  street  mixed 
with  oil. 

As  to  the  character  of  soil  in  which  petrolithic  pavement  may 
successfully  be  built,  almost  anything  will  do,  provided  it  is  free 
from  a  large  amount  of  alkali  or  other  ingredient  which  will  cause 
decomposition  of  the  oil.  In  sand  the  adhesive  qualities  of  the  oil 
will  hold  the  particles  together  and  make  possible  a  good  road, 
where  otherwise  some  expensive  paving  material  would  be  neces- 
sary. No  soil  gives  better  results  than  adobe  (clay),  although 
it  is  hard  to  work,  and  consequently  may  slightly  increase  the  cost. 
Between  the  extremes  of  sand  and  adobe  equal  satisfaction  will  be 
found. 

•  The  greater  the  amount  of  asphalt  in  the  oil,  the  better,  and  the 
specifications  of  the  city  of  Los  Angeles  require  a  minimum  of  70 
per  cent.  Natural  oils  having  this  amount  of  asphalt  are  difficult 
to  obtain,  but  the  Sunset  District  produces  some  which  run  from 
75  to  80  per  cent  or  even  more.  These  are  used  exclusively  for  road 
oils,  and  can  generally  be  had  at  a  reasonable  price,  say  50  cts.  per 
bbl.  of  42  gals.  Refinery  products  or  residuums  are  frequently 
used,  and  these  prove  satisfactory  when -the  quality  of  the  asphalt 
contained  in  them  is  unimpaired.  The  objection  to  their  use  arises 
from  the  fact  that  an  overheated  or  burned  asphalt  lacks  the  ad- 
hesive qualities  necessary  in  a  good  road  oil.  A  special  and  ex- 
pensive test  is  necessary  to  determine  whether  overheating  has 
taken  place,  and  as  it  should  be  applied  to  every  carload,  besides 
causing  delay,  it  will  form  quite  an  item  of  expense.  Care  should 
be  taken  to  get  an  oil  comparatively  free  from  water  and  sedi- 
ment, many  specifications  requiring  the  rejection  of  all  oil  con- 
taining more  than  2  per  cent  of  such  foreign  matter. 

It  is  commonly  required  that  the  oil  be  applied  to  the  road  at  a 
temperature  of  not  less  than  150°  F.,  and  some  oils,  because  of 
their  viscosity,  cannot  be  easily  handled  at  a  lower  temperature. 
Although  there  are  still  some  advocates  of  the  use  of  cold  oil,  the 
general  opinion  is  "the  hotter  the  better." 

For  heating  the   oil   a  portable  boiler   of  some  sort  is  generally 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  319 

used.  The  oil  may  be  heated  in  the  cars  in  which  it  is  delivered, 
which  are  usually  equipped  with  steam  pipes  for  this  purpose,  or  It 
may  be  run  into  a  tank  or  pit  in  which  a  steam  coil  has  been  set. 
In  soil  of  a  clayey  nature,  a  pit  without  lining  may  be  used,  as  the 
oil  will  penetrate  the  ground  only  a  few  inches.  An  oil  pump  with 
the  necessary  valves  and  connections  for  unloading  from  car  and 
loading  into  wagons,  will  complete  the  heating  establishment. 

Oil  tank  wagons  are  built  of  various  capacities,  the  common  sizes 
holding  from  800  to  1,000  gals.  The  distributors,  of  which  there  are 
several  good  designs,  are  attached  to  the  rear  of  the  tank,  and 
spread  the  oil  for  a  width  of  6  or  7  ft.  Some  are  divided  into 
three  or  four  sections,  so  that  a  narrower  strip  may  be  covered  if 
desired.  The  oil  holds  its  heat  well,  and  if  conditions  demand,  the 
heating  plant  may  be  situated  several  miles  from  the  work  and  still 
allow  of  the  delivery  of  oil  at  the  required  temperature. 

Warm  weather  is  desirable  for  carrying  on  the  work,  as  when  it 
is  cold  the  oil  tends  to  drag  or  form  into  chunks,  with  resulting 
irregularities  and  soft  spots  in  the  finished  roadway.  The  road  may 
be  opened  for  traffic  as  soon  as  the  tamping  is  finished. 

A  complete  outfit  for  building  petrolithic  pavement  will  be  about 
as  follows,  though,  of  course,  the  magnitude  of  the  work  will  de- 
termine the  number  of  pieces  of  machinery  necessary.  It  is  often 
possible  to  rent  a  portion  of  the  plant,  and  some  cities  have  their 
own  outfits,  which  they  are  prepared  to  rent  to  contractors,  gener- 
ally at  so  much  a  block : 

1  portable  steam  boiler,  with  fittings. 

1  oil  pump  and  connections. 

1  pit  or  tank  of  not  less  than  10,000  gals,  capacity,  and  fitted 
with  steam  heating  coils. 

1  oil  wagon  and  distributor. 

1  road  grader. 

1  road  drag   (home  made). 

3  dump  wagons,  for  rock. 

1  rooter  plow. 

1  gang  plow. 
3  cultivators. 

2  rolling  tampers. . 

The  operating  gang  is  as  follows : 

1  foreman. 

1  grader  man  and  oil  wagon  operator. 

1  fireman. 

7  "teamsters. 

3  laborers. 

35  horses  or  mules. 

The  accompanying  figures  give  an  average  of  the  amount  of 
labor  and  material  per  sq.  yd.  on  several  streets,  all  of  which  were 
in  clay  or  adobe  soil.  In  sandy  soil  more  tamping  and  more  water 
are  required,  but  the  preliminary  work  is  much  easier.  The  amount 
of  work  necessary  varies  widely,  and  depends  entirely  on  local  con- 
ditions, but  by  substituting  rates  of  wages  and  costs  of  materials 


320  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

in  this  table  an  approximation  to  the  cost  of  doing  the  work  may 
be  obtained.  Proper  allowance  must,  of  course,  be  made  for  inter- 
est and  depreciation  or  for  rental  of  plant. 

Plowing  and  Pulverising:  Per  sq.  yd. 

0.004  hr.  rooter  plow,  6  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.80 $00032 

0.004  hr.  cultivator,  4  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.60 0.0016 

0.002  hr.  tamper,  6  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.80 0.0016 

Oiling: 

0.0018  hr.  fireman,   heating  oil,  at  $0.20 0.0036 

0.007  hr.  oil  wagon,  6  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.80 0.0056 

0.004   hr.  oil  wagon  operator,  at  $0.20 0.0008 

0.0015  hr.  hand  labor,  at   $0.20 0.0003 

Mixing  Oil  and  Soil: 

0.0015  hr.  rooter  plow,  6  horses  and  driver,  $0.80 0.0012 

0.0027  hr.  gang  plow,  4  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.60 0.0016 

0.022     hr.  cultivator,  4  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.60 0  0132 

0.007     hr.  hand  labor,   at   $0.20 0.0014 

Watering: 
0.005  hr.  water  wagon,   6  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.80 0.0040 

Handling  and  Hauling  Crushed  Rock: 

0.042  hr.  labor,  loading  into  wagons,  at  $0.20 0.0084 

0.056  hr.   wagon  hauling,  2  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.40 0.0224 

0.009  hr.  labor,   spreading  rock,  at   $0.20 0.0018 

Grading: 

0.005  hr.  road  machine,   6  horses  and  driver,  at   $0.80 0.0040 

0.005  hr.  man  operating  machine,  at  $0.20 0.0010 

0.001  hr.  road  drag,  4  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.60 0.0006 

Tamping: 

0.023  hr.  rolling  tamper,  6  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.80 0.0184 

0.011  hr.  cultivator,  4.  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.60 0.0066 

Smooth  Rolling: 
0.003  hr.  roller,  6  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.80 0.0024 

Miscellaneous: 

0.009  hr.  labor  removing  large  stones,  etc.,  at  $0.20 0.0018 

0.0015  hr.  wagon,  2  horses  and  driver,  at  $0.40 0.0006 

Superintendence: 
0.019  hr.   foreman,    at    $0.40 0.0076 


Total  labor $0.1137 

Materials: 

3.50  gals,  asphaltic  oil,  at  $0.02 .' $0.0700 

0.09  gals,  oil  for  fuel   (heating),  at  $0.02 0.0018 

5.50  gals,  water  for  sprinkling,  at  $0.0002 0.0011 

0.083  cu.  yds.  crushed  rock,  at  $1.00 0.0083 


Grand  total,  labor  and  materials $0.1949 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  three  items  of  loosening  the  soil  and  re- 
compacting  it  with  the  rolling  tamper  total  as  follows : 

Per  sq  yd. 

Pulverizing  the  soil $0.0064 

Grading     0.0056 

Tamping     (excluding     cultivating) 0.0184 

Total    $0.0304 

This  cost  of  3  cts  per  sq.  yd.  shows  what  it  would  cost  to  break  up, 
shape  with  a  road  machine  and  tamp  the  subgrade  of  a  road  or 
street  with  a  rolling  tamper,  preparatory  to  laying  any  sort  of 
pavement.  Practically  the  same  price  is  charged  by  Massachusetts 
contractors  for  "shaping"  the  subgrade  of -macadam  roads,  usinjr 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  321 

only   the  old-fashioned  and  inferior  methods.     Each  rolling  tamper 
compacted  400  sq.  yds.  per  day  of  9  hrs. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  labor  item  of  oiling  totals  a  trifle  more 
than  1  ct.  per  sq.  yd.  (0.3  ct.  per  gal.  of  oil),  excluding  the  cost  of 
the  fuel  oil  used  in  heating  the  other  oil,  the  cost  of  which  is  given 
(under  Materials)  at  0.18  ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  making  a  total  of  1.18  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  Since  3%  gals,  of  oil  were  used  per  sq.  yd.,  this  is 
equivalent  to  %  ct.  per  gal.  for  heating,  pumping,  hauling  and 
sprinkling  the  oil  on  the  road. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  crushed  rock  was  spread  on  to  a  thick- 
ness of  3  ins.,  measured  loose,  and  that  when  expressed  as  a  cost 
per  cu.  yd.  of  loose  rock  instead  of  per  sq.  yd.,  we  have  the 
following : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Loading  wagons    $0.108 

Hauling     0.269 

Spreading    0.022 

Total     $0.399 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  superintendence  cost  17  per  cent  of  the 
total  labor. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  price  assumed  for  the  asphaltic  oil 
(2  cts.  per  gal.)  is  low — about  one-quarter  what  it  costs  in  most 
places  outside  of  California. 

None  of  the  foregoing  costs  include  an  allowance  for  interest, 
depreciation  and  repairs  of  plant,  nor  cost  of  installing  and  remov- 
ing plant. 

Cost  of  Petrolithic  Road. — The  method  of  construction  was  simi- 
lar to  the  work  just  described,   except  that  the  broken   stone  was 
omitted,   and   the   road  was   built   of  the   natural    soil   mixed   with 
asphaltic  oil.     It  was  tamped  with  a  petrolithic  rolling  tamper. 
The  wages  actually  paid  were  as  follows  per  day  of  9  hrs.  : 

Laborer    or     driver $2.50 

Horse,  without  driver 1.00 

Foreman    3.00 

The  cost  was  as  follows,  excluding  installation  of  plant  and  in- 
terest, depreciation  and  repairs: 

Cts.  per  sq  yd. 

Preliminary   team  work 0.26 

Plowing  with   rooter   plow 0.32 

Pulverizing    soil    0.34 

Sprinkling    water    0.27 

Leveling  with  road  machine 0.14 

Cultivating    0.27 

Mixing   oil    and    soil    with   cultivator 1.06 

Sprinkling  water 0.20 

Tamping  with  rolling  tamper 1.50 

Final  leveling 0.20 

Foreman     0.64 

Total    labor 5.20 

Oil,  3  gals,  at  2%  cts.  delivered  on  the  road 7.50 

Grand   total    12.70 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  items  do  not  include  heating  and 


322  UAXDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

hauling  the  oil  to  the  road,  for  this  cost  is  included  in  the  price  of 
2  </2  cts.  per  gal.  paid  for  the  oil.  Outside  of  California  it  is  at 
present  impossible  to  get  asphaltic  oil  at  any  such  low  price. 

The  soil  was  a  hard  clay  which  required  5  gals,  of  water  per  sq. 
yd.  (or  about  30  gals,  per  cu.  yd.)  to  soften  the  clods  so  that  they 
could  be  broken  up. 

Four  horses  and  a  driver  operated  each  rolling  tamper,  and  each 
tamper  compacted  435  sq.  yds.  per  day. 

The  rooter  plow  was  operated  by  6  horses,  2  drivers  and  1  man 
holding  the  plow.  They  broke  4,200  sq.  yds.  per  day,  and,  esti- 
mating a  depth  of  6  ins.,  the  plow  loosened  700  cu.  yds.  daily. 

The  water  was  hauled  by  6  horses  in  a  wagon  holding  840  gals., 
the  wheels  of  the  wagon  having  tires  5  ins.  wide. 

A  portable  oil  heater  and  oil  pump  loaded  the  oil  from  tank  cars 
into  1,000-gal.  tank  wagons,  requiring  20  mins.  to  load  a  wagon. 

Cost  of  Telford  Roads,  New  Jersey.— A  telford  road  consists  of 
a  "bottoming,"  6  to  12  ins.  thick,  made  of  rough  stone  blocks  sup- 
porting a  macadam  surface  3  to  6  ins.  thick.  If  the  stone  for  the 
"bottoming"  is  limestone  or  sandstone  that  comes  out  in  thin  layers, 
readily  shaped  with  a  hammer  into  rectangular  blocks,  the  "bot- 
toming" is  laid  like  a  rough  stone  block  pavement.  But  if  the 
stone  is  a  granite  or  trap  that  breaks  out  in  irregular  chunks,  or 
if  cobblestones  are  used,  no  attempt  is  made  to  lay  a  rough  block 
pavement ;  and  the  "bottoming"  then  becomes  a  sort  of  macadam 
itself,  consisting  of  large  and  small  pieces.  This  last  type  of  telford 
is  the  kind  so  largely  used  in  the  towns  of  northern  New  Jersey 
where  trap  rock  is  available. 

The  typical  New  Jersey  telford  is  made  of  a  "bottoming"  6  ins. 
thick,  consisting  of  chunks  of  trap  rock  broken  with  hammers  after 
delivery  on  the  road  until  no  chunk  is  more  than  6  ins.  thick.  The 
spalls  are  packed  in  between  the  larger  stone,  and  earth  is  shoveled 
over  the  stone  from  the  side  of  the  road  until  few  stones  are 
visible.  Then  a  5,500-lb.  horse-roller  is  run  over  the  stone  before 
the  3-in.  macadam  is  placed  upon  it.  The  macadam  is  bound  with 
earth,  and  finally  a  thin  layer  of  screenings  is  placed  over  all — 
more  for  appearance  sake  than  for  usefulness.  The  cost  of  quarry- 
ing the  trap  rock  for  the  "bottoming"  and  the  cost  of  crushing 
the  portion  of  it  that  is  used  for  the  macadam  surface,  will  be 
found  in  the  section  on  Rock  Excavation. 

In  building  a  telford  pavement  on  a  New  Jersey  village  street, 
the  pavement  was  made  16  ft.  wide.  The  stones  for  the  bottoming 
were  dumped  from  wagons,  and  a  gang  of  6  men  broke  the  larger 
ones  and  placed  them  all  by  hand  carefully  so  as  to  secure  a 
compact  "bottoming"  6  ins.  thick.  This  gang  of  6  men  averaged  4 
cu.  yds.  of  bottoming  laid  per  man  per  10-hr,  day,  at  a  cost  of  40 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  placing  the  "bottoming"  after  delivery.  It  took 
1.2  cu.  yds.  of  loose  stones  measured  in  the  wagon  to  make  1  cu.  yd. 
of  "bottoming." 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


The  macadam  surface  would  have  cost  as  much  as  any  other 
macadam  of  equal  thickness  (3  ins.)  had  it  not  been  for  the  use 
of  earth  as  a  binder  instead  of  screenings.  It  took  1.2  cu.  yds.  of 
broken  stone  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  rolled  stone,  for  a  horse  roller 
was  used,  and  it  did  not  compact  the  stone  as  much  as  a  steam 
roller  would.  The  cost  of  this  broken" stone  can  be  estimated  by 
data  already  given.  The  cost  of  rolling  the  "bottoming"  and  the 
macadam  surface  were  not  kept  separately ;  but  rolling  both  was 
as  follows : 

The  2% -ton  roller,  drawn  by  a  team,  averaged -150  lin.  ft.  of 
roadway  16  ft.  wide  per  day  of  10  hrs.,  which  is  equivalent  to 
90  sq.  yds.  per  day,  at  a  cost  of  4  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  By  far  the 
greater  part  of  the  rolling  was  confined  to  the  3-in.  macadam. 
The  team  on  the  roller  was  taken  off  from  time  to  time  and  hitched 
to  a  sprinkling  cart.  Water  for  sprinkling  the  macadam  was  ob- 
tained from  a  nearby  hydrant.  Summarizing  the  costs,  we  have 
the  following: 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Cost  of  bottoming  (6  ins.  thick).  in  place. 

Quarrying  and  loading  1.2  cu.  yds.  at  40  cts $0.48 

Hauling  2  miles,   1.2  cu.  yds.  at  40  cts 0.48 

Placing 0.40 

Total  per  cu.  yd.  in  place. $1.36 

Cost  of  macadam  surface   (3  ins.  thick). 

Quarrying  and  crushing  1.2  cu.  yds.  at  55  cts $0.66 

Hauling  2  miles,   1.2  cu.  yds.  at  40  cts 0.48 

Spreading  1.2  cu.  yds.  at  12  cts 0.14 

Shoveling  on  earth  for  binder,  0.4  cu.  yds.  at  12  cts...    0.05 
Sprinkling  and  rolling,   4  cts.   per  sq.  yd 0.48 

Total   per   cu.   yd.   in  place $1.81 

The  cost  per  square  yard,  exclusive  of  grading  the  roadway, 
was: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

1-6  cu.  yd.  bottoming,    at    $1.36 $0.23 

1-12  cu.  yd.  macadam,  at  $1.81 0.15 

Total     $0.38 

Laborers  were  paid  15  cts.  per  hr.,  and  teams  35  cts.  per  hr.  The 
cost  of  foremen  is  not  included.  The  cost  of  the  quarrying  is  given 
on  page  210. 

The  foregoing  relates  to  trap  rock.  If  limestone  or  sandstone 
occurring  in  thin  beds  is  quarried  by  wedging,  and  is  roughly 
scabbled  and  laid  like  a  paving,  the  cost  of  a  telford  "bottoming" 
is  practically  the  same  as  for  the  slope-wall  paving  given  in  sec- 
tion on  Masonry.  The  cost  of  the  macadam  surface  may  be  esti- 
mated from  data  given  on  previous  pages. 

Cost  of  Sand-Clay   Roads.*— The  mixing  of  sand  and   clay  as  a 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  28,  1906. 


324  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

form  of  road  construction  has  received  careful  study  by  the  Office 
of  Public  Roads,  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  and  a  bulletin 
by  William  L.  Spoon,  Road  Expert,  Office  of  Public  Roads,  has 
recently  been  issued  descriptive  of  this  method  of  construction. 
The  matter  of  sand-clay  roads  is  of  considerable  importance  to  the 
Atlantic  and  Gulf  States,  where  throughout  large  areas  sand  and 
clay  are  practically  the  only  materials  available  for  road  building. 
In  the  Southern  States  a  number  of  sand- clay  roads  have  been 
built,  and  they  have  proved  well  adapted  for  light  traffic. 

The  best  sand-clay  road  is  one  in  which  the  wearing  surface  is 
composed  of  grains  of  sand  in  contact  in  such  a  way  that  the  voids 
between  the  grains  are  entirely  filled  with  clay,  which  acts  as  a 
binder.  Any  excess  of  clay  above  the  arnount  necessary  to  fill 
the  voids  in  the  sand  is  detrimental.  All  the  experiments  made 
by  the  Office  of  Public  Roads  indicate  that  the  materials  should 
not  be  mixed  in  a  dry  state,  but  should  be  thoroughly  mixed  and 
puddled  with  water.  This  is  most  easily  brought  about  immediately 
after  a  heavy  rain,  the  clay  having  been  previously  spread  and  the 
larger  lumps  broken  up  as  completely  as  possible.  The  surface 
should  then  be  covered  with  a  few  inches  of  sand  and  plowed  and 
harrowed  thoroughly  by  means  of  a  turning  plow  and  a  cutaway 
or  disc  harrow.  In  cases  where  the  plowing  and  harrowing  are 
considered  too  expensive,  the  mixing  may  be  left  to  traffic.  This, 
however,  leads  to  a  muddy  road  surface  for  a  long  time,  although 
finally  it  is  possible,  by  a  proper  distribution  of  sand  upon  the 
clay,  to  bring  about  a  fairly  good  result. 

Where  a  slaking  clay  is  used,  very  much  less  puddling  is  re- 
quired, as  there  are  practically  no  lumps  to  be  broken  up  and  the 
mixing  can  easily  be  done  with  the  harrow  after  a  rain.  Slaking 
clays  do  not  usually  make  as  effective  binders  as  the  more  plastic 
clays,  and  as  a  result  the  road  surface  becomes  more  dusty  in  dry 
weather.  The  best  kind  of  clay  for  this  kind  of  construction  is  one 
that  slakes  sufficiently  easily  to  enable  the  lumps  to  be  readily 
broken  up,  and  that  at  the  same  time,  without  being  too  plastic,  has 
sufficient  binding  power  to  cement  the  grains  of  sand  and  form  a 
smooth,  impervious  surface  on  the  road. 

No  exact  rules  can  be  laid  down  for  calculating  in  advance  the 
best  mixture  of  clay  and  sand.  An  easy  method  for  making  a 
rough  estimate  of  the  volume  of  the  clay  filler  required  for  any 
unit  quantity  of  a  given  sand  is  given  by  Mr.  Spoon  as  follows : 
Two  ordinary  glass  tumblers  of  as  nearly  as  possible  the  same  size 
are  filled  to  the  brim,  one  with  the  dry  sand  to  be  tested  and  the 
other  with  water.  The  water  is  then  poured  carefully  from  the  one 
glass  into  the  sand  in  the  other  until  it  reaches  the  point  of  over- 
flowing. The  volume  of  water  removed  from  the  glass  which  was 
originally  full  of  water  can  be  taken  as  an  approximate  measure 
of  the  voids  in  the  unit  volume  of  sand  contained  in  the  tumbler.  A 
simple  calculation  will  reduce  this  to  percentage  volume. 


ROADS,   PAl'LMENTS,    WALKS.  325 

In  the  construction  of  sand-clay  roads  two  distinct  conditions  are 
likely  to  be  met :  The  road  may  have  a  sandy  subsoil,  that  must 
be  overcome  by  the  addition  of  clay ;  or  the  subsoil  may  be  of  clay, 
and  in  this  case  sand  must  be  added  to  it. 

Sand-Clay  Construction  in  a  Sandy  Subsoil. — In  the  construction 
of  a  sand-clay  road  upon  a  sandy  subsoil,  after  the  drainage  has 
been  provided,  the  roadbed  should  be  brought  to  crown.  A  sec- 
tion of  the  road  nearest  the  source  of  the  clay  is  crowned  first, 
and  on  this  section  the  first  load  of  clay  is  dumped,  each  succeeding 
load  being  hauled  over  the  preceding,  care  being  taken,  however, 
to  spread  each  dumped  load  separately  and  evenly  before  it  is 
driven  over.  After  the  clay  has  been  spread  it  is  covered  with  a 
layer  of  clean  sand,  and  when  the  road  has  been  opened  to  traffic 
additional  sand  should  be  added  to  keep  the  surface  smooth  and 
prevent  the  formation  of  mud.  If  a  narrow,  single  track  roadway 
is  to  be  built,  it  has  been  found  best  to  spread  the  clay  to  a  width 
of  about  12  ft.  and  to  a  depth  of  6  to  8  ins.  in  the  center,  tapering 
the  layer  to  a  thin  edge  at  the  sides.  After  the  clay  layer  is  com- 
pleted and  covered  with  sand,  if  the  clay  is  plastic  and  lumpy,  it 
will  probably  be  necessary  to  plow  and  harrow  it  alternately  until 
the  lumps  are  thoroughly  disintegrated,  advantage  being  taken  of 
rains  to  puddle  the  road  surface  with  a  harrow. 

More  sand  must  be  added  if  the  surface  shows  a  tendency  to 
"ball"  and  cake,  and  if,  on  the  other  hand,  the  surface  loosens 
in  dry  weather,  it  is  due  to  an  insufficient  quantity  of  clay  or 
because  the  clay  lacks  binding  power. 

A  roadway  12  ft.  wide,  with  an  average  depth  of  6  ins.  of  clay, 
will  require  1  cu.  yd.  of  clay  to  cover  4  y%  ft.  of  road  length ;  or 
1,173  cu.  yds.  of  clay  will  be  required  for  one  mile  of  12-ft.  road- 
way. Mr.  Spoon  states  that  the  average  load  has  been  found  to  be 
about  %  to  %  cu.  yd.,  when  the  haul  is  over  sand,  and  1  cu.  yd. 
when  the  haul  is  over  a  dry  clay  road. 

Sand-Clay  Construction  on  a  Clay  Subsoil. — As  in  the  first  case 
proper  drainage  must  be  provided ;  the  road  should  then  be  crowned 
as  nearly  as  possible  to  the  form  desired  in  the  finished  road.  The 
road  surface  should  have  a  slope  of  at  least  %  in.  per  foot.  It  is 
much  more  important  to  form  first  this  foundation  crown  with  a 
clay  than  with  a  sandy  subsoil. 

After  the  foundation  has  been  prepared,  the  surface  should  be 
plowed  and  harrowed  to  a  depth  of  about  4  ins.,  until  it  is  pulver- 
ized as  completely  as  possible.  It  is  then  covered  with  6  to  8  ins. 
of  clean,  angular  sand,  spread  so  that  the  layer  is  thickest  at  the 
center  of  the  road. 

The  first  mixing  by  plow  and  harrow  is  done  while  th6  materials 
are  still  in  a  comparatively  dry  state.  After  the  first  mixing  has 
been  finished  the  road  is  finally  puddled  with  a  harrow  after  a  rain. 
In  case  excess  of  clay  works  to  the  surface,  more  sand  is  applied. 

When   the  mixing  and  puddling  has  been  completed  the  road  is 


326  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

shaped  while  it  is  still  soft  enough  to  be  properly  finished  with  a 
scraper  and  at  the  same  time  stiff  enough  to  pack  well  under  the 
roller  or  action  of  traffic. 

Cost  of  Sand-Clay  Construction. — The  cost  of  this  form  of  con- 
struction varies  with  the  conditions.  The  following  data,  given  by 
Mr.  Spoon,  are  based  on  the  assumption  that  the  clay  can  be  pro- 
cured within  a  mile  of  the  road  that  is  to  be  improved,  and  that 
the  cost  of  labor  is  about  $1  per  day  and  teams  $3  per  day.  On 
those  assumptions  the  cost  of  constructing  a  12-ft.  sand-clay  road 
on  a  sand  foundation,  covered  with  clay  to  an  average  depth  of 
6  ins.,  would  be  approximately  as  follows  for  a  distance  of  one 
mile: 

Crowning  and  shaping  road  with  road  machine:  Total. 

2  teams  at  $3,  1  day $  6.00 

1  operator  at  $1.50,  1  day 1.50 

Loading  and  Hauling: 
Loosening  clay  with  pick  and  shoveling  into  wagons,  1,173.33 

cu.  yds.  at  15  cts 176.00 

Hauling,    1,173.33   cu.  yds.  at  23   cts 269.86 

Spreading  Clay  with  Road  Machine: 

2  teams  at  $3,  3  days 18.00 

1  operator  at   $1.50,    3   days 4.50 

Shoveling  Sand  on  Clay: 

Estimated  at  %  ct.  per  sq.  yd 35.20 

Harrowing: 

1  team  at  $3,  2  days 6.00 

Shaping  and  Dressing  with -Road  Machine: 

2  teams  at  $3,  2  days 12.00 

1  operator  at  $1.50,  2  days 3.00 

Rolling: 
Estimated  at  %  ct.  per  sq.  yd 


Total     $579.26 

On  this  basis  the  estimated  cost  per  square  yard  of  road  surface 
would  be  about  8  cts.  The  cost  of  building  a  sand-clay  road  on  a 
clay  -foundation  would  not  vary  much  from  the  figures  given.  In 
fact,  the  latter  form  of  construction  would  probably  be  cheaper. 

According  to  the  experience  of  the  Office  of  Public  Roads,  the 
cost  of  sand-clay  construction  in  the  South  has  been  found  to  range 
from  $200  to  $1,200  per  mile,  in  most  cases  running  from  $300 
to  $800. 

A  sand-clay  road  constructed  under  the  direction  of  the  Office 
at  Gainesville,  Fla.,  1  mile  in  length,  14  ft.  wide,  and  having  a 
9 -in.  sand-clay  surface,  cost  $881.25  per  mile,  or  10  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 
Another  sand-clay  road  built  under  the  direction  of  the  Office  at 
Tallahassee,  Fla.,  16  ft.  wide  and  surfaced  with  about  7  ins.  of 
sand-clay  mixture,  cost  $470  per  mile,  or  about  5  cts.  per  square 
yard.  In  case  changes  of  grade  have  to  be  made  with  consequent 
cuts  and  fills,  the  cost  would  be  proportionately  greater  than  the 
figures  given  above. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  327 

Cost  of  a  Sand-Clay  Road  in  Iowa.* — During  the  1908  session  of 
the  road  school  of  the  State  Highway  Commission,  a  mile  of  sand- 
clay  road  was  built  to  test  this  form  of  construction  for  Iowa. 
The  road  selected  lies  partly  within  the  incorporated  limits  of 
Waterloo,  and  was  in  such  bad  condition  that  there  was  practically 
no  heavy  traffic  over  it.  As  soon,  however,  as  the  road  was  com- 
pleted it  took  all  traffic  for  farmers  living  northeast  of  Waterloo, 
with  satisfactory  results  during  the  past  year.  Some  of  the  actual 
cost  figures  on  the  work  were  as  follows : 

Amount    of   clay   handled 2,124  cu.  yds. 

Total   road  covered 2,800  lin.  ft. 

Total    road    improved 5,880  lin.  ft. 

Width    of    sections 18  ft. 

Dept  of  clay  in  center 18-20  in. 

Amount  of  clay  per  lin.   ft 75  cu.  yds. 

Average  cost  per  yd.  in  place  including  clearing,  weed 

cutting  and  finishing    -. 41.6  cts. 

Average   haul    4,420  ft. 

Average  cost  per  mile  at  above  figures $1,650 

This  latter  figure  would  include  cost  where  the  entire  mile  had  to 
be  covered  with  clay,  but  in  the  case  of  the  road  at  Waterloo  only 
about  one-half  the  entire  length  improved  had  to  be  covered.  One- 
quarter  was  improved  by  cutting  down  a  clay  hill,  the  clay  being 
used  in  filling  over  the  sand,  and  one-quarter  being  simply  shaped 
with  a  road  machine.  The  cost  per  mile  under  these  conditions 
would  be  reduced  to  about  $1,000.  Labor  was  paid  $2.25  per  day 
and  $5  per  day  was  paid  for  teams  and  dump  wagons. 

Cost  of  Cinder-Clay  Road,  Iowa. f— Several  miles  of  road  have 
been  constructed  of  soft  coal  cinders  in  and  near  Council  Bluffs,  la. 
This  material  was  used  owing-  to  the  lack  of  stone  suitable  for 
macadam,  the  limestone  in  that  neighborhood  being  nearly  worth- 
less for  that  purpose,  and  suitable  stone  being  far  distant.  The 
method  of  constructing  these  roads  as  given  in  a  letter  to  the 
editors  from  Mr.  W.  F.  Baker,  Supervisor  of  Pottawattamie  County, 
Iowa,  is  as  follows :  "We  use  about  800  cu.  yds.  of  cinders  per  mile 
and  this  leaves  them  about  5  ins.  thick  and  10  ft.  wide  upon  the 
surface  of  the  road.  We  then  plow  the  roadbed  to  a  depth  of  about 
5  ins.  below  the  cinders  and  10  ft.  wide,  thus  thoroughly  mixing 
the  cinders  with  the  dirt, — about  one  half  of  each.  We  then  use  a 
blade  grader  moving  this  mixture  outward  from  the  center  to  the 
depth  plowed  and  10  ft.  wide,  finding  a  smooth  hard  surface  that  is 
rolled  thoroughly.  We  then  move  this  mixture  back  with  our 
grader,  spreading  it  evenly  over  this  hard  surface  about  2  ins.  thick 
at  a  time,  following  each  layer  with  a  heavy  roller,  thus  building 
up  till  it  conforms  to  the  roadbed  upon  each  side,  and  sloping  from 
the  center  outward  about  1%  ins.  to  the  foot.  Cinders  cement 
equally  well  with  hill  clay,  black  soil,  or  gum-bo,  but  not  so  well 
with  sandy  soil.  We  have  had  this  system  of  road  in  use  over 


"Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  18,  1909. 
t Engineering-Contracting,  July  3,  1907. 


328  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

one  year  where  there  has  been  exceedingly  heavy  traffic  with  nar 
row  tires  and  we  believe  it  is  equal  in  durability  to  macadam,  much 
easier  and  more  c"heaply  repaired  and  costing  not  to  exceed  one- 
tenth  as  much  in  this  locality.  This  roadbed  is  not  only  exceedingly 
hard  but  rough,  so  rubber  tires  do  not  pick  it  up,  and  when  dis- 
placed with  shoe  corks,  it  cements  again  under  pressure,  while  rain 
has  no  effect  upon  it.  This  form  of  road  leaves  a  dirt  road  on  each 
side  for  the  travel  in  dry  weather,  which  I  considered  very  impor- 
tant. As  to  the  cost,  if  you  were  to  pay  25  cts.  per  yard  for  the 
cinders,  and  then  haul  them  from  o^e  to  two  miles  to  your  road, 
your  road  when  completed  would  cost  not  to  exceed  $500  per  mile." 

Cost  of  Burnt  Clay  Roads.*— In  some  sections  of  the  country  clay 
is  the  only  available  material  from  which  roads  can  be  constructed. 
This  is  so  in  large  areas  in  the  South,  particularly  in  the  valleys  of 
the  Mississippi  and  its  tributaries,  where  sedimentary  clays  are 
found  very  generally.  There  is  little  or  no  sand  in  these  areas  and 
the  clays  are  of  a  particularly  plastic  and  sticky  variety,  making 
traffic  in  such  localities  almost  impossible  during  the  wet  season. 
To  meet  this  condition  the  Office  of  Public  Roads,  U.  S.  Department 
of  Agriculture,  has  made  experiments  as  to  the  burning  of  these 
clays  so  as  to  not  only  destroy  the  plastic  qualities,  but  also  as  far 
as  possible  to  form  hard  brick-like  lumps  which  should  be  capable 
of  sustaining  traffic.  Following  these  experiments  an  experimental 
road  was  constructed  which  is  proving  highly  satisfactory.  The 
construction  of  this  type  of  road  as  well  as  the  construction  of 
sand-clay  roads,  is  given  in  a  bulletin  by  William  L.  Spoon,  Road 
Expert,  Office  of  Public  Roads,  which  has  been  recently  issued  by 
the  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture.  In  the  preparation  of  the 
roadbed  for  burnt-clay  roads,  the  road  is  graded  to  an  even  width 
between  ditches,  and  is  then  plowed  up  as  deeply  as  possible. 
Furrows  are  then  dug  across  the  road  from  ditch  to  ditch,  extending 
through  and  beyond  the  width  to  be  burned.  If  it  is  intended  to 
burn  12  ft.  of  roadway,  the  transverse  furrows  should  be  16  ft. 
long,  so  as  to  extend  2  ft.  on  each  side  of  the  final  width  of  the 
roadway.  Across  the  ridges  formed  between  these  furrows,  which 
should  be  about  4  ft.  apart,  the  first  course  of  cordwood  is  laid 
longitudinally,  so  as  to  form  a  series  of  flues  in  which  the  firing  is 
started.  From  15  to  20  of  these  flues  are  fired  at  one  time. 

Good  sound  wood,  as  dry  and  well  seasoned  as  possible,  is  used 
for  fuel.  But  in  addition  dry  brushwood,  bark,  old  fence  rails,  ties, 
coal  slack,  may  be  used  to  advantage  with  the  cordwood.  The 
best  and  soundest  cordwood  is  selected  for  the  first  course,  and 
should  be  laid  so  that  the  pieces  will  touch,  thus  forming  a  floor. 
Another  layer  of  wood  is  thrown  irregularly  across  this  floor,  in 
crib  formation,  with  spaces  left  between  in  which  the  lumps  of  clay 
are  piled.  This  clay  should  be  in  coarse  lumps,  so  as  to  allow  a 
draft  for  easy  combustion. 

After  the  lumps  of  clay  have  been  heaped  upon  this  floor  another 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  5,   1906. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  329 

course  of  wood  is  laid  parallel  to  the  first.  The  third  layer  is 
placed  in  exactly  the  same  manner  as  the  first,  and  each  opening 
and  crack  filled  with  brush,  chips,  or  any  other  combustible  ma- 
terial. The  top  layer  of  clay  is  placed  over  all  and  the  finer  por- 
tions of  the  material  heaped  over  the  whole  structure.  This  final 
layer  should  be  taken  from  side  ditches,  and  may  be  lumps  of  all 
sizes.  It  is  spread  evenly  over  the  top  in  a  layer  of  not  less  than 
6  to  8  ins.  Finally  the  whole  is  tamped  and  rounded  off  so  as  to 
hold  the  heat  as  long  as  possible.  If  coal  slack  is  available  two  top 
layers  of  wood  may  be  left  out  and  the  slack  thoroughly  mixed  with 
the  clay.  A  careful  arrangement  of  the  cordwood  cribbing  to  sep- 
arate the  clay  is  important. 

In  the  practice  of  the  Office  of  Public  Roads,  15  or  20  flues  are 
prepared  ready  for  firing  in  one  section.  However,  if  a  large  force 
of  laborers  is  available,  a  greater  number  of  flues  can  be  fired  at 
one  time.  The  best  results  are  obtained  by  firing  all  the  flues  of  a 
section  simultaneously  and  maintaining  the  combustion  as  evenly 
as  possible. 

After  the  firing  is  completed  not  only  the  portion  of  clay  which 
forms  the  top  of  the  kiln,  but  the  ridges  between  the  flues  should 
be  burned  thoroughly,  so  as  to  form  a  covering  of  >  burnt  clay  1 0 
to  12  ins.  in  depth,  which,  when  rolled  down  and  compacted,  forms 
a  road  surface  of  from  6  to  8  ins.  in  thickness.  If  properly  burned, 
the  material  should  be  entirely  changed  in  character,  and  when  it 
is  wet  it  should  have  no  tendency  to  form  mud.  When  the  material 
is  sufficiently  cooled  the  roadbed  should  be  brought  to  a  high  crown 
before  rolling,  in  order  to  allow  for  the  compacting  of  the  material. 
This  can  best  be  done  with  a  road  grader.  After  this  the  rolling 
should  be  begun  and  continued  until  the  roadbed  is  smooth  and 
hard.  The  finished  croWn  should  have  a  slope  of  at  least  %  in. 
to  the  foot. 

The  main  advantages  of  burning  a  road  over  its  entire  length 
are  that  the  cost  of  transporting  clay  is  avoided  and  that  the  sub- 
grade  of  the  road  is  burned  as  well  as  the  material  above. 

In  giving  the  cost  of  burnt-clay  construction  Mr.  Spoon  states 
that  it  is,  of  course,  impossible  to  give  the  cost  of  a  burnt-clay  road 
which  will  apply  to  the  same  work  in  all  sections  of  the  country. 
Although  this  form  of  construction  in  the  South  up  to  the  present 
time  has  been  successful,  it  cannot  as'  yet  be  said  to  ha '  e  passed 
the  experimental  stage.  The  items  of  cost  of  the  experimental  road 
300  ft.  long,  as  constructed  at  Clarksdale,  Miss.,  are  as  follows: 

30%   cords  of  wood,  at  $1.30  per  cord $39.65 

20  loads  of  bark,  chips,  etc 6.00 

Labor  at  $1.25  per  day  and  teams  at  $3  per  day.  ...         38.30 

Total  cost  of  300  feet $83.95 

Total  cost  per  mile  at  this  rate $1,478.40 

Since  the  above  road  was  built  numerous  sections  of  burnt-clay 
road  have  been  constructed  in  that  locality,  and  up  to  the  present 
time  only  favorable  reports  regarding  them  have  been  received. 


330  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Cost  of  Maintaining  Earth  Roads  by  Dragging.*— In  a  recently 
issued  Farmers'  Bulletin,  Mr.  D.  Ward  King  gives  some  data  on  the 
cost  of  maintenance  of  earth  roads  by  dragging.  He  states  that 
the  most  elaborate  form  of  split  log  drag  will  cost  but  a  few  dollars 
for  material  and  labor,  while  one  man  and  team  can  operate  it  suc- 
cessfully under  all  usual  conditions.  Mr.  King  gives  the  following 
figures  as  showing  the  cost  of  maintaining  ordinary  country  roads 
per  mile  per  year  without  a  drag.  They  were  obtained  in  Kansas 
by  Prof.  W.  C.  Hoad,  of  the  University  of  Kansas,  in  1906,  and 
were  taken  from  the  official  records  of  the  counties : 

Crawford    County    $52 

Douglas  County    38 

Franklin   County 34 

Johnson   County    48 

Neosho    County    40 

Saline    County    43 

The  average  cost  is  $42.50  per  mile  per  year,  and  Mr.  King  states 
that  it  may  safely  be  said  that  the  cost  of  dragging  would  be 
trifling  in  comparison.  In  the  Report  of  Highway  Commissioner 
of  Maine  in  1906  it  is  stated  that  the  least  expense  per  mile  for 
dragging  was  about  $1.50  ;  the  greatest  a  little  over  $6  ;  the  aver- 
age expense  per  mile  for  5%  miles  a  little  less  than  $3.  One  town- 
ship in  Iowa  experimented  with  the  drag  on  28  miles  of  highway 
for  a  year.  The  township  paid  for  the  making  of  the  drags  and 
hired  men  to  use  them.  The  total  expense,  including  the  original 
cost  of  the  drags,  for  the  year  averaged  $2.40  per  mile.  A  neighbor- 
hood of  farmers  in  Ray  County,  Mo.,  employed  one  of  their  number 
to  drag  a  5 -mile  stretch.  He  received  compensation  at  the  rate  of 
$3  per  day.  When  the  end  of  the  year  came  and  a  settlement 
was  made,  the  cost  for  the  year  was  found  to  be  $1.66  per  mile. 
The  road  is  a  tough  clay.  Prof.  William  Robertson,  of  the  Minne- 
sota Agricultural  Station,  after  a  year's  experience  in  dragging  a 
main  road  made  entirely  of  gumbo  without  any  sand  or  gravel,  and 
which  during  the  past  year  has  shown  no  defects  either  by  rutting 
or  development  of  soft  places,  fixes  the  cost  of  the  work  at  not 
to  .exceed  $5  per  mile. 

Cost  of  Making  a  Corduroy  Road.t — The  old-fashioned  corduroy 
road  is  still  used  frequently  by  contractors  where  it  is  necessary 
to  cross  a  swampy  piece  of  ground  with  a  temporary  roadway. 
Such  a  road  is  frequently  made  of  split  cedar  sticks,  about  as 
large  as  fence  posts,  cut  in  8-ft.  lengths,  and  laid  in  a  close  row 
on  the  ground.  Then  earth  is  shoveled  onto  the  sticks  to  even  up 
the  hollows.  A  good  axman  can  cut  down,  saw,  split  and  lay  the 
cedar  for  a  corduroy  road  at  the  rate  of  40  to  50  lin.  ft.  (2y2  to 
3  rods)  per  day.  Hence  if  he  receives  $2  a  day,  it  costs  4  to  5  cts. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  road,  or  $200  to  $250  per  mile.  The  foregoing  is 
based  on  some  records  of  work  done  under  the  direction  of  the 
managing  editor  of  Engineering-Contracting. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.   6,   1907. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  331 

Cost  of  Gravel  Roads,  Indiana.*— Mr.  Chas.  C.  Hufflne,  county 
engineer  of  Clinton  County,  Ind.,  has  given  us  the  following  data 
on  the  construction  of  gravel  roads  in  that  county : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  gravel   at  pit $0.10 

Stripping    pit     0.05 

Hauling     0.30 

Dumping    and    spreading 0.03 

Shoveling 0.10 

Miscellaneous     .  .  . 0.05 

Total     $0.63 

As  about  1,800  cu.  yds.  of  gravel  are  required  per  mile  of  road, 
the  cost  will  be  $1,134.  In  addition  Mr.  Huffine  estimates  the  cost 
of  grading  the  roadbed  at  $200  and  the  cost  of  bridges  and  culverts 
at  $200,  making  the  total  cost  per  mile  $1,534.  The  above  estimate 
is  for  bank  gravel.  The  majority  of  roads  built  in  Clinton  County, 
however,  have  been  made  from  gravel  taken  from  wet  pits,  making 
an  additional  expense  of  25  cts.  per  cubic  yard  for  dipping  or 
10  cts.  per  cubic  yard  for  pumping  water,  depending  on  the  method 
by  Which  the  gravel  is  taken  out.  This  would  increase  the  cost 
of  the  road  $450  or  $180  per  mile,  respectively.  The  above  are 
about  the  average  cost  of  gravel  roads  in  Clinton  County  for  the 
past  five  years.  The  contract  prices  for  these  roads  have  varied 
from  $1,750  to  $2,100  per  mile.  The  specifications  for  the  con- 
struction of  a  gravel  road  in  the  above  county  require  the  road- 
bed to  be  graded  to  a  width  of  24  ft.  and  the  gravel  surfacing  to 
be  placed  to  a  width  of  9  ft.  The  gravel  is  required  to  be  placed 
15  ins.  deep  at  the  middle  and  9  ins.  at  the  side.  Common  labor 
in  Indiana  is  paid  about  13%  cts.  per  hour,  and  about  30  cts.  per 
hour  is  paid  for  a  two-horse  team  and  driver. 

Cost  of  Gravel  Street,  Michigan.— Mr.  A.  W.  Saunders  gives  the 
following:  The  gravel  was  often  very  wet,  puddled  in  fact;  87  cu. 
yds.  of  gravel  made  90  lin.  ft.  of  street  6  ins.  thick  on  the  center 
line  and  4  ins.  thick  at  the  gutter,  and  25  ft.  wide.  The  gravel  was 
unloaded  from  a  lighter,  10  men  doing  the  work.  Six  men  in  a 
10-hr,  day  loaded  124  cu.  yds.  on  six  teams,  using  eight  wagons. 
Kach  round  trip  of  team  averaged  45  mins.  a  total  of  68  trips  being 
made  in  a  10-hr,  day. 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  measured  loose  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Gravel     $0.850 

Unloading,  at  $1.75  per  day 150 

Hauling,   at  $4.50   per  day 257 

Spreading,  at   $1.75  per  day 087 

Superintendence    and    depreciation 021 

Total     $1.365 

Cross    Reference   on   Cost   of  Grading    Roads.— The  reader  Is  re 
ferred   to   the   section   on    Earth   Excavation   and   Embankment    for 
the  discussion  of  .grading  costs. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  18,  1907. 


332  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Cost  of  Grading  a  Road,  New  York.- A  stiff  clay  was  ditched 
and  graded  for  a  New  York  state  macadam  road  near  Buffalo,  at 
the  following  cost  per  cu.  yd. : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Plowing     $0.05 

Loading    into    wagons 0.1 2^ 

Hauling    1,000    ft 0.05 % 

Spreading     0.05 

Foreman,   supt.,  timekeeper  and  water  boy 0.05 

Total     $0.33 

The  work  was  done  by  contract,  and  wages  were  $1.50  for  com- 
mon laborers,  $4.50  for  teams,  per  8-hr.  day.  The  clay  was 
loosened  with  a  rooter  plow  and  was  hauled  in  patent  dump 
wagons.  This  cost  is  a  safe  figure  for  stiff  material  hauled  not 
more  than  1,000  ft. 

The  cost  of  grading  2%  miles  of  road  under  conditions  essen- 
tially as  above,  except  that  the  material  was  a  gravelly  soil,  was 
28  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  Grading  a  Road,  Maryland.— Mr.  W.  W.  Crosby  gives  the 
following : 

Grading  a  road  for  a  6 -in.  macadam  pavement  14  ft.  wide,  the 
whole  roadbed  being  24  ft.  wide,  cost  39.6  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  not  in- 
cluding the  cost  of  "shaping,"  which  was  y2  ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  which 
is  equivalent  to  adding  4.2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  to  the  grading  cost.  The 
road  averaged  1,700  cu.  yds.  per  mile.  Work  was  done  by  day 
labor,  negro  labor  at  10  cts.  per  hr.,  and  team  at  40  cts. 

Cost  of  Grading  Road  With  Road  Machine,  Michigan. — Mr.  Frank 
F.  Rogers  gives  the  following  data  on  work  done  at  Port  Huron, 
Mich. :  A  street  was  to  be  macadamized  with  a  strip  of  macadam 
9  ft.  wide  and  about  5  ins.  thick  after  rolling.  The  earth  was  sand 
and  sandy  loam  overlying  clay.  The  side  ditches  had  already  been 
made,  and  the  street  was  already  well  turnpiked  (crowned),  so  that 
the  grading  consisted  merely  in  preparing  a  bed  for  the  macadam 
and  in  making  earth  shoulders  to  hold  the  stone.  For  this  purpose 
a  common  road  machine  was  used,  first  to  cut  off  the  high  places 
and  fill  the  hollows  by  setting  the  blade  at  right  angles  with  the 
center  line  of  the  street.  Then,  to  form  the  shoulders  and  cut 
the  crown  of  the  subgrade,  the  blade  was  set  at  a  slight  angle  so  as 
to  crowd  enough  earth  to  one  side  of  the  9-ft.  strip,  forming  first 
one  shoulder,  then  the  other.  Stakes  were  set  1  ft.  outside  the 
9-ft.  strip  to  give  line  in  operating  the  grader.  The  edges  of  the 
shoulders  were  afterward  trimmed  by  hand  with  a  shovel  while  the 
subgrade  was  being  rolled  with  a  steam  roller.  The  grading  cost 
$85  per  mile  in  this  soft  sandy  soil,  where  no  ditching  or  turnpiking 
was  done. 

On  another  stretch  of  road,  in  sand,  it  was  necessary  to  break  up, 
re-grade,  and  trim  the  ditches  to  line,  as  well  -as  to  make  the 
shoulders  for  the  9-ft.  macadam.  This  cost  about  $360  per  mile. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  333 


Two  teams,  a  driver  for  each  team  and  another  man  to  operate 
the  grader  were  used.  Bach  team  and  driver  received  $3.50  for 
10  hrs.  and  the  other  man  received  $1.50. 

Average  Prices  of  Pavements  in  100  Representative  Cities,  To- 
gether With  the  Wages  of  Labor  and  Prices  of  Paving  Materials.*—- 
In  our  issue  of  March  27,1907,  we  printed  a  number  of  tables  show- 
ing the  character  and  cost  of  paving  work  done  In  1906,  in  a  num- 
ber of  representative  American  cities.  In  the  present  issue  we 
present  somewhat  similar  data  on  the  paving  work  done  in  1907  in 
100  cities  of  the  United  States.  No  attempt  was  made  to  get  com- 
plete statistics  of  the  United  States;  the  purpose,  rather, 'was  to 
select  cities  in  various  sections  of  the  country  on  the  assumption 
that  their  practice  and  activity  would  represent  with  approximate 
accuracy  the  practice  and  activity  of  these  sections  as  a  whole. 

Perhaps  the  most  interesting  of  the  tables  is  Table  IV,  showing 
the  wages  of  labor  and  the  prices  of  materials.  It  will  be  noted 
from  this  that  the  8-hr,  day  does  not  prevail  in  all  of  the  cities 
reporting.  Practically  all  of  the  Eastern  states  have  an  8-hr,  day, 
while  in  the  Middle  West  the  10-hr,  day  seems  to  be  the  more 
common.  The  rates  of  wages  of  labor  vary,  being  lowest  in  the 
South  and  highest  in  the  West.  In  the  New  England  cities  the 
wages  of  common  labor  averaged  $2.00  per  day,  while  in  the 
Middle  West  the  average  was  $1.75.  The  cost  of  the  various  paving 
materials  taken  in  combination  with  the  cost  of  labor  are  interest- 
ing in  as  much  as  they  show  in  a  measure  the  reason  for  the  vari- 
ation in  the  cost  of  the  pavement  given  in  the  other  tables. 

Tables  V  to  X,  giving  the  cost  of  the  various  kinds  of  pavement, 
should  be  of  general  interest,  although  it  is  evident  that  no  per- 
fectly just  comparison  can  be  made  without  going  far  deeper  into 
local  conditions  than  the  data  sent  us  would  permit.  In  these 
tables  the  average  price  per  square  yard  includes  grading,  unless 
stated  otherwise. 

Cost  of  Paving  in  50  American  Cities. t— Tables  XI  to  XIII  show 
the  construction  and  cost  of  street  paving  in  about  50  representa- 
tive American  cities.  These  figures  were  collected  by  the  Committee 
on  Roads  and  Pavements  of  the  Illinois  Society  of  Engineers  and 
Surveyors  and  were  reported  at  the  annual  convention  held  last 
week.  The  records  cover  macadam,  asphalt  and  brick  and  block 
pavements  and  give  the  materials  used,  thickness  and  cost.  The 
costs  given  are,  of  course,  costs  to  the  cities  and  not  costs  to  the 
contractors.  No  very  accurate  general  conclusions  can  be  drawn 
from  these  records,  and  in  fact  this  was  not  the  purpose  of  their 
collection;  they  show  individual  records  of  city  paving  work  and 
for  this  are  deserving  of  careful  study.  Mr.  A.  N.  Johnson,  State 
Engineer,  Illinois,  was  chairman  of  the  committee,  making  the 
report  from  which  the  tables  are  taken. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  April  1,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  3,  1909. 


334  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

+2        :  •  •  •  -o o  •  ;  ;  ;  •  -o  •  -o  •    •  i   . 

d. -•••::  -^  :::::::::::::  -^  • «>  :  :®  :  «»$ 

f£I  :;::  ;s  :;  ::!:::::  ::  ::-;::::  -  :  -  : g|g 

•5  ?s  w 

W  M  O 

H        rf^S"9     -OOlrtOOOO     •     •     -O     •     -OOOO     'tfjOOO     "     'O     '  O  O  O  O  O    -4  ^ 

j-1    .So    N  •°.c;tTc^c;0.0.  •  •  *0.  •  •l^<Rc!cj  'c~:c!ri  •  .°.  ^*®e**a  >>**"M' 
g  u  .°. 

.^       ^.^i^COU^lOOOt^-Olrt     •     'OOOOOlftOlrt     vo  WO     ^OOOlrtloJVoo          WJn 


<J 

•"Ej 


,5 


M  03 

«<»     •Oox-    -o    -woooo    -wwo    -oifflw   •    -S     .oo^usooLraS  wo   rt-*° 

5  S  C  t<  ^*US  O     -W     -S^IWOmO     •  iH  00  T-l     'USNW     •     -QO     •  rrf  O>  rH  CO  C»  O  Cl^  OO         r-5 


fi  5fe' 

b  »  «J3 


o 


tiooooomoo    •    "ftowooooo    •:!    -o 

.     ...^^S«A. ^ .     .TfOOOOOOWOlrt     -^     -t-     .^v^mi-^oo^rin  g  j^   3 

I     ICON        COT-!rHe<Ji-i     ^     IiH     .rHiHrHTH5^'iHe<i  O^O 

^  O      JZ, 


Q*  «i-ij5  — .  ^      ' 

§    ^*0"  ^c7c 

J 

^-o  •  -^o®®®®  *°25  *  •5®°"s  -poo  :p2popwpp 

S  0>k 


•t-lftOplflO     -(MOO 

fi"  " '  s 


u    o2rf^^^^IM''~'T^'~'rH'cs'r^e>'r^T^<:<''?c'1^1^'~*'~'r^'~*1~'  'r^c<'r^r^e<»5<'p^'-* 

3     to     rf 

W        C  ^  t-iOOO  OJOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  OOOOOOiOO     .OO5OOOO5     -OO> 

£  ?|g  -    3- 

^l^iiiiiiiMiniMiiiiiiniiiN;::; 

!  !s  i^s 


H  •    -^3    •.;;    ;    -r1  c-    • 

c/T.K^.        H2'»'>r*O'3,-.      K^J^*  "*^^j^^ 

^-o^;^     xte     Sugg     £  -fe^PJ  S  ®"  r?  ^,2«»| 

81^  .dc5o^§&Jrt^^^  3^"^* 


$          N'fi^raS* 

c   .^^c? 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  335 


~      arr£ rn : ;  .  .    o 

O        3  ^ 

H       *^  tf 

£ 

fcr     ^  o    ;    ;    ;ooo    ;©    ;    ;    ;oooo    ;  -oo    ;    :©i»    ;ooo    ;    ;    -oo    10 


EH         £  O         e     !     1     |iOOO     |O     )     )     ]OOOO     )     -OO     \     llON     |OOO     \     \     -OO     »» 
.     .     .«O-*rH      -N      •     •      -aicst-^CO     '     [oOrH     •     •  t-  rH     «Tl»o'     •     «     |lOlO 


W  • 

S  'OL^OW   '    -oioooioo  't-o    'oo  ;ooo   :< 

EH  gJ^CiM     .     .rHt-OOO-»O  .t>-CO     .°^°°.  .^OlO     .< 

r~(  CJQj3         r-i'-rHrHrH  •           '•  -—JrHM 


«  «o  t- 

*OO     *  <D  O  CO  10  to     "     *  CO  10     *' 
|00      iNiOCOcil^     I     !«^rH      I< 


•ooio    'OOio    'oo    to^jooioiooi    ; 

.OOOOO     .lOOOt-     -j^io     .  «C>  <£,  IO  C-  CO  •*     . 


o 

•oo    -oio    -o    •    -oooo    -ooo    •    .00    to 
'.oio    IOIN    ;o    .    ;oioioio    .0100    .    '*oo    N* 


•<  •  s 

J  ,          'gOOOOOlOlftlOOOuO  OOOOO     -OOIOIOOIOIOIOIOIOOIO     -1010  ^j 

C^^Q ,...^.....|. -.  £l 

I   6sJN  s' 

s  '  ° 

be     w  •-, 

<^       Cj^^cOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooasooooasooooooo    -ooc-. oo  g* 


336 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


•  °.   •   •   •°.c!   -°.   •°.0.°. 

•O     •     •     •  O  !*••     •  H3     •  1C  OC  O 


•oo  •  -o  •  o  -o  -ooooooooo  -ooooo  -ooo  •  -T , • 
.St!1*5  I0."5.  I  .°.  i°.  •  "?  •°.0.u^®1^0.0.0.0.  •0.0.°.°.c!  -°. MC!  '  **  3 
_,  u  ^  .woo  .  -I-  -os  .«  .cocic<it-.£irHrHtoin  ;^^®^^  INM*  :  o« 


;ir:oo    ;oow25000000irt»nooo^oin    •   % '~ 

C  >. 


•oo.^ouso    •    ;i 

C  t,  >>  «D  N  03  O     l^oJ^lrtlMt-     .     .(MC<|^T»<eCl-:pOe<«t-0^1^0l.Ct-rH(M 


J'gOCU'T-J     'rHr-J     .THTHrsCJrHT-l     •     .r-dH^rHiHi-liHNrH       T-lrHC^NT-i     'TH^-^ 


Nooo  ;  ;  :<=>oo  ;0ooo  :  ;ooo  ;ooooo  :oooo-^y3 


c<icoeoc<i    • 


;oioirs    ;i«0iftio    ',    ;oirtO    ;iflO_ooiA    ; ic  1000    g^ 
.»»tJ<M    .^inecc<J    •    .Neo-*    .co«co3-*e<i    >«'' 


"  S« 


9   I 


cioooooooioooooooooasooooooooooooooooooooo 


)  oo  o  01  o   ^  5  < 
1-1     ^  rj  >< 


.  C1    j 

. 

.co 


1  .    I'S^dC^ol  i  r^^SS^gScJ    K&fr»Slrfl13^ 

2  o"«  o  o  |J<Q  ^  c^.s  ^^11^2  g  ll^.l  d|  S  I  g  Ot  o> 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


337 


Bs 


oooaii-i>ooMOi-^o3oooo'*Tt'Ot-L--«oOr-icoi-io'?'>ooooeot-ococ'- 

oo  Tt«  oo  t-«-  •*  oo  01  TH  ^t<  as  eo  <N  -^  t-  <y>  o  •*  •*  t-  oo  TH  «o  co  o  o>  o  co  t-  in  M<  us  o  eo        ^ 

10  e^w^ei?»i>?V»o«ti?'*1<Po5'^'«ds'*i>»4r^*fqp«a*o«  r-To'evfc-'eo'  X"0  M  _  0)  mio 

00        CO  (MO        rHCOt-        CO        OOrH        rH  r-l        iH  t-        fHr-l  S'a^S1'0^® 


HANDBOOK   OF    COST   DATA. 


w    ;  in    ;«o«r>io«£>oooot-<£?O'*iom«r>    ;    ;    •  LO 
co    'coeoiMcocoiftcococoeocococo    •    •    .  co 


«c«o    •  t-  so 
coco    .^y»co 


*JO4jfi 

1 


2        .............    -oo    .0    .    •«    -o    -        .    .  :eo    -          c« 

aSil*  '     .  M     .     .  "5     .     !     .  "*  »«     -t-     !     .  M     .  <0     -CO      '     .     .en     'CM      .  ^     .  QJ  J-  "C  S 

''         •'••'•         '     " 


os  o.  o  ift  o    ;ooo^ooooooi^ciMoaiifl<NOT-i£JiiftOicoobLreo8'-<5"itf     ^  -5 


i- coco »HOS    .coi-o 


S.S  SS  o 


'S3 13  fe  C  -S  >  >  ^  5ic^  M  £  be—  .S^  riJJ'^XiS.S  ^^  rt  O  "^  >"  5  "w^S*  ^^j^S^S 
St!iC'^l?l*'?a3^iJ»-^ubX)C5>rt^3<P3^ft  ^'-'•^Oycij^^  ^S^m'Sj-it* 
•-^  3  S  !3  k-j  hr  *-*  >-r  '£  X  rT  n  ^S^^5^S£5  rT"r5  ii  iS?L,  tl  C  JT1 1?  t?  fe1  ^43(2^$^ 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


339 


340 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


£  g£  g        LOCOOrH^OOC-cn     fl          g  £S  C       COLfiLOt-OOCSLOOOLOroOCLO         ^ 

^  j^  jy'p   MNTHdrHTHdrHCOTH    ^          g  ^  ^^  |  C^frq'  <M"  <N  M  M  CO  <N  OJ  N  N  W  CO          g 


•c?      M 

o 


jOOlH^t*O«fcC~'-lT-lCO.2  M 


jy         (MTfl 

r;  ii 


'S        H 
G        O 


8 


>  o  Tt<  oo  CQ  LO  '"J.O  t- 1-  o:  co 


M   ° 


§  J 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


to  com    -oo 

i-l  CON     I  •«* 


-tn    -som     -. 
!  co    !  co  so  Tf    • 


-co    -ict--t-.to 
I  so    .  ^«Tf  T*  co 


.10 us •<*<-.    .« 


2     i 


!||l|||i.      .    .  ,       2*  ..9i 

O 

<        -de    £ 

hn1  K*1 S^  .2 

£      "*  M  ^  PH  r!5 

I  ^lo^t  S^sT* 

&         £$1NS  :  i10'10^  :  :  :  :  :  --  :  :  i^S  :    ^Issll 

S        S§S  g^^sf 

«  I!  .*2*  - 

-Jbfl  ##ia  S  *  ****          i-lcs2a)Om^ 

w  ?!Sc      t-co«ocominiooo    -ooot-c--^    -ocoomo  ft>c  OrH  ™  o 

Z  .^r1-'*     -t.~<0iOOOiHC<lOOO«0     'i-IOOOCOiHO     «OiOit>-iCO          oS7       T*     •  SiS 

>  ^,"§  n  <N co tc co eo co N IH T-H    Ico'c-ieococ^N    ICONNCO'^       ^'""'ftee-     w 
02  02  T!  ,5**  co^oai(-<D'o 

£*.%*  B'KSI'S 

§       ^S,M  ,l?|%| 

8  0;T,t.oo«5oooNS5^|<T,^T,P.u5ilt-^i>ooi      |n»^> 

g  g   t^dWCOOin-HOOC-OOUSOOgO^O^^rHCO         ^  _g  C        .5  8     rf 

p^  ^n  ooco^in^iftfo^in-^^T^o^c^  .^l00^   .T^   „  .™     "•      *^*ea  08  C     T 

o<     °°^     ,_( 3  ^     ol  ,H  *~  eo         N     ScoinS     '         aJtwTH^jrt^6^ 

TO -!.......     5°p«5^to 

I       [i[illlllllli  HU  ^  a 

;  j      |  i  ?iiilii" 

^  :::::::::::   ^:::  f^|tl^| 

li^i^iill^:^        ;:SfflS|^§1 
g  :    :6  •  :^s  .is^ls^  JJssl'8l 

i  t^^' 


342  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


^     o   ^S^      JJ 

*      |    -SS-g""  •"u""<0 


o    TJ.SS 
^coooa^w 

•£•£  JJcsS  «  g  ooo    .Oooo0    •  —  ^-- 

g  HH^SM 
S          .  be    ^ 

3     ,S|2l5  ::::::::::! 


£         |||  S-:—  ::::---    s^ 

g         o^  ?II-S5 

5 
£ 

Q 

o       £^32   ^^w^cis^w^ 


M}*"1"'*'*  •*  *  ^H^3'-< 

•O  oo5eo35000^5oiMcor-i          '          i3<C 
^H  co «o oo as o> «o e<i t- o oo eo  10        ^—I'-i 


!KL 

§|^i2^||§g§s"  llp-s-1 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS. 


343 


TABLE  X. — AVERAGE  PRICE  OF  MACADAM  LAID  IN  1907  IN  37  CITIES. 


Total 

Price         Thick- 

Per  cu.  yd.    ness  of 

Average      Guar-  for  Grading    Pave- 

Price         antee       if  Paid          ment 

Sq.  Yds.  Per  Sq.  Yd.  Years.  Separately.  Inches. 

Albany,  N.  Y.    1,661  $1.30 

Bayonne,  N.   J 5,600 

Brockton,    Mass 39,123  .60 

Easton,    Pa 22,104  .435 

East  Orange,  N.   J...    38,150*  1.00* 

Elizabeth,   N.    J 4,410*  1.25 

Evanston,     111 56,226  1.05*11 

Fond   du   Lac,   Wis. ..      6,000  .70* 

Holyoke,   Mass 27,124  .53 

Jersey  City,  N.  J 8,046  1.00 

Keokuk,   la 10,172  .635* 

La   Crosse,   Wis 33,529  1.08 

Medford,   Mass 29,0002  1.50 

Milwaukee,  Wis 87,215  .80 

Minneapolis,    Minn 20,592  .90 

Nashville,   Tenn 9,693  1.65s 

New   Bedford,    Mass..    29,793  .53 

Newton,     Mass 65,000*  .40 

Oshkosh,   Wis 14,026  .65 

Portland,    Me 22,275  .82 

Providence    33,407  

Racine,    Wis 7,845  1.24* 

Richmond,    Ind 33,000  .50 

Rockford,    111 65.0058  .39 

Salt  Lake  City,  Utah  64,000  l.OO*7 

San    Antonio,    Tex. .  .280,000*  .50 

Savannah,  Ga 6,397°  .50 

Sedalia,  Mo 12,555  .90 

Sheboygan,  Wis 4,568  .99 

Somerville,     Mass 5,8004  .65 

South   Bend,    Ind 1,006  .65*- 

Superior,   Wis 50,506  1.25* 

Stockton,    Cal 83,000  .52* 

Toledo,  0 10,977  1.40*10 

Troy,   N.   Y 800  1.90 

Washington,   D.   C...    47,300  .80V," 

Winona,  Minn 8,902  1.00  " 

*Does  not  include  grading. 

1Telford  macadam.  2About  one-half  of  this  was  over  a  marshy 
soil  and  4  ft.  average  fill,  thus  making  the  average  price  higher  than 
usual ;  the  ordinary  cost  for  6-in.  macadam  including  excavation 
and  grading  is  about  $1  per  yd.  3Miles  of  30-ft.  roadway  ;  of  this 
amount  7.43  miles  was  done  by  city  at  $1.65  per  lin.  ft.  and  2.23 
miles  by  contract  at  $1.79  per  lin.  ft.  4By  day  labor.  BLoose. 
"Done  by  City  Engineer's  department.  7$0.65  to  $1.00.  8$0.50  to 
$0.77.  8Gravel  laid  on  soil.  i°Per  lin.  ft.  "$0.92  to  $1.05.  12$0.10 
to  $0.25.  139  ins.  limestone,  3  ins.  granite.  14$0.60  to  $0.80.  15By 
day  labor. 


2 

8 

$b'.40 

9 

. 

5- 

6 

6- 

10 

I 

.55 

12 

1 

15 

5 

".2512 

12 

1 

.50 

12 

'5 

".40 

12 

1 

.35 

10 

• 



12 

• 



8- 

12 

15 

. 

.... 

12 

4 

I 

.... 

10 

• 



6 

g 

s 

• 

.... 

:::: 

i 

t 

.77* 

9 

• 

.... 

8 

5 

.... 

12 



12' 

2 

* 

".ii 

*6 

! 

.80 

12 

.50 

7 

* 

.... 

'• 

*15 

.... 

" 

.... 

12 

344 


HANDBOOK    OP    COST   DATA. 


CXMOiOOOOOJOOCqCOO 


§i«t^CC 
t>-oot-- 


CM  tlr-l 


e   w- 

1*1 

fr. 


B 


B 


Make  of 
or 
Kind  of 


5113:8  H&V! 

o^S^otfeuo      >    m 


J 


k 
lock 


Granite  bloc 
Purington  bl 

«  M 

Barr  brick 


1! 


• 


5  o  -p  G 
%>*%*  o  .» 
HI  "tc  ' 


Q  W 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


345 


a-Sito 

a^T!^ 

,-/.,                                                        w          m          *          « 

'      8  6^ 

(MO^^r^'ooooooooo'tio     oo«oooc 

ooo    :ooooooo 

'     a'2'   ' 

os^OiMoooooic^HO^-oro      tn      coe^o^e^ 

C^Ol>»      f  C^  t^  OO  i-H  ^  OO  CC 

<3      C/3 

" 

« 

ii     ^     •*•*                                   §  ^  ^ 

I 

I'D  g 

•^•o  l*a  1                                8  e,  11 

S    * 

itfj^ffl.H 

1 

'3 

•^     j 

Q, 

s  • 

•a    1 
«    S 

£ 

^ 

°u 

ti 

fi.  §11  1 

1    * 

111  ilfiigfilii  fill 
in*            lur 

jis  11   llfsl 

^'gs   iSs  -S28.2T 
oc5    oo    c^SS>o 

^ 

rt 

O  t> 

•O      . 

H  & 

S    | 

£ 

-o 

c 

^•O  ly'O 

11 

% 

2  tn  I>>  (« 

O 

^                                      ^H^^                                    *H                                     % 

<N<MQe^»                      C<1(M(M 

^  O  13     -  $ 

g!!1! 

H«MNHN^ 
CO  00  <O  <O  (O  CO  00  CO  CO  CO  !O  CO  CO  <C  CD      «o«O«OO« 

^•Hn              -*> 

(U 

G 

"o.o 

4)  tj 

«        S 

§      -3 

to 

D 

1 

3-0 

s.  ^  §« 

2                  ^o£ 

rt  -^ 

4)   ^                                Jg    U 

* 

o       mo    06 

Oo         fwwoo 

8 

tn 

III    1   b          1          I 

Is 

0*0*03 

*» 

^g  £&      •$       J4  c                     ^                     *£ 

rt  <u  a.^1 

o 

^^-*-*cS^                 o                 ^ 

.J^  C/^*^ 

^fc      .                                                     0 

i.  -  °- 

5  >5                                     — 

S               HH 

346 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


i  j4!i 

St-ooa>ooooo>oi  os.to  co  o 

OCMOO     (Mr-coeoos^OJOsoot^Tfcooo 

a'R'o^ 

i 

« 

P| 

SSSS   888S88SSKZSS3 

<      CO 

^      CM      ^      ec      ^ 

».-. 

1  Is 

•oil!  ^1 

8 

£    £ 

S§rt  «       &§§  w     * 

coo    o    <cocoo 

&        J 

Make  of  Brick 
Kind  of  Block. 

Sandstone  block 
Metropolitan  brick 

Trimble 
Medina  block  (stone) 
Metropolitan 
Granite  block 
Purington  block 
Corning  shale  brick 
Various 
* 

1-  1             -:llll|l' 

i!'5!l  nSffiSi' 

on  Thickness 
Character. 

B 

1-  -       -i 

^3-33              3      -      -      3                  '          1?3      3          ', 

11 

3  CS 
Q 

CM                                     CM 

ji  °  T3  ,-~  <5 

•|  a  §1-8 

pa!*! 

CO       SO       cOcOcO-^f'OCOCO'M 

OOCOCOOSCO       0  00  50  «0           -00  tO  CO  to  00  O 

=sj 

83 
21 
11 

«>                                         E 

I  ,  ,,,,.-,-! 

•1     - 
li 

C  M   "                                    «                         «                   4> 

81    g-,.            ^           g.^..       g33^g 

*£ 

J                1 

O      O                     COCOO      CO           O        '  COO 

2 

to 

•a                     c 
'a           oo 
rt            °    ^  p 

1 

i 

O                           y} 

gr  -gr  ,   ,  iU>%  , 

2            O    |s  -gS  >"  *  s  -  3  J  * 

^j     **3     CQOO 
rt 

(       .  .  ,  Q     .9,  .  ,  ,  ,  ,  ..  .  ,  ,  . 

i 

K     0 

ROADS,   PAl'EMENTS,    U'ALKS. 


347 


Ipll 

^SS5«g5SSlS^5Sg^ 

322SS^SgS 

Q.1^0^ 

CO 

i          N<N         ^ 

£d| 

O>      -OOOO      -!Ot^O"3>OOOOOOOOO 
(>J      -OCOIM      .t^T-tO^HO5  COOOOOOO 
IO     -O«Ot—     •«OOOOOO5OiOO'*lOOO 

"5W5000000OOO 
tr^COCQsoiCt^OOOO 

4-4 

;       *                   0>rHe" 

Hi 

^ 

|                         S3 

?    IP 

jjsljf  Is  ^l3  5  3  ill3  3  11 

'    1"    II" 

•51    •*' 

s        « 

•c    8 

•2s          ^> 

"C"    ^ 

"00-3 

,11  =  3             w  | 

^  «•  ^  ^-g 

1  1 

s  w 

Q     <cjS^^     Sffl     HJPQ     <£<£& 

rj.5       .5   C   r! 

5  s    c,is    is'C  o.  v 

(«•-      ^23  w.h 

.    <J>          CJOH<&H 

a 

at       aj 

Is 

11 

1  1 

12                                    -a 

Hrt 

§                        §   I 

§3 

1/5                                                      a"O  ^T3 
*2  ^'Sa    i  a    *T.£  ;.    a    »    »         'UGtC, 

11 

rt.2  cfl                                                  uj  w  o  w 

2* 

0 

^H  t>  Cq  M  $H  C^l                                                          *h«^<,H_( 

*« 

iiW 

oo      «o  >o  oo  o  o  co  oo  t^  oo  oo  oo  o      cotococo-^ 

ccnorfc^oocoicoo 

«4-i   d 

o.2 

I 

1-3 

0              ^    0>         S                            <U 

-"->  C 

•*-»               c  +->         ft              .           +J 

£% 

V4               O               (H            ^               O                         ^ 

9    §    2g§  |    g      § 

c/S    o    Oc«0    §    O        o 

c 

• 

g 

^       tn       C                                       'O                          ^ 

D             Q 

8 

d|l||l 

I 

<u 

^    ooo    oS    o^;      c/3     .H    Ht^1 
12 

OW^    .   r»^ 

s 

P!S  *  'Ip^ 

HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


lili 

<^ 

O  »C  CO  ^  QC  O  >O        10  O        fcC  >CO  O  1C  O  ^**  OS  CO  O^O   *-•  C^ 
OiO^f^^t^COt^*         »H»-H         Oit^-OOOlCQOCDOSCO^OO    P  vM 

jj       M  *H 

o^-io 

«»                         •                                                                                                                          <"<           IM^     yN 

w 

O0i                                                                                      .C 

III 

11            i  ':s§i  I 

F* 

«OI-HI-I                               ios^o«-ie-i         ••          c^ec 

•3ii"i 

(NH«Hc.       H«H«-4«             Hn       >*«-*<                         H« 

£i|j 

CO 

« 

W 

il 

0         g                                                                                         N 

•< 

cu 

33 

ill     ^              OQ    |o|              || 

H 

•5-5  ^                •«  ci    .S  £.S              c.§ 

3 

SncS                Oo^    f-^f^i             ff^pn 

X 

k                                                     " 

1 

i 

C  J 

a. 
O 

1 

its 

.  —  PRICES 

is    - 

fsl 
|1 

•o  2^ 

«J4       »  M~ 

||  ;3|t.      |h 

»—  < 

« 

5            r*  ?       ^§0"^"  " 

X 

j 
a 
•< 
H 

^lal 

gliU 

«^«       ««»*        ««       O^OO^^O^CO^       CO 

- 

o  E 

'o- 

"c  rt 

•Qig 

jj                                                                                                                                        C 

.91 

2                                                             «  c 

W^ 

ooo                                                                      O 

a                           -a-o 

2 

a 

CQ        ••                 *^      *O<C      pt-ii-HhHC/2    ^ 

c2 

||  §  s  *  *  j-  ,  |  s  3  s  s  1"?*  »  »  ^ 

ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


34? 


i?L- 

<35iO                   00 
(D  l^-                    CO  «O 
CO  O       OOOOiDO5iMC<3"     '«OO       _^      '«5       OO       C^J 
(--(         CTfCOi    f^CO^YT5000        ^TM         «°        C 

^^    pT^—  Sii«cteS^«    0003<^    ^    " 

£1* 

w 

^1S   -   -- 

o  c 

<U 

Us 

"5                        O        OOOO«OO5«CO       ^HOOO       O       C 

to                 o     ^f  <r>  i«  co  T*<  T»«  o     cooo     o     c 

00                        0        0-*0<Mt-050       i-iO-^t*       0       C 

o  6 

P* 

< 

0       <0  0  t^  r-H  0  "3  »0       0«0(M        0       ^> 
CD             ^H       «5CO       <M       «0                   0       OC 

N                TH                                      .-1          »0 

^T;  «j 

f| 

H«                                                  Hn       Hn 

o«e<i      co      c«      e^ic^e<i(MC<ic<ie^      O»C^>-H      T-I      e^i 

a 

S3 

C 

I                               1 

3    A  *    |  ||  -a  111  8 

I-  111  :1"H1  l-lll  1 

'C          CC^       C          <u      ctf4>      »-,      o>a>cd.rt 
H         HH         H         PQ     OPQ     H     CQ«O     > 

Binder  Thickness 
and 
Character 

•53           £ 

!l"stt'ig     i  N  i 

„     ^5    *                       SB        -g     S| 

-Me-^s.ti                 w               *S  S            'S^.in 

?!&"»„     =      t°  «s  ^P 

I.  l^g  §|  i  .11.11  le 

rK^'y^r^P 

j^lgi 
eij^ 

5DtOCO       «C>       Tti        CO  CO  »C  if}  U5  O  «)       «O«D«O       O 

«j 

o'£ 

11 

§ 

05 

•Bg                                              5 

^C«    ,        ,        ,        3    »    ,    5    S    ,    ,        »    ,    ,          g 

W  g 
fe 

!•§                               1 

<                                                                                     CJ 

Report  From. 

^•2,       »       ,       s      r                             ^^ 

^o                    S'                  P<Q    5 

350 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


•5  8.2 


>CM      -IOOO 
00 


Kind  o 
Materia 


s 


+j  1  i?q  I    i    I  < 


CO        IM  rt  i-H  O  CO  «  5O    1    SO 


al 


. 

sa 


IM  C<»  ^  •*  «O  Tf  ^         HNfOH"  Hc«C<J  IM  CO  CO  CO 

1      1      1      1      1      1          CM    I    (M  <M  »-(  (M    1      1      1      1      1 


CM  (M  r-4 


•IIP  — 


SS2 


|^  I- 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS. 


351 


. 


I    I      •   I          ... 


1  P 


••"•••*l  r-'-H  Ki- 


el 

H-l 


eo  :«^s<  sr; 


HM        -~ 

»cco  |  e 


T^TTT      °f  «T< 

CO  00(M 


«C»OTt<    1  OO 


358  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Prices  for  Estimating  Street  Work.*— Mr.  George  P.  Carver  gives 
the  following  prices.  They  are  the  prices  per  square  yard  on 
practically  all  classes  of  paving,  and  are  used  by  the  engineering 
department  of  one  of  the  largest  Massachusetts  cities  for  estimat- 
ing purposes  to  determine  amount  necessary  for  appropriation. 

These  figures  are  used,  and  to  the  total  10  or  15  per  cent  is 
added  for  incidentals. 

The  prices  in  this  list  are  made  up  from  the  figures  submitted  in 
bids  for  paving  work  in  that  city  and  are  very  close  to  actual 
figures. 

The  flagging  is  granite  and  North  River  stone. 

The  prices  given  are  per  square  yard  unless  otherwise  stated. 

*|Block    (granite)    paving    $2.35 

*ttBlock    (granite)    paving    3.20 

**ttBlock    (granite)    paving 4.10 

Telford  macadam,   8   ins.   plus   4   ins 1.50 

Macadam,    6    ins 1.00 

**Asphalt,    5-yr.   guarantee    3.50 

**Asphalt,    10-yr.   guarantee    3.75 

*Paving  with  old  granite  blocks 1.00 

**Repaving  with  old  granite  blocks 2.75 

New   blocks  furnished  on   ground 1.35 

Brick   sidewalks    1.10 

Gravel     sidewalks     0.40 

Crushed   stone   sidewalks    0.70 

New  bricks  furnished   0.55 

Laying    bricks    flat     0.55 

fRelaying  old  bricks   0.15 

Cobble   gutters,    old    cobbles 1.25 

Tar  concrete  furnished  and  laid 1.25 

Gravel    roadway,    12    ins.    deep 0.55 

**Wood  paving,  furnished  and  laid 3.50 

*Bit.  brick  paving   3.50 

Concrete   base,    6   ins 0.83 

New    flagging,    furnished    on    ground 3.30 

fLaying   flagging    1.00 

tFlagging  cross-walks,   furnished  and  laid 4.30 

**ttFlagging  furnished  and  laid 6.00 

**ttFlagging  furnished  and  laid 5.15 

New  edgestone  furnished,  per  lin.  ft 0.70 

Setting  edgestone,  per  lin.  ft 0.25 

Edgestone  furnished  and  laid,  per  lin.  ft 0.95 

Circular  edgestone,  furnished  and  laid,  per  lin.  ft.  1.55 

Granolithic   sidewalks,   per   sq.   yd 1.70 

Earth  excavation   (ordinary  digging),  per  cu.  yd.  0.38 

Rock  excavation,   per  cu.  yd 1.75 

Setting  manhole  covers,   each 3.00 

Extra  work,  actual  cost  plus  15%. 

•  Gravel  base  ;    t  gravel  joints  ;    ft  pitch  and  pebble  joints ; 
**  concrete  base. 

Cost  of  Unloading  and  Hauling  Bricks.— Unloading  bricks  from 
a  gondola  car  to  wagons,  each  man  will  average  100  to  130  sq.  yds. 
of  brick  per  10-hr,  day. 

In  8  to  10  mins.  a  gang  of  5  men  and  the  driver  will  easily  load 
a  wagon  with  enough  brick  to  lay  10  sq.  yds.,  which  is  equivalent  to 

* Engineering-Contracting,  May   16,   1906. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  353 

a  load  of  2  tons.      Such  a  load  can  be  hauled  by  a  team  over  an 
ordinary  good,  level  earth  street. 

In  unloading  the  bricks  at  the  curb  line,  the  driver  and  another 
man  in  the  wagon  toss  brick  to  two  men  who  stack  them  up.  They 
will  unload  the  wagon  (14  sq.  yds.)  in  8  to  10  mins. 

Summing  up  we  have  the  following  cost  of  loading  and  unloading 
(not  including  the  lost  team  time)  : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

0.08  hr.  labor  loading  wagon,   at   $0.20 $0.0160 

0.05  hr.  labor   unloading   wagon,    at    $0.20.....    0.0120 

Total     $0.028 

Since  the  lost  team  time,  while  loading  and  unloading,  amounts  to 
about  20  mins.  per  load,  or  2  mins.  per  sq.  yd.,  we  have  a  cost  of 
1.4  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  when  team  time  is  worth  40  cts.  per  hr. 

A  team  travels  2%  miles  per  hr.,  or  220  ft.  per  min.  Hence 
the  cost  of  hauling,  when  the  load  is  10  sq.  yds.  or  2  tons,  is  3.2  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  per  mile  of  distance  between  the  car  and  the  place  of 
unloading. 

We  have  a  fixed  cost  of  2.8  cts.  for  labor  of  loading  and  unload- 
ing, plus  1.4  cts.  for  lost  team  time,  or  a  total  fixed  cost  of  4.2  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  Hence  the  following  rule  for  the  cost  of  hauling  brick : 

To  a  fixed  cost  of  J^.2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  add  3.2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  per 
mile  when  the  load  is  2  tons. 

By  using  two  extra  wagons,  one  empty  wagon  at  the  car  being 
loaded,  and  one  full  wagon  being  unloaded  at  the  street,  the  item 
of  "lost  team  time"  can  be  almost  entirely  eliminated,  for  a  team 
can  be  unhitched  from  an  empty  wagon  and  hitched  to  a  loaded 
wagon  in  1  min.,  and  by  fastening  a  chain  from  the  rear  of  the 
loaded  wagon  to  the  tongue  of  the  empty,  the  empty  can  be  pulled 
up  alongside  the  car  ready  for  loading.  When  this  is  done,  the 
"fixed  cost"  is  reduced  to  2.8  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  Then  if  3  tons  are 
hauled  per  load,  as  is  common  on  city  streets,  the  cost  of  hauling 
brick  becomes: 

To  a  fixed  cost  of  3  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  add  2  cts.  per  mile  of  haul. 

The  use  of  extra  wagons  is  particularly  desirable  when  a  smaller 
gang  than  5  men  is  engaged  in  loading,  for  with  a  smaller  gang  the 
lost  team  time  would  be  correspondingly  greater  if  there  were  no 
extra  wagons. 

Gravity  Conveyor  for  Handling  Brick  to  Pavers  From  Stock  Piles 
Without  Breakage.* — Fig.  8  shows  a  simple  device  for  handling 
paving  brick  from  stock  piles  at  the  sides  of  the  street  to  pavers, 
which  has  been  successfully  used  by  Carlson  &  Theselius,  brick 
paving  contractors,  Chicago,  111.,  in  paving  work  in  Chicago  and 
other  western  cities.  The  usual  method  of  handling  brick  is  by 
wheelbarrows.  The  barrows  are  loaded  at  the  stock  piles  by  wheel- 
ers, wheeled  onto  the  street  and  dumped.  There  the  dumped  brick 
are  arranged  ready  to  the  hand  of  the  pavers  by  pilers.  For  say 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  April  21,   1909. 


854 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS.    WALKS.  355 

three  pavers  laying  1,500  sq.  yds.  per  day  there  will  be  required 
eight  wheelers  and  four  pilers  to  handle  the  brick.  In  addition  the 
loading  and  dumping  of  the  brick  results  in  more  or  less  break- 
age. With  the  device  illustrated  it  has  been  found  easily  possible  to 
supply  bricks  to  three  pavers  laying  1,500  sq.  yds.  per  day  with 
only  four  men,  a  saving  of  eight  men  over  wheelbarrow  work. 

The  general  arrangement  of  the  device  on  the  work  is  shown  by 
Fig.  8.  The  device  is  merely  a  set  of  conveying  rolls.  Two  boards 
5  ins.  wide  are  set  parallel  and  carry  between  them  a  train  of 
wood  spools.  The  axles  of  the  spools  extend  through  bushed  holes 
in  the  side  boards  and  have  removable  nuts  at  the  ends,  which 
permit  oiling.  The  spools  are  spaced  so  as  to  have  a  clearance  of 
ys  in.  They  are  ordinary  wooden  spools,  with  a  barrel  3%  ins. 
long  between  shoulders.  They  are  set  so  that  the  line  of  the 
shoulders  is  just  below  the  top  edges  of  the  side  boards  ;  this  per- 
mits a  steel  strap  guard  to  be  fastened  to  the  top  edge  of  each 
side  board  so  as  to  extend  inward  over  the  shoulders  and  prevent 
dirt  and  chips  from  lodging  between  the  ends  of  the  spools  and  the 
adjoining  side  boards.  Below  the  journals  the  side  boards  are 
thinned  down  so  as  to  permit  such  debris  to  fall  out  easily.  The 
whole  construction  is  very  simple  and  forms,  as  has  been  stated,  a 
train  of  rolls  which,  when  set  at  an  incline,  will  allow  a  brick, 
when  set  edgewise  on  the  spools,  to  move  from  top  to  bottom  by 
gravity. 

The  conveyors  described  above  are  usually  made  in  16-ft.  lengths. 
They  may,  of  course,  be  made  longer,  but  a  16-ft.  length  is  easily 
carried  by  one  man,  and  when  much  longer  conveyors  are  needed 
two  or  more  16-ft.  sections  can  be  coupled  end  to  end.  When  used 
on  the  street  the  ends  of  the  conveyors  near  the  sides  of  the  street 
are  supported  on  standards  extending  up  from  small  trucks  or  car- 
riages which  travel  along  the  gutter.  This  method  of  support  can 
be  seen  in  the  illustration.  Two  conveyors  are  employed,  one  ex- 
tending into  the  street  from  each  side.  The  inner  ends  of  the  two 
conveyors  meet  at  the  center  of  the  street  and  the  outer  ends  extend 
beyond  the  supporting  trucks  and  the  gutters  and  past  the  ends  of 
the  stock  piles.  Just  back  of  the  trucks  there  is  a  hinge  in  each 
conveyor  which  permits  the  projecting  end  to  be  tilted  up  to  clear 
trees,  poles  or  other  obstructions  when  the  conveyors  are  shifted 
ahead.  The  incline  given  the  conveyor  is  as  flat  as  may  be,  so'  that 
the  brick  can  be  put  on  and  taken  off  the  conveyor  with  as  little 
lifting  as  possible.  An  incline  of  1  in.  to  1  ft.  is  ample  ;  in  fact 
it  has  been  much  flatter  on  most  of  the  work  done  by  Messrs.  Carl- 
son and  Theselius.  In  one  case  the  incline  was  only  14  ins.  in  24  ft. 

The  method  of  operating  the  conveyors  is  quite  clearly  shown  by 
the  illustration.  The  loaders  take  the  bricks  from  the  piles  and  set 
them  edge  up  and  endwise  on  the  spools.  The  movement  of  the 
brick  is  then  by  gravity  down  the  conveyor.  In  putting  the  brick 
on  the  conveyor  the  loaders  take  care  to  place  the  best  or  smooth 
edge  up,  so  that  when  the  pavers  take  them  off  they  do  not  have 
to  turn  them  to  find  the  best  edge  to  come  on  top.  The  pavers 


ftifi  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

grasp  a  brick  in  each  hand  and  place  both  at  once.  The  loaders 
take  care,  in  placing  the  brick  on  the  conveyors  to  keep  the  supply 
just  ahead  of  the  laying.  If  the  conveyor  is  kept  tight  packed 
with  brick  all  the  time,  they  bind  and  the  paver  has  to  exert  more 
force  in  lifting  them,  which  reduces  his  speed. 

As  stated  above,  with  three  conveyors  a  gang  of  seven  men, 
four  loaders  and  three  pavers,  will  lay  1,500  sq.  yds.  of  paving  a 
day.  This  record  has  been  frequently  made  by  the  contractors 
named  above.  These  contractors  have  patented  the  device  and  are 
putting  it  on  the  market.  They  will  furnish  these  conveyors  made 
up  in  16-ft.  lengths  or  longer  at  $2  per  lineal  foot. 

Cost  of  Laying  Bricks.— Bricks  are  ordinarily  carried  in  wheel- 
barrows from  the  piles  along  the  curb  and  dump  on  the  finished 
pavement  behind  the  bricklayers.  The  average  wheelbarrow  load  is 
about  40  "pavers,"  or  270  Ibs.,  and  is  seldom  more  than  45 
"pavers,"  or  305  Ibs.  Such  loads  are  readily  wheeled  over  level  run- 
ways and  even  up  a  short  slope  of  1  in  7.  A  man  will  readily  load 
a  barrow  in  1%  mins.,  at  which  rate,  if  he  were  doing  nothing  else 
but  load  barrows  he  would  average  14,000  "pavers"  loaded  in 
10  hrs.  But  the  men  who  load  the  bricks  usually  wheel  them  to 
place  and  dump  them.  Where  the  distance  to  be  wheeled  is  about 
40  ft.,  it  takes  about  %  min.  to  go  and  return  plus  another  %  min. 
lost  In  dumping  the  barrow  and  in  brief  rests  ;  so  that  a  day's  work 
Is  10,000  "pavers,"  or  175  sq.  yds.,  loaded  and  wheeled  40  ft. 

Two  men  wheeling  bricks  to  each  bricklayer  is  a  common  ratio, 
and  300  sq.  yds.  laid  per  day  by  a  bricklayer  is  considered  a  big 
day's  work,  although  it  is  frequently  exceeded.  This  would  require 
the  wheeling  of  150  sq.  yds.  per  man  on  wheelbarrow. 

Foremen  are  often  very  careless  in  spacing  the  wagon  loads  of 
brick  along  the  curb,  so  that  there  are  frequently  too  many  bricks 
at  one  part  of  the  street,  and  too  few  at  another.  When  this  is  so, 
more  men  with  wheelbarrows  are  required  to  deliver  the  bricks. 

The  number  of  men  to  each  bricklayer  is  ordinarily  about  as 
follows : 

Per  day. 

1  bricklayer     $  2.50 

2  men  wheeling  and  delivering  bricks 3.50 

1  man    spreading    sand    cushion 2.25 

1  man   ramming    1.75 

1%  men   grouting  joints  with   cement 2.65 

%   man   raising   sunken   brick,    etc 0.85 

7  men  total    $13.50 

When  the  bricklayer,  who  really  "sets  the  pace,"  lays  300  sq.  yds. 
per  day,  the  cost  of  laying  and  grouting  is  $13.50 -H  300  =  4%  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.,  to  which  %  ct.  must  be  added  for  foreman  and  water 
boy,  making  a  total  of  5  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  laying  the  brick. 
This  is  a  cost  that  may  be  attained  under  good  management,  and 
with  skilled  men.  It  is,  perhaps,  nearer  an  average  to  say  that 
225  sq.  yds.  per  day  are  commonly  laid  by  each  bricklayer,  making 
the  cost  of  laying  6  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  exclusive  of  foreman  and 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  357 

water   boy,    or   6.6    cts.    including  them,    assuming   that   a  foreman 
supervises  about  20  men,  and  that  wages  are  as  above  given. 

Summary  of  Cost  of  Brick  Pavement. — Based  upon  the  foregoing 
data,  we  may  summarize  the  cost  of  a  brick  pavement,  bricks  laid 
on  edge,  grouted  with  1  to  1  cement  mortar,  as  follows: 
Materials: 

55   "pavers,"   at   $15.00  per  M $0.825 

0.042  cu.  yd.  sand  for  cushion  iy2  ins.  thick,  at  $1.00....    0.042 

0.004  cu.  yd.  sand  for  grouting  joints,  at  $1.00 0.004 

0.028  bbl.  cement  for  grouting  joints,  at  $1.50 0.042 

Total    materials    $0.913 

La&or: 

Hauling  brick    1   mile    (2  +  3   cts.) $0.050 

Laying  brick  and  grouting    0.050 

Total    labor    $0.100 

Total  materials  and  labor   $1.013 

1/6  cu.  yd.  concrete  base,   at  $3.60 0.600 

%  cu.  yd.  earth  excavation,  at  $0.30 0.100 

Grand    total     $1.713 

The  above  costs  of  concrete  base  and  of  earth  excavation  are 
merely  assumed  for  illustration,  the  details  of  those  classes  of 
work  being  given  elsewhere. 

The  cost  of  filling  of  the  joints  of  a  brick  pavement  is  discussed 
in  detail  in  the  next  paragraph. 

Cost  of  Filling  Joints  of  Brick  Pavement.— To  determine  the  area 
of  brick  pavement  occupied  by  the  joints,  refer  to  the  table  on 
page  359.  It  will  be  noted  there,  for  illustration,  that  2^  x  8y2  x 
4-in.  bricks  laid  on  edge  require  57.2  bricks  per  sq.  yd.  when  laid 
with  %-in.  joints,  or  61  bricks  if  it  were  possible  to  lay  them  so 
close  that  there  would  be  no  joints.  Hence  the  joints  occupy  an 
area  equivalent  to  61.0  —  57.2  =  3.8  bricks  per  sq.  yd.  But  3.8-^ 
61  =  6.2%,  which  is  the  percentage  of  area  occupied  by  joints. 
Since  the  joints  are  4  ins.  deep,  each  sq.  yd.  of  pavement  contains 
6.2%  X  (4  H-  36)  =  0.007  cu.  yd.  of  grout  or  tar  used  to  fill  the 
joints.  If  cement  grout  is  used,  then  the  amount  of  sand  and 
cement  per  cu.  yd.  for  any  specified  proportions  is  ascertained  by 
referring  to  Tables  I  and  II  in  the  Concrete  Section. 

Thus,  Table  I  shows  that  about  4  bb!s.  of  cement  and  0.6  cu.  yd. 
of  sand  are  required  per  cu.  yd.  of  1  to  1  mortar.  Hence  a  sq.  yd. 
of  brick  pavement  laid  with  pavers  will  require  0.007  X  4  bbls.  = 
0.028  bbl.  cement,  and  0.007  X  0.6  cu.  yd.  =  0.0042  cu.  yd.  sand. 

In  like  manner,  we  find  that  about  2%  bbls.  cement  and  0.8  cu. 
yd.  of  sand  are  required  per  cu.  yd.  of  1  to  2  mortar.  Hence, 
0.007  X  2%  =  0.019  bbl.  cement  will  be  required  to  grout  a  sq.  yd. 
of  brick;  and  0.007  X  0.8  =  0.0056  cu.  yds  of  sand. 

If  paving  blocks,  3^4  x  8^  x  4  ins.,  are  laid  with  %-ln.  joints,  it 
will  be  seen  on  page  359  that  44.5  blocks  lay  a  sq.  yd.,  while  with- 
out joints  it  would  require  46.9  blocks,  or  a  difference  of  2.4  blocks, 
which  is  5.1%  of  the  area.  Hence,  using  the  same  method  of 


V*  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

analysis  as  above  given,  it  would  require  5.1%  X  (4-4-36)  =0.0057 
cu.  yd.  of  grout  or  tar  to  fill  the  joints.  Therefore  it  would  require 
0.023  bbl.  cement  and  0.0034  cu.  yd.  sand  to  fill  the  joints  of  a 
square  yard  of 'blocks  with  a  1  to  1  grout.  With  a  1  to  2  grout,  it 
would  require  0.016  bbl.  cement  and  0.0046  cu.  yd.  sand  per  sq.  yd. 

If  a  tar  or  pitch  filler  is  used,  the  2^  x  8l/2  x  4-in.  "pavers"  will 
require  0.007  cu.  yd.,  or  0.19  cu.  ft.  of  tar  per  sq.  yd.  Since  there 
are  7%  gals,  per  cu.  ft,  this  is  equivalent  to  1.3  gals,  per  sq.  yd. 
Tar  is  usually  sold  in  52-gal.  barrels,  but  the  size  of  the  barrel 
should  always  be  specified. 

If  314  x  8%  x  4-in.  "blocks"  are  used,  0.0057  cu.  yd.,  or  0.15 
cu.  ft.,  or  1.1  gal.  of  tar  will  be  required  per  sq.  yd. 

Tar  has  a  specific  gravity  of  1.25,  and  therefore  weighs  78  Ibs. 
per  cu.  ft.,  or  a  trifle  more  than  10  Ibs.  per  gal. 

As  above  given,  the  labor  of  grouting  joints  of  "pavers,"  in- 
cluding mixing  the  Portland  cement  and  sand  and  brooming  it  into 
the  joints,  is  less  than  1  ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  where  the  men  work  at  all 
vigorously,  but  even  this  is  equivalent  to  $0.01  -5-  0.007  cu.  yd.  = 
$1.40  per  cu.  yd.  of  cement  grout,  and  is,  therefore,  susceptible  of 
considerable  reduction,  as  will  be  seen  by  subsequent  examples. 

The  labor  cost  of  melting  and  pouring  tar  into  joints  is  usually 
about  1  ct.  per  gal.,  when  wages  are  $1.75  per  10  hrs. 

Number  and  Weight  of  Paving  Brick  Per  Square  Yard.— The  so- 
called  "standard  brick"  for  house  building  is  2%  x  8*4x4  ins., 
and  for  a  time  brick  for  paving  purposes  were  also  made  of  the 
same  dimensions.  Within  recent  years  the  size  of  the  standard 
brick  for  paving  purposes  has  become  2^x8^x4  ins.,  and  such 
bricks  are  commonly  called  "pavers."  It  takes  52  to  57  of  these 
"pavers"  per  sq.  yd.  A  larger  size,  3*4  x  8V&  x  4  ins.,  is  also  much 
used,  and  is  known  as  "block.  '  Some  variations  from  these  dimen- 
sions occur,  as  in  Hallwood  block,  which  is  3x9x4  ins.  ;  and  as 
neither  the  engineer  nor  the  contractor  can  be  sure  of  the  exact 
side  of  brick  that  will  be  delivered,  it  is  always  necessary  to  secure 
from  manufacturers  a  statement  as  to  the  sizes  they  make. 

When  the  sizes  are  known  there  is  a  factor  of  uncertainty  to  the 
inexperienced,  and  that  is  the  thickness  of  the  grouted  or  tarred 
joints  between  bricks  as  ordinarily  laid.  I  have  found  as  the  aver- 
age of  a  large  number  of  measurements  that  the  thickness  of  the 
average  joint  is  about  %  in.,  unless  the  "pavers"  are  made  with 
projecting  lugs  to  give  a  wider  joint. 

The  following  table  gives  such  data  as  will  ordinarily  serve  in 
estimating  the  number  of  brick  that  will  be  required.  Brick  are 
occasionally  laid  with  extremely  close  joints  about  one-sixteenth 
inch,  in  which  case  about  3%  more  "pavers"  laid  on  edge  will  be 
required  than  given  in  the  table,  but  close  laying  is  not  only  ex< 
pensive  work  for  the  contractor,  but  objectionable  also  in  that  it  is 
then  impossible  to  fill  the  joints  perfectly. 

For  street  pavements  the  bricks  or  blocks  are  laid  on  edge  (mak- 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,  WALKS.  359 

ing  a  brick  pavement  4  ins.  thick),  but  for  sidewalks  they  are 
usually  laid  flatwise.  /  believe  that  in  residence  streets  the  bricks 
should  usually  be  laid  flatwise  for  true  economy's  sake. 

No.  of  Brick  Per  Square  Yard 

With  i/8 -in.  No  Allowance 

Size    of    Brick.  Joints.  for  Joints. 

2%  x  8  x  4,  laid  flatwise     38.7  40.5 

214x8x4,  laid  edgewise     67.1  72.0 

2  V4  x  8 1A  x  4,  laid  flatwise     37.5  39.3 

21/i  x  8V4  x  4,  laid  edgewise     65.1  69.8 

2%  x  8V2  x  4,  laid  flatwise     36.4  39.3 

2V2  x  8 1/,  x  4,  laid  edgewise 57.2  61.0 

3V4  x  8%  x  4,   laid  flatwise     36.4  38.1 

31/4x8  i/a  x  4,  laid  edgewise     44.5  46.9 

3x9x4,   laid   flatwise     34.4  36.0 

3x9x4,  laid  edgewise     45.5  48.0 

Having  obtained  the  price  per  thousand  (M)  for  the  paving 
brick,  f.  o.  b.  factory,  and  freight  rate  to  destination,  the  weight 
of  the  bricks  must  be  known  to  estimate  total  cost  f.  o.  b.  cars 
at  destination.  The  specific  gravity  of  paving  brick  ranges  from 
1.9  to  2.7.  Tests  of  12  Ohio  makes  show  a  range  of  1.95  to  2.25. 

Assuming  a  specific  gravity  of  2.2,  a  square  yard  of  brick  pavers 
4  ins.  thick  would  weigh  385  Ibs.,  and  a  square  foot  would  weigh 
43  Ibs.,  as  laid  with  %-in.  joints.  Whence,  by  taking  from  the 
bidding  sheet  the  number  of  square  yards  of  pavement  and  multiply- 
ing by  385,  the  total  weight  is  readily  ascertained ;  or,  for  all 
practical  purposes,  divide  the  number  of  square  yards  by  5,  and  the 
quotient  will  be  the  number  of  short  tons  of  freight. 

It  is  convenient  to  remember  that  a  "paver"  (2V&x8%x4  ins.) 
weighs  about  6%  Ibs.  and  a  "block"  (3^4x8^x4  ins.)  weighs 
8%  Ibs.  These  are  actual  averages  of  several  makes  of  New  York 
State  bricks  that  I  have  used. 

Cost  of  a  Brick  Pavement,  Champaign,  III. — Mr.  Charles  Apple 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  cost  of  a  brick  pavement  laid  in 
1903  at  Champaign,  111.  The  work  was  done  by  contract,  the  con- 
tract price  for  grading  being  23  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  for  brick 
pavement  on  concrete  base,  $1.29  per  sq.  yd. 

The  grading  was  done  with  drag-scoop  scrapers,  wheel-scrapers 
and  wagons,  each  being  used  as  demanded  by  the  length  of  haul. 
Earth  was  loosened  with  plows  to  within  3  ins.  of  subgrade  and 
this  last  layer  then  removed  with  pick  and  shovel. 

The  cost  of  removing  the  last  3  ins.  was  2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  (or 
24  cts  per  cu.  yd.)  with  labor  at  $1.75  per  day  of  10  hrs.  There 
was  a  total  of  26,715  cu.  yds.  of  grading,  and  there  were  38,504 
sq.  yds.  of  pavement. 

The  subgrade  was  compacted  with  a  horse-roller  weighing  150 
Ibs.  per  lin.  in.  at  an  average  cost  of  about  0.05  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

The  concrete  foundation  was  6  ins.  thick,  composed  of  1  part 
natural  cement,  3  parts  of  sand  and  gravel,  and  3  parts  of  broken 
stone.  All  the  materials  were  mixed  with  shovels,  and  were 
thrown  into  place  from  the  board  upon  which  the  mixing  was  done. 
The  material  was  brought  to  the  steel  mixing  board  in  wheel- 


360 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


barrows   from    piles   where    it   had   been   placed    in    the   middle   of 
the  street,  the  length  of  haul  being  usually  from  30  to  60  ft. 

When  the  concrete  base  had  set,  a  sand  cushion  1*4  ins.  thick 
was  placed  upon  it,  and  upon  this  the  brick  wearing  surface  was 
laid. 

The  cost  of  the  brick  wearing  surface  is  given  in  the  following 
table,  and  is  based  upon  the  assumption  that  1,000  paving  blocks 
will  lay  25  sq.  yds.  of  pavement,  or  40  blocks  per  sq.  yd.  This 
ratio  was  determined  by  actual  count  after  the  pavement  was  laid. 
To  this  cost  will  have  to  be  added  something  for  rejected  bricks, 
the  amount  depending  upon  how  closely  the  inspection  is  done  at 
the  kilns. 

COST  OF  6-iN.  CONCRETE  BASE  FOR  PAVEMENT. 

Cost  per 
sq.  yd. 

$0.0005 


No.  of      Sq.  yc 
men.      per  d{ 
Rolling    subgrade     (1     roller,    2 
teams     1    driver)               1          8,00 

Is.        Total 
iy.     wages. 

3         $  4.75 

12.00 
8.00 
3.50 
1.75 
3.50 
1.75 
10.50 
7.00 
4.00 

Mixing  and  tamping  concrete  : 
Turning  with   shovels    6 
Throwing   into   place   4 

Handling   cement    2 
^Wetting  with  hose            1 

"Foreman                                   1 

Total     27 

Total  labor  per  sq.  yd 


900 


$52.00 


Materials: 

0.2  bbl.    cement,    at    $0.50 $0.10 

0.1  cu.  yd.  sand  and  gravel,  at  $1.00 0.10 

0.1  cu.  yd.   broken  stone,  at  $1.40 0.14 


$0.0580 
$0.0585 


$0.3400 
$0.3985 


Total  for  material  and  labor  per  sq.  yd 

This  is  practically  40  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  or  $2.40  per  cu.  yd.  of 
concrete  for  materials  and  labor.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor 
cost  of  making  and  placing  the  concrete  was  only  35  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.,  average  wages  being  nearly  $1.85  a  day.  Excluding  the  fore- 
man, the  26  men  placed  900  sq.  yds.  or  150  cu.  yds.  per  day,  which 
is  nearly  6  cu.  yds.  per  man.  This  record  is  so  abnormally  high 
that  I  am  satisfied  the  concrete  did  not  measure  6  ins.  thick,  as 
stated  by  Mr.  Apple.  Certainly  0.2  cu.  yd.  of  stone  and  sand  com- 
bined could  not  make  a  sq.  yd.  of  6-in.  concrete.  It  is  more  than 
likely  that  the  compacted  concrete  actually  did  not  measure  much 
more  than  4  ins.  thick. 

The' cost  of  hauling  and 'laying  the  brick  blocks  (40  per  sq.  yd.) 
was  as  follows : 

Hauling  Brick:  Per  sq.  yc1.. 

0.01  day  labor  loading  wagons  from  car,  at  $1.75 $0.0175 

0.08  day  team  hauling,  1  mile  at  $3.00 0.0240 

0.008  day  labor  unloading  at  curb  line  at  $1.75 0.014^ 

Total,    hauling  brick    $0.055i. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  361 

Brick: 

0.0033  day  labor,    spreading  sand   cushion,   at   $1.75 $0.0057 

0.0066  day  wheeling  brick  to  layers,  at  $1.75 0.0115 

0.0033  day  bricklayer,    at   $2.50 0.0083 

0.0022  day  labor,    sweeping     and    filling    joints    with     sand, 

at   $1.75    0.0039 

0.0012  day  team  rolling  pavement,  at  $3.00 0.0037 

Total,    laying    brick $0.0331 

Grand  total,  labor,   hauling  and  laying :$ 0.0886 

Materials: 

0.0277  cu.  yd.   sand   cushion    (1   in.),  at  $1.00 $0.0277 

40  brick  block  f.  o.  b.  destination,  at  $16.00  per  M 0.6400 

0.0023  cu.   yd.   sand  filler,   at  $1.00 0.0023 


Total    materials    $0.6700 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  the  foregoing: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

0.435  cu.  yd.  grading,    at    $0.23 $0.1000 

0.167  cu.  yd.  concrete  base    0.3985 

Brick  and  sand  cushion 0.6700 

Hauling  brick    0.0555 

Laying    brick     0-0331 

Grand   total    $1.2571 

The  contract  price  was  $1.29.  Note  that  the  joints  were  filled 
with  sand  and  not  with  grout. 

It  will  be  seen  that  each  man  loading  blocks  from  car  to  wagon 
averaged  100  sq.  yds.,  or  4,000  blocks,  per  10-hr,  day;  and  that 
each  man  unloading  wagons  averaged  125  sq.  yds.,  or  5,000  blocks 
per  day.  Each  bricklayer  averaged  300  sq.  yds.  and  each  man 
wheeling  bricks  to  the  layer  averaged  150  sq.  yds. 

Cost  of  80,000  Square  Yards  of  Brick  Pavement,  Iowa. — The  fol- 
lowing is  quoted  from  Engineering-Contracting,  June  23,  1909. 
During  1905  and  1906,  a  large  amount  of  brick  paving  and  cement 
curb  was  built  at  Centerville,  la.,  by  contract.  Mr.  M.  G.  Hall 
required  the  inspectors  to  keep  a  careful  force  account  of  the  work 
done,  and  the  following  data  are  a  summary  of  the  records  thus 
gathered. 

Purington  paving  bricks  were  laid  on  a  concrete  base,  with  a 
1 1/2  -in.  sand  cushion  between.  The  joints  were  filled  with  a  1:1 
cement  grout.  Expansion  joints  of  asphalt  filler  were  provided 
from  curb  to  curb,  every  50  ft.,  and  along  each  curb.  The  fol- 
lowing costs  do  not  include  grading. 

The  concrete  base  was  a  1 :  3  %  :  6  mixture  and  it  was  machine 
mixed.  There  appears  to  have  been  a  serious  error  made  either 
in  recording  or  in  calculating  the  amounts  of  cement,  sand  and 
broken  stone  used,  for,  as  will  be  seen  below,  Mr.  Hall's  data 
show  about  two-thirds  as  much  of  each  of  these  materials  per 
cubic  yard  as  are  required  by  a'  1 :  3%  :  6  mixture.  Mr.  Hall's  data 
were  originally  published  in  "Engineering  News"  April  2,  1908, 
and  were  not  there  analyzed  as  we  have  analyzed  them  below, 
which  probably  accounts  for  his  failure  to  discover  the  discrep- 
ancy. This  emphasizes  the  importance  of  using  the  cubic  yard  as 


.".«)•-'  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

the  unit  in  checking  up  costs  of  concrete,  instead  of  relying  solely 

upon  the  square  yard. 

Our  analysis  of  the  cost  of  the  5-in.  concrete  base,  for  three  jobs 

aggregating  58,000  sq.  yds.,   shows  the  following: 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Sand  wheelers,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 12.24 

Concrete  wagons,  at  40  cts.  per  hr. 8.42 

Men-  on  mixer,  at  22%   cts.  per  hr 5.62 

Spreaders,   at  22%    cts.   per  hr 5.47 

Tampers,   at  20   cts.   per  hr 1.93 

Water  boy,  at  10  cts.  per  hr 0.72 

Extra  men,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 1.93 

Foreman,   at  30  cts.   per  hr 1.93 

Coal  for  mixer,  at  $2.50  per  ton 1.58 

Total    labor     39.84 

This  Is  practically  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  exclusive  of  Interest,  de- 
preciation and  repairs  on  mixer.  Since  the  concrete  was  5  ins. 
thick,  divide  any  of  the  above  Items  by  7.2  to  get  the  cost  per 
square  yard. 

According  to  Mr.  Hall's  records,  the  cost  of  materials  was  as 
follows,  when  reduced  to  the  cubic  yard  basis: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.56  bbl.  cement,  at  $2.00 $1.12 

0.40  ton    sand,    at    $0.70 0.28 

0.52  cu.   yd.    stone,   at   $1.20 0.62 

Hauling  cement    0.02 

Hauling  sand     0.14 

Hauling  stone     0.29 

Total    materials    $2.47 

The  sand  weighed  2,700  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  the  stone  weighed 
2,626  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd. 

Since  the  materials  would  have  to  be  about  50  per  cent  more 
than  above  given  to  make  a  cubic  yard  of  concrete  tamped  in 
place,  there  is  evidently  an  error,  and  the  cost  of  materials,  at  the 
unit  prices  given,  would  be  about  $3.70  per  cu.  yd.,  instead  of  $2.47. 
The  cost  of  laying  58,000  sq.  yds.  of  brick  pavement  was  as 
follows : 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Brick  wheelers,  at  20  cts.   per  hr 1.52 

Bricklayers,  at  22  %   cts.   per  hr 0.88 

Men  spreading  sand,  at  22%   cts.  per  hr 1.05 


Bricklayers,  at  22  %   cts.   per  hr 0.88 

nd,  at  22% 
"Water  boy,  at  10  cts.  per  hr " 0.15 


Other  men,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.96 

Foreman,  at  30  cts.  per  hr 0.41 

Total 4.97 

By  dividing  the  square  yard  cost  of  any  item  into  the  correspond- 
ing rate  of  wages,  the  number  of  square  yards  per  hour  is  obtained. 
Thus,  each  bricklayer  laid  22.5  -f-  0.88  =  25.6  sq.  yds.  per  hr.,  or  256 
sq.  yds.  per  day.  Since  there  were  53  bricks  per  sq.  yd.,  this  is 
equivalent  to  13,568  bricks  per  bricklayer,  which  is  an  excellent 
output. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  363 

On    another   job,    where    26,300    sq.    yds.    were    laid,    the    cost   of 
laying  was  as  follows : 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Brick  wheelers,   at  20  cts 1.05 

Bricklayers,    at    25    cts 0.75 

Brick  handlers,   at  20  cts 0.26 

Men    spreading   sand,    at   25    cts 0.76 

Men  wheeling  sand,   at  20  cts 0.06 

Patchers,    at    20    cts 0.21 

Water  boy,  at   10  cts 0.28 

Other  men,  at  20  cts 0.21 

Foremen,  at  30  cts 0.32 


Total     3.70 

Here  each  bricklayer  averaged  330  sq.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day;  and, 
as  there  were  56  bricks  per  sq.  yd.,  this  Is  equivalent  to  18,480 
bricks  per  bricklayer  per  day.  There  was  a  car  track  down  the 
center  of  this  street. 

The  cost  of  the  bricks  ranged  from  76%  to  80  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  the 
following  being  a  fairly  typical  cost  of  the  materials  and  labor : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

53  bricks,  at  $15  per  M $0.800 

Hauling   bricks    0.035 

Sand  for  1%   in.  sand  cushion,  at  96  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

delivered     0.041 

Total    materials    $0.876 

Labor  laying  brick,  as  above  detailed 0.050 

•  Total     .  .  ! $0.~9~26 

The  joints  were  filled  with  a  1 :  1  cement  grout,  the  cost  of  which 
was  as  follows  for  58,000  sq.  yds.: 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Screening  sand,  at  20   cts.   per  hr 0.05 

Dry  mixers,   at   22%    cts.   per  hr 0.15- 

Wet  mixers,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.20 

Rubbers,  at  20  cts.   per  hr 0.43 

Wheelers,   at    20   cts.    per  hr 0.13 

Other  men,   at   20   cts.   per  hr 0.03 

Water  boy,  at  10  cts.   per  hr 0.04 

Foreman,  at   40  cts.  per  hr 0.14 

Total    labor    1.17 

0.017  bbl.    cement,    at    $2.00 3.40 

0.034  ton    sand,    at    $1.05 0.35 

Grand   total    4.92 

On  the  26,300  sq.  yd.  job  the  labor  of  grouting  was  only  0.9  cts. 
per  sq.  yd. 

The  cost  of  the  expansion  joints  (every  50  ft.  and  along  each 
curb)  was  as  follows  per  sq.  yd.  of  pavement: 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Labor,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.32 

Pitch,   at   $4.80   per  bbl J).89 

Total     .  1.21 


364  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Summing  up  we  have : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Concrete,    labor     $0.06 

Concrete   materials    (too    low) 0  34 

Bricklaying,    labor    0.05 

Brick    and    sand   cushion 0.88 

Grout,    labor    0.01 

Grout,    materials    0.04 

Expansion  joints,  labor  and  materials 0.01 

Grand    total $1.39 

For  costs  of  cement  curb  on  this  job,  see  page  449. 

Cost  of  Laying  Brick  Pavement,  Gary,  Ind.*— Mr.  E.  M.  Scheflon 
gives  the  following.  In  1908,  Madison  street  was  paved  by  con- 
tract for  3,800  ft.  long  by  38  ft.  wide.  The  brick  pavement  was  laid 
on  a  natural  sand  base,  and  grouted  with  cement.  Common  labor- 
ers received  $2  per  10  hrs.  The  labor  cost  of  laying  the  brick,  not 
including  the  cost  of  hauling  the  brick  to  the  street,  was  as 
follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 
0.00255  day  labor,  preparing  subgrade,  at  $2.00. ..  .$0.0051 

0.0194     day  labor,  carrying  bricks,   at   $2.00 0.0388 

0.00318  day  bricklayers,     at     $3.50 0.0112 

0.0002     day  team,    rolling,    at    $5.50 0.0011 

0.0036     day  labor,  grouting,  at  $2.00 0.0072 


Total  labor,    16,800   sq.    yds $0.0634 

It  will  be  noted  that  there  were  6  men  carrying  brick  to  each 
bricklayer,  and  that  each  bricklayer  laid  ($3.50 -f- $0.0112)  312  sq. 
yds.  per  day.  This  is  an  excellent  output  for  the  bricklayers,  but  a 
very  poor  showing  for  the  men  who  delivered  the  brick,  apparently 
due  to  the  fact  that  they  did  not  use  wheelbarrows. 

Cost  of  Laying  Bricks,  New  York  State.— On  one  job,  30,000 
"pavers"  were  laid  per  day  by  the  gang  of  4  bricklayers  and  10 
men,  or  132  sq.  yds.  per  bricklayer.  The  management  was  fairly 
good,  but  the  bricklayers  worked  with  no  energy.  The  other  men 
worked  well. 

Per  sq.  yd. 

4  pavers,  at  25  cts.  per  hr.,  each 1.9 

3  laborers  wheeling,   at  15  cts.   per  hr 0.8 

1  laborer  spreading  sand,  at  15  cts.  per  hr 0.3 

3  laborers  grouting,  at  15  cts.  per  hr 0.9 

2  laborers  ramming,  at  15  cts.  per  hr 0.5 

1  laborer  raising  sunken  brick,  at  15   cts.  per  hr 0.3 

1  foreman,   at   30   cts.    per  hr 0.6 

Total 5^3 

Bricks  Laid  Per  Day  Per  Man,  Jackson,  Mich. — In  paving  a  street 
with  shale  brick,  at  Jackson,  Mich.,  in  1895,  there  were  about 
200,000  bricks  used  for  3,500  sq.  yds.,  or  57.1  bricks  per  sq.  yd. 
The  bricks  were  2%x4%x8  ins.,  with  rounded  corners.  On  a 
street  42  ft.  wide,  6  bricklayers,  supplied  with  brick  by  helpers, 
laid  70,000  bricks  in  9  hrs.  or  11,666  bricks,  or  204  sq.  yds.,  per 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   14,   1908, 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  365 

bricklayer.  The  ordinary  average,  however,  was  7,000  bricks,  or 
only  123  sq.  yds.,  per  bricklayer  per  day.  Note  that  the  average 
day's  output  was  only  about  two-thirds  the  best  day's  output.  It 
is  evident  that  these  bricklayers  did  not  exert  themselvs,  for  even 
their  best  day's  record  of  204  sq.  yds.  per  layer  per  day  lacks  50% 
of  being  as  large  a  day's  work  as  is  recorded  elsewhere  in  this 
book. 

Twelve  boys  filled  the  joints  with  tar.  To  do  this  a  cone-shaped 
pouring  can  was  used.  There  was  a  stopper  in  the  point  of  the 
cone,  controlled  by  a  rod  leading  to  the  hand  of  the  workman. 

Cost  of  a  Brick  Pavement  in  Minneapolis. — Mr.  Irving  E.  Howe 
gives  the  following  data  on  laying  17,000  sq.  yds.  of  brick  pave- 
ment in  1897.  The  work  was  not  done  by  contract,  but  by  day 
labor.  Six  weeks  were  required  with  a  force  of  about  65  men. 
An  old  cedar  block  pavement  on  a  plank  foundation  had  to  be  re- 
moved, and  the  street  graded.  The  subgrade  was  rolled  with  a 
7-ton  horse  roller.  A  6-in.  concrete  foundation  was  then  laid,  in 
proportion  of  1  natural  cement,  2  sand,  5  broken  stone.  There 
were  required  1.16  bbls.  of  natural  cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete, 
at  76  cts.  per  bbl.  The  stone  cost  $1.15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  delivered, 
and  the  sand  cost  30  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  delivered.  The  total  cost  of 
the  concrete  laid  was  $2.80  per  cu.  yd.  Laborers  mixing  received 
$1.75  per  day.  The  Purington  Paving  Brick  Co.,  of  Galesburg,  111., 
furnished  198  car  loads  of  brick,  2t/4x4x8-in.  size,  guaranteed 
to  lay  56  to  the  sq.  yd.,  costing  the  city  $15.50  per  M,  or  87  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  on  the  cars  at  Minneapolis.  The  manufacturers  guar- 
anteed the  bricks  for  ten  years.  A  1-in.  sand  cushion  was  laid  on 
the  concrete.  To  secure  a  perfect  crown  1-in.  strips  of  wood  were 
nailed  to  the  concrete  every  12  ft.,  from  curb  to  curb.  An  iron 
shod  straight  edge  or  scraper  was  placed  on  these  strips  and 
dragged  across  the  street  to  bring  the  sand  cushion  to  a  perfect 
surface.  Then,  one  of  the  wood  strips  was  pulled  up  and  moved 
ahead.  After  a  block  of  bricks  had  been  laid,  they  were  rolled 
with  a  roller,  broken  bricks  replaced,  and  the  joints  grouted  under 
a  special  contract  of  17^  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  the  grouting.  Ex- 
clusive of  this  grouting  the  actual  cost  per  square  yard  was  as 
follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Removing  old   cedar  paving $0.035 

Grading     0.032 

Concrete,    natural  cement,    6    ins.   thick 0.467 

Planking  over  concrete,   lumber,   etc 0.008 

56  bricks,  at  $15.55   per  M 0.870 

Hauling    brick     0.038 

Sand  cushion,   1-in.,  at  65  cts.  cu.  yd. 0.018 

Laying    brick     0.032 

Total  per  sq.   yd.    (not  including  grout) $1.500 

The  pavers  received   $2   a  day,   laborers   $1.75,   teams   $3.50.      It 
will  be  noticed  that  the  hauling  cost   68V2    cts.  per  M  of  bricks. 
Cost    of    a    Brick    Pavement,    Memphis,    Tenn. — Mr.    Niles   Meri- 


366  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

wether  gives  the  following  data  on  the  cost  of  1,300  sq.  yds.  of  brick 
pavements  laid  by  day  labor    (probably  colored)   in  1893  : 

Concrete   base  (8-in.):  Per  sq.  yd. 

Natural  cement,  at  $0.74  per  bbl $0.19V2 

Sand,  at  $1.25  per  cu.  yd 0.07  !/> 

Broken  stone,  at  $1.87  per  cu.  yd 0.35% 

Labor  hauling   stone  and   making  concrete 0.15% 

Total    concrete    $0.68 

Sand    cushion    0.07 

62   paving  bricks,   at   $18.20   per  M 1.13 

1-25    bbl.    pitch,    at    $5.25 0.21 

Sand   used   in   pitching 0.01 

Labor  paving  and  pitching 0.15 

Total     $2.^5 

Grading  and  removing  old  material 0.23 

Grand   total    $2.58 

The  cost  of  curbs  distributed  over  the  pavement  added  10  cts. 
more  per  sq.  yd.  Common  laborers  were  used  to  lay  the  bricks,  at 
$1.25  to  $1.50  per  day  of  8  hrs.  The  mortar  for  concrete  was 
mixed  1 :  2,  and  enough  mortar  used  to  fill  the  voids  in  the  stone. 
It  took  1.36  bbls.  of  Louisville  cement  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete. 
On  three  other  jobs  of  about  the  same  size,  the  costs  were  prac- 
tically the  same  as  above.  On  one  street  Hallwood  blocks  were 
used,  requiring  50  blocks  per  sq.  yd.,  and  1  bbl.  of  pitch  for  every 
25  sq.  yds.  On  one  job,  where  Virginia  paving  bricks  were  used 
56  bricks  were  required  per  sq.  yd.,  and  the  labor  cost  of  laying  the 
brick  and  pitching  the  joints  was  11  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  materials  was  unusually  high, 
and  that  the  labor  was  not  efficient. 

Cost  of  Brick  Pavement,  Baltimore,  Md. — In  Engineering-Con- 
tracting, Aug.  18,  1909,  was  published  an  article  giving  the  costs 
of  various  kinds  of  pavements  laid  in  1908  by  forces  in  the  employ 
of  the  city  of  Baltimore.  I  give  the  following  excerpts  merely  to 
show  the  enormously  high  costs  that  invariably  occur  when  such 
work  is  done  by  city  day  labor  instead  of  by  contract. 

In  laying  one  brick  pavement,  the  labor  of  mixing  and  placing 
the  6-in.  concrete  base  was  $0.217  per  sq.  yd.,  or  $1.30  per  cu.  yd. 
of  concrete.  It  never  costs  a  capable  contractor  more  than  half 
this,  even  when  he  does  not  use  a  concrete  mixer,  and  I  have 
known  many  contractors  to  mix  and  lay  concrete  for  5  cts.  per  sq. 
yd.,  6  ins.  thick,  or  30  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  when  a  machine  mixer  was 
used,  as  recorded  subsequently  in  this  book. 

In  laying  the  bricks  for  this  same  street,  the  labor  cost  $0.342 
per  sq.  yd.  This  does  not  include  $0.09(3  per  sq.  yd.  for  hauling  the 
brick.  Brick  blocks  were  used,  averaging  about  40  per  sq.  yd., 
and  costing  $25  per  M,  or  $1.00  per  sq.  yd. 

On  another  street  (8,400  sq.  yds.)  the  "vitrified  brick  paving, 
labor  and  materials"  cost  $1.56  per  sq.  yd.  Since  brick  cost  $1  per 
sq.  yd.  and  paving  sand  cost  $0.65  per  cu.  yd.,  it  is  evident  that 
the  labor  item  of  laying  the  brick  was  even  greater  than  on  the 
other  street  above  given.  The  $1.56  does  not  include  the  6-in.  con* 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  367 

crete  base,  which  cost  $0.676  per  sq.  yd.,  nor  the  excavation,  which 
cost  $0.099  per  sq.   yd. 

Almost  as  bad  an  example  of  the  inefficiency  of  the  day  labor 
system  is  given  in  the  next  paragraph. 

Cost  of  Removing,  Chipping  Off  Tar  and  Relaying  Brick. — It  is 
frequently  desirable  to  know  what  the  cost  will  be  of  taking  up, 
cleaning  old  brick  and  relaying.  A  gang  of  men,  working  leisurely, 
"by  the  day  for  the  city,"  accomplished  the  following  in  Rochester, 
N.  Y.  Each  laborer  chipped  the  tar  off  500  to  700  bricks  in  eight 
hours.  Replacing  a  strip  of  pavement  4  ft.  wide  over  a  sewer  re- 
quired a  gang  of  17  men,  employed  as  follows,  after  the  pavement 
had  been  removed  and  concrete  relaid: 

Wages  for  Cost  per 

8  hrs.  sq.  yd. 

3  men  toothing  or  chipping  out  bats $  4.50  $0.08 

6  pavers    15.00  .25 

2  men    furnishing    brick 3.00  .05 

2  men    ramming,     etc 3.00  .05 

4  men  melting  and  pouring  tar 6.00  .10 

Total     $31.50  $0.53 

The  average  per  8-hr,  day  by  the  above  gang  was  60  sq.  yds.,  the 
best  day's  work  being  70  sq.  yds. 

It  seems  almost  incredible  that  the  cost  of  such  repaving  was 
53  cts.  a  sq.  yd.,  but  it  well  illustrates  the  inefficiency  of  day 
labor  for  a  city. 

Cost  of  Chipping  Tar  Off  Bricks. — When  a  brick  pavement  with 
tar  joints  is  taken  up,  the  tar  must  be  chipped  off  the  old  bricks 
before  re-laying  them.  This  is  usually  done  with  a  hatchet,  after 
cooling  the  bricks  in  a  bucket  or  tub  of  water.  As  an  average  of 
a  good  many  thousand  brick  thus  cleaned,  I  found  that  one  laborer, 
working  deliberately,  could  be  counted  upon  to  clean  60  bricks  per 
hour.  With  wages  at  15  cts.  per  hr.,  this  is  equivalent  to  $2.50  per 
M  for  cleaning  the  bricks. 

Cost  of  Removing  and  Replacing  a  Brick  Pavement. — Mr.  C.  D. 
Barstow  gives  the  following  relative  to  removing  a  strip  of  brick 
pavement  3  ft.  wide  and  373  ft.  long,  preparatory  to  digging  a 
trench.  The  pavement  was  laid  on  a  concrete  base  7%  ins.  thick. 
The  laborers  were  negroes,  and  the  work  was  done  in  1892  in  a 
Southern  city.  Laborers  received  $1.25  per  10  hrs.,  and  white 
foreman  received  $3.  The  cost  was  as  follows  per  sq.  yd. : 

Removing  brick  and  concrete:  Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Laborer,    at    $1.25 7.0 

Foreman,    at    $3.00 1.2 

Total     : 8.2 

Relaying  concrete: 

Laborer,    at    $1.25 7.9 

Relaying  brick: 

Laborer,     at    $1.25 4.5 

Bricklayers,    at    $2.00 6.5 

Bricklayers'    helpers,    $1.75 JJ.8 

Total    relaying    brick , 13.8 


368  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Materials: 

14  new  brick,  at  1%  cts 21.0 

0.12  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $1.00. 12.0 

0.15  bbl.  cement  for  concrete,  at  $1.20 18.0 

Total    materials    51.0 

Summary: 

Removing   brick   and    concrete 8.2 

Relaying    concrete    7.9 

Relaying    brick     13.8 

Materials     51.0 

Grand   total    80.9 

Cost  of  Laying  a  Stone  Block  Pavement,  St.  Paul.* — While  gran- 
ite block  pavement  is  much  less  popular  now  than  it  was  a  few 
years  ago,  it  is  not  likely  that  stone  block  pavements  will  disap- 
pear from  use  entirely  for  many  years  to  come.  This  is  particu- 
larly true  of  cities  where  sandstone  of  good  quality  is  available  for 
pavements.  The  Medina  sandstone  of  central  New  York  is  a  justly 
popular  pavement  for  business  streets.  This  sandstone  is  extremely 
dense  and  tough,  having  been  partly  metamorphosed  until  it  is 
almost  a  quartzite.  A  very  similar  sandstone  is  found  in  Minne- 
sota and  is  extensively  used  in  St.  Paul  and  Minneapolis. 

Neither  the  Medina  sandstone  nor  the  Minnesota  sandstone  is 
open  to  the  objection  that  may  be  raised  against  granite  or  trap 
rock  blocks  on  the  score  of  slipperiness.  Both  granite  and  trap 
rock  wear  smooth  and  glassy  under  traffic,  and  the  corners  of  the 
blocks  become  rounded.  But  the  sandstones  just  mentioned  always 
remain  gritty  and  never  wear  smooth,  nor  do  the  corners  of  blocks 
become  rounded.  In  fact,  when  the  joints  are  filled  with  Portland 
cement  grout,  a  good  sandstone  pavement  appears  like  one  block 
of  solid  stone  after  it  has  been  in  use  a  while ;  yet  it  offers  an 
excellent  foothold  for  horses  in  spite  of  the  apparent  absence  of 
joints.  These  facts  are  stated  in  justification  of  an  article  on  a 
class  of  pavement  which  has  been  called  out  of  date.  It  is  alto- 
gether likely  that  New  York  City  itself,  which  has  tried  and  is  still 
trying  so  many  experiments  with  paving  materials,  will  some  day 
give  Medina  sandstone  the  trial  that  it  deserves  as  a  pavement  for 
heavy  traffic. 

On  the  steep  streets  of  Tacoma,  Wash.,  sandstone  block  pave- 
ments are  being  laid,  but  the  sandstone  does  not  appear  to  be  of  as 
good  a  quality  as  Medina  sandstone.  Nevertheless  it  seems  worth 
a  trial,  for  asphalt  is  too  slippery  for  such  steep  grades  as  are  en- 
countered in  certain  of  the  Tacoma  streets. 

Whatever  may  be  the  ultimate  history  of -stone  block  pavements, 
it  is  evident  that,  many  city  engineers  and  contractors  will  have 
to  estimate  the  cost  of  laying  such  pavements,  and  for  their 
benefit  the  following  data  are  offered : 

In  the  work  to  be  described  a  base  of  Portland  cement  concrete 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  3,  1906. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  369 

• 

(1:3:6)  was  laid  in  the  usual  manner,  anJ  a  sand  cushion  spread 
over  the  concrete.  The  sandstone  blocks  were  hauled  in  wagons 
and  tossed  out  into  the  street,  instead  of  being  piled  on  the  side- 
walk along  the  curb,  as  is  often  done.  A  considerable  saving  in 
the  cost  of  laying  is  effected  by  throwing  the  stone  blocks  upon  the 
concrete  in  advance  of  the  paving  gang,  and  a  somewhat  larger 
saving  would  be  possible  if  dump  wagons  were  used.  If  the  street 
is  about  40  ft.  wide,  the  stone  blocks  are  preferably  piled  in  four 
long  piles  parallel  with  the  curbs,  as  shown  in  Fig.  9.  No  attempt 
is  made  to  stack  the  blocks  u>p  regularly,  but  they  are  merely 
tossed  out  of  the  wagons.  A  space  is  left  between  the  piles  so  that 
strings  can  be  stretched  to  guide  the  pavers  in  laying  the  blocks 
to  grade. 

To  insure  laying  the  pavement  with  the  proper  crown,  three  sight 
rods  were  made.  Two  of  them  were  like  T  squares,  made  of  a 
wooden  leg  %  x  2  ins.  with  a  crosspiece  at  the  top.  The  other 
sight  rod  was  made  so  as  to  telescope,  as  shown  in  Fig.  10,  and  had 
a  leg  about  1  in.  square  that  was  provided  with  a  groove  on  one 
side  for  a  distance  2  ft.  below  the  crosshead.  In  this  groove  a  2-ft. 
rule  was  set,  thus  countersinking  the  rule  so  that  its  face  was  flush 
with  the  face  of  the  leg.  When  this  sight  rod  is  extended  so  that 
the  upper  half  of  the  2-ft.  rule  is  visible,  the  length  of  the  rod  is 
4  ft.,  which  is  precisely  the  length  of  each  of  the  other  two  sight 
rods.  Before  using  the  rods,  a  red  or  blue  chalk  line  is  struck 
with  a  chalked  string  on  the  face  of  each  curb  exactly  at  the  fin- 
ished grade  of  the  pavement.  Then  at  intervals  along  the  curbs, 
paving  blocks,  Bx,  B5,  B6  and  BIO,  are  temporarily  set  so  that  their 
upper  faces  are  at  grade.  A  sight  rod  is  then  held  on  each  of 
the  blocks,  B!  and  B5,  at  each  curb,  and  the  telescopic  sight  rod  is 
held  on  a  block,  B2,  one-quarter  of  the  distance  across  the  street, 
as  shown  in  Fig.  10.  The  telescopic  leg  of  this  sight  rod  is  lowered 
enough  to  give  the  drop  that  secures  the  exact  crown  to  the  pave- 
ment shown  in  the  specified  cross-section,  and  the  rod  is  clamped 
with  the  thumb  screw.  The  paving  block,  B2,  is  then  raised  or  low- 
ered until  the  tops  of  the  three  sight  rods  are  exactly  on  line. 
Then  paving  blocks  B3  and  B4,  are  likewise  put  on  grade  ;  strings 
are  then  stretched  from  these  blocks  back  to  surface  of  the  com- 
pleted pavement.  With  these  three  strings  to  guide  them,  the 
pavers  can  readily  lay  the  pavement  exactly  to  grade.  It  is  ob- 
vious that  where  paving  materials  are  piled  up  in  the  street,  it 
would  be  impracticable  to  use  a  straight  edge  from  curb  to  curb, 
hence  the  necessity  of  some  such  method  as  the  one  just  described. 

On  this  particular  piece  of  work  each  stone  block  averaged 
Gx6x9i/2  ins.  and  weighed  nearly  30  Ibs.  A  wagon  load  averaged 
200  blocks,  or  3  tons.  Slat  bottom  wagons  were  used.  This  load 
was  hauled  over  hard  earth  roads  for  much  of  the  distance,  and 
over  the  sand  cushion  on  the  concrete  base. 

The  blocks  were  delivered  in  gondola  cars,  and  unloaded  from 
the  cars  into  the  wagon  by.  two  men,  assisted  by  the  driver.  About 
half  a  wagon  load  (100  blocks)  were  tossed  from  the  car  into  the 


370 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


III 


BK> 


BIO 


'(>"- - -H 

Plan     of     Pavement, 


B*     ^J-5     jj£- 

^Concrete  Bo-si 
Cross     Section. 
Fig.   9.     Method  of  Laying  Stone  Blocks. 


ROAD'S,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  371 

wagon  box,  the  driver  and  the  two  men  standing  in  the  car.  Then 
the  driver  would  get  into  the  wagon  and  pile  up  the  rest  of  the 
blocks  with  some  regularity  as  fast  as  the  two  men  would  pass 
them  out  to  him.  When  the  men  were  tossing  the  blocks  into  the 
wagon,  each  man  averaged  14  blocks  per  minute  when  all  he  had 
to  do  was  to  stoop  to  pick  up  a  block,  but  when  it  became  neces- 
sary to  walk  to  the  opposite  side  of  the  car  to  get  the  blocks,  each 
man  would  pick  up  and  deliver  only  7  blocks  per  minute.  Under 
the  latter  condition  the  two  men  in  the  car  would  hardly  keep  the 
driver  busy  stacking  up  blocks  in  the  wagon,  yet  a  short-sighted 
foreman  would  have  had  one  man  in  the  wagon  to  each  man  in  the 
car.  With  wagons  coming  along  at  regular  intervals,  the  two  men 
aided  by  the  driver  would  load  a  wagon  every  10  minutes. 

In  unloading  the  wagon  on  the  street,  one  man  and  the  driver 
consume  about  5  minutes,  each  man  tossing  out  20  blocks  per  min- 
ute. To  allow  for  slight  delays  in  waiting  for  other  wagons,  etc., 
about  20  minutes  should  be  taken  as  the  average  time  consumed 

•Thumb  Screw 


Ji. 


fr.  Rule 
Countersunk 


Fig.    10.     Telescopic    Sight    Rod. 

in  loading  and  unloading  the  200  blocks  in  each  wagon.  With 
wages  of  laborers  at  20  cts.  per  hour,  and  team  with  driver  at 
45  cts.  per  hour,  the  fixed  cost  of  loading  and  unloading  (including 
lost  team  time)  is  35  cts.  per  wagon  load,  or  $1.75  per  1,000  pav- 
ing blocks.  The  rule  for  determining  the  cost  of  loading,  unload- 
ing and  hauling  is,  therefore,  as  follows : 

To  a  fixed  cost  of  $1.75  per  1,000  blocks,  add  $1.80  per  mile  of  dis- 
tance between  the  car  and  the  point  of  delivery  on  the  street. 

Since  it  takes  about  20  of  these  paving  blocks  per  square  yard, 
we  must  divide  the  above  figures  by  50  to  get  the  cost  per  square 
for  loading  and  hauling.  Then  we  have  this  rule : 

To  a  fixed  cost  of  3l/2  cts.  per  square  yard,  add  3^  cts.  more  per 
square  yard  for  each  mile  of  distance  between  the  car  and  the 
point  of  delivery  on  the  street. 

The  above  cost  of  hauling  is  based  on  team  wages  of  45  cts.  per 
hour,  a  speed  of  2%  miles  per  hour,  and  a  3-ton  load. 

The  paving  gang  engaged  in  laying  the  stone  blocks  consisted  of 
3  skilled  pavers  and  a  helper,  whose  principal  duty  was  to  deliver 
sand  wherever  the  sand  cushion  was  not  sufficiently  thick.  Each  of 
the  3  pavers  was  paid  5  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  laying  the  blocks.  Con- 
sequently the  work  was  rapidly  done.  There  were  no  men  engaged 
in  ramming  the  blocks,  but  occasionally  one  of  the  pavers  would 


372    ..  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

spend  a  few  minutes  ramming.  Each  of  the  three  pavers  averaged 
70  sq.  yds.  per  day  of  10  hours,  or  7  sq.  yds.  per  hour,  although 
as  much  as  85  sq.  yds.  per  paver  were  laid  in  one  day. 

The  joints  between  the  blocks  were  grouted  with  Portland  cement 
mortar  mixed  in  the  proportion  of  one  bag  of  cement  (1  cu.  ft.) 
to  one  wheelbarrow  of  sand.  The  sand  was  not  measured,  but 
probably  averaged  about  2  cu.  ft.  to  the  wheelbarrow.  The  grout 
was  mixed  in  a  sheet  iron  tub,  shaped  somewhat  like  a  long  bath- 
tub, about  18  ins.  deep,  30  ins.  wide,  and  6  ft.  long,  provided  with 
wooden  strips  (2x6  ins.)  bolted  to  each  side  of  the  tub  and  pro- 
jecting beyond  the  ends  to  serve  as  handles.  The  grouting  gang 
was  organized  as  follows : 

1  man  wheeling   sand. 

1  man  carrying  cement. 

1  man  carrying  water. 

3  men  mixing  grout  with  hoes. 

2  men  sweeping    grout    into    joints. 

These  men  averaged  a  batch  of  grout  (about  2^4  cu.  ft.)  every  3 
minutes,  and  a  batch  covered  about  4  sq.  yds.  Hence  a  barrel  of 
cement  would  cover  about  16  sq.  yds.  With  wages  at  20  cts.  per 
hour  for  laborers,  the  labor  cost  of  grouting  was  2  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 
With  sand  at  $1.00  per  cu.  yd.  delivered,  the  cost  of  sand  for  grout- 
ing was  2  cts.  per  sq.  yd. ;  and,  with  cement  at  $1.60  per  bbl.,  the 
cost  of  cement  for  grouting  was  10  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  After  the 
grouting  was  completed  a  thin  coat  of  sand  was  spread  over  the 
entire  pavement,  about  200  sq.  yds.  being  covered  by  1  cu.  yd. 
of  sand. 

Summing  up  we  have : 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Loading   and   unloading   blocks 3% 

Hauling    blocks    1    mile 3  y2 

Laying  blocks,  pavers,  at  35  cts.  per  hr. .  .  „ 5 

Laying  blocks,   helper,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 1 

Labor,  grouting,  wages,  at  20  cts.   per  hr 2 


Total    labor 15 

Add  10%  for  foreman,  etc l  % 

Total     16  % 

Material  for  grout : 

1-16  bbl.    cement,   at    $1.60 . . .  10 

1-50  cu.   yd.    sand,    at   $1.00 2 

1-200  cu.  yd.   sand    (cover),  at  $1 % 

Total 12  % 

The  above  does  not  include  the  concrete  base  nor  the  sand  cusn- 
ion  between  the  base  and  the  stone  blocks. 

Cost  of  Stone  Block  Pavement,  Rochester,  N.  Y. — We  have  first 
to  consider  the  dimensions  of  the  blocks.  When  made  of  granite, 
they  are  split  with  wedges  to  tolerably  uniform  sizes ;  but  when  of 
stratified  rock,  like  Medina  sandstone,  a  carload  of  blocks  will 
show  wide  variation  in  size  of  individual  stone.  In  depth,  of 
course,  the  blocks  must  be  quite  uniform,  and  6  ins.  depth  is  usually 
specified.  In  New  York  City  4  ins.  is  specified  as  the  maximum 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  373 

width  of  granite  blocks,  and  it  may  be  assumed  as  a  certainty  that 
they  will  not  be  found  less  than  the  maximum  allowed,  since 
to  split  them  of  less  width  out  of  granite  would  add  ma- 
terially to  the  cost  per  square  yard.  In  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  5%  ins. 
is  specified  maximum  width  for  Medina  blocks  but,  due  to  the  thin 
stratification  of  the  stone,  they  frequently  come  3  ins.  in  width. 
The  maximum  length  specified  is  usually  12  ins.,  the  minimum 
8  ins.  Granite  blocks  which  are  quite  uniform  in  size  are  sold  by 
the  1,000,  and  sometimes  by  the  square  yard,  laid.  Medina  blocks 
vary  so  in  size  that  they  are  sold  by  the  square  yard. 

Joints  are  ordinarily  about  y2-in.  wide,  and  are  filled  first  with 
gravel  or  sand,  into  which  hot  tar  is  poured.  In  New  York  City 
hot  gravel  is  first  poured  in  to  the  depth  of  2  ins.  and  hot  tar 
poured  upon  it  till  voids  are  filled ;  then  another  2-in.  layer  of 
gravel  and  tar  is  added,  and  so  on  until  the  joint  is  full.  By  this 
method  one-third  to  half  the  volume  of  the  joints  is  tar.  In 
Rochester  the  Medina  sandstone  joints  are  first  filled  clear  to  the 
surface  with  hot  sand  (damp  sand  will  not  run)  ;  then  men  with 
pointed  wire  pins  like  a  surveyor's  "stick-pin,"  used  in  chaining, 
force  the  sand  down  or  pick  it  out  if  there  is  an  excess,  until  the 
surface  of  the  sand  is  1%  to  2  ins.  below  the  surface  of  the  block 
pavement.  Hot  tar  is  then  poured  in  and  fills  the  upper  2  ins.  of 
the  joint  without  penetrating  to  the  bottom.  This  method  gives  as 
good  satisfaction,  apparently,  as  the  New  York  method. 

In  order  to  economize  tar,  which  is  quite  an  item,  I  would  sug- 
gest a  combination  of  the  two  methods;  that  is,  first  fill  the  joint 
with  sand  to  within  2  ins.  of  the  surface,  then  fill  the  upper  2  ins. 
with  hot  pea  gravel  (screened)  and  pour  in  tar. 

Cement  grout  is  used  as  a  joint  filler  in  some  cities. 

With  blocks  3y2xl2x6  ins.,  there  are  26  per  sq.  yd.  where 
joints  are  %-in.  and  the  area  of  joints  is  13%  of  the  total  area, 
and  the  volume  of  joint  filler  is  nearly  0.6  cu.  ft.  per  sq.  yd.  of 
pavement.  If  tar  is  worth  10  cts.  a  gallon,  or  75  cts.  a  cu.  ft., 
and  one-third  the  volume  of  the  joint  is  tar,  the  cost  for  tar  alone 
will  be  0.6x^x75  —  15  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  pavement,  or  1%  gals. 

Due  to  the  fact  that  only  one  man  helped  the  drivers  load  their 
wagons  from  the  car,  and  only  one  man  helped  unload  the  wagons 
at  the  curb,  the  cost  of  loading  and  hauling  was  so  excessive  as  not 
to  be  typical  of  what  can  be  accomplished  under  good  manage- 
ment, even  where  extra  wagons  are  not  used.  Therefore,  in  the 
following  summary  of  costs  of  this  Rochester  pavement  I  shall  . 
give  the  same  costs  for  loading  and  hauling  that  appear  on  page 
371. 

The  wagon  load  in  the  Rochester  work  averaged  2.7  tons. 

After  the  blocks  were  stacked  up  at  the  sides  of  the  street  they 
were  laid  out  on  edge  in  the  street  in  advance  of  the  pavers,  and 
assorted  into  sizes  of  uniform  thickness,  which  laborers  using 
wheelbarrows  did  at  a  cost  of  about  3  cts.  a  sq.  yd.  Two  skilled 
pavers,  with  one  laborer  as  a  helper  to  supply  stone,  formed  a 
gang.  A  paver  laid  5  to  8  sq.  yds.  an  hour ;  6  sq.  yds.  per  hr.,  or 


374  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

60  sq.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day,  may  be  taken  as  an  average  for  safe 
estimating,  which,  with  pavers'  wages  at  30  cts.  an  hour  and  labor 
at  15  cts.,  makes  cost  of  laying  6  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Following  the  pavers,  come  a  gang  of  3  men  ramming  and  rais- 
ing sunken  stone,  1  screening  sand  for  joints,  2  heating  sand  and 
tar,  1  wheeling  sand  for  joints,  1  sweeping  sand  into  joints,  7  pok- 
ing sand  down  into  joints  and  digging  out  excess,  5  filling  upper  2 
ins.  of  joints  with  tar,  making  a  gang  of  20  men  following  the 
pavers,  and  with  wages  at  15  cts.  an  hour,  such  a  gang  covering 
60  yds.  an  hour,  or  60  sq.  yds.  per  day,  makes  the  cost  of  ram- 
ming and  filling  joints  6  cts.  a  sq.  yd.  Summing  up,  we  have  for 
the  total  labor  cost: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Loading    and    unloading $0.035 

Hauling    1    mile 0.035 

Distributing   blocks    0.030 

Laying     0.060 

Filling    joints     0.060 

Foreman,  at  40  cts.  per  hr.,   30  sq.  yds 0.013 

2   water  and   errands   boys 0.007 

Total    labor    $0.240 

Cost   of   Medina   block   pavement :  Per  sq.  yd. 

%   cu.  yd.   street  excavation : $0.15 

6-in.   concrete  foundation 0.50 

1-18  cu.  yd.  sand  cushion  in  place,  at   $1.08 0.06 

Medina  block  (6-in.)   f.  o.  b.  Albion,  N.  Y 1.15 

Freight    to     Rochester 0.07 

Unloading,  hauling  and  laying 0.24 

1.5  gals,   tar  at  10  cts.  a  gal 0.15 

1-50   cu.   yd.    sand    for   joints 0.02 

Total     $2.34 

Add  for   contractor's  profit 0.26 

Total    contract    price $2.60 

In  paving  four  streets  with  Medina  sandstone  blocks,  at  Roches- 
ter, N.  Y.,  the  average  amount  of  joint  filler  was  1.4  gallons  of 
paving  pitch  per  sq  yd. 

The  foregoing  cost  data  apply  to  work  done  over  large  areas 
with  fairly  well  organized  gangs ;  but  on  small  areas,  such  as  pav- 
ing gutters  3  ft.  wide,  I  have  had  pavers  average  only  3%  sq.  yds. 
per  hour  per  paver,  each  paver  securing  his  own  blocks  from 
piles  along  the  curb. 

By  comparison  with  the  cost  of  similar  work  done  at  St.  Paul, 
described  previously,  it  will  be  seen  that  this  Rochester  work  was 
not  as  economically  done.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  in 
St.  Paul  a  cement  grout  filler  was  used,  while  in  Rochester  the  joint 
filler  was  tar. 

Cost  of  Stone  Block  Pavement,  Baltimore,  Md.*— In  1908  there 
were  1,517  sq.  yds.  of  Medina  sandstone  blocks  laid  by  day  labor 
forces  for  the  city,  replacing  old  wood  blocks. 

Wood  blocks  were  removed  from  the  tracks  on  Fayette  St.  from 


"Engineering-Contracting,    Aug.    18,    1909. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  375 

Calvert  to  Charles  streets,  and  also  on  Calvert  street  from  Balti- 
more to  Lexington  street,  and  were  replaced  with  Medina  sand- 
stone. The  joints  of  the  pavement  were  poured  with  Warren's 
Puritan  brand  block  filler  and  followed  with  a  covering  of  hot 
gravel.  The  itemized  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Blocks     $2.350 

0.0325   cu.   yd.   stone   dust,   at    $1.20 0.039 

0.02  cu.  yd.  screened  gravel,  at  $1.90 0.038 

41.9  Ibs.  filler,  at  $1   per  cwt 0.419 

1.3   Ibs.   coal,   at   $4   ton.* 0.003 

Hauling     0.094 

Labor     0.354 

Total    (1,517  sq.  yds.) $3.297 

This  high  cost  is  characteristic  of  all  the  work  done  by  the  city 
forces  in  Baltimore. 

Cost  of  Granite  Block  Pavement,  New  York.— MT.  G.  W.  Tillson, 
in  "Street  Pavements  and  Paving  Materials,"  p.  204,  gives  the  fol- 
lowing data  on  the  cost  of  granite  block  pavement  in  New  York 
City  in  1899.  The  day  was  10  hrs.  long: 

Concrete    gang :  Per  day. 

1  foreman     $  3.00 

8  mixers  on  two  boards,  at  $1.25   10.00 

4  wheeling  stone  and  sand,   at   $1.25 5.00 

1  carrying  cement  and  supplying  water,  at  $1.25....      1.25 
1   ramming,    at    $1.25 1.25 

Total,  240  sq.  yds.   (40  cu.  yds.),  at  8.6  cts $20.50 

The  concrete  is  shoveled  direct  from  the  mixing  boards  to  place. 
Cost    1:2:4    concrete :  Per  cu.  yd. 

1H   bbls.  natural  cement,  at  $0.90 $1.20 

0.95   cu.   yd.    stone,   at   $1.25 1.19 

0.37  cu.  yd.   sand,  at  $1.00 0.37 

Labor    - 0.51 


Total    $3.27 

With    concrete    6    ins.    thick   this   is   equivalent   to    54.6    cts.   per 
sq.   yd.   for  the  concrete  foundation. 

The  granite  blocks  were  laid  two  days  later  with  the  following 
gang: 

Per  day. 
10  pavers,    at    $4.50 $  45.00 

5  rammers,  at  $3.50    17.50 

6  chuckers,    at    $1.50 9.00 

20  laborers,  at  $1.25    25.00 

2  foremen,  at  $3.50    7.00 


Total,   650   sq.   yds.,   at   16   cts $103.50 

This  is  equivalent  to  65  sq.  yds.  per  paver  per  day. 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Labor    laying    blocks,    as    above    given $0.16 

22%   granite  blocks,  at  $55  per  M 1.24 

3  %   gals,    paving  pitch,    at   7    cts 0.24 

1%    cu.    ft.   gravel   for  joints,  at   $1.95  per  cu.   yd...    0.10 

l1^   cu.   ft.  sand  for  cushion,  at  $1.00  per  cu.  yd 0.06 

1  sq.  yd.  concrete,  as  above  given 0.55 

Total     ...  ..T5? 


376  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

A  gang  laying  granite  block  pavement  on  a  7-in.  bed  of  sand  was 
as  follows: 

Per  day. 
4  pavers,    at    $4.50     $18.00 

2  rammers,    at    $3.50 7.00 

3  chuckers,    at    $1.50     4.50 

3  laborers,    at    $1.25    3.75 


Total,    280  sq.  yds.,  at  12   cts $33.25 

This  is  equivalent  to  70  sq.  yds.  per  paver  per  day. 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Labor $0.12 

24   granite  blocks,  at  $55  per  M,   delivered 1.32 

0.2  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $1 0.20 

Total    $1.64 

Apparently  the  labor  cost  of  melting  and  pouring  the  pitch  filler 
is  included  in  work  done  by  the  20  laborers. 

Cost  of  Laying  Granite  Block  Pavement,  New  York.*— The  work 
was  done  in  1905  at  96th  street.  The  paving  was  done  by  contract 
and  was  commenced  Oct.  23,  and  finished  Dec.  20  of  the  same  year. 
The  work  consisted  of  laying  5,167  sq.  yds.  of  granite  block  pave- 
ment on  a  6-in.  concrete  base.  The  blocks  used  were  12  in.  x  3ya 
in.  x  7  in.,  and  116,250  of  them  were  laid.  The  total  number  of 
lineal  feet  of  joints  that  had  to  be  tarred  was  161,975. 

In  unloading  and  piling  stone  on  the  sidewalks  the  material  was 
handled  by  the  laborers  by  hand,  the  distance  over  which  the  stone 
was  carried  being  but  a  few  feet.  It  was  found  that  each  laborer 
unloaded  and  piled  1,390  blocks,  or  62  sq.  yds.,  per  day. 

The  following  was  the  labor  cost,  it  being  estimated  that  22.5 
blocks  make  1  sq.  yd. : 

Unloading    and   Piling   Blocks:  Per  sq.  yd 

0.016     day  labor,  at  $1.75 $0.028 

0.0006  day  foreman,    at    $3.50 0.002 

Total    $0.030 

Excavating  Old  Pavement  and  6  Ins.  Earth: 

0.077     day  labor,   at   $1.75 $0.135 

0.0054  day  foreman,  at  $3.50 0.019 

Total .$0.154 

Mixing  and  Laying  Concrete  Base: 

0.128  day  labor,  at  1.75 $0.225 

0.008  day  foreman,  at  $3.50 0.028 

Total     $0.253 

Paving  and  Tarring  Joints: 

0.021     days  pavers,  at  $4.00 .  $0.084 

0.0175  days  pavers'  helper,  at  $2.00 0.035 

0.0042  days  rammers,  at  $4.00 0.025 

0.0017  days  spreading  sand  cushion,  at  $1.75 0.003 

0.013     days  filling  joints  with  gravel,  at  $1.75 0.023 

0.004     days  pouring  tar  into  joints,  at  $1.75 0.007 

0.007     days  tending  tar  and  gravel  kettles,  at  $1.75.  .    0.012 
0.002     days  foreman,   at  $5.50 0.013 

Total     .  $0.200 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  June  20,  1906. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  377 

It  will  be  noted  none  of  this  work  was  done  economically.  The 
labor  on  the  concrete,  for  example,  was  double  what  is  commonly 
required  under  good  management. 

Each  paver  laid  only  1,066  blocks,  or  47%  sq.  yds.  per  day,  which 
is  an  equally  miserable  showing. 

Cost  of  Granite  Block  Pavement,  Baltimore,  Md.*— This  work  in- 
volved laying  12,500  sq.  yds.  of  granite  block  pavement  on  Light 
St.,  Baltimore,  during  Aug.  8  to  Dec.  8,  1908.  The  work  was  not 
done  by  contract,  but  by  city  forces  working  by  the  day.  The 
excessively  high  cost  of  the  labor  per  sq.  yd.  adds  another  ex- 
ample to  the  invariable  rule  that  it  is  cheaper  to  do  such  work  by 
contract. 

It  is  stated  that  during  the  4  mos.  one  week  was  lost  on  account 
of  bad  weather  and  three  weeks  on  account  of  the  failure  of  the 
blocks  to  arrive  on  time.  During  a  large  part  of  the  time,  two 
8-hr,  shifts  were  worked  daily.  The  Belgian  blocks  were  quar- 
ried in  Maine  and  shipped  to  Baltimore  by  boat,  the  first  boat 
arriving  Aug.  24.-r.  There  were  24y?  blocks  per  sq.  yd.,  the  price 
being  $68.50  per  M  delivered  on  the  line  of  the  work. 

The  cost  of  the  6-in.  concrete  base  was  as  follows,  the  mixture 
being  1:3%:  6%  : 

Per  cu.  yd.     Per  sq.  yd. 

Gravel,     1     cu.     yd $1.10  $0.183 

Sand,    1/2    cu.    yd.,   at   $0.72 0.36  .060 

Cement,   4   bags    1.285  0.214 

Total    materials $2.745  $0.457 

Tabor     0.786  0.131 

Grand    total    $3.531  $0.588 

It  is  stated  that  an  engineman,  at  $2.50  per  8  hrs.,  and  13  labor- 
ers, at  $1.67,  operated  a  %  cu.  yd.  mixer  (part  of  the  time  using  a 
Ransome  and  part  of  the  time  using  a  Smith  mixer),  and  the 
average  8  hrs.  run  was  333  sq.  yds.,  or  56  cu.  yds.  ;  but  the  ex- 
ceedingly high  cost  of  $0.786  per  cu.  yd.  for  labor  could  not  have 
occurred  had  the  output  averaged  even  the  56  cu.  yds. 

The  average  organization  of  the  paving  gang  and  the  wagefc 
paid  were  as  follows: 

Per  8  hrs. 

1  foreman,   at   $4.00 $  4.00 

6  pavers,     at     $4.00 24.00 

2  rammers,    at    $3.00 6.00 

4  carts  (including  horse,  cart  and  driver),  at  $2.50.    10.00 

7  pourers,    at    $1.75 12.25 

16  laborers,   at   $1.66%    26.62 

2  stone   cutters,   at   $4.00 8.00 

Total     $90.87 

Special  efforts  were  made  to  keep  this  gang  constantly  em- 
ployed, and  absolutely  no  time  was  lost  by  it  other  than  delays 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   22,   1909. 


378  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

occasioned  by  bad  weather  and  failure  of  blocks  to  arrive  on  time. 
The  concrete  base  at  all  times  was  kept  well   in   advance  of   the 
pavers,  experience  having  shown  that  the  laborers  would  do  better 
and  quicker  work  when  they  could  see  an  abundance  of  it  ahead 
and   no    interruption.      The   average   day's   work   complete   for   this 
gang  was  267  sq.  yds.  or  44%   sq.  yds.  to  the  paver.     This  makes 
the  cost  34  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  and  does  not  include  hauling  the  blocks 
from  the  boat  to  the  street.     This  34  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  is  just  about 
three  times  what  it  would  cost  a  competent  contractor,  as  will  be 
seen  by  comparison  with  records  above  given. 

It   should  be  noted  that  the  joints  were  filled    with  gravel   and 
pitch,  and  that  the  labor  of  the  7  "pourers,"  being  $12.25  per  day,  as 
above  given,,  amounted   to   4.6   cts.   per  sq.  yd.     It  is  stated,   how- 
ever, that  the  total  labor  cost  of  pouring  was  5.75  cts.  per  sq.  yd., 
from  which  it  would  appear  that  about  2  laborers  (of  the  16)  were 
used  to  open  barrels  and  keep  the  fires  going,  etc. 

Coal,   at   $4   per  ton,   was  used  to   melt   the  pitch  and  heat   the 
gravel,   and  this  wood   cost   %    ct   per   sq.   yd.   Of  pavement.     The 
tar  kettle  had  a  capacity  of  2  tons,  and  was  mounted  on  wheels. 
The   gravel  heater,   also   on  wheels,   had   a   capacity   of   32   cu.   ft. 
of   gravel,    but    did   not   meet   the   requirements,    so    that   two   un- 
mounted sheet  iron  pans  (3%  x7  ft.)  were  also  used.     It  is  stated 
that  prior  to  the  use  of  this  tar  kettle  and  the  gravel  heater,  fuel 
(wood,  at  $5  per  cord)  had  cost  1%   ct.  per  sq.  yd. 
Summarizing  the  cost,  we  have: 

Materials:  Per  sq.  yd. 

24%   granite  blocks  delivered  on  street,  at  $68  per  M  ......  $1.6900 

0  083  cu.  yds.  stone    dust    for    cushion     (instead    of    sand), 
'  at     $1.05  ..............................................    0.0875 

0.039  cu.  yds.  gravel   for  joints,   at  $1.80  ..................   0.0700 

48  rbs.  tar  for  joints,  at  $0.01  ............................    0.4800 

1*4  Ibs.  coal  for  heating  tar  and  gravel,  at  $4.00  per  ton.  .  .  .   0.0025 


Total    materials    .................  ,  ................  $2.3300 

Labor: 
Heating  and  pouring  filler  and  gravel  .....................  $0.0575 

Other  labor  laying  blocks  ................................    0.2675 


Total     -. $2.6550 

Concrete  base   (6-in.)    as  above  given 0.5880 

Grand  total    $3.2430 

This  does  not  Include  removing  an  old  pavement  and  grading. 

The  very  high  cost  of  the  tar  filler  per  sq.  yd.  is  noteworthy.  If 
ft  weighed  10  Ibs.  per  gal.,  then  there  were  4.8  gals,  per  sq.  yd., 
an  altogether  unnecessary  amount. 

After  the  final  pouring  of  the  tar  (Warren's  Puritan  filler),  the 
pavement  was  covered  with  hot  gravel. 

Cost  of  Dressing  Old  Granite  Blocks,  Baltimore,  Md.* — Before  lay- 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   22,  1909. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  379 

ing  a  new  granite  pavement  on  Light  St.,  Baltimore,  6,500  sq.  yds. 
of  old  granite  blocks  were  taken  up  and  relaid  by  city  forces.  The 
cost  of  laying  the  new  blocks  is  given  on  page  377. 

The  following  costs  relate  only  to  the  dressing  of  the  old  blocks 
and  relaying  them.  The  costs  were  exceedingly  high,  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  work  was  done  by  city  forces. 

Each  man  dressing  old  granite  blocks  averaged  253  blocks  per 
8-hr,  day,  and  the  cost  was  $13.16  per  M,  which  indicates  that  the 
stonecutters  received  less  than  $3.30  per  day.  When  relaid  the 
labor  cost  was  as  follows: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Dressing  and  laying  old  blocks $0.4325 

Heating  and  pouring  filler  and  gravel 0.0575 

Total    labor    $0.4900 

For  rates  of  wages  and  organization  of  the  gang  engaged  in 
laying,  see  page  377. 

Cost  of  Taking  Up  and  Relaying  a  Cobble  Stone  Pavement.* — In 
repairing  pavements,  the  costs  of  labor  vary  greatly,  owing  to  the 
fact  that  the  repair  work  is  done  in  small  patches  and  there  is 
much  time  lost  in  the  moving  of  tools  from  place  to  place  as  well  as 
the  time  the  men  consume  in  moving.  Records  of  these  costs  are 
exceedingly  difficult  to  obtain,  but  we  are  fortunate  in  being  able 
to  give  the  cost  of  doing  a  repairing  job  that  involved  enough  work 
to  keep  a  repair  gang  busy  for  a  day,  so  that  some  idea  of  the 
cost  of  the  various  labor  items  can  be  calculated. 
The  wages  paid  were  as  follows  for  an  8-hr,  day: 

Foreman     $4.50 

Laborers     1.66 

Pavers     5.30 

Rammers     3.90 

2-horse  wagon  and  driver 5.00    • 

Cart  and  driver    3.50 

The  work  consisted  of  cobble  stone  paving,  between  the  curb  and 
a  street  car  track,  being  10  ft.  wide  and  104  ft.  long.  A  10-in. 
gutter  of  flag  stones  was  laid  15  ins.  from  the  curb;  the  inter- 
vening 15  ins.  being  laid  with  cobbles.  In  all  there  were  115.55  sq. 
yds.  of  paving,  9.55  sq.  yds.  of  this  being  in  the  gutter,  and  14.55 
sq.  yds.  being  between  the  gutter  and  the  curb. 

The  system  of  carrying  on  the  work  was  for  three  laborers  to 
loosen  the  cobbles  with  bars,  being  followed  by  three  laborers  with 
picks,  who  piled  the  stones  within  reach  of  the  pavers  and  kept  the 
ground  beneath  the  paving  loosened  with  their  picks.  A  wagon 
hauled  ashes  from  the  city  stock  pile  to  be  used  beneath  the  new 
paving,  and  it  also  hauled  some  cobbles  from  the  yard  that  were 
needed.  One  laborer  spread  the  ashes  for  the  pavers. 

One  paver  set  the  gutter  and  paved  between  the  curb  and  the 
gutter.  The  curbing  was  not  disturbed.  This  paver  laid  24  sq.  yds, 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  2,   1907. 


380  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

in  the  day,  more  than  one-third  of  it  being  gutter.  The  othei 
three  pavers  did  the  rest  of  the  laying,  doing  not  quite  31  sq.  yds 
apiece.  Two  rammers  rammed  106  sq.  yds.  of  paving,  being  the 
entire  amount  less  the  gutter.  The  man  who  spread  the  ashes 
followed  the  rammers  spreading  sand  over  the  work.  The  carl 
hauled  the  sand.  At  the  close  of  the  day  the  7  laborers  cleaned  up 
in  a  few  minutes. 

The  varJous  labor  items  cost  as  follows : 

Tearing  up  and  handling  stone: 
3  laborers    with    bars $4.98 

3  laborers  with  picks    4.98     $   9.96 

Paving' 

1  laborer  on  ashes  and  sand $   1.66 

4  pavers     21.20 

2  rammers     7.80       30.66 

Hauling  materials: 

Cart   sand    $3.50 

Wagon  for  ashes  and  stone 5.00          8.50 

Superintendence     4.50 

Grand  total    $53.62 

The  cost  per  sq.  yd.  was : 

Tearing  up  and  handling  stone $0.086 

Paving     265 

Superintendence     040 

Hauling   materials    073 

Total   cost  per   sq.   yd $0.464 

The  cobble  stones  averaged  about  8  ins.  deep,  hence  the  cost 
of  tearing  them  up  and  stacking  them  was  nearly  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
Cost  of  Laying  Asphalt  Block  Pavement,  New  York.* — In  the  up- 
per part  of  New  York  City  asphalt  block  pavements  have  been  in 
use  for  many  years  and  have  steadily  grown  in  popularity,  particu- 
larly for  residence  streets.  Formerly  it  was  the  custom  to  lay  the 
blocks  on  edge,  following  the  precedent  of  stone  block  and  brick 
pavement  construction  ;  but  within  recent  years  the  asphalt  blocks 
have  been  laid  flatwise,  thus  forming  a  wearing  coat  of  asphalt 
blocks  3  ins.  thick,  each  block  being  3x5x12  ins.  The  old  theory 
that  a  block  pavement  of  any  kind  should  be  made  of  blocks  set 
on  edge  is  thus  utterly  overthrown,  and  it  is  not  unreasonable  to 
expect  to  see  the  time  when  paving  bricks  will  also  be  laid  flatwise, 
thus  effecting  a  great  economy  in  material.  About  five  years 
ago  the  managing  editor  of  this  journal  wrote  an  article  setting 
forth  the  reasons  why  paving  bricks  of  larger  size,  known  as 
"blocks,"  should  be  laid  flatwise  instead  of  edgewise,  but  conserva- 
tism among  city  engineers  is  so  strong  that,  so  far  as  we  know,  not 
a  single  city  has  adopted  the  plan  of  laying  paving  brick  flatwise. 

Coming  now  to  the  method  of  laying  asphalt  blocks  in  New  York 
City,  we  find  another  departure  from  precedent  in  that  the  ven- 
erable "sand  cushion"  has  been  abandoned.  Of  course  a  base  of 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   26,  1906, 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  381 

concrete  is  provided  in  the  usual  manner,  but,  instead  of  laying  a 
sand  cushion  on  this  base,  it  is  now  the  practice  to  spread  a  thin 
coat  of  cement  mortar  on  which  the  asphalt  blocks  are  laid.  This 
mortar  coat  is  y2  in.  thick,  made  of  1  part  cement  to  4  parts  sand. 
It  is  mixed  dry  and  wheeled  onto  the  concrete  in  barrows,  roughly 
spread  with  shovels  and  rakes  and  then  leveled  off  with  a  wooden 
straight  edge.  To  insure  perfect  leveling  and  the  desired  thick- 
ness of  mortar,  strips  of  wood  %  in.  thick  are  laid  at  intervals  of 
about  10  ft.  Then  two  men  shove  a  straight  edge  over  these  strips 
until  the  dry  mortar  is  spread  evenly.  After  this  a  man  with  a 
hose  sprinkles  the  mortar  until  it  is  quite  damp  and  ready  to  receive 
the  asphalt  blocks. 

No  attempt  is  made  to  bed  the  asphalt  blocks  down  into  the  mor- 
tar, but  they  are  merely  laid  firmly  and  given  a  rap  with  a 
hammer.  In  order  to  keep  the  courses  of  blocks  in  perfect  line,  a 
man  with  an  ax  follows  the  pavers  and  shoves  over  any  parts  of 
courses  that  are  crooked  by  prying  the  blocks  along  with  the  ax 
bla,de  shoved  into  the  joint. 

The  blocks  are  loaded  in  wagons  from  boats  or  cars,  hauled  to  the 
site  of  the  work  in  advance  of  the  concreting,  and  stacked  in 
piles  on  the  sidewalk  along  the  curb.  Asphalt  blocks  are  not  as 
tough  as  stone  or  brick  and  must  be  handled  more  carefully.  In 
loading,  as  well  as  in  unloading,  one  man  tosses  blocks  to  another 
man  who  stacks  them  up  in  the  wagon,  or  on  the  sidewalk.  About 
300  blocks  make  a  wagon  load,  and  as  each  block  weighs  18  Ibs.,  a 
load  is  approximately  2.7  tons.  In  loading  the  blocks  from  gondola 
cars  into  wagons,  it  takes  two  men  in  the  car  to  deliver  blocks  to 
one  man  in  the  wagon,  who  piles  them  up.  With  four  men  in  the 
car  and  two  men  on  the  wagon  (including  the  driver  as  one  of  these 
two  men),  300  blocks  are  easily  loaded  in  10  minutes,  even  when 
the  men  in  the  car  have  to  walk  several  steps  to  get  each  block. 
But  when  the  blocks  are  merely  picked  up  and  tossed  to  the  men 
in  the  wagon,  these  six  men  will  load  300  blocks  in  7%  mins.  If 
the  teams  are  in  sufficient  number  for  one  team  to  arrive  at  the 
car  every  10  mins.,  the  5  men  (and  the  driver)  load  1,800  blocks 
per  hour.  With  wages  of  laborers  at  20  cts.  an  hour,  and  team 
with  driver  at  45  cts.,  the  cost  of  loading  (including  lost  team  time) 
is  80  cts.  per  1,000  blocks,  or  1.7  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Then  the  hauling  costs  $1.20  per  1,000  blocks  per  mile  of  haul 
from  car  to  place  of  unloading,  when  300  blocks  form  a  load,  speed 
of  travel  being  2  %  miles  an  hour. 

In  unloading  the  wagon  the  driver  and  another  man  in  the  wagon 
toss  blocks  to  two  men  on  the  sidewalk,  who  pile  them  up.  These 
men  unload  300  blocks  in  7%  mins.  without  difficulty,  but  allowing 
10  mins.  for  unloading,  so  as  to  include  waits  for  wagons;  we  have 
a  cost  of  60  cts.  for  unloading  each  1,000  blocks  including  the  lost 
time  of  the  team.  Hence,  to  estimate  the  cost  of  handling  and 
hauling,  with  wages  as  above  given,  use  the  following  rule : 

To  a  fixed  cost  of  $UtO  per  M  for  loading  and  unloading  (in- 
cluding lost  team  time),  add  $1.20  per  M  for  each  mile  of  haul. 


382  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  organization  of  the  gang  laying  the  pavement  (exclusive 
of  the  gang  laying  the  concrete  base),  is  as  follows: 

Per  hour. 

4  pavers  laying  blocks,  at  40  cts $  \  QQ 

16  men  carrying  blocks,  at  20  cts 3  20 

1  man  lining  up  blocks,  at  20  cts '20 

2  men  splitting  blocks,  at  30  cts .*.'!!!        '60 

1  man  laying  strips  for  straight  edge,  at  30  cts...  '30 

7  men  mixing  mortar,   at   20  cts 1*40 

6  men  wheeling  and  spreading  mortar,  at  20  cts...  l  20 

2  men   raking  mortar,   at   20    cts '40 

2  men  leveling  mortar  with  straight  edge,  at  20  cts..  '40 

1  man  sweeping  sand  into  joints,  at  20  cts '20 

1  foreman,   at  50   cts [59 

42  men,   total,   160   sq.   yds.,   at   6^   cts $10~00 

This  is  equivalent  to  40  blocks  per  paver  per  hr.,  or  360  per  day. 

This  gang  worked  9  hrs.  daily,  and  when  engaged  in  laying 
blocks  averaged  180  to  200  sq.  yds.  per  hr.  There  was  no  loafing 
on  the  part  of  the  men  who  carried  the  blocks  to  the  pavers,  nor  on 
the  part  of  the  pavers.  But  the  17  meiv  mixing,  wheeling  and 
spreading  mortar  averaged  only  23  cu.  yds.  of  mortar  placed  per 
day,  which  is  not  a  very  good  record. 

The  asphalt  blocks  were  carried,  two  at  a  time,  by  hand,  and  were 
not  delivered  in  wheelbarrows.  They  were  laid  to  break  joint  by 
4  ins.,  and  this  left  a  good  deal  of  work  to  be  done  at  the  curbs  in 
cutting  at  least  two  blocks  to  fill  out  each  course.  The  two 
men  splitting  blocks  for  this  purpose  were  unable  to  keep  up  with 
the  paving  gang.  Hence,  at  intervals,  the  whole  gang  stopped 
paving  and  went  back  to  assist  in  splitting  blocks  to  close  the 
courses,  and  to  fill  the  joints  of  the  blocks  with  sand. 

No  cement  is  mixed  with  this  sand  filler,  but  loads  of  dry  sand 
are  hauled  onto  the  pavement,  dumped,  spread,  and  swept  into  the 
joints.  A  cubic  yard  of  sand  fills  the  joints  of  about  200  sq.  yds. 
of  block  pavement. 

The  time  required  to  spread  the  sand  filler  and  fill  out  the  courses, 
when  included  with  the  time  actually  spent  in  laying  reduced  the 
average  output  to  160  sq.  yds.  per  hour,  making  a  cost  of  6%  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  for  laying  the  mortar  and  blocks  and  filling  the  joints 
with  sand.  Wages  actually  paid  were  somewhat  lower  than  those 
above  given,  being  $1.50  for  9  hours  for  laborers  and  $2.50  to  $3.00 
for  pavers.  The  pavers  did  not  belong  to  a  union. 

It  will  be  noted  that  each  of  the  4  pavers  averaged  45  sq.  yds. 
per  hour  when  not  engaged  in  cutting  and  fitting  blocks  at  the  end 
of  courses,  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  on  the  best  day  each  paver 
averaged  55  sq.  yds.  per  hour,  or  495  sq.  yds.  per  day. 

To  the  contractor  who  has  been  used  to  laying  stone  block  pave- 
ment only,  these  records  may  seem  erroneous.  Even  the  brick 
paving  contractor  may  be  inclined  to  doubt  theii  accuracy.  It 
should  be  remembered,  however,  that  one  asphalt  block  covers 
5x12,  or  60  sq.  ins.  of  surface,  and  that  it  takes  only  21  asphalt 
blocks  per  square  yard,  as  compared  with  two  or  three  times  that 
number  of  paving  bricks  or  blocks. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  383 

The  time  consumed  in  selecting  stone  blocks  and  in  bedding 
them  in  the  sand  cushion  materially  reduces  the  output  of  the  pavers 
compared  with  asphalt  block  work. 

Cost  of  Asphalt  Block  Pavement,  Baltimore.*— This  work  was 
done  in  1908  by  city  day  labor  forces,  and,  as  is  usual  in  such  cases, 
the  cost  was  high.  An  8-hr,  day  was  worked,  wages  being  as  given 
on  page  377. 

Nearly  30,000  sq.  yds.  were  laid  in  1908,  some  of  it  on  a  con- 
crete base,  of  which  the  following  is  a  typical  cost  where  the  con- 
crete was  6  ins.  thick,  the  stone  dust  cushion  being  1  in.  thick, 
and  the  asphalt  block  wearing  coat  being  3  ins.  thick.  The  blocks 
were  3x5x12  ins. 

Per  sq.  yd. 

1-6  cu.  yd.  concrete  base,  at  $3.60 $0.600 

0.07  cu.  yd.  stone  dust,  at  $1.20 0.084 

20.7  asphalt  blocks,   at   $65  per  M 1.340 

Labor    laying  blocks    0.220 

Total     $2.244 

Cost  of  Creosoted  Wood  Block  Pavement,  Minneapolis.* — Minne- 
apolis was  among  the  first  cities  in  the  United  States  to  lay  creo- 
soted  wood  block  pavement  to  any  extent.  At  the  end  of  1902  the 
city  had  over  200,000  sq.  yds.  of  this  type  of  pavement,  and  since 
then  this  yardage  has  been  largely  increased.  Minneapolis  was  also 
probably  the  first  city  to  use  blocks  made  of  Norway  pine  and 
tamarack  to  any  considerable  amount. 

The  following  figures  show  the  actual  average  detailed  cost  of 
about  145,000  sq.  yds.  of  pavement  constructed  in  various  parts  of 
Minneapolis  in  1908.  The  figures  were  obtained  from  pay  rolls,  bills 
of  materials  and  estimates  and  are  the  actual  cost  for  labor  and 
materials  for  constructing  the  pavement. 

The  average  unit  cost  per  square  yard  for  the  145,000  sq.  yds, 
of  creosoted  wood  block  pavement  was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Removing    old    cedar    paving $0.0270 

Grading     0.1320 

Concrete  base   (labor  and  materials) 0.5226 

Cushion   sand,   at   $0.60   per  cu.  yd 0.0200 

Creosoted  paving  blocks  (f.  o.  b.  Mpls.) 1.3900 

Hauling    blocks     0.0450 

Laying   blocks .  .  .  0.0590 

Hauling    cement    0.0090 

Paving  pitch  filler,  at  5.7  cts.  per  gal 0.0570 

Hauling  pitch   for   filler 0.0100 

Labor   on   filler    0.0120 

Asphalt  filler  along  St.  R.  R.  tracks 0.0029 

Headers    (plant)     * 0.0030 

Sand   on    finished   paving '.  0.0100 

Tools     0.0200 

Rolling 0.0100 

Cleaning   up    finished    street 0.0050 

Miscellaneous    materials     0.0030 

Miscellaneous    labor     0.0100 


Total      $2.3475 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  18,  1909. 


384  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Summarizing   the   labor   items    of    laying   the   wood   block   pave- 
ment, we  have: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Laying  blocks    $0.0590 

Labor    on    pitch    filler 0.0120 

Rolling     0.0100 

Cleaning   up    0.0050 

Total     $0.0860 

Hauling   blocks    0.0450 

Miscellaneous    labor     0.0100 


Grand  total    $0.1410 

This  does  not  include  labor  of  removing  old  pavement  and 
grading. 

The  organization  and  wages  of  the  gang  directly  engaged  in 
laying  the  blocks  were  about  as  follows : 

Per  day. 
6  pavers,   at    $2.50 $15.00 

6  helpers    setting   up    blocks,    at    $2 12.00 

7  wheelers,    at    $2 14.00 

4  sand  cushion  men  and  sweepers,  at  $2 8.00 

2  sand  cushion  men  and  sweepers,  at   $2.25....      4.50 

2  sand  cushion  men  and  sweepers,  at  $2.50 5.00 

1  grader,    at   $2.25 2.25 

1  water   boy,    at    $1.20 1.20 

Total    (1,050    sq.    yds.) $61.95 

This  gang  averaged  about  1,050  sq.  yds.  per  8-hr,  day  for  the  full 
season's  work.  This  included  waits  for  material  at  times  and 
delays  for  other  causes.  Some  days  the  gang  laid  as  high  as 
1,400  sq.  yds. 

The  detailed  cost  of  the  concrete  base  was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Crushed  limestone,  at  $1.65  per  cu.  yd $0.2186 

Sand,  at  $0.60  per  cu.  yd 0.0374 

Cement,   at  $1.12   per  bbl 0.1122 

Labor     0.1303 

Street  railway   concrete    0.0241 


Total     $0.5226 

The  above  figures  include,  of  course,  a  number  of  items  peculiar 
to  the  city,  which  might  not  obtain  in  another  community.  For 
instance,  the  first  item — removing  old  blocks  (cedar)  happens  only 
in  a  few  streets,  but  yet  amounts  in  total  to  enough  materially  to 
affect  the  cost  price  and  must  be  considered.  Also  in  the  detailed 
cost  of  the  concrete,  there  is  included  an  item  for  street  railway 
concrete.  This  item  would  not  appear  elsewhere,  but  is  a  very  con- 
siderable one  in  Minneapolis.  The  street  railway  company  main- 
tains paving  from  the  outer  edge  of  the  rails  in  one  track  to  the 
outer  edge  of  the  rail  in  the  other  track,  and  does  not  include  the 
ties  extending  beyond  the  rail,  iy2  ft.  in  each  case,  and  for  con- 
venience to  them  and  to  the  city,  the  railway  company  puts  in  the 
concrete  base  from  the  rail  to  end  of  the  tie  at  the  same  time  it  puts 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  385 

in  the  concrete  for  the  tracks,  the  city  paying  the  company  for  it. 
This  constitutes  the  item  of  "street  railway  concrete."  An  item  of 
"headers"  also  is  included.  This  is  a  4  x  10-in.  plank  set  on  edge  at 
the  returns  on  unpaved  streets  to  protect  the  edge  of  the  new 
paving. 

The  cost  varies  in  different  localities  in  the  city,  there  being 
as  much  as  25  cts.  per  square  yard  difference.  This  is  due  to 
difference  in  length  of  hauls  for  materials,  difference  in  the  grading 
and  from  other  local  conditions. 

The  concrete  is  mixed  by  hand.  It  is  5  ins.  thick  and  is  mixed  in 
the  proportion  of  1:3:7.  The  stone  used  in  1908  was  a  crushed 
limestone,  costing  on  an  average  $1.65  per  cu.  yd.,  on  the  basis  of 
$1  per  cu.  yd.  at  the  crusher,  the  city  doing  the  hauling.  The 
cement  cost  $1.12  per  barrel  f.  o.  b.  Minneapolis,  and  the  mason 
sand  for  concrete  cost  on  an  average  60  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  filler  used  in  the  work  was  distilled  from  coal  tar  and  was 
furnished  by  the  Barrett  Manufacturing  Co.  It  was  brought  on  the 
streets  in  hot  tanks.  The  season's  work  averaged  about  10  Ibs. 
of  pitch  filler  to  the  square  yard  of  finished  pavement.  This  is  a 
little  less  than  one  gallon  to  the  yard. 

The  sand  cushion  was  1  in.  thick  and  the  fine  sand  used  cost  on 
an  average  60  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  blocks  used  were  Norway  pine  and  tamarack,  4  ins.  thick, 
and  were  treated  with  16  Ibs.  of  oil  to  the  cubic  foot. 

Common  labor  was  paid  at  the  rate  of  $2  per  day,  teams  were 
paid  $4  per  day,  block  layers  $2.50  per  day,  and  a  few  special 
men  from  $2.25  to  $2.50  per  day.  An  8-hr,  day  was  worked. 

All  the  work  was  done  by  force  account  under  the  direction  of 
B.  H.  Durham,  street  engineer,  to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  the 
above  information. 

Labor  Cost  of  Creosoted  Wood  Block  Pavement  at  Seattle.* — The 

following  data  abstracted  from  the  "Pacific  Builder  and  Engineer" 
show  the  labor  cost  of  constructing  some  creosoted  wood  block  pave- 
ment on  4th  Ave.  in  Seattle.  The  blocks  had  a  cross-section  of 
3x4x8  ins.  and  were  made  from  selected  Western  Washington 
fir  stock.  They  were  treated  by  the  Pacific  Creosoting  Co.  at  its 
Eagle  Harbor  works.  The  sub-base  for  the  pavement  consisted  of 
6  ins.  of  concrete,  on  which  was  placed  a  1-in.  cushion  of  cement 
and  sand  mixed  1 :  3,  spread  and  sprinkled. 

During  one  day's  work  322  sq.  yds.  of  the  pavement  were  laid, 
the  organization  of  the  gang  and  wages  being  as  follows : 

Per  day. 

16  laborers,  at  $2  per  day $32.00 

1  paver,   at    $5   per   day 5.00 

Superintendent,   at   $5    per  day 5.00 

Total,    322    sq.    yds.,    at    $0.1203 $42.00 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  4,  1909. 


386  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

This  gang  mixed  the  grout,   spread  it  and  laid  the  blocks  at  the 
following  cost : 

Per  sq.  yd. 
Laborers     $0.0993 


Total $0.1303 

The  concrete  base  cost  90  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  by  contract.  Sand  cost 
$1.25  per  cu.  yd.  delivered,  and  cement  was  $2.25  per  bbl.  deliv- 
ered. About  4,000  sq.  yds.  of  pavement  was  constructed. 

It  should  be  noted  that  there  was  an  unnecessarily  large  number 
of  laborers  (16)  to  one  paver. 

Cost  of  Creosoted  Wood  Block  Pavement,  Holyoke,  Mass.* — The 
following  work  was  done  in  1906,  by  day  labor,  under  the  super- 
vision of  Mr.  James  L.  Tighe,  city  engineer.  About  5,500  sq.  yds.  of 
wood  blocks  were  laid  on  a  5-in.  concrete  base,  the  concrete  being 
a  1:3:6  mixture.  The  1-in.  cushion  coat  was  a  1 :  7  mixture.  An 
8-hr,  day  was  worked.  The  organization  of  the  gang  for  excavating, 
concreting  and  paving  with  blocks  was  as  follows : 

Excavation:  Per  day. 

1  steam  roller  and  engineman  hauling  plow $   10.00 

4  men    on    plow,    at    $2.00 8.00 

20  men  loading  earth,   at  $2.00 40.00 

4  teams   hauling    (%    mi.),    at    $4.00 16.00 

2  men  finishing  subgrade,  at  $2.00 4.00 

Total     excavation     $   78.00 

Hauling  Stone  and  Sand: 

6  men   loading   stone   from   cars,   at    $2.00 $  12.00 

2  teams    hauling    stone,    at    $4.00 8.00 

3  men  loading  sand  in   pit,   at   $2.00 6.00 

2  teams  hauling  sand   (0.8  mi.),  at  $4.00 8.00 

Total  hauling  broken   stone  and  sand $  34.00 

Mixing  Concrete: 
20  men  mixing  and  placing  by  hand,  at  $2.00 $  40.00 

Paving: 

4  men  mixing  and  placing  cement  cushion,  at  $2.00..$  8.00 

2  pavers   laying   blocks,    at    $2.00 4.00 

6  pavers'    tenders,    at    $2.00 12.00 

1  man  spreading  sand  over  pavement,  at  $2.00....        2.00 

Total  paving   $  26.00 

Supervision: 

2  foremen,   at   $3.10 $      6.20 

1   superintendent     5.00 

Total   supervision    $  11-20 

Grand    total  labor    $189.20 


*Engineering-Contracting,  May  13,   1908. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  38? 

This  gang  excavated  earth  and  laid  300  sq.  yds.  per  8-hr,  day, 
hence  the  labor  cost  was : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Excavation     $0.260 

Hauling  broken  stone  and  sand 0.113 

Mixing  and  placing  5-in.  concrete 0.133 

Paving    0.087 

Supervision J).037^ 

Total $0.630 

The  cost  of  the  concrete  materials  was  about  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

0.14  cu.  yd.  broken  stone  for  concrete,  at  $1.20 $0.17 

0.07  cu.  yd.  sand    (pit  royalty),   at  $0.10 0.01 

0.14  bbl.  cement  for  concrete,  at  $1.67 0.24 

Total   materials   for   concrete $0.42 

We  have  the  following  cost: 

Materials  for  Wearing  Coat:  Per  sq.  yd. 

54   creosoted  blocks,   at   $3.95 $2.140 

0.03  bbl.  cement  for  mortar  cushion,  at  $1.67 0.050 

0.03  cu.  yds.  sand  for  mortar  cushion,  at  $0.55 0.017 

Total   materials   for    wearing   coat $2.207 

Labor  on  Wearing  Coat: 

Men  on   cement   cushion $0.027 

Pavers  laying  wood  blocks 0.013 

Pavers'  tenders   0.040 

Man  spreading  sand  over  blocks 0.007 

Supervision,    6%  of  labor 0.005 

Total   labor  on  wearing  coat $0.092 

Concrete  Base: 

Materials   for   5-in.    concrete   base $0.420 

Labor  on  concrete  base,  incl.   6%  for  supervision.  ...  $0.140 

Total,   excluding   grading    $2.859 

Grading,   incl.    6%    for    supervision 0.276 

Grand   total $3.135 

Life  of  Wood  Block  Pavement.*— Mr.  William  Weaver  gives  the 
following  English  data: 

Wood  paving  has  received  my  special  attention  since  1872,  when  it 
came  into  extended  use. 

In  Kensington,  May,  1882,  I  had  laid  experimental  areas  of  creo- 
soted wood  blocks,  respectively  3  ins.,  4  ins.  and  5  ins.  deep,  jointed 
in  different  ways,  and  as  the  result  of  careful  observation,  I  advised 
my  board  to  lay  4-in.  creosoted  deal  blocks  in  Sydney  place,  an 
omnibus  route  leading  from  Fulham  road  to  South  Kensington  sta- 
tion. These  blocks  were  laid  close,  and  grouted  first  with  pitch 
and  then  with  Portland  cement,  the  work  being  carried  out  in 
November,  1889,  and  the  blocks  lasted  until  June,  1901,  when  the 
road  was  repaved  in  a  similar  manner. 

The  conclusion  at  which  I  have  arrived,  after  my  experiments 
initiated  in  1882,  was  that  creosoted  deal  furnished  the  most 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  15,  1909, 


388  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

suitable  and  economical  road  pavement ;  further,  that  5-in.  blocks 
lasted  as  long  as  6-in.,  and  that  4-in.  creosoted  blocks  answered 
all  the  requirements  of  roads  where  the  traffic  is  not  excessive. 
In  order  to  understand  that  a  5-in.  will  last  as  long  as  6-in.  paving, 
it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  wood  paving  must  be  renewed  as  soon 
as  its  general  surface  ceases  to  drain  itself ;  and  this  happens 
when  the  blocks  forming  the  haunches  of  the  road  are  reduced 
between  1  in.  and  2  ins.  in  depth,  the  channel  or  watercourse  mean- 
while not  being  exposed  to  similar  traffic,  suffer  no  diminution  of 
depth. 

The  above  conclusions  are  fully  borne  out  by  Table  XIV  of  in- 
stances, extracted  from  my  annual  reports,  which  furnishes  details 
of  304,220  yds.  of  5-in.  and  137,164  yds.  of  4-in.  wood  paving  laid 
in  Kensington  since  1887. 

In  connection  with  that  list,  an  instructive  comparison  is  fur- 
nished by  the  history  of  the  wood  laid  in  the  Hammersmith  road 
in  continuation  westward  of  the  area  laid  in  Kensington ;  at  the 
same  time  (May,  1886),  Hammersmith  laid  down  6-in.  plain  deal 
blocks  which  lasted  a  little  over  six  years,  being  replaced  in  July, 
1892,  with  5-in.  jarrah  blocks.  After  eight  years  the  jarrah  blocks 
were  reversed  and  rebedded  in  July,  1900,  and  replaced  with  5-in. 
creosoted  deal  in  July,  1903.  The  5-in.  creosoted  deal  adjoining  in 
Kensington,  laid  in  May,  1886,  lasted  until  September,  1901,  equal 
to  the  combined  lives  (less  two  years)  of  the  plain  deal  with  jarrah 
together. 

Further,  with  regard  to  the  above  schedule,  I  may  add  that  all  the 
roads  enumerated  are  omnibus  routes,  but  the  traffic  on  each,  of 
course,  varies  in  severity. 

In  conclusion,  I  would  point  out  that  by  reducing  the  depth  of 
the  wood  (each  inch  of  reduction  means  over  a  shilling  per  yard 
saved),  and,  further,  by  about  doubling  the  life  of  the  wood  by 
creosoting,  wood  paving  need  no  longer  be  considered  an  expensive 
luxury,  but  must  be  regarded  as  a  sanitary  and  economical  substi- 
tute for  macadam,  where  costing  over  8d.  per  yard  annually  to 
maintain.  At  the  same  time  it  must  not  be  lost  sight  of  that  such 
substitution  has  a  tendency  to  increase  the  rateable  value  of  the 
abutting  property,  owing  to  the  improved  appearance,  cleanliness 
and  quietude  of  the  road. 

Cost  of  Asphalt  Pavement  in  California.*— Through  the  kindness 
of  Mr.  Charles  Kirby  Fox,  C.  E.,  we  are  enabled  to  give  the  costs 
of  two  asphalt  paving  jobs  in  a  Southern  California  city. 

The  first  piece  of  work  was  done  under  a  Vrooman  act  con- 
tract, the  contract  price  being  $1.89  per  sq.  yd.  It  consisted  of  the 
construction  of  pavement  on  two  blocks  of  street.  The  street  was 
48  ft.  wide,  had  2%  ft.  concrete  gutters,  a  rise  of  6  ins.  to  8  ins. 
and  a  grade  of  1  per  cent.  It  drained  well  and  there  were  no  water 
holes.  The  pavement  consisted  of  a  5-in.,  1:3:6  concrete  base,  a 
1-in.  binder  course  and  a  2-in.  asphalt  wearing  surface. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  April  1,  1908. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


38* 


JS    e 

«•£  -< 


13' 

^•§"8.  S  -S3  -S 

O         N-H  ft 

TJ2  Oj«        rrj  rrj 

C    0>  03  'W^       5  S       <^ 


£S$       g 

•c-a-o    ^ 


-  - 

-COX3*    ci---« 

05  To-r  **5 


^  s  OS^Si 

g  I 

rrt        M 


o      o  o  0-P.o- 

G     s  d  c  fl  d  d  c  c  c  c  c 


Is 

P>  CO 

is 


O    S 

S    S 

S    .0 


*J       ™ 


I  E 


wo 


390  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Grading. — The  grading  ctfst  $0.1233  per  sq.  yd.  and  was  done  by 
the  following  organization : 

Per  day. 

1  foreman,   at    $5 $   5.00 

1  timekeeper,  at  $3 3.00 

1  engineman,    at   $3,    part    time   on   steam   roller 

and  part  time  on  plowing 3.00 

2  teams  plowing,  at  $4 12.00 

6   teams  hauling,  at  $4 24.00 

14  laborers    shoveling,    at    $2 28.00 

Total,   610  sq.  yds $75.00 

Concrete  Base. — The  5-in.  concrete  base  was  made  of  a  1 :  3  :  « 
mixture.  On  Job  No.  2  it  was  found,  however,  that  these  propor- 
tions did  not  work  well,  as  all  the  voids  were  not  filled,  and  tlwt 
a  1:3:5  or  1:4:6  mixture  made  a  better  concrete.  The  concrete 
was  hand  mixed  on  two  7  x  7-f t.  boards,  in  the  following  manner : 
First,  the  sand  and  cement  were  dumped  on  the  board  and  hoed 
across  and  wet ;  then  the  stone  was  dumped  on  the  mortar  and  the 
whole  mess  pulled  back  and  forth  across  the  boards  and  set  on  the 
ground  in  about  the  place  it  was  to  occupy.  In  the  meantime  the 
other  board  was  being  filled  up  and  the  operation  repeated,  the  first 
board  being  pulled  a  little  forward  and  refilled.  The  concrete 
secured  was  fair.  The  cost  of  mixing  and  placing  the  concrete  was 
as  follows  : 

Per  cu.  yd.     Per  sq.  yd. 

0.93  bbl.  cement,  at  $2.50 $2.28  $0.316 

0.45  cu.  yd.   sand,   at  $0.80 0.31  0.043 

0.9     cu.  yd.  stone,   at    $2.00 1.80  0.250 

Tools   and   water 0.12  0.016 

Labor    and    superintendence 1.20  0.166 

Total     $5.71  $0.791 

The  wages  and  organization  of  the  gang  engaged  in  mixing  and 
placing  the  concrete  base  were  as  follows: 

Per  day. 
1  superintendent,    at    $5 $  5.00 

1  timekeeper,   at  $3. . . . . 3.00 

2  laborers,    at   $2,    wheeling   sand 4.00 

3  laborers,  at  $2,  wheeling  stone 6.00 

6  laborers,    at    $2,    mixing 12.00 

1  laborer,  at  $2,   tending  water. 2.00 

2  laborers,  at  $2,  leveling  and  spreading 4.00 

1  laborer,   at   $2,   tamping 2.00 

Total,    31.7    cu.    yds.,    at    $1.20 $38.00 

The  tools  used  were  as  follows: 

Two  7  x  7-ft.  mixing  boards,  7  wheelbarrows,  12  picks,  12  shovels, 
6  hoes,  300  ft.  of  hose,  1  tamper,  12  lanterns  and  1  tool  box. 

Binder. — The  1-in.  binder  course  cost  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Asphalt,  at   $20  per  ton $0.063 

Binder  stone,   at  $2  per  cu.  yd 0.081 

Labor  and  plant   0.045 

'total     . $0.189 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  391 

The  2-in.  asphalt  wearing  surface  was  mixed  in  a  plant  having  a 
capacity  of  8  cu.  ft.  The  tools  used  in  connection  with  the  wearing 
surface  work  consisted  of  a  2y2-ton  (30-in.)  roller,  a  300-lb.  hand 
roller,  a  fire  pot,  2  Watson  wagons,  2  smoothers,  6  tampers,  6 
shovels,  2  dirt  picks,  6  asphalt  picks,  3  rakes,  5  brooms  and  4 
wheelbarrows. 

The  cost  of  the  2-in.  asphalt  wearing  surface  was  as  follows: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Asphalt,  at  $20  per  ton $0.198 

Sand,  at  $1  per  cu.  yd 0.045 

Dust,   at   $10   per   ton 0.090 

Labor     0.090 

Plant 0.198 

Total     $0.621 

The  high  plant  charge  of  19.8  cts.  was  due  in  part  to  the  mixing 
plant.  This  occupied  two  cars.  In  addition  the  job  was  very  small, 
consisting  of  two  330-ft.  by  46-ft.  blocks. 

The  wages  and  organization  of  the  gang  engaged  in  the  wearing 
surface  work  were  as  follows : 

Per  day. 

Superintendent,    at     $5 $  5.00 

Timekeeper,    at    $3 3.00 

1  engineman,   at   $3.50 , 3.50 

1  mixer,    at    $3 '    3.00 

1  mixer   helper,   at   $2.50 2.50 

1  mixer   dipper,   at   $2.50 2.50 

2  men  shoveling  to  heater,  at  $2.00 4.00 

3  men  wheeling,  at   $2 6.00 

2  teams  hauling  to  streets,  at  $4 8.00 

2  rakers,    at    $3 : 6.00 

3  shovelers,    at    $2.50 7.50 

1  smoother,    at    $2.00.... 2.00 

1  tamper,  at  $2.10 2.10 

2  roller  men,  at  $2.50 5.00 

1  engineman  on  roller,  at  $3.50 3.50 

1  man   sweeping,    at    $2 2.00 

Total $65/60 

The  second  piece  of  work  was  done  in  the  fall  of  1907  by  private 
contract,  at  a  contract  price  of  $1.89  per  sq.  yd.  The  work  con- 
sisted of  the  construction  of  pavement  on  five  blocks  of  streets  and 
four  alleys.  The  streets  were  48  ft.  wide,  had  a  rise  of  6  ins.,  and  a 
grade  of  1  per  cent ;  they  had  no  gutters.  The  alleys  were  20  ft. 
wide  and  had  a  grade  of  0.4  per  cent  to  1  per  cent.  The  alley  that 
had  a  1  per  cent  grade  drained  well,  but  those  where  grade  was 
less  had  to  be  ironed  out.  The  alleys  had  no  gutters.  Experience 
in  the  city  where  this  pavement  was  laid  has  shown  that  if  the 
gutters  fall  more  than  %  In.  to  the  foot  they  can  be  m,ade  to  drain 
by  using  the  straight  edge.  If  the  fall  is  less  than  %  in.  there  will 
be  water  holes.  Where  the  gutter  has  to  be  raked  it  was  found 
advisable  to  have  double  the  fall  per  foot.  The  pavement  consisted 
of  4-in.,  1:3:6  concrete  base,  a  1-in.  binder  course  and  a  2-in. 
wearing  surface. 


392  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Grading. — The  grading  was  done  by  another  contractor  and  cost 
10.099  per  square  yard,  the  work  being  done  by  the  following  force: 

Per  day. 

1  foreman,   at   $3 $   3  00 

%   timekeeper,  at  $3 1.50 

1  engineman,    at    $3,    part    time   on    steam   roller 

and  part  time  plowing 3.00 

2  teams  plowing,  at  $4 g!oo 

8  teams  hauling  dirt  away,  at  $4 32.00 

18  laborers  shoveling,  at  $2 36!oo 

Total    $83.50 

Concrete  Base. — The  concrete  base  was  laid  by  the  contractor 
who  did  the  grading.  The  concrete  was  mixed  in  a  Ransome  mixer, 
a  3  cu.  ft.  barrow  of  sand  being  dumped  into  the  mixer  first,  then  1 
cu.  ft.  of  loose  cement  and  finally  two  ban-ows  of  stone.  After  sev- 
eral turns  of  the  mixer  the  mass  was  discharged  and  taken  in 
scoops  by  the  laborers  and  put  in  place.  Two  laborers  spread  the 
mixture,  two  laborers  leveled  it,  and  two  more  laborers  tamped  it. 
The  mixture  was  as  wet  as  It  could  be  without  the  mortar  running 
from  the  stone.  Each  wheelbarrow  man  had  two  helpers.  The  gang 
usually  consisted  of  28  men;  42  men  were  the  most  that  could  be 
used  to  advantage.  The  concrete  on  this  job  was  better  than  that 
on  the  first  job.  The  cost  of  the  4-in.  concrete  base  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd.     Per  sq.  yd. 

0.95  bbl.  cement,  at  $3.00 $2.85  $3.16 

0.45  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $0.80 0.31  0.034 

0.91  cu.  yd.  stone,     at     $2.00 1.82  0.202 

Labor  and  superintendence 0.974  0.108 

Rent  of  machine,  repairs,  oil... 0.246  0.027 

Total     .  .$6.2(T  $0.687 

The  stone  used  in  the  concrete  was  hauled  from  cars  about  % 
mile  distant,  the  cost  of  unloading  and  hauling  being  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman,    at    $3 $0.03 

Laborers,   at   $2 15 

Teams,    at    $4 19 

Total $0.37 

This  cost  is  included  in  the  $2  in  the  table. 

The  wages  and  organization  of  the  force  engaged  in  mixing  and 
placing  the  concrete  base  were  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

1  foreman,  at  $100  per  month $  4.00 

1  engineman  on  mixer,  at  $3.50 3.50 

1  handyman,  at   $2.50 2.50 

1  team,   at    $4 4.00 

1  laborer  tending  mixer  discharge,  at  $2 2.00 

2  laborers  carry  and  measure  cement,   at  $2....      4.00 

1  laborer    at    $2    wheeling    sand,    and    1    laborer 

at    $2    helping 4.00 

2  laborers  at  $2   wheeling  stone,  and  2   laborers 

at  $2  helping 8.00 

2  laborers   dumping  concrete,   at  $2 4.00 

2  laborers  tamping,   at  $2 4.00 

9  laborers  taking  concrete  from  machine,  at  $2.  .  18.00 

Total,  60  cu.  yds $58.00 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  393 

These  concrete  men  evidently  worked  with  no  energy,  as  is  shown 
by  their  miserably  small  output  with  a  good  plant. 

The  plant  used  consisted  of  a  Ransome  concrete  mixer  with  6  h.p. 
gasoline  engine  mounted  on  wheels,  one  1  cu.  ft.  cement  box,  four  3 
cu.  ft.  wheelbarrows,  29  scoops,  12  short-handled  shovels,  18  long- 
handled  shovels,  12  picks,  400  ft.  of  hose,  three  tampers,  12  lanterns 
and  one  tool  box. 

Binder. — The  stone  used  in  the  binder  had  the  dust  screened  out 
and  was  passed  through  a  1%  in.  screen.  It  was  found,  however, 
that  this  did  not  leave  enough  fine  stuff,  pea  size  or  thereabouts,  so 
screenings  from  the  sand  were  taken  and  from  this  was  screened 
out  all  particles  above  1  in.  in  size.  One  part  of  these  screenings 
was  mixed  with  two  parts  of  broken  stone  and  heated  to  200°  F. 
Four  cubic  feet  of  this  was  mixed  with  27  Ibs.  of  melted  asphalt, 
making  a  strong  binder.  The  cost  of  the  binder  was  $0.171  per 
square  yard. 

The  wearing  surface  was  mixed  in  batches  of  the  proportion  of 
4  cu.  ft.  of  sand,  heated  to  about  300°  F..  30  Ibs.  of  cold  dust,  and 
50  Ibs.  of  melted  asphalt.  These  were  mixed  very  thoroughly,  usual- 
ly taking  1%  minutes  to  the  batch.  The  mixture  usually  arrived  on 
the  street  at  about  280°  F.  It  was  found  that  a  4  cu.  ft.  batch  would 
lay  about  20  sq.  ft.  of  2  in.  surface.  The  cost  of  the  wearing  sur- 
face was  $0.549  per  square  yard. 

The  wages  and  organization  of  the  force  engaged  in  preparing  and 
laying  the  binder  and  the  wearing  surface  were  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

Superintendent,  at  $120  per  month $  5.00 

1  engineman.  at  $3.50 3.50 

1  mixer,    at    $3.00 3.00 

1  mixer  helper,    at   $2.50 2.50 

1  heater,  at  $2.50 2.50 

1  man     shoveling    sand    and     1     man    shoveling 

marble    dust,    at    $2.50 2.50 

1  scraper  team,  at   $4.00 4.00 

2  teams  hauling  to   street,   at  $4.50 9.00 

1  engineman   on   roller,   at   $3.50 3.50 

2  rakers,    at    $3.00 6.00 

2  shovelers,   at  $2.50 5.00 

2  hand    roller   men,    at    $2.50 5.00 

2  tampers,    at    $2.50 5.00 

Total    $56.50 

The  plant  used  consisted  of  a  4  cu.  ft.  mixer,  a  5  ton  (38  in.) 
roller,  a  500  Ib.  hand  roller,  a  fire  pot,  3  Watson  wagons  and  teams, 
a  scraper,  3  rakes,  3  shovels,  2  tampers,  3  smoothers,  1  asphalt  pick 
and  2  brooms. 

Summary. — A  summary  of  the  costs  of  the  two  jobs  is  as  follows : 

Job  1.  Job  2. 

Per  sq.  yd.     Per  sq.  yd. 

Grading    $0.123  $0.099 

Concrete     0.791  0.687 

Binder     0.189  0.171 

Surface    0.621  0.549 

Office,  collection  and  general  expense 
estimated    0.180  0.180 

Total  .  .$1.904  $1.686 


394 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Job  2  had  more  material  and  better  workmanship  per  unit  than 
Job  1.  It  was  better  managed,  especially  in  the  asphalt  department. 
Job  1  had  an  asphalt  mixer  requiring  two  cars  to  move,  while  on 
Job  2  the  mixer  required  but  one  car,  but  it  cost  more  to  move  the 
latter.  The  small  plant  was  the  most  economical.  On  concrete  work 
the  lost  time  of  steady  pay  men  when  they  were  not  mixing 
amounted  to  about  10  cts.  per  cubic  yard;  usually,  however,  wheri 
these  men  were  not  mixing  they  were  engaged  on  other  work. 

Cost  of  77,200  Square  Yards  Asphalt  Pavement.* — Mr.  F.  E.  Puffer 
gives  the  following: 

The  cost  of  laying  77,208  sq.  yds.  of  asphalt  pavement  in  an  east- 
ern city,  which  was  a  season's  work,  was  as  follows : 

The  price  paid  for  common  labor  was  $1.5 0  a  day,  and  $5  a  day 
for  team  and  driver. 

Total 

Grading  street:  Per  sq.  yd.     Per  sq.  yd. 

Sundries    10.021 

Labor   0.204 

Teams  ($5  a  day) 0.087  $0.312 

Concrete  base  (6-in.): 

0.173  bbl.  natural  cement,  at  $0.83 $0.144 

0.055  cu.  yd.  sand  delivered,  at  $0.98.  . .  .    0.054 

0.176  cu.  yd.  stone  delivered,  at  $1.62 0.285 

Sundries    0.015 

Labor  laying 0.094 

Labor,  general 0.001  $0.593 

Binder  (1%  ins.): 

Materials    $0.188 

Fuel 0.016 

Tools  and  sundries 0.001 

Labor,  yard  (mixing,  etc.) 0.026 

Labor,   laying   0.023 

Labor,  general 0.001 

Teams,  hauling  ($5  a  day) 0.024  $0.279 

Surface  (2-in.): 

Materials    $0.645 

Fuel 0.022 

Tools  and   sundries 0.054 

Labor,  yard   (mixing,  etc.) 0.053 

Labor,   laying 0.047 

Labor,   general 0.028 

Teams,  hauling 0.035  $0.884 

General    expense: 

Salaries     $0.018 

Rent  and  expenses 0.014 

Plant,   etc 0.025  $0.057 

Grand  total $2.125 

The  exact  proportions  of  the  materials  used  in  the  binder  and  in 

the  surface  coats  are  not  available,  but  the  prices  paid  for  materials 

and  supplies  were  as  follows : 

Binder  stone,  per  cu.  yd $   1.00 

Asphalt,   per   ton 50.75 

Petroleum   residuum,    per   gal 07% 

Sand,  per  cu.  yd. . 65 

Pulverized  limestone,   per  ton 3.50 

Coal  (anthracite)  used  in  dryers,  per  ton 3.00 

Coal  (soft)  used  under  boilers,  per  ton 2.85 

Wood  to  heat,  asphalt  tanks,  per  cord. 4.00 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  5,  1908. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS. 


395 


It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  the  asphalt  was  much  higher 
than  it  is  at  present,  the  present  price  being  about  $30  a  ton.  Since 
there  are  about  4  Ibs.  of  asphalt  per  sq.  yd.  of  binder,  and  about 
19  Ibs.  per  sq.  yd.  of  surface  coat,  the  difference  of  $20  a  ton  (or 
1  ct.  per  Ib.  of  asphalt)  would  reduce  the  above  given  costs  by  4  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  of  binder  and  19  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  surface  coat. 

An  old  plant  having  a  value  of  about  $22,000  was  used.  The 
plant  repairs  amounted  to  $1,525,  or  2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  which  is 
unusually  low.  Ordinary  plant  charges  are  about  7  %  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 
where  a  modern  plant  is  used,  but  in  such  cases  the  labor  cost  is 
lower  than  in  this  case.  I  have  made  no  allowance  for  interest  on 
and  depreciation  of  plant. 

The  fallacy  of  attempting  to  estimate  .the  cost  of  asphalt  pave- 
ments from  a  single  day's  operation  is  clearly  shown  by  comparing 
the  records  of  costs  on  different  jobs  extending  over  considerable 
periods  of  time.  Marked  differences  of  cost  occur,  arising  partly 
from  variations  in  local  conditions,  and  partly  from  the  varying 
efficiency  of  the  workers,  and  partly  from  the  exactions  of  the 
inspector. 

The  following  are  the  costs  of  three  different  streets,  showing 
how  costs  vary. 

Contract  A  was  performed  under  favorable  weather  conditions 
on  a  suburban  street,  close  to  the  source  of  supply  of  concrete  ma- 
terials and  far  from  the  paving  plant.  The  cost  was  a  little  below 
the  season's  average  above  given: 

CONTRACT     A. 

(3,284  sq.  yds.) 

Total 

Grading  street:  Per  sq.  yd.     Per  sq.  yd. 

Sundries    $0.019 

Labor 0.123 

Teams   0.089  $0.231 

Concrete  base  (6-in.): 

Natural  cement,  at  $9.866  per  bbl $0.138 

Sand,  at  $0.92  per  cu.  yd 0.051 

Stone,  at  $1.77  per  cu.  yd 0.295 

Sundries     0.015 

Labor     0.093  $0.592 

Binder  (iy2-in.): 

Materials    $0.192 

Fuel 0.011 

Tools  and  sundries 0.002 

Labor,     yard 0.024 

Labor,  laying 0.024 

Teams    hauling 0.024  $0.277 

Surface  (2-in.): 

Materials    $0.673 

Fuel 0.026 

Tools  and  sundries 0.055 

Labor,  yard 0.047 

Labor,    laying    0.042 

Labor,  general   0.029 

Teams  hauling    0.035  $0.907 

General    expense    $0.042  $0.042 

Grand  total..  $2.049 


396 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Contract  B  was  the  last  contract  of  the  season.  Weather  was 
unfavorable  but  not  severe.  Length  of  haul  was  less  than  the  aver- 
age for  the  season.  The  forces,  except  asphalt,  were  somewhat 
demoralized  by  the  fact  that  the  job  would  soon  end.  The  cost 
was  naturally  high. 

CONTRACT     B. 

(5,278  sq.  yds.) 

Grading  street:  Per  sq.  yd.     Persq^yd. 

Sundries    $0.021 

Labor    0.138 

Teams   0.129  $0.288 

Concrete  base  (6-in.): 

Cement,  at  $0.845   per  bbl 50.142 

Sand,  at  $1.18  per  cu.  yd 0.063 

Stone,  at  $1-93  per  cu.  yd 0.321 

Tools  an'l  sundries 0.015 

Labor 0.104  $0.645 

Binder  (1%-in.): 

Materials    $0.195 

Fuel   0.011 

Labor,  yard   0.030 

Labor,  laying 0.025 

Teams  hauling 0.025  $0.287 

Surface  (2-in.): 

Material   $0.666 

Fuel : 0.023 

Tools  and  sundries   0.056 

Labor,  yard   0.041 

Labor,    laying    0.053 

Labor,  general 0.029 

Teams  hauling    0.035              $0.903 

General  expense   $0.057  $0.057 

Grand  total   $2.180 

Contract  C  varies  from  the  others  in  having  a  1-in.  binder  and  a 
1 1/2 -in.  surface  specified.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  asphalt 
was  laid  thicker  than  specified,  due  to  the  fact  that  the  men  had  not 
been  used  to  laying  any  light  pavement  that  year.  The  work  was 
located  near  the  paving  plant,  also  near  the  source  of  supply  of 
cement,  etc.  The  weather  was  good.  The  cost  was  naturally  low. 


CONTRACT     C. 

(2,404  sq.  yds.) 

Grading  street:  Per  sq.  yd. 

Sundries    $0.021 

Labor     0.110 

Teams     0.091 

Concrete  base  (6-inJ: 

Cement,  at  $0.876  per  bbl $0.151 

Sand,  at  $0.71  per  cu.  yd 0.039 

Stone   0.205 

Tools  and  sundries 0.016 

Labor   0.069- 


Total 
Per  sq.  y<5 


$0.222 


$0.480 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,  WALKS. 

CONTRACT    C     (CONTINUED). 

(2,404  sq.  yds.) 

Binder  (1-in):  Per  sq.  yd.     Per  sq.  yd. 

Materials    $0.152 

Fuel 0.009 

Sundries    0.001 

Labor,  yard   0.027 

Labor,    laying    0.020 

Teams  hauling 0.005  $0.215 

Surface  (iy2-in.): 

Materials    $0.495 

Fuel    0.019 

Tools  and  sundries 0.042 

Labor,  yard   0.043 

Labor,   laying    0.062 

Labor,   general    0.022 

Teams  hauling 0.007  $0.690 


General  expense $0.057  $0.057 

Grand  total $1.664 

Cost  of  Asphalt  Pavements  at  Winnipeg. — The  following  data  are 
given  by  H.  N.  Ruttan,  City  Engineer  of  Winnipeg,  Manitoto,  on  the 
cost  of  laying  asphalt  with  a  municipally  owned  plant.  In  1899,  the 
city  purchased  a  second-hand  stationary  plant  for  $12,322,  and  made 
the  following  additions : 

New    10-ton   roller    $  3,500 

New   sheds,   etc 733 

Tools  bought  1899 .         262 

Tools  bought  1900 121 

Maintenance  1899    568 

Maintenance  1900   1,048 


$   6,232 
Second-hand  plant    12,322 


Total $18,554 

The  maintenance  items  consisted  largely  in  repairs  to  the  second- 
hand plant  necessary  to  put  it  in  first-class  condition.  The  plant 
includes  2  asphalt  melting  tanks,  sand  drum,  cold  and  hot  sand  ele- 
vators, millstone  for  grinding  limestone,  storage  tank  for  hot  asphalt, 
storage  bins  for  ground  limestone  and  hot  sand,  mixer  of  7  cu.  ft. 
capacity,  60-hp.  boiler,  30-hp.  engine,  air  compressor  and  receiver, 
5-ton  roller,  10-ton  roller,  and  accessories.  The  force  required  tn 
operate  the  mixing  plant  was  as  follows : 

1  superintendent    $   8.00 

1  engineman     3.00 

2  firemen    4.00 

2  asphalt  melters    4.00 

1  asphalt  dipper  and  mixer 2.00 

1  measurer  of  sand  and  limestone 2.00 

2  sand  and   limestone   shovelers 2.00 

1  record  keeper   4.00 

1  man    for   odd    jobs 2.00 

Total  labor  for  9  hrs $31.00 

I  have  assumed  the  above  rates  of  wages,  but  it  is  stated  that  the 


398  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

total  cost  of  operating  was  $40  a  uay,  which  doubtless  Includes  the 
cost  of  1%  or  2  tons  of  coal.  It  Is  stated  that,  in  1900  the  prices  of 
materials  and  labor  were  as  follows,  on  cars  : 

Asphalt,   per   short  ton  ........................  $36.00 

Portland  cement,  per  bbl  .......................      3.65 

Sand,  per  cu.  yd  ...............................      1.35 

Broken  stone,  per  cu.  yd  .......................      1.10 


Common  labor  is  said  to  have  been  17%  to  20  cts.  per  hr.  ;  teams, 
40  cts.  per  hr. 

Asphalt  pavement,  consisting-  of  1%-in.  binder  and  2-in.  wearing 
surface,  laid  on  a  4%  -in.  Portland  cement  concrete  foundation,  cost 
$2.04  per  sq.  yd.  for  materials  and  labor.  The  concrete  foundation 
cost  $0.74  per  sq.  yd.,  leaving  $1.30  per  sq.  yd.  for  the  asphalt  and 
the  grading.  It  will  be  noticed  that  interest  and  depreciation  are  not 
included.  • 

The  plant  has  a  capacity  of  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  2-in.  wearing  surface, 
or  1,500  sq.  yds.  of  1%-in.  binder,  which  is  equivalent  to  saying  that 
it  has  a  capacity  of  about  60  cu.  yds.  of  asphalt,  measured  in  the 
street,  per  day  of  9  hrs. 

In  1899*the  city  laid  45,800  sq.  yds.  ;  in  1900,  it  laid  22,000  sq.  yds. 
If  we  assume  30,000  sq.  yds.  as  a  fair  average  for  a  term  of  10  years, 
the  plant  would  pay  for  itself  by  charging  6  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  plant, 
and  it  would  be  occupied  about  60  days  of  actual  work  per  year. 
But  we  should  not  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  the  services  of  an 
expert  to  run  the  plant  could  not  be  secured  on  the  basis  of  a  few 
dollars  a  day  for  only  a  small  fraction  of  the  year.  Indeed  the 
cost  of  an  expert's  annual  salary  alone  might  very  easily  run  up  the 
cost  an  amount  equivalent  to  10  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Since  the  above  was  written  I  have  secured  the  following  addi- 
tional data  for  the  year  1903.  The  plant  has  been  enlarged  and  its 
estimated  value  is  now  $21,082.  The  charges  against  this  plant  for 
the  year  1903  were  as  follows: 

Maintenance   and   repairs  ......................  $2,297 

%    cost  of  new  tools.  ...  ......................       236 

4%  interest  on  $21,082   ........................       843 

5%  depreciation  on   $21,082  ....................    1,054 

Lost   taxes    ..................................       100 

Total  plant  charge,  65,381  sq.  yds.  at  6.93  cts..  $4,530 

In   1903   there  were  laid   65,381   sq.   yds.,    so  that  the  charge  for 
plant  was   6.93    cts.   per    sq.   yd.      The   soil   is   clay  and  upon   it   la 
spread   3   ins.   of  sand   and  gravel  before  laying  the  concrete  base. 
The  cost  of  the  pavement  in  1903,  including  grading,  was  as  follows; 

Per  sq.  yd. 
Grading,  including  cross-drains  ..................  $0.15 

Sand,    3-in.    foundation  ..........................    0.15 

Concrete,    4  %    ins.   thick  .............  .  ..........    0.65 

Binder  coat  ...................................    0.28 

Surface  coat   ..................................    0.60 

Plant  charges  .................................    U-»« 

Total     .  ...  ..........................  $1.90 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  399 

The  prices  paid  for  materials,  f.  o.  b.  Winnipeg,  in  1903,  were 
as  follows : 

Portland  cement,  per  bbl $   2.96 

Broken  stone,  per  cu.  yd 1.30 

Sand  and  gravel,  per  cu.  yd 1.00 

Crushed   granite,    per   cu.    yd 5.00 

Asphalt,  per  ton 26.37 

Maltha,    per    imp.    gal 0.12 

Common   labor,    per    9-hr,    day $1.80  to  2.25 

Skilled  labor,  per  9-hr,  day 2.70 

Foremen $3.00  to  4.00 

Superintending  chemist  (for  5  or  6  mos.) 8.00 

Mr.  Ruttan  informs  me  that  a  2-in.  surface  coat  (Bermudez) 
costs  as  follows  at  the  mixer : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

0.06  cu.  yd.   (135  Ibs.)  sand,  at  $1.35 $0.081 

21  Ibs.  dust,  at  $2.60  per  ton 0.027 

3.5  Ibs.  oil,  at  iy2  cts 0.048 

15  Ibs.  Bermudez  (gross),  at  1.93  cts 0.291 

Labor  at  the  mixing  plant 0.048 

Fuel    (wood) 0.018 

Total,  at  the  mixer $0.517 

This  gives  a  weight  of  117  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft. 

Cost  of  Laying  Asphalt  Pavement. — The  following  shows  the 
labor  cost  of  laying  asphalt  on  a  concrete  base  at  Rochester,  N.  Y. 
A  binder  coat,  %-in.  thick,  was  first  laid;  then  a  wearing,  or  sur- 
face coat  iy%  ins.  thick;  making  a  total  of  2  ins.  The  gang  consist- 
ed of  16  men,  working  part  of  the  time  on  the  "binder"  and  part  of 
the  time  on  the  "surface  coat,"  as  follows : 

Binder  gang.  Surfacing  gang. 

4  barrow  loaders.  4  shovelers. 

4  barrow  wheelers.  5  rakers. 

2  rakers.  2  tampers. 

2  tampers.  2  smoothers. 

1  wagon  unloader.  1  cement  spreader. 

1  tar  melter.  1  iron  heater. 

1  iron  heater.  1  foreman. 

1  foreman. 

16  men. 
16  men. 

The  binder  gang  averaged  2,250  sq.  yds.  (=31  cu.  yds.)  in  10  hrs. 
of  %-in.  binder  coat  laid,  although  they  frequently  laid  390  sq.  yds. 
in  an  hour.  The  surfacing  gang  averaged  1,800  sq.  yds.  (=  75  cu. 
yds.)  of  1%-in.  surface  coat  in  10  hrs.,  although  they  frequently  laid 
260  sq.  yds.  in  an  hour.  There  were  two  asphalt  steam  rollers  con- 
stantly at  work,  with  this  gang  of  16  men.  In  laying  several  thou- 
sand yards  of  this  2-in.  asphalt  pavement,  I  found  the  average  labor 
cost  to  be  as  follows,  the  gang  laying  1,000  sq.  yds.  per  day : 

15  laborers,   at   $1.50 $2250 

1  foreman,   at   $4.00 4.00 

2  roller  engineers,  at  $3.00 6.00 

Fuel  for  rollers 2.50 

Total  for  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  2-in.  asphalt,  at  3%  cts..  .$35.00 
This  is  equivalent  to  3%   cts.  per  sq.   yd.  for  laying  and  rolling, 
or  63  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  haul   from   the   mixer  to   the    street   was   3   miles,   and   «ach 


400  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

team  made  4  trips  daily,  averaging  only  1  %  cu.  yds.  of  loose  ma- 
terial per  load.  It  took  2%  cu.  yds.  of  loose  material  in  the  wagons 
to  make  2  cu.  yds.  packed  by  the  roller,  or  a  shrinkage  of  25%. 
The  wagons  were  slat-bottom  wagons,  and  it  took  about  8  mins.  to 
dump  a  wagon,  but  fully  as  much  more  time  was  lost  waiting  for 
other  wagons,  turning  around,  etc.,  which  time  was  made  up  by 
trotting  back.  There  were  17  teams  kept  busy,  at  |3  per  day  each, 
making  the  cost  5  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  hauling  the  asphalt  3  miles. 

Cost  of  Asphalt  Pavement,  New  York.*— In  the  following  tabula- 
tion is  given  the  labor  cost  to  the  contractor  of  laying  8,900  sq.  yds. 
of  asphalt  pavement  on  Broadway,  from  110th  street  to  119th  street, 
west  side,  New  York.  The  work  was  done  in  November,  1904.  The 
wages  paid  were  on  the  basis  of  an  8-hr.  day.  The  concrete  founda- 
tion for  the  asphalt  pavement  was  5  ins.  thick  and  was  composed 
of  1  part  of  cement,  3  parts  of  sand  and  6  parts  of  broken  stone. 
In  preparing  the  concrete  for  the  foundation  a  Foote  mixer  was  used. 
The  inefficiency  of  the  concrete  workmen  is  well  shown  by  the  fol- 
lowing cost : 

Concrete:  Per  so  vd 

0.008  day  foreman,  at  $3.75 $003 

0.162  day  laborers,    at   $1.50 '243 

0.008  day  teams,    at    $5.00 '.'.        '04 

0.008  day  steam  engine,  at  $3.50 '. .  [     ]o28 


Total  concrete  labor,  per  sq.  yd $034 

Binder: 

0.0004  day  foreman,   at   $4.00 $0.0016 

0.0008  day  engineman,   at   $4.00 -      0032 

0.0063  day  labor,    spreading,    at    $1.75..  Oil 

0.0009  day  labor,  ramming,  at  $2.25 002 


Total  binder,  per  sq.  yd $0.018 

Wearing  surface: 

0.0005  day  foreman,   at   $4.00, $0.002 

0.0040  day  laborers,  at  $1.75 007 

0.0010  day  engineman,   at  $4.00 004 

0.0070  day  labor,    spreading,    at    $1.75 012 

0.0008  day  labor,  raking,  at  $2.50 002 

0.0009  day  labor,  ramming,  at  $2.25 002 

0.0016  day  labor,   ironing,   at  $2.50 004 

Total  surface  coat,  per  sq.  yd $0.033 

The  binder  was  1  in.  thick,  and  the  surface  coat  was  l1/^  ins. 
thick,  making  a  total  of  2  y2  ins.  of  asphalt.  It  will  be  seen  that  the 
laying  cost  of  laying  this  asphalt  was  1.8  cts+  3.3  cts.  =  4.1  cts.  per 
sq.  yd. 

Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt,  Indianapolis,  Ind.f— Mr.  S.  R.  Murray 
gives  the  data  upon  which  the  following  is  based. 

Work  on  the  municipal  repair  plant  of  Indianapolis,  Ind.,  waa 
begun  on  April  16,  1908,  and  on  June  16,  1908,  the  first  asphalt  mix- 
ture was  turned  out.  The  plant  was  made  by  Werthington  &  Berner 
and  has  a  capacity  of  1,200  sq.  yds.  of  2-in.  asphalt.  The  total  cost 
of  the  plant,  one  5-ton  steam  asphalt  roller,  four  dump  wagons,  fire 
wagons,  office  building,  roller,  stone  dust  and  tool  sheds  and  all  tools 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May   16,   1906. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.   27,   1909. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  401 

necessary  to  carry  on  the  work,  amounted  to  $20,557.68.  This  also 
includes  the  cost  of  grading  off  the  yard  for  plant,  putting  brick 
driveway  under  mixer  and  cement  floor  around  cold  sand  elevator. 
The  plant  itself  cost  $15,525. 

Between  June  16  and  Dec.  31,  the  following  was  the  plant  output: 

Boxes. 

Surface  mixture   ' 16,691 

Binder    1,730 

Total    18,421 

A  "box"  was  9  cu.  ft.  of  mixed  material  measured  at  the  plant. 
Hence  the  total  output  was  165,789  cu.  ft.  of  surface  and  binder, 
measured  before  rolling.  With  this  there  were  laid : 

Sq.  yds. 

Surface,  or  wearing  coat 92,472 

Binder    7 11,271 

It  will  be  seen  that  each  box  (9  cu.  ft.)  of  surface  mixture  made 
5.54  sq.  yds.  of  wearing  surface,  indicating  that  the  wearing  surface 
measured  2.17  ins.  thick  before  rolling.  If  it  was  compressed  33% 
under  the  roller,  the  thickness  was  reduced  to  1.45  ins.  If  it  was 
compressed  16%%  (a  common  assumption)  the  thickness  was  re- 
duced to  1.8  ins. 

The  total  cost  of  82,908  sq.  yds.  of  wearing  surface  (without  any 
binder)  laid  in  repairing  50  different  streets  was  $51,900,  or  $0.625 
per  sq.  yd.  for  all  expenses,  including  interest,  at  5%,  on  the  $20,600 
plant  for  6^  mos.,  and  depreciation  at  5%  for  6%  mos. 

This  $0.625  per  sq.  yd.  is  equivalent  to  $3.46  per  box  of  9  cu.  ft., 
or  $0.39  per  cu.  ft. 

The  work  was  done  on  the  same  basis  as  other  city  work,  8  hrs. 
per  day,  and  was  performed  under  the  most  favorable  conditions,  as 
a  great  many  of  the  repairs  were  large  and  close  together.  Only 
one  day  was  lost  account  of  rain,  and  four  days  lost  waiting  for 
material. 

Only  seven  hours  were  lost  on  account  of  the  plant  not  being  ready 
when  called  upon ;  two  hours  on  account  of  the  breaking  of  a  driv- 
ing pinion  and  five  hours  for  replacing  brick  work  in  the  furnace 
under  the  sand  drier.  This,  it  will  be  noted,  is  a  very  small  loss  of 
time  when  it  is  considered  that  the  plant  turned  out  18,421  boxes 
in  all. 

Maltha  California  asphalt  was  used  for  the  most  part  on  the  re- 
pair work ;  but  on  account  of  the  West  Michigan  St.  being  under 
guarantee  and  specifications  calling  for  this  material,  Trinidad  Pitch 
Lake  asphalt  was  used  in  its  resurface,  which  involved  9,500  sq.  yds. 

Petroleum  residuum  was  used  as  a  flux  and  the  very  best  of  ma- 
terial and  workmanship  were  used  throughout. 

The  cost  of  materials  used  in  the  plant  was  as  follows. 

California  asphalt,    $23   per  ton. 
'  Trinidad  asphalt,  $29  per  ton. 

Limestone  dust,  $3  per  ton. 

Residuum  oil,  average  5  cts.  per  gal. 

Sand,  90  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Common  labor  was  paid  20  cts.  per  hour,  skilled  asphalf  men  re' 


402 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


ceived  $2.50  per  8-hr,  day,  teams  were  paid  for  at  rate  of  $3.50  per 
day,  roller  engineers  received  $3.50  per  day,  and  foremen  received 
$4  per  day. 

High  Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt,  New  Orleans.*— The  total  amount 
of  asphalt  pavement  in  New  Orleans,  maintenance  of  which  by  its 
constructors  had  expired  prior  to  Jan,  1,  1908,  was  549,749  sq.  yds. 
Of  this  amount  398,536  sq.  yds.  is  to  be  maintained  by  the  city,  and 
151,213  sq.  yds.  by  the  New  Orleans  Ry.  &  Light  Co. 

In  order  to  care  for  this  pavement  the  city  decided  to  erect  a 
plant,  and  accordingly  in  1904  asked  bids  for  furnishing  and  erecting 
a  repair  plant.  The  specifications  under  which  bids  were  asked  gave 
the  fullest  latitude  to  bidders  in  designing  the  arrangement  of  the 
plant  and  in  selecting  the  machinery,  apparatus,  fixtures,  etc.  It 
was  required,  however,  that  the  plant  be  operated  with  coal  as  a 


Fig.  12.     Asphalt  Plant. 

fuel,  and  that  it  be  capable  of  turning  out  each  10-hr,  working  day 
not  less  than  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  binder  when  laid  iy2  ins.  thick  after 
compression  on  the  street,  or  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  pitch  asphalt  wearing 
surface  when  laid  2  ins.  thick  after  compression.  The  Warren  Bros. 
Asphalt  Paving  Co.,  of  Cambridge,  Mass.,  was  the  only  bidder,  and 
on  Dec.  5,  1905,  its  bid  was  accepted.  The  plant  was  accepted  by 
the  city  on  Aug.  21,  1906.  A  report  on  the  operation  of  the  plant  for 
the  year  ending  Aug.  31,  1907,  has  just  been  made  by  Mr.  W.  J. 
Hardee,  City  Engineer,  and  from  this  report  has  been  taken  the 
matter  in  this  article. 

The  plant,  Fig.  12,  was  erected  in  a  lot  of  ground  175  ft.  x  260  ft, 
owned  by  the  city  and  formerly  employed  for  garbage  disposal  pur- 
poses. The  plant,  furnished  and  erected  by  the  Warren  Bros. 
Asphalt  Paving  Co.,  covers  about  1,500  sq.  ft.  of  ground  and  con- 
sists of  a  building  formed  of  concrete  foundation,  brick  walls  and 
floors  and  roof  of  steel  beams,  expanded  metal  and  cinder  concrete. 
The  boiler  and  engine  section  is  1  story  high  ;  the  dryer  section  and 
the  asphalt  melting  tanks  section  are  each  2  stories  high,  and  the 
central  or  tower  section,  containing  the  sand  bin,  the  mineral  dust 
bin,  and  the  mixer,  is  3  stories,,  or  32  ft.  high.  The  boiler  and 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  5,  1908. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  403 

engine,  the  dryer,  and  the  asphalt  melting  tanks  each  have  a  sub- 
stantial foundation  of  concrete,  independent  of  the  foundation  of 
the  buildings.  The  hot  sand,  or  stone  bin,  and  the  mixer,  together 
with  their  auxiliary  apparatus,  are  carried  on  a  conical-shaped 
steel  frame,  4-legged  tower  erected  just  within  the  building  and 
resting  on  pier  concrete  foundations  independent  of  building 
foundations. 

The    cost    of   the   plant  and   the  appurtenant   structures   was   as 
follows : 

Demolition  of  old  garbage  plant  buildings $      475 

Asphalt  plant — Warren   Bros.   Asphalt  Paving  Co.'s 
contract,  $16,862.50  ;  city  alterations  and  additions, 

$2,736.50   19,599 

Yard  fences  and  gates 859 

Switch    tracks    . . 1,189 

Yard  pavements  and   drains 6,721 

Tower  tank  and  filter 1,330 

Water  pipes  and  outlets 1,015 

Warehouse  and  platform 1,471 

Asphalt  shed ^ .  .  .. '.  .         289 

Blacksmith  shop  and  equipment 222 

Stable,  rolling  pen  and  wagon  shed : 5,311 

Stone  crusher  and  storage  bin - 1,966 

Yard  material  bins 332 

Office  and  store  room  building 5,509 

Landing  bins  and  roads 1,432 

Lighting    352 

General  cleaning  of  premises 298 


Total ,  ..$48,365 

Note. — No  allowance  is  made  for*  value  of  the  land. 

The  live  stock  consist  of  17  mules  and  3  horses;  the  mules  are 
used  in  wagons  and  carts  and  the  horses  in  buggies. 

The  rolling  stock  consists  of  10  Watson  (2-cu.  yd.)  asphalt  dump 
wagons;  8  (1-cu.  yd.)  single-mule  dump  carts;  2  Tennessee  4-wheel 
wagons  with  capacity  of  4,000  Ibs.  each;  1  (4-wheel)  float  dray, 
5 -in.  tires,  with  capacity  of  6  tons ;  and  1  single-horse  storm  buggy. 
Each  wagon  and  cart  is  equipped  with  a  canvas  (tarpaulin)  cover. 

In  addition  to  134  tools  of  various  kinds  necessary  to  operate  the 
plant  furnished  by  the  Warren  Bros.  Asphalt  Paving  Co.,  the  plant 
is  equipped  with  the  following :  1  Fairbanks  platform  scales  mount- 
ed on  rollers  for  weighing  materials;  1  (4-wheel)  3  ft.  10  in.  by  2 
ft.  10  in.  Fairbanks  wagon  hand  truck;  12  iron  frame  and  bed  wheel- 
barrows; 6  short-handle  shovels;  12  long-handle  shovels;  10  axes; 
6  picks ;  8  crowbars ;  8  sledgehammers,  assorted  sizes ;  and  a  num- 
ber of  small  tools  of  various  kinds. 

The  street  tools  consist  of  the  following:  2  large-size  tool  boxes; 
18  wooden  street  barriers;  1  Universal  8 -ton  steam  asphalt  roller; 
1  Universal  3%-ton  steam  asphalt  roller;  1  1,000-lb.  iron  hand 
asphalt  roller;  1  (4-wheel)  fire  wagon  for  heating,  tamping  and 
smoothing  irons;  1  (2-wheel)  100-gal.  mixing  kettle;  18  asphalt 
tamping  irons;  15  asphalt  smoothing  irons;  66  asphalt  axes;  107 
picks;  18  mattocks;  102  long-handle  shovels;  40  short-handle 
shovels;  24  iron  frame  and  bed  wheelbarrows;  6  axes;  200  lin.  ft.  of 
1-in.  diameter  wire  wrapped  rubber  hose ;  6  sledgehammers ,  8 


404  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

chisels  of  various  sizes;  10  crowbars;  and  a  number  of  small  tools 

of  various  kinds. 

The  testing  laboratory,  opepated  in  connection  with  the  plant,  is 

equipped  with  cement  testing  apparatus,  oil  tester,  brick  tester,  etc. 
The  cost  of  this  equipment  may  be  summarized  as  follows : 

Live  stock,  harness  and  stable  equipment $   6,197 

Rolling  stock  and  equipment 3,180 

Plant  tools    837 

Street  tools 5,492 

Office  furniture    447 

Laboratory  equipment 1,490 


Total     $17,644 

Soon  after  the  plant  was  placed  in  operation  the  city  ordered  it 

to  do  a  considerable  amount  of  work  not  originally  contemplated. 

This  included  the  repairing  of  streets  other  than  those  paved  with 

asphalt,   and   accordingly   the   following   additional   equipment   was 

purchased : 

Pioneer   7-ton   steam   road  roller $1,113 

Champion  steel  road  grading  machine 150 

Austin  700-gal.  capacity  road  sprinkler 396 

Rolling  stock    1,027 

Railroad  plows  with  extra  points 39 

Wheel   scrapers    140 

Harness   139 

Live    stock    1,700 

Total ?4~704 

For  the  plow  and  grading  machine  mules   17*6   hands  high   and 
weighing  about  1,600  Ibs.  were  secured. 

Summarizing,   the  total  cost  of  the  plant  and  equipment  is  seen 
to  be  as  follows  : 

Structures  and  their  equipment $48,365 

Equipment 17,673 

Additional  equipment    4,704 


Total  cost   $70,583 

The  largest  day's  run  made  by  the  asphalt  plant  was  on  June  24, 
1907,  when  surfacing  (new  pavement)  the  Esplanade-Claiborne  Ave. 
intersection.  In  9  hrs.  205  boxes,  gross,  of  "wearing  surface"  mix- 
ture were  turned  out ;  3  Watson  wagons  hauled  this  material  from 
the  plant  to  where  it  was  laid,  a  distance  of  a  little  more  than  2 
miles;  and  this  material  completed  1,020  sq.  yds.  of  pavement  in- 
tended to  be  2  ins.  in  thickness.  The  cost  of  the  fuel  and  labor, 
including  wages  of  plant  foreman,  employed  in  preparing  the  "wear- 
ing surface"  mixture ;  the  wages  of  wagon  drivers  and  the  care  and 
feed  of  the  teams ;  and  the  labor,  including  foreman,  roller  men  and 
fuel,  in  laying  this  "naptha  coat"  and  "wearing  surface"  amounted 
in  all  to  $127.23,  or  12.47  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

The  repair  plant  force  worked  every  working  day  of  the  year 
when  it  did  not  rain.  The  asphalt  plant  worked  141  days  and 
turned  out  9,883  boxes,  or  88,947  cu.  ft.  of  wearing  surface  mix- 
ture. It  was  estimated  that  a  9  cu.  ft.  box  would  lay  5  sq.  yds.  of 
2-in.  wearing  surface,  assuming  that  the  loose  material  compresses 
16%%  under  the  roller.  On  this  assumption  49,415  sq.  yds.  of  2-in. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  405 

wearing  surface  would  have  been  laid.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  only 
44,300  sq.  yds.  were  laid,  due  to  using  a  greater  thickness  than 
2  ins.  This  greater  thickness  was  necessitated  because  no  "binder" 
coat  was  laid  to  replace  any  of  the  old  binder  removed  from  the 
street.  Instead  of  a  binder  coat,  the  concrete  was  "painted"  with 
a  "naphtha  coat." 

Naphtha  binder  was  not  only  much  cheaper,  but  Mr.  Hardee  con- 
siders it  also  much  more  substantial  and  durable.  Naphtha  coat  is 
formed  of  vaporized  gasoline  and  asphalt  mixed  in  equal  propor- 
tions ;  it  is  put  on  the  concrete  foundation,  when  the  same  is 
perfectly  dry,  by  hand,  with  brushes,  just  as  paint  would  be  applied, 
and  to  the  least  possible  thickness ;  it  is  practically  impervious  to 
moisture  and  prevents  the  moisture  that  is  commonly  ever  present 
in  the  concrete  foundation  of  our  pavements  from  attacking,  through 
capillary  attraction,  the  base  of  the  asphalt  "wearing  surface"  and 
rotting  it ;  additionally,  the  "naphtha  coat"  effects  a  strong  union  of 
the  concrete  foundation  and  the  asphalt  "wearing  surface"  and  pre- 
vents the  latter  from  being  displaced  in  warm  weather,  as  is  so  fre- 
quently the  case  in  old  pavements  in  which  gravel  "binder"  has  been 
employed.  In  repairing  old  pavements,  where  the  combined  thick- 
ness of  the  "binder"  and  "wearing  surface"  was  considerably  more 
than  2  ins.,  concrete  was  generally  added  to  the  original  concrete 
foundation. 

From  time  to  time  such  laborers,  additional  assistant  foremen  and 
other  employes,  as  were  required,  were  hired  by  the  day.  When 
operations  were  first  commenced  nearly  all  the  plant  and  street 
employes  were  negroes,  but  as  fast  as  white  men  who  could  satis- 
factorily do  the  work  were  found,  the  negroes  were  displaced ;  within 
a  few  months  six  negroes  only  remained  and  these  were  engaged 
at  the  plant  on  a  class  of  work  for  which  white  men  were  not  well 
fitted. 

Teamsters  and  some  of  the  laborers  were  paid  at  the  rate  of  $1.75 
per  day  ;  but  the  large  majority  were  paid  at  the  rate  of  $2  per 
10-hr,  day.  Pavers,  stone  .workers  and  brick  masons  were  paid 
from  $2.50  to  $4  per  8-hr.  day. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  permanent  employes: 

Annual  wage. 

Superintendent    $  2,500 

Secretary    .' 1,800 

Stenographer 720 

Street  foreman 1,500 

Assistant  street  foreman 1,200 

Yard  foreman 1,500 

Engineman    , 1,500 

Fireman 780 

Steam  roller  engineman   1,380 

Blacksmith 1,080 

Yard  clerk 720 

Messenger   600 

Hostler 720 

-   Night  watchman    720 

Veterinary    180 

Chemist,    %    of   $1,800 900 

Chemist  helper,  %  of  $720 360 

Total     ,  $18,160 


40fi  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

For  reasons  that  are  not  made  at  all  clear  in  his  report,  Mr. 
W.  J.  Hardee,  City  Engineer,  deducts  the  following  salaries  tronj 
the  above,  and  puts  them  in  an  account  that  he  designates  by  the 
very  ambiguous  phrase  "Special  Charges": 

Chemist    . „$    720 

Chemist   helper 310 

Engineman    , 1,450 

Fireman 725 

Total  salaries  in  "Special  Charges" $3,205 

Deducting  this  $3,205  from  the  annual  salaries  of  $18,160,  we 
have  left  $14,955,  which  somehow  becomes  $15,674  when  recorded  in 
the  "Annual  Employes'  Salaries." 

Then. the  account  of  "Special  Charges"  contains  the  following: 

Salaries   (as  above  given) $   3,205 

%   laborer's  wages  at  the  plant 8  092 

342  tons  coal  at  the  plant,  at  $2.84 972 

Supplies  at  the  plant   606 

Wood  at  the  plant 76 

Gas  and  laboratory  supplies 16 

Damaged  cement 100 


Total    "Special   Charges" $13,067 

Then  under  an  account  designated  as  "General  Charges"  is  placed 
the  $15,674  of  "annual  employes'  salaries,"  also  "one-half  day  labor- 
ers' wages  at  the  plant"  ;  but,  unless  the  purpose  is  to  confuse  the 
analyst  of  these  costs,  there  appears  to  be  no  sound  reason  for 
separating  the  "plant  labor"  into  two  halves,  as  is  thus  done. 

The  following  is  the  statement  of  "General  Charges"  : 

Annual  employes'  salaries $15,673.96 

i  One  half  day  laborer's  wages  at  plant 8,092  35 

Live  stock  feed 3  032  76 

Electric  lighting 831.76 

Electricity    for    crusher 133.35 

Water  at  plant 30o!oo 

Water    on    street 163.50 

Blacksmith's    supplies     87.52 

Office  supplies 436.00 

Stable  supplies ..  .  309.30 

Horseshoeing 494.70 

Extra    teams 1,629.10 

Car  fare  and  incidental  expenses 570.90 

Lost  and  worn-out  tools 265!80 

Lost  live  stock 270.00 

Total    "General    Charges" $31,790.99 

The  cost  of  300  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  and  35,905  sq.  yds.  of  "wear- 
Ing  surface"  supposed  to  be  2  ins.  thick,  was  as  follows  per  sq.  yd.  of 
2-in.  asphalt  wearing  surface: 

Total.         Per  sq.  yd. 

Materials $15,279  $0.425 

Special  Charges  (prorated) 6,761  0.189   . 

General  Charges  (pro  rated) 11,090  0.309 

Other  labor 7,177  0.200 

Total,  Repairs  to  Asphalt $40,307  $1.123 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  407 

As  I  shall  show  presently,  there  is  no  valid  excuse  for  prorating 
the  "Special  Charges"  or  the  "General  Charges"  in  this  manner. 

In  addition  to  the  above  given  repairs,  8,400  sq.  yds.  of  new 
asphalt  pavement,  on  a  6-in.  concrete  base,  were  laid,  and  excavation 
made  for  the  same,  at  the  following  cost : 

Total.         Per  sq.  yd. 
Materials     (asphalt     and     concrete 

materials)     $12,130  $1.444 

Special  Charges    (pro  rated) 6,305  0.750 

General  Charges  (prorated) 10,342  1.231 

Other  labor   8,812  1.050 


Total,    New   Pavement. $37,589  $.4.475 

This  is  "saving  the  contractor's  profits"  with  a  vengeance.  A 
cost  of  $4.48  per  sq.  yd.  of  2-in.  asphalt  on  a  6-in  concrete  base,  is 
approximately  three  times  what  it  would  cost  any  capable  con- 
tractor. Bear  in  mind,  also,  that  the  $4.48  does  not  include  any 
allowance  for  plant  interest  and  depreciation. 

Finally,  in  addition  to  the  asphalt  repairs  and  the  new  asphalt 
pavement  above  given,  there  was  a  considerable  amount  of  "Mis- 
cellaneous Improvements,"  such  as  curb  setting,  repairing  with 
crushed  stone,  grading,  filling,  and  the  like,  the  total  cost  of  which 
was : 

Materials     $13,854 

General  Charges  (pro  rated) 10,364 

Other  labor 7,129 

Total,  Miscellaneous  Improvements $31,347 

Analysis  of  the  above  costs  -discloses  how  the  "special  charges" 
and  the  "general  charges"  were  prorated,  namely,  according  to  the 
cost  of  the  materials  used  on  the  three  classes  of  work,  i.  e.,  on  (1) 
repairs,  (2)  new  pavement,  and  (3)  miscellaneous.  A  more  absurd 
distribution  could  not  be  imagined,  for  here  is  an  expensive  ($70,000) 
asphalt  plant,  with  34%  of  its  "general  charges"  prorated  to  curb 
setting,  grading,  etc. !  Were  this  not  done,  the  costs  of  the  asphalt 
repairing  and  new  pavement  would  show  up  even  higher  than  they 
do  in  the  above  tabulations. 

I  have  arranged  the  cost  of  materials  and  supplies  used  during 
the  year,  under  five  heads,  as  follows : 

Asphalt  Materials  and  Supplies: 

465.99  tons  asphalt,  at  $18.50 $   8,561 

125,527  Ibs.  fluxing  oil,  at  7%   cts 940 

6,753  gals,  naphtha,  at  15  cts 1,019 

3,900  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $1.27 4,953 

321  tons  mineral  dust,  at  $5.50 1,764 

389  tons  coal,  at  $2.84 1,105 

90  cords  wood 563 


Total   asphalt   materials $18,905 

Concrete  Materials: 

1,936  bbls.  cement,  at  $2.04 $   3,944 

700  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $1.27 889 

564   cu.  yds.   gravel,    at    $2.27 1,272 

696  cu.  yds.  brickbats  (for  crushing),  at  $1.48     1,032 



Total    concrete   materials.    =. $  7,137 


408  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Miscellaneous  Materials: 

3,178  cu.  yds.  clay  gravel,  at  $1.50 $  4,786 

3,618  cu.  yds.  lake  shells,  at  $1.46 5.304 

3,200  new  granite  blocks,  at  7  cts 227 

4,600  old  granite  blocks,  at  4    cts 184 

9,000  new  building  brick 98 

8,500  old   building  brick 25 

32,924  Ibs.  cast  iron 1,289 

3,026  lin.  ft.  drain  pipe 979 


Total     $12,892 

Office  Supplies: 

Laboratory    $         24 

Office 436 

Engineer    606 

Total  supplies  $  1,066 

Stable: 

122,172  Ibs.  oats,  at  1%  cts $  1,820 

6,600  Ibs.  bran,  at  1  ct 66 

39 %  tons  hay,  at  $24.72 983 

Stable  supplies  $309,  blacksmith  $87 396 

Total  stable $   3,265 

Grand   total    $43,265 

These  prices  are  all  for  materials  delivered  at  the  plant. 

The  foregoing  distribution,  under  the  five  heads,  may  be  slightly 
in  error.  The  sand,  for  example,  is  given  as  4,600  cu.  yds.,  without 
statement  as  to  its  use.  About  1,400  cu.  yds.  of  new  concrete  base 
were  laid,  which  would  require  about  700  cu.  yds.  of  sand,  and  I 
have,  therefore,  distributed  it  in  that  manner,  although  there  was 
a  certain  small,  but  unstated,  amount  of  concrete  laid  on  old  con- 
crete base  to  bring  it  up  to  grade. 

This  distribution  of  the  cost  of  materials  shows  conclusively  the 
absurdity  of  prorating  the  "General  Charges"  and  "Special  Charges" 
according  to  the  cost  of  materials.  A  glance  at  the  items  under 
"Miscellaneous  Materials"  proves  that  no  appreciable  part  of  the 
cost  of  operating  a  $70,000  asphalt  plant  should  be  properly  prorated 
to  "Miscellaneous  Improvements,"  as  was  done.  It  is  true  that  a 
rock  crusher  (which  crushed  only  1,143  cu.  yds.  of  stone  and  brick- 
bats during  the  year)  and  a  road  machine,  and  a  few  tools  (worth 
about  $2,000,  exclusive  of  mules)  were  used  on  tne  "Miscellaneous 
Improvements"  ;  but  so  insignificant  was  the  plant  necessary  for  that 
work  that  it  is  manifestly  wrong  to  prorate  any  asphalt  plant 
charges  or  any  asphalt  plant  operating  expense  to  these  "Miscel- 
laneous Improvements."  I  have  been  at  some  pains  to  point  out 
these  details,  for  it  is  a  very  common  practice  for  managers  of 
municipally  operated  plants  to  conceal  the  true  costs  of  operation 
by  prorating  charges  in  this  fashion.  The  following  is  my  own 
analysis  of  the  year's  operating  expense,  which  errs,  if  at  all,  on 
the  side  of  liberality  toward  the  managers  of  this  municipal  plant. 
I  shall  not  Include  the  cost  of  the  grading  nor  of  the  concrete  for 
the  new  pavement  laid,  but  confine  the  summary  only  to  the  cost 
of  asphalt  repairs,  giving  total  costs,  and  cost  per  "box"  (9  cu.  ft.) 
of  wearing  surface,  there  being  9,883  boxes  (88,947  cu.  ft.),  equiva- 
lent to  49,415  sq.  yds.  2  ins.  thick  after  rolling: 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


409 


Per  box. 
Total.          (9cu.  ft.) 

Salaried   employes    $18,160  $1.838 

Laborers'  wages  at  plant 16,184  1.637 

Feeding  Stock,  Etc.: 

Feed  for  regular  teams $   3,033 

Blacksmith  supplies 88 

Stable  supplies    309 

Horse  shoeing 495 

Lost  live  stock 270 

Extra   teams   hired 1,629 

Total,  feeding  stock,  etc $  5,824  $0.589 

Street   Labor,    Teamsters,   Etc. 

On  35,900   sq.  yds.  repairs $  7,177 

On     8,400  sq.  yds.  new  2-in.  surface  (estimated)  1,780 

Total  street  labor,  teamsters,  etc $  8,957             $0.907 

Office  Expense,  Etc.: 

Engineers'   supplies $  606 

Office    supplies    436 

Laboratory  supplies 24 

Total  office  expense,  etc $  1,064  $0.107 

Asphalt  Materials  and  Supplies: 

465.99  tons  asphalt,  at  $18.50 $   8,561 

125,527  Ibs.   fluxing  oil,  at   7y2    cts 940 

6,753  gals,  naphtha,  at  15  cts 1  019 

3,900  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $1.27 4,953 

321  tons  mineral  dust,  at  $5.50 1,764 

389  tons  coal,  at  $2.84 1,105 

90  cords  wood   563 

Total  asphalt  materials  and  supplies $18,905  $1.914 

Miscellaneous  Plant  Expense: 

Electric  lighting $      332 

Water    300 

Lost  tools,  etc 266 

Total    miscellaneous    plant    expense $  898             $0.091 

Plant  Charges: 

Interest,   5%   of   $65,000 $  3,250 

Depreciation,  etc.,  10%  of  $65,000. . .' 6,500 

Total  plant  charges...... $   9,750  $0.987 

Grand  total   $79,724  $8.070 

Note. — I  have  made  no  allowance  for  "ground  rental." 
Upon  Mr.  Hardee's  assumption  that  a  "box"  of  wearing  coat  will 
lay  5  sq.  yds.  of  2-in.  wearing  coat,  we  have  simply  to  divide  all  the 
above  items  of  "cost  per  box"  by  5,  to  arrive  at  the  cost  per  sq.  yd., 
which  summed  up  is  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Salaried  employes • $0.368 

Laborers'  wages  at  plant 0.327 

Feeding  stock,  etc 0.118 

Street  labor,  teamsters,  etc 0.181 

Office  expenses,  etc 0.021 

Asphalt  materials  and  supplies 0.383 

Miscellaneous  plant  expense 0.018 

Plant  charges 0.198 


Total    $1.614 


410  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  item  of  plant  charges  (interest,  depreciation  and  repairs) 
does  not  appear  in  the  report  of  the  city  engineer,  although  such  an 
item  should  always  appear,  nor  is  there  any  allowance  for  interest 
on  the  ground  occupied,  although  it  certainly  had  value.  I  have  as- 
sumed the  conventional  5%  interest  and  10%  depreciation  and  repairs 
on  $65.000  plant  (omitting  about  $5,000  of  plant  used  on  "Miscel- 
laneous Improvements").  It  should  be  noted  that  the  first  cost  of 
this  plant  is  unusually  high. 

A  small  part  of  the  item  of  "Feeding  Stock,  Etc.,"  should  unques- 
tionably be  charged  to  "Miscellaneous  Improvements"  and  to  haul- 
ing materials  for  concrete,  but  I  am  unable  to  segregate  the 
amount,  which  is  inconsiderable  anyway. 

The  item  of  "Street  Labor,  Teamsters,  Etc.,"  is  exact  for  the 
35,900  sq.  yds.  of  repairs,  but  the  report  gave  no  details  that  would 
enable  one  to  arrive  at  the  corresponding  cost  for  the  8,400  sq.  yds. 
of  asphalt  laid  on  the  new  concrete  base,  so  I  have  prorated  it  at  the 
same  cost  as  for  the  35,900  sq.  yds.  of  repairs,  namely  at  20  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  This  cannot  be  far  wrong,  and,  in  any  event,  the  new 
pavement  was  less  than  20%  of  the  total  wearing  coat. 

We  have  in  this  work  the  highest  cost  of  2-in.  asphalt  wearing 
coat  of  which  I  have  any  knowledge.  It  even  exceeds  the  cost  .of 
Brooklyn  municipal  work.  It  forms,  indeed,  an  object  lesson  of  the 
gigantic  folly  of  doing  public  work  with  a  municipal  plant  instead 
of  by  contract. 

Note  especially  the  fact  that  my  analysis  of  the  true  cost  of  this 
repair  work  shows  $1.61  per  sq.  yd.,  as  contrasted  with  the  $1.12 
(which,  even  at  that,  was  an  enormously  high  cost).  By  improper 
prorating  of  "general  and  special  expenses"  and  by  entire  omission 
of  any  plant  interest  and  depreciation  charges,  ground  rental,  etc., 
it  is  an  easy  matter  always  to  give  an  appearance  of  lower  unit  costs 
than  actually  exist. 

In  Engineering-Contracting,  April  7,  1909,  is  given  an  abstract  of 
Mr.  W.  J.  Hardee's  report  for  the  year  1908,  relating  to  this  same 
plant.  The  following  is  a  brief  summary : 

Repairs  of  asphalt  pavements $   27,545.59 

New  asphalt  pavements. 14,409.33 

Other  kinds  of  new  pavements 23,445.84 

Miscellaneous  improvements   74,398.91 


Total    $139,799.67 

The  repair  work  consisted  of  the  construction  of  2,640  sq.  yds.  of 
naphtha  coat  and  24,081  sq.  yds.  of  asphalt  wearing  surface,  the  cost 
per  square  yard  of  wearing  surface  being  as  follows: 

Total.          Per  sq.  yd. 

Materials    $8,831  $0.367- 

Labor    6,778  0.281 

Proportion  special  charges 3,153  0.131 

Proportion  general  charges 8,784  0.364 

Total .$27,546  $1.143 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  same  misleading  method  of  prorating 
"special  and  general  charges"  was  used,  and  that  the  unit  cost  of 
these  repairs  exceeded  the  cost  of  work  done  the  previous  year. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  411 

The  new  asphalt  pavement  work  consisted  in  the  construction  of 
r,550  sq.  yds.  of  pavement,  the  work  including  14,580  cu.  ft.  of  con- 
crete, 7,500  sq.  yds.  naphtha  coat  and  7,500  sq.  yds.  2-in.  wearing 
surface.  The  gross  cost  of  this  was  $14,409  or  about  $1.90  per 
sq.  yd. 

The  other  new  pavement  work  consisted  in  the  construction  of 
vitrified  brick  and  gravel  roadways,  the  total  cost  of  the  work  being 
$23,445.84.  The  largest  item  of  work  was  for  miscellaneous  improve- 
ments, these  consisting  of  graveling  roads,  constructing  oyster  shell 
pavement,  grading,  etc.  The  total  cost  of  these  miscellaneous  im- 
provements was  $74,398.  The  output  of  the  plant  was  86,004  cu.  ft. 
(9,778  boxes)  wearing  surface  mixture,  which  was  employed  in  new 
pavements  and  repair  of  old  pavements.  The  crusher  operated  in 
connection  with  the  asphalt  plant  crushed  7,834  cu.  yds.  of  old  stone 
at  an  average  cost  for  labor  and  electricity  of  51.4  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
The  stone  was  furnished  free  of  charge.  The  cost  per  cubic  yard 
in  the  previous  year  was  46.66  cts.  Including  feed,  hostler  and 
stable  boy's  wages,  veterinary's  salary,  shoeing,  medicine,  etc.,  it 
cost  an  average  of  76  cts.  per  head  per  day  to  feed  and  care  for  the 
live  stock,  as  against  64.9  cts.  for  the  year  ending  Aug.  31,  1907. 

In  the^  first  annual  report  the  cost  of  the  plant  including  equip- 
ment is  given  as  $70,583.  Additions  to  the  plant  costing  $4,261  were 
made  in  the  second  year,  bringing  the  total  investment  for  plant 
and  equipment  up  to  $74,844.  The  asphalt  cost  $19  per  ton  de- 
livered. 

Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt,  Marion,  Ind.* — Mr.  T.  E.  Petrie  gives 
the  following: 

The  accompanying  data  relate  to  repair  work  in  the  city  of  Mar- 
ion, Ind.,  throughout  the  month  of  September,  1908.  This  is  a  very 
good  average  of  the  season's  work,  after  the. force  was  thoroughly 
organized  and  all  equipment  put  into  service. 

A  city  of  the  size  of  Marion  could  not  afford  a  plant  costing  up- 
wards of  $20,000,  which  would  possibly  remain  idle  eleven  months 
out  of  the  year ;  so  we  had  to  look  for  a  smaller  and  less  expensive 
repair  plant.  We  have  in  our  city  6.64  miles  of  asphalt  streets,  or 
123,486  sq.  yds.  The  first  street  was  constructed  in  1899  and  the 
last  in  1902.  While  we  have  some  excellent  asphalt  streets,  some 
are  much  below  the  average.  We  found  in  past  experience  that  to 
rely  on  the  asphalt  companies  to  do  our  repair  work,  it  was  neces- 
sary that  our  streets  should  become  quite  bad  before  any  com- 
pany would  agree  to  come  in  to  do  our  repair  work,  as  the  repair 
yardage  was  so  small  that  it  would  not  pay  them  to  move  their 
plant  to  our  city,  so  we  could  expect  them  once  in  two  or  possibly 
three  years,  even  though  the  street  was  under  guarantee. 

In  the  spring  of  1908,  even  though  two  of  our  streets  were  yet 
under  guarantee,  our  Board  of  Public  Works  came  to  an  agreement 
with  the  Barber  Asphalt  Co.  that  the  city  should  take  care  of  all 
streets  under  guarantee  and  that  the  Barber  Asphalt  Co.  would  re- 
linquish all  retainer  claims  that  they  held  against  the  city. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  10,  1909. 


412  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  the  meantime  three  of   our   streets  became  quite  bad,   so  we 
began  to  look  about  for  some  relief,   and  finally  purchased  one  of 
Hooke's  largest  combined  asphalt  plants  and  a  carload  of  asphalt. 
To  this  plant  was  added  another  pan  and  a  700-lb.  hand  roller. 
The  cost  of  the  plant  was  as  follows: 

Combined  fire  wagon  and  asphalt  heater $465 

Freight 42 

Extra  pan   43 

Hand  roller    65 

Hand  cart   10 

Total  cost  of  plant    $625 

Depreciation  on  the  plant  was  figured  on  the  basis  of  60  days'  use 
for  the  season,  This,  at  10  per  cent,  amounted  to  $62.50  or  $25.72 
for  the  25  days  for  which  the  cost  records  are  given. 

We  began  work  July  20,  1908,  and  finished  or  rather  run  out  of 
material,  Nov.  28th.  While  not  working  quite  all  ttie  time  we  laid 
4,142  sq.  yds.  of  patch  work.  Great  care  was  taken  about  the  work 
and  it  is  almost  impossible  to  detect  many  places  where  patches 
were  made.  We  used  the  Acme  asphalt,  which  came  already  fluxed, 
and  three  grades  of  sand,  so  as  to  obtain  as  nearly  a  standard  mix 
as  possible,  as  well  as  to  make  the  mixture  as  dense  as  possible. 

We  used  Portland  cement  as  a  filler,  instead  of  stone  dust,  which 
caused  the  price  per  sq.  yd.  to  run  up  somewhat  higher  than  it  would 
have  had  stone  dust  been  used. 

We  had  two  experienced  men  in  the  gang  and  paid  them  25  cts. 
per  hour,  all  other  men  were  paid  20  cts.  per  hour.  A  one-horse 
dump  cart  was  used  for  hauling  material  from  stock  room  to  plant, 
also  hauling  prepared  material  to  street,  and  cuttings  or  old  asphalt 
away,  usually  hauling  same  on  some  nearby  street  as  repairing  ma- 
terial. The  cart  man  was  paid  27%  cts.  per  hour. 

The  full  repair  gang  consisting  of  8  men,  3  out  on  the  street  and  5 
at  the  plant,  and  1  horse  cart  and  driver. 

Orders  were  given  to  work  until  the  pans  were  cleaned  and  filled 
with  sand  at  the  end  of  each  day's  work,  ready  for  fire  the  next 
morning. 

Four-foot  wood  was  generally  used- for  firing,  costing  $5.50  per 
cord,  yet  some  shorter  wood  was  used,  costing  $1.75  per  cord.  The 
Portland  cement  cost  $1.40  per  barrel ;  sand  cost  $0.75  at  the  plant 
and  the  asphalt  cost  $30  per  ton  f.  o.  b.  Marion. 

During  the  25  working  days  in  September  a  total  of  1,308  sq. 
yds.  of  asphalt  pavement  of  an  average  depth  of  2  ins.  was  laid, 
there  being  2,742  cu.  ft.  of  asphalt  mixture  used,  costing  41  cts.  per 
cu.  ft.  laid.  The  itemized  cost  was  as  follows: 

Ti  Total.        Per  sq.  yd. 

Labor    $    483.64  $0.3697 

Asphalt   (including  freight),  at  $30  ton 340.34  .2602 

Sand,  at  $0.75 70.12  .0536 

Cement  (instead  of  dust)    98.17  .0750 

Fuel    72.93  .0557 

Cartage,    30   tons  asphalt    11.22  .0086 

Interest,    6%    15.00  .0114 

Depreciation,   10%   25.72  .0120 

Total    .  ..$1,117.14  $0.8538 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  413 

Last  season  was  an  excellent  one  to  do  repair  work,  on  account 
of  there  being  but  little  rain.  The  sand  was  kept  as  dry  as  pos- 
sible, and  therefore  was  covered  at  night,  and  at  daytime  in  case 
of  rain.  This  materially  assisted  in  the  progress  of  the  work  as  well 
as  in  the  saving  of  much  fuel. 

The  plant  was  located  at  some  convenient  point,  near  where  con- 
siderable patching  was  to  be  done  and  care  was  taken  not  to  move 
the  plant  too  frequently,  as  this  expense  will  cause  the  price  per 
square  yard  to  rise  quite  rapidly.  We  were  able  to  get  out  eight 
batches  per  day,  providing  everything  worked  well.  It  is  intended 
to  enlarge  the  mixing  pans  before  beginning  work  this  season,  and 
by  so  doing  it  is  hoped  to  increase  the  output  fully  25  per  cent,  and 
by  using  stone  dust  instead  of  Portland  cement  for  filler,  to  cut  the 
price  down  to  at  least  $0.75  per  sq.  yd.  or  perhaps  lower. 

There  has  been  nothing  allowed  for  superintendence  of  the  work 
as  either  the  city  engineer  or  his  assistant  will  have  time  to  see  that 
work  is  going  on  as  it  should.  However,  last  season  I  gave  this 
work  quite  considerable  attention,  measuring  all  patches  made,  as  I 
desired  to  know  just  what  it  was  costing  per  square  yard. 

I  do  not  anticipate  that  we  will  have  as  much  repair  work  in  the 
next  two  seasons  as  we  had  last  season. 

Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt,  Marion,  Ind.*— In  1908  the  city  of 
Marion,  Ind.,  had  6.64  miles  of  asphalt  streets  or  a  total  of  123,486 
sq.  yds.  of  that  kind  of  pavement.  In  that  year  the  city  took  over 
the  maintenance  of  all  of  the  asphalt  paved  streets  and  pur- 
chased one  of  Hooke's  largest  combined  asphalt  plants  for  the  work. 
To  this  plant  was  added  another  pan  and  a  700-lb.  hand  roller. 
The  cost  of  the  plant  in  1908  was  as  follows: 

Combined  fire  wagon  and  asphalt  heater $465    - 

Freight     42 

Extra   pan    . 43 

Hand  roller 65 

Hand   cart    10 

Total $625 

In  1908  a  total  of  4,142  sq.  yds.  of  patch  work  was  laid.  Fur- 
ther details  of  that  year's  work  are  given  in  our  issue  of  Feb. 
10,  1909. 

Before  beginning  work  in  1909  a  new  bottom  was  put  in  the 
Hooke  pan,  and  it  was  also  enlarged  so  that  a  batch  of  16  5/6 
cu.  ft.  of  loose  mixture  was  turned  out  for  the  1909  work,  instead 
of  14%  cu.  ft.  as  in  1908.  This  should  have  increased  the  output 
as  well  as  decreased  the  labor  cost.  Owing,  however,  to  the  fact 
that  a  different  brand  of  fluxed  asphalt  was  used  in  1909,  which, 
for  the  same  amount  of  mixture,  took  about  25%  more  asphalt,  the 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.    15,   1909. 


414  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

material  expense  was  increased,  and  also  the  labor  cost  as  it  took 
considerably  longer  to  mix  a  batch. 

In   the    1909    work   stone   dust   was   used   as   a   filler,   whereas   in 

1908  Portland   cement  was   used   for   this   purpose.      In   this  year's 
work  the  Portland  cement  was  used  as  a  top  covering  only. 

The  working  force  consisted  of  the  following: 
Plant : 

1  man  at  25  cts.  per  hr. 
4  men  at  20  cts.  per  hr. 

Street : 

1  man  at  25  cts.  per  hr. 

2  men  at  20  cts.  per  hr. 

A  one-horse  dump  cart  was  used  for  hauling  material  from  stock 
room  to  plant,  also  for  hauling  prepared  material  to  street  and 
cuttings  or  old  asphalt  away.  The  driver  was  paid  27%  cts.  per 
hr.  This  was  the  same  gang  as  in  the  1908  work  with  the  ex- 
ception of  one  man.  The  men,  however,  were  not  as  energetic  to 
push  the  work,  as  they  were  in  the  previous  year  and  this  brought 
up  the  labor  cost.  In,  addition  the  patches  were  smaller  in  the 

1909  work  and  this  also  caused  the  labor  cost  to  increase,  as  when 
many  small  patches  were  made  in  succession  the  gang  at  the  plant 
would  be  compelled  to  hold  back  waiting  on  the  men  on  the  street 
to  prepare  places  to  receive  the  material. 

The  working  season  in  1909  was  33  days,  and  in  that  time  the 
gang  placed  1,451.5  sq.  yds.  of  patches  of  an  average  depth  of 
2  ina  This  is  an  average  of  about  44  sq.  yds.  of  patchwork  per 
day.  A  total  of  2,828.1  cu.  ft.  of  loose  mixture  was  produced  in 
the  season  of  33  days  or  an  average  of  85.5  cu.  ft.  per  day.  This 
would  be  an  average  of  about  five  patches  per  day,  there  being 
16  5/6  cu.  ft.  to  a  patch.  As  2,828.1  cu.  ft.  of  loose  mixture  made 
1,451.5  sq.  yds.  of  compacted  2-in.  patches,  there  was  about  1.95 
cu.  ft.  of  loose  mixture  per  square  yard  of  2-in.  compacted  asphalt. 
This  is  1.3  cu.  ft.  of  loose  mixture  compacted  down  to  1  cu.  ft. 
For  fuel  cord  wood  was  used,  16.8  cords  being  used  for  this  pur- 
pose. As  the  season  covered  33  days  the  average  amount  of  wood 
consumed  per  day  would  be  about  V2  cord.  As  there  was  an  aver- 
age of  five  batches  per  day  there  was  about  0.1  of  a  cord  of  wood 
used  per  batch. 

The  cost  of  the  various  materials  used  in  the  work  in  19  C  9  was 
as  follows : 

Asphalt,  including  freight,  per  ton $28.714 

Sand  at  plant,  per  cu.  yd 0.7o 

Cement,   per  bbl 1-40 

Stone     dust,    including     freight     and    .drayage, 

per   ton    •*•££ 

Cordwood  for  fuel,  per  cord 4.50 

Interest  on  the  plant  investment  was  figured  at  6%  per  annum,  or 
$37.38  for  the  year.  Depreciation  on  the  plant  was  figured  at  109A 
per  annum,  or  $62.50  per  year. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  415 

The  itemized  cost  of  materials  in  the  asphalt  surface  was  as 
follows : 

Per  sq.Td. 

2  ins.  thick. 

27.17  Ibs.  fluxed  asphalt,  at  1.43  cts $0.388 

14.47  Ibs.  stone  dust,  at  .176  cts 025 

.069  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  75   cts 052 

.0033   bbls.   cement,  at   $1.40.. 005 

Total  materials  for  surface $0.470 

Labor,  at  20  and  25  cts $0.426 

Wood,  16.8  cords,  at  $4.50 *     .052 

Cartage    of   asphalt 005 

Interest    on    plant 026 

Depreciation    on    plant 043 

Grand    total     $1.022 

The  average  cost  per  cubic  foot  material  and  labor  was  52^  cts. 
A  comparison  of  the  1908  costs  and  the  1909  costs  may  be  of  In- 
terest and  accordingly  we  have  abstracted  the  costs  from  the 
former  year  as  given  in  our  issue  of  Feb.  10,  1909.  The  costs 
for  1908  are  for  25  working  days  in  September,  during  which  1,308 
sq.  yds.  of  asphalt  of  an  average  depth  of  2  ins.  was  laid.  The 
costs  in  the  two  years  were  as  follows : 

1908.  1909. 

Per  sq.  yd.  Per  sq.  yd. 

Labor    $0.3697  $0.426 

Asphalt     2602  .388 

Sand    0536  .052 

Cement     0750  .005 

Stone   dust    .025 

Fuel     0557  .052 

Cartage     0086  .005 

Interest 0114  .026 

Depreciation    019&  .043 

Total     $0.8537  $T.~022 

In  the  1908  work  the  asphalt,  including  freight,  cost  $30  per  ton, 
and  wood  cost  $5.59  per  cord.  With  these  exceptions  the  prices  for 
material  and  labor  are  the  same  as  in  1909.  Portland  cement  was 
used  for  a  filler  in  1908,  whereas  stone  dust  was  used  in  1909.  In 
the  figures  for  the  1908  work  the  depreciation  was  figured  for  the 
25  days  in  September  only  on  the  basis  of  60  days'  use  for  the 
season;  while  in  the  1909  costs  the  depreciation  is  for  the  entire 
season. 

All  of  the  work  was  done  under  the  direction  of  T.  E.  Petrie, 
city  engineer. 

High  Cost  of  Patching  Asphalt,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.— In  Engineering- 
Contracting,  May  27,  1908,  a  complete  description  is  given  of  the 
municipal  asphalt  plant  in  Brooklyn,  which  was  placed  in  opera- 
tion, June  13,  1907.  The  plant  was  constructed  by  the  Warren 
Asphalt  Paving  Co.  A  60  h.p.  Babcock  and  Wilcox  boiler,  and  a 
56  h.p.  engine  (Erie  Engine  Works)  and  a  9  h.p.  engine  (Sturde- 
vant  Blower  Works),  furnish  the  power.  Without  going  further 


416  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

into  details  of  design,  the  following  summary  gives  the  cost  of  the 

plant : 

Contract  price $22,485.00 

Engine  and  boiler  foundations,  piles,  etc 509.54 

Office  and  sheds 712.00 

Fire    ext'ing    150.00 

Oil  tank    365.00 

Extra  parts — machinery 411.76 

Office  furniture  and  equipment 174.28 

Electrical  work,  wiring,  lights,  annunciators.  .  58.80 

Four  asphalt  rollers 6,156.00 

Twelve  asphalt   trucks  at 4,920.00 

Tools  and  gang  equipment 2,000.45 

Miscellaneous 337.35 

Total .$38,280JL~8 

Fixed  Charges. 

Interest  on  payments  on  above  at  5% $      897.10 

Depreciations  on  plant  at  10%    (6^  months) 

on  $37,892.08   2,052.49 

Rent  of  plant  grounds,  $1,440  per  year,  7  mos.         840.00 


Total  per  annum    $  3,789.59 

The  plant  was  in  operation  6%  mos.,  in  1907,  beginning  June 
13,  1907,  and  there  were  134  working  days  out  of  202. 

The  output  of  the  plant  was  6,951  boxes  of  wearing  surface  mix- 
ture and  1,524  boxes  of  binder,  total  8,475  boxes.  Each  of  these 
boxes  held  9  cu.  ft.  of  the  mixed  product,  as  measured  at  the  plant. 
It  was  found  that,  during  the  hauling  in  wagons  from  the  plant  to 
the  street,  the  wearing  surface  mixture  consolidates  and  looses  about 
3%  of  its  volume,  but  the  binder  mixture  does  not  consolidate  ap- 
preciably. 

The  average  wagon  load  is  8  boxes,  or  72  cu.  ft.  of  mixture,  and  . 
the  average  distance  from  the  plant  to  the  point  of  repairs  was  4.14 
miles.  Observations  on  35  loads  showed  a  traveling  speed  of  only 
2.15  miles  per  hr.  A  team  and  wagon  cost  $6  per  8  hr.  day.  The 
cost  of  hauling,  as  given  below,  includes  all  delays  at  the  plant  and 
on  the  street,  as  well  as  the  cost  of  hauling  the  old  asphalt  from 
the  street  to  the  dump,  but  it  does  not  include  the  cost  of  hauling 
any  materials  to  the  plant,  for  all  prices  of  materials  include  de- 
livery at  the  plant.  The  wages  for  an  8  hr.  day  were : 

Plant    foreman     $6.00 

Foreman   4.00 

Rakers 2.50 

Tampers    2.50 

Smoothers    2.00 

Laborers   2.00 

Team   (with  driver)    6.00 

In  making  a  box  of  wearing  coat  0.3  cu.  yd.  of  net  measure  of 
sand  was  used,  but  allowing  for  losses  in  the  yard,  shrinkage  on 
drying,  etc.,  0.4  cu.  yd.  of  sand  were  bought.  According  to  the 
statement  of  total  weight  of  stone  dust  used,  there  were  84  Ibs.  per 
box,  but,  according  to  the  cost  per  box,  at  $3.50  per  ton,  it  would 
appear  that  63  Ibs.  were  used. 

No  record  was  kept  of  the  number  of  square  yards  repaired,  the 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  417 

"box"  (9  cu.  ft.)  being  the  unit  of  record.  For  purposes  of  com- 
parison, however.  I  have  assumed  that  a  9  cu.  ft.  box  of  wearing 
surface  would  make  5  sq.  yds.  of  wearing  surface  measuring  2  ins. 
chick  after  rolling.  If  9  cu.  ft.  of  loose  wearing  surface  shrinks 
1/6,  or  16%%,  under  the  roller,  we  have  7%  cu.  ft.  of  compacted 
wearing  surface,  which  will  make  exactly  5  sq.  yds.  2  ins.  thick. 
However,  careful  measurements  on  27  sq.  yds.,  made  in  1905  by  Mr. 
John  C.  Sheridan,  Chief  Engineer  of  the  Bureau  of  Highways  of 
Brooklyn,  showed  the  following: 

"When  the  concrete  foundation  was  completed  ordinates  were 
taken  every  few  feet  from  a  line  stretched  from  curb  to  curb.  These 
sections  were  taken  about  2l/2  ft.  apart.  After  the  1-in.  binder 
was  laid,  measurements  were  made  from  the  line  over  the  same 
points,  and  after  the  2-in.  wearing  surface  was  laid,  similar  meas- 
urements were  taken  at  the  identical  points,  the  material  having 
previously  been  measured  in  the  truck.  It  was  found  that  there  was 
a  shrinkage  of  21%  per  cent  from  the  loose  measure  in  the  truck 
to  the  measurement  compacted  in  place,  and  that  there  was  a  shrink- 
age of  33  per  cent  from  the  plant  measurement  to  the  measurement 
compacted  in  place.  This  was  on  the  wearing  surface ;  the  shrink- 
age in  binder  was  not  determined."* 

If  we  were  to  assume  the  greater  shrinkage  indicated  by  this  ex- 
periment, instead  of  the  16%%  shrinkage  from  the  measurement  at 
the  plant,  we  should  get  a  very  much  smaller  yardage  of  2-in.  pave- 
ment, and  a  correspondingly  higher  cost.  I  prefer,  therefore,  to 
give  the  benefit  of  the  doubt  to  the  managers  of  the  Brooklyn  muni- 
cipal plant,  by  assuming  that  a  9  cu.  ft.  box  will  make  5  sq.  yds. 
of  2-in.  wearing  coat. 

The  following  costs  per  box,  are  as  I  have  deduced  them  from 
the  annual  report  for  1907,  and  the  costs  per  sq.  yd.  are  based  upon 
the  assumption  just  stated. 

COST  OF  WEARING  SURFACE. 

Per 

Per  box.         sq.  yd. 
(9cu.  ft.)      (2-in.) 
Materials: 

0.4  cu.  yd.   gross    (0.3  cu.  yd.  net)    sand  at  $0.75.  .$0.299  $0.060 

63  Ibs.  stone  dust  at  $3.50  ton 0.110  0.022 

13  Ibs.,   or   1.63  gals,  flux  at  6%    cts.  per  gal 0.121  0.024 

91  Ibs.  asphalt  at  $24.80  ton 1.127  0.225 


Total    materials    $1.657  $0.331 

Supplies: 

0.037  tons  soft  coal  for  plant  at  $4.00  per  ton $0.148  $0.030 

0.0056  tons  hard  coal  for  rollers  at  $5.50 0.031  0.006 

Oil  and  waste    0.030  0.006 

0.008  cords  wood  for  street  fire  wagon  at  $11.34.  .  .  .    0.091  0.018 

Miscellaneous   supplies    0.030  0.006 


11  & 


Total  supplies   $0.330          $0.066 

^Engineering-Contracting,  May  19,   1909. 


418  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

COST  OF  WEARING  SURFACE  (CONTINUED). 

Per 

Per  box.  sq.  yd. 

Plant   Charges:                                                             (9cu.  ft.)  (2  in.) 

Rent    $0.099  $0.020 

Dump  privileges   0.018  0.004 

Interest   on  plant,   5%  per  yr 0.106  0.021 

Depreciation,   10%  per  yr 0.242  0.048 

Repairs  to  plant 0.091  0.018 

Repairs  to  tools 0.024  0.005 


Total   plant   charges $0.580  $0.116 

Labor: 

Plant  labor  (including  foreman) $1.438  $0.288 

Hauling,   4.14  miles .' 0.934  0.187 

Street  labor    (including  foreman)         2.356  0.471 

Superintendent   ($1,363  for  6%  mos.) 0.161  0.032 

Total  labor $4.889          $0.978 

Grand  total    $7.456          $1.491 

Attention  should  be  called  to  the  fact  that  this  plant  is  new,  and 
that  repair  costs  are  therefore  smaller  than  they  will  be  later  on. 
There  is  apparently  nothing  included  for  chemist's  salary,  etc. 
Nevertheless,  the  cost  of  $7.45  per  "box,"  or  $1.49  per  sq.  yd.  of  2- 
in.  surface,  is  enormously  high.  Note  particularly  the  tremendous- 
ly high  cost  of  each  of  the  labor  items,  except  the  superintendent. 
Here  is  a  cost  of  almost  $1.00  per  sq.  yd.  for  labor  alone  on  a  2-in. 
wearing  surface !  Compare  this  with  records  given  elsewhere  in 
this  book.  Even  the  outrageously  high  cost  of  similar  municipal 
work  at  New  Orleans  is  outdone  by  this  municipal  asphalt  repairing 
in  Brooklyn.  (See  page  402.)  However,  they  are  both  typical  of 
municipally-operated  plants. 

The  cost  of  the  binder  was  as  follows : 

COST  OF  BINDER. 

Per  box 
Materials:  (9cu.  ft.) 

0.385  cu.  yds.  stone  at  $1.45 $0.558 

0.46  gals,  flux  at  7%  cts.  per  gal 0.034 

25.5  Ibs.  asphalt  at  $24.80  per  ton 0.312 

Total  materials $0.904 

Supplies  (same  as  for  wearing  surface) $0.33 

Plant  charges  (same  as  for  wearing  surface) 0.580 

Labor  (same  as  for  wearing  surface) 4.889 

Grand  total $6.703 

Table  XV  shows  the  output  and  cost  by  months: 

Cost  of  Bltulithic  and  Asphalt  Pavements  and  Repairs,  Toronto.* 

Mr.    C.    H.    Rust,    City   Engineer   of   Toronto,    is   authority   for   the 

following : 

Most  of  the  streets  in  Toronto  are  of  a  uniform  width  of  66  ft., 

and  the  width  of  the  roadway  has  been  fixed  as  follows:    In  busi- 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   17,  1909. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS. 


rH  CM  r-l  rH  CM  CM  rH        rH 


gfi    <OrHC^CO^CO         d 
t-i  '^-'^•^i^jjUCOCOCNCO       CO 


<^3  ^^l>-CMt*-O^t*OO 

5»  UOin-Tj«cMoqo«oo 

^  o  ^  S^.'*"3'*' 

^  a  «j  rH^oieosia* 

^  SS    MOCOTHOOCX) 

Hi  ^gco^co-^oseooi^ 

R      H  0," 
H      -2 

*    o 

c^  A       moooooo     m 

^  "Q    .Mooooinm 

•U  U>  fl    «O-<X)  in  «O  O  CO  rH 

S  fn"-1  co  o^co  05  in  in  TH 

!§|  ««- 

^ 

d.  tnot^ciooojin'co 

t^  O  •»*<  -<JH  Oi  OO  c^ 

.*.  +j  ^  co  os  oi  o  in  oc  eo' 

8  ^OOcMrHCOinO-.cO 

S  ^^    OOrH?OOi«OOiOO        05 

to  £3        M«C^?O^N 

*»• 

t'Omt-ot^oo       . 

^  •COOl^»OOLO(X)(5^         CO 

S  §^OrHcomioc-in     oo 

^1  i— (   ^    O^rHOOin^Oi 

,££  WJ    rH*'rH'«M'cM'>eM"'rHrH'' 

£  ^::-:: 

:  •  •  h  •  C  ti 


.'SO  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ness  districts,  where  the  traffic  is  fairly  heavy,  or  where  a  double 
line  of  street  car  tracks  exist,  the  width  between  curbs  is  42  ft.; 
on  residential  streets  the  rule  is  to  have  the  streets  24  ft.  between 
curbs,  and  in  a  few  cases  this  has  been  reduced  to  18  ft,  but  the 
writer  is  not  in  favor  of  this.  By  reducing  the  width  of  these 
streets  to  the  above  dimensions,  a  considerable  saving  has  been 
effected  to  the  property  owners,  and  also  a  very  large  saving  in  the 
general  city  taxes  by  reducing  the  maintenance,  street  cleaning, 
watering,  etc. 

Asphalt  pavements  have  been  in  use  in  Toronto  for  the  past  20 
years,  and  have  given  general  satisfaction.  The  first  pavement 
laid  was  of  Trinidad  Pitch  Lake,  and  several  streets  constructed  of 
this  material  have  been  in  use  16  or  17  years  before  the  surface 
required  to  be  renewed.  A  few  years  ago  California  asphalt  was 
introduced  and  the  pavements  constructed  of  it  have  shown  splen- 
did wearing  qualities,  and  may  be  expected  to  give  as  good  satis- 
faction as  the  earlier  pavements.  Texas  asphalt  has  only  been 
used  in  Toronto  for  the  last  two  years.  The  analysis,  however, 
shows  up  as  well  as  that  of  any  other  type  of  asphalt  and  may 
be  expected  to  stand  the  wear  and  tear  of  general  traffic  equally 
as  well  as  the  others. 

This  class  of  pavement  is  easily  cleaned,  quickly  laid  and  re- 
paired, and  at  the  present  prices  is  the  most  economical  and  satis- 
factory pavement  which  can  be  laid. 

Formerly  two  types  were  used,  namely  light  and  heavy,  but  ex- 
perience has  led  to  dividing  this  into  three  classes,  light,  medium 
and  heavy.  The  light  calls  for  4  ins.  of  concrete  with  2  ins.  of 
asphalt ;  medium  for  5  ins.  of  concrete,  1  in.  binder  and  2  ins.  sur- 
face, the  heavy  having  6  ins.  of  concrete,  1  in.  binder  and  2  ins. 
of  surface.  The  price  at  the  present  time  for  light  asphalt  is  $1.45 
per  sq.  yd. ;  medium,  $1.75  per  sq.  yd.,  and  heavy,  $2.00  per 
sq.  yd. 

In  1907  the  city  purchased  an  asphalt  plant  with  a  capacity  of 
1,500  sq.  yds.  per  day  of  8  hrs.,  and  since  then  not  only  have  some 
streets  been  constructed,  but  all  the  repairs  have  been  made  to 
pavements  which  are  out  of  guarantee. 

The  cost  of  material  and  wages  in  paving  work  are  as  follows : 

Material: 

Asphalt,  per  net  ton,  f.  o.  b.  Toronto $21.95 

Screened  gravel,  per  cu.  yd.,  delivered  on  street 1.60 

Pit  gravel,  per  cu.  yd.,  delivered  on  street 1.05 

Sand  for  asphalt,  per  cu.  yd.,  at  plant 84 

Cement,   per  bbl.,   carload  lots 1.29 

Crushed  limestone,  per  ton,  on  cars 1.28 

Limestone  rubble,  per  ton,  on  cars 1.10 

Crushed  granite,  per  ton,  on  cars 1.60 

Limestone  dust  for  asphalt  mixture,  per  ton,  in  bags  of  90 

Ibs.,   on   cars 5.60 

Granite   blocks,    per    1,000 67.00 

Paving  blocks    (brick),   per   1,000 -. 24.50 

Paving  bricks,  per  1,000 18.00 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  421 

Wages: 

Laborers,  per  day  of  9   hrs . , %  2.00 

Pavers,  per  hr ...  .25  to  . 

Concrete   finishers,   per   hr 25  to  .35 

Asphalt    rakers,    per    hr 25 

Carters    (single    team),    per    hr 35 

Teamsters   (double  team),  per  hr 55   5-9 

Roller  engineer,  per  hr 25 

Foremen,   per   day $3.00  to  4.00 

The  cost  of  cement  curbs  and  sidewalks  at  Toronto  is  not  re- 
printed here,  but  may  be  found  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  17, 
1909. 

Plant  Burden. — The  charges  for  the  plant  during  the  year  1909 
were  as  follows: 

Sinking  Fund  on  Investment: 

Cost  of  plant,  $33,522,  at  7%    (rate  for  20  yrs.) $  2.346.54 

Rental   of   site,    one-half   of   $1,000 '500.00 

Taxes    309.00 

Miscellaneous  Services: 

Phone 15.50 

Railway   siding    60.17 

Insurance    (fire)     842.00 

Depreciation — (a)  building,  (b)  machinery,  5%  of  $33,522  1,676.10 

Fuel: 

18,000  batches  at  this  year's  average  cost,  .06  cts.  for  fuel  1,080.00 

Heat  and  light  in  winter 40.00 

Management: 

%   of  salary  of  chemist 300.00 

Fixed  Charges: 

Foreman     1,014.00 

Watchman,   summer  and  winter 608.30 

Timekeeper    315.00 

Engineer     -.  .  .  .  577.50 

Roller     255.00 

Repairs 500.00 

Total     $10,439.11 

Note. — At  full  capacity  the  plant  develops  38,000  batches  in  the 
season  of  150  days.  An  estimate  of  18,000  batches  as  safe,  which 
gives  a  cost  of  58  cts.  per  batch,  burden.  If  binder  is  used  as  well 
as  surface,  it  makes  the  cost  per  batch  75  cts.  There  are  6  sq. 
yds.  of  2-in.  surface  to  the  batch,  hence  the  plant  burden  is  nearly 
10  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  2-in.  surface  coat. 

Cost  of  Repairs. — The  following  was  the  cost  of  resurfacing 
8,117  sq.  yds.  during  theanonth  of  June,  1909,  with  a  2-in.  surface 
coat  : 

Materials:  Per  sq.  yd. 

0.18  batch  asphalt  mixture,  at  $2.12 $0.380 

0.18  batch  plant  burden    (as  above),  at  $0.58...    0.104 

0.2     Ibs.  stone  dust,  at  $0.30  per  cwt 1 

0.17  Ibs.  asphalt  cement,  at  $1.25 V  0.006 

0.006  cords  wood,  at  $5.11 J 

Total  materials   $0.490 

Labor  on  Street: 

Laying     $0.082 

Carting 0.044 

Rolling,   0.023   hrs,   at   $1.40 0.032 

Total   labor  on   street..  ..$0.158 


422  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Miscellaneous  Charges: 

Office  expense    $0.005 

Engineering,    3%     0.020 

Tools,    1  %     : 0.007 

Total  miscellaneous    $0.032 

Grand   total    $0.680 

Note  that  the  item  "Labor"  includes  only  street  labor,  and  that 
"asphalt  mixture"  and  "plant  burden"  includes  materials  and  labor 
at  the  plant. 

Cost  of  a  Light  Asphalt  Pavement. — A  light  asphalt  pavement, 
18  ft.  wide  and  544  ft.  long,  was  laid  on  Broadway,  Toronto.  It 
was  begun  May  27  and  completed  June  19,  1909.  The  2-in.  asphalt 
surface  occupied  950  sq.  yds.  (after  deducting  the  cement  gutter 
area).  The  cost  was  as  follows: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Grading     $0.359 

Concrete  Foundation    (4-in.) 0.577 

Asphalt  Surface: 

0.158   batch 'asphalt  mixture,  at   $2.70 0.427 

Stone  dust,  asp.  cement  and  wood 0.004 

Carting   asphalt    mixture 0.033 

Labor   on    street 0.017 

Rolling,    0.005    hrs.,   at   $1.40 0.007 

Total    asphalt    surface $0.488 

Miscellaneous    charges    $0.100 

Grand   total    $1.524 

The  labor  on  the  concrete  foundation,  exclusive  -of  carting  the 
materials,  was  only  9  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Note  that  the  $2.70  per  batch  of  "asphalt  mixture"  includes  labor 
at  the  plant  and  plant  burden,  as  well  as  materials. 

Cost  of  Medium  Asphalt  Pavement.— An  asphalt  pavement  (1,651 
sq.  yds.)  consisting  of  a  5-in.  concrete  base,  1-in.  binder,  and  2-in. 
surface  was  laid  on  Sackville  St.,  Toronto,  at  the  following  cost: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Grading:  tn-nr 

Labor 
Rolling,   at   $1.40  per  hr _ 

Total   grading    $0.203 

Concrete    Foundation    $0.666 

So!o95  'batch  binder,  at  $1.98 'SHIS 

0.17     batch  asphalt  top,  at  $2.70 , 0.450 

Stone  dust,  cement  and  wood O-Wo 

Carting    J-jJJJ 

Labor    on    street J J.043 

Rolling,    0.011   hrs.,   at   $1.40 _0.01. 

Total    asphalt    $0.732 

Miscellaneous     |t?f£ 

Grand   total    $1-610 

The  labor  on   the   concrete   cost   8    cts.    per   sq.    yd.,   exclusive  of 

carting. 

Cost  of  Bitulithic  Pavement. — On  Alhambra  Ave.,  Toronto,  for  a 
distance  of  304  ft.,  a  bitulithic  pavement  was  laid  on  4-in.  con- 
crete, 719  sq.  yds.,  at  the  following  cost: 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  423 


Per  sq.  yd. 

Grading     $0.252 

Concrete  Foundation    0.592 

Bitulithic  Surface: 

Bitulithic  materials    $1.150 

Carting    0.093 

Labor   on    street 0.050 

Rolling     0S015 

Total   bitulithic    $1.308 

Miscellaneous    Charges    $0.170 

Grand   total $2.322 

Cost  of  Repairs  to  Asphalt  Pavements,  Syracuse,  N.  Y.*— Valu- 
able data  on  the  amount  and  cost  of  repairs  of  asphalt  pavements 
at  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  are  given  in  his  annual  report  by  City  Enginee/ 
H.  C.  Allen.  In  addition  to  the  data  on  life  and  cost,  the  report 
presents  a  plan,  which  will  interest  city  engineers,  for  determining 
when  repairs  should  cease  and  the  pavement  be  resurfaced.  We 
quote  Mr.  Allen's  report  as  follows: 

The  first  asphalt  pavements  in  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  were  laid  in  1889, 
20  years  ago.  Since  that  time  more  or  less  of  this  kind  of  pavement 
has  been  laid  each  year,  excepting  1891  and  1892,  until  at  present 
there  are  about  625,000  sq.  yds.,  outside  of  the  railroad  strip  and 
exclusive  of  asphaltina.  In  1902,  the  Department  of  Public  Works 
commenced  to  repair  systematically  all  asphalt  pavements  out  of 
guarantee  and  to  make  a  record  of  the  amount  of  work  done  and  its 
cost. 

Following  is  a  table  showing  the  total  number  of  square  yards 
of  asphalt  pavement  out  of  guarantee,  and  the  total  cost  of  repair* 
each  year  from  1902  to  1908,  both  inclusive. 

Total  Repairs  Total 

Year.  Sq.  Yds.  Sq.  Yds.  Cost. 

1902    154,498  1,414  $   2,656.40 

1903    241,125  2,710  4,586.46 

1904    381,180  5,617  9,628.37 

1905    396,814  9,308  13,275.43 

1906    450,427  14,958  19,447.43 

1907    457,152  17,574  24,092.24 

1908    494,391  17,821  24,028.03 

Totals 69,402  $97,714.36 

The  total  amount  of  asphalt  pavement  required  was  69,402  sq. 
yds.,  and  the  cost  $97,714.36,  or  $1.41  per  sq.  yd.  of  patching.  Be- 
sides this,  there  has  been  a  large  amount  of  asphaltina  pavement 
repaired.  The  laying  of  asphaltina  ceased  in  1899  and  it  has  al- 
ways been  kept  in  repair  with  asphalt. 

During  the  past  two  or  three  years  it  has  been  observed  that  the 
older  asphalt  pavements,  those  laid  in  1895  and  previous  thereto, 
were  fast  reaching  a  condition  impracticable  to  repair,  and  a  time 
when  a  new  surface  must  be  laid.  It  was  also  noticeable  that  the 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.   3,    1909. 


424  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

greater  part  of  the  cost  of  repairs  was  upon  these  old  pavements. 
Because  of  these  observed  facts,  and  the  constantly  increasing  an- 
nual charge  for  repairs,  a  study  and  analysis  of  the  records  were 
undertaken  with  a  view  to  recommending  a  policy  on  the  part  of 
the  Department  of  Public  Works  with  reference  to  the  mainten- 
ance of  this  class  of  pavements.  According  to  the  provisions  of 
the  Charter,  the  cost  of  paving  streets  has  been  paid  by  the  owners 
of  abutting  property  and,  after  the  expiration  of  the  guaranty  period, 
the  Department  of  Public  Works  has  made  the  necessary  repairs. 
The  analysis  above  referred  to  show  that  the  cost  per  square  yard 
per  year  for  repairs  to  asphalt  increases  in  an  increasing  ratio. 
This  ratio  has  been  estimated  from  experience  with  the  pavements 
in  this  city  as  follows : 

Cost  Per  Sq.  Yd.  Total  Cost  to 

Year  of  the  Per  Yr.  at  $1.41  Date  Each  Yr. 

Pavement  Life.  Per  Sq.  Yd.  Sq.  Yd. 

6th  $0.003  $0.003 

7th  .011  .014 

8th  .014  .028 

9th  .028  .056 

10th  .035  .091 

llth  .056  .147 

12th  .085  .232 

13th  .127  .359 

14th  .169  .528 

It  is  apparent  from  these  figures  as  well  as  from  the  contempla- 
tion of  the  increasing  actual  cost  from  year  to  year,  that  the  re- 
pairs to  asphalt  pavements  by  the  Department  of  Public  Works 
can  not  go  on  indefinitely  without  involving  the  resurfacing  of  en- 
tire pavements. 

The  Charter  provides  that  the  resurfacing  of  street  pavements 
shall  be  done  at  the  expense  of  the  owners  of  abutting  property, 
and  the  problem  here  to  be  solved  is  the  determination  of  the  time 
at  which  the  Department  of  Public  Works  shall  cease  making  re- 
pairs, and  leave  the  pavement  to  be  resurfaced  in  the  manner  pro- 
vided by  law.  Several  suggestions  have  been  made,  one  that  a 
pavement  having  once  been  laid,  the  city  shall  keep  it  in  repair  for 
a  certain  period  of  years,  say,  until  it  is  15  years  old  ;  another  that 
a  pavement  shall  be  kept  in  repair  by  the  city  until  a  certain  per- 
centage of  its  area  shall  have  been  repaired. 

Objection  is  found  to  the  first  proposition  in  that  the  lives  of  pave- 
ments vary  with  their  location  and  the  volume  of  traffic  to  which 
they  are  subjected.  Some  of  the  asphalt  pavements  are  found  to 
have  had  as  low  as  1  per  cent  of  the  total  surface  repaired  and  to 
be  still  in  fair  condition  at  the  end  of  12  years,  while  others  not 
so  favorably  located  and  sustaining  heavy  traffic  have  had  more 
than  50  per  cent  of  the  total  surface  repaired  in  the  same  period, 
and  are  not  capable  of  further  repairs.  It  is  evident  that  a  hard 
and  fast  rule  that  all  asphalt  pavements  must  be  resurfaced  at  the 
end  of  15  years  of  life  will  not  operate  in  an  equitable  ana  con- 
sistent manner,  for  the  reason  that  in  some  cases  the  condition  of 
the  pavement,  due  principally  to  its  use,  will  require  resurfacing  at 
an  earlier  period,  and  in  others  the  rule  will  require  the  destrue- 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  425 

tiou  and  replacement  of  a  pavement  which  still  has  in  it  the  ability 
to  render  service  for  a  longer  period. 

The  proposition  that  the  city  keep  an  asphalt  pavement  in  repair 
until  such  a  time  as  a  certain  percentage  of  its  total  area  has  been 
repaired  seems  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  situation  in  a  more 
practical  and  equitable  manner. 

The  study  of  the  information  contained  in  the  record  of  repairs 
shows  that  after  the  tenth  year  of  life,  the  amount  of  repairs  per 
square  yard  per  year  increases  at  a  much  more  rapid  rate  than  in 
previous  years.  The  results  obtained  by  taking  the  mean  or  aver- 
age of  the  quantity  of  repairs  to  pavements  which  have  reached  the 
age  considered  is  as  follows : 

Year.  Amount  of  Repairs.  Sq.  Yds. 

llth  Year — Per  Sq.  Yd.,  Per  Year 04 

12th  Year — Per  Sq.  Yd.,  Per  Year.  . 06 

13th  Year — Per  Sq.  Yd.,  Per  Year 09 

14th  Year — Per  Sq.  Yd.,  Per  Year 12 


Total   repairs 0.31 

Average  from  6th  to   10th  year  inclusive 0.065 

Total  for  14  years   0.375 

It  is  also  to  be  observed  that  in  the  majority  of  pavements  the 
general  condition  at  the  time  repairs  to  the  extent  of  37%  per  cent 
have  been  made  is  such  as  to  render  furtker  repairs  impracticable, 
and  resurfacing  necessary. 

Taking  the  average  of  all  pavements  of  this  kind,  it  is  found  that 
at  the  end  of  the  14  years  of  life  the  percentage  t>f  37%  per  cent  of 
the  total  area  has  been  repaired,  the  extremes  being  such  streets 
as  North  and  South  Salina,  which  reach  the  limit  in  11  years,  and 
others  such  as  Davis  and  Fitch  streets  which  have  not  required  5 
per  cent  repairs  in  12  or  13  years. 

It  is  therefore  recommended  that  it  be  the  policy  of  the  De- 
partment of  Public  Works  to  keep  up  the  repairs  to  asphalt  pave- 
ments until  such  time  as  the  total  repairs  thereon  have  reached 
37%  per  cent  of  the  total  area;  that  having  made  repairs  to  that 
extent  upon  any  pavement  it  be  abandoned  for  further  repairs,  and 
reported  to  the  Common  Council  as  a  proper  object  for  resurfacing. 
It  should  be  noted  in  connection  with  this  discussion  and  the  gen- 
eral one  of  the  participation  by  the  city  at  large  in  the  cost  of 
pavements,  that  by  paying  the  cost  of  repairs  until  the  time  the 
percentage  of  total  surface  above  commended  has  been  reached,  the 
city  at  large  participates  in  the  cost  of  the  pavement  during  the 
period  of  its  life  to  the  extent  of  about  53  cts.  per  square  yard  or 
about  30  per  cent  of  the  total  cost  of  the  perishable  portion  of  the 
pavement. 

[For  a  correct  mathematical  discussion  of  problems  of  this 
nature,  consult  Section  I  of  this  book.] 

If  it  is  thought  to  be  advisable  that  the  general  scheme  of  paving 
assessment  now  in  force  should  be  changed  by  Charter  amend-, 
ment,  so  that  the  city  at  large  is  made  to  participate  in  a  portion  of 
the  original  cost  of  a  pavement,  it  is  suggested  that  it  would  be  an 
equitable  arrangement  in  making  such  assessments  to  consider  that 


426  HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

the  streets  crossed  by  any  proposed  pavement  are  city  property 
fronting  the  improvement,  and  to  charge  the  cost  of  the  pave- 
ment to  this  property  at  the  same  rate  per  foot  front  as  other 
property  along  the  line  is  called  upon  to  pay. 

Cost  of  Repairs  and  Life  of  Asphalt,  Washington,  D.  C.— Capt. 
H.  C.  Newcomer  gives  the  following:  On  July  1,  1903,  there  were 
2,886,786  sq.  yds.  of  sheet  asphalt  pavements,  on  2,425,732  sq.  yds. 
of  which  the  5  yr.  guarantee  had  expired.  The  following  is  the 
number  of  sq.  yds.  of  given  age  above  5  yrs. : 

Age,  Years.  Sq.  Yds.  Age,  Years.  Sq.  Yds. 

5  97,642  19  60,967 

6  99,967  20  108,385 

7  81,497  21  95,762 

8  109,128  22  106,439 

9  105,693  23  126,657 

10  101,296  24  66,949 

11  130,745  25  35,417 

12  209,632  26  21,869 

13  202,134  27  15,041 

14  165,746  28  30,682 

15  59,668  29  1,642 

16  97.607  30  23,254 

17  70,841  31  7,330 

18  45,154  ..  

Total 2,277,144 

The  average  age. of  the  above  is  14.8  years.  The  average  age  of 
the  areas  patched  during  the  fiscal  year  ending  July  1,  1903,  was 
21  years.  The  patching  is  done  by  contract,  and  is  not  paid  for  by 
the  sq.  yd.,  but  by  the  cubic  foot  of  mixed  materials  measured  in 
the  cart,  the  price  being  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  ft. 

Asphalt   surface    $0.49 

Asphalt    binder 0.25 

The  standard  pavement  has  a  6-in.  concrete  base,  a  1%-in.  binder 
course  and  a  1%-in.  wearing  surface — total  3  ins.  of  asphalt  meas- 
ured after  rolling. 

The  contract  price  for  a  standard  asphalt  pavement  is  $1.59  per 
sq.  yd.,  the  pavement  having  a  6-in.  base  (1  part  Portland  cement, 
i  parts  sand,  5  parts  gravel  and  5  parts  broken  stone),  on  which 
is  laid  2  ins.  of  binder  and  2%  ins.  of  asphalt  surface,  both  meas- 
ured before  compression. 

The  cost  of  repairs  during  the  year  of  1903  was  2.8  cts.  per  sq. 
yd.  for  pavement  of  all  ages,  being  distributed  thus: 

Age  of 

Pavements,  Cost  Repairs 

Years.  Per  Sq.  Yd. 

5  to  10  1.65  cts. 

10  to  15  3.37  cts. 

15   to  20  3.78  cts. 

20  to  25  2.8     cts. 

This  relates  only  to  patching  and  does  not  include  any  entire 
renewals  of  worn  out  pavements. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  42V 

Cost  of  Repairing  Asphalt  Pavement  in  Various  American 
Cities.* — The  committee  appointed  by  the  Municipal  Engineers  of 
the  City  of  New  York  to  investigate  the  cost  of  repairing  asphalt 
pavement  has  submitted  a  report  of  their  work,  from  which  we  take 
the  following  data.  A  blank  prepared  by  the  committee  was  sent 
to  20  of  the  leading  cities  in  the  country  which  have  the  largest 
amount  of  asphalt  pavements,  with  the  request  that  it  be  filled  out 
in  detail.  The  object  was  not  only  to  ascertain  the  actual  cost  and 
method  of  repairing  asphalt  pavements,  but  if  possible  to  deter- 
mine the  cost  of  repairs  according  to  the  age  of  the  pavements. 
Only  eight  of  the  cities  replying  have  kept  their  records  in  such 
shape  that  this  could  be  obtained  and  the  results  are  embodied  in 
the  accompanying  table.  The  figures  in  Table  XVI  are  all  for  the 
year  1905  except  Washington,  which  is  for  the  year  ending  June 
30,  1905.  Although  not  being  able  to  furnish  just  what  was  desired, 
the  following  cities  gave  information  regarding  their  methods: 

In  Philadelphia  there  are  about  25  miles  of  asphalt  out  of  guar- 
antee and  it  is  stated  they  all  required  resurfacing  entire.  The 
prices  for  resurfacing  in  patches  of  100  sq.  yds.  or  less  for  1906 
are  $1.19  per  sq.  yd.,  patches  between  100  and  500  sq.  yds.  $1.17  per 
sq.  yd.,  for  surfaces  from  500  to  1,000  sq.  yds.,  $1.11  per  sq.  yd.,  for 
over  1,000  sq.  yds.  $1.07  per  sq.  yd.  It  is  said  the  amount  expended 
per  year  depended  upon  the  annual  appropriation  rather  than  the 
need  of  the  streets. 

In  Minneapolis  the  area  repaired  last  year  was  wholly  in  streets 
under  guarantee  where  the  contractor  had  failed  to  live  up  to  his 
agreement.  They  were  made  at  a  cost  of  $1.65  per  sq.  yd.  The  to- 
tal yardage  laid  under  this  agreement  was  4,525  sq.  yds.,  but  no 
statement  was  made  as  to  the  total  area  of  the  streets  as  repaired. 

In  Omaha  the  repairs  are  made  by  a  municipal  asphalt  plant, 
and  while  no  statement  was  made  of  the  cost  by  the  age  of  the 
pavements,  the  total  of  5.8%  of  the  entire  yardage  repaired  was  re- 
laid.  This  would  mean  at  a  cost  of  82  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  an  average 
of  4%  cts.  over  the  entire  area. 

In  Kansas  City  the  method  of  repairs  is  such  that  the  following 
quotation  is  made  from  a  letter  of  the  Engineer : 

"We  have  repaired  since  1903,  when  the  first  repairing  of  asphalt 
pavements  out  of  maintenance  was  begun,  41  miles  of  streets, 
amounting  to  88,000  sq.  yds.,  costing  $124,277.65.  The  cost  of  this 
work  has  been  $1.50  per  square  yard  until  within  the  last  year,  when 
the  Economic  Asphalt  Repair  Co.  came  into  the  field  with  their 
Surface  Heater.  Since  then  the  price  has  been  cut  to  90  cts.  per 
square  yard.  Previous  to  this  time  all  repairing  work  was  done 
by  the  Barber  Asphalt  Paving  Co.,  and  the  method  used  was  to  cut 
out  all  worn  asphalt  and  replace  by  new.  This  latter  method  was 
very  unsatisfactory,  leaving  the  street  in  a  lumpy  condition,  and  in 
a  short  while  after  this  work  was  done  a  bad  place  or  hole  was 

"Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.    19,   1906. 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


t*  -MNM  •CCOTf«XtOf05iOit-COl.r-       LC 

•     P  -J       -000  ICSrHiHOiHNCO^rHT-lJji;        <M 

»  j         -000  .  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  3  CJ 

' 


•  CO  O  W  O  Ot>  Tf-  < 


g  ^ 


_;  .^j  **»  o    .    -ocas    •    «    •   ;   •  o  05  o  o    '  -j, 


^  .  r-  • 

ryj       •  JQ    t-  «  .OOr-l  •  •     •  -OllOi-llO  •  l/S 

"*     D'rQ    0_  •  -eOrH  •  •      «  .  -O«5«CCO  -CO 

>>  10  «  i'-n't^-'  !  '  •  *cq  0500*0'  *T-H 


rH  10  U5  10  CC  i-l  CO  ^<  Tt<  00 
.  '.   t- 1-  tH  t-  t-  CO  N  ^"lO  iDtT^oJ"®^ 

.  .  .  IM  iH  rH  kO  IO  IM  t- LO   COr-<   i-H 


g^     -O00500t-i»cri00ocoo^a5«> 

oj   o  w*    I  °.  °.  °.  "^  "^  °.  ^  °.  ®  °.  °.  °.  ^  ^  w 
3  C 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  429 

likely  to  develop  alongside  the  place  repaired.  It  is  also  very  diffi- 
cult under  this  method  to  get  a  good  joint.  These  repair  contracts 
are  for  two  years — they  agreeing  to  keep  the  street  in  condition 
during  the  two  years  of  their  contract  and  tax  bills  being  issued  for 
the  work  done  on  the  street  at  the  middle  and  end  of  the  period  of 
their  contract.  This  has  resulted  in  the  work  being  in  a  state  of 
continual  repair,  tax  bills  being  issued  at  the  end  of  each  year,  at 
the  end  of  the  period  of  the  contract  the  street  being  in  a  little  bet- 
ter condition  than  when  started." 

In  New  York  City,  Borough  of  Manhattan,  it  is  reported,  in  1904, 
265,000  sq.  yds.  were  maintained  at  a  cost  of  $201,167.38,  or  prac- 
tically an  average  of  76  cts.  per  sq.  yd.;  in  1905,  460,882  sq.  yds., 
at  a  cost  of  $161,800.90,  or  an  average  of  34  cts.  per  sq.  yd. ;  in  1906 
there  will  be  maintained  760,091  sq.  yds.,  at  an  estimated  cost  of 
$216,235,  or  28^  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  The  figures  of  Manhattan  are  very 
much  more  than  for  any  other  city.  This  is  probably  due,  it  is  con- 
sidered, to  the  heavy  traffic  of  the  Manhattan  streets  and  the  fact 
that  many  streets  have  been  paved  with  asphalt  where  that  ma- 
terial does  not  make  an  economic  pavement. 

[I  do  not  concur  with  this  conclusion  at  all.  The  City  of  New 
York  is  one  of  the  most  extravagant  cities  in  the  world,  as  well  as 
one  that  has  suffered  most  from  "graft."] 

Specific  Gravity  of  Bitulithic  and  Asphalt  Pavements.— Mr.  J.  W. 
Howard  states  that  the  specific  gravity  of  a  sample  of  bitulithic 
pavement  in  Baltimore  was  2.69,  as  compared  with  2.96,  which  was 
the  specific  gravity  of  the  broken  stone  used  in  its  construction,  the 
pavement  being  only  9%  less  dense  than  the  stone.  He  states  that 
asphalt  pavements  have  a  specific  gravity  of  1.90  to  2.24,  as  com- 
pared with  2.60  or  2.70,  which  is  the  density  of  the  sand  and  lime- 
stone dust  used  in  their  construction,  indicating  that  the  pave- 
ment averages  about  20%  less  dense  than  the  minerals  of  which  it 
is  made. 

Cost  of  Asphalt  Cross  Walks.— Mr.  H.  B.  R.  Craig  gives  the  data 
upon  which  the  following  is  based : 

In  Kingston,  Canada,  the  crossing  of  macadam  streets  are  made 
of  asphalt,  which  has  been  found  to  have  a  life  of  10  to  20  years. 
A  small  plant,  costing  only  $100,  is  used.  It  consists  of  a  40-gal. 
asphalt  boiler,  a  sand  heater  (100  sq.  ft.  of  surface),  and  a  mixing 
board  of  the  same  size.  The  sand  heater  is  a  ^-in.  sheet  iron  plate 
resting  on  four  brick  walls  2  ft.  high  and  1  ft.  thick,  enclosing  an 
oven.  The  fuel  (wood)  is  fed  through  a  hole  in  the  wall. 

The  following  is  the  gang: 

Per  day. 
3  men  heating  asphalt  and  sand  and  mixing,  at  $1.50 $  4.50 

1  cart  hauling  to  the  street. 2.25 

2  men  laying  and  finishing  the  asphalt  surface 3.00 

Total,  300  sq.  ft.,  at  3.25  cts $   9.75 

2  men  preparing  the  foundation,  at  $1.50 3.00 

Grand   total,    300   sq.   ft,   at   4.25   cts $12.75 


430  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

The  following  was  the  cost  of  15,000  sq.  ft.  of  asphalt  crossings 
laid  in  1905  : 

Per  sq.  ft. 
Materials:  Cts. 

Stone 0.267 

Asphalt,  at  1.57  cts.  per  Ib 3.690 

Cement,  at  $1.70  per  bbl 0.080 

'  Tarred  gravel,  at  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd 0.510 

Sand,  at  90  cts.  per  cu.  yd 0.630 

Fuel     (very    cheap) 0.110 

Hardware    0.015 


Total  materials    5.302 

Labor: 

Boiling  asphalt,  heating  sand,  etc 1.250 

Carting     1.088 

Laying  and  finishing   surface 0.917 

Preparing   foundation    1.020 

Total  labor    .                                                              .4.275 
Grand  total    9.577 

The  fuel  was  old  wood  and  its  cost  was  merely  the  cost  of 
hauling  it. 

The  method  of  construction  is  as  follows :  The  macadam  is 
shaped  to  the  desired  cross-section,  and  a  load  or  two  of  tarred 
gravel  is  spread  across  the  street.  The  asphalt  mixture  is  laid  on 
this  foundation  to  a  thickness  of  2  ins.  It  is  well  tamped  along  the 
edges  and  rolled  with  a  2-man  roller.  The  tamper  and  roller  must 
be  oiled  to  prevent  the  mixture  from  adhering.  A  thin  coating  of 
cement  is  sprinkled  over  the  surface  and  wetted  down,  about  1  Ib. 
of  cement  for  every  10  sq.  ft. 

The  surface  mixture  is  made  by  heating  270  Ibs.  of  Acme  asphalt 
to  300°  F.  and  maintaining  that  temperature  for  2  hrs.,  constantly 
stirring.  Twenty  bushels  of  medium  coarse  sand  (screened  through 
%-in.  screen)  are  heated  to  drive  off  moisture.  The  asphalt  and 
sand  are  mixed  by  hand  on  a  mixing  board. 

Asphalt  walks  are  similarly  constructed  on  a  base  of  4  ins.  of 
tarred  gravel  laid  on  rammed  cinders. 

Cost  of  Mixing  Concrete  Base  By  Hand.— The  ordinary  labor  cost 
of  concrete  foundations  is  0.4  to  0.5  of  a  10-hr,  day's  wages  per  cubic 
yard  of  concrete,  although  occasionally  it  may  be  as  low  as  0.3  of  a 
day  where  two  mixing  gangs  are  worked  side  by  side  under  separate 
foremen,  and  under  an  exacting  contractor.  In  such  a  case,  the 
rivalry  between  the  two  mixing  gangs  where  the  progress  of  the 
work  can  be  seen  at  a  glance,  as  in  laying  pavement  foundations, 
will  insure  a  saving  of  at  least  25%  in  the  labor  item.  The  follow- 
ing, taken  from  my  note-books  and  time-books,  indicates  the  ordi- 
nary cost  of  concrete  mixing  and  laying: 

Case  I.  Laying  6-in.  pavement  foundation.  Stone  delivered  and 
dumped  upon  2-in.  plank  laid  to  receive  it.  If  dumped  directly  upon 
the  ground  it  costs  half  as  much  again  to  shovel  it  up.  Sand  and 
stone  were  dumped  along  the  street,  so  that  the  haul  in  wheelbar- 
rows to  mixing  board. was  about  40  ft.  Two  gangs  of  men  worked 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  431 

under  separate   foremen,  and  each  gang  averaged  4.5  cu.  yds.   con- 
crete per  hour. 

The  labor  cost  was  as  follows  for  45  cu.  yds.  per  gang: 

Per  day.     Per  cu.  yd. 
4  men  filling  barrows  with  stone  and  sand  ready 

for  the  mixers,  wages  15  cts.  per  hr $   6.00          $0.13  • 

10  men,   wheeling,   mixing  and   shoveling  to   place 

(3  or  4  steps),  wages  15  cts.  per  hr .    15.00  0.33 

2  men  ramming,   wages   15   cts.   per  hr 3.00  0.07 

1  foreman   at   30    cts.    per   hr.   and    1    water   boy, 

5    cts.    ,  3.50  0.08 


Total $27.50          $0.61 

Case  II.  Sometimes  it  is  desirable  to  know  every  minute  detail 
of  cost,  for  which  purpose  I  give  the  following : 

— Per  cu.  yd. — 

Day's  labor.  Cost. 

3  men  loading  stones  into  barrows.. .06       -  $0.09 

1  man  loading  sand  into  barrows •   .02  0.03 

2  men    ramming    .04  0.06 

1  foreman  and  1  water  boy  equivalent  to .035  0.05 

(wheeling  sand  and  cemen,t  to  mix.  board  .02  0.03 

[wheeling  stone  to  mixing  board .026  0.04 

9  men  i  mixing  mortar    .013  0.02 

mixing  stone  and  mortar .049  0.07 

[placing  concrete   (walking  15   ft.) .072  0.11 

Total     335  $0.50 

In  one  respect  this  is  not  a  perfectly  fair  example  (although  it 
represents  ordinary  practice),  for  the  mortar  was  only  turned  over 
once  in  mixing  instead  of  three  times,  and  the  stone  was  turned  only 
twice  instead  of  three  or  four  times.  Water  was  used  in  great 
abundance,  and  by  its  puddling  action  probably  secured  a  very  fair 
mixture  of  cement  and  sand,  and  in  that  way  secured  a  better  mix- 
ture than  would  be  expected  from  the  small  amount  of  labor  ex- 
pended in  actual  mixing.  About  9  cts.  more  per  cu.  yd.  spent  in 
mixing  would  have  secured  a  perfect  concrete  without  trusting  to 
the  water. 

Case  III.  Two  gangs  (34  men)  working  under  separate  foremen 
averaged  600  sq.  yds.,  or  100  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per  10-hr,  day  for 
a  season.  This  is  equivalent  to  3  cu.  yds.  per  man  per  day.  The 
stone  and  sand  were  wheeled  to  the  mixing  board  in  barrows,  mixed 
and  shoveled  to  place.  Each  gang  was  organized  as  follows : 

Per  day.     Per  cu.  yd. 

4  men  loading  barrows    $  6.00  $0.12 

9  men  mixing  and   placing 13.50  0.27 

2  men  tamping     3.00  0.06 

1  foreman    2.50  0.05 

Total     $25.00  $0.50 

These  men  worked  with  great  rapidity.  The  above  cost  of  50  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  is  about  as  low  as  any  contractor  can  reasonably  expect 
to  mix  and  place  concrete  by  hand  in  pavement  work. 

Case  IV.     Two  gangs  of  men,  34  in  all,  working  side  by  side  on 


432  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

separate  mixing  boards,  averaged  720  sq.  yds.,   or  120  cu.  yds.,  per 
10-hr,  day.     Each  gang  was  organized  as  follows: 

Per  day.  Per  cu.  yd. 

6   men  loading     and     wheeling $   9.00  $0.15 

8  men  mixing  and   placing 12.00  0.20 

2  men  tamping    3.00  0.05 

1  foreman    3.00  •  0.05 

Total      $27.00  $0.45 

Instead  of  shoveling  the  concrete  from  the  mixing  board  into 
place,  the  mixers  loaded  it  into  barrows  and  wheeled  it  to  place. 
The  men  worked  with  great  rapidity. 

Case  V.  Mr.  Alfred  F.  Harley  is  authority  for  the  following: 
In  laying  concrete  foundations  for  street  pavement  in  New  Orleans, 
a  day's  work,  in  running  three  mixing  boards,  covering  the  full 
width  of  the  street,  averaged  900  sq.  yds.,  6  ins.  thick,  or  150  cu.  yds. 
with  a  gang  of  40  men.  With  wages  assumed  to  be  15cts.  per  hr.  the 
labor  cost  was : 

Cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

6  men  wheeling  broken  stone 6 

3  men  wheeling  sand    3 

1  man  wheeling  cement   1 

2  men  opening  cement   2 

7  men  dry   mixing    7 

8  men  taking  concrete  off 8 

3  men  tamping 3 

3  men  grading  concrete   3 

1  man  attending  run  planks 1 

3  water    boys    1 

2  extra  men  and  3    foreman 4 

Total    labor    cost 39  cts. 

Case  VI.  The  following  cost  of  a  concrete  base  for  pavements 
at  Toronto  has  been  abstracted  from  a  report  (1892)  of  the  City 
Engineer,  Mr.  Granville  C.  Cunningham.  The  concrete  was 
1:2%:  7%  Portland;  2,430  cu.  yds.  were  laid,  the  thickness  being 
6  ins. ;  at  the  following  cost  per  cu.  yd. : 

0.77  bbl.   cement,   at   $2.78 ^ $2.14 

0.76  cu.   yd.  stone,  at  $1.91 1.45 

0.27  cu.'  yd.  sand  and  gravel,  at  $0.80 0.22 

Labor    (15   cts.   per   hour) 1.03 

Total     $4.84 

Judging  by  the  low  percentage  of  stone  in  so  lean  a  mixture  as 
the  above,  the  concrete  was  not  fully  6  ins.  thick  as  assumed  by 
Mr.  Cunningham.  Note  that  the  labor  cost  was  iy2  to  2  times  what 
it  would  have  been  under  a  good  contractor. 

It  is  also  noteworthy  that  Portland  cement  was  used.  Until  quite 
recently  natural  cement  has  been  used  almost  exclusively  in  pave- 
ment foundations  in  America.  A  natural  cement  concrete  is  usually 
made  1:2:5,  the  cement  being  measured  loose,  so  that  about  1.15 
bbls.  of  cement  are  required  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete.  A  suffi- 
ciently good  Portland  cement  concrete  can  be  made  with  %  bbl. 
cement  per  cubic  yard  ;  and,  if  the  mixing  is  well  done  in  a  me- 
chanical mixer,  it  is  safe  to  make  concrete  for  pavement  founda- 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  433 

tions  6   ins.   thick  using  not  more  than   %   bbl.   of  Portland  cement 
per  cubic  yard. 

Case  VII.  Mr.  Charles  Apple  gives  the  following  data  on  the  cost 
of  a  6-in.  concrete  foundation  for  a  brick  pavement  at  Champaign, 
111.  The  concrete  was  3:3:3,  natural  cement,  mixed  by  hand.  The 
material  was  brought  to  the  .steel  mixing  plate  from  piles  30  to  60  ft. 
away. 

Cost  per  cu.  yd. 

1.2  bbls.  cement,  at  $0.50 $0.600 

0.6  cu.  yd.  sand  and  gravel,  at  $1 0.600 

0.6   cu.  yd.  broken   stone,  at   $1.40 0.840 

6  men  turning  with  shovels,   at   $2 0.080 

4  men  throwing  into  place,  at  $2 0.053 

2  men  handling  cement,   at   $1.75 0.023 

1  man  wetting  with  hose,  at  $1.75 0.012 

2  men  tamping,    at    $1.75 0.023 

1  man  leveling,   at  $1.75 0.012 

6  men  wheeling  stone,  at   $1.75 0.070 

4   men  wheeling  gravel,    at   $1.75 0.047 

1  foreman,    at    $4 0.027 

Total  per  cu.  yd $2.387 

The  cost  of  mixing  and  placing  this  concrete  was  only  35  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.,  a  gang  of  26  men  and  1  foreman  placing  150  cu.  yds.,  or  900 
sq.  yds.,  per  day.  I  do  not  believe  these  figures  of  Mr.  Apple  to  be 
trustworthy,  for  reasons  given  on  page  3  60. 

Cost  of  Machine  Mixing  and  Wagon  Hauling. — Mr.  G.  D.  Fisher. 
Asst.  Engr.,  The  Laclede  Gas  Light  Co.,  St.  Louis,  has  given  the 
following  data  on  the  mixing,  delivering  and  placing  of  Portland 
cement  concrete  for  a  pavement  base  6  ins.  thick. 

The  gravel  was  dumped  from  wagons  into  a  large  hopper,  raised 
by  a  bucket  elevator  into  bins,  and  drawn  off  through  gates  into 
receiving  hoppers  on  the  charging  platform  where  the  cement  was 
added.  The  receiving  hoppers  discharged  into  the  mixers,  which 
discharged  the  mixed  concrete  into  a  loading  car  that  dumped  into 
wagons,  which  delivered  it  on  the  street  where  wanted.  The  long- 
est haul  in  wagons  was  30  mins.,  but  careful  tests  showed  that  the 
concrete  had  hardened  well.  The  wagons  were  patent  dump  wagons 
of  the  drop-bottom  type. 

Mr.  Fisher  says : 

"You  may  consider  the  following  figures  a  fair  average  of  the 
plant  referred  to,  working  to  its  capacity.  To  these  amounts,  how- 
ever, must  be  added  the  interest  on  the  investment,  the  cost  of 
wrecking  the  plant  and  the  depreciation  of  the  same,  superintend- 
ence, and  the  pay  roll  that  must  be  maintained  in  wet  weather.  I 
am  assuming  the  street  as  already  brought  to  grade  and  rolled. 

"With  labor  at  $1.75  per  day  of  10  hrs.,  teams  at  $4,  engineer  and 
foremen  at  $3,  and  engine  at  $5  per  day,  concrete  mixed  and  put  in 
place  by  the  above  method  costs : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

To  mix     $0.12   to   $0.15 

To  deliver  to  street 0.10  to     0.14 

To  spread  and  tamp  in  place 0.08  to     0.11 

Total ^0.30  to   $0.49 


434  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

"The  mixers  are  No.  2%  Smith,  sold  by  the  Contractors'  Supply 
and  Equipment  Co.,  Chicago,  111.,  and  a  %-yd.  Cube,  sold  by  Munici- 
pal Engineering  &  Contracting  Co.,  Chicago. 

"The  Smith  mixer  will  deliver  40  thoroughly  mixed  batches  per 
hour  under  favorable  conditions. 

"The  above  figures  are  on  the  basis  of  a  batch  every  2  minutes, 
which  is  easily  maintained  by  using  the  loading  car,  as  by  this 
means  there  will  be  no  delay  in  the  operation  of  the  plant  owing  to 
the  irregularity  of  the  arrival  of  the  teams. 

"My  experience  leads  me  to  believe  that  a  better  efficiency  can  be 
obtained  by  using  mixers  of  1  cu.  yd.  capacity." 

Cost  of  Mixing  Concrete  for  a  Pavement  Base  Using  a  Contin- 
uous Mixer.* — Of  all  the  concrete  annually  laid  as  the  base  for 
pavements,  only  a  small  percentage  is  mixed  with  mechanical  mix- 
ers. But  this  condition  of  affairs  will  disappear  with  great  rapidity 
as  contractors  learn  what  a  very  large  saving  is  possible  where 
machinery  of  the  proper  type  is  used. 

In  the  work  about  to  be  described  a  Foote  mixer  was  used.  This 
mixer  is  manufactured  by  the  Foote  Mfg.  Co.,  Nunda,  N.  Y.,  and 
sold  by  the  W.  H.  Wilcox  Co.,  Binghamton,  N.  Y.,  and  is  of  the  con- 
tinuous type.  It  is  provided  with  an  automatic  measuring  device, 
by  means  of  which  any  desired  proportion  of  cement,  sand  and  stone 
is  delivered  to  the  mixing  trough.  The  mixer  is  mounted  on  trucks. 
and  the  hoppers  that  receive  the  sand  and  stone  are  comparatively 
low  down.  The  sand  is  wheeled  in  barrows  up  a  run  plank  and 
dumped  into  a  hopper  on  one  side  of  the  mixer,  and  in  like  manner 
the  gravel  or  broken  stone  is  delivered  into  a  hopper  on  the  other 
side.  The  cement  is  delivered  in  bags  or  buckets  to  a  man  who 
dumps  it  into  a  cement  hopper  directly  over  the  mixer. 

As  above  stated,  the  measuring  of  the  materials  is  done  auto- 
matically and  in  a  very  simple  manner  by  the  machine  itself,  so  that 
all  the  operator  needs  attend  to  is  to  see  that  the  men  keep  the  hop- 
pers comparatively  full. 

On  one  job  visited  by  a  member  of  our  editorial  staff,  the  sand 
was  delivered  from  the  stock  pile  by  a  team  hitched  to  a  drag 
scraper,  and  was  dumped  alongside  the  mixer  where  two  men  shov- 
eled it  into  the  hopper.  On  the  same  job  the  concrete  was  hauled 
away  from  the  mixer  in  Brigg's  concrete  carts,  made  by  the  J.  E. 
Briggs  Co.,  of  Waterloo,  la.  The  contractor  was  very  enthusiastic 
about  these  carts.  He  said  that  with  a  gang  of  30  men  and  2  to  4 
horses  hauling  concrete  in  Briggs'  carts,  he  averaged  1,200  sq.  yds. 
or  600  cu.  yds.  per  day  of  10  hrs.  "With  wages  of  laborers  at  15  cts. 
per  hour,  and  a  single  horse  at  the  same  rate,  the  cost  of  labor  was 
26  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  less  than  4%  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  concrete  base 
6  ins.  thick.  The  coal  was  a  nominal  item,  and  did  not  add  1  ct. 
per  cu.  yd.  to  the  cost.  In  this  case  the  mixer  was  set  up  on  a  side 
street,  and  the  concrete  was  hauled  in  the  carts  for  a  distance  of  a 
block  each  way  from  the  mixer.  At  first,  4  carts  were  used,  but  as 

'Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  10,  1906. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  435 

the  concrete  approached  the  mixer,  less  hauling  was  required,  and 
finally  only  2  carts  were  used. 

The  Briggs  cart  is  provided  with  an  ingenious  dumping  device 
that  is  operated  by  the  driver,  who  does  not  leave  the  horse's  head 
to  dump  the  cart.  As  is  customary  with  all  one-horse  carts  on 
short  haul  work,  the  driver  leads  the  horse.  The  cart  dumps  from 
the  bottom  and  spreads  the  load  in  a  layer  about  8  or  9  ins.  thick, 
so  that  no  greater  amount  of  spreading  with  shovels  is  necessary 
than  where  the  concrete  is  delivered  in  wheelbarrows.  Another 
feature  about  the  cart  that  is  worthy  of  mention  is  the  fact  that 
no  appreciable  amount 'of  the  material  leaks  out,  even  when  the  con- 
crete is  mixed  very  wet.  It  takes  about  20  seconds  for  a  cart  to 
back  up  and  get  its  load  and  about  5  seconds  to  dump  and  spread 
the  load. 

On  another  job  where  wheelbarrows  were  used  for  conveying  the 
concrete,  the  gang  was  organized  as  follows: 
8  men  loading  and  wheeling  gravel  in  barrows. 

2  men  assisting  in  loading  gravel  into  barrows. 
1  man  dumping  barrows  into  hopper. 

3  men  loading  and  wheeling  sand. 

1  man  dumping  barrows  into  hopper. 

7  men  wheeling  concrete   in   barrows.     . 
3  men   spreading  concrete. 

2  men  tamping  concrete. 

1  man  opening  cement  and  filling  buckets. 

1  man   pouring  cement   into   hopper. 

1  man  operating  mixer. 

1  man  shoveling  up  concrete  spilled  at  outlet  of  mixer  in  loading 

barrows. 
1  engineman. 

32  Total. 

In  dumping  the  wheelbarrows  into  the  hopper,  one  man  assisted 
the  barrow  men  at  each  of  the  two  side  hoppers.  The  wheelbarrow 
loads  of  concrete  were  very  small,  probably  not  more  than  1  cu.  ft. 
and  were  wheeled  only  a  short  distance  over  the  dirt.  The  mixer 
was  moved  forward  at  frequent  intervals,  the  stock  piles  of  sand  and 
gravel  being  continuous  piles  dumped  in  advance  along  the  street, 
sand  on  one  side,  gravel  on  the  other  side  of  the  street. 

Portland  cement  concrete  was  used  in  the  proportion  of  1:3:6. 

The  average  day's  output  of  this  gang  was  150  cu.  yds.,  or  900 
sq.  yds.,  in  8  hrs.  ;  but  on  the  best  day's  work  the  output  was  200 
cu.  yds.,  or  1,200  sq.  yds.,  in  8  hrs.,  which  is  a  remarkable  record 
for  32  men  and  a  mixer  working  only  8  hrs. 

When  one  remembers  that  an  excellent  day's  work  is  3  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  per  man,  where  no  mixer  is  used,  and  that  2  to  2% 
cu.  yds.  is  a  more  common  record  for  hand  work  on  streets,  we 
realize  that  concrete  mixers  are  bound  to  become  universally  used 
on  street  work  in  the  very  near  future,  for  a  mixer  practically 
doubles  the  output  of  every  man,  if  the  work  is  properly  handled 
with  a  mixer  adapted  to  the  purpose. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Pavement,  Windsor,  Ont.* — Concrete  pavement 


'Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   20,   1907. 


436  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

is  constructed  in  all  essential  respects  like  cement  sidewalk.  The 
subsoil  is  crowned  and  rolled  hard,  then  drains  are  placed  under  the 
curbs ;  if  necessary  to  secure  good  drainage  a  subbase  of  gravel, 
cinders  or  broken  stone  4  to  8  ins.  thick  is  laid  and  compacted  by 
rolling.  The  foundation  being  thus  prepared  a  base  of  concrete 
4  to  5  ins.  thick  is  laid  and  on  this  a  wearing  surface  2  to  3  ins 
thick. 

In  constructing  concrete  pavement  at  Windsor,  Ont.,  the  street  is 
first  excavated  to  the  proper  grade  and  crown  and  rolled  with  a 
15-ton  roller.  Tile  drains  are  then  placed  directly  under  the  curb 
line  and  a  6  x  16-in.  curb  is  constructed,  using  1:2:4  concrete  faced 
with  1 :  2  mortar.  Including  the  3-in.  tile  drain  this  curb  costs  the 
city  by  contract  38  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  The  pavement  is  then  con- 
structed between  finished  curbs. 

The  fine  profile  of  the  subgrade  is  obtained  by  stretching  strings 
from  curb  to  curb,  measuring  down  the  required  depth  and  trim- 
ming off  the  excess  material.  The  concrete  base  is  then  laid  4  ins. 
thick.  A  1:3:7  Portland  cement  concrete  is  used,  the  broken  stone 
ranging  from  %  in.  to  3  ins.  in  size,  and  it  is  well  tamped.  This 
concrete  is  mixed  by  hand  and  as  each  batch  is  placed  the  wear- 
ing surface  is  put  on  and  finished.  The  two  layers  are  placed  within 
10  mins.  of  each  other,  the  purpose  being  to  secure  a  monolithic  or 
one-piece  slab.  The  top  layer  consists  of  2  ins.  of  1:2:4  Portland 
cement  and  screened  gravel,  }£  in.  to  1  in.,  concrete.  This  layer  is 
put  on  rather  wet,  floated  with  a  wooden  float  and  troweled  with  a 
steel  trowel  while  still  wet.  Some  20,500  sq.  yds.  of  this  construc- 
tion have  been  used  and  cost  the  city  by  contract : 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Bottom  4-in.  layer  1:3:7  concrete $0.57 

Top   2-in.   layer   1:2:4   concrete 0.32 


Excavation 


Total     $0.99 

This  construction  was  varied  on  other  streets  for  the  purpose  of 
experiment.  In  one  cafc;e  a  4-in.  base  of  1:3:7  stone  concrete  was 
covered  with  2  ins.  of  1:2:2  gravel  concrete.  In  other  cases  the 
construction  was:  4-in.  base  of  1:3:7  stone  concrete;  1 1/2 -in. 
middle  layer  of  1:2:4  gravel  concrete  and  %-in.  top  layer  of  1 :  2 
sand  mortar.  All  these  constructions  have  been  satisfactory ;  the 
pavement  is  not  slippery.  The  cost  to  the  city  by  contract  for  the 
three-layer  construction  has  in  two  cases  been  as  follows: 

Church   St.,   8,000   sq.  yds.  :  Per  sq.  yd. 

4-in.  base  1:3:7  concrete $0.57 

1%-in.  1:2:4  and  %-in.  1 :  2  mixture 0.32 

Excavation    0.10 

Total ?0.99 

Albert  and  Wyandotte  Sts.,  400  sq.  yds.  :  Per  sq..yd. 

4-in.    base    1:3:7    concrete $0.66 

li/2-in.    1 :2  :4   and    i/2-rn.    l  :2   mixture 0.39 

Excavation    0.10 

Total ?  1 . 1 5 


ROADS,   PArEMENTS,    WALKS.  437 

The  cost  of  materials  and  rates  of  wages  were  about  as  follows : 

Portland  cement  f.  o.  b.  cars  Windsor,  per  bbl $2.05 

River  sand,  excellent  quality,  per  cu.  yd 1.15 

River  gravel,   screened,  per  cu.  yd 1.25 

Crushed  limestone,   ^   to  3  ins.,  per  ton 1.15 

Labor,    per    day fl.75  to  2.00 

At  these  prevailing  prices  the  contractor  got  a  fair  profit  at  the 
contract  price  of  $1.15  ;  at  99  cts.,  any  profit  is  questionable,  ac- 
cording to  City  Engineer  George  S.  Hanes,  who  gives  us  the  above 
records.  Expansion  joints  are  located  from  20  to  80  ft.  apart  and 
are  filled  with  tar.  Mr.  Hanes  writes  that  a  large  amount  of  this 
pavement  will  be  built  during  1908. 

Cost  of  Excavating  Concrete  Base  (Street  Railway)  and  Laying 
New  Concrete.*— In  the  spring  of  1906  the  United  Railways  Com- 
pany, of  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  undertook  the  reconstruction  of  six  miles  of 
its  tracks  on  Olive  St.,  in  St.  Louis.  The  reconstruction  of  these 
tracks  is  described  by  Mr.  Richard  McCulloch  as  follows: 

Excavating  Old  Concrete  Foundation. — In  order  to  build  the  track 
it  was  necessary  to  make  an  excavation  21  ins.  in  depth  in  a  con- 
crete which  had  been  setting  for  18  years,  and  which  experience 
in  whatever  excavations  had  been  made  had  shown  to  be  extremely 
hard.  The  method  adopted  for  excavating  tl\e  concrete  was  by 
blasting  with  small  charges  of  dynamite,  the  object  being  to  make 
these  charges  strong  enough  to  shatter  the  concrete  so  that  it  could 
be  taken  out  in  large  pieces,  but  not  heavy  enough  to  do  other 
damage.  Holes  were  drilled  7  to  8  ins.  deep  in  the  concrete,  10  ins. 
from  the  center  of  each  rail,  and  24  ins.  apart,  four  holes  coming 
between  each  pair  of  yokes.  (The  Olive  St.  line  was  at  one  time 
a  cable  road,  a  double  cable  track  having  been  built  for  a  dis- 
tance of  3%  miles.  In  this  construction  a  girder  rail  was  laid  on 
cast-iron  yokes  weighing  300  Ibs.  each,  set  in  concrete  4  ft.  apart. 
These  yokes  were  48  ins.  in  depth  and  inclosed  a  conduit  for  the 
cable  38  ins.  in  depth.  In  subsequent  reconstructions  when  the  road 
was  converted  into  an  electric  line  these  yokes  were  left  in  place 
and  the  electric  cars  operated  over  the  cable  roadbed  without 
change.)  The  hole  was  so  located  that  the  bottom  of  the  hole  was 
a  little  below  the  center  of  gravity  of  the  section  of  concrete  to  be 
removed. 

For  drilling  the  holes  there  were  used  No.  2  Little  Jap  drills  made 
by  the  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  operated  by  compressed  air  at  90  Ibs. 
pressure.  This  tool  drills  a  1.25-in.  hole.  A  dry  hole  was  drilled, 
the  exhaust  air  from  the  hollow  drill  steel  blowing  the  dust  from 
the  hole  and  keeping  it  clean.  Common  labor  was  used  to  run  the 
drills  and  very  little  mechanical  trouble  was  experienced.  Three 
cars  were  fitted  up,  one  for  each  gang,  each  car  being  equipped  with 
a  motor-driven  air  compressor,  water  for  cooling  the  compressors 
being  obtained  from  the  fire  plugs  along  the  route.  The  air  compres- 
sors were  taken  temporarily  from  those  in  use  in  the  repair  shops, 
no  special  machines  being  bought  for  the  purpose.  Electricity  for 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  5,   1906. 


496  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

operating  the  air  compressor  motors  was  taken  from  the  trolley 
wire  over  the  tracks.  The  car  was  moved  along  as  the  holes  were 
drilled,  air  being  conveyed  from  the  car  to  the  drills  through  a 
flexible  hose.  Two  drills  were  operated  normally  from  each  car. 
One  ol'  the  air  compressors  was  exceptionally  large  and  at  times 
operated  four  drills. 

The  total  number  of  holes  drilled  in  the  reconstruction  of  the  track 
was  31,000.  The  total  feet  of  hole  drilled  was  20,700  ft.  The  fol- 
lowing figures  give  the  average  performance  of  the  best  one  of  the 
drilling  outfits,  which  operated  from  two  to  three  drills : 

Depth   of   hole 8  ins. 

Number  of  holes  per  hour  per  drill 30 

Feet  of  hole  drilled  per  hour  per  drill 20.3 

Labor  cost  per  foot  of  hole  drilled $0.027 

Labor  cost  of  drilling  per  cu.  yd.  blasted $0.085 

Drilling  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  track $0.017 

Drilling  cost  per  mile  of  track $89. 7G 

In  these  figures  there  is  no  charge  for  electric  power  or  for  de- 
preciation of  machinery. 

For  blasting,  a  0.1-lb.  charge  of  40  per  cent  dynamite  was  used  in 
each  hole.  A  fulminating  cap  was  used  to  explode  the  charge,  and  12 
holes  were  shot  at  one  time  by  an  electric  firing  machine.  The 
dynamite  was  furnished  from  the  factory  in  0.1-lb.  packages,  and 
all  the  preparation  necessary  on  the  work  was  to  insert  the  ful- 
minating cap  in  the  dynamite,  tamp  the  charge  into  the  hole  and 
connect  wires  to  the  firing  machine.  In  order  to  prevent  any  dam- 
age being  done  by  flying  rocks  at  the  time  of  the  explosion,  each 
blasting  gang  was  supplied  with  a  cover  car,  which  was  merely 
a  flat  car  with  a  heavy  bottom  and  side  boards.  When  a  charge  was 
to  be  fired,  this  car  was  run  over  the  12  holes  and  the  side  boards  let 
down,  so  that  the  charge  was  entirely  covered.  This  work  was  re- 
markably free  from  accidents.  There  were  no  personal  accident 
claims  whatever,  and  the  total  amount  paid  out  for  property  dam- 
ages for  the  whole  six  miles  of  construction  was  $685.  Most  of  this 
was  for  glass  broken  by  the  shock  of  explosion.  There  was  no  glass 
broken  by  flying  particles.  The  men  doing  this  work,  few  of  whom 
had  ever  done  blasting  before,  soon  became  very  expeditious  in 
handling  the  dynamite,  and  the  work  advanced  rapidly.  The  report 
made  by  the  firing  of  the  12  holes  was  no  greater  than  that  made 
by  giant  firecrackers. 

For  the  drilling  and  blasting  the  old  rail  had  been  left  in  place 
to  carry  the  aim  compressor  car  and  the  cover  car.  After  the 
blasting,  this  rail  was  removed  and  the  concrete  excavated  to  the 
required  depth.  In  most  cases  the  cable  yokes  had  been  broken 
by  the  force  of  the  blast.  Where  these  yokes  had  not  been  broken, 
they  were  knocked  out  by  blows  from  pieces  of  rail.  The  efficacy  of 
the  blasting  depended  largely  upon  the  proper  location  of  the  hole. 
Where  the  holes  had  been  drilled  close  to  the  middle  of  the  concrete 
block,  so  that  the  dynamite  charge  was  exploded  a  little  below  the 
center  of  gravity  of  the  section,  the  concrete  was  well  shattered 
and  could  be  picked  out  in  large  pieces.  Where  the  hole  had  been 
located  too  close  to  either  side  of  the  concrete  block,  however,  the 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS  439 

charge  would  blow  out  at  one  side  and  a  large  mass  of  solid  con- 
crete'would  be  left  intact  on  the  other  side.  The  total  estimated 
quantity  of  concrete  blasted  was  6,558  cu.  yds.,  or  0.2  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  per  lineal  foot  of  track.  The  cost  of  the  dynamite  deliv- 
ered in  0.1-lb.  packages  was  13  cts.  per  Ib.  The  exploders  cost 
$0.0255  each. 

The  following  data  represent  the  average  work  of  the  three  gangs 
working  on  the  westbound  track  between  14th  St.  and  Boyle  Ave. : 

Cost  of  dynamic  charge  per  hole $0.013 

Cost  of  exploder  per  hole $0.0255 

Four  holes  blasted  in  each  4  ft.  of  track : 

Lin.  ft.  of  track  blasted  per  hour 138 

Cu.  yds.  of  concrete  blasted  per  hour 27.6 

Cu  yds.  of  concrete  blasted  per  Ib  of  dynamite ....  2 

Labor  cost  per  cu.  yd.  blasted $0.076 

Cost  dynamite  and  exploders  per  cu.  yd.  blasted...    $0.192 

Cost  labor  and  material  per  cu.  yd.  blasted $0.268 

Cost  blasting  per  lin.  ft.  of  track $0.054 

Cost  blasting  per  mile  of  track $285.12 

Cost  drilling  and  blasting  per  cu.  yd $0.353 

Cost  drilling  and  blasting  per  lin.  ft.  of  track $0.071 

Cost  drilling  and  blasting  per  mile  of  track $374.88 

When  the  excavation  was  completed,  the  ties  were  placed  in  the 
trench,  the  rail  spiked  down,  the  tie  rods  pulled  up  to  gage  and 
temporary  fishplates  put  on  the  joints.  Work  trains  were  then  run 
on  this  track  and  the  excavated  material  hauled  away.  The  exca- 
vated material  in  this  job  amounted  to  11.410  cu.  yds.,  or  0.348  cu. 
yd.  per  lineal  foot  of  track.  The  United  Railways  Company  pur- 
chased a  sink  hole  and  completely  filled  it  with  excavated  material. 
All  excavated  material  and  all  new  material  with  the  exception  of 
the  cement  used  in  this  work  was  handled  on  cars,  no  teams  being 
used  at  all.  It  would  have  been  impossible  to  do  the  work  in  the 
time  occupied  had  wagons  and  teams  been  depended  upon. 

The  ties  were  of  hewn  cypress,  6  ins.  x  8  ins.,  in  sections,  and 
7  ft.  long,  and  were  spaced  2  ft.  between  centers.  Tie  plates  were 
used  under  the  rail,  each  alternate  tie  plate  being  a  brace  plate. 
The  rail  used  weighed  112  Ibs.  per  yard  and  was  furnished  in  60-ft. 
lengths. 

Mixing  and  Placing  New  Concrete. — After  the  excavated  ma- 
terial had  been  hauled  away  and  the  street  cleaned  up,  the  track 
was  lined  and  surfaced  by  means  of  wooden  blocks  and  wedges 
placed  beneath  the  ties.  Concrete  was  then  tamped  beneath  and 
around  the  ties,  the  concrete  being  deposited  in  the  track  from  a 
concrete  mixing  machine  running  on  the  rails.  The  concrete  used 
was  composed  of  a  mixture  by  volume  of  1  part  of  Portland 
cement,  2l/2'  parts  of  river  sand  and  6%  parts  of  crushed  limestone 
n>ck.  The  cost  (delivered)  of  the  materials  composing  this  concrete 
Was  as  follows : 

=  $0.0285    per    cu.    ft. 

=    0.77        per    cu.    yd. 

=    0.025      per    cu.    ft. 

=    0.675      per   cu.    yd. 
Portland  cement   $1.70  per  barrel  =    0.425     per  sack. 

For  the  track  work,  7.36  cu.  ft,  or  0.273  cu.  yd.,  were  required  per 


"Jrushed  rock $2.85  per  square 

Sand    $2.50  per  square 


440  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

lineal  foot  of  track,  l1^  sacks  of  cement  per  lineal  foot  of  track,  or 
1,650  bbls.  of  cement  per  mile  of  track,  were  used  in  this  work. 

The  value  of  the  cement,  rock  and  sand  used  was  $0.108  per  cu.  ft. 
of  concrete,  or  $2.92  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete. 

The  material  for  the  concrete  was  distributed  on  the  street  beside 
the  tracks  in  advance  of  the  machine,  the  sand  being  first  deposited, 
then  the  crushed  rock  piled  on  that,  and  finally  the  cement  sacks 
emptied  on  top  of  this  pile.  The  materials  were  shoveled  from  this 
pile  into  the  concrete  mixing  machine  without  any  attempt  at  hand 
mixing  on  the  street.  Great  care  was  taken  in  the  delivery  of 
materials  on  the  street  to  have  exactly  the  proper  quantity  of  sand, 
rock  and  cement,  so  that  there  would  be  enough  for  the  ballasting 
of  the  track  to  the  proper  height  and  that  none  would  be  left  over. 
Each  car  was  marked  with  its  capacity  in  cubic  feet,  and  each 
receiver  was  furnished  with  a  table  by  which  he  could  easily  esti- 
mate the  number  of  lineal  feet  of  track  over  which  the  load  should 
be  distributed. 

The  concrete  mixing  machines  were  designed  and  built  in  the 
shops  of  the  United  Rys.  Co.  Three  machines  were  used  in  this 
work,  one  for  each  gang.  The  machine  is  composed  of  a  Drake 
continuous  worm  mixer,  fed  by  a  chain  dragging  in  a  cast-iron 
trough.  The  trough  is  36  ft.  long,  so  that  there  is  room  for  fourteen 
men  to  shovel  into  it.  Water  is  sprayed  into  the  worm  after  the 
materials  are  mixed  dry.  This  water  was  obtained  from  the  fire 
plugs  along  the  route.  In  the  first  machine  built,  the  Drake  mixer 
was  8  ft.  long.  In  the  two  newer  machines  the  mixer  was  10  ft. 
long.  Both  the  conveyor  and  the  mixer  Were  motor  driven,  current 
being  obtained  for  this  purpose  from  the  trolley  wire  overhead. 
Two  types  of  machines  were  used,  one  in  which  the  conveyor 
trough  was  straight  and  45  in.  above  the  rail,  and  the  other  in  which 
the  conveyor  trough  was  lowered  back  of  the  mixer,  being  25  in. 
above  the  rail.  The  latter  type  had  the  advantage  of  not  requiring 
such  a  lift  in  shoveling,  but  the  trough  is  so  low  that  a  motor  truck 
cannot  be  placed  underneath  it.  In  the  high  machine  the  mixer  is 
moved  forward  by  a  standard  motor  truck  under  the  conveyor.  In  the 
low  machine  the  mixer  is  moved  by  a  ratchet  and  gear  on  the  truck 
underneath  the  mixer.  A  crew  of  27  men  is  required  to  work  each 
machine,  and  under  average  conditions  concrete  for  80  lin.  ft.  of 
single  track,  amounting  to  22  cu.  yds.,  can  be  discharged  per  hour. 
The  following  figures  give  the  average  performance  of  the  three 
machines  in  concreting  the  westbound  track  from  14th  St.  to  Boyle 
Ave. : 

Number  men  employed  at  machine 

Number   men    shoveling   into    machine 

Lin.  ft.  track  concreted  per  hour 80.95 

Cu.   ft.   concrete  discharged  per  hour .    595.79 

Cu.  yd.  concrete  discharged  per  hour 22.06 

Labor  cost  concrete  per  lin.  ft.  of  track $0.071 

Labor  cost  concrete  per  cu.  yd $0-.26 

Cost    of   materials    composing    concrete    per    lin.    ft. 

of  track    $0.791 

Cost  of  materials  composing  concrete  per  cu.  yd..  .  .      $2.92 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  441 

Total  cost  of  concrete  (labor  and  material)  per 

lin.  ft.  of  track $0.862 

Total  cost  of  concrete  (labor  and  material)  per 

cu.  yd $3.18 

Total  cost  of  concrete  (labor  and  material)  per  mile 

of  single  track $4,551.36 

In  these  figures  there  is  no  charge  for  electric  power  or  for  de- 
preciation. 

The  section  between  14th  St.  and  Boyle  Ave.  (5.51  miles  long) 
was  divided  into  three  sections,  and  three  foremen,  with  independent 
gangs,  were  put  on  each  section.  Work  was  carried  on  day  and 
night.  The  Olive  St.  line  is  a  double-track  road,  and  during  con- 
struction one  track  was  kept  open  for  traffic  in  one  direction.  Cars 
going  in  the  opposite  direction  were  sent  by  another  route. 

The  work  was  begun  April  30,  1906,  and  the  cars  were  turned 
back  on  the  street,  exactly  six  weeks  having  elapsed  since  ground 
was  broken.  Of  this  time  two  weeks  were  allowed  for  the  setting 
of  the  concrete,  so  that  the  entire  work,  with  the  exception  of  pav- 
ing, was  done  in  four  weeks,  an  average  of  1,040  lin.  ft.  of  single 
track  per  day.  The  cost  of  this  5%  miles  of  track  was  about  $170,- 
500.  For  the  entire  work,  after  allowing  for  scrap  material  from  the 
old  track,  the  average  cost  per  mile  was  about  $27,000. 

Cost  of  Excavating  an  Asphalt  Pavement  and  Its  Concrete  Base.* 

— In  relaying  a  street  car  track  it  was  necessary  to  excavate  the 
I  pavement  between  the  rails,  and  for  two  feet  outside  the  rails. 
.The  pavement  was  asphalt  2%  ins.  thick  laid  on  a  concrete  base  9 
I  ins.  thick.  The  concrete  was  made  with  natural  cement  and  was 

consequently  by  no  means  as  difficult  to  excavate  as  it  would  have 

been  if  Portland  cement  had  been  used. 

In  taking  up  the  asphalt  between  the  tracks  it  was  found  that 

the  progress  depended  very  much  upon  the  temperature  of  the  day. 

On  cool  days  when  the  asphalt  was  brittle  and  the  men  worked 
i  rapidly,  it  was  possible  for  three  men  to  excavate  4,800  sq.  ft.  be- 
,  tween  the  tracks  in  10  hours.  This  is  equivalent  to  nearly  180  sq. 
j  yds.  per  man  per  day.  Of  course,  it  was  not  necessary  to  cut  the 

isphalt  loose  from  the  rails  on  each  side,  so  the  work  consisted 
•  nerely  in  prying  up  the  asphalt  with  crow  bars  and  breaking  it 

vith  a  sledge.     Two  men  pried  the  asphalt  up,  while  a  third  man 

i  ised  the  sledge,  and  cast  the  pieces  aside  ready  to  be  hauled  away. 
During  most  of  the   time,  however,   the  asphalt  was  hot  enough 

luot  to  be  brittle,  and  had  to   be  cut  up  with  a  grub  ax.      In  that 

i  ase  two  men  would  pry  up  the  asphalt,  using  picks,  while  the  third 

I  nan  would  cut  off  a  strip  iy2  ft.  wide  and  as  long  as  the  distance 
etween  the  tracks.  Then  he  would  cut  this  strip  in  two  pieces  with 
lie  grub  ax.  In  the  meantime  the  two  men  with, the  picks  would 

|  e  prying  up  some  more  of  the  asphalt.     These  three  men  worked 

t  ery    deliberately   and    averaged    1,700    sq.    ft.    per   day.        This      is 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.    19,   1906. 


I  .*,, 


442  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

equivalent  to  63  sq.  yds.,  or  4*4  cu.  yds.  per  man  per  day.  Wages 
were  $1.75,  hence  the  cost  of  excavating  the  asphalt  was  2%  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.,  or  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  This  does  not  include  the  cost 
of  loading  and  hauling  it  away. 

In  excavating  the  strip  1  ft.  wide  outside  the  rails,  it  was,  of 
course,  necessary  to  cut  through  the  asphalt  along  a  line  parallel 
with  the  rail  and  1  ft.  away.  To  do  this  cutting  a  chisel  having  a 
bit  3  ins.  wide  and  provided  with  a  handle,  was  held  by  one  man 
while  a  second  man  struck  it  with  a  sledge.  These  two  men,  when 
working  rapidly,  would  cut  1,200  lin.  ft.  in  10  hours;  hence  one  man 
cut  600  lin.  ft.,  thus  loosening  600  sq.  ft.  of  asphalt  ready  to  be 
pried  up.  A  third  man  would  pry  up  the  asphalt  with  a  pick  and 
cut  it  off  in  sections,  and  he  averaged  600  sq.  ft.  a  day,  working 
very  deliberately.  Hence  the  average  output  of  each  of  the  three 
men  was  300  sq.  ft.,  or  33  sq.  yds.,  per  man  per  day,  cut  out,  pried 
up,  and  cast  aside.  This  is  equivalent  to  a  little  more  than  2% 
cu.  yds.  per  man  per  day,  and  the  cost  was  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or 
5%  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

As  above  stated,  the  concrete  was  9  ins.  thick  and  was  made  with 
natural  cement.     It  was  loosened  with  picks,  usually  without  great 
difficulty,  and  was  shoveled  aside  ready  to  be  hauled  away.    Each 
laborer  averaged  3  cu.  yds.,  or  12  sq.  yds.  per  day.     Hence  the 
was  practically  60  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  15  cts.  per  sq.  yd.     To  thi 
should  be  added  the  cost  of  loading  into  wagons,  which  was  16  cts 
per  cu.  yd.,  or  4  cts.  per  sq.  yd.    The  cost  of  hauling  depends  upoi 
distance  to  be  hauled,  and  can  be  easily  estimated  for  any  giv« 
conditions. 

Amount  of  Materials  Required  for  Cement  Sidewalk  Construction. 
—  The  great  majority  of  cement  sidewalks  come  within  the  rani 
of  3  ins.  to  7  ins.  in  thickness ;  the  most  common  base  mixtures 
1:2:5  and  1  :  3  :  6  and  the  most  common  finishing  mixtures  ai 
1:1,  1:1%  and  1  :  2.  The  accompanying  tables  have  been  cc 
puted  to  give  by  simple  arithmetic,  the  volume  of  concrete,  and  tl 
quantities  of  cement,  sand  and  stone  required  per  100  sq.  ft.  of  sid< 
walk,  ranging  from  3  ins.  to  7  ins.  thick  and  constructed  of  tl 
above  named  mixtures.  Table  XVII  gives  separately  the  volui 
of  base  concrete  and  of  surfacing  mortar  in  100  sq.  ft.  of  walk 
the  different  thicknesses ;  Table  XVIII  gives  for  each  of  the  thic 
nesses  and  mixtures  named  the  amount  of  cement,  sand  and  stor 
required  per  100  sq.  ft. 

The  tables  have  been,  calculated  on  the  assumption  that — tl 
cement  being  measured  loose  as  is  usual  in  sidewalk  work — a  bar 
rel  of  cement  measures  4.4  cu.  ft.  For  finishing  mortar  the  voi< 
in  the  sand  amount  to  45  per  cent;  for  base  concrete  the  voids  ar 
assumed  to  be  40  per  cent  for  sand  and  45  per  cent  for  broken  stc 
On  these  assumptions  according  to  the  theory  of  proportioning  ar 
the  tables  of  mortar  given  in  the  section  on  Concrete,  tl 

•Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  4,  1908,  and  Jan.  13,  1909. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


443 


1 

02 

p 

H 

ci 

I 

72* 

-3 
3* 

OS 

ro 
d 

d 
O 
(M 

d 

t- 

d 

t^ 
d 

oo 

•»»• 
d 

00    LO 
•rf    LO 

d  d 

fe 

H 

*  • 

O 

O 

£ 

ONCRE 

7 

6 

w 

3 

d 

t~- 

«o 
d 

0 
OS 

d 

rH 

CO 

T-i 

t-    OS 

10  t- 

rH    rH 

<2 

O 

M 

72 

L- 

00 

co  •"*• 

r^ 

i 

T3 

7 

C-l 

00 

O 

j^. 

CO    OS 

0 

o 

i 

c 

r*> 

rH 

C\J 

CO 

CO 

•^    ^ 

o 

rH 

^ 

ci 

in 

3 

d 

d 

0 

0 

0 

0    0 

5 

T-H 

O 

m 

O 

B 

0 

7 

i 

3 

(M 

1C 

t- 

00 
0 

Ci 

eg 

1C 

oo  o 

| 

0 

i 

o 

d 

d 

rH 

T-H 

r1 

rH    C* 

B 

g 

r-T 

CO 

CO 

Ci 

US 

CI 

00 

10    iH 

O^ 

p  j 

? 

OS 

CO 

00 

CO 

t~ 

CM    I— 

• 

i 

P^ 

o 

e-i 

co  co 

tf 

f-1 

^ 

0 

0 

o 

o 

O 

0    0 

§ 

H 

rH 

° 

H 

1 

I 

0) 

2 

H 

rH 

e-i 

LC 

co 

00 

co  co 
o  co 

02 

fa 

0 

d 

d 

rH 

rH 

^H 

eg  eg 

fi 

j 

H 

M 

73 

7} 

.  »i 

O 

0 

2 

.S 

> 

K^ 

^^ 

rH 

^-' 

^ 

03 

fe 

c 

m 

^ 

y' 

o 

W 

72 

I 

s 

00 
CO 

•M 

OO 

U5 

as 

0 

N 

co  co 

<J 

S 

1 

3 
O 

o 

0 

0 

rH 

^ 

rH   rH 

o 

I 

£ 
O 

CO 

i 

& 

72 

3 

CO 

d 

rH 
0 

t- 

d 

LC 

LC 

d 

d 

oo  eg 

CO    00 

d  d 

fa 

1" 

E^ 

ej 

H 

8 

i 

^ 

ls.bbls. 

o: 
d 

d 

i- 

jr. 
d 

e-i 

C-l 

05    00 
CO    10 

fc 
o 

Q 

. 

1 

0 

•w 

CO 

i- 

oo 

oo 

•M 

o 

CO 

CO 

t—  oo 

<n 

J 

1 

10 

M 

0 

0 

o 

B 

^* 

**« 

J 

to 

t3 

r~ 

Ci 

1C 

t- 

CO 

& 

w 

r*" 

<M 

^t1 

ir: 

LO    t- 

H 

•? 

fa 

^ 

d 

3 

o 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0   0 

4 

M 

0 

| 

^ 

02 

-^ 

7} 

Ci 

oo 

1C 

CO 

T-H 

OS    t>- 

O 

aj 

H 

i 

3 

oo 

0 

0! 

CO 

t-    rH 

g 

fa 

i 

0 

,0 

0 

i 

J 

2 

X 

1" 

4)" 

c 

o 

7J 

'a 

1C 

oo 

Ci 

o 

t- 

CO    LO 

0 

p 

M 

3 

0 

0 

0 

T-H 

T_ 

rH    rH 

H 

<! 

w 

4 

02 

0 

• 

« 
^ 

" 

. 

to 

eg 

OS 

1C 

e-i 

00 

1C    00 

| 

0, 

H 

'O 

^ 

CO 

CO 

•*t* 

LC 

H 

£ 

rH 

^ 

^? 

o 

o 

0 

0 

0 

0    0 

£ 

72 

| 

02 

3 

0 

^ 

^d 

5 

* 

. 

0 

0 

o 

,_ 

0 

eg  10 

tj 

,_J 

CM 

P 

EQ 

0 

CM 

f 

CO 

OO 

0   •* 

9 

«! 

0 

, 

3 

^! 
J2 

rH 

rH 

7-1 

^ 

T-H 

eg  M 

i 

*s 

yf 

. 

-•( 

,  ^ 

^^ 

« 

EH 

p 

<c 

c 

C 

C-T 

CO 

c-t 

f 

•*> 

to  co 

444  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

amount  of  materials  per  cubic  yard  of  mortar  and  of  concrete  are 
as  follows: 

Mortar  proportions:  1:1         1:1%        1:2 

Barrels    of   cement 3.94          3.34          2.90 

Cubic  yards  of  sand 0.6  0.8  0.9 

Concrete  proportions:  1:2:5  1:3:6 

Barrels    cement 1.16  0.90 

Cubic  yards  sand   0.38  0.44 

Cubic  yards  stone 0.95  0.88 

Table  XVIII  has  been  computed   from  the   above  quantities  and 
those   given   in   Table  XVII;    thus  for   a   3-in.    base    (Table  XVII) 
0.93  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  is  required  per  100  sq.  ft.  ;  if  the  base  be  a 
1:2:5  mixture,   then   the 
Cement  =  0.93  cu.  yd.  X  1.16  bbl.  =  1.08  bbl. 
Sand=  0.93  cu.  yd.  X  0.38  cu.  yd.  =  0.35  cu.  yd. 
Stone  =  0.93  cu.  yd.  X  0.95  cu  yd.  =  0.88  cu.  yd. 

The  final  results  are  the  quantities  given  in  Table  XVIII,  and  the 
other  quantities  given  in  this  table  are  obtained  in  a  similar  manner. 

TABLE  XVII. — SHOWING   VOLUME  OF  CONCRETE  BASE  AND   MORTAR 
WEARING  SURFACE  PER  100  SQ.   FT.  OF  CEMENT   WALK 

OF  VARIOUS  THICKNESSES. 

— Concrete  Base. —  — Mortar  Wearing  Surface. — 

Thickness,  Volume,  Thickness,  Volume, 

ins.  cu.  yds.  ins.  cu.  yds. 

2y2  0.77  1/2  0.155 

3  0.93  %  0.232 
3V2                           1.08                               1  0.309 

4  1.24  1%  0.386 
41/2                         1.39                              11/2  0.464 

5  1.55  1%  0.541 

6  1.87  2  0.618 
Note. — 100  sq.  ft.  of  walk  1  in.  thick  has  a  volume  of  0.309  cu.  yd. 

To  get  the  volume  in  a  walk  of  any  thickness,  multiply  0.309  by  the 
thickness  of  the  walk  in  inches,  e.  g.,  0.309  cu.  yd.  X  6  ins.  =  1.87 
cu.  yd. 

Table  XVIIT  is  used  in  estimating  as  follows: 

Problem :  Find  the  amount  of  cement,  sand  and  stone  required 
for  1,000  ft.  of  sidewalk,  5  ft.  wide;  base  4  ins.  thick  of  1  :  2  :  5 
concrete  ;  wearing  surface  1  in.  thick  of  1  :  1 1/2  mortar. 

From  Table  XVIII  we  have: 

Cement.  Sand.          Stone. 

Per   100  sq.  ft.  bbls.  cu.  yds.      cu.  yds. 

Base,    4    ins 1.43  0.47  1.18 

Wearing  surface  1  in 1.03  0.247  

Total  per  100  sq.  ft. ..  2.46  0.717  1.18 

50*  50  50 

Total  per  5,000  sq.  ft 123.00  35.850          59.00 

*1,000  X  5  =  5,000  -h  100  =  50. 

Cost  of  Cement  Walks. — The  cost  of  cement  walks  is  commonly 
estimated  in  cents  per  square  foot,  including  the  necessary  excava- 
tion and  the  cinder  or  gravel  foundation.  The  excavation  usually 
costs  about  13  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  if  the  earth  is  loaded  into 
wagons  the  loading  costs  another  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages  being 
15  cts.  per  hr.  The  cost  of  carting  depends  upon  the  length  of  haul, 
and  may  be  estimated  from  data  given  on  page  121.  If  the  total 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  445 

cost  of  excavation  is  27  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  if  the  excavation  is  12 
ins.  deep  we  have  a  cost  of  1  ct.  per  sq.  ft.  for  excavation  alone. 
Usually  the  excavation  is  not  so  deep,  and  often  the  earth  from 
the  excavation  can  be  sold  for  filling  lots. 

The  base  of  the  walk  is  often  made  3  ins.  thick,  of  1  :  3  :  6  con- 
crete, and  the  top  wearing  coat  is  often  made  1  in.  thick  of  1  :  IJfc 
mortar.  The  cement  is  invariably  Portland. 

Such  a  walk  is  frequently  laid  on  a  foundation  of  gravel  or  cin- 
ders 4  ins.  thick. 

And  by  using  the  table  on  page  443,  we  can  estimate  the  quan- 
tity of  cement  required  for  any  given  mixture. 

As  the  average  of  a  number  of  small  jobs,  my  records  show  the 
following  costs  per  sq.  ft.  of  4-in.  walk  such  as  just  described  : 

Cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Excavating  8  ins.  deep 0.65 

Gravel  for  4-in.  foundation,  at  $1.00  per  cu.   yd ..1.20 

0.018  bbl.  cement,  at  $2.00 3.60 

0.009   cu.   yd.   broken   stone,   at    $1.50 1.35 

0.006  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $1.00 .0.60 

Labor  making  walk 1.60 

Total    9.00 

This  is  9  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  finished  walk.     The  gangs  that  built 
the  walk  were  usually  2  masons  at  $2.50  each  per  10-hr,  day  with  2 
I  laborers  at  $1.50  each.     Such  a  gang  averaged  500  sq.  ft.  of  walk 
|  per  day. 

Cost  of  Cement  Walk.*— The  following  notes,  based  on  actual  ex- 

ij  perience,  relative  to  the  cost  of  a  walk,  are  taken  from  a  pamphlet 

'  prepared   by  Mr.    C.    W.    Boynton   and   published   by    the  Universal 

Portland  Cement  Co.     Experience  has  shown  that  a  gang  of  six  men 

can  lay  between  600  and  800  sq.  ft.  of  walk  in  a  day  of  10  hrs.  and 

700  sq.  ft.  is  considered  as  a  day's  work  in  arriving  at  the  figures 

(given  below.     This  estimate  is  based  on  a  6-ft.  walk  having  a  4-in. 

base,  consisting  of  1  part  cement,  2  %  parts  sand  and  5  parts  crushed 

I  stone,  covered  with  a  %-in.  top  of  1  part  cement  and  iy2  parts  sand. 

i  The  stone  ranged  in   size  from    ^4 -in.   to    %-in.   and  contained   48% 

voids.     A  good  grade  of  lake  sand  passing  a  ^4 -in.  screen  was  used. 

The  sand  contained  36%  voids.     The  mixing  was  done  by  hand,  and 

;he  cost  of  materials  includes  delivery  on  the  work.     The  costs  were 

is  follows: 

Labor: 

One  finisher  at  $5  per  day $   5.00 

Five  laborers  at  $2  per  day 10.00 


Total,  700  sq.  ft.  at  2.14  cts $15.00 

Materials: 

Cement,   2.5  bbls.  at  $2.00 $  5.00 

Stone,   1.11  cu.  yds.  at  $1.50 1.66 

Sand,   .77   cu.  yds.  at   $1.00 77 

Cinders,    2.7    cu.    yds.    at    50c 1.35 


Total  cost  materials  for   100    sq.   ft.   at   8.78 

cts $   8.78 

Total  labor  and  materials,  per  sq.  ft,  10.92  cts. 

1  *  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  26,  1908. 


440  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

It  should  be  noted  that  this  estimate  provides  for  a  walk  where 
an  excavation  for  the  sub-base  was  necessary. 

Cost  of  Cement  Walks  in  Iowa. — Mr.  L.  L.  Bingham  sent  out 
letters  to  a  large  number  of  sidewalk  contractors  in  Iowa  asking  for 
data  of  co;st.  The  following  was  the  average  cost  per  square  foot  as 
given  in  the  replies : 

Cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Cement,  at  $2  per  bbl 3.6 

Sand  and  gravel    1.5 

Labor,  at  $2.30  per  day   (average) 2.2 

Incidentals,   estimated    0.7 

Total  per  sq.  ft 8.0 

This  applies  to  a  walk  4  ins.  thick,  and  Includes  grading  in  some 
cases,  while  in  other  cases  it  does  not.  Mr.  Bingham  writes  me  that 
in  this  respect  the  replies  were  unsatisfactory.  He  also  says  that  the 
average  wages  paid  were  $2.30  per  man  per  day.  It  will  be  noted 
that  a  barrel  of  cement  makes  55%  sq.  ft.  of  walk,  or  it  takes  1.8 
bbls.  per  100  sq.  ft. 

The  average  contract  price  for  a  4-in.  walk  was  11%  cts.  per 
«q.  ft. 

Cost  of  Cement  Walk,  San  Francisco.— Mr.  George  P.  Wetmore, 
of  the  contracting  firm  of  Gushing  &  Wetmore,  San  Francisco,  gives 
the  following: 

The  foundations  of  cement  walks  in  the  residence  district  of  San 
Francisco  are  2  %  ins.  thick,  made  of  1:2:6  concrete,  the  stone 
not  exceeding  1  in.  in  size.  The  wearing  coat  is  %  in.  thick,  made 
of  1  part  cement  to  1  part  screened  beach  gravel.  The  cement  is 
measured  loose,  4.7  cu.  ft.  per  bbl.  The  foundation  is  usually  laid  in 
sections  10  ft.  long;  the  width  of  sidewalks  is  usually  15  ft.  The 
top  coat  is  placed  immediately,  leveled  with  a  straight  edge  and 
gone  over  with  trowels  till  fairly  smooth.  After  the  initial  set  and 
first  troweling,  it  is  left  until  quite  stiff,  when  it  is  troweled  again 
and  polished — a  process  called  "hard  finishing."  The  hard  finish 
makes  the  surface  less  slippery.  The  surface  is  then  covered  with 
sand,  and  watered  each  day  for  8  or  10  days.  The  contract  price 
Is  9  to  10  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  for  a  3 -in.  walk ;  12  to  14  cts.  for  a  4-in. 
walk  having  a  wearing  coat  %  to  1  in.  thick.  A  gang  of  3  or  4  men 
averages  150  to  175  sq.  ft.  per  man  per  day  of  9  hrs.  Prices  and 
wages  are  as  follows: 

Cement,  per  bbl $2.50 

Crushed  rock,  per  cu.  yd 1.75 

Gravel  and  sand  for  foundation,  per  cu.  yd 1.40 

Gravel  for  top  finish,  per  cu.  yd 1.75 

Finisher  wages,  best,  per  hr 0.40 

Finisher  helper,   best,  per  hr 0.25 

Laborer,   best,   per   hr. 0.20 

Cost  of  Cement  Sidewalks,  Toronto,  Ont.* — A  considerable  part  of 
the  public  improvement  work  of  Toronto,  Ont.,  is  done  by  day  labor 
under  the  supervision  of  the  city  engineer.  In  the  following  article 
is  given  the  actual  unit  costs  of  the  construction  of  4% -in.  con- 
crete sidewalks,  4  ft.  and  6  ft.  wide,  built  by  day  labor. 


Engineering-Contracting.   Aug.    29.    1906. 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  447 

The  sidewalks  have  a  4 -in.  foundation  of  coarse  gravel  or  soft  coal 
cinders,  thoroughly  consolidated  by  pounding  or  rolling,  upon  which 
is  placed  a  3*4  -in.  layer  of  concrete,  composed  of  1  part  Portland 
cement,  2  parts  of  clean,  sharp,  coarse  sand,  and  5  parts  of  approved 
furnace  slag,  broken  stone  or  screened  gravel.  The  wearing  surface 
is  1  in.  thick  and  is  composed  of  1  part  Portland  cement,  1  part  of 
clean,  sharp,  coarse  sand  and  3  parts  of  screened  pea  gravel,  crushed 
granite,  quartzite  or  suitable  hard  limestone. 

COST    OF    6 -FT.    SIDEWALK. 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Labor    5.59  cts. 

0.016  bbls.  cement,  at  $1.54 2.49  cts. 

0.027  cu.  yds.  gravel,  at  $0.80 2.21  cts. 

0.0046  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $0.80 .' 0.37  cts. 

Water    .    0.05  cts. 


Total    10.71  cts. 

COST  OF  4 -FT  SIDEWALK. 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Labor    6.73  cts. 

0.0204  bbls.  cement,  at  $1.54 3.15  cts. 

0.0206  cu.  yds.  gravel,  at  $0.80 1.65  cts. 

0.0049  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $0.80 0.39  cts. 

Water    .   0.07  cts. 


Total 11.93  cts. 

The  rates  of  wages  and  the  number  of  men  employed  were  as 
follows : 

1    foreman   $3.50  per  day. 

1  finisher 0.30  per  hour. 

I  helper    0.22  per  hour. 

15  laborers    0.20  per  hour. 

We  are  indebted  to  Mr.  C.  H.  Rust,  City  Engineer  of  Toronto,  Out., 
for  the  above  information. 

Note  how  these  labor  costs  are  double  what  it  costs  a  capable  COP 
tractor  to  do  the  same  class  of  work. 

Cost  of  a  Cement  Walk,  Forbes  Hill  Reservoir.— Mr.  C.  M.  Savill* 
M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  gives  the  following  data  relating  to  6,250  sq.  ft, 
of  cement  walk  built  by  contract : 

Per  Per 

Stone  foundation                                     cu.  yd.  sq.  ft. 

Broken  stone  for  12-in.  foundation $0.40  $0.015 

Labor  placing  same,  15  cts.  per  hr 1.50  0.056 

Total $1.90  To. 071 

Concrete  base   (4V2   ins.  thick). 

1.22   bbls.  cement  per  cu.  yd.,  at  $1.53..  $1.87  $0.026 

0.50  cu.  yd.   sand  per  cu.   yd.,  at  $1.02..  0.51  0.007 

0.84  cu.  yd.  stone  per  cu.  yd.,  at  $1.57..  1.32  0.019 

Labor  (6  laborers  and  1  team) 3.48  0.050 

Total   (for  90  cu.  yds.) $7.18  $0.102 

Top  finish   (1  in.  thick). 

4  bbls.  per  cu.  yd.,  at  $1.53 $6.12  $0.019 

0.8  cu.   yd.  sand,  at  $1.00 0.80  0.002 

Lampblack   0.29  0.001 

Labor   (2  walk  masons  and  1  helper)...  6.36  0.016 

Total    ..$13.57      $0.038 

Grand   total    .  .  .$0.211 


448  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

This  walk  was  6  ft.   wide  laid  on  a   12-in.  foundation   of  broken 
stone.     On  top  of  this  foundation  was  the  concrete  base,  5  ins.  thick 
in  the  middle  and  4  ins.  thick  at  the  sides.     This  base  was  surfaced 
with  a  top  granolithic  finish  about  1  in.  thick. 

It  is  difficult  to  account  for  the  high  labor  cost  ($1.50)  of  placing 
the  12-in.  stone  foundation  except  on  the  supposition  that  the  stones 
were  broken  by  hand. 

The  work  on  the  concrete  base  was  unusually  expensive,  for  no 
apparent  reason  except  inefficiency  of  the  men. 

The  two  masons  received   $2.25   each   per  day,    and   their  helper 
$1.50,  and  they  averaged  360  sq.  ft.  per  day,  or  60  lin.  ft.  of  walk 
6  ft.  wide,  which  is  equivalent  to  1%  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Atlas  cement  was  used,  and  in  measuring  was  assumed  to  be  3.7 
cu.  ft.  per  bbl. 

It    is   perhaps    useless    to    comment    on    the    extravagantly    large 
amount  of  stone  used  in  the  foundation. 

Cost  of  Acid  Finish  on  Cement  Walk.*—  In  making  86,650  sq.  ft. 
of  cement  walks  (25  ft.  wide),  the  South  Park  Commission  of  Chi- 
cago did  the  work  by  day  labor  (in  1908)  at  the  following  cost: 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Cts. 
Cement,  at  $1.35  per  bbl  ................  '  ........    3.46 

Sand  and  broken  stone  .........................    4.70 

Forms   ........................................    0.39 

Labor    ........................................    3.70 

Superintendence  and  tools   (10%  of  above)  ......      1.22 

Total    .....................................  13.47 

Grading  and  filling  with  cinders  .................    4.73 

Finishing  surface  with  acid  .....................    1.67 

Grand  total  ...............................  20.17 

The  cement  walk  was  5  ins.  thick  (a  4-in.  base  of  1:2:4  concrete 
and  a  1-in.  surface  of  1  :  2  Ms),  resting  on  12  ins.  of  cinders.     In  spite 
of  the  fact  that  a  machine  mixer  was  used,   the  labor  and  super- 
intendence on  the  cement  work  cost  the  very  high  sum  of  4.92  cts. 
per  sq.  ft.,  which  did  not  include  the  labor  on  the  acid  finish   nor  on 
the  grading  and  cinders.     This  furnishes  another  example  of  an  ill- 
advised  attempt  to  "save  the  contractor's  profits." 

The  cost  of  finishing  29,395  sq.  ft.  of  the  surface  by  acid  was  as 
follows  : 

Per  sq.  ft. 
Total.  Cts. 

10,800  Ibs.    (60  carboys)   muriatic  acid, 

at  1%   cts  .........................  $135.00          0.46 

36  deck  brushes,  at  50  cts  .............      18.00         0.06 

Labor     ..............................    290.00          1.00 

Add  10%  for  superintendence  ..........      44.00         0.15 


Total  ...........................  ssroo          67 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  9,  1908. 


ROADS,   PAr EVENTS,    WALKS.  449 

Cost    of    Cement    Curb    and    Sidewalks,    Gary,    Ind.* — Mr.    E.    M. 

Scheflow  gives  the  following: 

The  improvement  of  Madison  St.  at  Gary,  Ind.,  from  the  south  line 
of  the  Wabash  R.  R.  to  the  north  line  of  the  Pittsburg,  Ft.  Wayne 
&  Chicago  R.  R.,  a  distance  of  3,800  ft.,  has  been  recently  com- 
pleted. The  improvement  consisted  of  brick  pavement  (see  page 
364  for  cost),  concrete  curbs  5  ins.  x  18  ins.,  with  5  ft.  radii  at 
street  intersections  and  cement  sidewalk  5%  ft.  wide.  The  grading 
was  all  done  during  the  winter  while  the  ground  was  frozen  and  all 
the  material  was  hauled  at  that  time.  These  costs  do  not  include 
grading. 

Cost  of  Placing  Curb. — The  mixture  for  curbs  was  1:3:5  Port- 
land cement,  torpedo  sand  and  broken  limestone,  with  a  facing  1% 
ins.  thick  composed  of  1 :  1 :  S  of  Portland  cement,  sand  and  granu- 
lated granite.  The  concrete  was  mixed  dry  by  hand  and  then  mixed 
wet  in  a  worm  screw  mixer  operated  by  a  gasoline  engine.  Wooden 
forms  were  used. 

The  labor  cost  was  as  follows : 

Total.         Per  lin.  ft. 

Laborers,  mixing,  128  days,  at  $2.00 $256.00          $0.0351 

Laborers,  wheeling  and  tamping,  127  days,  at  $2   254.00  0.0348 

Finishers,   51   days,  at   $5.50 280.50  0.0383 

Form  setters,   80  days,   at   $3 240.00  0.0330 


Total,  7,268  lin.  ft $1,030.50          $0.1412 

Labor  Cost  of  Laying  Sidewalks. — The  sidewalk  was  laid  with  a 
concrete  foundation  3%  ins.  thick  of  the  same  proportions  as  that 
given  for  curbs  and  a  wearing  surface  %  in.  thick  composed  of  five 
parts  of  Portland  cement  to  seven  parts  of  sand.  The  labor  cost  was 
as  follows,  the  same  method  of  mixing  the  concrete  being  used  as  for 
curbs : 

Total.       Per  sq.  ft. 

Laborers,  mixing,  117  days,  at  $2 ( $234.00          $0.0060 

Laborers,  wheeling,  spreading  and  tamping,  142 

days,  at  $2 284.00 

Finishers,  47  days,   at  $5.50 v^fc.  ...'...    258.50 

Form  setters,  37  days,  at  $3 111.00 

Total,   38,930  sq.  ft...  $887.50          $0.022! 

Cost  of  Cement  Curb,  lowa.t — Data  were  given  by  Mr.  M.  G.  Hall, 
in  "Engineering  News,"  April  2,  1908,  relating  to  cement  curb  work. 
We  have  rearranged  and  analyzed  the  costs  as  follows.  (For  com- 
ments on  the  brick  paving  laid  at  the  same  time  and  place,  see 
page  361.) 

The  cement  curb  material  was  mixed,  1  of  cement  to  3  of  sand,  in 
a  %-cu.  yd.  Smith  mixer.  The  average  cost  of  the  three  jobs,  A,  B 
and  C,  reduced  to  the  same  rates  of  wages,  is  given  below.  Job  A 
was  2,000  lin.  ft.;  B  was  10,000  lin.  ft;  C  was  20,000  lin.  ft.  The 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   14,   1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  June  2?.,   1909. 


450 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


cu$b  measured  5x18  ins.  and  was  backed  with  cinders  as  shown  in 
Fig.  13.     The  following  costs  are  in  cents  per  lin.  ft.  : 


Trenchmen,  20c  per  hr 3.44 

Form  setters,,  35c  per  hr 2.74 

Filling  cinders,   20c  per  hr 0.47 

Wheelers,  20c  per  hr 0.58 

Shovelers  (concrete),  20c  per  hr 

Tampers,  20c  per  hr 0.24 

Finishers,  35c  per  hr 0.42 

Men  on  mixer,  22c  per  hr 0.99 

Removing  forms,   20c  per  hr 0.48 

Backfilling,    20c   per   hr 0.78 

Miscellaneous,    20c   per   hr 0.72 

Water  boy,  lOc  per  hr 0.33 

Team  and  driver,  40c  per  hr 3.86 

Concrete  wagon,  40c  per  hr , 

Foreman,  35c  per  hr 2.28 

Total  labor 17.33 

Cement,  at  $1.40  bbl 7.65 

Sand,  at  $1.05  ton 3.45 

Cinders     2.00 

Total  materials 13.10 

Grand    total    .  .30.43 


— Job- 
B 

3.50 
4.03 
0.62 
0.68 

0.37 
0.70 
1.34 
0.24 
0.64 
1.00 
0.31 
3.71 

i'.so 

18.62 
7.76 
3.51 
2.00 

13.28 
31.89 


Since  it  takes  43  lin.  ft.  of  5  x  18-in.  curb  to  make  1  cu.  yd.,  the 
above  items  must  be  multiplied  by  43  to  reduce  to  a  cubic  yard 
.basis.  Omitting  the  items  of  trenching,  backfilling  and  handling 


.   13.     Cement    Curb. 


cinders,  we  see  that  the  labor  on  Job  C  cost  7.4  cts.  per  lin.  ft., 
which  is  equivalent  to  $3.18  per  cu.  yd.  Of  cement  curb.  The  other 
two  jobs  were  considerably  more  expensive,  particularly  in  the  items 
trenching  and  teaming. 

None  of  the  three  was  economically  handled,  as  may  be  seen  by 
comparison  with  the  costs  given  on  page  451,  where  the  labor  cost 
about  half  as  much  per  cubic  yard  as  on  Job  C,  and  far  less  than 
half  as  much  as  on  Jobs  A  and  B. 

I  would  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  curbs  often  differ  consider- 
ably in  cross-section,  and  the  labor  of  mixing  and  placing  the  con- 
crete therefore  differs  materially  when  compared  in  terms  of  the 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS. 


451 


lineal  foot  as  the  unit.  Hence  all  costs  should  also  be  reduced  to 
the  cubic  yard  basis  also.  When  this  is  done,  a  contractor  will  fre- 
quently find  that  his  work  is  not  being  handled  with  the  expedition 
that  it  should  be  ;  for  comparison  with  the  cubic  yard  cost  of  other 
jobs  of  similar  character  may  disclose  to  the  contractor  a  weakness 
of  management  or  laziness  of  men  on  his  own  job.  This  is  well 
exemplified  in  the  above  costs  recorded  by  Mr.  Hall. 

Cost  of  Cement  Curb.* — The  concrete  curb  shown  in  Fig.  14  was 
built  at  an  average  labor  cost  of  6  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  The  labor  force 
employed  on  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Per  day. 

8  laborers,   at    $1.75 $14.00 

1   finisher,  at  $3.00 3.00 

1  working  foreman,  sit  $4.00 4.00 

Total,  350  lin.  ft.,  at  6  cts $21.00 

This  force  averaged  350  lin.  ft.  of  curb  per  day  of  10  hrs.  For  the 
body  of  the  curb,  1%  yds.  gravel  and  7  sacks  of  Portland  cement  in 


~LT  "LT 


Fig.    14.     Cement    Curb. 

a  batch  would  make  60  lin.  ft.  of  curb.  For  the  outside  finish  a 
batch  was  made  of  18  pails  of  screened  gravel  mixed  with  4  sacks 
(12  pails)  of  Portland  cement 

The  cost  of  the  materials  was  as  follows,  not  including  the  out- 
side cement  finish  : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

0.03  cu.  yd.  gravel,  at  $1.25 $0.0375 

0.03  bbl.   cement,   at   $2.40 0.0720 


Total $0.1075 

For  the  above  information  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  A.  W.  Saunders, 
of  Johnstown,  Pa. 

Cost  of  Cement  Curb  and  Gutter. — The  following  costs  were  re- 
corded by  Mr.  Charles  Apple,  and  relate  to  work  done  at  Champaign, 
111.,  in  1903.  The  work  was  done  by  contract,  at  45  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 
of  the  curb  and  gutter  shown  in  Fig.  15. 

The  concrete  curb  and  gutter  was  built  in  a  trench  as  shown  in  the 
it.     The  earth  was  removed  from  this  trench  with  pick  and  shovel 
a  rate  of  1  cu.  yd.  per  man  per  hour.     The  concrete  work  was 
lilt   in  alternate    sections,    7   ft.    in   length.      A   continuous  line   of 
inks  was  set  on  edge  to  form  the  front  and  back  of  the  concrete 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  June  10,  1908. 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


curb  and  gutter  ;    and  wood  partitions,  staked  into  place,  were  used 
The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows  : 


COST  OF  CURB  AND  GUTTER. 

No.  of  Lin.  ft.     Total 
men.  per  day.  wages. 


Opening  trench,    18  x  30-in 2 

Placing  and  tamping  cinders 2 

Setting  forms : 

Boss  setter    1 

Assistant    setter    1 

Laborer 1 


144 
350 


$3.50 
3.50 

3.00 
2.00 
1.75 


Cost  per 

100  ft. 

$2.43 

1.00 


Total    setting    forms  

3 

100          $6.75 

$1.75 
5.25 
7.00 
3.50 
1.75 

4.00 
3.00 

._.  .50 

550        $26~75 

$1.69 

.  $0.50 
1.50 
2.00 
1.00 
0.50 

1.14 
0.88 
1.14 

$    7.64 
$12.76 

$15.42 
3.75 
2.50 
3.50 
1.00 

$26.17 
$38.93 

Mixing  and  placing  concrete  : 

1 

\Vheelers                      

3 

Mixing  concrete    

4 

2 

I 

Finishing  : 
Foreman  and  boss  finisher  

1 

1 

\Vater  boy                         

1 

Total  making  concrete  
Total  for  labor  per   100   ft.. 

.  14        : 

Materials  for  100  lin.  ft.  : 

Quant 
.      8%  bl 

ity.        Price. 
)ls.          $1.85 
Is.               .50 
Is.              1.00 
Is.              1.40 
Is.             1.00 

7.5  y< 

.  .      2.5  y< 
2.5  yc 

Sand                  

.  .      1.0  y< 

Total  for  material  per  100  ft 
Tntal  for  material  and  labor 

ner  100  ft.. 

m 


'$&$!£$. 

:<J%*fc: 


m^3s&^t&m?M^: 


oT, 


Fig. 


Cement  Curb  and  Gutter. 


This  is  the  total  cost,  exclusive  of  lumber,  tools,  interest,  profit 
etc.,  and  it  is  practically  40  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

In  100  lin.  ft.  of  curb  and  gutter  there  were  4.6  cu.  yds.  of  cor 
crete  and  mortar  facing,  4  cu.  yds.  of  which  were  concrete  ;  hence  tl 
9  men  in  the  concrete  gang  laid  14  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per 
whereas  the  4  men  mixing  and  placing  the  mortar  finishing  lai 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  453 

only  2%  cu.  yds.  of  mortar  per  day,  assuming  that  the  mortar  fin- 
ishing averaged  just  1  in.  thick.  Since  these  4  men  ( 2  mixers  and  2 
finishers)  received  $10.50  a  day,  it  cost  more  than  $4  per  cu.  yd.  to 
mix  and  place  the  1 :  2  mortart  as  compared  with  $1.41  per  cu.  yd. 
for  mixing  and  placing  the  concrete.  The  concrete  was  built  in 
alternate  sections  7  ft.  long.  The  3  men  placing  forms  averaged  400 
lin.  ft.  a  day,  so  that  the  cost  of  placing  the  forms  was  $1  per  cu.  yd. 
of  concrete.  The  2  men  placing  and  tamping  cinders  averaged  16 
cu.  yds.  of  cinders  per  day,  or  8  cu.  yds.  per  man.  This  curb  and 
gutter  was  built  by  contract  at  45  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

For  several  jobs,  in  which  a  curb  and  gutter  essentially  the  same 
as  shown  in  Fig.  15  was  built,  my  records  show  a  general  corre- 
spondence with  the  above  given  data  of  Mr.  Apple.  Our  work  was 
done  with  smaller  gangs,  1  mason  and  2  laborers  being  the  ordi- 
nary gang.  Such  a  gang  would  lay  80  to  100  lin.  ft.  of  curb  and 
gutter  per  10-hr,  day,  at  the  following  cost: 

1  mason,  at  $2.50 $2.50 

2  laborers,   at   $1.50 3.00 

Total $5.50 

This  made  a  cost  of  5%  to  7  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  labor,  and  it  did 
not  include  the  cost  of  digging  a  trench  to  receive  the  curb  and  gut- 
ter. 

Cost  of  Cement  Curb,  Baltimore,  Md. — I  give  the  following 
abstract  from  an  article  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  22,  1909, 
merely  to  show  how  high  the  cost  of  a  cement  curb  may  be  when 
built  by  day  labor  instead  of  by  contract.  This  work  was  done  in 
Baltimore,  in  1908,  by  city  forces,  at  the  following  cost: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

0.037  cu.  yd.  crushed  stone,  at  $1.75 $0.065 

0.02   cu.   yd.   sand,  at  $0.80 0.015 

0.05  bbl.  cement,  at  $1.29 0.064 

Total    concrete    materials $0.144 

"Wainwright  iron  bar 0.150 

Frogs     ' 0.010 

Total  materials   $0.304  ' 

Labor    0.506 

Grand  total $0.810 

The  gang  engaged  in  making  this  curb  was  as  follows  per  8-hr, 
day : 

Per  day. 

1   foreman    $   4.00 

1   finisher    2.50 

3  laborers,    at   $1.66% 5.00 

1   cart,  horse  and  driver 2.50 

Total,  28  lin.  ft.,  at  50  cts $14.00 

\>  The  curb  measured  6  ins.  thick  by  24  ins.  high,  or  1  cu.  ft.  per 
lin.  ft.,  and  the  concrete  was  mixed  1  :  2%  :  o.  Since  the  labor  cost 
50  cts.  per  lin  ft,  this  is  equivalent  to  $13.50  per  cu.  yd. !  So  far  as 
I  know,  this  breaks  all  records  for  high  cost  of  cement  curb  work. 
*Of  course  the  "contractors'  profits"  were  saved. 


454  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Cement  Curb  and  Gutter,  Ottawa,  Ont.*— The  method 
and  cost  of  constructing  1,326  ft.  of  cement  curb  and  gutter  at  Ot- 
tawit,  Ont.,  are  given  in  some  detail  by  Mr.  G.  H.  Richardson,  As- 
sistant City  Engineer.  We  have  remodeled  the  description  and  re- 
arranged the  figures  of  cost  in  the  following  paragraphs. 

The  concrete  curb  was  built  before  doing  any  work  on  the  road- 
way, and  the  first  task  was  the  excavation  of  a  trench  2y2  ft.  wide 
and  averaging  1  ft.  8  ins.  in  depth  •  through  light  red  sand.  On  the 
bottom  of  this  trench  there  was  placed  a  foundation  of  stone  spalls 
8  ins.  thick  ;  in  width  this  foundation  reached  from  3  ins.  back  of  the 
curb  (:o  6  ins.  beyond  the  front  of  the  water  table.  The  curb  was 
made  5  ins.  thick  and  ran  from  10  ins.  to  5*4  ins.  in  height,  and 
the  water  table  was  14  ins.  wide  and '4  ins.  thick,  with  a  fall  of  iy* 
ins.  from  front  to  back.  The  concrete  used  was  a  mixture  of  1  of 
Portland  cement,  3  of  sand,  3  of  %-in.  screened  limestone,  and  4 
of  2-in.  stone.  It  was  deposited  in  forms  and  tamped  to  bring  the 
water  to  the  face  and  then  smoothed  with  a  light  troweling  of  stiff 
mortar. 

The  forms  were  constructed  by  first  setting  pickets  and  nailing  to 
them  a  back  board  2  ins.  thick  and  12  ins.  wide  and  a  front  board 
2  ins.  thick  and  6  ins.  wide.  The  concrete  for  the  water  table  was 
deposited  in  this  form  in  sections  and  brought  to  surface  by  straight 
edge  riding  on  wooden  strips  nailed  across  the  form  and  properly  set 
to  slope,  etc.  After  the  water  table  had  been  troweled  down  and 
brushed  a  1  x  10-in.  board  was  set  to  mold  the  front  face  of  the 
curb.  This  board  was  sustained  by  small  "knee  frames"  made  of 
three  pieces  of  1  x  2-in.  stuff,  one  conforming  to  the  slope  of  the 
water  table  and  long  enough  to  extend  beyond  the  front  of  the  2x6- 
in.  front  board,  a  second  standing  plumb  and  bearing  against  the 
1  x  10-in.  face  board,  and  the  third  forming  a  small  corner  brace 
between  the  two  former  to  hold  them  in  their  proper  relative  posi- 
tions. The  1  x  10-in.  face  board,  etc.,  was  separated  from  the  2x12- 
in,  back  board  by  a  5-in.  block  at  each  end,  and  then  braced  by  the 
knee  frames  every  3  or  4  ft.  In  this  way  it  was  possible  to  bring 
this  IxlO-in.  board  into  perfect  line  by  moving  the  knee  braces  in 
or  out,  and  when  correct  nailing  them  to  the  2  x  6-in.  front  board. 
The  1  x  10-iii.  face  board  being  in  position  and  braced  and  lined, 
the  curb  material  was  thoroughly  tamped  in,  and  when  ready  was 
troweled  and  brushed  on  the  top,  a  small  round  being  worked  onto 
the  top  front  corner  with  the  trowel. 

Expansion  joints  were  provided  for  by  building  into  the  curb 
every  12  ft.,  a  piece  of  %-in.  boiler  plate,  which  was  afterward 
withdrawn  and  the  joint  filled  with  sand  and  faced  over.  As  soon 
as  the  concrete  had  set  sufficiently  the  face  board  was  taken  down 
and  face  of  curb  finished  and  brushed,  the  fillet  between  curb  and 
water  table  being  finished  to  2%  ins.  radius.  Circular  curb  and 
gutter  of  samo  construction  was  built  at  each  corner,  %-in.  bass- 
wood  being  used  for  forms,  instead  of  2  x  1-in.  lumber. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  13,  190' 


1 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  455 

In  addition  to  the  actual  construction  of  curb  and  gutter  the  cost 
given  below  includes  the  cleaning  up  of  the  street,  spreading  or  re- 
moval of  all  surplus  material  from  excavation,  and  the  extension 
of  all  sidewalks  out  to  the  curbs  at  the  corners.  It  was  also  neces- 
sary to  maintain  a  watchman  on  this  work,  which  duty,  under  ordi- 
nary circumstances,  would  be  done  by  the  general  watchman.  The 
total  length  built  was  1,326  ft.,  of  which  1,209  ft.  is  straight  and 
117  ft.  curved  to  a  12 -ft.  radius. 

The  rates  of  wages  paid  were  $2  for  horse  and  cart,  $1.65  for 
watchman,  and  an  average  of  $1.90  per  day  for  labor,  including 
foreman ;  all  for  nine  hours'  work  per  day.  The  working  force  con- 
sisted of  1  foreman,  1  finisher,  1  handy  man,  4  concrete  men,  and 
3  laborers,  total  10  men. 

The  labor  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Labor:  Total.  Cts. 

Excavation  and  setting  boards $   &S.90  0.7 

Laying  stone  foundation 43.30  3.3 

Concreting    61.30  4.6 

Finishing    45.15  3.4 

Carting     9.85  0.76 

Watchman    25.00  1.89 

Clearing  up    13.60  1.04 

Extras    (sidewalk   extensions) 17.23  1.31 


Total    $304.33  23.00 

The  cost  of  materials  for  curb  and  foundation  were  as  follows: 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Materials:  Total.  Cts. 

171.112    tons    spalls $102.93  7.76 

42  tons  2-in.  stone 41.16  3.09 

30.8   tons   %-in.   stone 42.57  3.21 

33,000  Ibs.   cement   161.70  12.19 

24   cu.   yds.   sand 19.20  1.45 

Total    $367.56  27.70 

The  cost  of  supplies  and  tools  was  as  follows : 

Supplies,  Etc.:  Total. 

1,000  ft.  B.  M.  2  x  12  boards  charged  off. . . $   9.25 

500  ft.  B.  M.  2x6  boards  charged  off 4.12 

1,000  ft.  B.  M.  1  x  10  boards  charged  off 14.25 

%-in.   basswood    4.30 

%   keg    3-in.    nails 1.42 

V2  keg   4-in.    nails 1.43 

Pickets     3.25, 

Tools  charged  off 3.15 

Total     $41.17 

This  total,  when  divided  by  1,326  lin.  ft  of  curb,  gives  the  cost  per 
;al  foot  as  about  3  cts.    We  can  now  summarize  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.     Per  lin.  ft.     P.  C.  of  total. 

Labor    $304.33  $0.23  43 

Material    367.56  .28  51 

Supplies    41.17  .03  6 

Total    $713.06  $0.54  100 

As  indicated  above,  on  more  extensive  work  the  costs  of  carting, 
iman,   cleaning  up,  and  extras  would  be  avoided.     They   cost 


4Gt>  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

on  this  work  5  cts.  and  the  work  could  therefore  be  done  for  49  cts. 
if  no  such  charges  were  included.  On  such  work  also  the  charge  for 
supplies  would  be  lower  per  foot  and  on  any  future  work  the  labor 
cost  could  be  materially  lowered,  this  curb  having  been  somewhat 
of  an  experiment  as  to  method  of  construction.  It  is  thought  that 
with  no  charges  for  carting,  cleaning,  watchman,  and  extras,  and 
with  the  experience  obtained,  this  curb  could  be  built  for  about  46 
cts.  The  proportions  adopted  and  the  method  of  construction  fol- 
lowed, produce  a  very  strong,  dense,  homogeneous  curb  and  gutter. 
Cost  of  Setting  .  Stone  Curbs. — After  the  trench  has  been  dug 
and  foundation  prepared,  a  mason  and  a  helper  will  set  225  lin.  ft. 
of  stone  curb  in  10  hrs.  If  the  mason  receives  35  cts.  per  hr.,  and 
his  helper  receives  20  cts.  per  hr.,  the  placing  of  the  curb  costs  2V(j 
cts.  per  lin.  ft.  This  cost  is  based  upon  the  work  of  laying  several 
thousand  feet  of  dressed  Medina  sandstone  curb,  24  ins.  deep,  and 
does  not  Include  any  dressing  of  the  stone.  The  men  were  not  very 
efficient. 

Cost  of  Cutting  and  Setting  Granite  Curb,  N.  Y.* — The  work 
was  done  by  a  contractor  on  a  New  York  City  street,  and  involved 
the  dressing  and  setting  of  1,560  lin.  ft.  of  granite  curb.  Each  curb 
cutter  cut  28^  lin.  ft.  of  curb  per  day,  and  each  curb  setter  set  184 
lin.  ft.  per  day.  The  labor  cost  was  as  follows : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

0.0352  day  curb  cutter,   at   $4.00 $0.141 

0.0058  day  curb    setter,   at   $4.00 0.023 

0.0120  day  curb   setter's   helper,   at   $2.00 0.024 

Total    $0.188 

These  men  were  very  inefficient  or  poorly  managed. 
Cost  of  Resetting  Curb,  N.  Y.f — On  Broadway,  between  110th 
and  119th  street,  2,253  lin.  ft.  of  stone  curb  was  set  in  1904.  Of 
this  only  500  ft.  was  new  curb,  the  rest  being  old  curb  that  was 
taken  up,  dressed  and  reset.  The  work  was  done  by  a  contractor, 
whose  men  worked  an  8-hr,  day,  and  the  actual  costs  were  as  fol- 
lows: 

Excavation:  Rate  per  day.     Per  lin.  ft. 

Foreman    $3.75  $0.004 

Laborers 1.50  .020 

Total  per  lin.  ft 

Concrete:  Rate  per  day. 

Foreman $3.75 

Laborers    1.50 

Total  per  lin.  ft 

Setting  and  Dressing  Curbs:    Rate  per  day. 

Stonecutters     $5.00 

Curb    setters    4.00 

Curb   setters'   help 2.50 

Total  per  lin.  ft $0.167 

•Engineering-Contracting,   June   20,    1906. 
^•Engineering-Contracting,  May  16,   1906. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS,    WALKS.  457 

It  should  be  noted  that  in  the  table  the  excavation  under  curb  is 
for  the  taking  up  of  the  old  curb  and  making  excavation  for  new 
curb. 

The  concrete  for  the  curb  foundation  required  twenty-nine  loads 
of  stone  costing  $72,  sixteen  loads  of  sand  at  a  total  cost  of  $35,  and 
160  bags  of  cement  at  a  total  cost  of  $64.  The  total  cost  of  the  ma- 
terial for  the  curb  foundation  amounted  to  $171. 

Recording   Cost   of   Street   Sprinkling.— No  record  of  the   cost   of 

street  sprinkling  is  entirely  satisfactory  unless  it  shows : 

1.  The  average  daily  wage  of  team  and  driver  on  the  sprinkling 
wagon. 

2.  Number  of  miles  of  street  of  given  width  kept  sprinkled  each 
day  by  each  sprinkling  wagon. 

3.  Number  of  gallons  of  water  averaged  per  day  per  square  yard 
of  street,  of  given  kind  of  pavement,  during  the  sprinkling  season 
(usually  Apr.  1  to  Oct.  31  in  the  North). 

4.  Number  of  days  that  sprinkling  was  done  during  the  year. 

5.  Cost  per   sq.   yd.   for  the  year  for    (a)    water  and    (b)    team 
time  sprinkling  it.  , 

Contracts  have  often  been  let  on  the  basis  of  a  given  price  per 
1,000  sq.  yds.  for  sprinkling  during  the  dry  season.  This  form  of 
contract  is  objectionable  in  that  disputes  are  very  apt  to  arise  over 
the  inspection  of  the  work.  What  seems  sufficient  sprinkling  to  the 
contractor  may  seem  quite  insufficient  to  the  inspector.  I  am  strong- 
ly in  favor  of  doing  all  sprinkling  by  contract,  but  the  contract 
should  be  based,  not  upon  the  number  of  square  yards  sprinkled  a 
Stated  number  of  times  daily  for  a  stated  number  of  days,  but  upon 
the  number  of  gallons  sprinkled  from  a  nozzle  of  specified  kind.  This 
involves  metering  the  sources  of  water  supply,  which,  however,  is  an 
expense  of  slight  consequence. 

The  cost  of  sprinkling  depends  primarily  upon  the  amount  of  water 
loaded  into  the  tank,  hauled  and  spread  upon  the  street ;  hence  the 
gallon  is  the  proper  unit  of  cost.  Obviously,  however,  the  kind  of 
sprinkler  or  nozzle  from  which  the  water  flows  should  be  specified, 
so  that  too  much  water  will  not  be  put  upon  the  street  at  one  time 
and  place. 

Such  a  contract  is  flexible  as  to  the  number  of  sprinklings — de- 
.  pending  on  the  weather — and  is  exact  as  to  its  payment  in  pro- 
portion to  work  done.  Nor  can  it  fail  .to  be  far  cheaper,  in  the  long 
run,  than  any  attempt  to  do  'the  sprinkling  by  day  labor  forces  work- 
ing for  the  city. 

Cost  of  Street  Sprinkling,  Washington,  D.  C.*— About  40  miles 
of  streets  and  roads  in  the  District  of  Columbia  are  sprinkled  each 
day  upon  which  weather  conditions  were  such  as  to  render  it  neces- 
sary. The  District  owns  its  own  sprinklers  and  teams  and  hires  the 
drivers.  In  all  19  sprinklers  are  used,  four  on  the  heavily  traveled 

* 'Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.   4,   1907. 


458  HANDBOOK    OF   C  O.ST   DAT. I. 

car-track  paved   streets,    and    15    on   macadam   and   dirt   streets  or 
roads. 

Each  sprinkler  is  required  to  cover  two  miles  of  territory  from  8  a. 
m.  to  5  p.  m.,  at  least  three  times  each  day.  The  sprinklers  are 
2-horse  wagons,  and  have  a  capacity  of  450  gallons  each.  On  the 
average,  it  is  necessary  to  fill  the  tanks  about  every  SVi  squares, 
or  a  distance  in  one  direction  of  1,750  ft. 

The  dimension  of  the  spray  nozzle  on  the  inside  is  4%  ins.  in  di- 
ameter, and  the  holes  through  which  the  water  flows  vary  from  2/32 
ins.  to  4/32  ins.  and  cover  a  diameter  of  2ya  ins. 

The  water  is  supplied  free  of  charge,  and  drivers  are  paid  $1.75 
per  day,  in  addition  to  which  it  is  estimated  that  the  cost  of  main- 
taining the  2  horses,  repairs,  etc.,  is  about  $1.25  per  day,  or  a  total 
of  $3.00  for  each  day  per  wagon  for  each  day  upon  which  work 
is  performed. 

The  cost  of  the  sprinkling  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30, 
1907,  was  as  follows: 

Drivers     ?   4,621.27 

Forage,   pro   rata 4,863.77 

Horseshoes  and  nails,  pro  rata 218.55 

Incidental   expenses,    pro   rata 419.13 

Miscellaneous  expenses,  pro  rata 830.46 

Wages  of  extra  laborers 1,289.13 

Total,  40  miles,  at  $306.. $12,242.31 

The  total  number  of  days  worked  was  195. 

The  cost  of  maintaining  and  operating  each  sprinkler  for  the 
fiscal  year  was  about  $644,  or  $3.30  per  sprinkler  per  day  worked. 
Since  each  sprinkler  covered  2  miles  of  street,  or  about  37,5"00  sq. 
yds.  daily,  the  total  cost  of  sprinkling  (exclusive  of  the  cost  of  the 
water)  was  $644  -f  37,500  sq.  yds.  =  1.72  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  per  season 
(of  195  days),  for  sprinkling  three  times  daily. 

Cost  of  Sprinkling  Streets  and  Roads.— Mr.  J.  J.  R.  Croes  says 
that  to  keep  down  the  dust  in  Central  Park,  N.  Y.,  from  April  1  to 
Oct.  31  (7  mos.),  about  100  cu.  ft.  (750  gals.)  of  water  were  used 
daily  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  macadam,  the  greatest  amount  on  any 
one  day  being  157  cu.  ft.  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  Carts  holding  41  cu.  ft. 
of  water  were  used.  From  the  above  it  appears  that  about  160  gals, 
of  water  were  used  per  sq.  yd.  of  macadam  during  the  7  mos. 

Mr.  E.  P.  North  states  that  to  keep  down  the  dust  on  an  earth 
road,  water  applied  twice  daily,  there  were  143  cu.  ft.  (1,070  gals.) 
of  water  used  daily  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  .A  sprinkling  cart  holding  60 
cu.  ft.  covered  850  sq.  yds.,  or  about  %  gal.  per  sq.  yd. 

Mr.  E.  W.  Howe  gives  the  cost  of  sprinkling  park  (macadam) 
roads.  The  road  was  sprinkled  10  times  daily  to  keep  the  dust 
down,  a  sprinkler  with  fine  holes  being  used. 

Per  mile 
per  year. 

•1,170,000  gals,  water,  at  16  cts.  per  1,000  gals $187 

Teams .    533 

Total    .  ?720 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS  WALKS.        -ir>!i 

Unfortunately  the  width  of  these  park  roads  is  not  given,  so  that 
it  is  impossible  to  arrive  at  the  amount  of  water  or  cost  per  sq.  yd. 

Amount  of  Water  for  Sprinkling  Streets,  Indianapolis  and 
Minneapolis. — Mr.  F.  A.  W.  Davis  gives  the  following.  In  Indian- 
apolis, during  the  year  of  1892,  from  Apr.  1  to  Oct.  31  (7  mos. ), 
14,900,000  sq.  ft.  of  streets  were  sprinkled,  using  7.1  gals,  per  sq.  ft., 
or  64  gals,  per  sq.  yd.,  for  the  season.  The  water  was  metered  and 
paid  for  at  8  cts.  per  1,000  gals,  (or  $80  per  1,000,000  gals.).  Hence 
the  water  cost  $0.005,  or  %  ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  or  about  %  mill  per  sq. 
ft.  The  sprinkling  was  done  by  contract,  the  prices  ranging  from 
$38  to  $48  per  10,000  sq.  ft.,  which  is  equivalent  to  3.4  ct.  to  4.3 
ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  for  the  season.  The  streets  were  sprinkled  3  to  4 
times  daily.  Hence  these  contract  prices  were  high. 

During  1893  there  were  8  gals,  used  per  sq.  ft.,  or  72  gals,  per 
sq.  yd. 

It  is  stated  that  in  Minneapolis,  during  1893,  each  team  on  a 
sprinkling  cart  averaged  7,100  lin.  ft.  of  street  sprinkled  per  day, 
which  is  nearly  1.4  miles  of  street,  there  being  150  carts  employed  in 
sprinkling  207  miles  of  street.  During  two  of  the  driest  months  of 
summer,  10,000,000  gals,  were  vised  per  day,  which  is  nearly  50,000 
gals,  per  mile  per  day.  The  width  of  streets  is  not  stated,  but  if 
they  averaged  32  ft.,  there  were  2.67  gals,  of  water  per  sq.  yd.  per 
day,  during  the  two  driest  months. 

Sprinkling  Car  Tracks. — The  cost  of  sprinkling  the  street  car 
tracks  of  the  Detroit  United  Railway  of  Detroit,  Mich.,  amounts  to 
$4,123  per  season;  the  company  has  eight  sprinkling  cars  in  opera- 
tion, fhe  cost  for  each  car  per  year  thus  being  $511.  Two  of  the 
cars  have  tanks  of  a  capacity  of  3,670  gallons  each,  and  six  cars 
have  a  tank  capacity  of  3,702  gallons  each.  A  car  having  a  tank 
capacity  of  3,702  gallons  sprinkles  at  one  filling  3.3  miles  of  track 
to  a  width  of  8  ft.  The  rate  per  hour  is  10%  miles. 

Recording  Cost  of  Street  Sweeping.— Very  rarely  does  an  annual 
report  on  municipal  street  sweeping  contain  the  data  in  form  that 
admits  of  comparison  with  other  cities.  Sweeping  cost  data  should 
be  so  compiled  as  to  show  the  following: 

1.  The  organization  of  the  workmen,  the  numbers  in  each  class, 
and  their  respective   daily  wages. 

2.  The  average  daily  wage. 

3.  The  number  of  days  worked  by  the  average  workman  during 
the  fiscal  year. 

4.  If  possible,   the  average   number  of  times  all     streets     were 
swept  during  the  year. 

5.  The  cost  of  this  sweeping  per  sq.  yd.  of  street  per  year. 

6.  The  cost  per  1,000   sq.  yds.   for  one  sweeping. 

7.  The  number  of  loads  and  cu.  yds.  of  sweepings  removed. 

It  is  further  desirable,  where  there  are  several  different  kinds  of 
ivements,  to  give  the  unit  costs  of  sweeping  each  class. 


460  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

Where  machines  are  used,  their  kind  and  number,  as  well  as  the 
methods  of  doing  the  work  should  be  stated. 

A  common  cost  of  sweeping  is  about  20  cts.  per  1,000  sq.  yds. 
swept  once.  Hence  if  a  street  is  swept  3  times  a  week,  or  156  times 
a  year,  the  cost  is  3.12  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  per  year  for  sweeping. 

It  is  commonly  believed  that  street  cleaning  can  not  be  well  done 
by  contract,  due  to  the  difficulty  of  specifying  exactly  what  is 
wanted  and  of  determining  by  inspection  whether  the  contract  is  be- 
ing lived  up  to.  This  is  undoubtedly  true  where  the  attempt  is  made 
to  contract  at  a  given  price  per  sq.  yd.  of  street  per  year.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  has  been  demonstrated  in  Washington,  D.  C.,  and 
elsewhere,  that  much  of  the  difficulty  vanishes  when  a  contract  is 
made  on  the  basis  of  1,000  sq.  yds.  swept  once.  Then,  if,  say,  3 
sweepings  a  week  does  not  give  satisfactory  cleanliness,  the  number 
of  sweepings  can  be  increased  and  paid  for  at  the  contract  price  of, 
say,  20  cts.  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  swept  once. 

Under  such  a  contract,  the  contractor  should  be  required  to  work 
his  men  in  fairly  large  gangs,  and  under  the  general  direction  of  the 
city's  representative.  Under  the  "patrol  system"  of  sweeping,  each 
street  cleaner  is  assigned  a  certain  length  of  street  to  keep  clean. 
This  is  a  fairly  satisfactory  method  where  work  is  done  by  day  labor 
by  the  city ;  but  it  is  not  an  economic  method,  nor  one  to  be  gen- 
erally used.  The  German  method  of  having  men  work  in  large 
gangs  is  far  more  economic.  It  possesses  the  very  important  advan- 
tage of  enabling  one  to  know  exactly  how  many  times  each  street 
has  been  actually  swept  over  each  week,  and  thus  makes  it  possible 
to  determine  what  it  has  cost  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  for  each  sweeping. 
As  this  is  the  only  unit  of  cost  of  sweeping  that  admits  of  a  rational 
comparison  of  the  cost  in  different  cities,  or  of  the  cost  in  different 
sections  of  the  same  city,  it  is  obviously  of  the  utmost  importance 
to  adopt  the  "gang  system"  -and  abandon  the  "patrol  system"  of 
sweeping. 

Cost  of  Street  Sweeping  in  35  Cities.— In  January,  1900,  Mr. 
Andrew  Rosewater,  City  Engineer  of  Omaha,  Neb.,  collected  the 
data  shown  in  Table  XIX.  It  will  be  noted  that  he  secured  the 
actual  costs  for  the  year  1898;  and  that  the  costs  for  1899  were 
estimated,  but  probably  close  to  actual.  It  is  unfortunate  that  the 
data  were  not  secured  to  show  how  many  times  the  average  street 
was  swept  in  each  city,  for  then  we  could  have  determined  what  it 
cost  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  swept  once. 

Excluding  New  York,  Chicago,  Philadelphia  and  Pittsburg,  the 
31  remaining  cities  have  3,670  miles  of  paved  streets  with  an  area  ofj 
71,439,091  sq.  yds.  Hence  the  average  width  of  pavement  is  33% 
ft.,  which  is  equivalent  to  3.7  sq.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  street,  or  19,500 
sq.  yds.  per  mile.  The  estimated  cost  of  cleaning  these  31  cities  in 
3899  was  $2,305,895  (including  Newark  and  Minneapolis  on  the  basis 
of  1898).  This  is  equivalent  to  3.23  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  pavement 
for  the  year,  or  $32.30  per  1,000  sq.  yds. 

Assuming  that  the  pavements  of  Chicago,  Philadelphia  and  Pitts- 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS    WALKS.  4fll 

burg  also  averaged  33%  ft.  wide,  the  cost  of  cleaning  the  four  large 
cities  was: 

Per  sq  yd. 
Cts. 

New  York 18.0 

Chicago   2.8 

Philadelphia -3.1 

Pitcsburg    3.8 

The  shameful  record  of  New  York  is  well  seen  by  this  contrast. 
There  has  been  no  improvement  in  New  York  since  1899.  In  fact 
the  unit  costs  of  cleaning  have  risen.  In  1906  the  boroughs  of  Man- 
hattan and  the  Bronx,  had  635  miles  of  paved  streets,  12,366,000  sq. 
yds.  and  a  population  of  2,516,502.  The  cost  of  street  sweeping 
alone  was  $1,566,482,  or  12.7  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  The  cost  of  carting  all 
the  refuse,  ashes,  garbage,  and  street  sweepings,  was  $1,211,899. 
This  material  was  carried  away  in  scows  and  deposited  in  dumps  at 
a-  cost  of  $775,249,  making  a  total  of  nearly  $2,000,000,  of  which 
at  least  17%  should  be  charged  against  the  street  sweepings,  or 
$340,000,  as  that  was  their  relative  number  of  cart  loads.  This  is 
equivalent  to  2.8  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  pavement.  Administration  ex- 
penses added  6%,  or  another  1.0  ct.  per  sq.  yd.,  making  a  total  of 
16.5  cts.,  without  any  allowance  for  interest  and  depreciation  on  the 
plant  (horses,  carts,  etc.),  or  for  rents  and  miscellanies,  which  were 
fully  2  cts.  more  per  sq.  yd.  The  city  accounts  are  so  kept  that 
complete  unit  costs  are  almost  impossible  to  secure  from  the  annual 
reports.  Political  misrule  is  written  all  over  these  New  York  City 
cost  records. 

Cost  of  Street  Cleaning,  Washington,  D.  C.*— The  street  cleaning 
work  of  Washington  covers  an  area  of  7,686,936  sq.  yds.  Of  this 
amount  1,745,452  sq.  yds.  of  paved  streets  are  cleaned  by  hand 
patrol  work;  3,245,297  sq.  yds.  of  paved  streets  are  cleaned  by 
machine  sweeping;  1,734,400  sq.  yds.  are  unpaved  streets;  and 
961,737  sq.  yds.  are  public  alleys,  paved  and  unpaved. 

The  hand  patrol  work  is  done  by  municipal  forces,  a  summary  of 
the  work  done  by  them  during  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1907, 
;  being  as  follows  : 

b       Number  of  days  worked 281 

Number  of  men  employed 189  to  215 
Area  cleaned,  sq.  yds 497,811,216 
Area  cleaned,  miles 22,330 

Debris   removed,    cu.    yds 39,952 

Bags  of  paper  removed 56,292 

From   this   it   is   evidont   that   since   1,745,452    sq.   yds.   of   street 
iviivolved  sweeping  an  area  of  497,811,216  sq.  yds.,  these  streets  must 
jiave  been  swept  285  times  during  the  year,  or  not  quite  once  every 
Jay. 
The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows  for  each  sweeping : 

Per  1,000 
Total.  sq.  yds. 

Labor    $82,336.91          $0.165 

Materials,  etc 8,338.14  .017 


Total    $90,675.05          $0.182 

^Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   27,   1907. 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

,  «  H';UOQQOUQQUUUQUUQPQQ 


s 


.00000    -oOooo 

.U5lTiTj<o     -00000 

I  co  c*i      eo    I  co  co  co  eo  c«s 


00      «!MOSOOO©00>OrH 

oo    -jsioaoooooaiot-        -ooooOrH 

O     •t-O'MOOOlO^fOCO  •  O  LO  O  O  OO  t- 

so   )cTim  " 

10 

w- 

• 

gC.b  t-»OrHa5X)Tj4«£»OOrHOCOrHrHOt-OOOC<l 

rj '2  w ^ .       ooioi-OM^oc-oocvioiMi-ioooiooasOrfi 

§  ^  "^  TJ. 

i 

rl  «j|  » w  «6 oo' O ei do'* o;o BO ««e us « iwo « 

®  0>  a;  oi  •*  10 -M  oo  t- co  t>.  to  I-H  o  t- o  os  o  oo  TJ<  t- r-i  oo 

.  —  w  M  Lfl  <M  O  S^I  O     •  t-O  O  Tj<  co  MOOOrH 

W  g    30  Tft-OO-*(MO     «O  O  t-  OCOCOO  O  O  Tt< 

kJ      •  ^  r*  eo"    co"cTrH't^'c<ro" 

M  .  rf  N 

H          O  co      T-I 

^  OOOOOOOO O OO OOOOO OO OO 

t^          Jj    OOOO  OOO  OO  OOOOO  OOOOOO 

S  f3  00000000000000000000 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS  WALKS. 


It* 


II  p 

Oo     .OOo     •  O  O  O  to     "O     "O            ^  ^       •-* 
Oirt     .0100     -00  lOt-     -O     -O            <p 

eoeoIeoM^^i^Je^oq.'Tflco         J-*  £ 

OooOOtOOOlOOOOO     *  IO           °5  (3Q 

WrHfO^Ot~j-C<tlOOlOiMM<OU3<55'*f              W  t^  "^     O**-1^ 

e^iMlOrf«OC^CO-»ti       oo^COlO            C)  ^—     w  4> 

'O  rtx:        *°  . 

•flOOOCO^OOrHOOOOOO            >  ^"S    L^,£  hjn  a 

Mooooio-^ooooooooo-^'        rt  w       r  *^  C *'•* 

o"'M''io''^i>rrH'?OT-To'o'ai'«oo5'io"'io"       ^  35'fe-yS'S 

(Ht>.CO«flC>lrHiOT».^lfO                      03                   -p  O            Oa>> 

I  oo'l.S^MQ 

oowt-eo     or-to^ioooooai        S?  fe^^r.'S 

OLOOOOCOOOOOO        .::  S jj  *»  S5  S 

OrHOMOOCOOOOS            C  !^  ^    ^  W  S 

«MOO               t>.              5j  ^co'OO'O*J^-« 

w  >>  c  ?3  c  4)  P 

^  -o    .S    6 

d  ^  C  c*j  <" 

IfOOOrHrHrHMOOrHS^^TH  M'^            •«  ®  £    2  ^  bC'C* 

'c  .-2     U  ^  §  g 

^OOrfO^OlOlOOOOOC^St^            fi  °bC§"^*-' 

i—  ^5  ^?      titl  ?? 

«  05, 

o 

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO            ?  C^ 

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOO    r  J2 

ooooooooooooooo    "  -*-1 

IC'M'M'MTHTHOOOnoOt-t-CcSS           -2  "S '«)    ^S" 

1-1  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH  rH                                                         4  jSjg     J  ^  <D 

!      n?!      rtrrtt-J.^'h-i'.'lir'?       "O  "rrj/S    IW2^ 

3  •  <U  O      I          B  • 

oi£  ..^S.5 


*«•'  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

The  item  materials,  etc.,  included  the  following: 

Bamboo,  bass  and  blocks 11,268.47 

Bags   1,920.00 

Corn   brooms    108.00 

Horse  shoes  and  nails,  pro  rata 141.85 

Forage,   pro  rata    3,157.18 

Incidental  expenses,  pro  rata 279.12 

Miscellaneous 1,415.52 

Rent  of  tool  house 48.00 

Total    $8,338.14 

The  cost  of  hand  cleaning  per  cubic  yard  of  debris  removed,  ex- 
clusive of  waste  paper,  was  $2.269,  as  against  $2.091  in  1906,  the 
increase  being  due  to  the  longer  haul. 

The  average  width  of  the  streets  cleaned  was  38  ft.,  and  the  cost 
per  mile  of  cleaning  was  $4.06.  A  total  area  of  1,745,452  sq.  yds. 
was  gone  over  each  day.  The  wage  paid  laborers  was  $1.50  per 
8-hr,  day,  and  each  laborer  had  an  average  street  service  area  of 
between  9,000  and  10,000  sq.  yds. 

The  cost  of  this  hand  sweeping  was  5.2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  pave- 
ment per  year,  which  Is  just  twice  what  the  machine  sweeping  cost, 
due  principally  to  the  fact  that  the  machine  swept  streets  were 
only  swept  115  times  during  the  year. 

A  total  of  56,292  large  sacks  of  paper  was  gathered  in  the  hand 
cleaning  district  alone,  an  average  of  200.3  sacks  per  working  day. 
Only  a  small  proportion  of  this  amount  was  taken  from  the  waste 
paper  boxes  placed  at  different  points  throughout  the  business  dis- 
trict. In  order  to  keep  the  streets  and  sidewalks  within  the  hand 
cleaning  territory  free  of  paper  during  the  daytime  an  average  ol 
two  hours  out  of  the  eight  was  devoted  by  the  laborers  to  picking  it 
up.  For  this  purpose  the  men  were  required  to  go  over  their 
respective  sections  four  times  per  day — the  first  thing  in  the  morn- 
ing, before  lunch,  after  lunch,  and  toward  the  end  of  the  working 
day. 

The  machine  sweeping  of  paved  streets  (3,245,297  sq.  yds.)  was 
done  by  contract,  a  summary  of  the  work  accomplished  for  th« 
fiscal  year  1907  being  as  follows: 

Number  of  days  worked    241% 

Area  cleaned,   sq.  yds 373,029,844 

Area  cleaned,  miles   16,733 

Debris  removed,   cu.  yds 86,814 

Contract    price     per     1,000     sq.     yds.    per 

sweeping    $0.22% 

Cost  per  mile  per  sweeping $5.07 

The  area  covered  by  machine  sweeping  was  as  follows : 

Area,    sq.    yds ...3,245,297 

Cost  per  sq.  yd.  per  year 

Area,  miles   145.6 

Average  width  of  paved  street,  ft 

Area  cleaned  per  day,   sq.  yds 1,991,465 

Area  cleaned  6  times  per  week,  sq.  yds 737,63 

Area  cleaned  3  times  per  week,  sq.  yds 1,253,832 

Average  number  of  times  streets  were  swept.  . 

A    summary    of    the    work    of    cleaning    the    unimproved    street 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS    WALKS.  465 

(1, 734, 440  sq.  yds.),  consisting  of  rough  cobblestone,  macadamized, 

gravel  and  dirt  roads  and  streets  is  as  follows : 

Number  of  days  worked    276 

Area  cleaned,  sq.  yds 31,007,419 

Area  cleaned,  miles  .  . .  . 1,652 

Debris  removed,  cu.  yds 20,235 

Contract  price  per  day  for  full  force $73.80 

Cost  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  per  sweeping $0.586 

Cost  per  mile  per  sweeping $11 

Average  number  of  times  streets  were  swept  18 

The  total  area  of  unpaved  streets  was  1,734,440  sq.  yds.,  the 
average  width  being  32  ft.  A  total  area  of  214,195  sq.  yds.  was 
cleaned  each  day. 

The  cleaning  of  public  alleys  (961,737  sq.  yds.  paved  and  un- 
paved) was  done  by  contract,  a  summary  of  the  work  done  being  as 
follows : 

Number  of  days  worked    250 

Area   cleaned,   sq.    yds 44,131,505 

Area    cleaned,    miles 6,269 

Average  width  of  alleys,  ft 12 

Debris  removed,  cu.  yds 12,286 

Contract  price  per  1,000  yds.  per  sweeping.  .  $0.40 

Cost  per  mile  per  sweeping $2.816 

Average  number  of  times  swapt 46 

Cost  of  Sweeping  Streets  Washington,  D.  C.— Mr.  Warner  Stutler 
gives  the  following: 

During  the  year,  July  1,  1901-02,  1,565,809  sq.  yds.  asphalt  were 
swept  daily  by  hand.  There  were  200  men,  at  $1.25,  and  9  teams. 
The  total  area  cleaned  was  413,765,028  sq.  yds.,  at  a  cost  of  18.6 
ets.  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  for  each  sweeping. 

The  number  of  times  swept  during  the  year  was  413,765,028  -~ 
1,56 5, 809  =  264.  Hence  the  cost  per  sq.  yd.  of  pavement  per  year, 
for  sweeping,  was  4.9  cts. 

Then  a  "pick-up"  sweeper  ("The  Peerless,"  made  by  Barren  & 
i  Cole,  of  New  York  City)  was  adopted,  with  which  a  laborer  could 
!  clean  33%  more  area  daily  than  with  hand  brooms  and  do  better 
=  work. 

Cost  of  Sweeping  With  a  "Pickup"  Sweeper.*— During  the  sum- 
mer of  1907  Mayor  Geo.  B.  McClellan  appointed  Mr.  H.  de  B.  Par- 
sons, Dr.  Rudolph  Hering  and  Mr.  Samuel  Whinery  a  commission 
to  report  on  an  improved  and  more  effective  system  of  street  clean- 
ing  and  waste  disposal  than  is  now  in  operation  in  New  York  City. 
At  the  end  of  the  year  this  commission  made  its  report,  which  has 
f  since  been  printed  by  the  city. 

The  report,  covers  nearly  250  pages,  and  has  in  It  much  Valuable 
information  on  street  cleaning  and  waste  disposal.  The  commission 
has  made  a  study  of  many  features  of  this  kind  of  work,  and 
has  collected  a  large  amount  of  data  on  the  subject. 

The   report   discusses   at   some   length   the   various   methods   used 

^Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  inn*. 


466  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

in  street  cleaning,  and  gives  an  estimated  cost  for  each  method  de- 
scribed, thus  allowing  a  comparison  of  each  with  the  other.  The 
estimate  on  hand  sweeping  by  the  "patrol  method"  is  as  follows : 
Cost  of  one  outfit : 

One  hand  cart   $10.09 

Five  cans  for  sweepings,  at  $2.50 12.50 

P'our    hand    brooms,    at    65    cts 2.60 

One  shovel    0.75 

Two  steel  scrapers,  at  $2 4.00 


Total    $29.85 

Annual  charges: 

Interest  on  outfit  at  4%   $   1.19 

Repairs  and  depreciation  at  60% 17.01 


Total  annual  charges    $19.10 

Or   for   310    days,    per   day $0.062 

Cost  of  operation  per  day,  1  man  sweeping  2.190 

Total  cost  per  day $2.252 

On  the  basis  that  one  sweeper  will  clean  satisfactorily  8,000  sq. 
yds.  of  pavement  per  day  the  cost  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  will  be  28.1  cts. 

In  closing  their  remarks  on  hand  sweeping  the  commissioners 
said: 

"A  modified  method  of  hand  sweeping  in  use  in  a  number  of 
American  and  foreign  cities  consists  in  substituting  for  the  ordinary- 
push  broom  a  small  machine  with  a  revolving  broom.  This  machine 
is  generally  similar  to  the  large  machine  sweeper,  except  that  it  is 
designed  to  pick  up  its  own  sweepings  and  deposit  them  in  an 
attached  receptacle,  which  is  emptied  when  necessary.  This  small 
machine  is  pushed  over  the  street  by  the  street  sweeper  and  does 
its  work  quite  well  when  the  street  is  dry.  It  is  extensively  used 
in  Washington,  where  it  is  well  liked.  One  objection  is  that  on 
heavy  traveled  streets  there  is  difficulty  in  working  it  among  horses 
and  vehicles.  Upon  the  whole,  this  hand  sweeping  machine  is  not 
in  general  favor  in  American  cities." 

It  is  to  be  very  much  regretted  that  this  commission  of  eminent 
engineers  did  not  make  a  thorough  investigation  of  this  sweeping 
machine  and  report  their  findings  on  it.  This  type  of  machine 
seems  to  us  to  solve  some  of  the  problems  of  street  cleaning,  and  in 
this  article  we  give  some  data  that  we  have  collected.  We  realize 
that  their  can  be  some  objection  to  any  method,  but  on  good  pave- 
ments these  machines  can  effect  a  saving  over  the  patrol  hand 
sweeping,  and  at  the  same  time  do  much  more  efficient  work. 

This  style  of  machine-  has  been  used  in  Washington,  D.  C.,  since 
the  summer  of  1901,  and,  as  the  commission  states,  "it  is  well  liked." 
The  name  of  the  machine  used  in  Washington  is  the  "Peerless,"  sold 
by  Barren  &  Cole,  of  New  York  City. 

Prior  to  the  installation  of  these  machines  in  Washington  a  patrol 
sweeper  swept  daily  7,456  sq.  yds.,  and  with  the  pick-up  machine 
the  same  man  covered  9,145  sq.  yds.,  an  increased  area  of  more  than 
22  per  cent.  In  order  to  compare  this  with  the  costs  given  above  the 
same  wages  will  be  applied.  Thus  we  have : 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS    WALKS.  467 

Cost  of  one  outfit: 

One  Peerless  hand  sweeper .$75.00 

Forty  bags 4.00 

Four  upright  brooms  at  35   cts 1.40 

One   shovel    75 

One  steel  loosener 40 


Total    181.55 

Annual  charges: 

Int.  on  outfit  at  4 % $   3.26 

Four  new  brooms  at  $4 16.00 

Depreciation  at   20% 16.31 

Total  annual  charges $35.57 

Or,  for  310  days,  per  day $0.114 

One  man  . . 

Total  cost  per  day    $2.304 

With  the  area  of  9,145  sq.  yds.  swept  per  day  this  gives  a  cost  per 
1,000  su.  yds.  of  25.1  cts.,  or  just  3  cts.  less  than  the  estimated  cost 
of  the  patrol  sweeping. 

The  working  day  in  Washington,  like  New  York,  is  8  hrs.,  but  the 
machines  are  only  operated  6  hrs.  each  day,  as  the  men  spend  2  hrs. 
each  day  in  picking  up  paper.  For  this  purpose  the  men  are  re- 
quired to  go  over  their  respective  sections  four  times  per  day — 
the  first  thing  in  the  morning,  before  lunch,  after  lunch,  and  towards 
the  end  of  the  working  day.  It  would  seem  possible  that  this  paper 
could  be  cared  for  in  some  other  way.  With  ordinances  properly 
enforced  the  greater  part  of  it  should  be  put  into  boxes  on  the  side- 
walks by  the  users  of  the  street,  thus  preventing  th,e  paper  from 
being  scattered  in  the  street.  With  the  waste  paper  eliminated  and 
the  men  employed  on  the  machines  operating  them  8  hrs.,  the  area 
covered  per  day  would  be  between  11,000  and  12,000  sq.  yds.  at  a 
cost  of  about  20  cts.  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  The  style  of  box  for  de- 
positing waste  paper  should  be  somewhat  similar  to  the  package 
mail  boxes  used  by  the  government,  as  the  self-closing  lids  prevent 
the  paper  from  being  blown  out  of  the  boxes  by  the  wind. 

Burlap  bags  should  likewise  be  used  for  collecting  the  street 
sweepings,  instead  of  cans.  The  bags  are  cheaper  and  better  adapted 
to  the  work.  The  dirt  receptacle  on  a  sweeper  ordinarily  holds  the 
sweepings  of  about  800  sq.  yds.  When  the  dirt  is  dumped  from  the 
sweeper  it  can  be  shoveled  into  a  bag,  the  bag  being  held  open  on 
hooks  made  for  the  purpose  on  the  handle  of  the  machine.  The  bag 
can  be  tied  up  and  placed  on  the  sidewalk  for  the  pick-up  wagon 
to  carry  away.  With  a  bag  it  is  not  possible,  either,  for  the  wind 
or  some  boy  to  scatter  the  dirt  as  with  an  open  top  can.  With  the 
machine  carrying  a  bag  on  the  hooks  on  the  handle  paper  can  also 
be  picked  up  by  the  operator  as  he  passes  a  piece  and  placed  in  the 
bag.  With  bags  a  larger  load,  without  chance  of  spilling  any  dirt, 
can  be  carried  on  the  pick-up  wagon  or  cart. 

Upright  brooms  are  cheaper  than  push  brooms,  and  can  be  used 
with  this  machine,  as  brooms  are  only  needed  to  sweep  the  dirt 
away  from  curbs  or  in  taking  up  the  sweepings  after  the  machines 
Jiave  been  emptied. 

The  steel  loosener  has  a  long  handle  and  is  used  to  loosen  any 


4(18  HANDBOOK    OP   COST  DATA. 

materials  that  have  become  stuck  to  the  pavement,  the  length  of  the 
handle  admitting  of  this  being  done  without  the  operator  leaving  his 
position  behind  the  machine. 

The  machine  uses  up  four  brooms  a  year,  and  these  have  been 
charged  in  the  annual  expenses.  The  life  of  a  machine  is  from 
8  to  10  years,  hence  a  depreciation  of  20  per  cent  per  year  is  more 
than  ample  to  allow,  and  this  will  also  cover  renewals,  as  we  are 
informed  by  the  manufacturer  that  for  about  200  machines  used  by 
the  city  of  Washington  the  repair  parts  ordered  during  the  past  two 
years  have  not  amounted  to  quite  $200,  or  a  yearly  expense  of  less 
than  50  cts.  for  each  machine. 

The  great  problem  in  street  cleaning  is  the  removing  of  the  finer 
particles  and  the  dust.  The  commission,  in  its  report,  dwells  at  some 
length  on  this.  The  coarser  particles,  they  state,  are  easily  cleaned 
up,  but  even  when  a  street  has  been  swept  there  still  remains  the 
dust,  which  is  a  "serious  menace  to  health  and  a  destructive  and  dis- 
comforting element  of  city  life."  The  hand  pick-up  sweeper  does  not 
take  up  all  of  this  dust,  but  it  does  take  up  the  greater  part  of  it, 
as  is  evident  when  one  walks  along  Pennsylvania  Ave.  in  Wash- 
ington on  a  windy  day,  for  it  is  possible  to  keep  one's  eyes  open 
without  having  them  filled  with  dust.  In  New  York  a  puff  of  wind 
means  a  cloud  of  dust.  On  this  point  the  superintendent  of  the 
street  cleaning  department  of  Washington,  in  his  report  dated 
June  30,  1902,  in  commenting  on  the  work  of  these  machines,  said  : 

"The  daily  area  cleaned,  therefore,  was  not  only  enlarged  and  the 
expenses  reduced,  but  the  streets  were  kept  cleaner  than  ever 
before." 

Estimated  Cost  of  Machine  Sweeping. — In  the  Parsons-Hering- 
Whinery  report,  above  mentioned,  the  cost  of  sweeping  with  horse- 
drawn  machines  (having  revolving  brooms)  is  estimated  as  follows: 
Cost  of  one  outfit: 

1  sweeping  machine    %    275.00 

i/>   of  1  one-horse  sprinkling  cart 104.00 

12   hand  brooms   at   $0.65 .  .  7.80 

6   shovels  at   $0.75 4.50 

2  horses  for  sweeper 600.00 

V,  horse  for  %  sprinkler 150.00 

2 1/2  sets  of  harness  at  $25 62.50 


Total    outfit     ?1, 203.80 

Annual  plant  charges: 

Interest  on  $1,203.80  at-4% $      48.15 

Repairs  and  depreciation  on  tools,  at  20%....         90.76 
Depreciation  on  horses,  at  15% 112.50 

Total,  310  days  at  $0.81 I    251.41 

Operating  expenses:  Per  day. 

Maintenance  of  2%  horses  at  $1.35 ? 

Rent,    storage   of    sweeper 

Wages,   1  sweeper  driver   J.1* 

Wages,    1/2    sprinkler  driver    .  .  ... . 1.09 

Wages,    6    gutter    sweepers,    at    $2.19 13.14 

Plant  charges 

15,000  gals,  water  at   $90  per  million 

Total,  70,000  sq.  yds.  at  31.7  cts.  per  1,000 

sq.    yds ?      22-16 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS    WALKS.  469 

This  is  estimated  for  an  8-hr,  day  in  New  York  City,  and  for 
an  asphalt  pavement.  It  does  not  include  loading  the  sweepings 
into  carts  and  carting  away. 

Estimated  Cost  of  Flushing  Streets. — In  the  Parsons-Hering- 
Whinery  report,  above  mentioned,  the  cost  of  flushing  Nev/  York 
streets  with  a  horse  and  with  a  machine  are  estimated  as  follows: 

Using  a  2%  -in.  fire  hose  with  a  1^4 -in.  nozzle,  under  a  pressure 
of  40  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  235  gals,  per  min.  are  discharged,  and  4,000 
to  10,000  sq.  yds.  are  washed  per  hour.  Assuming  an  average  of 
6,000  sq.  yds.  per  hr.,  and  that  the  water  jet  is  operating  80%  of  the 
time,  there  would  be  1.88  gals,  used  per  sq.  yd. 
The  cost  of  one  outfit  is: 

100  ft.  of  2i/2-in.  hose  at  $1.10 $110.00 

1  fire  nozzle   12.50 

6  brooms   3.90 


$126.40 
Annual  plant  charges: 

Interest  on   $126.40  at  4%    $     5.06 

Repairs   and   depreciation    150% 189.60 

Total,    310   days  at   $0.63.  .  ,-j  .!£  AM  i $194.66 

Operating  expense:  Per  day. 

3   men  at   $2.19    $   6.57 

90,000  gals,  water  at  $90  per  million 8.10 

Plant    charges    0.63 

Total,  48,000  sq.  yds.  at  31.9  cts.  per  M $15.30 

It  was  estimated  that  as  rapid  and  as  thorough  work  could 
ably  be  secured  with  a  1-in.  special  nozzle  (on  a  2-in.  hose),  throw- 
ing a  fan-shaped  jet,  and  with  30  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  pressure.  Under 
such  conditions,  the  cost  of  flushing  was  estimated  thus : 

Per  day. 

2  men  at  $2.19    $  4.38 

57,600  gals,  of  water  at  $90  per  million 5.18 

Plant   charges    0.48 


Total,   40,000  sq.  yds.  at  25.1  cts.  per  M $10.04 

Street  flushing  with  special  wagons  was  estimated  as  follows. 
The  wagon  has  a  tank  with  two  airtight  compartments,  one  holding 
water  (600  gals.)  and  the  other  holding  compressed  air,  the  two 
being  connected  above  the  water  line.  When  the  water  tank  is  filled 
with  a%ose,  air  is  compressed  in  the  air  compartment.  In  flushing 
the  water  is  forced  out  at  a  pressure  of  about  35  Ibs.  per  sq.  ih. 
through  a  special  nozzle. 

Cost  of  one  outfit: 

One  flushing  wagon    $1,000.00 

6  hand  brooms  at  $0.65 3.90 

3   shovels  at   $0.75    2.25 

2   horses  at  $300 600.00 

2  sets  harness  at  $25   ~ 50.00 

Total    $1,656.15 

Annual  plant  charges: 

Interest  on  $1,656.15   at   4% $      66.25 

Repairs  and  depreciation  on  tools  at  14% 147.86 

Depreciation  on  horses  at  15% 90.00 

Total,  310  days  at  $0.98 $    304.11 


470  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Operating   expenses:  Per  day. 

1    driver    $      2.19 

ya  day  helper 1.09 

Maintenance  2  horses  at  $1.35 2.70 

4  men  collecting  dirt  in  grutters  at  $2.00 8.00 

Rent,  storage  of  plant 0.20 

Plant  charges    0.98 

56,000  gals,  water  at  $90  per  million 5.04 

Total  28,000  sq.  yds.  at  72.1  cts.  per  M...$      20.20 

Cost  of  Street  Sweeping,  Minneapolis.*— The  asphalt  pavement  of 
the  city  of  Minneapolis,  Minn.,  is  swept  by  hand,  using  the  Ross 
scraper  according  to  the  block  system.  Each  man  has  from  two  to 
five  blocks  to  keep  clean.  The  sweepings  are  deposited  in  galvanized 
iron  cans  placed  at  street  corners,  from  which  they  are  removed  by 
teams.  The  asphalt  pavement  is  also  swept  by  machine  at  night, 
and  flushed  whenever  necessary. 

The  wages  paid  per  day  are  as  follows:  Teams,  $4;  men,  $1.50 
to  $2. 

According  to  the  annual  report  of  the  city  engineer,  the  cost  of 
hand  sweeping  for  1906,  21  men  being  employed,  was  $16,049,  or  8.69 
cts.  per  sq.  yd,  per  year. 

The  cost  of  cleaning,  machine  sweeping  and  washing  was  $9,276, 
or  5.02  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  per  year. 

A  total  of  11.65  miles  of  27-ft.  roadway  cost  per  mile  per  year  for 
cleaning,  $796  ;  for  sweeping,  $1,378,  or  a  total  of  $2,174. 

In  all  184,528  sq.  yds.  of  asphalt  pavement  were  cleaned  and 
swept. 

The  cost  of  cleaning  and  sweeping  the  other  paved  (not  asphalt) 
streets  was  $43,014,  or  3.33  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  This  cost  is  for  a 
yardage  of  1,290,930  sq.  yds.,  and  does  not  include  macadam  and 
asphalt  pavement.  The  cost  of  cleaning  was  1.47  cts.  per  sq.  yd., 
and  the  cost  of  sweeping  was  1.86  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

During  1899.  there  were  200,000  sq.  yds.  of  asphalt  pavement 
cleaned  by  hand  by  the  block  system.  The  sweepings  were  put  into 
cans,  from  which  they  were  collected  by  teams.  The  gang  was  31 
men  at  $1.75  and  5  teams  at  $3.50.  The  cost  was: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Per  jj^ar. 

Cts. 

Machine  sweeping  and  washing 1.45 

Hand  sweeping 5.74 

Total    7.19 

Cost  of  Street  Sweeping,  Williamsport,  Pa.f — Mr.  James  F. 
Fisher,  City  Engineer  of  Williamsport,  Pa.,  in  his  report  for  1907, 
gives  the  cost  of  sweeping  the  streets  by  machines. 

The  work  is  done  by  employes  of  city  engineer's  department,  the 
force  used  and  the  wages  paid  being  as  follows : 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.   29,   1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908. 


ROADS,   PAVEMENTS   WALKS.  471 

One  team  on  sprinkler   $  4.50 

One  team  on   sweeper 4.50 

Two  one  horse  pick  up  wagons 5.50 

Four  men  10  hrs.  at  ?1.65 6.60 

Total   for   one  day. $21.10 

Int.  and  depreciation  of  outfit 1.00 

$22.10 

The  one  dollar  added  covers  interest  at  6%  per  annum  and  de- 
preciation of  the  plant  at  20%  per  year,  divided  by  200  working 
lays,  which  is  the  length  of  the  season  in  Williamsport. 

Each  day  this  force  sweeps  parts  of  seven  streets  aggregating 
62,000  sq.  yds.  This  gives  a  cost  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  for  cleaning  by 
machine  sweeping  of  35.6  cts.  The  city  has  206,875  sq.  yds.  of  im- 
proved pavements,  which  would  cost  $73.65  to  clean  daily,  or  $14,730 
for  a  season  of  200  working  days,  which  is  equivalent  to  7.1  cts.  per 
sq.  yd.  per  year.  This  enormously  high  cost  shows  the  usual  low 
efficiency  of  men  working  by  the  day  for  a  city. 

Cost  of  Sweeping,  Rochester,  N.  Y.— Mr.  Edwin  A.  Fisher  gives 
the  following  cost  of  sweeping  for  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  in  1901 : 

No.  times     Per  sq.  yd. 
swept.         for  year. 

Asphalt  streets 99  3.71  cts. 

Brick     60  2.69  cts. 

Medina  stone  block 101  5.27  cts. 

It  will  be  noted  that,  at  this  rate,  each  sweeping  cost : 

Per  1,000  sq.  yds. 

Asphalt  streets   37  cts. 

Brick 47   cts. 

Medina  stone  block   52  cts. 

These  high  costs  show  poor  efficiency  of  workmen. 
These  streets  were  sprinkled  at  a  cost  of  2.21  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  or 
$350  per  mile,  during  the  year. 

Cost  of  Street  Sweeping,  Albany,  N.  Y.*— The  street  cleaning  of 
Albany,  N.  Y.,  is  effected  by  three  methods :  Machine  sweeping 
of  improved  streets ;  hand  cleaning  of  cobblestone  streets  and  alleys 
and  hand  cleaning  in  the  business  district.  All  of  the  work  is  done 
by  city  forces,  and  the  city  owns  the  sweeping  machines  and  street 
sprinklers  and  hiring  necessary  teams  and  drivers. 

In  the  principal  business  districts  the  asphalt  pavements  (173,000 
sq.  yds. )  are  kept  cleaned  and  waste  paper  picked  up.  The  follow- 
ing regular  gang  is  employed  for  this  work,  the  wages  being  $1.75 
per  day : 

2  men  cleaning  granite  cross-walks $   3.50 

3  men   cleaning   asphalt    5.25 

2  men  picking  up  waste  paper 3.50 


Total  daily  expense $12.25 

This  is  equivalent  to  an  annual  expense  of  $4,100,  or  nearly  2.4 
cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  not  including  the  additional  cost  of  sweeping  streets 
with  machines. 

^Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  4,  1907. 


472  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cobblestone  pavements,  of  which  there  is  a  total  area  of 
229,229  sq.  yds.,  are  cleaned  by  hand  hoes  or  broom,  at  the  follow- 
ing daily  expense : 

1  foreman,  at  $2.35 $   2.35 

10  men,  at  $1.75 17.50 

1   horse  and  driver  for  sprinkler,  at  $3.50 3.50 


Total $24.35 

The  pavements  are  cleaned  for  a  period  of  eight  months  at  a  total 
cost  of  about  $4,800,  or  2.1  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  per  year. 

The  principal  part  of  the  street  cleaning  work  Is  effected  by 
machine  sweeping,  the  areas  and  kinds  of  pavement  covered  being 
as  follows: 

Sq.  yds. 

Granite  block   pavements 560,623 

Vitrified   brick  pavement    458,733 

Sheet   asphalt    173,094 

Asphalt  block    14,500 


Total 1,206,950 

This  area  is  swept  twice  a  week  during  eight  months  of  the  year, 
or  from  about  April  1  to  December  1.  The  force  engaged  in 
machine  sweeping  consists  of  four  gangs,  each  under  a  foreman,  and 
made  up  of  1  street  sprinkler,  2  machine  sweepers  and  12  men. 
Each  gang  has  its  regular  district  to  cover  day  or  night  as  the 
case  may  be. 

The  sweeping  is  done  in  the  usual  manner,  the  pavements  first 
being  lightly  sprinkled  with  water  to  lay  the  dust  and  then  swept 
with  the  machines,  the  dirt  being  pushed  by  the  latter  from  the 
center  of  the  street  to  each  of  the  gutters.  The  men  then  sweep  the 
dirt  into  piles  along  the  gutters  at  intervals  of  about  25  ft.  Ma- 
chine cleaning  in  the  business  district  is  done  only  at  night. 

The  daily  labor  cost  of  sweeping  and  collecting  the  dirt  in  piles  is 
as  follows : 

8  teams  and  drivers  for  8   sweeping  machines,   at  $5 $  40.00 

4  teams  and  drivers  for  4   sprinklers  at   $5 20.00 

4   foremen,  at  $2.35 9.40 

48  men,    at    $1.75 84.00 

Total  daily  labor  cost   $153.40 

The  above  force  is  employed  about  eight  months,  the  total  yearly 
expense  for  labor  being  about  $32,000.  The  cost  of  repairs  to  sweep- 
ing machines  and  sprinklers,  cost  of  new  brooms  and  refitting  old 
brooms  and  other  incidentals  amounts  to  about  $4,000  per  year, 
making  a  total  cost  of  sweeping  the  dirt  into  piles  amount  to  about 
$36,000.  As  the  total  amount  of  pavement  swept  over  each  amounts 
to  about  85,000,000  sq.  yds.,  the  cost  of  sweeping  the  dirt  into  piles 
is  about  42  cts.  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  for  each  sweeping.  This  does  not 
include  the  cost  of  shoveling  the  dirt  from  the  piles  into  wagons 
and  conveying  it  to  dumps  or  other  places  where  it  is  used  for  filling. 
This  work  is  done  by  contract,  the  price  for  1907  being  $11,500. 

There  are   8  public  dumps,   which  receive  street  dirt,  ashes,  etc., 


ROADS,  PAVEMENTS,   WALKS.  4T 

and  are  cared  for  by  9  men  at  an  expense  of  $15.75  per  day,  or  abou, 
$5,000  per  year. 

Since  the  1,206,950  sq.  yds.  involve  85,000,000  sq.  yds.  of  sweeping 
yearly,  each  street  is  swept  about  70  times  during  the  year. 

Summing  up  we  have  the  following  cost  of  sweeping  1,206,950  sq. 
yds.,  not  including  the  229,229  sq.  yds.  of  cobblestone  pavement: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

Per  yea,  ""<£" 

Laborers   cleaning   business    streets $   4,100  0.34 

Gangs  with'  street  sweeping  machines 32,000  2.65 

Repairs  to  sweeping  machines,   etc 4,000  0.33 

Loading  and  hauling  dirt  to  dumps  (by  contract)    11,500  0.95 

Spreading  dirt  and  ashes  at  dumps 5,000  0.42 

Total    $56,600  4.69 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  first  item,  "laborers  cleaning 
business  streets,"  costs  2.4  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  business  street  cleaned, 
which  becomes  0.34  ct.  per  sq.  yd.  of  entire  area  of  city  streets. 

Since  the  8  machine  sweepers  sweep  85,000,000  sq.  yds.  in  the 
working  season  (8  mos. ),  each  machine  covers  10,600,000  sq.  yds.  in 
the  210  working  days,  or  50,000  sq.  yds.  per  day,  at  a  cost  of  38.4  cts. 
per  1,000  sq.  yds.  swept  once.  This  is  for  labor  alone,  and,  as  will 
be  seen  from  the  tabulation  of  wages  above  given,  more  than  50%  of 
this  cost  is  for  the  wages  of  the  laborers  who  sweep  the  dirt  into 
piles  in  the  gutters  ready  to  haul  away,  there  being  6  such  men 
to  each  machine  sweeper.  This  is  an  exceedingly  high  cost,  but  it 
does  not  include  the  excessive  cost  of  repairs,  etc.,  which  is  $500 
per  year  for  each  machine  sweeper  (plus  half  a  sprinkler*),  etc., 
or  nearly  $2.50  per  working  day,  thus  adding  nearly  5  cts.  per  1,000 
sq.  yds.  swept. 

Summing  up  we  have  the  following  total  cost  for  sweeping  1,000 
sq.  yds.  each  time : 

Per  1,000  sq.  yds, 
Cts. 

Gang  with  street  sweeper    36.4 

Repairs  to  sweeper,  etc 4.7 

Loading  and  hauling  dirt   (by  contract) 13.6 

Spreading  dirr  and  ashes 6.0 

Total 60.7 

All  of  the  last  item  is  not  properly  chargeable  to  sweeping,  since 
it  involves  spreading  ashes  also. 

In  excuse  for  these  exceedingly  high  costs  it  has  been  said  that 
a  large  part  of  the  pavement  is  granite  blocks  and  that  the  Albany 
streets  are  in  many  cases  very  steep,  or  hilly.  This  excuse  is  in- 
adequate, for  not  half  the  streets  are  granite,  and  far  less  than  half 
are  steep.  The  true  excuse  is  the  general  inefficiency  of  men  work- 
ing by  the  day  for  any  municipality. 

Cost  of  Street  Flushing  and  Sweeping,  St.  Louis,  Mo.*— The 
street  cleaning  of  St.  Louis  is  done  by  the  day  labor  plan,  six  day 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.    15,    1908. 


474  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

gangs  and  four  night  gangs  being  employed  in  the  work.     A  gang 
comprises  the  following: 

5  flushing  machines  at  $6.00 $30.00 

4   dirt  wagons  at  $4.50 18.00 

6  laborers  at  $1.50    •.  .  .      9.00 

1  inspector  at  $3.00 3.00 


Total $60.00 

From  20  to  35  gals,  of  water  are  used  for  each  square  (100  sq.  ft.) 
of  flushing,  or  2  to  3  gals,  per  sq.  yd.  The  average  cost  to  the  city 
per  great  square  (10,000  sq.  ft.)  for  one  flushing  of  the  pavements 
in  the  business  and  residence  districts  is  $1.10,  or  $1  per  1,000  sq. 
yds.  This  estimate  is  based  upon  the  number  of  squares  flushed  per 
month,  without  regard  to  the  paving  material,  or  where  the  streets 
cleaned  are  located.  It  is  possible  to  flush  an  asphalt  pavement 
in  the  residential  district  for  $0.75  per  great  square,  or  $0.70  per 
1,000  sq.  yds.  ;  while  the  granite  block  pavements  in  the  busmess 
district,  where  the  delays  are  caused  by  traffic,  may  cost  $1.35  per 
great  square,  or  $1.22  per  1,000  sq.  yds. 

The  average  cost  for  machine  broom  sweeping  is  about  $0.50  per 
great  square,  or  $0.45  per  1,000  sq.  yds.,  these  machines  being  used 
on  the  brick  pavements  except  where  the  streets  are  very  dirty. 

The  block  patrol  system  of  cleaning  is  also  employed.  In  this,  one 
man  is  given  about  five  city  blocks  to  clean,  the  average  length  ot 
block  being  300  ft.  With  wages  at  $1.50  and  the  width  of  road- 
way assumed  at  36  ft.,  5^  great  squares  are  cleaned  each  day  at  a 
cost  of  $0.28  per  great  square,  or  $0.25  per  1,000  sq.  yds.  The  sys- 
tem of  street  sprinkling  aids  very  much  the  cleaning  of  streets  by 
the  block  system,  as  all  of  the  paved  streets  are  sprinkled  from  one 
to  four  times  per  day,  the  cost  thereof  being  charged  as  a  special 
tax  against  the  property  fronting  the  street  sprinkled,  the  average 
rate  for  the  year  amounting  to  about  $0.04  per  front  foot. 
The  total  mileage  of  hard  pavements  is  as  follows : 

Miles. 

Asphalt 45.42 

Bituminous  macadam   24.46 

Vitrified  brick 96.19 

Granite  blocks    63.48 

Wood   blocks    2.50 

Total    232.05 

In  addition,  134  miles  of  improved  alleys  are  cleaned  from  the  ap- 
propriation for  street  cleaning. 

It  will  be  noted  that  all  these  costs  are  exceedingly  high. 
Life   of   Sweeping    Machines. — In   Berlin   the   life  of   horse-drawn 
sweeping  machines    (rotary  brooms)    has  been   about  20  years.     A 
rotary  broom  lasts  only  21  days  when  used  every  night;    a  machine 
requires  17  brooms  yearly,  and  works  7  hrs.  daily. 


SECTION  V. 
STONE    MASONRY. 

Definitions. — Consult  Section  VI,  on  Concrete,  for  definitions  not 
found  in  this  section. 

Abutment.— The  foundation  or  substructure  of  a  bridge.  Abut- 
ments are  built  on  the  banks  of  a  stream ;  piers  are  built  in  the 
stream  itself. 

Apron. — A  covering  over  the  earth  or  rock  below  the  spillway 
of  a  dam. 

Arch  Culvert. — A  culvert  with  an  arched  roof. 

Arch  Masonry. — That  portion  of  the  masonry  in  the  arch  ring 
only,  or  between  the  intrados  and  the  extrados. 

Ashlar. — First-class  squared  stone  masonry  dressed  so  that  its 
joints  do  not  much  exceed  %-in.  in  thickness. 

Axed. — Dressed  so  as  to  cover  the  surface  of  a  stone  with  chisel 
marks  which  are  nearly  or  quite  parallel. 

Back. — The  rear  face  of  a  wall. 

Backing. — The  rough  backing  masonry  of  a  wall  faced  with  a 
higher  class  of  masonry.  The  earth  deposited  back  of  a  wall  or  arch 
is  sometimes  miscalled  backing  instead  of  backfilling  or  lining. 

Barrel. — The  under  surface  of  an  arch.     See  Soffit. 

Bat. — A  part  of  a  brick  or  stone. 

Batter. — The  backward  slope  of  the  face  of  a  wall.  A  1-in.  batter 
means  that  the  face  of  the  wall  departs  from  a  plumb  line  at  the 
rate  of  1  in.  in  every  foot  of  rise. 

Beds. — Or  bed  joints,  the  horizontal  joints  of  masonry.  See 
also  "Natural  bed." 

Belt  Course. — A  projecting  course  of  masonry  immediately  under 
the  coping ;  a  belt  course  is  often  called  a  corbel  course.  Its  object 
is  to  give  a  better  appearance  to  a  wall. 

Bench   Wall. — The  wall  or  abutment  supporting  an  arch. 

Blind  Header. — A  header  that  extends  only  a  short  distance  back 
into  a  wall  instead  of  extending  to  the  full  depth  specified;  blind 
headers  are  also  called  "bob-tails." 

Block  Rubble. — Large  blocks  of  building  stone  as  they  come  from 
the  quarry.  See  Rubble. 

Bond. — The  arrangement  of  stones  so  as  to  overlap  or  "break 
joints." 

Box  Culvert. — A  culvert  having  a  waterway  of  rectangular  cross- 
section. 

475 


476  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Breast  Wall — A  wall  built  against  the  face  of  an  excavation  to 
prevent  its  caving  down  ;  also  called  a  face  wall. 

Bridge  Seat. — See  Pedestal. 

Broken  Range  Masonry. — Masonry  in  which  the  bed  joints  are 
parallel  but  not  continuous. 

Build. — A  vertical  joint. 

Bulkhead. — A  head  wall  at  the  end  of  a  culvert,  and  perpen- 
dicular to  the  axis  of  the  culvert.  See  Head  Wall. 

Bush  Hammer. — To  dress  stone  with  a  hammer  having  a  number 
of  pyramidal  cutting  teeth  on  its  striking  face. 

Buttress. — A  vertical  piece  of  masonry  projecting  from  the  face 
of  a  retaining  wall  to  strengthen  it. 

Centers. — The  temporary  structure  that  supports  an  arch  during 
its  construction.  (Also  called  Centering.) 

Chisel  Draft. — A  narrow  plane  surface  cut  with  a  pitching  chisel 
along  the  outer  edges  of  the  face  of  an  ashlar  stone,  usually  cut  the 
width  of  the  chisel. 

Classes. — Different  kinds  of  masonry  specified,  usually,  first,  sec- 
ond and  third  class ;  the  first  class  being  the  most  expensive. 
What  is  "firsc  class"  according  to  one  engineer  may  be  "second 
class"  according  to  another. 

Closer. — A  narrow  stone  used  to  finish  a  course  of  masonry. 

Coping. — The  top  course  of  stones  on  a  wall,  usually  made  of 
large  flat  stones  which  are  laid  so  as  to  project  a  few  inches  over 
the  face  of  the  wall.  A  projecting  coping  relieves  the  wall  of  a 
"bobtailed"  appearance. 

Course. — A  horizontal  layer  or  tier  of  stones.  "Coursed  masonry" 
is  built  up  in  courses. 

Course  Bed. — Stone,  brick  or  other  building  material  in  position, 
upon  which  other  material  is  to  be  laid. 

Cover-Stones. — The  flat  stones  forming  the  roof  of  a  box  culvert. 

Cramp. — A  bar  of  metal  having  the  two  ends  bent  at  right  angles 
to  the  bar  for  insertion  into  holes  drilled  in  adjoining  blocks  of 
stone. 

Crandall. — A  stone  dressing  hammer,  consisting  of  a  steel  bar  with 
a  slot  in  one  end  holding  10  double-headed  points  of  steel  O/i-in. 
square  x  9  ins.  long),  producing  an  effect  like  fine  pointing. 

Crown. — The  top  of  an  arch  at  its  highest  point. 

Cull. — A  rejected  stone  or  brick. 

Culvert. — A  waterway  under  a  road,  canal  or  railroad  embank- 
ment. 

Cut-Stone. — A  stone  that  is  carefully  "dressed"  or  shaped  with 
tools. 

Cut-Water. — The  upper  wedge-shaped  end  of  a  bridge  pier. 

Cyclopean  Masonry. — Masonry  made  of  huge  stones,  usually  bed- 
ded in  concrete. 

Damp-Course. — A  waterproofed  course  or  bed  joint  in  a  wall,  usu- 
ally just  above  the  surface  of  the  ground  ;  its  purpose  being  to  pre- 
vent the  rise  of  water  in  the  pores  of  the  stone  and  mortar  due  to 
capillary  action. 


STOXE  M.1SOXRY.  477 

Depth. — The  width  of  a  stone  measured  perpendicularly  to  the 
face  of  the  wall ;  the  distance  that  a  face  stone  extends  Into  the 
wall. 

Dimension  Stone. — Stone  dressed  to  exactly  specified  dimensions. 

Dirt  Wall. — See  "Mud  Wall." 

Dog  Holes. — Shallow  holes  drilled  in  a  stone  to  afford  a  bite  for 
the  "dogs,"  or  hooks,  used  in  lifting  the  stone  with  a  derrick. 

Dowel.— A  short  steel  pin  Inserted  part  way  into  the  adjoining 
faces  of  two  blocks  of  stone. 

Draft  Line. — See  "Chisel  Draft." 

Drafted  Stones. — Stones  on  which  the  face  is  surrounded  by  a 
draft,  the  space  inside  the  draft  being  left  rough. 

Dress. — To  cut  or  shape  a  stone  with  tools. 

Drove. — Dressed  on  the  face  so  as  to  have  a  series  of  small  paral- 
lel ridges  and  valleys. 

Dry    Wall. — A   stone  wall  built  without  mortar. 

Efflorescence. — A  white  crust  that  often  forms  on  the  face  of  ma- 
sonry, due  to  the  leaching  of  soluble  salts  out  of  the  mortar ;  often 
called  "whitewash." 

Expansion  Joint. — A  vertical  joint  or  space  to  allow  for  tempera- 
ture changes. 

Extrados. — Tne  curve  that  bounds  the  outer  extremities  of  the 
joints  between  the  arch  stones,  or  voussoirs. 

Face. — The  front  surface  of  a  wall. 

Face  Stones. — The  stones  forming  the  front  of  a  wall. 

Face  Wall. — See  "Breast  Wall." 

Fine  Pointed. — Dressed  by  fine  point  to  smoother  finish  than  by 
rough  point. 

Flush. —  (Adj.)  Having  the  surface  even  or  level  with  an  adjacent 
surface.  (Verb.)  (1)  To  fill.  (2)  To  bring  to  a  level.  (3)  To 
force  water  to  the  surface  of  mortar  or  concrete  by  compacting  or 
ramming. 

Footing  Courses. — The  bottom  or  foundation  courses,  which  usu- 
ally project  beyond  the  "neat  work"  of  an  abutment. 

Foundation. —  (1)  That,  oortion  of  a  structure,  usually  below  the 
surface  of  the  ground,  which  distributes  the  pressure  upon  its  sup- 
port. (2)  Also  applied  to  the  natural  support  itself;  rock,  clay,  etc. 

Foundation  Bed. — The  surface  on  which  a  structure  rests. 

Frost  Batter. — A  batter  occasionally  given  to  the  rear  of  a  wall 
near  its  top  to  prevent  the  dislocation  of  the  top  course  of  stones 
upon  the  formation  of  frost  in  the  ground. 

Full-Centered. — An  arch  that  is  a  full  semi-circle,  or  half  circle. 

Groin.— The  curved  intersection  of  two  arches  meeting  at  an 
angle. 

Grout. — A  thin  watery  mortar  which  is  poured  into  the  joints 
after  the  stones  have  been  laid. 

Haunch. — The  part  of  an  arch  between  the  crown  and  the  skew- 
back. 

Header. — A  stone  laid  with  its  longest  dimension  perpendicular  to 
tnti  face  of  the  wall. 


478  HAXDB.OOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Head  Wall. — An  end  wall,  or  bulkhead,  of  a  culvert. 

Hollow  Quoin. — The  vertical  semi-circular  groove  in  the  masonry 
into  which  nts  the  "quoin  post,"  or  hinge  post,  of  a  canal  lock 
gate. 

Jntrados. — The  inner  circle  of  an  arch. 

Joint. — The  space  between  adjacent  stones ;  sometimes  the  word 
joint  is  used  to  denote  the  vertical  joints  only,  in  distinction  from 
the  "beds"  or  bed  joints.  Joints  are  usually  hlled  with  mortar. 

Keystone — The  center  stone  at  the  crown  of  an  arch. 

Lagging. — The  sheeting  plank  placed  upon  the  ribs  of  arch  centers. 

Length. — The  longest  dimension  of  a  stone. 

Leveler. — A  small  rectangular  stone,  not  less  than  4  to  6  ins.  thick,, 
used  in  broken  range  work  to  complete  the  bed  for  a  stone  in  the 
course  above  and  give  it  proper  bond.  Sometimes  called  jumper  or 
dutchman. 

Lewis  Hole. — A  wedge-shaped  hole  in  a  biock  of  stone,  made  for 
the  purpose  of  lifting  the  block  by  the  aid  of  a  lewis. 

Lining. — The  gravel  or  broken  stone  filling  back  of  a  slope  wall 
or  retaining  wall,  for  the  purpose  of  drainage  and  to  protect  the 
earth  from  wash. 

Lock. — Any  soecial  device  or  method  of  construction  used  to 
secure  a  bond  in  the  work. 

Mortar. — A  mixture  of  sand  with  cement  (or  lime)  and  water. 
A  1 :  2  (one  to  two)  mortar  contains  1  part  cement  and  2  parts  sand. 

Mud-Wall. — A  small  parapet  or  retaining  wall  built  on  top  of  a 
bridge  abutment  to  prevent  the  earth  backfill  from  sliding  or  wash- 
ing down  upon  the  coping. 

Natural  Bed. — A  laminated  or  stratified  stone  is  laid  in  its  "nat- 
ural bed,"  or  "quarry  bed,"  when  its  laminations  are  horizontal  or 
are  perpendicular  to  the  load  that  they  carry.  Granite  has  no 
"natural  bed." 

Neat  Mortar. — Mortar  made  without  sand. 

Neat  Work. — That  part  of  an  abutment  above  the  footing  courses, 
which  is  generally  equivalent  to  saying,  that  part  above  the  sur- 
face of  the  ground  or  water. 

Nigged. — Hewed  with  a  pick. 

Niggerheads. — Rounded  cobble  stones. 

Parapet. — The  "mud-wall"  of  a  bridge  abutment ;  the  "bulkhead" 
of  a  culvert ;  the  spandrel  wall  at  each  end  of  an  arch  bridge  or 
culvert,  but  more  properly  the  extension  of  the  spandrel  wall  above 
the  crown  of  the  arch ;  a  low  guard  wall  rising  above  the  surface 
of  a  roadway  or  walk  to  prevent  pedestrians  or  vehicles  from  leav- 
ing  the  roadway  or  walk. 

Patent  Hammer. — A  double-faced  hammer  so  formed  as  to  hold 
at  each  face  a  set  of  wide  thin  chisels  for  giving  a  finish  to  a  stone 
surface. 

Paving. — Regularly  placed  stone  or  brick  forming  a  floor. 

Pedestals. — Or  pedestal  blocks,  are  stone  blocks  on  top  of  an 
abutment  coping ;  the  pedestal  blocks  receive  the  weight  of  the 
bridge,  and  are  often  called  "bridge  seats"  ;  the  term  pedestal  is 


STONE  MASONRY.  479 

also  applied  to  a  small  masonry  pier  upon  which  the  post  or  sill  of 
a  trestle  rests. 

Perch. — 16 Ms  cu.  ft.  In  most  parts  of  the  United  States;  in  some 
places  22  cu.  ft. ;  and  rarely  24%,  which  was  the  old-fashioned 
perch. 

Pier. — A  masonry  structure  built  to  support  a  bridge,  between 
the  abutments ;  a  column  supporting  two  sequent  arches.  See 
"Abutment." 

Pilaster. — A  sauare  cillar  projecting:  from  the  face  of  a  wall  to 
the  extent  of  one-quarter  to  one-third  its  breadth. 

Pinner. — A  spall  or  small  stone  used  to  wedge  up  a  stone  and 
give*  it  better  bearing. 

Pitch-Line. — A  well  defined,  straight  line  cut  along  the  edge  of  a. 
quarry-faced  stone,  but  not  as  wide  as  a  chisel  draft. 

Pitched-Face. — A  face  roughly  dressed  with  a  pitching  chisel. 

Plug  and  Feathered. — Split  with  plug  and  feathers  ;  the  plug  being 
a  small  wedge  of  steel  driven  between  two  pieces  of  half-round  steel, 
called  feathers,  which  bear  against  the  sides  of  the  drill  hole. 

Pointing. — A  superior  class  of  mortar  used  to  fill  the  joints  in  the 
face  of  a  masonry  wall  for  a  depth  of  1  to  3  ins. 

Quarry  Faced. — A  rough  face  of  stone,  only  the  larger  projections 
having  been  knocked  off  with  a  hammer. 

Quoin. — See  "Hollow  Quoin." 

Raising  Stone. — See  "Pedestal." 

Ramp  Wall. — The  wing  of  an  abutment,  often  called  a  ramp. 

Random. — Not  coursed. 

Range  Masonry. — Masonry  in  which  the  various  courses  are  laid 
up  with  continuous  horizontal  beds. 

Ranged. — Laid  in  a  course  of  -the  same  thickness  for  its  full 
length  ;  broken  ranged  masonry  is  laid  in  courses  not  of  uniform 
thickness  throughout  each  course. 

Retaining  Wall. — A  wall  that  receives  the  horizontal  thrust  of 
earth  back  of  it ;  on  canal  work  such  walls  are  called  "vertical 
walls"  to  distinguish  them  from  slope  walls. 

Ring-Stones. — The  voussoirs  that  form  the  end  faces  of  an  arch, 
as  distinguished  from  the  "sheeting  stones"  that  form  the  body  of 
the  arch. 

Rip-rap. — Large  stones  thrown  in  at  random  to  protect  earth  from 
scour  by  currents  or  waves ;  occasionally  called  "random  stones." 
The  term  "hand  placed  rip-rap"  is  sometimes  used  to  denote  rough 
slope  wall,  but  slope  wall  is  a  preferable  term. 

Rise. — The  thickness  (or  vertical  height)  of  a  stone,  measured 
from  its  lower  bed  to  its  upper  bed.  Do  not  confuse  the  "rise"  with 
the  "denth."  The  rise  of  an  arch  is  the  vertical  distance  from  the 
spring  line  to  the  under  face  of  the  keystone. 

Rock-faced. — See  "Quarry- faced." 

Rock-fill  Dam. — A  dam  made  of  dry  masonry ;  a  rubble  dam  in 
Which  no  mortar  is  used. 

Rubble. — Masonry   made   of   stones    that    have   not   been    dressed, 


480  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

or  if  dressed  at  all,  have  been  only  roughly  shaped  WilL  a  .lammer, 
or  "scabbled." 

Scabbled. — Hammer  dressed. 

Sheeting. — The  stones  forming  an  arch.     See  "Ring-Stonen." 

Skew  Arch. — An  arch  the  Diane  of  whose  ring-stone  face:?  forma 
an  angle  of  less  than  90°  with  the  axis  of  the  barrel.  If  the  sheet- 
ing stones  are  all  cut  skewed,  the  arch  is  a  "true  skew"  ;  but  if  only 
the  faces  of  the  ring-stones  are  cut  on  a  skew,  while  all  th>3  other 
sheeting  stones  are  cut  with  end  joints  perpendicular  to  uie  bed 
joints,  the  arch  is  called  a  "false  skew." 

Skewbacks. — The  course  of  stones  against  which  the  springer 
stones  of  an  arch  abut. 

Slope  Wall. — A  pavement  of  scabbled  stones  laid  upon  an  earth 
slope  to  protect  it  from  wash.  If  the  stones  are  not  scabbled,  the 
terms  rip-rap,  or  hand-laid  rip-rap,  are  more  appropriate. 

Soffit. — The  under  surface  of  an  arch. 

Span. — The  shortest  distance  between  the  spring  lines  of  an  arch. 

Spandrel. — The  triangular  area  bounded  by  the  extrados  of  an 
arch,  a  horizontal  line  tangent  to  the  extrados  at  the  crown  and 
a  vertical  line  through  the  springing.  A  spandrel  wall  is  a  wall 
built  on  the  extrados  and  filling  the  spandrel  area ;  it  is  often  mis- 
called a  parapet  wall.  Spandrel  filling  is  the  earth  filling  between 
the  spandrel  walls. 

Spall. — A  fragment  of  stone,  or  stone  chip. 

Springers. — The  lowest  course  of  arch  stones,  the  course  resting 
on  the  skewbacks. 

Springing. — Or  spring  line,  the  inner  edge  of  the  skewbacks,  or 
the  lower  edge  of  the  springers. 

Squared-Stone  Masonry. — Masonry  in  which  the  stones  are  roueh- 
ly  squared  and  roughly  dressed  on  beds  and  sides. 

Starlings. — The  two  ends  of  a  pier. 

Stretcher. — A  stone  laid  so  that  its  longest  face  forms  part  of  tl?o 
face  of  a  wall. 

Voussoir. — An  arch  stone. 

Wing. — A  spur  wall  at  the  end  of  a  bridge  abutment ;  also  called 
a  ramp. 

Note. — Other  definitions  will  be  found  at  the  beginning  of  the  sec- 
tion on  Concrete. 

Percentage  of  Mortar  in  Stone  Masonry. — Published  tables  giving 
the  percentages  of  mortar  in  different  kinds  of  masonry  have  been 
very  misleading  not  only  because  they  have  been  based  upon  meager 
data,  but  because  the  factors  that  cause  variations  in  mortar 
percentages  have  not  been  discussed. 

There  are  two  wajB  of  estimating  the  amount  of  cement  required 
per  cubic  yard  of  masonry:  (1)  By  estimating  the  percentage  of 
mortar  in  the  cubic  yard  of  masonry,  and  then  using  a  mortar  table 
like  that  on  page  253.  (2)  By  tabulating  the  different  kinds  of 
masonry  and  giving  the  fractions  of  a  barrel  of  cement  required  for 
a  cubic  yard  of  each  kind  of  masonry,  when  the  mortar  is  a  1 :  J 
mixture,  also  when  it  is  a  1 :  3  mixture — these  two  being  the  com- 


STONE  MASONRY.  481 

mon  mixtures.  Each  method  possesses  its  advantages,  but  the  first 
is  the  safest  because  proper  allowance  can  be  made  for  variations 
in  the  size  of  cement  barrel. 

A  great  many  masonry  walls  consist  of  a  "facing"  of  ashlar,  or 
squared  stone  cut  to  lay  close  joints,  and  a  "backing"  of  more  or 
less  irregular  rubble  stones.  Obviously,  if  the  wall  is  a  thin  one,  the 
percentage  of  backing  is  much  smaller  than  if  the  wall  is  thick. 
So  that  it  would  be  desirable  always  to  keep  separate  records  of  the 
amount  of  mortar  used  for  the  backing  and  for  the  ashlar.  In  prac- 
tice, however,  it  is  usually  impracticable  to  keep  separate  records. 
The  final  record  usually  gives  only  the  amount  of-  cement  per  cubic 
yard  of  the  whole  wall.  However,  in  making  close  estimates  of 
probable  cost  it  is  well  to  keep  the  two  classes  of  masonry  distinct. 

Knowing  the  average  size  of  cut  stone  blocks  and  the  thickness  of 
joints  specified,  we  can  estimate  the  per  cent  of  mortar  for  the  face 
stone  with  considerable  accuracy.  Suppose  the  cut  stone  is  to  be  in 
courses  12  ins.  high,  and  dressed  to  lay  %-in.  joints  for  12  ins.  back 
of  the  face.  We  can  assume  that  the  length  of  each  face  stone  will 
not  be  far  from  1%  times  its  thickness,  or  18  ins.  in  this  case. 
Hence  each  cut.  stone  will  contain  1x1x1%,  or  1%  cu.  ft.  Each 
stone  must  have  one  end  and  one  bed  mortared  to  a  thickness  of 
%  in.,  hence  we  have:  I  X  1V2  X  (  %  -j- 12),  or  0.04  cu.  ft.  of  mor- 
tar for  the  end;  and  1  X  1%  X  (%-j-12),  or  0.06  cu.  ft.  of  mor- 
tar for  the  bed;  making  a  total  of  0.1  cu.  ft.  of  mortar  for  the  end 
and  bed  of  each  stone.  But  as  each  stone  contains  1.5  cu.  ft.,  we 
see  that  0.1  -r- 1.5  gives  us  7%  (nearly)  of  mortar  for  the  cut  stone. 

Obviously  the  larger  the  individual  stones  the  less  is  the  per- 
centage of  mortar.  Stones  18  ins.  high,  30  ins.  long,  and  dressed 
to  lay  %-in.  joints  for  18  ins.  back  of  the  face,  require  4^%  of 
mortar. 

The  mortar  required  for  the  back  of  the  stone  is  apparently 
omitted  in  applying  the  above  method,  but  it  is  not  omitted  in  the 
final  account,  since  it  is  included  in  the  rubble  backing  to  a  con- 
sideration of  which  we  now  pass. 

Rubble  is  a  term  having  wide  variations  in  meaning,  but  in  gen- 
eral it  may  be  said  to  apply  to  masonry  built  of  undressed  stones 
just  as  they  come  from  the  quarry.  Now,  if  the  quarry  is  lime- 
stone or  sandstone  yielding  flat-bedded  stones,  the  rubble  may  be 
laid  with  bed  joints  as  close  as  the  joints  of  well-dressed  granite 
ashlar.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  quarry  is  granite  or  rock  that 
when  blasted  yields  chunks  of  irregular  shape,  the  rubble  becomes  a 
sort  of  giant  concrete  and  requires  a  large  percentage  of  mortar  to 
fill  its  voids. 

In  any  kind  of  rubble  the  percentage  of  mortar  can  be  consider- 
ably reduced  by  packing  spalls  into  the  vertical  joints  between' 
adjacent  stones.  As  Portland  cement  mortar  seldom  costs  less  than 
$5  per  cu.  yd.,  and  as  spalls  usually  cost  but  a  few  cents  per  cu.  yd., 
no  pains  should  be  spared  to  use  as  many  spalls  as  the  joints  will 
hold. 

If  no  spalls  are  used,  and  if  the  rubble  is  made  of  irregular  stones, 


482  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

about  35%  of  the  rubble  masonry  is  mortar.  If  the  rubble  is  matk 
of  flat-bedded  sandstone  or  limestone,  it  may  contain  as  low  as  15% 
mortar,  but  more  often  will  average  20  to  25%. 

The  following  are  records  of  the  actual  amounts  of  mortar  used 
in  different  masonry  structures : 

(1)  The  Medina  sandstone  retaining  walls  on  the  Erie  Canal 
averaged  about  10  ft.  high  and  were  faced  with  hammer-dressed 
stones  and  backed  with  flat-bedded  rubble.  About  22%  of  the  wall 
was  mortar.  The  mortar  was  1 :  2,  and  it  required  about  0.63  bbl. 
cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  wall.  A  barrel  was  counted  as  holding  3.8 
cu.  ft. 

02)  Mr.  A.  J.  Wiley  states  that  in  the  Crow  Creek  Dam,  near 
Cheyenne,  Wyo.,  there  are  14,420  cu.  yds.  of  rubble  masonry,  of 
which  34%%  was  mortar.  About  80 %  of  this  mortar  was  1  Port- 
land cement  to  4  sand :  the  rest  was  1  to  3.  Each  barrel  was 
counted  as  4  cu.  ft.,  and  8.844  bbls.  were  used,  or  0.62  bbl. 
per  cu.  yd. 

(3)  The  Cheesman  Dam  is  of  rubble,  with  one  ashlar  face,  and 
is  said  to  contain  28%  mortar. 

(4)  The    Cheat    River    Bridge,    on    the    B.    &    O.    R.    R..    near 
Uniontown,  Pa.,  has  five  piers  and  two  abutments.     The  masonry  is 
a  first-class  sandstone  facing  with  a  rubble  backing  of  heavy  stones, 
and  the  mortar  was  1  of  Louisville  (natural)   cement  to  2  of  sand. 
There  were   3.710  cu.   yds.    of  masonry,   which  required   1,500   bbls. 
of  cement   (shipped  in  bags),  or  0.4  bbl.  per  cu.  yd. 

(5)  The   masonry    locks    on    the    Great    Kanawha    River,    West 
Virginia,  were  built  of  sandstone  obtained  at  Lottes,  W.  Va.     Face 
stones  were  cut   to   lay    %-in.   bed- joints  and   1-in.   vertical   joints 
Backing  bed-joints  were   1   in.      The  mortar  was  1  part  Rosendale 
cement  (Hoffman  brand),  to  2  parts  sand.     It  required  0.36  bbl.  per 
cu.  yd.  of  masonry. 

(6)  A   curved   masonry    dam.    82    ft.    high,    built   at   Remscheid, 
Germany,   is  made  of  slate  having  a   specific  gravity  of  2.7.     The 
masonry,  laid  in  trass  mortar,  weighs  4,015  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.     Owing 
to   the   irregular   form   of   the   stones   the   mortar  was   38%    of  the 
masonry. 

(7)  The  Holyoke  Dam,   30  ft.  high,  is  of  rubble  masonry  with 
a  cut  granite  face.     The  mortar  was  1  Portland  cement  to  2  sand, 
and  it  is  stated  that  0.87  bbl.  of  cement  was  required  per  cubic  yard 
of  rubble  masonry. 

(8)  Masonry  in  bridge  piers,  at  Van  Buren,  Arkansas  River,  was 
for  the  most  part  of  white  limestone.     In  10  piers  there  were  4,500 
cu.   yds.   of  masonry,  which  averaged  0.57   bbl.  natural  cement  per 
cu.  yd.     The  beds  and  joints  were  1 :  2  mortar,  and  a  1 :  1  grout  was 
also  used. 

(9)  The  limestone  masonry  for  the  Sault  Ste.   Marie  locks   (U. 
S.  Government)  amounted  to  80.876  cu.  yds.,  of  which  23%  was  cut 
stone,  60%  backing  and  17%  mortar.     The  cut  stone  blocks  average 
1.3  cu.  yds.  each,  and  were  dressed  to  lay  %-in.  vertical  joints  for 
18  ins.  back  of  the  face,  and  the  bed  joints  were  dressed  to   %   in. 


STONE  MASONRY,  483 

the  full  depth  of  the  stone.  In  cutting  the  stone  there  was  a 
wastage  of  26^»%  of  stone.  The  mortar  was  1:1,  and  it  required 
0.29  bbl.  of  Portland  cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  cut  stone,  1.21  bbls.  of 
natural  cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  backing,  and  0.78  bbl.  per  cu. 
yd.  of  the  wall,  including  cut  stone  and  backing.  The  backing  stones 
each  averaged  8  sq.  ft.  bed  area,  and  no  bed-joint  was  greater  than 
1  in. ;  and  no  vertical  joint  exceeded  4  ins.,  the  average  being  2 
ins.  This  is  remarkably  close  jointing  for  backing,  and  was  un- 
questionably very  expensive  to  secure. 

(10)  The  Lanchensee  Dam,   Germany,  was  made  of  graywacke 
rubble  (stones  %  to  %  cu.  yd.  each)  ;  35%  of  the  dam  was  mortar. 
A    force    of    45    masons.    12    helpers,    27    laborers    and    4    foremen 
worked  on  the  dam,  and  110  men  at  the  quarry.     They  averaged  120 
cu.  yds.  of  masonry  per  day.  the  best  day's  work  being  196  cu.  yds. 
Eight  locomotive  cranes  running  on  trestles  took  the  stone  from  the 
cars.     The  work  was  done  by  day  labor  for  the  German  Government. 

(11)  The  Sweetwater  Dam,   California,   was  built  of  a  granitic 
rubble   that   was   quarried   in   irregular   chunks.    •  Mortar  was    1 :  3, 
proportioned  by  barrels,  and  it  required  0.86  bbl.  cement  per  cu.  yd. 
of  rubble  masonry. 

Cost  of  Laying  Masonry. — According  to  my  experience  on  numer- 
ous small  culvert  bulkheads  made  of  limestone  or  sandstone  rubble, 
one  mason  with  a  helper  to  mix  mortar  and  "get  stone"  will  lay 
4  to  5  cu.  yds.  per  8-hr.  day.  If  mason's  wages  are  $3  and  helper's 
$1.50  this  makes  the  cost  average  $1  per  cu.  yd.  for  laying.  No 
derrick  is  used  in  such  work  the  stone  being  one-man  or  two-man 
stone.  Moreover,  the  stone  requires  little  or  no  hammer-dressing 
on  the  part  of  the  mason. 

In  laying  dry  slope-walls  (12  or  15  ins.  thick)  where  stone 
of  the  same  kind  as  the  above  is  used,  requiring  very  little  hammer- 
dressing,  a  slope- wall  mason  will  lay  5  to  7  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day, 
and  I  have  had  a  man  lay  as  high  as  12  cu.  yds.  per  day.  One 
laborer  to  about  2  or  3  slope-wall  masons  is  required,  to  furnish 
them  with  stone.  A  common  laborer  will  lay  about  half  as  many 
yards  of  slope-wall  stone  as  a  skilled  mason,  so  there  is  little  or 
no  economy  in  using  unskilled  labor  in  laying  the  stone  that  must 
be  laid  to  a  line  and  occasionally  dressed  with  a  hammer. 

On  a  highway  arch  bridge  of  30-ft.  span,  with  a  barrel  20  ft. 
long,  there  were  50  cu.  yds.  of  cut  stone  sheeting,  30  cu.  yds.  of  cut 
stone  facing  in  the  abutments  and  walls,  and  190  cu.  yds.  of  lime- 
stone rubble  in  the  abutments  and  walls.  The  masonry  was  laid 
by  a  mason  and  3  laborers,  two  of  the  laborers  operating  a  hand 
power  derrick  and  getting  stone  for  the  mason,  while  the  third  labor- 
er made  mortar  and  also  assisted  in  getting  stone.  This  gang  worked 
without  a  foreman  and  were  very  slow,  since  they  averaged  only 
3  cu.  yds.  per  8-hr.  day.  With  mason's  wages  at  $3  and  laborers' 
at  |1.50,  the  cost  of  laying  the  masonry  was  $2.50  per  cu.  yd.  This 
Included  the  erecting  of  two  small  derricks  on  opposite  sides  of  the 
stream,  but  did  not  include  erecting:  the  centers  for  the  arch.  On 
page  206.  the  cost  of  laying  the  masonry  of  an  arch  bridge,  similar 


484  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

to  this  one  is  given  in  detail;  it  being  $1.35  per  cu.  yd.,  which 
shows  how  easy  it  is  to  reduce  the  cost  of  laying  where  the  men  are 
better  organized.  The  common  mistake  made  in  organizing  forces 
for  laying  stone  with  hand  operated  derricks  is  in  having  too  many 
laborers  to  one  mason,  who  is  unable  to  keep  them  busy. 

If  the  mason  must  hammer-dress  the  stone  to  a  great  extent,  as 
is  often  required  by  inspectors  on  granite  rubble  arches,  the  cost 
of  laying  (including  this  hammer  dressing)  may  amount  to  $3.50 
per  cu.  yd.  It  is  difficult  to  be  definite  in  the  matter  of  costs  of 
hammer-dressed  granite  rubble,  because  inspectors  vary  so  ex- 
tremely in  their  interpretation  of  specifications.  If  no  hammer- 
dressing  is  required  (and  none  should  be  required  for  backing  laid 
in  cement  mortar),  the  cost  of  laying  granite  rubble  need  not  exceed 
the  cost  of  laying  limestone  or  sandstone  rubble,  say  $1  per  cu.  yd., 
wages  being  as  above  given. 

In  tearing  down  and  relaying  an  old  masonry  retaining  wall  (9 
ft.  high),  the  author  employed  16  laborers  and  2  masons  under  a 
foreman.  A  stiff -leg  derrick  having  30-ft.  boom,  and  operated  by 
hand,  was  used  to  handle  the  heaviest  stones.  Much  of  the  back- 
ing was  laid  by  hand  by  the  laborers.  This  gang  averaged  36  cu. 
yds.  of  masonry  laid  per  10-hr,  day,  at  a,  cost  of  $30,  exclusive  of 
foreman's  wages,  or  less  than  85  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  It  cost  75  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  to  tear  down  the  wall  before  relaying  it. 

For  laying  any  considerable  quantity  of  masonry,  never  use  a 
hand-operated  derrick.  A  horse-whim  forms  cheaper  power  than  two 
men  on  a  winch.  But  in  either  case  the  lost  time  of  swinging,  or 
slewing,  the  boom  cannot  be  avoided.  The  men  (usually  two)  who 
swing  the  boom  are  called  "tag  men,"  because  they  pull  the  boom 
back  and  forth  with  "tag  ropes."  The  wages  of  these  men  form 
a  surprisingly  large  part  of  the  cost  of  laying  stone  where  a  derrick 
is  used  which  is  not  provided  with  a  "bull-wheel"  for  swinging  the 
boom.  The  engineman  controls  the  swinging  of  the  boom  where  a 
bull- wheel  is  used,  and  can  make  a  swing  of  90°  in  15  to  20 
seconds. 

To  show  how  rapidly  stone  may  be  handled  with  a  60-ft.  boom 
derrick,  the  following  record  will'serve: 

Seconds. 

Hooking  on  to  skip 35 

Swinging  boom  90° 20 

Dumping  skip    15 

Swinging  back  90° 20 

Total    90 

This  is  equivalent  to  400  skip  loads  in  10  hrs.  ;  and,  were  the 
material  supplied  and  removed  fast  enough,  the  derrick  could  readily 
maintain  this  output  for  10  hrs.,  handling  1  cu.  yd.  of  rubble  in 
each  skip  load.  Obviously  in  masonry  work,  where  a  bull-wheel 
derrick  is  used,  the  limiting  factor  is  the  amount  of  stone  the  masons 
can  handle  per  day.  Much  of  the  derrick  time  is  spent  in  the  put- 
tering work  necessary  in  carefully  placing  large  stones  in  the  wall. 
Now,  where  tag-rope  men  are  used  instead  of  a  bull-wheel,  prac- 


STONE  MASONRY.  485 

tically  all  their  time  is  wasted,  as  they  spend  so  little  of  the  day 
doing  active  work. 

Further  data  on  the  cost  of  laying  masonry  will  be  found  on  sub- 
sequent pages. 

Estimating  the  Cost  of  Stone  Dressing. — Stone  may  be  divided 
into  two  classes :  (1)  Stone  stratified  in  beds  of  a  thickness  not 
much  exceeding  30  ins.  ;  and  (2)  stone  that  is  either  unstratified,  or 
occurs  in  beds  of  such  thickness  that  the  blocks  must  be  split  with 
plugs  and  feathers  to  secure  sizes  which  can  be  handled  with  a 
derrick. 

Many  sandstones  and  limestones  occur  in  thin  strata  or  layers, 
and,  after  the  use  of  a  little  black  powder  to  "shake  up"  the  ledge, 
it  is  possible  to  quarry  blocks  with  wedges  and  bars.  These  blocks 
will  often  be  as  smooth  as  a  floor  on  the  bed-joints,  but  may  be  quite 
irregular  on  trie  vertical  joints.  However,  either  by  hammering,  or 
by  plug  and  feathering,  the  vertical  joints  can  be  squared  up  at 
slight  expense  ready  for  further  dressing  if  required  by  the  specifi- 
cations. On  the  other  hand,  all  granites  and  many  thick-bedded 
limestones  and  sandstones,  break  out  in  such  irregular  shapes  that  it 
often  happens  that  every  face  must  be  plug  and  feathered  before  the 
block  is  roughly  squared  up  ready  to  be  dressed  by  the  stonecutters. 
Obviously  the  dressing  of  the  beds  of  such  stones  is  far  more  ex- 
pensive than  the  dressing  of  the  beds  of  smoothly  stratified  stones. 

Besides  differences  in  hardness,  we  see  that  the  shape  of  the 
stones  as  they  come  from  the  quarry  is  a  very  important  factor  in 
the  cost  of  dressing. 

Another  factor  of  scarcely  less  importance  is  the  size  of  the 
blocks  of  stone.  It  is  generally  possible  to  quarry  granites  in  blocks 
of  any  desired  size,  the  limit  being  fixed  by  the  strength  of  the 
derricks  and  other  machinery  used.  A  very  common  size  of  granite 
blocks  dressed  ready  to  lay  in  the  wall  is  18  ins.  rise  x  40  ins. 
length  x  24  to  30  ins.  depth.  And  as  every  block  of  granite  must  be 
plug  and  feathered  to  size  before  dressing,  it  is  just  as  cheap  to 
make  coursed  ashlar  as  random  range  ashlar.  On  the  other  hand, 
stratified  rocks  like  sandstone  usually  occur  in  layers  of  different 
thickness,  and  it  may  be  impossible  to  secure  enough  stone  for 
courses  of  a  specified  rise  without  wasting  a  large  part  of  the 
quarry  product.  An  engineer  should  never  specify  any  given  "rise" 
for  the  courses  (except  in  granite),  until  he  has  examined  the 
quarries  and  is  sure  that  they  will  yield  the  product  specified. 
But  engineers  often  fail  to  do  this,  and  the  contractor  must  be 
careful  not  to  be  equally  foolish  in  failing  to  examine  the  stone 
available. 

Stone  is  often  so  seamy  or  so  orittle  that  it  can  be  quarried  only 
in  small  chunks.  Now  it  is  obvious  that  the  smaller  the  chunk 
'the  greater  the  area  that  must  be  dressed  per  cubic  yard ;  but 
how  greatly  this  factor  affects  the  cost  of  dressing  is  seldom  consid- 
ered. To  illustrate,  let  us  assume  that  blocks  for  ashlar  are  each 
12  ins.  rise  x  24  ins.  long  x  18  ins.  deep.  Each  block  then  contains 


486  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

3  cu.  ft.,  and  has  6  sq.  ft.  of  bed  joints  and  3  sq.  ft.  of  end  joints, 
or  9  sq.  ft.  of  joints  to  be  dressed.  Let  us  now  take  an  ashlar  block 
18  ins.  rise  x  36  ins.  long  x  24  ins.  deep.  This  block  contains  9 
cu.  ft.,  and  has  12  sq.  ft.  of  bed  joints  and  6  sq.  ft.  of  end  joints,  or 
18  so.,  ft.  of  joints  to  be  dressed.  With  the  smaller  block  we  have 
9x9,  or  81  sq.  ft.  of  joints  to  be  dressed  for  every  cubic  yard ; 
whereas  with  the  larger  block  we  have  3x12,  or  36  sq.  ft.  to  be 
dressed  for  every  cubic  yard.  In  other  words  the  cost  of  dressing 
ashlar  of  the  3-cu.  ft.  blocks  is  more  than  twice  as  expensive  per 
cubic  yard  as  the  cost  of  dressing  the  9-cu.  ft.  blocks. 

It  is  apparent,  therefore,  that  all  records  of  the  cost  of  dressing 
stone  should  be  expressed  in  terms  of  the  square  feet  actually 
dressed,  and  then  the  data  can  be  applied  to  blocks  of  any  given  size 
to  obtain  the  cost  of  dressing  per  cubic  yard.  This  method  of  esti- 
mating costs  will  often  lead  a  contractor  to  import  his  stone  a  long 
distance  by  rail  rather  than  attempt  to  dress  the  small-sized  stones 
from  local  quarries. 

It  is  customary  among  contractors  and  stonecutters  to  speak 
of  so  and  so  many  "square  feet"  of  stone  dressed  per  day,  meaning 
not  the  number  of  square  feet  of  beds  and  joints  dressed,  but  the 
square  feet  of  "face."  For  example  a  stone  is  1%  ft.  rise  x  3  ft. 
long  x  2  ft.  deep.  This  stone  when  laid  lengthwise  in  the  face  of 
a  wall  will  show  a  face  area  of  4^  sq.  ft.,  and  the  stone  cutter  is 
said  to  have  dressed  4^  sq.  ft.  As  a  matter  of  fact  he  has 
dressed  12  sq.  ft.  of  bed  joints,  and  6  sq.  ft.  of  end  joints,  beside 
plugging  off  or  hammering  the  face  of  the  stone,  and  cutting  the 
drafts  if  specified.  In  my  early  work  I  was  misled  by  this  method 
of  estimating  stone  dressing  in  terms  of  the  square  feet  of  face.  It 
is  a  method  that  should  be  abandoned. 

Data  of  the  actual  cost  of  stone  dressing  will  be  given  in  subse- 
quent pages. 

Data  on  Stone  Sawing.— There  is  little  on  this  subject  in  print, 
but  in  almost  any  large  city  stone  saws  may  be  seen  at  work,  and 
a  rough  estimate  can  be  made  of  the  cost  of  stone  sawing.  To 
tell  how  many  inches  deeo  a  saw  cuts  in  a  day,  examine  a  slab  of 
stone  newly  cut  in  the  yard.  It  will  be  noted  that  there  are  rust 
lines  on  the  face  of  the  slab.  The  distance  between  these  lines 
indicates  the  depth  cut  in  a  day,  for  when  the  saws  are  idle  at 
night,  the  rust  forms. 

For  cutting  stone  into  thin  slabs,  it  is  common  practice  to  run  two 
"gangs"  of  saws,  of  15  saws  in  a  "gang"  driven  by  a  small  engine. 
As  nearly  as  I  have  been  able  to  estimate  by  observation  and  in- 
quiry, the  daily  cost  of  operating  a  "two-gang"  plant  is  as  follows 
per  9-hr,  day  in  New  York  City : 

1  gangman    $   4.00 

1  helper 3.00 

2  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $3 6.00 

%  ton  coal,  at  $6 3.00 


Total  per  day $16.00 


STONE  MASONRY.  487 

Working  in  Tennessee  marble  each  saw  cuts  about  6  ins.  deep 
per  day,  therefore,  if  the  block  is  6  ft.  long,  the  30  saws  cut  90 
sq.  ft.  per  day  of  9  hrs.  The  cost  of  sawing  slabs,  therefore,  ap- 
proximates 17  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  The  saw  cuts  a  kerf  %-in.  wide. 

I  am  told  that  with  wages  of  polisher  at  $3.50,  slabs  can  be  pol- 
ished by  hand  at  6  cts.  per  sq.  ft. ;  but  where  the  polishing  is  done 
by  machine  the  cost  is  about  2%  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Wages  of  stone  yard  men  in  New  York  City  are  about  a  third 
higher  than  in  most  other  American  cities. 

Mr.  R.  J.  Cooke  states  that  the  rates  of  sawing  different  kinds  of 
stone  are  as  follows : 

Depth  cut  in 
10  hrs.,  ins. 

Granite,  Addison,  Me.   (shot) 10 

Granite,  Chester,  Mass,    (sand) 12 

Granite,    Red   Beach,    Me.    (shot) 7% 

Bluestone,   Hudson  River    (sand) 8 

Marble,  Carara,  Italy   (sand) 15 

Marble,    Tennessee    (sand) 9 

Marble,  Tate,  Ga.    (sand) 6 

Marble,  Tate,  Ga.    (sand) 12 

Marble,  Gouverneur,  N.  Y.   (sand)  .  .  . 12 

Marble,  W.  Rutland,  Vt.    (sand) 20 

Marble,    Proctor,   Vt.    (sand) 15 

Limestone,   New   Point,    Ind.    (sand) 10 

Limestone,    New    Point,    Ind.    (sand) 15 

r  Oolitic  limestone,  Bedford,  Ind.  (sand) 40 
Oolitic  limestone,  Bedford,  Ind.  (sand) 70 
Magnesian  limestone,  Lemont,  111.  (sand) 36 

Sandstone,   N.   Amherst,    O.    (sand) 40 

Sandstone,  Clarksville,  O.    (sand) 36 

Brownstone,   Portland,   Conn,    (shot) 20 

Brownstone,  Hummelston,   Pa.    (shot) 25 

The   Young   &   Farrell   Diamond    Stone   Sawing   Co.,    of    Chicago, 
classifies   stone   into    soft,   medium   and  hard ;     soft   includes  sand- 
stones ;    medium  includes  limestones,  and  hard  includes  marbles  and 
granites.'   They  say   (1890)   the  cost  of  sawing  per  sq.  ft.  is:     Soft, 
8  to  10  cts. ;  medium,  13  to  17  cts. ;  hard,  25  to  30  cts. ;  all  on  the 
basis  of  4-in.  sawing  or  two  cuts  to  the  cubic  foot.     With  wages  of 
i  stone  cutters  at  50  cts.  an  hour,  the  cost  of  hand  dressing  the  same 
!  classes  of  stones  is  given  as  follows  per  square  foot:     Soft,  25  to 
30  cts.  ;  medium,  40  to  45  cts. ;  and  hard,  75  to  80  cts. ;  all  clear  face 
work. 

Cost  of  Stone  Dressing.— In  addition  to  the  data  just  given,  The 

Syenite  Granite  Co.,  of  Graniteville,  Mo.,   say   (1890)    that  the  cost 

of  hand  dressing  36,000  cu.  ft.  of  granite  to  ^-in.  joints  was  20  cts. 

|  per  sq.   ft,   not  including  blacksmithing,   handling,   etc.,   which  was 

6  cts.  more  per  sq.  ft.     This  stone  was  granite  cut  to  lay  in  24  to 

'    30-in.    courses   for    the    Merchants'    Bridge,    St.    Louis,    and   it    was 

delivered  for  $1.15  per  cu.  ft. 

The  Kankakee  Stone  &  Lime  Co.  say  (1890)  that,  with  wages  at 
$3  a  day,  the  cost  of  dressing  limestone  (bush-hammered  or  drove- 
work)  is  25  ct.s.  Der  so.  ft. 

Cost  of  Cutting    Limestone   and   Sandstone. — In   dressing  Medina 


488  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

sandstone,  a  stonecutter  will  dress  enough  stone  in  9  hrs.  to  lay  12 
sq.  ft.  of  face  in  a  wall  having  courses  that  average  15  ins.  rise, 
which  is  equivalent  to  about  0.9  cu.  yd.  of  face  stone  per  day,  or 
30  sq.  ft.  of  beds  and  joints  cut  to  lay  %-in.  joints  for  at  least 
12  ins.  back  of  the  face.  The  face  is  rock- faced,  and  is  plugged  off 
by  the  stonecutter. 

In  dressing  limestone  for  arch  sheeting,  the  author  made  the  mis- 
take of  using  a  quarry  whose  product  was  all  small  and  gnarled 
stones.  Each  stone  after  dressing  averaged  only  11  ins.  thick,  22 
ins.  long,  and  18  ins.  deep,  or  about  0.1  cu.  yd.  per  stone,  so  that 
to  secure  1  cu.  yd.  of  this  cut-stone  required  the  dressing  of  80  sq. 
ft.  of  beds  and  joints.  Each  stonecutter  averaged  36  sq.  ft.  of 
beds  and  joints  (dressed  to  lay  %-in.)  per  9-hr,  day,  or  1  cu.  yd.  in 
2^4  days.  These  cutters  received  40  cts.  per  hour. 

Cost  of  Sandstone  Bridge  Piers.— The  cost  of  cutting  246  cu.  yds. 
sandstone  to  %-in.  joints  for  bridge  piers  was  $2.65  per  cu.  yd. ; 
the  cutting  of  the  stones  for  the  nose  of  the  pier  cost  $3  per  cu.  yd. 
The  wages  of  cutters  were  38  cts.  per  hr. 

The  cost  of  loading  the  stone,  train  service,  sand,  cement  and 
laying  the  masonry  was  $3.60  per  cu.  yd.  About  %  bbl.  of  Port- 
land cement  costing  $2.40  per  bbl.  was  used  per  cu.  yd.  of  masonry. 
The  cost  of  quarrying  the  stone  was  $1.65  per  cu.  yd.  The  total 
cost  of  the  pier  masonry  was  $9  per  cu.  yd.  For  the  foregoing  data 
I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  C.  R.  Nehr. 

Cost  of  Cutting  Granite  for  a  Dam.— In  building  a  dam  in  the 
northern  part  of  New  York  state,  the  author  used  a  granitic  rock. 
The  face  stones  were  cut  to  lay  in  courses  with  beds  and  joints 
%  in.  thick.  Each  cut  stone  was  quarry-faced  and  averaged  1%  ft. 
rise  x  3  ft.  long  x  2  ft.  deep,  or  about  %  cu.  yd.  A  stonecutter 
averaged  one  such  stone  per  8-hr  day,  or  18  sq.  ft.  of  beds  and  end 
joints  dressed  per  day.  A  blacksmith,  at  $2.50,  and  a  helper,  at 
fl;50,  sharpened  the  points  and  plug  drills  for  8  stonecutters.  The 
cost  of  cutting  this  face  stone  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Stone  cutters,  at  $4  per  8  hrs $12.00 

Blacksmithing    1.20 

Labor  bankering  stones  and  plugging  off  faces.  . .      1.80 

Sheds  and  tools 0.80 

Superintendence     1.20 

Total    $17.00 

On  a  small  portion  of  the  work  the  stone  was  dressed  to  lay  %-in. 
joints,  which  added  $6  per  cu.  yd.  to  the  cost. 

Cost  of  Cutting  Granite,  New  York  City.— Mr.  Wm.  W.  Maclay 
gives  the  cost  of  cutting  2,065  cu.  yds.  of  granite  by  a  force  of  40 
stonecutters  working  for  the  New  York  Department  of  Docks,  during 
1873  to  1875.  The  working:  day  was  8  hrs.  The  following:  table 
gives  the  average  day's  work  of  a  stonecutter  working  for  the  Dock 
Department  as  compared  with  work  done  for  contractors  in  New 
York: 


STONE  MASONRY.  489 

Sq.  ft.  per  8-hr.  day. 
For  Dock  For  Con- 
Cutting  Granite.                                                       Dept.  tractors. 

Dressing  beds  and  joints  (  *4  in.) 13.5  16.0 

Pointed  work  with  1%-in.  chisel  draft  all  around     8.5  10.0 

Pean-hammered    6.0  7.25 

6-cut  patent  hammered 5.25  6.15 

8-cut  patent  hammered 4.25  5.00 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  men  working  for  the  Dock  Department 
did  about  15%  less  work  daily  than  is  said  to  have  been  the  average 
under  contractors. 

In  doing  this  dock  work  there  were  1,524  cu.  yds.  of  dimension 
stones  cut  into  headers  and  stretchers.  The  headers  averaged  2  ft. 
on  the  face  by  3  ft.  deep  ;  and  the  stretchers  averaged  6  ft.  long  on 
the  face  by  3  ft.  deep;  the  rise  being  20,  22  and  26  ins.  for  the  dif- 
ferent courses.  The  stones  were  cut  to  lay  %-in.  beds  and  joints, 
the  faces  being  pointed  work  with  a  1^-in.  chisel  draft  all  around. 
The  cost  of  this  cutting  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd.  Per  cent. 

Cutting  (4.53  days)    $13.22  48 

Labor  rolling  stones 8.26  30 

Sharpening  tools   4.13  15 

Superintendence     1.38  5 

New  tools  and  timber  for  rolling  stones 0.28  1 

Interest  on  sheds,  derrick,  and  railroad 0.28  1 

Total $27755  100 

In  addition  to  this  work  there  were  310  cu.  yds.  of  coping  cut  to 
lay  }4 -in  joints,  pointed  on  the  face  and  with  a  chisel  draft,  8-cut 
patent-hammered  on  the  top,  and  with  a  round  of  3% -in.  radius. 
The  coping  stones  were  8  ft.  long,  4  ft.  wide,  and  2y2  ft.  rise.  The 
cost  of  cutting  this  coping  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd.  Per  cent. 

Cutting  (6.26  days)    |18.27  48 

Labor  rolling  stones 11.42  30 

Sharpening  tools   5.71  15 

Superintendence 1.90  5 

New  tools  and  timber 0.38  1 

Interest  on  sheds,  etc 0.38  1 

Total   $38~06  100 

It  would  appear  from  the  above  that  the  stonecutters  received  $3 
for  8  hrs.,  but  Mr.  Maclay  states  that  the  pay  was  $4  for  8  hrs. 
If  so  there  is  some  error  in  the  other  items,  which  I  have  calculated 
from  the  percentages  given  by  him.  It  is  difficult  to  understand 
how  the  "labor  of  rolling  stones"  could  have  been  30%  of  the  total 
cost  of  cutting,  unless  the  laborers  assisted  in  plug  and  feathering 
the  stones  preparatory  to  cutting.  The  cost  of  tool  sharpening 
(15%)  was  also  very  high  Certainly  these  two  items  were  much 
higher  than  they  would  have  been  under  a  contractor. 

Mr.  J.  J.  R.  Croes  states  that  in  cutting  granite  for  the  gate-houses 
of  the  Croton  Reservoir  at  86th  St.,  New  York,  in  1861-2,  the  least 
day's  work  was  fixed  at  15  sq.  ft.  of  beds  and  joints.  This  included 
the  cutting  of  a  chisel  draft  around  the  face  of  the  stone,  the  cost  of 
Which  was  about  one-fourth  as  much  as  cutting  a  square  foot  of 


490  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

joint,  making  the  actual  least  day's  work  equivalent  to  17.7  sq.  ft. 
of  beds  and  joints  cut.  With  wages  of  stonecutters  assumed  at  $3 
per  day,  from  the  percentages  given  by  Mr.  Croes,  I  have  calculated 
the  cost  of  cutting  to  have  been  as  follows  per  square  foot : 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Cutting  ( 15  sq.  ft.  per  day) $0.200 

Sharpening  tools    0.022 

Labor  moving  stone  in  yards 0.020 

Drillers  plugging  off  rough  faces 0.008 

Superintendence    0.016 

Sheds  and  tools 0.014 

Total    $0.280 

The  cost  of  all  the  items  other  than  the  wages  of  stone  cutters 
was  40%  of  the  wages  of  the  stonecutters,  or  8  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  Quarrying,  Cutting  and  Laying  Granite.— Mr.  J.  J.  R. 
Croes  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  work  done  on  the  Boyd's 
Corner  Dam.  near  New  York  City : 

The  stone  is  a  gneiss  that  is  about  as  difficult  to  quarry  as  granite. 
The  face  stone  for  the  dam  average  1.8  ft.  rise,  3.6  ft.  long  and  2.7 
ft.  deep,  and  were  cut  to  lay  %-in.  joints.  In  quarrying  the  dimen- 
sion stone,  plug  and  feathers  were  used  to  split  the  stone  to  size 
ready  for  cutting.  The  cost  of  quarrying  and  plug  and  feathering 
4,000  cu.  yds.  of  dimension  stone  ready  for  cutting  was  as  follows: 

Days(10hr.)      Cost  per 
per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman,  at  $3 0.114 

Drillers,  at  $2 0.917 

Laborers,  at  $1.50 0.429 

Blacksmiths,  at  $2.50    0.102 

Tool  boys,  at  $0.50 0.108 

Labor  loading  teams,  at  $1.50. .....     0.284 

Total  (not  including  explosives  and  teaming)  $3.55 
The  work  was  done  by  contract  in  1867-8.  The  rates  of  wages 
were  not  given  by  Mr.  Croes,  but  Mr.  John  B.  McDonald  has  been 
kind  enough  to  give  me  most  of  the  rates  of  wages  as  nearly  as  he 
can  remember.  The  length  of  haul  from  quarry  to  stone  yard  was 
about  a  mile,  and  Mr.  McDonald  states  that  oxen  were  used.  The 
cost  of  "teams"  is  given  by  Mr.  Croes,  as  0.62  team  day  per  cu.  yd., 
which  indicates  that  a  good  deal  of  stone  boat  work  was  done, 
or  else  that  there  is  an  error  in  this  item. 

The  cost  of  quarrying  3,400  cu.  yds.  of  rubble  stone  for  this  same 
dam  vas  as  follows: 

Days  per        Cost  per 
cu.  yd.  cu.  yd. 

Foremen,  at  $3 0.041  $0.12 

Drillers  at  $2 0.339  0.68 

Laborers,  at  $1.50   0.140  0.21 

Blacksmiths,    at    $2.50    0.036  0.09 

Tool  boy,  at  $0.50 0.035  0.02 

Labor,    loading   teams,    at    $1.50....      0.077  0.12 

Teams,  at   $4 0.141  0.56 


Total  labor   $1.80 

It   is  presumable  that  both  the  dimension   stone  and  the  rubble 
stone  were  measured  in  the  dam. 


STONE  MASONRY.  491 

The  masonry  was  called  "rubble  range'"  a  term  that  deceived 
most  of  the  Contractors,  for  the  specifications  in  fact  called  for 
stones  cut  to  lay  in  courses  with  %-in.  bed  joints.  During  3^ 
years  of  work  there  were  5,200  cu.  yds.  of  this  "rubble  range"  cut, 
requiring  the  dressing  of  6.373  sq.  ft.  Each  stone  averaged  1.8  ft. 
rise,  3.6  ft.  long,  and  2.7  ft.  deep,  or  0.65  cu.  yd.  per  stone.  Each 
stonecutter  averaged  18.7  sq.  ft.  of  bed  joints  dressed  per  day,  so 
that  it  took  1.57  days  to  dress  each  cubic  yard  of  "rubble  range" 
stone. 

The  ashlar  stones  were  called  "dimension  cut-stone  masonry" 
and  were  cut  to  lay  }4-in.  joints  both  on  bed  and  end  joints,  and 
the  faces  were  pean  hammered.  The  lowest  bid  on  this  ashlar  was 
$30  per  cu.  yd.,  but  another  contractor,  who  had  previously  done  the 
same  kind  of  work,  bid  $60  per  cu.  yd. 

It  took  9  days'  work  of  a  stonecutter  to  dress  each  cubic  yard  of 
this  ashlar. 

The  coping  was  laid  in  two  courses ;  one  course  of  stones  12-in. 
rise,  30-in.  bed,  and  3%-ft.  length;  the  other  course,  24-in.  rise, 
48-in.  bed,  and  2%-ft.  length.  The  top  was  pean  hammered,  and  the 
face  was  left  rough  with  a  chisel  draft  around  it.  The  beds  and 
joints  were  cut  to  lay  %-in.  It  took  a  stonecutter  6.1  days  to  dress 
each  cubic  yard  of  this  ashlar. 

The  cost  of  laying  the  masonry  in  the  dam  was  as  follows, 
wages  being  assumed  to  be  approximately  what  they  are  now  (not 
what  they  were  in  1875)  : 


Mason    at  $3.00  

A 

$0  36 

B 

$0.36 

c 

$0.25 

D 

$0.32 

Laborers,   at  $1.50  

0.28 

0.28 

0.22 

0.23 

Mortar   mixers    at   $1  50 

0  15 

0  12 

0  11 

0.15 

Derrick  and  carmen    at  $1  50                . 

0  49 

0  51 

0.36 

0.39 

0.18 

0.20 

Teams  from  yard,  at  $3.50  

0.35 

0.20 

0.20 

0.39 

Laborers  loading  teams,  at  $1.50.... 

0.28 

0.33 

0.33 

0.13 

Total    $1.91       $1.80       $1.65        $1.81 

Columns  A  and  B  relate  to  work  done  in  1868  and  1869  when  the 
stone  was  hoisted  by  hand;  A  was  a  lift  of  5  ft.,  B  was  a  lift  of 
10  to  20  ft.  Columns  C  and  D  relate  to  work  done  in  1869  and 
1870,  when  the  hoisting  was  done  by  engines;  C  being  a  lift  of  20 
to  30  ft. ;  D  being  a  lift  of  30  to  50  ft.  It  will  be  noted  that  each 
mason  laid  from  8%  to  12%  cu.  yds.  per  day.  Each  engine  ap- 
parently served  two  masons,  but  it  is  not  stated  whether  each 
mason  had  a  separate  derrick  or  both  worked  with  one  derrick. 

The  stones  were  laid  in  inclined  or  sloping  courses,  which  made 
it  hard  to  keep  them  in  place  as  a  rap  of  a  hammer  would  cause 
sliding. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  loading  and  hauling  the  stone 
from  the  stone  yard  to  the  dam  is  included  in  the  above  costs  of 
laying.  This  cost  of  loading  and  .hauling  is  not  properly  a  part  of 
the  cost  of  laying. 

The  mortar  was  a  1 :  2  mixture,  natural  cement,  and  it  required 


498  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

0.3  bbl.  of  cement  0.093  cu.  yd.  sand,  and  0.89  cu.  yd.  of  stone 
per  cu.  yd.  of  dam  masonry.  In  other  words,  only  11%  of  the 
masonry  was  mortar. 

Cost  of  Plug  Drilling  by  Hand. — By  timing  a  number  of  masons 
at  work  splitting  granite  blocks  24  to  30  ins.  thick,  I  found  that  each 
man  drilled  each  hole  (%-in.  diam.  x  2%  ins.  deep)  in  a  trifle  less 
than  5  mins.,  by  striking  about  200  blows.  It  took  about  1  min.  for 
placing  and  striking  each  set  of  plug  and  feathers.  A  block  30  ins. 
long,  with  four  plug  holes,  was  drilled  and  split  with  the  plugs  and 
feathers  in  24  mins.,  on  an  average.  At  this  rate,  a  good  workman 
can  drill  and  plug  80  holes  in  8  hrs.,  but  it  is  not  safe  to  count  upon 
so  large  an  average. 

Cost  of  Pneumatic  Plug  Drilling. — For  drilling  plug  holes  in  gran- 
ite certainly  no  tool  is  as  economic  as  the  pneumatic  plug  drill. 
Horizontal  as  well  as  vertical  holes  can  be  rapidly  drilled.  The 
ordinary  plug  drill,  according  to  the  manufacturers,  consumes  15 
cu.  ft.  of  free  air  per  min.  at  70  Ibs,  pressure.  At  the  Wachusett 
Dam  I  found  that  a  workman  averaged  one  hole  (%-in.  diam.  x  3 
ins.)  drilled  in  1%  mins.,  including  the  time  of  shifting  from  hole 
to  hole,  but  not  including  the  time  of  driving  the  plugs.  About  250 
plug  holes  are  counted  a  fair  day's  work  for  a  plug  drill  where  the 
driller  does  not  drive  the  plugs  himself. 

Cost  of  Quarrying  Granite. — Cost  data  relating  to  the  quarrying 
of  granite  dimension  stone  are  extremely  hard  to  secure.  I  have 
been  able  to  find  only  one  writer,  Mr.  J.  J.  R.  Croes,  who  has  pub- 
lished anything  on  the  subject.  Mr.  Croes'  records,  together  with 
mine,  will  at  least  form  a  basis  for  approximate  estimates  of  cost 
of  granite  quarrying.  My  data  apply  to  quarrying  three-dimension 
stone  in  a  sheet  quarry  on  the  coast  of  Maine.  The  total  number  of 
men  engaged  was,  cm  the  average:  6  enginemen,  6  steam  drillers, 
6  drill  helpers,  3  blacksmiths,  3  helpers,  5  tool  and  water  boys,  38 
quarrymen,  47  laborers,  2  foremen  and  1  superintendent.  This  force 
quarried  and  loaded  on  boats  about  1,400  cu.  yds.  of  rough  granite 
blocks.  The  stone  was  loaded  by  derricks  onto  cars  from  which  it 
was  unloaded  into  boats  ready  for  shipment.  The  following  cost 
includes  everything  except  interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,  and 
development  expenses: 

Cost 
per  cu  yd. 

Enginemen,  at  $2  a  day  (of  9  hrs.) $0.20 

Steam   drillers,   at   $2.00 0.20 

Drill  helpers,  at  $1.50 0.15 

Blacksmiths,    at    $2.75 0.14 

Blacksmiths'  helpers,  at  $1.75 0.09 

Tool  and  water  boys,  at  $1 0.16 

Quarrymen,   at    $1.75 1.09 

Laborers,  at  $1.50 1.15 

Foremen,   at   $3.00 0.15 

Superintendent,  at  $8 0.20 

Coal,  at   $5  ton 0.45 

Explosives    0.25 

Other  supplies    0.30 

Total    $4.53 


STONE  MASONRY.  493 

On  the  best  month's  work,  when  a  larger  force  was  being  op- 
erated, the  cost  of  all  labor,  superintendence  and  supplies,  was 
reduced  to  a  little  below  $4  per  cu.  yd.,  but  the  above  $4.50  per  cu. 
yd.  may  be  taken  as  a  fair  average  of  several  months'  work.  To 
this  should  be  added  the  charges  for  plant  rental,  quarry  rental  (if 
any),  stripping  (if  any),  and  freight  charges  to  destination.  The 
freight  rate  by  boat  from  Maine  to  New  York  is  about  $1  a  ton, 
but  as  rough  granite  blocks  are  always  measured  on  their  least 
dimensions,  the  freight  charges  when  $1  per  ton  amount  to  about 
$2.70  per  cu.  yd.  of  three-dimension  stone  in  the  rough.  The  ex- 
plosives used  were  black  powder,  costing  $2.25  a  keg  (25  Ibs.),  and 
dynamite  for  channeling,  costing  15  cts.  a  Ib.  The  sheet  from 
which  this  granite  was  quarried  averaged  about  6^»  ft.  thick,  and 
was  nearly  flat.  The  stone  was  loosened  in  lone  blocks  by  Knox 
blasting  with  black  powder,  and  was  split  up  into  sizes  by  plug  and 
feathering ;  both  hand  drills  and  pneumatic  plug  drills  being  used 
for  this  purpose.  The  stone,  as  before  stated,  was  three-dimension 
stone.  To  auarry  random  stone  (not  rubble)  in  this  quarry  cost 
about  $3.50  per  cu.  yd. 

If  granite  is  blasted  out  in  all  shapes  and  sizes,  to  be  used  for 
rubble  or  for  concrete,  the  cost  of  quarrying  is  far  less  than  the 
above  and  is  approximately  the  same  as  quarrying  trap  rock,  pro- 
vided the  two  kinds  of  rock  are  equally  seamy  or  jointed.  Traps, 
however,  are  usually  much  more  seamy  than  granites ;  hence  the 
drill  holes  in  trap  can  usually  be  spaced  much  farther  apart  than  in 
granite  having  few  seams. 

Cost  of  a  Masonry  Arch  Bridge.— This  arch  bridge  had  a  span 
of  30  ft.,  and  its  barrel  was  60  ft.  long.  The  masonry  was  lime- 
stone laid  in  Portland  cement  mortar.  There  were  365  cu.  yds.  of. 
masonry  distributed  as  follows: 

Cu.  yds. 

Arch  sheeting   112 

Bench  walls    (or  abutments) 165 

Backing  above  arch 17 

Backing  above  haunch 38 

JWing  walls    21 
Parapet  walls   t 7 
Coping 5 
Total    365 

The  arch  sheeting  masonry  was  dressed  to  lay  %-m.  joints,  and 
the  cost  of  these  112  cu.  yds.  was  as  follows: 

Cu.  yd. 

Quarrying  rough  blocks $  1.00 

Plug  and  feathering  into  blocks 0.85 

Hauling  and  loading  onto  car 0.75 

Freight    1.05 

Unloading  from  car  and  hauling  1  mile 0.70 

Cutting    4.55 

Laying     1.35 

Mortar     1.50 

Centers    2.20 

Total    $13.95 


494  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

This  sheeting  was  cut  to  lay  an  arch  18  ins.  thick,  each  block 
averaging  12x18x28  ins.  in  size,  or  about  %  cu.  yd.  The  blocks 
were  small,  but  the  quarry  did  not  yield  large  material  Quarrymen 
were  paid  30  cts.  per  hr.  and  helpers  17  %  cts.  per  hr.  The  un- 
loading from  cars  onto  wagons  cost  35  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages  being 
15  cts.  per  hr. ;  and  the  hauling  1  mile  cost  35  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
teams  being  40  cts.  per  hr. 

The  stonecutters  were  paid  35  cts.  per  hr.,  and  their  work  cost 
$4-25  per  cu.  yd. ;  the  sharpening  of  cutters'  tools  cost  15  cts.  more 
per  cu.  yd. ;  and  the  help  of  laborers  occasionally  in  bunkering  a 
stone  cost  another  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd. ;  making  a  total  of  $4.55  for 
cutting  the  stone  after  it  had  been  plug  and  feathered  roughly  into 
blocks.  The  small  size  of  the  blocks  made  this  cost  high. 

The  stone  was  laid  by  a  hand-power  derrick,  the  cost  of  laying 
being  in  detail  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Masons,  at  30  cts.  per  hr , $0.80 

Helpers,  at  15  cts.  per  hr 0.45 

Team  on  stone  boat,  40  cts.  per  hr 0.10 

Total  cost  of  laying $1.35 

Each  mason  had  1*4  helpers  and  laid  3  cu.  yds.  in  8  hrs.  This 
was  the  average  of  all  the  365  cu.  yds.  of  masonry;  the  cost  of  lay- 
ing each  kind  was  not  kept  separately. 

The  mortar  was  1 :  3  Portland  cement,  allowing  4.5  cu.  ft.  per 
bbl. ;  it  took  2  bbls.  of  cement  and  0.9  cu.  yd.  sand  to  make  1  cu.  yd. 
mortar;  and  the  cost  of  these  materials  was  $4.50  per  cu.  yd.  of 
mortar.  It  took  ^  cu.  yd.  of  mortar  for  each  of  the  365  cu.  yds.  of 
masonry ;  no  attempt  was  made  to  determine  the  amount  of  mortar 
for  each  kind  of  masonry. 

The  cost  of  the  ashlar  facing  in  the  abutments  and  wing  walls  was 
the  same  per  cubic  yard  as  the  arch  sheeting  after  deducting  the 
$2.20  for  centers,  that  is  $11.75  per  cu.  yd. ;  and  there  were  about 
50  cu.  yds.  of  this  in  the  bridge. 

The  cost  of  the  rubble  backing  in  the  abutments,  haunch,  etc.,  of 
which  there  were  nearly  200  cu.  yds.,  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Rubble  sandstone  delivered  at  bridge $1.20 

Vs  cu.  yd.  mortar,  at  $4.50 1.50 

Laying 1.35 

Total     $I(J5 

This  rubble  was  a  local  sandstone,  but  the  ashlar  was  a  lime- 
stone imported  by  rail. 

The  foregoing  costs  do  not  include  foreman's  salary  and  general 
expenses,  which  amounted  to  15%  of  the  total  cost  of  the  bridge.  In 
addition  to  the  365  cu.  yds.  of  stone  masonry  there  were  65  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  foundations  laid  on  a  hard  clay.  There  was  no  coffer- 
damming. 

The  cost  of  the  work  was  higher  than  it  would  have  been  under  a 
better  foreman. 

Cost  of  Centers  for  30-ft.  Arch.— Centers  for  a  masonry  arch  of 


STONE  MASONRY.  495 

30-ft.  span  and  having  a  barrel  60  ft.  long  were  made  of  hemlock. 
There  were  21  arch  ribs  or  centers  spaced  3  ft.  apart  and  lagged 
with  hemlock  2  ins.  thick  by  6  ins.  wide.  Each  center  was  made 
of  two  thicknesses  of  2  x  12-in.  plank  cut  in  section  6  ft.  long  and 
spiked  together,  breaking  joints.  The  ribs  were  cut  to  the  curve  of 
the  arch  at  a  saw  mill.  The  following  was  the  bill  of  timber  in  each 
center : 

Ft.  B.  M. 

6— 2-in.  x  12-in.  x  12-ft.  curved  ribs 144 

4— 2-in.  x  6-in.  x  16-ft.   ties    64 

1 — 2-in.  x  6-in.  x  10-ft.   splices   10 

1 — 2-in.  x  6-in.  x  10-ft.  post 10 

2— 2-in.  x  6-in.  x  16-ft.   struts   32 

Total  per  bent 260 

22  centers  at  260  ft.  B.  M 5,720 

Lagging  2  ins.  x  33  ft.  x  60  ft 3,960 

Total    9,680 

The  machine  work  at  the  mill  cost  $20,  and  the  carpenter  work 
of  framing  the  centers  was  $7.75  for  carpenters  at  22^  cts.  per  hr. 
and  $9.25  for  carpenters'  helpers  at  15  cts.  per  hr.,  making  a  total 
of  $37.  This  is  equivalent  to  $6.50  per  M  when  distributed  over  the 
5,720  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  centers.  The  cost  of  erecting  the  centers 
with  the  aid  of  a  hand-power  derrick  together  with  the  cost  of 
placing  the  lagging  was  $24,  all  this  work  being  done  by  laborers  at 
15  cts.  cer  hr.  This  $24  distributed  over  all  the  9,712  ft  B.  M.  is 
$2.56  per  M.  The  cost  of  removing  the  centers  after  completion  of 
the  work  was  $10,  wages  being  15  cts.  per  hr.,  or  $1.05  per  M.  The 
total  cost  of  the  centers  was: 

9,712  ft.  B.  M.  hemlock,  at  $16 $155.51 

132  oak  wedges,  at  10  cts 13.20 

230  Ibs.  wire  nails,  at  3^  cts 8.05 

Machine  work  at  mill 20.00 

Work  framing  centers 17.00 

Work  erecting  centers 24.00 

Work  tearing  down  centers. 10.00 


Total     $247.76 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  millwork  and  labor  cost  $71,  which  is 
equivalent  to  $7.30  per  M  distributed  over  the  9,712  ft.  B.  M.  There 
were  112  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  in  the  arch  alone,  so  that  the  cost 
i  of  the  centers  distributed  over  the  arch  sheeting  was  $2.20  per  cu. 
yd.  But  there  were  250  cu.  yds.  of  masonry,  all  told,  in  the  arch, 
the  abutments,  parapet  and  wing  walls.  The  short  posts  support- 
'ing  the  centers  rested  on  hard  clay. 

!  Cost  of  Arch  Culverts  and  Abutments,  Erie  Canal. — In  1840  con- 
3  tracts  were  let  for  enlarging  the  Erie  Canal.  The  courts  later  de~ 
i clared  the  law  making  the  appropriation  unconstitutional  and  the 
i  New  York  State  Legislature  directed  that  the  contracts  be  canceled 
'.and  that  contractors  be  paid  their  prospective  profits.  The  12  engi- 
neers in  charge  of  the  work  submitted  the  following  estimates  of  the 
!  actual  cost.  The  stone  in  masonry  was  limestone  from  the  lower 
t'Mohawk  valley.  Masons  and  stonecutters  were  paid  $2.25  per  day 


4H«  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

of   11  hrs.  worked,   laborers  $1.     The  cost  of  masonry  in  arch  cul- 
verts and  bridges  was  as  follows: 

Face  stone :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Quarrying,  1  cu.  yd.  per  man  day $2.25 

Cutting,   1.3  cu.  yds.  per  man  day 2.25 

Laying,  0.7  cu.  yd.  per  man  day* 1.25 

Mortar     0.75 

Total,   not  including  hauling $6.50 

Note:  The  cost  of  quarrying  includes  sharpening  drills,  fore- 
men, etc. 

Backing   (rubble)  : 

Quarrying,  2  cu.  yds.  per  man  day $1.00 

Laying,  1.75  cu.  yds.  per  man  day 1.00 

Mortar     1.25 

Total,  not  including  hauling $3.25 

Arch  sheeting: 

Quarrying,  1  cu.  yd.  per  man  day $2.25 

Cutting,  0.88  cu.  yd.  per  man  day 3.25 

Laying,  0.7  cu.  yd.  per  man  day 1.25 

Mortar   1.00 

Total,  not  including  hauling,  or  centers $7.75 

Ring  and  Coping: 

Quarrying,  0.6  cu.  yd.  per  man  day $  3.40 

Cutting,  0.55  cu.  yd.  per  man  day 5.00 

Laying,   0.58  cu.  yd.  per  man  day 3.00 

Mortar    0.50 

Total,  not  including  hauling $11.90 

The  cost  of  hauling  stone  1  mile  from  quarry  to  canal  was  50 
cts.  per  cu.  yd..  7  round  trips  being  made  per  day  by  a  team  haul- 
ing %  cu.  yd.  of  stone,  as  measured  in  the  work. 

The  centers  for  arch  culverts  of  4  to  8-ft.  span  were  estimated 
to  cost  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  arch  masonry.  For  spans  of  10  to 
15  ft.  the  centers  cost  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  arch  masonry. 

Timber  stringers  covered  with  2  or  3-in.  plank  were  largely  used 
for  foundations  and  floors  of  culverts.  The  cost  of  placing  such 
timber  was  $4  per  M. 

Cost  of  Lock  Masonry,  Erie  Canal. — The  following  is  a  continua- 
tion of  the  data  just  given : 

The  masonry  for  locks  was  dressed  as  follows:  Cut  stone  face, 
%-in.  joints;  hammer  dressed  backing,  1-in.  joints.  Wages  were 
as  above  given. 

Lock  face  stone : 

Quarrying,   0.67  cu.  yd.  per  man  day $   3.00 

Cutting,  0.50  cu.  yd.  per  man  day 5.50 

Laying,  3.00  cu.  yds.  per  man  day 0.83 

Mortar     0.50 

Machinery 0.25 

Total,    not    including   hauling $10.08 


STONE  MASONRY. 


497 


Lock  backing  (1-in.  joints)  : 

8uarrying,  1  cu.  yd.  per  man  day $2.00 
utting,  1.8  cu.  yds.  per  man  day 1.50 

Laying,  4  cu.  yds.  per  man  day 0.62 

Mortar 0.75 

Machinery 0.25 

Total,  not  including  hauling $5.12 

The  average  cost  of  lock  masonry,  including  face  and  backing, 
vvas  $1.70  per  cu.  yd.,  exclusive  of  transportation  which  was  $2.75 
per  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  of  a  masonry  aqueduct  consisting  of  masonry  piers, 
arches  and  spandrels,  was  as  follows: 

To  lay  masonry :  Per  day. 

1  mason    $2.25 

2  tenders,  at  $1 2.00 

y2   stone  cutter,  at  $2.40 1.20 

Total,  5.9  cu.  yds.  laid,  at  $0.92  per  cu.  yd... $5. 45 
To  lay  arch  masonry :  Per  day. 

1  mason $  2.25 

2  tenders 2.00 

1  stone  cutter 2.50 

Total,  8.95  cu.  yds.  laid  at  $0.76  per  cu.  yd..  .$  6.75 
To  lay   spandrel  masonry :  Per  day. 

1  mason    $  2.25 

2  tenders    2.00 

1  %    stone  cutters    . . . 4.00 

Total,  8.26  cu.  yds.  laid  at  $1  per  cu.  yd....$  8.25 
The  total   cost  of  aqueduct  masonry,  per  cubic  yard,   excluding 
the  cost  of  laying  just  given,  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Quarrying    $   2.25 

Transportation 2.00 

Cutting    2.25 

Mortar 1.00 

Machinery   0.25 

Total,    not    including    laying $  7.75 

Approximately  $0.90  per  cu.  yd.  should  be  added  to  this  $7.75  to 
include  cost  of  laying  the  masonry. 

Cost  of  Sweetwater  Dam. — James  D.  Schuyler  gives  the  following 
data  on  the  Sweetwater  Dam,  California:  The  dam  is  46  ft.  thick 
at  the  base,  12  ft.  at  the  top,  and  90  ft.  high.  It  is  built  as  an 
arch  with  a  radius  of  222  ft.  on  line  of  face  at  the  top.  The  stone 
was  a  rnetamorphic  (or  igneous?)  rock  with  no  well-defined  cleav- 
age, breaking  out  in  irregular  masses.  Its  weight  ranged  from 
175  to  200  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  And  the  average  weight  of  the  masonry 
was  estimated  to  be  164  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  The  mortar  was  a  1  :  3, 
proportioned  by  barrels,  mixed  in  a  Ransome  mixer.  The  mixer 
was  given  3  or  4*  turns  after  charging  it  with  sand  and  cement, 
then  the  water  was  admitted  during  the  next  3  or  4  revolutions ; 
8  to  10  revolutions  made  a  thorough  mixture,  requiring  2  to  3 
mina.  A  tramway  for  delivering  the  mortar  was  carried  around 
the  face  of  the  dam,  on  a  bracket  trestle  held  by  bolts  driven  into 


498  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

holes  drilled  in  the  face  of  the  dam  masonry.  A  grade  of  3  ft. 
in  40  at  the  end  of  the  tramway  next  to  the  mixer  was  sufficient 
to  give  the  mortar  car  an  impetus  that  would  carry  it  to  the  farthest 
end  of  the  dam.  By  using  this  mechanical  mixer  and  tramway  a 
force  of  5  men  and  a  horse  did  the  work  formerly  done  by  4  mortar 
mixers  and  14  hod  carriers.  The  box  of  mortar  was  lifted  from 
the  car  by  a  derrick  and  delivered  to  the  masons. 

The  stone  was  quarried  from  a  cliff  100  ft.  high  situated  800 
ft.  below  the  dam.  It  was  hauled  in  wagons  rigged  with  platforms 
on  a  level  with  the  rear  wheels.  The  quarry  derricks  were  simple 
shear-legs,  slightly  inclined.  All  stones  smaller  than  500  Ibs.  were 
loaded  on  stone  boats,  4  ft.  square,  made  of  3-in.  plank  with  a  bot- 
tom of  boiler  plate  and  provided  with  chains  at  the  corners.  The 
shear-leg  derricks  were  used  to  hoist  the  stone  boats  and  deposit 
their  loads  on  the  wagons.  Stone  boats  cost  $30  each,  and  several 
sets  of  them  were  worn  out  on  the  job.  A  single  stone,  weighing 
3  tons  or  more,  was  readily  lifted  by  the  shear-legs,  and  lowered 
upon  a  wagon  driven  underneath.  All  hoisting  was  done  by  horse 
power.  Four  derricks  were  used  on  the  dam,  masts  being  30  to  38 
ft.  long,  and  booms  26  to  32  ft.  A  fifth  derrick,  with  a  50-ft. 
mast  and  a  45-ft.  boom,  proved  far  more  efficient  than  the  others. 
The  work  was  completed  Apr.  7,  1888,  after  16  mos. 

The  masonry  was  rubble  throughout,  amounting  to  20,507  cu.  yds., 
of   which    19,269    cu.    yds.    were   in   the   dam   proper;    0.86    bbl.    of 
cement  was  used  per  cubic  yard  of  masonry. 
The  cost  of  the  dam  was  as  follows: 

17,562   bbls.  cement   $  63,111 

Hauling  cement 8,614 

Lumber 2,408 

Iron  work  4,916 

Powder   and   miscellaneous   supplies 3,230 

Pipes,  gates,  etc 5,152 

Plant,   tools,    etc 6,237 

Total  for  materials  and  plant $  93,668 

Labor,    common    and    skilled $  93,591 

Foremen    6,866 

Teams   19,696 

Engineering    10,555 

Clerical  work   654 

Earthwork  (by  contract) 7,666 

Miscellaneous  expenses 1,377 

Total  for  labor $140,405 

Total  for  materials,  etc 93,668 

Grand  total $234,073 

Common  laborers  were  paid  $2  to  $2.50  a  day;  masons,  $4  to 
?5 ;  carpenters,  $3.50  to  $4  ;  blacksmiths,  $4  ;  teams  with  drivers, 
?5  ;  machinists,  $7  to  $8  ;  foremen,  4  to  $6.  Workmen  were  scarce 
and  independent  on  account  of  the  "boom"  in  California.  The  work 
cost  20  to  25%  more  than  it  would  have  cost  under  normal  con- 
ditions. 

The  itemized  cost  of  11,322  cu.  yds.  of  the  masonry  laid  from 
May  1  to  Dec,  31,  1887,  was  as  follows  per  cubic  yard: 


STONE  MASONRY.  498 

Percentage 

Per  cu.  yd.  of  total. 

Quarrying  stone   (labor) '. .?  0.425  4.829 

Loading  stone 0.523  5.933 

Hauling  stone   0.420  4.758 

Hoisting   stone 0.577  6.550 

Loading  and  hauling  sand ".  0.345  3.915 

Cement,  at  $4-20  per  bbl 3.427  38.900 

Mixing  and  delivering  mortar 0.239  2.710 

Masons    0.797  9.050 

Helpers   0.186  2.109 

Excavating  foundations    0.303  3.444 

Making  and  repairing  roads 0.118  1.336 

Blacksmithing   (labor)    0.163  1.854 

Carpentry    0.097  1.104 

Rope 0.104  1.186 

Tools 0.046  .524 

Steel     0.014  .155 

Blacksmith    coal 0.009  .109 

Blocks  and  sheaves 0.011  .13i 

Powder     0.086  .974 

Lumber 0.195  2.220 

.  Wetting  masonry   0.048  0.542 

Foremen 0.332  3.774 

Engineering  and   superintendence...  0.343  3.891 

Total    ?   8.808         100.000 

Cost  of  a  Granite  Dam,  Cheyenne,  Wyo. — Mr.  A.  J.  Wiley  gives 
the  following  data  on  a  dam  for  the  Granite  Springs  Reservoir, 
Cheyenne.  The  work  was  done  by  contract,  April  20,  1903,  to 
June  21.  1904.  From  'NOV.  20.  1903.  to  April  11,  1904.  work  was 
closed  down  on  account  of  cold  weather.  The  extreme  height  of 
the  dam  is  96  ft.,  and  the  length  of  the  crest  is  410  f t. ;  the  thickness 
at  the  base  is  56  ft,  and  on  the  top  it  is  10  ft.  It  contains  14,222 
cu.  yds.  of  granite  rubble  masonry  laid  in  1:4  Portland  mortar, 
except  for  the  face  of  stones  where  1 :3  mortar  was  used.  The 
mortar  constituted  35.2%  of  the  dam;  and  0.61  bbl.  cement  was 
used  per  cubic  yard  of  masonry. 

The  mortar  was  mixed  with  a  Smith  mixer,  in  batches  of  %  cu; 
yd.,  and  the  mixer  output  was  6  cu.  yds.  per  hr.  The  mortar  was 
dumped  into  buckets  and  carried  on  cars  running  on  a  trestle  built 
along  the  up-stream  face  of  the  dam.  .Derricks  on 'top  of  the  dam 
hoisted  the  mortar  buckets. 

The  stone  was  a  gabbro,  quarried  about  100  ft  below  the  dam. 
It  was  devoid  of  cleavage  and  was  blasted  out  in  large  masses  from 
an  open  face  20  to  40  ft.  high.  The  drilling  was  done  by  hand. 
For  each  cubic  yard  of  rock  there  were  used  0.35  Ib.  of  dynamite 
and  1.05  Ibs.  of  black  powder.  The  stones  averaged  2  cu.  yds.,  but 
pieces  containing  5  cu.  yds.  were  used. 

Rocks  breaking  smaller  than  3  cu.  yds.  were  used  as  they  were 
blasted  out  of  the  quarry,  and  larger  masses  were  split  up  by  plug 
and  featner  into  roughly  rectangular  shapes.  The  best  shaped 
stones  were  used  for  face  stones,  the  ordinary  rough  rocks  were 
used  in  the  body  of  the  dam,  and  the  smaller  pieces  made  the  spalls. 
The  rock  was  taken  from  the  quarry  by  a  guyed  derrick  with  40-ft. 
boom,  and  loaded  upon  platform  cars.  The  track  was  laid  upon 
such  a  grade  that  the  loaded  cars  ran  alone  and  the  empties  were 


500  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

pushed  back  by  hand.  The  trestle  which  carried  the  track  was 
supported  by  the  steps  on  -the  down-stream  side  of  the  dam.  Upon 
the  top  of  the  dam  were  located  two  guyed  derricks  with  40-ft. 
booms  similar  to  the  quarry  derrick.  Each  of  the  three  derricks 
was  operated  by  a  10-ton  hoisting  engine  located  in  an  engine 
house  near  the  south  end  of  the  dam.  The  derricks  on  top  of  the 
dam  took  the  rock  from  the  cars  on  the  lower  side  of  the  dam 
and  set  them  in  the  masonry.  They  also  took  the  mortar  buckets 
from  the  cars  on  the  up-stream  side  of  the  dam  and  dumped  them 
where  needed  on  top  of  the  dam. 

Spalls  were  brought  upon  the  dam  in  skips,  holding  about  a 
cubic  yard  each,  and  kept  in  the  skips  until  used.  The  mortar 
was  usually  dumped  in  half-yard  batches  in  a  convenient  depres- 
sion of  the  masonry,  and  was  distributed  with  long-handled,  round- 
pointed  shovels. 

The  up-stream  face  was  laid  with  the  joints  in  the  true  plane 
of  the  face.  No  objection  was  made  to  having  the  convexity  of 
a  stone  project  beyond  this  plane,  but  no  stones  with  concave 
faces  were  permitted  in  the  face  of  the  dam.  The  upper  20  ft.  of 
the  down-stream  face  were  laid  in  the  same  manner,  but  the  rest 
of  the  down-stream  face  was  laid  in  rough  steps  with  half  the 
step  inside  and  half  outside  the  theoretical  plane  of  this  face. 
The  stones  in  both  these  faces  were  laid  to  break  joint  and  were 
well  bonded  into  the  body  of  the  dam.  In  the  body  of  the  dam 
but  little  attention  was  paid  to  the  bond  of  the  work,  the  irregular 
stones  insuring  this  without  effort,  but  every  precaution  was  taken 
to  insure  the  filling  of  voids.  To  this  end  the  mortar  was  used 
very  wet,  even  sloppy,  and  the  chief  rule  observed  was  that  there 
should  first  be  placed  a  large  excess  of  mortar  of  which  the  largest 
possible  percentage  was  to  be  displaced  by  rock.  In  setting  the 
large  rock,  a  bed  was  prepared  with  spalls  and  mortar,  and  then 
a  considerable  excess  of  mortar  was  placed  on  the  bed.  The  rock 
was  then  slowly  lowered  and  settled  on  the  bed  by  working  it  with 
bars.  The  excess  mortar  would  ooze  from  under  the  rock  which 
would  then  float  upon  an  even  layer  of  mortar,  filling  all  the 
spaces  under  it.  During  this  operation  the  inspector,  either  stand- 
ing upon  the  rock  or  having  his  hand  upon  it,  can  tell  if  the  rock 
is  riding  or  rocking,  and,  if  necessary,  has  the  rock  raised  and  the 
bed  readjusted.  The  large  rocks  were  set  as  close  as  possible  to 
each  other  without  being  in  contact,  the  intervening  spaces  being 
filled  with  mortar  and  spalls.  In  this  work  the  masons  were  not 
permitted  to  sandwich  the  spalls  between  layers  of  mortar,  but 
were  required  first  to  fill  the  space  with  wet  mortar  in  which  the 
spalls  were  submerged,  displacing  as  much  as  possible  of  the  mortal- 
While  it  was  the  intention  to  have  the  masonry  brought  up  in 
horizontal  benches  extending  the  full  length  of  the  dam,  the 
exigencies  of  the  work  prevented  this  and  the  middle  portion  of 
the  dam  was  completed  first,  stepping  off  toward  each  end.  The 
average  rate  of  progress  was  60  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  per  day  of 
ten  hours.  The  best  monthly  rate  was  2,370  rn.  yds.  during  July, 


STONE  MASONRY.  501 

1903,  averaging  83  cu.  yds.  for  a  ten-hour  day,  or  41.5  yds.  of 
masonry  per  ten-hour  day  for  a  single  derrick,  including  the  time 
lost  in  moving  and  resetting  derricks.  During  this  month  the 
average  daily  force  employed  was  as  follows:  In  the  quarry,  21.3 
men,  1  %  engine  runners,  and  one  derrick ;  in  screening  and  haul- 
ing sand,  3.2  teams  with  drivers,  and  3.2  men;  in  mixing  and 
delivering  mortar,  3  men ;  in  laying  masonry,  3.5  masons,  6.5 
helpers,  2%  engine  runners,  and  2  derricks. 

The    following   were    the   average    wages    paid    per    10-hr,    day: 
Quarrymen,   $2.50 ;  masons,   $5.00  ;  masons'  helpers,  $2.25  to  $2.50 ; 
engine  runners,   $3.00  ;  common  labor,  $2.25. 
The  actual  cost  of -the  masonry  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.652    cu.    yd.    solid   rock,    $1.96 $   1.28 

0.348  cu.  yd.  mortar  (not  incl.  cement),  at  $1.93.      0.67 

0.613    bbl.   cement,    at   $3.58,   delivered 2.19 

.Labor  laying   1   cu.   yd 1.11 

Total    $  5.25 

The  solid  rock  was  quarried  and  delivered  for  $1.96  per  cu.  yd. 
(solid),  itemized  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Quarrying   and   Delivering:  (solid). 

Common  labor   $   1.06 

Engine  runners   0.14 

Coal,   $6  per  ton 0.08 

Blacksmithing   0.13 

Steel   0.04 

Explosives 0.15 

Interest  and  dep.  on  plant   ($1,644) 0.18 

General   expenses    0.18 

Total  per  cu.    yd.    (solid) $  1.96 

This  is  equivalent  to   $1.28  per  cu.  yd.  measured  in  the  dam. 
The  cost  of  securing  the  sand  and  mixing  the  mortar  was  as  fol- 
lows per  cu.  yd.  of  mortar : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor  digging  and  hauling   (teams)   sand $   1.10 

Blacksmithing,  sand  pit < 0.13 

General  expense,   sand  pit 0.19 

Labor  mixing  and  delivering 0.30 

Fuel,   $6   per  ton 0.04 

Interest  and  depreciation  on  plant  ($620) 0.12 

General   expense    0.05 

Total   per   cu.   yd.   mortar $  1.93 

The  cost  of  laying  the  masonry  was  as  follows  per   cu.   yd.   of 
masonry : 

Per  cu.  yd 

Labor,  masons  and  helpers $  0.50 

Engine  runners   0.18 

Fuel,   $6  per  ton 0.10 

Blacksmithing    0.02 

Interest  and  depreciation  on  plant   ($3,000) 0.22 

General  expense 0.09 

Total ...$  1.11 

The   interest  and   depreciation  on  the  plant  was  assumed  to  he 


502  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

50%  of  the  first  cost  of  the  plant.  The  fuel  was  estimated  on 
the  basis  of  5  Ibs.  of  coal  per  horse-power  hour  of  actual  working 
time  for  the  nominal  horse-power  of  the  engines.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  a  large  amount  of  cord  wood  was  used  instead  of  coal. 

Cost  of  Masonry,  New  Croton  Dam. — This  dam  was  built  of 
gneiss'  (a  granitic  rock),  and  the  average  cost  to  the  contractor 
during  the  years  1897  to  1905  was  about  as  follows  for  the  rubble 
masonry : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.95  bbl.  cement,  at  $1.85 $1.75 

Quarrying  %  cu.  yd.  solid  stone,  at  $1.50 1.00 

Sand,  %  cu.  yd.,  at  $0.90. • 0.30 

Labor   laying   masonry O.yO 

Pumping    , 0.10 

Plant,   roads,   etc 0.60 

General    expense,    2%    estimated 0.10 

Total $4.75 

In  quarrying  about  25%  of  the  rock  was  wasted. 
In  laying  the  masonry  cableways  were  used  for  about  half  the 
yardage,  and  steel  towers  with  derricks  were  used   for   the  other 
half. 

Some  of  the  face  stone  was  dressed.  The  rough  pointing  of  38.000 
eq.  ft.  cost  $0.60  per  sq.  ft.  The  6-cut  ax  work  on  84,000  sq.  ft. 
cost  $1.20  per  sq.  "ft 

Cost  of  a  Rubble  Dam. — This  dam  was  built  in  1898  by  contract, 
under  the  direction  of  Mr.  George  W.  Rafter,  across  the  Indian 
River,  Hamilton  County,  N.  Y.  The  main  dam  was  7  ft.  wide  on 
top,  47  ft  high,  33  ft  wide  on  bottom,  and  400  ft.  long.  The  face 
masonry  was  dressed  to  lay  1%-in.  joints.  The  backing  was  large 
irregular  rubble  stones  laid  in  beds  of  1:3%  mortar,  and  the 
vertical  joints  filled  with  1  :  3  %  :  7  %  concrete.  No  attempt  was 
made  to  keep  separate  accounts  of  the  face  masonry  and  the  back- 
ing, but  it  was  estimated  that  27%  of  the  dam  was  mortar.  The 
stone  was  a  pink  synetic  granite,  quarried  500  ft  from  one  end. 
of  the  dam.  There  was  no  difficulty  in  quarrying  regular  blocks 
for  the  face.  The  sand  was  loaded  upon  a  scow  holding  30  cu. 
yds.  and  hauled  2  miles  down  the  river.  A  foreman  and  6  men, 
by  using  a  windlass,  rope  and  sail,  handled  the  scow.  They  loaded 
and  delivered  720  cu.  yds.  of  sand  and  180  cords  of  wood  per  month, 
at  a  cost  of  about  $310.  Wages  of  common  laborers  were  $1  a 
day  and  board,  and  it  is  probable  that  the  board  cost  $0.50  per 
man  per  day. 

The  plant  to  build  the  dam  cost  $10,340.  The  actual  cost  of  the 
Cam  to  the  contractor  was: 

Labor  clearing  35  miles  of  margins,  1,160  acres. $13, 000 

Hauling  cement  and  supplies  22  miles 6,836 

Freight,  cement  and  supplies 960 

Barn  account  (teams  owned  by  contractor)  ....         725 

Stone,  cement  and  other  materials 18,830 

Labor  (not  including  clearing) 31,218 

General  expense    9,6G  I 


STONE  MASONRY.  503 

Interest    1,150 

Insurance    1,235 

Depreciation  of  plant,   est.   33% 3,450 

Total    , $87,005 

The    "general    expense"    includes    coffer-damming    and    pumping, 

erecting  and  wrecking  the  plant,   etc.     The  time  occupied  in  doing 

the  work  was  7  months. 

In  July  and   August,    when   the  work  was  well   under  way,   the 

cost  of  the  masonry  was  very  low,  and  aver-aged  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Quarrying  face  stone    (not  incl.   backing) $0.35 

Labor  laying  masonry    0.53 

Labor  pointing  masonry    0.15 

Mixing  mortar   and   concrete,   and   crushing 0.20 

Cement    2.00 

Sand   0.15 

General   expense   and    superintendence 0.27 

Total    $3.65 

In  addition  to  this  there  was  the  cost  of  quarrying  the  stone  for 
the  backing ;  but  this  stone  was  paid  for  as  excavation,  so  it  is  not 
included  above.  During  July  and  August  this  excavation  cost  46 
cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  accounts  were  not  well  kept,  for  no 
statement  is  given  of  the  proportion  of  backing  to  face  stone.  The 
quarrying  of  the  face  stone  doubtless  cost  several  dollars  per  cubic 
yard  of  the  face  stone,  although  it  amounted  to  only  $0.35  per  cu. 
yd.  when  distributed  over  all  the  masonry.  Nor  is  it  stated  what 
the  dressing  cost  From  measurements  on  a  drawing  of  the  cross- 
section  of  the  main  dam.  I  estimate  that  it  runs  29  cu.  yds.  of 
masonry  Der  lin.  ft.  of  which  about  30%  is  face  stone,  if  we  allow 
a  deoth  of  2%  ft  of  face  stone  extending  into  the  dam:  but  in 
the  lower  third  of  the  dam,  where  there  is  great  breadth,  the  face 
stone  would  not  be  more  than  20%  of  the  total  masonry,  and  at 
the  bottom  only  15%.  Hence  if  the  work  in  July  and  August  was 
In  the  lower  part  of  the  dam,  as  it  doubtless  was,  we  must  multiply 
the  $0.35,  above  .given,  by  at  least  5  to  secure  an  approximate 
estimate  of  the  cost  of  quarrying  a  cubic  yard  of  face  stone.  In- 
deed, it  is  likely  that  the  cost  of  face  stone  was  more  than  5  times 
$0.35  per  cu.  yd. 

I  have  gone  into  these  details  for  the  purpose  of  showing  how 
little  value  there  often  is  in  published  cost  records,  because  of  the 
failure  of  engineers  to  keep  their  cost  records  properly.  The  wages 
of  quarrymen  and  masons  are  not  given. 

Data  on  Laying  Masonry  With  a  Cableway. — Mr.  Spencer  Miller 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  use  of  cableways  for  laying  ma- 
sonry. The  Basin  Creek  Dam  for  the  water-works  of  Butte,  Mont, 
is  120  ft  high  and  300  ft.  long,  designed  by  Mr.  Chester  B. 
Davis.  A  cableway  892  ft.  between  towers,  spanned  the  dam  and 
the  quarry.  No  derricks  were  used  on  the  dam,  for,  by  using  a 
snubbing  post  and  a  horse,  the  stones  could  be  swung  where  desired. 


504  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  16  days  a  gang  of  86  men  quarried  and  laid  1,430  cu.  yds.  of 
masonry.  This  gang  included  6  masons,  quarrymen,  firemen  and 
all  laborers  about  the  dam  and  camp.  These  six  masons  averaged 
15  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  each  per  day. 

At  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  two  cableways,  side  by  side  and  60  ft. 
apart,  were  used  to  erect  a  stone  arch  bridge  630  ft.  long  and 
towers  50  ft  high.  A  30-hp.,  8&  X  10-in.,  engine  was  used  for 
each  cableway.  Stones  were  laid  between  the  cableways  by  hitch- 
ing the  hoisting  lines  of  both  cableways  to  the  same  stone.  To  lay 
the  masonry  piers  a  frame  was  used  which  straddled  the  piers  and 
on  top  of  which  a  traveler  was  used  to  place  the  stone  as  fast 
as  it  was  delivered  by  the  cableway.  After  a  pier  was  completed 
the  framework  and  traveler  were  lifted  by  the  cableways  to  the 
site  of  the  next  pier,  in  less  than  10  minutes.  The  centers  for  the 
arches  were  lifted  into  place  by  the  cableways.  This  highway 
bridge  contained  2,200  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  in  piers  and  arches, 
2,278  cu.  yds.  arch  sheeting,  2,660  cu.  yds.  concrete  spandrel  back- 
ing, and  310,000  Ibs.  of  iron  work;  350  M  of  lumber  were  used 
in  the  centers. 

Cost  of  Masonry  and  Timber  Crib  Dam. — Mr.  Maurice  S.  Parker 
gives  data  on  the  Black  Eagle  Falls  Dam,  Missouri  River,  Great 
Falls,  Mont.  The  work  was  done  by  day  labor  (Apr.  15,  1890,  to 
Jan.  6,  1891)  under  Mr.  Parker's  supervision,  wages  being  as  fob 
lows:  Common  labor,  $2;  stone  masons,  $4;  carpenters,  $3.50', 
quarrymen,  $2.25 ;  stone  cutters,  $4.50 ;  quarry  foremen,  $3.50 ; 
mason  foremen.  $5;  stone  cutter  foremen,  $5;  carpenter  fore- 
men, $5. 

The  stone  was  a  red  sandstone  weighing  160  to  170  Ibs.  (some 
specimens  178  Ibs.)  per  cu.  ft,  and  was  quarried  from  the  bed  of 
the  river,  the  average  haul  being  500  ft  on  push  cars.  The  stone 
occurs  in  vertical  strata  1  to  4  ft.  thick,  the  bedding  planes  making 
an  angle  of  45°  with  the  current.  Timber  was  delivered  near  the 
gate  chambers.  Cement  used  was  Milwaukee  and  Buffalo  mixed 
1 :2.  Portland  cement  was  used  in  freezing  weather  and  gave  per- 
fect satisfaction,  being  now  as  hard  as  stone.  The  following  table 
gives  the  cost  of  the  labor  in  construction,  including  all  handling 
of  materials  after  unloading  from  cars: 

Cost  of  labor. 

4,600  cu.  yds.  first  class  rubble,  at  $6.56 $30  438 

1,500  cu.  yds.     cut   stone  masonry,    at    $16.40 24,600 

5,000  cu.  yds.  dry  stone  filling  in  cribs,  at  $2.10 10*500 

10,000  cu.  yds.  excav.,   half  rock,   half   earth,   at   $1.07..  10*700 

1,200  M  timber  in  cribs,  at  $10.85 13^020 

100  M  timber  in  gates   and   chambers,    at    $33.72 

Engineering  expenses,  12  mos 5,900 

Total  cost  of  labor $98,530 

The  expense  of  false  work  of  all  kinds,  such  as  cofferdams,  tram- 
ways, etc.,  amounted  to  5%  of  the  total  cost  and  is  divided  propor- 
tionately between  the  classes  of  work  above  given.  The  cost  of 
labor  on  timber  In  gates  and  chambers  includes  the  cost  of  placing 
all  irons  and  gearing.  The  total  cost  of  the  dam  was  $175,000, 


STONE  MASONRY.  505 

Including  materials,  labor  and  salaries.  About  20%  of  the  rubble 
was  broken  range  faced.  The  cut-stone  masonry  was  laid  with 
close  beds  and  joints. 

The  minimum  flow  of  the  river  is  4,000  cu.  ft  per  sec.  The 
average  depth  of  water  was  2  ft.  when  work  was  begun,  but  it 
was  very  swift  as  the  rapids  at  the  site  of  the  dam  had  a  fall  of 
2  ft.  in  a  100  ft.  During  June  floods  the  depth  was  6  ft.  The 
crib  dam  is  745  ft.  long,  and  the  canal  and  gates  occupy  an  addi- 
tional width  of  95  ft.  The  average  height  of  the  dam  is  14  ft., 
resting  on  a  ledge  of  sandstone.  The  longitudinal  timbers  of  the 
crib  are  spaced  8  ft.  c.  to.  c.  The  bottom  timbers  were  cut  to 
fit  the  rock,  bedded  in  cement  mortar  and  drift  bolted  to  plugs  of 
wood  driven  into  holes  drilled  in  the  ledge  rock. 

The  work  was  begun  on  the  north  side  of  the  river,  a  sheer  dam 
being  first  built  to  divert  the  stream  from  the  dam  site.  This 
sheer  dam  consisted  of  wooden  horses  placed  8  ft.  apart,  with 
stringers  of  4-in.  plank.  A  facing  of  2-in.  tongue  and  grooved 
planks  was  placed  on  the  up-stream  legs  of  the  horses,  and  a  row 
of  sand-filled  bags  placed  at  the  toe  of  the  planks.  There  was  a 
little  leakage,  and  the  leakage  water  was  diverted  by  a  second 
row  of  sand  bags  parallel  with  the  first  row,  and  a  short  distance 
down  stream.  This  sheer  dam  withstood  a  flood  6  ft.  deep. 

On  the  south  side  of  the  river,  which  was  deeper  and  swifter,  it 
was  necessary  to  sink  small  triangular  stone-filled  cribs  to  sup- 
port the  wooden  horses  for  the  sheer  dam.  These  cribs  were  of 
4-in.  plank  with  6-in.  posts,  each  holding  1  cu.  yd.  of  stone,  and 
were  placed  8  ft.  apart,  each  crib  supporting  a  horse.  At  times 
the  depth  of  water  against  this  sheer  dam  was  15  ft.,  but  the 
leakage  was  easily  cleared  with  hand  pumps. 

To  close  the  long  gap  between  the  two  ends  of  the  dam,  wooden 
horses  were  placed  8  ft.  apart  with  a  foot  walk  of  4-in.  plank  on 
top,  and  heavy  timbers  to  hold  the  horses  down.  From  this  tem- 
porary bridge  a  second  tier  of  horse  bents  was  placed  (8  ft.  c.  to 
c.)  on  the  up-stream  side,  connected  with  4-in.  stringers  and 
sheeted  with  4-in.  plank.  The  dam  was  intended  to  break  the  force 
of  the  current,  which  it  did  admirably.  The  leakage  was  taken 
care  of  in  sections  by  small  sheer  dams  built  of  matched  plank,  and 
by  the  use  of  sand  bags.  Every  48  ft.,  an  opening  of  14  ft.  was 
left  in  the  crib  dam  which  was  used  as  a  temporary  sluiceway 
when  the  cofferdam  was  removed.  These  gaps  were  subsequently 
closed  with  planks,  and  the  cribwork  with  its  stone  filling  built  in. 

Cost  of  Laying  Masonry,  Dunning's  Dam. — Mr.  E.  Sherman  Gould 
is  authority  for  the  following  data  on  The  Dunning's  Dam  near 
Scranton,  Pa,  The  dam  is  masonry  on  a  concrete  foundation,  built 
by  contract.  The  stone  for  the  masonry  was  a  conglomerate  laid 
in  swimming  beds  of  mortar.  On  one  occasion  one  foreman,  8 
masons  and  about  9  helpers  laid  nearly  500  cu.  yds.  of  rubble  in 
76  hrs.,  using  a  double  drum  engine  and  derrick.  This  is  equivalent 
to  8.2  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day  per  mason.  On  another  occasion, 
another  foreman,  7  masons  and  8  or  9  helpers  laid  375  cu.  yds. 


506  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

in  7  days,  or  7.6  cu.  yds.  per  mason  per  day.  This  was  very  rapid 
work  in  both  cases. 

Cost  of  Quarrying  and  Laying  a  Limestone  Wall. — Mr.  James  W. 
Beardsley  is  authority  for  the  following  data  on  the  cost  of  quarry- 
ing and  laying  limestone  for  retaining  walls  on  the  Chicago  Canal. 
The  contractors  selected  parts  of  the  canal  where  the  limestone 
occurred  in  strata  and  were  uniform,  so  that  the  beds  of  the  stone 
quarried  required  no  dressing.  The  stone  was  laid  in  courses 
averaging  about  15  ins.  thick,  the  better  stone  beine  selected  for 
the  face  of  the  wall.  Guy  derricks  having  a  capacity  of  6  to  10 
tons,  boom  40  to  60  ft.  long,  operated  by  a  hoisting  engine,  were 
used  for  loading  the  stone.  Black  powder  was  used  to  shake  up 
the  ledges  and  the  stone  was  then  barred  and  wedged  out.  The 
cost  per  cu.  yd.  is  the  average  of  93,500  cu.  yds.,  measured  in 
retaining  walls.  The  mortar  was  only  13*4%  of  the  wall,  indicat- 
ing an  unusually  even  bedded  stone  that  squared  up  well.  The 
cost  does  not  include  general  superintendence,  installation  of  plant, 
plant  rental,  powder,  material  for  repairs,  and  cost  arising  from 
delays. 

Mr.  Beardsley  has  evidently  divided  the  number  of  working  days 
credited  to  each  class  of  men  by  the  total  number  of  days  worked 
on  the  job,  which  results  in  giving  fractions  of  days  labor  in  the 
following  typical  force: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Quarry  force:  masonry. 

1  foreman,  at  $3.50 $0.078 

2.11  derrickmen,  at  $1'.50   0.075 

8.42  quarrymen,  at  $1.65    0  312 

1.10  enginemen,  at  $2.25   0.052 

2.28  laborers,  at  $1.50    0  080 

0.33  waterboy,  at  $1.00   0.007 

0.27  blacksmith,   at  $2.5*0 0.013 

0.18  blacksmith's  help,  at  $1.75    0  007 

0.36  drill  runner,  at  $2.00 0.023 

0.07  drill  helper,  at  $1.50 0.002 

0.04  watchman,  at  $1.50   0.001 

0.29  team,  at  $3.50 0  028 

1.12  derricks,  at  $1.25   0.040 

0.36  drill,  at  $1.25 0.015 

Total  quarry  force   $0.733 

Wall  force: 

1  foreman,  at  $4.25 .  $0113 

4.20  masons,  at  $3.50 0.354 

1.46  masons'  helpers,  at  $1.50. o  058 

1.81  mortar  mixers,  at  $1.50 0.073 

0.66  mortar  laborer,  at  $1.50   . 0  027 

1.82  hod  carriers,  at  $1.50 0  073 

1.77  derrickmen,  at  $1.50    o'071 

1  engineman,  at  $2.25    0  054 

1.62  laborers,  at  $1.50 o'065 

0.45  waterboy,  at  $1.00   0  009 

0.86  team,  at  $3.50 (K078 

0.20  carpenters,  etc.,  at  $2.50 0  010 

1.59  derricks,  at  $1.50 o.'042 


Total  wall  farce $1.027 


STONE  MASONRY.  50V 

This  wall  force  of  16  men  laid  37  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day,  each 
mason  averaging  8.8  cu.  yds.  The  rates  for  derricks,  etc.,  apply 
to  the  cost  of  fuel,  at  $2  a  ton.  The  wall  derricks  were  stiff -legs, 
having  booms  40  ft.  long,  and  were  moved  on  a  track  parallel  with 
the  wall. 

Work  was  done  between  Sept.,  1894,  and  Oct.,  1896,  with  a  plant 
having  a  total  value  of  $30,200.  The  total  cost  of  the  masonry  was 
as  follows: 

Quarry  force : $0.73 

Wall   force    1.03 

Sand,   at  $1.35  per  cu.   yd 0.13 

Cement,  at  60  cts.  per  bbl 0.24 

Total     $2.13 

Cost  of  a  Masonry  Wall,  Including  Excavation.* — The  work  was 
done  in  September.  1896.  and  consisted  of  the  construction  of  a 
retaining  wall  at  the  round  house  of  the  Detroit,  Lansing  and 
Northern  R.  R..  at  Grand  Rapids,  Mich.  The  contractor  furnished 
the  labor  only,  the  material  being  furnished  by  the  railroad  com- 


Fig.    1.     Masonry   Abutment. 

pany.  The  wall  was  built  in  the  shape  shown  in  Fig.  1,  as  it  was 
desired  to  utilize  it  as  the  foundation  for  a  future  extension  of 
the  round  house. 

Excavation. — The  excavation  was  nearly  all  stiff  clay  with  stone 
and  small  boulders,  thus  making  hard  digging.  Almost  all  of  the 
excavated  matter  was  handled  twice,  cast  out  on  the  ground  and 
then  loaded  on  flat  cars.  The  time  given  for  excavation  includes, 
perhaps,  six  or  eigrht  dollars'  worth  of  time  spent  in  moving  cars. 
In  all  of  the  work  the  contractor  was  considered  as  a  foreman  and 
was  allowed  40  cents  per  hour  for  the  time  he  himself  actually 
worked.  In  all  of  the  cases  the  foremen  hours  are  for  the  hours 
during  which  actual  work  was  done  by  them.  That  is  to  say,  the 
foreman  not  only  acted  as  overseer,  but  also  did  actual  work,  exca- 
vating, laying  stone,  etc. 
'  The  cost  of  the  excavation  work  was  as  follows: 

Foreman,  33  hours,  at  40  cts.  per  hour $13.20 

Foreman,  104  hours,  at  22%  cts.  per  hour 23.40 

Laborer,   285   hours,   at   12y2    cts.   per  hour 35.63 

Total $72.23 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  30,  1906, 


508  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

A  total  of  168.1  cubic  yards  was  excavated  at  a  cost  of  $0.43 
per  yard.  The  contract  price  at  which  the  work  was  let  was  $0.25. 
Back  Filling. — In  back  filling  the  earth  was  wheeled  from  the 
flat  cars  and  placed  back  of  the  wall.  A  small  amount  of  earth 
was  cast  in  directly  from  the  bank.  The  cost  of  this  work  was 
as  follows: 

Foreman,   4   hours,   at  40   cts.   per  hour $1.60 

Foreman,  11  hours,  at  22%  cts.  per  hour 2.48 

Laborer,  52  hours,  at  12%  cts.  per  hour 6.50 

Total    f  10.58 

The  back  filling:  amounted  to  63  4/10  cu.  yds.,  and  this  was  done 
at  a  cost  of  $0.17  per  cubic  yard.  The  contract  price  was  $0.25  per 
cubic  yard. 

Concrete. — The  proportions  for  the  concrete  were  1:2%:5,  Akron 
(natural)  cement  being  used.  All  conditions  were  favorable  for 
fair  work.  It  was  found  that  1  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  was  equivalent 
to  29.8  cu.  ft.  of  material,  composed  of  3.6  cu.  ft.  cement  (1  1/10 
bbl.),  8.4  cu.  ft.  sand  (2  7/10  bbl.)  and  17.8  cu.  ft.  broken  stone 
(5V2  bbl.). 
The  cost  of  15%  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  was  as  follows: 

Foreman,  14  hours,  at  40  cts.  per  hour $  5.60 

Foreman,  20  hours,  at  22%   cts.  per  hour 4.50 

Laborer,  49  hours,  at  12%  cts.  per  hour 6.11 

Mason,  2  hours,  at  35  cts.  per  hour .70 

Total $16.91 

A  total  of  15%  cu.  yds.  concrete  was  prepared  at  a  cost  of  $1.09 
per  cubic  yard;  the  contract  price  was  $1.00  per  cubic  yard. 

Stone  Laying. — In  the  stone  laying,  Petoskey  limestone  was  used. 
The  limestone  weighed,  according  to  car  weights,  5.9  tons  per  cord, 
equal  to  93  Ibs.  per  cubic  foot  of  piled  stone.  Conditions  were  fair 
for  good  work.  It  was  here  found  that  1  cu.  yd.  rubble  masonry 
required  0.25  cord  stone.  0.22  cu.  yds.  sand  and  0.54  bbl.  cement. 
Akron  (natural)  cement,  one  barrel  containing  3%  cu.  ft.,  was 
used  and  the  mortar  was  mixed  in  the  proportions  of  1:3.  In  the 
force  account  sriven  below  the  foreman  laid  stone,  and  all  other 
foreman  hours  are  for  actual  work. 

The  cost  of  laying  the  82.2  cu.  yds.  of  rubble  is  shown  in  the 
following  table: 

Foreman,  78  hours,  at  40  cts.  per  hour $31.20 

.Foreman,   80  hours,  at  22%   cts.  per  hour 18.11 

Mason,  41  hours,  at  35  cts.  per  hour 14.52 

Laborer,   168  hours,  at  12%   cts.  per  hour 21.00 

Total  .TsTii 

A  total  of  82.2  cu.  yds.  of  wall  was  built,  the  labor  cost  per 
cubic  yard  being  $1.03;  the  contract  price  was  at  $1.25  per  cubic 
yard. 

If  the  full  cost  of  the  plant  is  charged  to  the  work,  another 
32  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  must  be  added  for  plant 


STONE  MASONRY.  509 

The  mortar  was  mixed  1:1,  and  Louisville  (natural)  cement 
Was  used,  each  bag  being  called  2  cu.  ft. 

The  wall  averaged  24  ft.  high,  and  was  4  ft  wide  for  the  upper 
8  ft.,  then  it  widened  to  12  ft.  at  the  base.  It  was  laid  in  courses 
12  to  18  ins.  thick. 

Cost  of  Laying  Bridge  Pier  Masonry. — Mr.  Gustave  Kaufman 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  abutments  and  piers  of  a  highway 
bridge  across  the  Ohio  River  at  Cincinnati.  The  total  length  of 
the  bridge  is  2.966  ft.  with  a  2 4 -ft.  roadway  and  two  7 -ft.  side- 
walks. There  are  two  abutments,  nine  masonry  piers,  of  which 
four  piers  are  founded  on  limestone,  and  five  on  piles.  There  are 
28  pedestals  for  the  steel  viaduct  approaches.  The  center  span  of 
the  bridge  has  a  clear  height  of  102  ft  above  low  water.  Work 
on  the  substructure  was  begun  May  1,  1890,  and  floods  caused  many 
delays,  so  that  the  bridge  was  not  opened  till  Aug.,  1891. 

Louisville  cement  was  used  throughout,  except  Portland  cement 
for  pointing.  Piers  Nos.  1.  2.  3  and  9  are  Ohio  River  freestone, 
with  a  backing  of  freestone.  Where  pile  foundations  were  used, 
the  heads  of  piles  were  imbedded  in  3  to  4%  ft  of  concrete  foun- 
dation. Piers  4  to  8,  inclusive,  are  of  Berea  sandstone  with  a 
backing,  or  hearting,  of  concrete,  up  to  the  belt  course,  above  which 
the  masonry  is  Ohio  River  freestone  entirely.  The  dimensions  of 
the  piers  are  shown  in  Table  I. 

TABLE   I. — DIMENSIONS   OHIO   RIVER  PIERS. 

Remarks.* 

Square  shaft. 
Circular  shaft 


Square  shaft. 

Note. — Pier  No.  3,  height  includes  caisson.  The  coping  of  all 
piers  was  Bedford  oolitic  limestone  18  ins.  thick,  except  for  piers 
5  and  6  which  had  a  24-in.  coping.  There  were  2,173  cu.  yds.  of 
masonry  in  the  ramps  on  both  sides  of  the  river. 

The  masonry  was  laid  with  the  help  of  derrick  scows,  and  the 
cost  of  laying  the  280  cu.  yds.  above  the  starling  course  was  $1.25 
per  cu.  yd.,  including  the  cost  of  sand  and  cement.  The  cost  of 
laying  the  sub-coping  and  coping  was  $1.45  per  cu.  yd.,  including 
sand  and  cement  The  cost  of  laying  masonry  and  concrete,  courses 
5  to  21,  was  $1.30  per  cu.  yd.,  including  sand  and  cement.  These 
costs  do  not  include  cofferdams.  Wages  were  as  follows,  per  10-hr, 
day:  Common  labor.  $1.50;  masons.  $3.25;  stone  cutters,  $3.50; 
enginemen,  $2.00 ;  foreman,  $4.00. 

The  face  stones  were  laid  alternate  headers  and  stretchers,  stones 
being  not  less  than  3%  ft  long,  dressed  to  %-in.  bed  joints  and 


Size 

Height 

Size  at 

Cubic 

Pier. 

Under 

Over 

Base  of 

Yards 

No. 

Coping. 
Feet 

All. 
Feet. 

Shaft. 
Feet. 

Masonry. 

1 

5X  30 

26.2 

6.4  X  31.4 

146.2 

2 

5  X  30 

39.4 

7.6  X  32.6 

271.7 

3 

6  X  30 

47.0 

9.1  X  33.1 

393.9 

4 

9  X  34 

74.0 

13.8  X  49.5 

1,432.9 

5 

10  X  34 

112.8 

17.3  X  53.7 

2,357.6 

6 

10  X  34 

104.1 

17.8  X  54.2 

2,475.6 

7 

9X  34 

93.4 

16.0  X  51.8 

1,974.1 

8 

7  X  32 

87.1 

13.4  X  46.8 

1,393.3 

9 

7  X  32 

37.3 

9.6X  34.6 

330.1 

510  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

%-in.   vertical  joints  for   at  least    12   ins.   back  of   the   face.     The 
width  of  each  stone  was  1^  times  the  depth  of  the  course. 

The  cost  of  laying  Pier  5  was  $0.73  per  cu.  yd.,  courses  1  to  37  ; 
and  |1.11  per  cu.  yd.,  courses  38  to  54;  and  $1.10  per  cu.  yd., 
courses  55  to  56;  the  cost  of  sand  and  cement  is  included  in  all 
cases.  See  Tables  II  and  III. 

Cost  of  Sodom  Dam. — Mr.  Walter  McCulloch  gives  the  following 
data  on  the  Sodom  Dam.  on  the  east  branch  of  the  Croton  River, 
N.  Y.  The  dam  is  500  ft  long  at  the  coping,  240  ft.  long  at  top  of 
foundation,  53  ft.  thick  at  foundation.  12  ft.  thick  under  coping, 
and  78  ft.  high  above  ground  line.  Work  was  begun  Feb.  22,  1888, 
and  completed  Oct.  29,  1892.  The  contractor  paid  laborers  $1.25 
a  day,  and  masons,  $3.50.  There  were  35,887  cu.  yds.  of  masonry 
of  all  classes.  Of  this  23,600  cu.  yds.  were  rubble  laid  in  1 :  2 
Portland  mortar,  6,300  cu.  yds.  rubble  in  1  :  3  mortar,  780  cu.  yds. 
of  granite  dimension  stone  masonry,  4,300  cu.  yds.  limestone  face 
masonry,  and  530  cu.  yds.  of  brick  masonry.  The  face  masonry  and 
brickwork  were  laid  in  1  :  2  Portland  mortar.  The  rubble  was 
quarried  IVi  miles  from  the  dam  and  hauled  on  double  team  trucks 
carrying  1  to  iy2  cu  yds.  per  load,  making  6  to  8  trips  a  day.  The 
rock  was  a  hard,  close-grained  gneiss  of  irregular  cleavage.  The 
face  stones  (4.300  cu.  yds.)  were  quarried  at  a  limestone  quarry 
7  miles  away  and  delivered  on  cars  of  the  N.  Y.  &  N.  E.  R.  R.  These 
stones  were  cut  for  30-in.  courses,  stretchers  being  3%  ft.  long, 
and  headers  4  ft.  long.  Dimension  stones  (780  cu.  yds.)  were 
granite  from  Wilmington,  Del.  Cement  cost  from  $2.31  to  $2.51 
per  bbl.  The  cost  of  the  rubble  stone  delivered  on  the  work  from 
the  quarry  was  $1.97  per  cu.  yd.,  including  5  cts.  quarry  royalty. 
Rubble  stone  and  spalls  from  the  excavation  waste  banks  cost  $0.67 
per  cu.  yd.  The  average  cost  of  rubble  stone  was  $1.26.  The 
actual  cost  of  rubble  masonry  in  1 :  2  mortar  was  $4.45  per  cu.  yd. 
The  actual  cost  of  limestone  for  face  work  was  $9.75  per  cu.  yd., 
including  15  cts.  quarry  royalty,  but  not  including  laying  and  mor- 
tar. The  cost  of  dimension  granite  on  the  work,  including  dressing, 
was  $30.08  cer  cu.  yd.  The  cost  of  the  coffer-damming  and  other 
work  is  not  given. 

A  cableway  spanned  the  dam,  2-in.  cable,  7  Ibs.  per  ft.,  667-ft. 
span,  sag  25  ft.  under  10-ton  load.  The  cableway  plant  cost  $3,800. 
After  four  months'  use  the  cable,  under  a  load  of  only  6  tons,  broke 
50  ft.  from  one  tower,  at  a  place  where  stone  and  cement  skips 
were  taken  UP.  A  new  cable  was  installed,  the  towers  raised  10  ft. 
so  as  to  give  it  more  sag,  and  it  served  till  the  end  of  the  work. 
The  cableway  anchors  were  oak  deadmen,  2  ft.  diameter  by  10  ft. 
long,  in  trenches  in  rock  6  ft.  deep.  The  masonry  was  laid  with 
fixed  derricks  and  with  a  traveling  derrick  on  a  30-ft.  trestle  run- 
ning upon  a  track  of  36-ft.  gage.  The  best  month's  work  was  3,000 
cu.  yds.  laid  with  12  masons  and  three  derricks;  the  average  prog- 
ress was  1,700  cu.  yds.  per  month.  The  Giant  Portland  cement 
came  in  duck  bags  of  100  Ibs.  each  (93  Ibs.  net),  four  to  the  barrel. 
The  Union  natural  cement  came  in  100-lb.  bags  (96  Ibs.  net),  three 


STONE  MASONRY. 
AM£ 

~  o 


Slj 


512 


HANDBOOK    Ob    COS'l    DATA. 


1-1       1-1  G>  v 

rt)  iH  ni  rH  O  O     »> 


w is  «s    .  <U ^  o; "  <U "^ "  <IJ  0) "  O> '-"-' ^    fe  ,,          _  KT 

^^    CJOS   >«5>;^   >dw   >>rH>OiHM    Z   S  2fl 

°3    rH^<JrH  ^  ^1  <J  ^  r-H  <j  <j  rt  <{  r-4  r-l  rH     «ft  gg 


. 
O  3 


s* 

§C 


1030        «0 


STONE  MASONRY.  513 

to  the  barrel.  The  sand  and  cement  were  mixed  dry  (3  turns  with 
shovels)  and  delivered  in  boxes  on  the  work  where  it  was  wet  as 
needed.  Rubble  stones  varied  from  1  cu.  ft.  to  1  cu.  yd.  in  size,  and 
in  placing  them  the  beds  of  mortar  were  made  very  full  and  the 
stone  thoroughly  shaken  till  firm.  Mortar  was  filled  into  .the  joints 
and  then  all  the  spalls  that  it  would  take  were  forced  in.  Care 
was  taken  not  to  build  the  rubble  up  in  courses.  In  freezing 
weather,  above  zO°,  hot  brine  (5  Ibs.  salt  to  1  bbl.  of  water)  and 
heated  sand  were  used  for  the  mortar.  Salt  and  sand  were  sprinkled 
over  the  fresh  mortar  at  night.  In  the  spring  the  mortar  laid  in 
freezing  weather  could  be  scaled  off  1/16  to  %  in.  deep,  but  under 
this  it  was  hard.  In  laying  the  foundation  it  was  found  that 
springs  of  water  would  wash  the  cement  out  of  the  concrete,  so  it 
proved  better  to  lay  beds  of  rubble  made  of  small  stones.  The 
water  could  be  led  around  the  rubble  and  nursed  from  place  to  place 
till  finally  a  small  well,  2  ft.  in  diameter  and  1  to  2  ft.  deep,  would 
be  formed  where  the  water  boiled  up.  When  the  mortar  about  each 
little  well  had  set,  the  water  was  bailed  out,  the  well  quickly  filled 
with  dry  mortar,  a  bed  of  stiff  wet  mortar  laid  on  top  and  covered 
with  a  large  rubble  stone.  When  the  water  was  turned  in  behind 
this  dam  there  were  no  leaks.  This  was  in  a  large  measure  due  to 
the  use  of  rich  mortar  and  careful  work.  No  cracks  developed. 

Cost  of  Dams  and  Locks,  Black  Warrior  River.— Mr.  R.  C.  Mc- 
Calla  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  the  cost  of  building 
masonry  locks  and  dams  on  the  Black  Warrior  River,  Alabama. 
The  work  was  done  by  hired  labor  for  the  government,  in  1888  to 
1895,  at  costs  given  in  Table  IV. 

The  stone  is  a  sandstone  quarried  near  the  locks  along  the  banks 
of  the  river  and  in  the  river  bed.  The  stone  for  Lock  and  Dam  No. 
3  was  quarried  in  a  reef  just  above  falls  7  ft.  high.  The  quarry 
covered  two  acres,  and  was  operated  a  depth  of  12  to  18  ft. 
during  low  water,  requiring  only  two  3-in.  pulsometer  pumps  to 
keep  it  drained. 

The  face  stone  of  locks  Nos.  1,  2  and  3  were  set  in  1 :  3  Portland 
mortar  (cement  measured  loose)  ;  the  backing  was  partly  set  in  mor- 
tar and  partly  in  1:3:5  concrete.  Stiff-leg  derricks  were  used  to 
set  the  stones. 

In  October,  1891,  200  cu.  yds.  of  backing  and  600  cu.  yds.  of 
dimension  stone  were  quarried  for  Lock  No.  2,  Black  Warrior  River, 
Tuskaloosa,  Ala.  The  stone  was  a  fine  quality  of  blue  sandstone 
quarried  from  the  bed  of  the  river  at  the  fcJls,  after  diverting  the 
water.  The  cost  of  quarrying  these  800  cu.  yds.  was  $1,598,  or  about 
$1  per  cu.  yd.  for  the  backing  and  $2.33  per  cu.  yd.  for  the  dimen- 
sion stone.  In  this  month  434  cu.  yds.  of  dimension  stone  were 
cut  by  stonecutters  at  a  cost  of  $6.83  per  cu.  yd.  The  masonry 
wall  is  390 V2  ft.  long,  8  to  14  ft.  wide,  and  34  ft.  high,  built  in 
courses  of  ashlar  18  to  24  ins.  thick,  and  about  50%  cut  stone.  In 
October  two  gangs  of  masons,  using  two  derricks,  laid  1,563  cu.  yds. 
of  first-class  masonry  at  a  total  cost  of  92%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  in- 
cluding the  cost  of  screening  sand,  mixing  mortar,  operating  steam 


514 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


,-5   <0(Mi-l«OOOS     •    T*     O     -000000        iHCO 
.2   «O  O  00  <M  O  W     "i-H     O     • OOOOOO        «O  OS 

cjiHcoTHOiHO    Id    os    ]  d  iri  co  IM' co  c<i      ^os 

.  OS        ITS  Tf  O  OO  C~  OO        CO 

•""   »>rf«Jj;10"3   ~          * 
L  I 

$J;Su3t~moso?o«co      I     • .  •  ^ 

O -U    i-l  OS  iH  W  O  OS      -CO          |        •      *  _i 

M  S3  -*  as  ^  us  10  •*    -o      j 

3  ^e^^ev'<rq"t>       t^  rt 

<y  I 

aJ 

„'   ?0  «0  05  •*  «0  rH     -W     OOOOOOOO 

^  •* rH oo c<i o uq    •  eg    oooooocso      oo 

Si-Ht^i-HOTHoIdo6cqcoc<ii>coi-Hi-J      °°-   . 
6®.  OiOO^«Oi-l^^        <0  C 

<o  ^  o  M<  oo  to  oo  oo 
e<J  ascQ&ttaZc^iatt 

rH  N        rH 

I       *     .  ,— ,  1 

^   "^S£S!£3S  *^«  '**':*::  I  '  '. 

O  rf    THMrHtO        to"'001"1 j       *     *'.  ^ 

s    S1"1  « 

53  ^ 

^  ° 

P"  .TH50COOOCOU50     •     .00000000        OS     • 

..          _2^«5U5!Ncoc<iio    •    .00000000      r-    • 

Q          cd  codoadiHod    *    '  o  to  co  oo  c<i  uj  i-5 1«     ^.  |  *C 

^  Qi    se-rH  'iHlOt-iHOOCOt-O        rH  £ 

8  **"  SS25SSS5  « 

°  & 

2£  *'                                         ,          ^ 
yt         %•<->    t~  O  C—  Ol  OO  O  O  •**"  Oq I       "     *  rT 

ITJ      x'^Joocoooot-oot^co |     ••  r 

g       MgOlOOOOr-irtiOt-iH fO 

M 

I     .|1_;_1  :  : 

I    s  g: :      :  f  : : 

I  !  .  1  '.  I  !      !  I  !  i 

"^       :::     :1     |§ 
::§"    :i     ol 


ofl 

15 


o  o 

-»->•(-> 
03  O2 


^C^O^Oj-lOCrH  O 

HO^WWHH£H      o 


STONE  MASONRY. 


515 


„•   05COOOt~rH     .0000000       C-  <D 

.3  laeocorHoo  •CP.C;C^C;C^C^C!    M  2 

ri  cot^OrHO    •oioodiftoiuiod      ^  'S 

.Qj    rH                                 *         CO  CO  CO  CO -^  t-         CO  r 
MM    W-                                       rHrHCOCOrHW        rH 

,_  . 

S^?oio>ocoo    -^ I     •  .£• 

g-~    ££COO>CO      .^      .     .     .     .     .     .    |       .  ^ 

Ctf    COCo'co"       CO     'rH I  ifl 

3  osoj  I 

C'  t! 

CO 
rH 

^J  OiCOCqOirHCOCOOOOOOO        <M 

g  0>   OO  T-HOlCOLOrHCO  OOOOOO 

M     M'f3  r5t~0r"100      MOOOCOOJOO 

«    «««                    -»«.«.    s  o 

I  ^  ga 

3     .^iicococDcocoot- I     •  5f  us 

^*     Q'-4-iLOLO^t"-^c£>o    *    *    •    •    •    •)     **tco 

^           C  irt  in  co  eo  CD  co  co •  £ 

^  coco'co' 

M  3    U51T5 

o       Q^ 

PQ  s*'  oj 

•   C5  OO  rH  ^J<  LO  OO  U5     -OOOOO    I   OS  _- >^ 

8?            .2   00<^^OiOOrHOO     -00000    |  gj  "g^ 

S       •dt-^aJco<rqooo    ]IOOLO-*I>-I     .  pjc3 
3         Di  N                                cooinM't-      c 

~S          .HH^^                                          TtirHlCrHTtiTH  .<!> 

Q      O                                                              **•  a2 

rJ          S^  -° 

rM        rrttfOOOOt^Ot-OSiM ^J 

PH       /^'-WCOCOCOCOCDIMO I      '  tlt-l 

•     H  fl  NN^eo^wio  ;:;;;;!    :  ^^ 

g               rt    COCOrH        rH  <JJ  jq 

(§  *^-^ 

3    jg 

I        ^   s       ;  •./".'::;  •  "sr« 

K*                     "    Bi           O  *?  IFH 

^  f^H 

CO 

s 

a 

T|f 

r-:  o 

£                §  O^ 

be 

H^'tJ      H'-S'O         •«  c      *s  rt' 

9« 


Ililllillllli     s 


U6  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

noists,   unloading  material    at   the  wall    and   converting   them   into 
masonry.     The  itemized  cost  of  the  mason  work  was : 

Foreman,    1   mo $   90.00 

Masons,    202    days   of    8   hrs.,    at   $2.80 565.60 

Laborers,    35%    davs  of    8   hrs..   at  $1.20 42.15 

Laborers,    270%    days  of   8   hrs..   at   $1.00 270.50 

Laborers,  369%   days  of  8  hrs.,  at  $0.80 295.70 

Laborers,   146%   days  of  8   hrs.,  at   $0.60 88.05 

Boys,    83^4    days  of   8   hrs.,   at   $0.40 33.30 

Wages  paid   in    board 42.00 

Fuel    for    hoists .      18.49 

Total,    at   92%    cts.    cer   cu.   yd $1,445.79 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  wages  of  laborers  were  very  low.  Doubt- 
less the  men  were  negroes. 

On  the  south  wall  of  Lock  No.  2.  Black  Warrior  River,  during 
August,  1892,  two  gangs  of  masons,  three  masons  to  the  gang,  with 
helpers,  laid  and  pointed  2,370  cu.  yds.,  about  40%  of  which  was 
dry  rubble  wall,  the  rest  being  first-class  masonry  in  Portland  ce- 
ment mortar.  This  is  16  cu.  yds.  per  mason  per  8-hr.  day.  The  fol- 
lowing includes  the  cost  of  screening  sand,  mixing  mortar,  unload- 
ing materials  at  the  wall,  operating  steam  hoists,  fuel  for  same, 
laying  and  pointing  the  masonry: 

Foreman,    1    mo $    100.00 

Masons,    147%    days,    at    $3.50 516.25 

Laborers,  27%    days,    at    $1.50 41.25 

Laborers,   108    days,    at    $1.25 135.00 

Laborers,  510%    days,   at   $1.00 510.50 

Laborers,  216   days,   at  $0.80 172.80 

Laborers,   186%    days,    at    $0.75 139.88 

Laborers,   103    days,    at    $0.55 56.65 

Boys,    87%    days,    at    $0.50 43.88 

Wages   paid    in    board 100.00 

Fuel     22.75 

Total,  at  77.6  cts.  per  cu.  yd $1,838.96 

Cost  of  Rock-fill  Dams.— The  three  dams  on  the  Black  Warrior 
River,  built  by  hired  labor,  were  of  the  rock-fill  type  without  mor- 
tar or  core-walls.  The  down  stream  face  is  composed  of  large 
roughly  dressed  stones,  laid  in  steps  and  doweled  together.  A 
timber  crib  is  built  into  the  upper  face  of  the  dam  and  sheathed 
with  6  x  12-in.  plank.  The  dams  were  built  during  low  water, 
without  cofferdamming.  Floating  and  stationary  derricks  were 
used.  Sandstone  for  dams  Nos.  1  and  2  was  delivered  by  barge, 
and  for  No.  3  by  rail,  a  track  being  laid  on  stone-filled  cribs  along 
the  toe  of  the  dam.  The  cost  of  this  work  is  given  in  Table  V. 

Crib  No.  1.        Crib  No.  2.        Crib  No.  3. 

Lumber  and  iron  Ft.B.M.  34,453  $13.65  33,109  $12.68  33,109  $14.16 
Carpenter  work.  Ft.B.M.  34,453  6.94  33,109  6.83  33,109  12.62 
Filling  rock  ...  Cu.  yds.  1,640  0.35  1,105  0.24  1,090  0.46 

Total     $1,277 $909 $1,390 

Note.— Crib  No.  1  is  29  ft.  10  ins.  high,  11  ft.  8  ins.  wide,  and 
90  ft.  long;  Cribs  Nos.  2  and  3  are  28  ft.  8  ins.  high,  11  ft.  6  ins. 
wide,  and  90  ft.  long.  The  cribs  are  of  6  x  8-in.  yellow  pine  with 
cross-pieces  at  intervals  of  5  ft.,  drift-bolted  together,  and  filled 
with  one-man  stone. 


STONE  MASONRY.  517 

Cost  of  Cyclopean  Masonry,  Reference. — See  the  section  on  Con- 
crete under  Rubble  Concrete. 

Cost  of  Limestone  and  Sandstone  Slope-Walls. — A  slope-wall  is 
practically  a  stone  block  pavement  laid  upon  a  sloping  face  of  earth 
to  protect  it  from  erosion.  The  "wash"  of  passing  boats  in  canals 
makes  necessary  some  such  protection  of  the  earth  in  certain 
places.  The  beating  of  waves  upon  the  sides  of  a  reservoir  or  small 
lake  acts  in  a  similar  manner,  and  a  slope-wall  is  usually  provided 
to  resist  the  erosion.  The  concave  side  of  a  river  bank  is  occasion- 
ally protected  by  slop-walling,  with  perhaps  a  line  of  piling  at  the 
toe  of  the  wall. 

A  dry  slope-wall,  it  will  be  seen,  is  an  engineering  structure 
often  used,  although  very  little  exists  in  print  as  to  its  design  or 
cost.  Since  the  forces  acting  upon  a  slope-wall  are  not  readily 
measurable,  the  design  is  an  art,  and  not  a  science.  Recorded  ex- 


EN6.N8WS.V  .  '-' 


Fig.  2.     Slope  Wall.  Fig.  3. 

perience  of  others,  personal  experience  of  the  designer  and  com- 
mon sense  should  govern  the  design. 

The  oldest  slope-walls  on  the  Erie  Canal  were  made  of  cobble- 
stones rammed  solidly  into  the  bank,  and  placed  so  that  the  stones 
touched  one  another  Cobbles  for  this  purpose  were  gathered  from 
fields  or  creek  beds,  and  ranged  in  diameter  from  4  ins.  to  12  ins., 
the  average  being  about  6  or  8  ins.  These  cobble  slope-walls,  while 
not  as  handsome  as  those  made  of  dressed  quarry  stone,  were  in 
fact  more  durable,  for  the  shales  and  limestone  ledges  along  the 
route  of  the  Erie  Canal  furnish  stone  more  or  less  subject  to 
weathering.  Cobbles,  or  "hardheads,"  on  the  contrary,  are  often 
granitic  and  always  tough. 

Slope-walls  made  of  quarry  stone  are  built  as  shown  in  Figs.  2 
and  3.  The  stones  are  split  with  wedges  or  plug  and  feathered, 
then  roughly  dressed  with  a  hammer,  and  placed  in  the  wall  on 
edge,  just  as  brick  or  stone  block  are  placed  in  a  street  pavement. 
The  longest  dimension  of  the  stone  is  laid  parallel  with  the  axis  of 
the  canal  or  river.  In  some  of  the  earlier  walls,  huge  slabs  of  stone 
were  laid  flatwise  just  as  sidewalk  flagging  is  laid,  but  such  stones 
are  apt  to  settle  unevenly  and  tilt  up  so  that  a  passing  boat  or  mov- 
ing ice  will  displace  them  entirely.  Moreover  it  is  practically  im- 
possible to  bed  very  large  stone  properly,  since  ramming  has  no 


518  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

effect.  Experience,  therefore,  has  shown  the  necessity  of  splitting 
up  slabs  into  blocks  readily  laid  and  bedded  by  hand ;  and  it  costs 
no  more  in  the  end  to  build  walls  in  this  way,  for  the  cost  of 
handling  with  a  derrick  and  cost  of  frequent  moving  of  derrick 
more  than  offset  the  cost  of  splitting  the  stone.  It  is  customary  on 
the  Erie  Canal  always  to  provide  a  lining  of  gravel  (Fig.  1)  back 
of  the  wall.  This  lining  serves  a  twofold  purpose:  It  makes  it 
easy  for  the  workman  to  bed  jagged  stone  properly,  and  it  further 
adds  to  the  protection  of  the  subsoil  from  wash.  Waves  beating 
through  the  joints  in  the  slope-wall  strike  this  gravel  which  is  not 
easily  disclaced,  and  do  not  reach  the  subsoil  with  sufficient  force 
to  displace  it.  It  is  my  opinion  that  this  gravel  lining  is  one  of 
the  most  important  and  necessary  features  of  a  well-made  slope- 
wall.  Crushed  stone,  of  course,  would  serve  equally  well  or  better, 
but  usually  the  cost  is  more  than  for  gravel.  There  are  places 
where  broken  stone  costs  less  than  gravel  and  in  such  places  it 
should  be  used. 

On  rivers  or  reservoirs,  subject  to  wide  fluctuation  in  water  level, 
the  gravel  or  stone  lining  for  the  paving  is  even  more  necessary ; 
for  there  the  surface  rain  water,  flowing  down  over  the  face  of  the 
slope-wall,  will  cut  rivulets  beneath  it  unless  proper  lining  is  pro- 
vided. Embankments  ara  usually  so  designed  as  to  prevent  much 
rain  water  from  flowing  over  the  slope- wall  face,  as  shown  in  Fig. 
1,  where  the  towpath  is  seen  to  have  a  slope  away  from  the  canal. 
In  diking  a  river  the  same  form  of  top  slope  is  usually  provided 
where  a  slope- wall  is  to  be  laid ;  but  in  protecting  a  natural  river 
bank  it  is  often  impossible  entirely  to  prevent  rain  water  from 
flowing  over  the  face  of  the  slope-wall.  Ditches  should  be  dug  to 
divert  the  rain  water,  which  is  then  carried  in  a  pipe  culvert 
through  to  the  river.  Ditches,  however,  are  apt  to  fill  up  with 
washed-in  earth,  so  that  in  any  event  a  substantial  lining  of 
gravel  should  be  placed  back  of  the  slope-wall,  in  order  to  guard 
against  erosion  by  rain  water.  A  thickness  of  gravel  lining  of  from 
4  to  8  ins.  will  suffice,  4  ins.  ordinarily  being  enough. 

Passing  to  the  thickness  of  the  stone  slope-wall  itself,  we  find 
a  range  of  from  6  ins.  to  24  ins.  with  12  to  16  ins.  most  commonly 
used.  The  Chemung  River,  near  Elmira,  N.  T.,  is  a  stream  about 
600  ft  wide  and  20  ft.  deep  in  times  of  high  water.  At  one  place 
on  this  river  a  slope-wall  24  ins.  thick  was  built  by  the  State, 
and  a  few  miles  away  another  had  been  built  12  ins.  thick,  both  of 
a  shaley  limestone.  Both  walls  have  served  for  years,  except  in 
places  where  the  piling  at  the  toe  has  been  undermined.  The  24-in. 
wall  was  evidently  an  extravagant  design ;  and  not  justified  by 
the  conditions,  particularly  as  the  lighter  wall  had  been  in  service 
some  years  before  the  construction  of  the  24-in.  wall  was  begun. 
Because  a  river  is  occasionally  a  raging  torrent  it  does  not  follow 
that  the  floating  debris  or  ice  will  displace  the  small  stones  of  a 
well-laid  slope-wall.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  each  stone  is  held  by  the 
weight  of  stones  above,  even  when  laid  on  a  1%  to  1  slope,  and  a 
stone  is  pried  out  of  a  slope-wall  with  great  difficulty.  I  believe 


STONE  MASONRY.  519 

that  ordinary  brick  laid  dry  as  a  slope-wall  pavement  will  protect 
a  river  embankment  perfectly,  provided  the  subsoil  does  not  become 
undermined.  In  slope- wall  masonry,  on  river  embankments  subject 
to  blows  of  ice  and  logs,  a  thickness  of  8  to  10  ins.  seems  an  advis- 
able minimum,  for  some  erosion  and  settlement  of  the  subsoil  or 
lining  must  be  provided  for.  On  reservoirs  or  canals  a  less  thick- 
ness may  be  used  where  blows  from  boats  are  not  frequent 
But  as  above  stated  12  ins.  is  very  often  specified,  and  as  will  be 
seen  later,  it  is  not  an  extravagant  depth.  Having  fixed  upon  the 
depth  of  stone  to  be  used  in  the  wall,  the  thickness  (or  rise)  and 
length  remain  to  be  determined.  A  minimum  thickness  of  4  ins. 
is  usually  specified.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  except  for  appearance 
sake,  thickness  is  not  an  important  factor.  An  engineer  who  is 
fond  of  seeing  coursed  masonry  will  often  require  that  the  slope- 
wall  be  laid  in  courses  of  a  specified  minimum  and  maximum 
thickness.  It  costs  money  to  dress  the  stone  to  lay  in  such  courses, 
but  for  appearance  sake,  near  a  highway,  such  expense  may  be 
justified.  Ordinarily  it  is  not  justifiable.  Slope-walls  are  built  for 
protection,  not  for  beauty. 

If  any  definite  minimum  thickness  of  courses  is  specified,  it  should 
be  governed  by  the  stratified  thickness  of  stone  in  the  nearest 
quarry.  If  the  quarry  is  thick-bedded  limestone,  then  it  is  safe  to 
omit  any  minimum  thickness  requirement ;  for  to  split  into  thin 
slabs  with  plug  and  feathers  is  expensive,  and  the  contractor  will 
surely  not  split  the  stone  thinner  than  the  maximum  thickness 
specified.  If  the  quarry  stone  is  thin-bedded,  as  shaley  limestone 
and  some  sandstones  are,  a  minimum  thickness  of  3  or  4  ins. 
may  be  named.  A  maximum  thickness  of  10  or  12  ins.  is  a 
reasonable  requirement.  A  minimum  length  of  12  ins.  is  often 
specified,  and  is  not  unreasonable,  for  slabs  are  readily  broken  with 
a  hammer  to  almost  any  desired  length.  There  is  no  objection  to 
stones  up  to  24  ins.  in  length. 

Slope-wall  paving  is  "laid  to  break  joint,"  as  shown  in  Fig.  3, 
and  it  is  well  so  to  lay  it,  because  if  the  toe  is  washed  out,  this 
breaking  of  joint  enables  the  wall  above  to  span  the  space,  and  so 
prevents  rapid  crumbling  away  of  the  wall.  However,  specifications 
are  often  drawn  with  absurd  refinement  as  to  this  bonding ;  the 
least  admissible  number  of  inches  of  bond  is  named,  and  altogether 
the  wall  is  treated  as  if  it  were  to  be  a  bridge  pier,  or  arch, 
or  other  necessarily  strong  structure.  To  require  that  the  stones 
shall  be  laid  so  as  to  break  joint  is  a  sufficient  requirement  for 
slope-wall  work. 

We  come  now  to  the  feature  of  the  specifications  that  makes  a 
wall  cost  little  or  much — the  allowable  maximum  width  of  bed  and 
end  joints.  Specifications  sometimes  name  %-in.  joints  to  the  full 
depth  of  each  stone.  Such  work,  as  we  shall  see,  costs  twice  as 
much  as  under  the  more  reasonable  requirement  of  1%-in.  joints, 
carried  back  4  ins.  from  the  face  beyond  which  the  stone  may  fail 
away  to  a  wedge  shape.  To  call  for  joints  of  less  than  1*£  ina. 
Is  justifiable  only  where  well  coursed  slope-walling  is  desired  for 


520 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


appearance  sake.  Wall  with  iy2-in.  maximum  joints  serves  the 
purpose  of  protection  from  erosion,  and  any  expense  incurred  in 
better  dressing  is  merely  "for  looks." 

In  laying  a  slope-wall,  "frames"  or  "profiles"  should  be  set 
about  20  or  25  ft.  apart,  as  shown  in  Fig.  4.  Stakes  are  driven  as 
shown,  and  a  1  x  4-in.  profile-stick  of  timber  is  nailed  to  the  stake 
at  the  proper  grade,  as  determined  by  the  Y-level.  The  workmen 
then  stretch  a  string  from  the  bottom  of  one  frame  to  the  bottom 
of  the  next  one,  and  thus  have  a  line  to  which  they  can  accurately 
lay  the  face  of  the  slope-wall.  Never  allow  a  workman  to  attempt 
to  lay  slope-wall  without  such  frames  and  a  cord  to  guide  him ; 
for  without  such  guides  he  will  surely  lay  a  wall  with  humps  and 
hollows.  Another  point  in  practical  laying  is  always  to  incline 
each  stone  lightly  uphill.  Do  not  try  to  set  it  exactly  at  right 
angles  to  the  surface  of  the  ground,  for  an  endeavor  to  do  this  re- 
sults in  a  wall  like  that  in  Fig.  5,  where  the  stone  are  in  steps. 


Toe  Stick 


Fig.  4.     Profiles. 


It  is  an  excellent  plan  to  set  the  profile  strips  exactly  13^  ft.  apart, 
for  reasons  given  later  on. 

The  stone  are  split  with  plug  and  feathers  and  hammers  in  the 
quarry,  hauled  by  wagons  and  dumped  at  the  top  of  the  embank- 
ment as  in  Fig.  4.  Laborers  then  throw  the  stones  down  to  the 
slope- wall  masons,  who  roughly  scabble  and  lay  them,  filling  in  the 
chinks  back  of  the  face  with  spalls  and  gravel  lining.  An  intelli- 
gent laborer  can  soon  learn  to  lay  common  slope-wall,  but  skilled 
si  ope- wall  masons,  if  available,  usually  lay  a  better-appearing  wall 
at  less  cost.  Sharp-pointed  stones  like  A,  Fig.  6,  should  ordinarily 
not  be  allowed ;  but  stones  like  B,  that  are  roughly  dressed,  3  to  4 
ins.  back  of  the  face,  and  then  fall  away  so  as  to  leave  a  wide  end 
joint  as  shown,  are  not  objectionable,  provided  these  joints  are 
filled  with  spalls  and  gravel. 

Before  passing  to  a  consideration  of  costs,  a  word  should  be  given 
as  to  protecting  the  toe  or  foot  of  the  wall.  In  canal  work  it  is 
customary  to  lay  a  12  x  12-in.  toe-timber  or  stick,  as  shown  In 
Fig.  4.  Since  timber  continually  submerged  does  not  rot,  ana 


STONE  MASONRY.  521 

since  frozen  timber  in  the  winter  when  canals  are  closed  does  not 
rot  either,  this  design  is  not  objectionable  for  canals.  However, 
I  question  the  necessity  of  using  a  toe  stick  at  all  under  ordinary 
conditions  in  canal  work.  In  river  work,  a  toe  stick  resting  against 
piles  driven  5  ft.  c.  to  c.,  is  often  used.  In  some  cases  the  toe 
stick  is  done  away  with  entirely  and  a  line  of  close-driven  piles 
substituted,  which  is  a  very  expensive  solution  of  the  problem  and 
not  altogether  satisfactory.  Piling  on  the  concave  bank  of  a  river 
seems  to  hasten  rather  than  retard  undermining.  A  brush  mattress 
is  a  better  toe  protection  under  such  conditions,  and  heavy  rip-rap 
is  still  better  where  the  brush  is  alternately  wet  and  dry. 

The  following  are  actual  costs  of  work  that  I  have  done.  The 
quarry  required  very  little  stripping,  and  was  located  on  a  side 
bill, '2%  miles  from  the  work.  The  stone  was  a  thin  bedded  lime- 
stone, rather  shaley,  and  was  barred  and  wedged  out  with  the  use 
of  little  or  no  powder.  There  was  very  little  plug  and  feathering 
as  the  stone  split  readily  under  the  hammer.  Common  labor  was 
employed,  the  only  skilled  man  being  the  foreman,  who  worked 
with  the  men. 

One  hundred  and  forty  wagon  loads  of  stone,  each  load  measur- 
ing 2  cu.  yds.  corded  upon  the  wagon,  and  1.55  cu.  yds.  laid  in  the 
slope- wall,  making  a  total  of  220  cu.  yds.  in  the  wall,  were  quar- 
ried and  loaded  by  five  men  (including  the  foreman)  in  20  working 
days  of  10  hrs.  each,  or  at  the  rate  of  2.2  cu.  yds.  of  slope- wall 
quarried  per  man  per  day.  Laborers  received  $1.50  a  day  and 
foreman  $2.50,  so  the  wages  averaged  $1.70,  which,  divided  by  2.2, 
makes  the  cost  nearly  80  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  quarrying  and  loading 
the  stone.  Each  driver  helped  load  and  unload  his  wagon,  and 
hauled  4  to  5  loads  a  day.  A  team  and  driver  received  70  cts.  a 
load  for  hauling  (5  miles  round  trip)  over  a  good  hard  gravel  road 
with  no  upgrades ;  so  the  cost  of  hauling  was  about  45  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  of  slope-wall,  making  a  total  of  $1.25  for  the  stone  delivered  at 
the  work.  A  quarry  rental  of  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  was  paid  for  the 
stone.  To  estimate  the  cost  of  loading  and  hauling  for  other  dis- 
tances the  following  observations  were  made :  Two  laborers  work- 
ing quite  deliberately  handed  up  the  stone  to  the  driver,  who  stacked 
them  on  his  "stone  rack"  (3x11  ft.),  or  wagon  box  without  sides 
other  than  a  strip  of  4  x  4-in.  timber.  It  required  15  mins.  to  load 
a  wagon  with  2  cu.  yds.  measured  on  the  wagon,  or  1.55  cu.  yds. 
in  the  slope-wall.  The  driver  alone  would  unload  his  wagon  at  the 
dump  in  7  mins.,  by  simply  rolling  the  stone  off. 

The  team  traveled  at  a  speed  of  2^  miles  an  hour,  or  220  ft. 
a  minute,  at  a  walk,  and  generally  trotted  part  of  the  way  back 
to  make  up  for  lost  time  at  both  ends.  With  a  short  haul,  or  over 
soft  roads  trotting  would  have  been  out  of  the  question  ;  and  over 
very  soft  earth  roads  with  occasional  steep  pulls  a  load  half  as 
great  as  the  above  is  the  maximum. 

On  another  similar  contract  750  cu.  yds.  of  slope- wall  were  quar- 
ried at  a  cost  of  $1.10  per  cu.  yd.,  the  stone  being  a  "grit"  or 
shaley  limestone,  quarried  by  laborers  at  $1.50  per  day  of  10  hrs. 


522  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  haul  was  1  %  miles  from  Quarry  to  wall  and  6  trips  a  day  were 
made  by  each  team,  hauling  1%  cu.  yds.  each  trip  as  measured  in 
the  wall,  at  a  cost  of  35  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  hauling.  This  stone, 
therefore,  cost  $1.45  per  cu.  yd.  delivered. 

In  laying  750  cu.  yds.  of  "second-class"  slope- wall,  12  ins.  thick, 
joints  1%  ins.  as  a  maximum,  stone  allowed  to  fall  away  4  ins. 
back  of  face,  not  laid  in  courses,  but  an  excellent  wall  in  appear- 
ance and  in  reality,  the  cost  was  as  follows:  The  first  few  days, 
using  new  hands,  intelligent  laborers,  each  man  laid  2^  cu.  yds.  at 
a  cost  of  60  eta  a  cu.  yd.,  wages  being  $1.50  per  10-hr,  day.  Later 
these  men  readily  averaged  3  cu.  yds.  per  day.  Some  skilled  slope- 
wall  layers  were  imported  and  received  $2.50  per  10-hr,  day.  These 
men  readily  laid  5  cu.  yds.  each  day,  one  laborer  to  every  four 
si  ope- wall  layers  acting  as  a  helper  to  deliver  stone.  Thus  600 
cu.  yds.  of  slope-wall  were  laid  in  130  layer-days  and  35  helper- 
days,  half  of  the  layers  being  skilled  men,  and  half  common  labor- 
ers. There  was  no  foreman  in  constant  attendance,  as  each  man's 
work  between  the  frames  was  easily  measured  up,  and  his  daily 
progress  thus  known.  A  portion  of  the  work  was  sublet  at  50  cts. 
per  cu  yd.  to  two  of  the  skilled  slope-wall  masons  who  had  each 
been  averaging  5  cu.  yds.  a  day.  From  that  time  on  each  averaged 
7%  cu.  yds.  of  wall  daily.  Skilled  men  like  these  under  subcon- 
tract will  lay  10  or  even  12  cu.  yds.  of  a  somewhat  rougher  slope- 
wall  in  10  hrs.  On  another  contract  where  the  wall  was  16  ins. 
thick,  4  masons  at  $2.50  and  4  laborers  at  $1.50  averaged  60  cu. 
yds.  of  fair  slope-wall  per  10-hr,  day.  Work  was  scarce,  and  one 
of  the  masons  was  the  subcontractor  himself,  and  received  30  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  Assuming  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  as  a  fair  average  cost  for 
laying  good  "second-class"  slope-wall  and  $1.25  to  $1.50  for  cost 
of  stone  delivered,  we  have  a  total  cost  of  $1.75  to  $2.00  per  cu.  yd. 
in  place. 

The  average  contract  price  for  slope-wall  on  the  Erie  Canal 
deepening  in  1896-7  was  $2.50  per  cu.  yd.,  wages  being  as  above 
given.  Slope-wall  laid  in  courses,  with  close  joints  the  full  depth 
of  the  wall,  no  course  less  than  6  ins.  thick — a  sand-papered  job — 
was  let  for  $4.50  per  cu.  yd.  under  conditions  where  $2.50  was  a 
fair  crice  for  good  ordinary  slope-wall.  The  actual  cost  was  not 
far  below  the  contract  price  for  stone  plug  and  feathered  to  size 
cost  delivered  $2.50  per  cu.  yd.,  and  laying  cost  $1.25  per  cu.  yd. 
Gravel  lining  in  both  cases  was  paid  for  separately,  the  contract 
price  along  the  Erie  Canal  averaging  90  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  lining 
in  place.  The  actual  cost  of  this  lining  is  of  course  figured  as  for 
any  earthwork,  an  allowance  being  made  for  spreading  it  on  the 
face  of  the  embankment  after  dumping  it.  To  spread  it  most  ex- 
peditiously  it  will  pay  to  make  a  wooden  chute  into  which  the 
gravel  is  shoveled  from  the  wagons,  a  shoveler  helping  the  driver 
to  unload.  Two  men  will  unload  1  cu.  yd.  in  this  way  in  10  min- 
utes, if  they  work  as  they  should.  The  driver  then  has  a  rest  on 
his  return  trip,  at  the  end  of  which  it  is  well  to  provide  an  extra 
wagon,  which  has  been  loaded  during  his  absence.  It  takes  oniy 


STONE  MASONRY.  523 

1%  mins.  to  change  the  team  from  the  empty  to  the  loaded  wagon. 
Since  1  to  1%  cu.  yds.  of  gravel  constitute  a  load,  since  teams 
travel  220  ft.  per  min.,  and  since  a  laborer  can  load  18  cu.  yds.  of 
gravel  in  10  hrs.,  we  have  all  the  factors  necessary  to  compute  th<8 
cost  of  hauling  and  unloading.  There  is  very  little  work  in  spread- 
ing the  gravel  where  a  chute  is  used,  2  to  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  cover- 
ing this  item. 

If  good  thin-bedded  sandstone  or  limestone  is  not  available,  it 
may  be  necessary  to  plug  and  feather  the  stone  to  sizes  specified, 
and  this  cost  may  be  estimated  by  data  on  page  492. 

In  order  to  secure  the  most  economic  results,  slope-wall  masons 
should  be  paid  on  the  bonus  system.  To  do  this,  the  profile  strips 
are  set  13^  ft.  apart,  so  that  every  lineal  foot  on  the  strip  means 
%  cu.  yd.  of  slope-wall,  if  the  wall  is  1  ft.  thick.  Each  mason  is 
assigned  to  one  lot,  between  two  profile  strips,  and  the  lots  are 
numbered  consecutively  with  red  chalk  marks  on  the  posts.  The 
profile  strips  are  of  2  x  4  dressed  pine,  painted  with  foot  marks,  so 
that  a  timekeeper  can  see  at  a  glance  the  height  to  which  the 
wall  in  any  given  lot  has  reached  at  the  end  of  the  day.  There  is 
no  measuring  to  be  done  after  the  strips  are  nailed  in  place,  yet 
the  timekeeper  and  the  masons  themselves  can  keep  a  perfect 
record  of  daily  progress.  After  the  work  has  been  under  way  a 
short  time,  it  will  be  evident  that  a  laborer  to  every  two  masons, 
say,  will  be  necessary  to  deliver  stone  down  the  slope.  At  first 
the  average  output  is  but  little  better  than  before,  but  certain  of  the 
masons  will  do  much  better  than  the  average.  Their  wages  are  then 
increased  and  perhaps  two  or  more  of  the  slower  masons  are  dis- 
charged. Immediately,  if  there  are  no  unions  to  interfere,  the  out- 
put of  the  men  increases.  At  the  end  of  a  week  I  have  had  the 
average  yardage  increase  50%,  and  individual  yardage  increase 
much  more,  the  quality  of  the  workmanship  remaining  as  before. 
The  men  receive  higher  wages  and  the  contractor  increases  his 
profits,  both  by  virtue  of  the  greater  output  and  by  reducing  the 
cost  of  supervision.  I  have  been  away  from  such  work,  after 
organizing  it,  for  two  weeks  at  a  time,  without  a  foreman  in  direct 
charge,  yet  the  output  has  not  fallen  off.  A  more  effective  plan 
than  merely  to  increase  the  daily  wage  is  to  pay  a  bonus  per  cubic 
yard  for  every  yard  in  excess  of,  say,  3  cu.  yds.  laid  per  day. 

Cost  of  Granite  Slope-Wall.— The  cost  of  a  granite  slope-wall 
greatly  exceeds  the  cost  of  slope-walls  of  stratified  rock  such  as  are 
described  in  the  preceding  paragraphs,  if  any  attempt  is  made  to 
square  the  granite  slope-wall  stones,  for  rubble  granite  stones 
must  be  plug  and  feathered  on  all  faces  to  square  them  up.  Even 
where  the  specifications  are  lenient,  if  an  attempt  is  made  to  secure 
a  granite  slope-wall  with  a  smooth  face,  but  without  close  joints, 
the  cost  of  plugging  off  the  faces  of  stone  before  laying,  and  the 
cost  of  reducing  them  to  a  size  not  greater  than  the  thickness  of 
the  wall  (12  to  18  ins.)  is  not  a  small  item.  If  granite  boulders,  or 
granite  rubble  stones  from  a  quarry,  are  to  be  used,  first  estimate 


524  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

roughly  the  average  size  of  each  stone,  then  estimate  the  number  of 
plug-holes  necessary  to  split  it  into  slope-wall  stones.  Use  the 
data  on  page  492  for  estimating  the  cost  of  this  plug  and  feather 
work. 

On  one  job  of  granite  slope-wall  work,  3  masons  splitting  field 
boulders  with  plugs,  and  10  laborers  laying  a  wall  18  ins.  thick, 
averaged  14  cu.  yds.  per  day  of  10  hrs.  for  $24,  or  $1.70  per  cu.  yd. 
for  splitting  and  laying  the  stones.  No  attempt  was  made  to  secure 
close  joints  or  to  lay  the  stone  in  courses.  Stones  were  frequently 
laid  flatwise  and  bedded  in  spawls;  and  spawls  were  used  liberally 
between  joints.  The  masons  were  rapid  workers,  but  the  laborers 
were  a  slow  lot  of  men. 

Cost  of  Laying  a  Limestone  Slope-Wall.— Mr.  W.  B.  Fuller  says. 
"The  paving  of  the  upper  sides  of  the  sedimentation  basin  (Al- 
bany, N.  Y.)  is  of  blue  limestone  blocks,  10  to  15  ins.  deep,  8  to 
20  ins.  wide,  and  15  to  36  ins.  long.  Two  masons  and  one  helper 
together  would  lay  about  16  sq.  yds.  per  day,  and  the  labor  cost  of 
laying  the  stone  and  gravel,  including  the  teaming  of  the  material 
about  800  ft.,  was  72  cts.  per  SQ.  yd." 

The  specifications  called  for  a  slope-wall  10  ins.  thick  laid  on  a 
gravel  lining  24  ins.  thick. 

Cost  of  Slope  Wall  Paving.*— Maj.  Graham  D.  Fitch  gives  the 
following : 

In  paving  the  bank  of  the  Upper  White  River,  selected  sand- 
stone (bluestone)  was  used,  the  pieces  being  set  on  edge  and 
rammed.  A  coat  of  gravel  was  then  swept  over  the  paving.  The 
work  was  done  by  Government  forces ;  common  laborers  receiving 
$1.50  for  8  hrs. 

The  cost  of  grading  and  paving  behind  the  land  wall  was  as 
follows : 

Material.  Unit  cost  Total.  Paving. ' 

Riprap    stone,    798   cu.   yds $0.74  $590  $0.307 

Cement,    5    bbls 1.97  10  .006 

Total    materials     $600  $0.313 

Labor: 

Insp.  of  riprap  stone,  798  cu.  yds.   $0.008  $6  $0.003 

Insp.    of   cement,    5    bbls 022  

Grading  and  paving  1,916  sq.  yds.       .495  947  .493 

Total   labor    $953  $0496 

Grand  total,   1,916   sq.   yds $1,553  $0.810 

The  total  labor  time  for  the  1,916  sq.  yds.  of  grading  and  paving 
was  550%  days,  the  work  done  per  man  per  day  being  3.49  sq.  yds., 
or  1.45  sa.  yds. 

It  will  be  noted   that   1    cu.   yd.    of   stone   made  2.4    sq.   yds.    of 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908,  p.   283. 


STONE  MASONRY.  525 

pavement,    showing   that   the   thickness  was   15    ins.     The  labor   of 

grading  and  paving  was  $1.18  per  cu.  yd. 

At  another  place  the  cost  of  slope-wall  pavement  was  as  follows: 
Material :  Unit  cost.  Total.       Per  cu.  yd. 

Riprap,   693   cu.    yds 74  $513  $0.74 

Labor : 

Paving,    425    days $835  $1.20 

Inspection  of  riprap,   8   days 15  .02 

Total     $850  $1.96 

.      Grand  total,    693   cu.   yds.   placed $1,363  $1.96 

The  amount  of  paving  done  per  man  per  day  was  1.16  cu.  yds. 

At  another  place  the  cost  was: 

Unit  cost.       Total.       Per  cu.  yd. 

Riprap,    438    cu.    yds $.74  $324  $.74 

Labor,     203%     days 374  .85 

Grand  total,  438  cu.  yds $698  $1.59 

The  average  work  done  per  man  per  day  was  2.1  cu.  yds.  of  rip- 
rap placed. 

Cost  of  Riprap  on  a  River  Bank.*— Maj.  Graham  D.  Fitch  gives 
the  following: 

The  work  was  done  on  the  Upper  White  River,  by  Government 
forces,  common  laborers  receiving  $1.50  per  8-hr.  day.  Sandstone 
was  used. 

The  following  was  a  piece  of  bank  revetment,  the  riprap  being 
laid  roughly  by  hand  to  a  depth  of  nearly  12  ins.  There  were 
3,588  sq.  yds.: 

Unit  cost.       Total.         Per  sq.  yd. 

Riprap,     1,235    cu.    yds $0.74  $914  $0.254 

Inspection  of  riprap,   1,235   cu.  yds..        .008      .          10  .002 

Placing  riprap,    1,235   cu.   yds .. .        .245  302  .084 

Total     $1,226  $0.340 

The  labor  time  for  placing  the  1,235  cu.  yds.  of  riprap  was  156 
days,  and  each  man  placed  an  average  of  7.92  cu.  yds.  of  riprap  per 
day.  On  the  basis  of  3,588  sq.  yds.  of  revetment  each  man  placed 
an  average  of  2.3  sq.  yds.  per  day. 

At  another  place  riprap  was  placed  on  a  brush  mattress  for  bank 
revetment.  The  bank  thus  protected  was  450  ft.  long  by  44  ft. 
wide  (measured  along  the  slope).  The  bank  was  graded  by  124 
man-days,  at  a  cost  of  $229,  or  18  sq.  yds.  per  man-day. 

The  cost  of  riprapping  the  bank  was  as  follows . 

Unit  cost.         Total.       Per  cu.  yd. 

Riprap,    1,044    cu.    yds $0.74  $768  $0.74 

Paving,    109 %    days 206  .197 

Inspection  of  riprap,   14   days 26  .024 

Grand  total,  1,044  cu.  yds $1,000  $0.96 

The  work  done  per  man  per  day  was  8.42  cu.  yds.  of  riprap  placed. 


* Engineering  Contracting,  May  6,   1908,  p.  288. 


526  HANDBOOK    OF    COST    DATA. 

There  were  2,200  sq.  yds.,  hence  the  cost  per  sq.  yd.  was  9.4  cts. 
for  labor,  and  35  cts.  for  stone. 

Cost  of  Riprap  and  Brush  Mattress,  Cross- Reference.— Data  on 
this  will  be  found  in  the  section  on  Timberwork.  Consult  the  index 
under  "Brush  Mattress." 

Cost  of  Riprap  in  a  Crib  Dam.* — Maj.  Graham  D.  Fitch  gives  the 
following: 

The  work  was  done  on  the  Upper  White  River,  by  Government 
forces,  common  laborers  receiving  $1.50  for  8  hrs.  The  stone  was 
sandstone. 

In  filling  the  pockets  of  a  crib  dam  324  ft.  long,  8,000  cu.  yds. 
of  riprap  were  used,  at  the  following  cost: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Riprap  stone   $0.74 

Labor   filling   crib. 0.43 

Total    .-. $1.17 

Each  laborer  averaged  4  cu.  yds.  filled  per  day. 

On  a  small  crib  near  one  abutment  of  the  dam,  527  cu.  yds.  of 

riprap  were  put  in  at  the  rate  of  4.45  cu.  yds.  per  man-day. 
On  a  foundation  crib  for  the  abutment  of  the  dam,  876  cu.  yds. 

of  riprap  were  put  in  at  the  rate  of  6.84  cu.  yds.  per  man-day. 

Cost  of  Riprapping  Cribs.t — The  following  data  relate  to  the  cost 
of  riprapping  cribs  with  breakwater  stone  at  Ashtabula  Harbor, 
Ohio.  The  stone  was  loaded  from  the  dock  into  a  derrick  scow 
by  the  derrick,  the  scow  was  then  towed  an  average  of  one -fourth 
mile  and  the  stone  placed,  as  riprap,  behind  new  crib  docks  which 
had  just  been  completed.  The  object  of  this  crib  backing  was  to 
protect  the  cribs  from  storms  and  also  to  relieve  them  of  any 
lateral  thrust  which  might  cause  them  to  move.  The  derrick  scow 
used  in  handling  the  stone  holds  a  maximum  deck  load  of  about 
125  tons.  The  derrick  boom  is  about  50  ft.  long  and  all  move- 
ments of  the  derrick  are  operated  by  steam. 

The  stone  was  placed  in  a  mound  of  a  triangular  cross-section 
against  the  cribs,  the  apex  of  this  right-angle  triangle  being  at  the 
water  surface.  The  depth  of  water  at  the  site  of  work  averaged 
about  15  ft. 

The  stones  used  were  irregular  in  shape,  weighing  160  Ibs.  per 
cu.  ft.,  the  total  average  weight  of  each  stone  being  about  one  ton. 

The  cost  records  below  are  for  the  months  of  May  and  June, 
1907,  and  embrace  the  entire  operation  of  riprapping  the  cribs,  the 
work  including:  Loading  the  stone  from  the  dock  onto  the  deck 
of  the  scow;  towing  the  scow  from  the  dock  to  the  site  of  the  new 
cribs,  an  average  distance  of  about  one-fourth  mile;  unloading 
the  stone  behind  the  cribs  as  riprap;  towing  the  scow  from  the 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908,  p.   285. 
t Engineering-Contracting,  July  31,  1907. 


STONE   MASONRY.  527 

cribs  back  to  the  dock  to  be  loaded  again;  time  due  to  bad  weather 
and  breakdowns,  interest  and  depreciation  on  value  of  plant  and 
miscellaneous  expense. 

The  scale  of  wages  per  10-hr,  day  was  as  follows: 

Foreman    (who   was   also   steam   engineer) $3.00 

Deck   hands    2.00 

Watchman : 1.75 

The  cost  of  backing  the  cribs  with  breakwater  stone  for  month  of 

May,  during  which  time  661  tons  of  stone  were  placed,  was  as 
follows: 

Total.  Per  ton. 

10  transfers  by  tugs,   at  $5 .$  50.00  $0.075 

6  tons    coal,    at    $2.70 16.20  .024 

Labor,    placing  stone : 47.15  .071 

Lost  time  due  to  bad  weather  and  breakdowns...     31.60  .048 

Interest  and  depreciation  on  value   of  plant 90.00  .136 

Miscellaneous 10.00  .015 


Total  $244.95        $0.369 

The  cost  of  backing  the  cribs  for  the  month  of  June,  during  which 
time  1,380  tons  of  stone  were  placed,  was  as  follows: 

Total. 

24  transfers,  by  tugs,  at  $5 $120.00 

17  tons    coal,    at    $2.70 45.00 

Labor,    placing   stone 189.15 

Lost  time,  due  to  bad  weather  and  breakdowns 42.50 

Repairs    and    miscellaneous 38.55 

Interest  and  depreciation  on  value  of  plant 90.00 

Total  $545.20        $0.397 

In  the  above  tables  the  item  "placing  stone"  includes  the  loading 
of  stone  on  the  scow  from  the  dock  and  placing  it  behind  the  cribs. 
The  labor  cost  of  these  two  portions  of  the  work  were  about  equal. 
Interest  and  depreciation  on  plant  was  taken  as  15%  per  annum 
and  was  distributed  over  five  months.  The  item  "miscellaneous" 
includes  wages  of  watchman  on  Sundays,  and  a  few  supplies,  such 
as  engine-oil,  waste,  manila  lines,  etc.  The  repairs  shown  in  the 
record  for  June  consisted  of  repairing  the  damage  due  to  a  boom 
being  dropped  by  accident  and  breaking  in  two. 

On  the  basis  that  the  weight  of  the  stone  was  160  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft., 
the  cost  per  cubic  yard  for  riprapping  the  cribs  was  as  follows: 
Month  of  May,  80  cts.;  month  of  June,  85  cts. 

For  the  above  information  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  E.  C.  Bowen, 
Jr.,  Assistant  Engineer,  Lake  Shore  &  Michigan  Southern  Ry. 

[For  further  data  on  riprap,  see  the  index  under  "Riprap."] 

Cost  of  Riprap  Stone,  References.— For  the  cost  of  quarrying  and 
handling  stone  see  the  sections  on  Rock  Excavation  and  on  Stone 
Masonry.  Also  consult  the  index  under  "Riprap,"  for  contract 
prices  of  riprap  are  given  in  the  section  on  Railways  and  elsewhere. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Masonry  With  Acid.— Mr.  C.  M.  Saville  gives 
the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  cleaning  masonry  with  acid. 


528  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  granite  ashlar  masonry  of  a  reservoir  gate  chamber  had  been 
pointed  with  1 :  1  Portland  cement  mortar  late  in  the  fall,  during 
very  cold  weather.  In  order  to  work  quickly  the  pointing  mortar 
was  mixed  very  wet,  and  consequently  dripped  over  the  ashlar,  giv- 
ing an  unsightly  appearance.  In  the  spring,  the  pointing  was  re- 
moved, the  stone  washed  with  acid,  and  then  repointed.  About  560 
sq.  yds.  of  stone  facing  were  thus  gone  over  in  9  days  by  2  men  at 
a  total  cost  of  $50,  or  9  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  labor.  Dilute  muriatic 
acid  was  used,  1  part  acid  to  2  parts  water,  applied  with  old  paint 
brushes;  4  gals,  of  acid  were  required,  or  1  gal.  for  140  sq.  yds. 
The  two  men  were  engaged  5  days  removing  pointing,  2  days  clean- 
ing stone,  and  2  days  repointing. 

For  other  data,  see  the  index  under  "Masonry,  Cleaning." 

Cost  of  Excavating  Masonry. — The  masonry  abutments  of  an  old 
bridge  were  removed  to  make  way  for  a  new  arch  bridge.  A  hand- 
power  derrick  was  used,  and  the  material  was  piled  near  the  der- 
rick. The  cost  of  excavating  this  masonry  was  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
wages  being- 15  cts.  per  hr.  In  another  similar  case  the  cost  was 
75  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  average  contract  price  for  such  work  on 
the  Erie  Canal,  in  1896,  was  80  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages  being  12% 
cts.  per  hr. 

Mr.  C.  R.  Neher  informs  me  mat  the  cost  of  excavating  3,140 
cu.  yds.  of  old  railway  bridge  piers,  and  depositing  the  material 
in  the  river  bed,  was  38  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  not  including  the  cost  of 
scaffolding. 

For  other  data  on  masonry  excavation,  see  the  index  under 
"Masonry,  Excavation." 

Cost  of  Pointing  Old  Bridge  Masonry. — Cleaning  and  pointing  old 
masonry,  using  Alpha  cement  at  $2.40  per  bbl.,  masons'  wages 
being  $2  and  helpers  $1.60  per  day,  cost  as  follows: 

Small  jobs  ;     no   staging :  Cts.  per  sq.  ft 

Cement     0.26 

Labor     0.74 

Total    per    sq.    ft 1.00 

This  is  equivalent  to  9  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Large    jobs ;     staging   used :                              Cts.  per  sq.  ft. 
Cement                                                                                   .    0.27 
Labor     1.87 

Total    per    sq.    ft 2.14 

This  is  equivalent  to  19  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

For  other  similar  data,  see  the  index  under  "Masonry,  Pointing." 
Cost  of  Lining  Tunnel  With  Masonry. — Drinker  gives  the  follow- 
ing data  on  the  lining  of  Carr's  Tunnel    (825  ft.)    on  the  Pennsyl- 
vania R.  R.  in  1868-1869: 

Brickwork. —  Six  hundred  and  nine  thousand  brick  in  the  arch 
(5%  broken  and  lost)  ;  10.44  bushels  of  neat  cement  (no  sand  used 
in  the  mortar)  laid  1,000  bricks,  the  mortar  forming  30%  of  the 


\ 


STONE  MASONRY.  529 

brick  masonry;    the  arch  was  25  ins.  thick,  24%-ft.  span  and  9-ft. 

rise: 

Cost  per  M. 

Bricks,    f.    o.    b $8.80 

Loss  in   handling    0.51 

Unloading    and    delivering 1.92" 

Laying     5.84 

Cement     5.10 

Total $22.17 

Bricklayers  received  40  cts.  per  hr. ;  helpers,  17%  cts.  per  hr. ; 
carpenters,  21  y%  cts.  per  hr.  ;  laborers,  17  cts.  per  hr. 

Stonework. — One  thousand  seven  hundred  and  thirty  perches  '(25 
cu.  ft. )  of  rough  masonry  for  side  walls,  presumably  sandstone ; 
187  perches  of  ring  stone;  25  perches  wasted  in  dressing.  The 
bench  walls  were  4  ft.  wide  at  the  bottom,  3  ft.  at  the  top  and  13  ft. 
high: 

Cost  per  perch. 

Quarrying    (1,730    perches) $4.80 

Cutting     (1,730    perches) 4.36 

Hauling    (1,942    perches) ' 1.06 

Handling  and   laying    (1,917    perches) 2.80 

Cement.     1.65     bu.    Der    perch     (8  1/6%     of    the 

masonry)     0.81  ^ 

Total     $13.83 

Stonecutters  and  masons  received  35  cts.  per  hr. ;  quarrymen, 
nVz  cts.  per  hr. ;  laborers,  17  cts.  The  stone  side  walls  were  laid 
in  8  courses  averaging  2  ft.  thick  each;  hence  there  were  52,800 
sq.  ft.  of  beds  cut ;  and  estimating  each  stone  3  ft.  long  and 
dressed  for  iy2  ft.  back  of  the  face  on  joints,  there  were  14.300 
sq.  ft.  of  joints;  making  a  total  of  67,100  sq.  ft.  of  cutting  which 
cost  11.2  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  This  is  said  to  have  been  too  high  a  unit 
cost,  and  the  accuracy  of  the  measurements  is  questioned. 

Arch  centering  cost  $1,400,  to  which  was  added  $600  for  moving 
the  centering  forward  from  time  to  time  ;  making  $2.40  per  lin.  ft. 
of  tunnel,  to  which  must  be  added  $0.70  per  lin.  ft.  for  scaffolding. 

For  further  data  on  tunnel  lining,  see  the  index  under  "Tunnel, 
Lining." 

Cross- References. — Other  data  on  stone  masonry  will  be  found  in 
various  parts  of  this  book,  for  which  see  the  index  under  Masonry. 


SECTION  VI. 

CONCRETE  AND   REINFORCED  CONCRETE 
CONSTRUCTION. 

Definitions.— See  also  the  definitions  in  Section  V  on  Stone 
Masonry. 

Aggregate. — The  broken  stone  or  gravel  used  in  concrete.  The 
word  ballast  is  also  used  in  this  sense. 

Batch. — The  amount  of  concrete  mixed  at  one  time  either  by  a 
gang  of  men  or  by  a  machine  mixer.  In  hand  mixing,  ordinarily 
one  barrel  of  cement  and  the  proper  proportions  of  sand  and  stone 
make  a  batch. 

Cement. — A  preparation  of  calcined  clay  and  limestone,  or  their 
equivalents,  possessing  the  property  of  hardening  into  a  solid  mass 
when  moistened  with  water.  This  property  is  exercised  under 
water,  as  well  as  in  ocen  air.  Cements  are  divided  into  four 
classes:  Portland,  Natural,  Puzzolan  and  Silica  cement. 

Portland  cement  is  the  finely  pulverized  product  resulting  from 
the  calcination  to  incipient  fusion  of  an  intimate  mixture  of  properly 
proportioned  argillaceous  and  calcareous  materials,  and  to  which 
no  addition  greater  than  3%  has  been  made  subsequent  to  cal- 
cination. 

Natural  cement  is  the  finely  pulverized  product  resulting  from 
the  calcination  of  an  argillaceous  limestone  at  a  temperature  only 
sufficient  to  drive  off  the  carbonic  acid  gas.  A  few  years  ago  it 
was  common  practice  to  give  to  all  natural  cements  the  name 
Rosendale  cement,  for  it  was  at  Rosendale,  N.  Y.,  that  the  first 
natural  cement  was  made  in  this  country. 

Pozzolan  is  an  intimate  mixture  of  pulverized  granulated  fur- 
nace slag  and  slaked  lime  without  further  calcination  which  pos- 
sesses the  hydraulic  dualities  of  cement.  , 

Silica  cement  (or  sand  cement)  is  a  mixture  of  clean  sand  and 
Portland  cement  ground  together. 

Concrete. — An  artificial  stone  made  by  mixing  cement  mortar 
with  gravel  or  broken  stone.  The  proportions  of  cement,  sand  and 
stone  are  generally  expressed  in  parts  by  measure  (occasionally 
by  weierht).  A  1:2:5  (one.  two.  five)  concrete  means  1  part 
cement  to  2  parts  sand  to  5  parts  stone.  A  1:3:6  concrete  is 
made  of  1  part  cement,  3  parts  sand  and  6  parts  stone  (or  gravel). 
When  both  stone  and  gravel  a.fe  used,  the  concrete  may  be  desig- 

£30 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  531 

nated  thus.  1:3:2:4.  which  means  1  cart  cement,  3  parts  sand,  2 
parts  gravel  and  4  parts  stone. 

Dry  concrete  is  a  term  used  to  designate  a  mixture  containing 
so  small  a  percentage  of  water  that  very  hard  ramming  is  required 
to  flush  the  water  to  the  surface. 

Wet  concrete  contains  so  much  water  as  to  require  little  or  no 
ramming.  "Sloppy  concrete"  is  concrete  so  wet  that  it  will  run 
down  a  slightly  inclined  trough. 

Concrete  that  is  mixed  dry  is  spread  in  layers  6  or  8  ins.  thick 
and  rammed  or  tamped  until  the  water  flushes  to  the  surface. 
Concrete  that  is  mixed  wet  is  spaded  with  a  spade-like  tool  that 
is  worked  up  and  down  in  the  concrete  to  remove  all  air  bubbles 
particularly  near  the  forms  or  near  any  steel  used  to  reinforce 
the  concrete. 

The  terms  crushed  stone  and  broken  stone  are  used  indiscrim- 
inately to  designate  stone  that  has  been  broken  by  a  rock  crusher. 

Crusher  run  means  all  the  crushed  stone  just  as  it  comes  from 
the  crusher,  without  separation  into  sizes,  and  generally  it  in- 
cludes the  product  that  would  be  termed  screenings  if  it  were 
screened  out. 

Facing. —  (1)  A  rich  mortar  placed  on  the  exposed  surfaces  to 
make  a  smooth  finish.  (2)  Shovel  facing  by  working  the  mortar 
of  concrete  to  the  face. 

Forms  are  the  molds  (usually  of  lumber)  that  hold  the  concrete 
in  shape  until  it  has  set  or  hardened. 

Matrix  is  a  term  sometimes  used  instead  of  mortar,  but  there 
is  no  good  reason  for  using  the  term  at  all. 

Molds. — See   Forms. 

Reinforced  concrete  is  concrete  in  which  are  embedded  bars  or 
wires  of  steel  or  iron.  It  is  often  called  concrete-steel. 

Rubble  concrete  is  a  term  applied  to  concrete  in  which  large 
rubble  stones,  or  plums,  are  embedded.  Stones  from  the  size  of 
a  man's  head  to  the  size  of  a  barrel  are  thus  used.  When  larger 
stones  are  used,  and  the  concrete  becomes  simply  a  coarse  grained 
mortar  between  them,  probably  the  term  cyclopean  masonry  is 
more  correct  than  rubble  concrete;  still  there  is  no  distinct  divid- 
ing line. 

Screenings  applies  to  the  product  of  the  crusher  that  passes 
through  the  smallest  screen  used.  The  size  of  the  smallest  hole 
in  the  screen  varies  from  .%-in.  to  %-in.,  so  the  word  screenings 
has  no  definite  meaning,  although  it  can  usually  be  taken  to  apply 
to  all  stone  under  %-in.  in  diameter. 

Sylvester  wash. — A  waterproofing  wash  consisting  of  alum  and 
soft  soap  applied  alternately  to  the  surface  of  concrete. 

Voids  is  a  term  applied  to  the  spaces  between  the  grains  of 
sand,  or  to  the  spaces  between  the  fragments  of  broken  stone. 
The  voids  are  expressed  in  a  percentage  of  the  total  volume  of 
the  loose  material. 

Magnitude  of  the  Subject  and  General  Discussion.— I  have  spoken 
of  earth  excavation  as  being  a  subject  of  great  magnitude.  But 


532  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

the  subject  of  concrete  is  even  greater.  This  is  well  indicated  in  the 
citation  even  of  a  few  of  the  important  books  on  concrete  which 
will  be  found  at  the  end  of  this  section. 

Mr.  Charles  S.  Hill,  of  the  editorial  staff  of  Engineering-Contract- 
ing, and  I  have  collaborated  in  writing  a  700-page  book*  devoted 
solely  to  the  methods  and  cost  of  concrete  and  reinforced  concrete 
construction.  Yet  there  is  practically  no  duplication  in  our  book 
of  the  matter  in  Reid's  great  treatise,  "Concrete  and  Reinforced 
Concrete  Construction,"  in  whose  900  pages  the  subject  of  tti£ 
design  of  concrete  construction  is  elaborated. 

It  will  be  evident,  therefore,  that  in  the  space  devoted  to  concrete 
in  this  handbook,  only  the  principles  of  the  methods  and  cost  of 
construction  can  be  given,  supplemented  by  a  few  illustrative  ex- 
amples. However,  the  reader  will  find  a  good  many  more  examples 
in  other  sections  of  the  book,  notably  the  sections  on  Bridges, 
Sewers,  Waterworks,  Pavements,  and  Buildings,  for  which  consult 
the  index  under  "Concrete." 

While,  at  first  glance,  estimating  the  cost  of  concrete  may  seem 
difficult,  it  is  in  reality  a  comparatively  simple  task  when  the  cost 
is  divided  into  separate  items  and  sub-items.  Then  the  reason  why 
the  concrete  base  of  a  pavement  costs  say,  $3.50  per  cu.  yd.,  while 
the  cost  of  a  reinforced  concrete  building  is,  say,  ?15  per  cu.  yd.,  is 
made  very  clear. 

In  considering  variations  in  published  cost  data  one  should 
always  bear  in  mind  that  there  are  not  only  many  different  ways 
of  doing  the  same  thing,  but  that  workmen  vary  greatly  in  effi- 
ciency. The  latter  element  depends  mainly  on  the  management, 
and  it  is  a  particularly  important  factor  in  this  comparatively  new 
branch  of  engineering  work — concrete  construction.  I  have  re- 
ceived several  letters  from  experienced  concrete  contractors  ques- 
tioning the  accuracy  of  certain  costs  of  concrete  work  that  I  had 
published,  because,  it-  was  said,  no  such  low  costs  had  ever  come 
under  their  observation.  This  was  doubtless  true  and  it  was  for 
just  that  reason  that  I  had  published  those  low  costs ;  for,  accom- 
panied by  the  methods  of  doing  the  work,  those  records  showed 
what  thoroughly  efficient  workmen  under  good  management  could 
accomplish.  I  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  unit  costs  of  concrete  work 
that  are  now  regarded  as  being  very  low  will,  before  long,  seem 
exceedingly  high — unless  it  should  happen  that  rates  of  wages  and 
prices  of  materials  rise  sufficiently  to  .offset  entirely  all  improve- 
ments in  machines,  methods,  and  management. 

There  is  not  the  slightest  doubt,  for  one  thing,  that  we  are 
using  too  much  cement  in  most  of  our  concrete.  Rarely  do  we  see 
American  specifications  requiring  less  than  0.9  bbl.  of  cement  per 
cu.  yd.,  although  there  are  many  classes  of  heavy  concrete  work 
for  which  0.5  to  0.6  bbl.  of  cement  per  cu.  yd.  would  suffice. 

We  have  excellent  machines   for  mixing  concrete,   but  compara- 

*"Concrete  Construction— Methods  and  Cost,"  by  Gillette  and 
Hill. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  533 

tively  few  contractors  know  how  to  transport  the  materials  to 
and  from  the  mixers  with  any  great  degree  of  economy. 

Not  only  do  poor  designs  of  forms,  but  inefficient  workmanship 
in  framing,  erecting  and  shifting  them,  usually  run  up  the  cost  of 
formwork  far  above  what  it  should  be.  Incidentally  I  may  say 
that  it  is  my  opinion  that  the  oft-berated  method  of  intrusting 
both  the  design  and  erection  of  concrete  buildings  to  firms  of  con- 
structing engineers  is  a  method  that  is  likely  to  grow  more  popu- 
lar. In  spite  of  the  objection  that  the  designer  should  not  be 
also  the  contractor  for  the  structure,  there  is  one  very  important 
element  to  consider,  and  one  that  seems  to  me  to  offset  entirely 
any  objection.  The  concrete  contractor  who  is  also  a  designer  will 
so  design  as  to  be  able  to  use  his  forms  again  and  again  on  many 
different  buildings  of  the  same  character.  Eventually  this  will 
lead  to  the  wide  use  of  steel  forms  for  certain  classes  of  work, 
and  thus  reduce  the  item  of  form  cost  still  more. 

The  manufacture  of  concrete  in  slabs,  beams,  boards,  etc. — a  sort 
of  concrete  lumber — is  certain  to  become  common,  and  will  greatly 
reduce  the  cost  of  many  classes  of  concrete  work.  Why,  for  ex- 
ample, should  not  rough  retaining  walls  be  built  of  concrete  beams, 
or  sticks,  exactly  as  timber  bulkheads  are  now  made  on  railway 
work  in  timb^ed  countries?  By  casting  dovetailed  shapes  on  the 
ends  of  the  sticks,  and  corresponding  recesses  in  other  beams,  it 
would  be  a  simple  matter  to  build  such  a  concrete  retaining  wall  of 
concrete,  say  8x12  ins.,  in  cross-section,  with  "anchors"  of  similar 
concrete  sticks  extending  back  into  the  earth  filling  that  is  placed 
back  of  the  wall.  In  this  manner  a  wall  only  8  ins.  thick,  with 
each  course  anchored  to  the  earth  fill,  could  be  built  by  unskilled 
laborers  at  a  very  low  cost.  The  concrete  sticks  would  be  made  in 
a  yard,  hauled  to  tne  site  of  the  work,  and  erected  with  a  light  A 
derrick  or  moved  on  "dolleys"  up  an  incline,  just  as  heavy  timbers 
are  now  handled. 

In  spite  of  the  questionable  success,  thus  far,  of  reinforced  con- 
crete cross-ties  for  railways,  there  is  abundant  reason  to  believe 
that  such  ties  will  eventually  be  perfected,  thus  leading  to  the 
making  of  concrete  lumber  in  great  quantities. 

I  am  satisfied  that  thin  concrete  slabs,,  both  in  the  form  of  con- 
crete lumber  and  made  in  place  by  plastering  mortar  upon  a 
reinforcing  sheet  or  mesh,  are  destined  to  play  a  very  important 
part  in  the  construction  fteld.  Flues  for  carrying  hot  smelter 
gases  have  been  made  of  expanded  metal  plastered  on  both  sides 
with  cement  mortar.  Why  should  not  tall  smokestacks  be  made 
in  the  same  way?  It  might  be  necessary  to  give  a  large  flare  to 
the  base.  Eiffel  Tower  fashion,  in  order  to  secure  stability  when 
anchored  to  a  concrete  base.  The  great  advantages  of  this  method 
of  plastering  cement  mortar  upon  a  steel  skeleton  are  two:  (1) 
The  ability  to  build  concrete  work  without  any  forms  at  all ;  and 
(  2  )  the  ability  to  secure  an  exceedingly  thin  structure  of  great 
strength  and  durability. 

With  these  and  kindred  possibilities  of  development  of  concrete 


534  HANDBOOK    OF    COST    DATA. 

construction  along  lines  of  greater  economy,  it  is  not  likely  that  the 
lowest  construction  costs  given  in  this  book  will  look  very  low  to 
readers  of  its  next  edition. 

Cost  of  Manufacturing  Cement. — Boilleau  &  Lyon  give  the  fol- 
lowing cost  of  manufacturing  slag  cement: 

"The  following  figures  may  be  relied  upon  as  absolutely  accurate. 
They   represent   the   writer's   experience   as   treasurer   and   general 
manager  of  the  Maryland  Cement  Co.   of  Baltimore." 
Cost  for  an  output  of  5,000  bbls.  per  month: 

Per  bbl. 

Mill    force,    labor   and    supt. $0.160 

125  tons  coal  per  mo.,  at  $3.05 0.076 

3,000  bu.  lime  per  mo.,  at  $0.16 0.100 

900  tons  slag  per  mo.,  at  $0.50 1 0.090 

Repairs,  $100  per  mo 0.020 

Oil  and  grease,  $40  per  mo 0.007 

Contingencies    0.011 

Total     $0.464 

Administration     0.121 

Grand   total    $0.585 

The  same  authorities  give  the  following  estimate  of  cost  of 
manufacturing  Portland  cement  in  Pennsylvania  in  1904. 

The  figures  are  based  on  an  output  of  l.,200  bbls.  per  day,  using 
60-ft.  kilns,  and  are  the  results  of  actual  experience  in  Penn- 
sylvania. 

Labor:  Per  bbl. 

Quarry    $0.050 

Stone  house   (2  men  each  shift) 0.005 

Mill  building  (6  men  each  shift) 0.015 

Kiln  room    (4   men  each   shift) 0.015 

Engine  and  boiler  room  (4  men  each  shift) 0.015 

Fuel  mill    (3   men  per   shift) 0.010 

Yard   gang    (13    men   one   shift) 0.015 

Repair  gang   (12   men   one  shift) 0.023 

Packing    house    0.040 

Miscellaneous    0.002 

Total  labor ' $0.190 

Raw  Material: 

Coal  for  quarry  and  mill $0.225 

Gypsum    0.018 

Total   raw  material $0.243 

Supplies: 

Repair  parts    $0.040 

Lubricants    0.020 

Miscellaneous  supplies 0.030 

Total  supplies $0.090 

Plant  Charges: 

Interest    $0.070 

Sinking  fund    0.050 

Depreciation  and  wear  and  tear 0.050 

Total    plant    charges $0.170 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  535 

General  Expense: 

Office  force   (12  men  one  shift) $0.020 

Administration   and    selling 0.065 

Total  general  expense ' $0.085 

Grand  total   $0.778 

The  above  figures  multiplied  by  1,200  give  the  daily  cost. 

There  were  4  boilers,  each  250  hp.,  and  2  engines  of  500  hp.  each. 
Six  kilns  were  run,  two  shifts  daily. 

The  fuel  for  burning  clinker  was  gas  slack  coal,  at  $2.60  per  ton, 
requiring  105  ]bs.  per  bbl.  of  clinker.  Under  the  boilers  and  in  the 
dryers  75  Ibs.  of  bituminous  coal  (at  $3  per  ton)  per  bbl.  of  cement. 

The  mill  equipment  was  of  the  ball  and  tube  type. 

A  mill  can  be  built  for  $50,000  to  $60,000  per  kiln,  exclusive  of 
land.  A  1,200-bbl.  plant  (6  kilns)  need  not  cost  more  than 
$420,000  including  land.  From  30  to  100  acres,  at  $200  per  acre,  are 
commonly  used  by  larger  plants  than  this.  Figuring  on  11  mos. 
run,  or  an  annual  output  of  360,000  bbls.,  interest  at  6%  on  $420,000 
is  $25,200  per  year,  or  7  cts.  per  bbl. 

A  60-ft.  kiln  costs  $3,000,  but  a  100-ft.  kiln  can  be  bought  for 
$5,000,  and  will  do  the  duty  of  two  60-ft.  kilns  at  much  less  ex- 
pense; 100-ft.  kilns  have  turned  out  as  much  as  475  bbls.  per  day. 
The  Edison  Cement  Co.  uses  150-ft.  kilns. 

In  a  well-equipped  mill  without  countershafting,  the  raw  and 
clinker  mills  alone  use  half  the  horsepower,  and  of  the  repair  parts 
fully  75%  are  required  by  them,  as  well  as  50%  of  the  lubricants 
and  66%  of  the  miscellaneous  supplies.  One-third  the  cost  of  a 
cement  mill  is  in  the  crushing  and  pulverizing  departments  with 
their  necessary  buildings  and  power. 

The  stone  from  the  quarry  is  crushed  to  2%  to  3-in.  size  in  a  No. 
5  or  6  gyratory  crusher,  but  a  No.  7%  or  8  is  much  better. 

In  the  1,200-bbl.  mill,  three  ball  mills  and  three  tube  mills  on 
the  raw  side  kept  the  six  60-ft.  kilns  going  even  when  1,3.10  bbls. 
were  turned  out  per  day.  The  same  number  of  ball  and  tube  mills 
on  the  clinker  side,  however,  only  averaged  750  bbls.  per  day,  but 
under  better  management  this  was  increased  to  900  bbls. 

Theory  of  the  Quantity  of  Cement  in  Mortar  and  Concrete. — All 
sand  contains  a  large  percentage  of  voids.  In  1  cu.  ft.  of  loose 
sand  there  are  0.3  to  0.5  cu.  ft.  of  voids:  that  is,  30%  to  50%  of 
the  sand  is  voids.  In  making  mortar  the  cement  is  mixed  with 
sand,  and  the  flour-like  grains  of  the  cement  fit  in  between  the 
grains  of  the  sand,  occupying  a  part  or  all  of  the  voids  in  the 
sand.  According  to  the  old  theory  (as  given  in  Trautwine's  Pocket- 
book  and  elsewhere),  the  amount  of  cement  required  to  make  a 
given  mortar  is  calculated  as  follows:  Suppose  the  mortar  is  to  be 
1  cu.  ft.  of  cement  to  2  cu.  ft.  of  sand  (a  1  to  2  mortar)  ;  and  eup- 
pose  the  sand  contains  35%  voids,  then  2  cu.  ft.  of  sand  would 
contain  2  X  0.35 ;  or  0.7  cu.  ft.  voids.  Now,  the  1  cu.  ft.  of 
cement  would  fill  this  0.7  cu.  ft.  of  voids  in  the  sand  and  leave  an 
excess  of  1  —  0.7,  or  0.3  cu.  ft.  of  cement;  hence,  the  resulting 
mortar  would  be  2  cu.  ft.  of  sand  +0.3  cu.  ft.  of  cement  (the  excess 
left  over  after  filling  the  voids  in  the  sand),  thus  making  2.3  cu.  ft. 


536  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

of  mortar  from  the  mixture  of  1  cu.  ft.  of  cement  with  2  cu.  ft.  of 
sand.  As  above  stated,  this  simple  theory  was  commonly  given  by 
all  writers  (without  exception,  so  far  as  I  know),  although  many 
contractors  and  some  engineers  must  have  learned  by  experience 
that  the  theory  is  incorrect.  In  1901,  I  called  public  attention  to 
the  errors  of  the  theory  and  published  a  formula  that  gives  much 
closer  approximations  to  actual  tests. 

Since  a  correct  estimate  of  the  number  of  barrels  of  cement  per 
cubic  yard  of  mortar  or  concrete  is  very  important,  and  since  it  is 
not  always  possible  to  make  actual  mixtures  before  bidding,  it 
seems  wise  to  give  space  to  a  discussion  of  the  theory  that  I  have 
offered. 

When  loose  sand  is  mixed  with  water,  its  volume  or  bulk  is  in- 
creased, subsequent  jarring  will  decrease  its  volume,  but  still  leave 
a  net  gain  of  about  10%;  that  is.  1  cu.  ft.  of  dry  sand  becomes 
about  1.1  cu.  ft.  of  damp  sand.  Not  only  does  this  increase  in 
the  volume  of  the  sand  occur,  but,  instead  of  increasing  the  voids 
that  can  be  filled  with  cement,  there  is  an  absolute  loss  in  the 
volume  of  available  voids.  This  is  due  to  the  space  occupied  by  the 
water  necessary  to  bring  the  sand  to  the  consistency  of  mortar ; 
furthermore,  there  is  seldom  a  perfect  mixture  of  the  sand  and 
cement  in  practice,  thus  reducing  the  available  voids.  It  is  safe 
to  call  this  reduction  in  available  voids  about  10%. 

When  loose,  dry  Portland  cement  is  wetted,  it  shrinks  about  15% 
in  volume,  behaving  differently  from  the  sand,  but  it  never  shrinks 
back  to  quite  as  small  a  volume  as  it  occupies  when  packed  tightly 
in  a  barrel.  Since  barrels  of  different  brands  vary  widely  in  size, 
the  careful  engineer  or  contractor  will  test  any  brand  he  intends 
using  in  large  quantities,  in  order  to  ascertain  exactly  how  much 
cement  paste  can  be  made.  He  will  find  a  range  of  from  3.2  cu.  ft. 
to  3.8  cu.  ft.  per  bbl.  of  Portland  cement.  Obviously  the  larger 
barrel  may  be  cheaper  though  its  price  is  higher.  Specifications 
often  state  the  number  of  cubic  feet  that  will  be  allowed  per  barrel 
in  mixing  the  concrete  ingredients,  so  that  any  rule  or  formula  to 
be  of  practical  value  must  contain  a  factor  to  allow  for  the  speci- 
fied size  of  the  barrel,  and  another  factor  to  allow  for  the  actual 
number  of  cubic  feet  of  paste  that  a  barrel  will  yield — the  two 
being  usually  quite  different. 

The  deduction  of  a  rational,  practical  formula  for  computing  the 
quantity  of  cement  required  for  a  given  mixture  will  now  be  given, 
based  upon  the  facts  above  outlined. 

Let    p  =  number  of  cu.  ft.   cement  paste  per  bbl.,  as  determined 

by  actual  cost. 
n  =  number  of  cu.  ft.  of  cement  per  .bbl.,  as  specified  in  the 

specifications. 
s  =  parts  of  sand    (by  volume)    to  one  part  of  cement,   as 

specified. 
g  —  parts   of   gravel    or    broken    stone    (by   volume)    to   one 

part  of  cement,  as  specified. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  537 

v  =  percentage  of  voids  in  the  dry  sand,   as  determined  by 
tests 

V  =  percentage   of    voids    in    the   gravel   or    stone,    as   deter- 
mined by  test. 

Then,    in    a    mortar    of    1    part    cement    to    s    parts    sand,    we 
have: 

n  s  =  cu.  ft.  of  dry  sand  to  1  bbl.  cement. 
n  s  v  =  cu.  ft.  of  voids  in  the  dry  sand. 
0.9nsv  =  cu.  ft.  of  available  voids  in  the  wet  sand. 

l.lns  =  cu.  ft.  of  wet  sand. 

p  —  0.9  n  s  v  =  cu.  ft.  of  cement  paste  in  excess  of  the  voids. 
Therefore : 

l.lns+(p  —  0.9  n  s  i>)  =  cu.   ft.   of   mortar   per  bbl. 
Therefore  : 

27  27 


1.1  n  s  +  (p  —  0.9  n  s  v)  p  -{-n  s  (1.1  —  0.9  v.) 

N  being  the  number  of  barrels  of  cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  mortar. 
When  the  mortar  is  made  so  lean  that  there  is  not  enough  cement 
paste  to  fill  the  voids  in  the  sand,  the  formula  becomes 

27 


1.1  n  s 

A  similar  line  of  reasoning  will  give  us  a  rational  formula  for 
determining  the  quantity  of  cement  in  concrete  ;  but  there  is  one 
point  of  difference  between  sand  and  gravel  (or  broken  stone), 
namely,  that  the  gravel  does  not  swell  materially  in  volume  when 
mixed  with  water.  However,  a  certain  amount  of  water  is  required 
to  wet  the  surface  of  the  pebbles,  and  this  water  reduces  the  avail- 
able voids,  that  is,  the  voids  that  can  be  filled  by  the  mortar.  With 
this,  in  mind,  the  following  deduction  is  clear,  using  the  nomen- 
clature and  symbols  above  given  : 

nflr  =  cu.  ft.  of  dry  gravel  (or  stone). 
ng  V  =  cu.  f  t.  of  voids  in  dry  gravel. 

0.9  n#  V  =  cu.  ft.  of  "available  voids"  in  the  wet  gravel. 
p  +  n  s  (1.1  —  0.9  v)  —  0.09  ng  V  =  excess  of  mortar  over  the  avail- 

able voids  in  the  wet  gravel. 

ng  +  p  +  n  s  (1.1  —  0.9  v)  —  0.9  ngV  =  cu.    ft.    of    concrete    from    1 
bbl.  cement. 

27 


p+n  a  (1.1  —  0.9  vl  +  ng  (1  —  0.9  F) 

N  beinsr  the  number  of  barrels  of  cement  required  to  make  1  cu. 
yd.  of  concrete. 

This  formula  is  rational  and  perfectly  general.  Other  experi- 
menters may  find  it  desirable  to.  use  constants  slightly  different 
from  the  1.1  and  the  0.9,  for  fine  sands  swell  more  than  coarse 
sands,  and  hold  more  water. 

The  reader  must  bear  in  mind  that  when  the  voids  in  the  sand 


538  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

exceed  the  cement  paste,  and  when  the  available  voids  in  the  gravel 
(or  stone)   exceed  the  mortar,  the  formula  becomes  : 

27 


ng 

These  formulas  give  the  amounts  of  cement  in  mortars  and  con- 
cretes compacted  in  place.  Tables  I  to  IV  are  based  upon  the  fore- 
going theory,  and  will  be  found  to  check  satisfactorily  with  actual 
tests. 

TABLE  I.    BARRELS  OF  PORTLAND  CEMENT  PER  CUBIC  YARD  OF  MORTAR. 
(Voids  in  sand  being  35%,  and  1  bbl.  cement  yielding  3.65  cu.  ft. 

of  cement  paste.) 

Proportion  of  Cement  to  Sand.  1  to  1  1  to  1  %  1  to  2  1  to  2  y2  1  to  3  1  to  4 

Bbls.    Bbls.     Bbls.    Bbls.    Bbls.  Bbls. 

Barrel  specified  to  be  3.5  cu.  ft.  4.  22  3.49  2.97  2.57  2.28  1.76 
"  3.8  "  .4.09  3.33  2.81  2.45  2.16  1.62 
"  4.0  "  .4.00  3.24  2.73  2.36  2.08  1.54 
"  4.4  "  .3.81  3.07  2.57  2.27  2.00  1.40 


Cu.  yds.  sand  per  cu.  yd.  mortar   0.6        0.7         0.8        0.9         1.0       1.0 

TABLE  II.  BARRELS  OF  PORTLAND  CEMENT  PER  CUBIC  YARD  OF  MORTAR. 
(Voids  in  sand  being  45%,  and   1   bbl.   cement  yielding  3.4   cu.   ft. 

of  cement  paste.) 

Proportion  of  Cement  to  Sand.  1  to  1  1  to  1  %  1  to  2  1  to  2  %  1  to  3  1  to  4 

Bbls.    Bbls.     Bbls.    Bbls.    Bbls.  Bbls. 

Barrel  specified  to  be  3.5  cu.  ft.  4.62  3.80  3.25  2.84  2.35  1.76 
"  3.8  "  .4.32  3.61  3.10  2.72  2.16  1.62 
"  4.0  "  .4.19  3.46  3.00  2.64  .  2.05  1.54 
"  4.4  "  .3.94  3.34  2.90  2.57  1.86  1.40 

Cu.  yds.  sand  per  cu.  yd.  mortar  0.6        0.8         0.9        1.0         1.0       1.0 

In  using  these  tables  remember  that  the  proportion  of  cement  to 
sand  is  by  volume,  and  not  by  weight.  If  the  specifications  state 
that  a  barrel  of  cement  shall  be  considered  to  hold  4  cu.  ft.,  for  ex- 
ample, and  that  the  mortar  shall  be  1  part  cement  to  2  parts  sand, 
then  1  barrel  of  cement  is  mixed  with  8  cu.  ft.  of  sand,  regardless 
of  what  is  the  actual  size  of  the  barrel,  and  Tegardles  of  how  much 
cement  paste  can  be  made  with  a  barrel  of  cement.  If  the  specifica- 
tions fail  to  state  what  the  size  of  a  barrel  will  be,  then  the  con- 
tractor is  left  to  guess. 

If  the  specifications  call  for  proportions  by  weight,  assume  a 
Portland  barrel  to  contain  380  Ibs.  of  cement,  and  test  the  actual 
weight  of  a  cubic  foot  of  the  sand  to  be  used.  Sand  varies  ex- 
tremely in  weight,  due  both  to  the  variation  in  the  per  cent  of 
voids,  and  to  the  variation  in  the  kind  of  minerals  of  which  the 
sand  is  composed.  A  quartz  sand  having  35%  voids  weighs  107  Ibs. 
per  cu.  ft.;  but  a  quartz  sand  having  45%  voids  weighs  only  91 
Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  If  the  weight  of  the  sand  must  be  guessed  at,  assume 
100  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  If  the  specifications  require  a  mixture  of  1  cement 
to  2  of  sand  by  weight,  we  will  have  380  Ibs.  (or  i  bbl.)  of  cement 
mixed  with  2X380.  or  760  Ibs.  of  sand;  and  if  the  sand  weighs 
90  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.,  we  shall  have  760  4-  90,  or  8.44  cu.  ft,  of  sand  to 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  539 

every  barrel  of  cement.  In  order  to  use  the  tables  above  given,  we 
may  specify  our  own  size  of  barrel ;  let  us  .say  4  cu.  ft. ;  then  8.44 
~-  4  gives  2.11  parts  of  sand  by  volume  to  1  part  of  cement.  With- 
out material  error  we  may  call  this  a  1  to  2  mortar,  and  use  the 
tables,  remembering  that  our  barrel  is  now-  "specified  to  be"  4  cu. 
ft.  If  we  have  a  brand  of  cement  that  yields  3.4  cu.  ft.  of  paste 
per  bbl.,  and  sand  having  45%  voids,  we  find  that  approximately 
3  bbls.  of  cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  mortar  will  be  required. 

It  should  be  evident  from  the  foregoing  discussions  that  no  table 
can  be  made,  and  no  rule  can  be  formulated  that  will  yield  accu- 
rate results  unless  the  brand  of  cement  is  tested  and  the  percent- 
age of  voids  in  the  sand  determined.  This  being  so  the  sensible 
plan  is  to  use  the  tables  merely  as  a  rough  guide,  and,  where  the 
quantity  of  cement  to  be  used  is  very  large,  to  make  a  few  batches 
of  mortar  using  the  available  brands  of  cement  and  sand  in  the 
proportions  specified.  Ten  dollars  spent  in  this  way  may  save  a 
thousand,  even  on  a  comparatively  small  job,  by  showing  what 
cement  and  sand  to  select. 

TABLE  III.     INGREDIENTS  IN  1  CUBIC  YARD  OP  CONCRETE. 

(Sand  voids,  40%  ;  stone  voids,  45%  ;  Portland  cement  barrel  yield- 
ing 3.65  cu.  ft.  paste.     Barrel  specified  to  be  3.8  cu.  ft.) 
Proportions  by  Volume.          1:2:4   1:2:5   1:2:6   1:2^:5   1:2%:6  1:3:4 
Bbls.    cement    per    cu.    yd. 

concrete    1.46      1.30       1.18         1.13          1.00          1.25 

Cu.   yds.    sand  per   cu.    yd. 

concrete     0.41     0.36      0.33         0.40         0.35          053 

Cu.   yds.   stone  per  cu.   yd. 

concrete    0.82     0.90      1.00        0.80          0.84          0.71 

Proportions  by  Volume       1:3:5  1:3:6  1:3:7     1:4:7       1:4:8     1:4:9 

Bbls.    cement    per    cu.    yd. 

concrete  1.13  1.05  0.96  0.82  0.77  0.73 

Cu.  yds.  sand  per  cu.  yd. 

concrete  0.48  0.44  0.40  0.46  0.43  0.41 

Cu.  yds.  stone  per  cu.  yd. 

concrete     0.80      0.88       0.93         0.80          0.86          0.92 

Note. — This  table  is  to  be  used  where  cement  is  measured  packed 
in  the  barrel  for  the  ordinary  barrel  holds  3.8  cu.  ft. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  above  table  can  be  condensed  into  the 
following  rule: 

Add  together  the  number  of  parts  and  divide  this  sum  into  ten, 
the  quotient  will  be  approximately  the  number  of  barrels  of  ce- 
ment per  cubic  yard. 

Thus  for  a  1:2:5  concrete,  the  sum  of  the  parts  is  1  +  2  +  5, 
which  is  8  ;  then  10  -7-  8  is  1.25  bbls.,  which  is  approximately  equal 
to  the  1.30  bbls.  given  in  the  table.  Neither  this  rule  nor  this  table 
is  applicable  if  a  different  size  of  cement  barrel  is  specified,  or  if 
the  voids  in  the  sand  or  stone  differ  materially  from  40%  and  45% 
respectively.  There  are  such  inumerable  combinations  of  varying 
voids,  and  varying  sizes  of  barrel,  that  the  author  does  not  deem 
it  worth  while  to  give  other  tables. 


540  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

TABLE  IV.     INGREDIENTS  IN  1  CUBIC  YARD  OF  CONCRETE. 
(Sand  voids,  40%  ;  stone  voids,  45%  ;  Portland  cement  barrel  yield- 
ing 3.65   cu.  ft.   of  paste.     Barrel  specified  to  be  4.4   cu.   ft.) 
Proportions  by  Volume.          1:2:4   1:2:5   1:2:6  1:2%:5   I:2y2:6  1:3:4 
Bbls.    cement    per    cu.    yd. 

concrete ..    1.30     1.16      1.00        1.07          0.96          1.08 

Cu.   yds.   sand   per   cu.   yd. 

concrete 0.42      0.38       0.33         0.44          0.40          0.53 

Cu.  yds.   stone  per  cu.  yd. 

concrete    0.84     0.95      1.00        0.88         0.95          0.71 

Proportions  by  Volume.          1:3:5   1:3:6  1:3:7     1:4:7      1:4:8      1:4:9 

Bbls.    cement    per    cu.    yd. 

concrete  0.96  0.90  0.82  0.75  0.68  0.64 

Cu.  yds.  sand  per  cu.  yd. 

concrete  0.47  0.44  0.40  0.49  0.44  0.42 

Cu.  yds.  stone  per  cu.  yd. 

concrete  0.78  0.88  0.93  0.86  0.88  0.95 

NOTE. — This  table  is  to  be  used  when  the  cement  is  measured 
loose,  after  dumping  it  into  a  box  for  under  such  conditions  a 
barrel  of  cement  yields  4.4  cu.  ft.  of  loose  cement. 

CEMENT  PER  CUBIC  YARD  OF  MORTAR  BY  TEST. 

According  to  tests  by  Sabin.  by  Fuller    (in  Taylor  and  Thompson) 
and  by  H.  P.  Boardman,  the  following  results  were  obtained : 

Neat.    1:1.    1 :  2.  •  1 :  3.    1:4.    1:5.    1:6.    1:7.    1:8. 

Authority.        Bbls.  Bbls.  Bbls.  Bbls.  Bbls.  Bbls.  Bbls.  Bbls.  Bbls. 

Sabin     7.40     4.17      2.84      2.06      1.62      1.33      1.14     

W.  G.   Fuller...    8.02      4.58     3.09'     2.30     1.80     1.48      1.23      1.11      1.00 
H.  P.  Boardman    7.40     4.50     3.18     2.35     

The  proportions  were  by  barrels  of  cement  to  barrels  of  sand, 
and  Sabin  called  a  380-lb.  barrel  3.65  cu.  ft.,  whereas  Fuller  called 
a  380-lb.  barrel  3.80  cu.  ft.  ;  and  Boardman  called  a  380  Ib. 
barrel  3.5  cu.  ft.  Sabin  used  a  sand  having  38%  voids; 
Fuller  used  a  sand  having  45%  voids;  and  Boardman  used  a  sand 
having  38%  voids.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  cement  used  by  Sabin 
yielded  3.65  cu.  ft.  of  cement  paste  per  bbl.  (i.  e.  27 -j- 7.4),  whereas 
the  (Atlas)  cement  used  by  Fuller  yielded  3.4  cu.  ft.  of  cement 
paste  oer  bbl.  Sabin  found  that  a  barrel  of  cement  measured 
4.37  cu.  ft.  when  dumped  and  measured  loose. 

Mr.  Boardman  states  a  barrel  (280  Ibs.,  net)  of  Lehigh  Portland 
cement  yields  3.65  cu.  ft.  of  cement  paste;  and  that  a  barrel  (265 
Ibs.,  net)  of  Louisville  natural  cement  yields  3.0  cu.  ft.  of  cement 
paste. 

Mr.  J.  J.  R.  Croes,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  states  that  1  bbl.  of  Rosen- 
dale  cement  and  2  bbls.  of  sand  (8  cu.  ft.)  make  9.7  cu.  ft.  of 
mortar,  the  extreme  variations  from  this  average  being  7%. 

The  Size  and  Weight  of  Barrels  of  Cement.— A  barrel  of  Port- 
land cement  contains  380  Ibs.  of  cement,  and  the  barrel  itself 
weighs  20  Ibs.  more.  The  size  of  the  barrel  varies  considerably, 
due  to  the  difference  in  weight  per  struck  bushel,  and  to  the  differ- 
ence in  compressing  the  cement  in  the  barrel.  A  light  burned  Port- 
land cement  weighs  100  Ibs.  per  struck  bushel;  a  heavy  burned 
cement  weighs  118  to  125  Ibs.  per  struck  bushel.  The  number  of 
cubic  feet  of  packed  Portland  cement  in  a  barrel  ranges  from  3  to 
3%.  English  Portland  cement  barrels  contain  3%  to  3%  cu.  ft. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  541 

packed.     There  are  usually   four  bags    (cloth  sacks)    of  cement  to 
the  barrel,  and  each  bag  itself  weighs  1%  Ibs. 

The  natural  cements  are  lighter  than  Portland.  The  Western  ce- 
ments, such  as  Louisville,  Akron  and  Utica  weigh  265  Ibs.  per  bbl., 
and  the  barrel  weighs  15  Ibs.  more.  A  barrel  of  Louisville 
cement  =  3%  cu.  ft,  packed.  The  Rosendale  cements  of  New  York 
and  Pennsylvania  weigh  300  Ibs.  per  bbl.  and  the  barrel  weighs  20 
Ibs.  more.  There  are  usually  three  bags  of  natural  cement  to  the 
barrel. 

When  cement  is  ordered  in  cloth  sacks,  there  is  a  charge  made  of 
10  cts.  per  sack,  but  on  return  of  the  sacks  a  credit  of  8  to  10  cts. 
per  sack  is  allowed.  Cement  ordered  in  wooden  barrels  costs  10  cts. 
more  per  bbl.  than  in  bulk.  Cement  ordered  in  paper  bags  costs 
5  cts.  more  per  bbl.  than  in  bulk.  Hence  it  is  that  nearly  all  cement 
used  in  large  quantities  is  ordered  in  cloth  sacks  which  are  returned. 

When  a  barrel  of  cement  is  dumped  out  and  shoveled  into  a  box 
it  measures  much  more  than  when  packed  in  the  barrel,  ordinarily 
from  20  to  30%  more.  I  have  measured  a  number  of  barrels  of 
English  Portland  cement,  which  is  still  much  used  on  the  Pacific 
Coast  of  America,  and  find  that  a  barrel  having  a  capacity  of  3% 
cu.  ft.  between  heads  will  yield  4.5  cu.  ft.  of  cement  measured  dry 
and  loose  in  a  box.  I  have  found  brands  of  American  Portland 
cement  that  yield  4.65  cu.  ft.  when  measured  loose  in  a  box.  The 
variation  is  considerable,  as  is  seen  in  the  following  table,  com- 
piled from  data  given  by  Mr.  Howard  Carson,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. : 

(2)  (3) 

( 1 )  Actual  Volume 

Brand  Capacity        contents  when 

of  of  of  packed         dumped         Increase 

Portland  bbl.  bbl.  loose.  in 

cement.  Cu.  ft.  Cu.  ft.  Cu.  ft.  bulk. 

Giant    3.5  3.35  4.17  25% 

Atlas    3.45  3.21  3.75  18% 

Saylor's     3.25  3.15  4.05  30% 

Alsen   (German)    3.22  3.16  4.19  33% 

Dyckerhoff    (German)      3.12  3.03  4.00  33% 

Some  engineers  require  the  contractor  to  measure  the  sand  and 
stone  in  the  same  sized  barrel  that  the  cement  comes  in  ;  then  1 
part  of  sand  or  stone  usually  means  3%  cu.  ft.  Other  engineers 
permit  both  heads  of  the  barrel  to  be  knocked  out,  for  convenience 
in  measuring  the  sand  and  stone ;  then  a  barrel  means  about  3  % 
cu.  ft.  Still  other  engineers  permit  the  contractor  to  measure  his 
cement  in  a  box  loose;  then  a  barrel  usually  means  from  4  to  4.5 
cu.  ft.  Since  most  of  the  cement  now  used  is  shipped  in  bags  and 
since  four  bags  of  Portland  cement  make  a  barrel,  it  is  the  custom 
among  most  engineers  to  call  a  bag  1  cu.  ft.,  even  though  it  may 
yield  a  little  more  cement.  Still  other  engineers  prefer  to  specify 
that  a  Portland  barrel  shall  be  called  3.8  cu.  ft.,  which  is  equiva- 
lent to  100  Ibs.  of  cement  per  cu.  ft. 

It  is  desirable  that  engineers  and  architects  adopt  some  uniform 
practice  in  this  matter,  for  now  a  contractor  is  often  unable  to 
estimate  the  quantity  of  cement  required  for  any  specified  mix- 
ture because  the  size  of  the  barrel  is  not  specified. 


542  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

There  have  been  advocates  of  proportioning  parts  by  weight, 
but,  aside  from  the  fact  that  it  is  seldom  convenient  to  weigh  the 
ingredients  of  every  batch,  there  is  no  gain  in  such  a  departure 
from  long-standing  precedent.  Sand  and  gravel  and  stone  are  by  no 
means  constant  in  specific  gravity,  as  advocates  of  weighing  seem 
to  suppose. 

Effect  of  Moisture  on  Voids  in  Sand. — Few  engineers  and  fewer 
contractors  realize  how  greatly  the  volume  of  sand  is  affected  by 
the  presence  of  varying  percentages  of  moisture  in  the  sand.  A  dry, 
loose  sand  that  has  45%  voids  if  mixed  with  5%  (by  weight)  of 
water  will  swell  (unless  tamped)  to  such  an  extent  that  its  voids 
may  be  57%.  The  same  sand  if  saturated  with  more  water  until  it 
becomes  a  thin  paste,  may  show  only  37V£%  voids  after  the  sand 
has  settled.  The  following  tests  by  Feret  show  the  effect  that 
water  has  upon  sand: 

Two  kinds  of  sand  were  used,  a  very  fine  sand  and  a  coarse  sand. 
They  were  measured  in  a  box  that  held  2  cu.  ft.  and  was  8  ins.  deep, 
the  sand  being  shoveled  into  the  box,  but  not  tamped  or  shaken. 
After  measuring  and  weighing  the  dry  sand,  0.5%  (by  weight)  of 
water  was  added,  the  sand  was  mixed  and  shoveled  into  the  box 
again  and  weighed.  This  was  repeated  with  varying  percentages 
of  water,  up  to  10%,  with  the  following  results: 

Per  cent  of  water  in  sand.  0%  0.5%  1%  2%  3%  5%  10% 

Lbs.  Lbs.  Lbs.  Lbs.  Lbs.  Lbs.  Lbs. 
Weight  per  cu.  yd.  of 

fine  sand  and  water 3,457  2,206  2,085  2,044  2,037  2,035  2,133 

Weight  per  cu.  yd.  of 

coarse  sand  and  water.    2,551  2,466  2,380  2,122  2,058  2,070  2,200 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  weight  of  mixed  sand  and  water  is 
given ;  but,  to  ascertain  the  exact  weight  of  dry  sand  in  the  mix- 
ture, divide  the  weight  given  in  the  table  by  100%  plus  the  given 
tabular  per  cent ;  thus,  the  weight  of  dry  fine  sand  mixed  with 
5%  of  water  is  2,035  -H  1.05  =  1,938  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  It  will  also  be 
noted  that  when  the  water  exceeds  3  to  5%,  the  weight  of  the  mix- 
ture increases,  showing  that  a  larger  percentage  of  water  com- 
pacts the  sand.  The  voids  in  the  dry  fine  sand  were  45%,  and  in 
the  sand  with  5%  moisture  they  were  56.7%. 

It  is  well  known  that  pouring  water  onto  loose,  dry  sand  com- 
pacts it.  By  mixing  fine  sand  and  water  to  a  thin  paste,  pouring  it 
into  a  pail  and  allowing  it  to  settle,  it  was  found  that  the  sand 
occupied  11%  less  space  than  when  measured  dry  in  a  box.  The 
voids  in  fine  sand,  having  a  specific  gravity  of  2.65,  were  deter- 
mined by  measurements  in  a  quart  measure,  and  found  to  be  as 
follows : 

Voids. 

Sand,  not  packed   44  %  % 

Sand,  shaken  to  refusal 35      % 

Sand,  saturated  with  water 37  ^  % 

Mr.  H.  P.  Boardman  made  some  experiments  with  Chicago  sand 
having  34  to  40%  voids  when  dry,  by  adding  water  to  the  sand. 
The  results  were  as  follows: 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  543 


Water  added,  %  by  weight 2  46  8  10 

Resulting  increase  in  volume..      17.6         22         19.5         16.6         15.6 

However,  a  very  moderate  amount  of  shaking  would  reduce  this 
increase  in  volume  by  %  to  %. 

Effect  of  Size  of  Sand  Grains  on  Voids.— If  in  any  given  volume 
of  sand  all  the  grains  were  of  the  same  shape  and  of  uniform  size, 
the  percentage  of  voids  would  be  the  same  regardless  of  the  size 
of  the  grains.  This  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  the  finest  birdshot 
has  the  same  percentage  of  voids  as  the  coarsest  buckshot.  Nat- 
ural sand  grains,  unless  they  have  been  sorted  by  screening,  are  apt 
to  vary  greatly  in  size,  large  and  small  being  intermixed.  It  is 
this  that  causes  such  wide  discrepancies  in  published  data  as  to 
the  percentage  of  voids  in  dry  bank  sands.  We  may  divide  sand 
Into  three  sizes,  for  convenience.  The  largest  size  (L)  being  sand 
that  will  pass  a  sieve  of  5  meshes  per  lineal  inch,  but  will  not 
pass  a  sieve  of  15  meshes  per  lineal  inch;  the  medium  size 
(M)  being  sand  that  will  pass  a  15-mesh  sieve,  but  will  not 
pass  a  sieve  of  50  meshes  per  lineal  inch;  and  the  fine  size  (F) 
being  sand  tnat  will  ass  a  50-mesh  sieve.  If  we  mix  varying 
proportions  of  the  large,  medium  and  fine  (L,  M  and  P),  we  find 
that  we  get  the  densest  mixture,  with  the  least  voids,  when  we  have 
an  L6,  MO,  F4  mixture,  that  is,  6  parts  large  size,  no  parts  medium, 
and  4  parts  fine  size.  With  a  dry  sand  whose  grains  have  a  specific 
gravity  of  2.65,  if  we  weigh  a  cubic  yard  of  either  the  fine,  or  the 
medium,  or  the  large  size,  we  find  a  weight  of  2,190  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd., 
which  is  equivalent  to  51%  voids.  If  we  mix  the  three  different 
sizes  in  varying  proportions,  we  find,  as  above  stated,  that  an  L6, 
MO,  F4  mixture  is  densest,  and  it  weighs  2,840  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd. 
shoveled  into  a  dry  box.  This  is  equivalent  to  36%  voids.  We  can 
get  a  denser  mixture,  with  a  lower  percentage  of  voids,  if  we  mix 
about  equal  parts  of  sand  and  clean  gravel.  It  will  be  noted  that 
the  common  statement  that  the  densest  mixture  is  obtained  by  a 
mixture  of  gradually  increasing  sizes  of  grains  is  erroneous.  There 
must  be  enough  difference  in  the  sizes  of  grains  to  provide  voids 
so  large  that  the  smaller  grains  will  enter  them  and  not  wedge 
the  larger  grains  apart. 

The  shape  of  the  grains  has  a  rery  pronounced  effect  upon  the 
percentage  of  voids,  rounded  grains  having  less  voids  than  angular 
grains.  Using  sand  having  a  granulometric  composition  of  L5,  M3, 
F2,  measured  in  a  quart  measure,  the  following  results  were  obtained 
by  Feret: 

Voids. 

Unshaken.       Shaken. 

Natural  sand,   rounded  grains 35.9%  25.6% 

Crushed  quartzite  angular  grains 42.1  27.4 

Crushed  shells,  flat  grains 44.3  31.8 

Residue  of  quartzite,  flat  grains 47.5  34.6 

The  measure  was  shaken  until  no  further  settlement  could  be 
produced. 

Mr.  William  B.  Fuller  made  the  following  tests:  A  dry  sand, 
having  34%  voids  shrank  9.6%  in  volume  upon  thorough  tamping, 


544 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


until  it  had  27%  voids.  The  same  sand  moistened  with  6%  water, 
and  loose,  had  44%  voids,  which  was  reduced  to  31%  by  ramming. 
The  same  sand  saturated  with  water  had  33%  voids,  and  by  thorough 
ramming  its  volume  was  reduced  8  %  % ,  until  the  sand  had  only 
26V2%  voids. 

TABLE  V. — SIZES  OF  SAND  GRAINS. 


Held  by  a  Sieve. 
No    jo               

A. 

35.3% 

No     20    

32.1 

No     30 

14.6 

No     40                    

No    50    

9.6 

No     100 

4.9 

No     200      

2.0 

B. 


12.8 
49.0 


5.7 
2.3 


4.2% 
12.5 
44.4 


E. 


53 


Voids  33%  39%  41.7%  31% 

Note. — A  is  a  "fine  gravel"  (containing  8%  clay)  used  at  Phila- 
delphia. B.  Delaware  River  sand.  C.  St.  Mary's  River  sand. 
D,  Green  River,  Ky.,  sand,  "clean  and  sharp." 

TABLE  VI. — VOIDS  IN  SAND. 

Locality.                            Authority.  Voids.  Remarks. 

Ohio    River    W.    M.    Hall  31%  Washed 

Sandusky,     O C.    E.    Sherman  40%  Lake 

Franklin   Co.,    O....      C.    E.    Sherman  40%  Bank 

Sandusky   Bay,   O. . .      S.    B.    Newberry  32.3%  

St.    Louis,    Mo H.    H.    Henby  34.3%  Miss.  River 

Sault  Ste.   Marie H.  von  Schon  41.7%  River 

Chicago,    111 H.  P.  Boardman  34  to  40% 

Philadelphia,     Pa 39  %  Del.  River 

Mass.     Coast 31  to  34%  

Boston,   Mass Geo.   A.    Kimball  33%  Clean 

Cow  Bay,  L.  I Myron   S.   Falk  40%% 

Little  Falls,   N.   J. .  .      W.    B.    Fuller  45.6%  

Canton,  111 G.  W.   Chandler  30%  Clean 

Voids  and  Weight  of  Broken  Stone  and  Gravel — Data  as  to 
these  will  be  found  in  Section  III,  Rock  Excavation.  Consult  the 
index  under  "Broken  Stone,"  also  under  "Gravel." 

Tables  for  Estimating  the  Cost  of  Concrete  and  for  Designing 
Reinforced  Concrete  Beams  and  Slabs." — Tables  of  cost  and  crush- 
ing strength  of  concrete  mixtures,  when  compiled  from  reliable 


t 
t 

i 

*J4$a 

It 

•«U» 

Si 

£ 

J 

Fig.  1. 

data,  have  a  very  useful  purpose  in  figuring  on  concrete  work.  In 
our  issue  of  Feb.  19.  1908,  we  published  a  table  of  this  character 
long  used  by  a  prominent  Eastern  contractor.  Another  table  of 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  26,  1908. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  545 

••xiui   g:%s:i    uo  6fe>s- 

P8SBQ     S8}8JOUOO     JO  ^  coast- 

jo  : 


8 


333 

l 


£  §,     WSJ 

c^ 

SI 

R'-1 


„_.     C-  -cS  ••> 
P«     'gSh 

•fi&afc  *• 


O  „      ooooooooo 


i.3    S  M 

1  o  o 

pqcc 


^.M^tOOOON    tl^^5><ij 
,HOO«>^COl-l005     g**        ^S 

co  e<i  03  w  M  w  eqiH    C  ^  ti  o>  rt 


wa— 


£ 

t»    "S     S^d"P^    '"O- 

~    IS2§3 


•3    -g^s  : 

13   l^g"*    'iqa—  -ui9o 

«        PQ        P  l 

,3 

S  "  '     euo;s  'H 


546  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

similar  scope  is  given  here  (Table  VII).  This  table  has  been  com- 
piled by  Mr.  H.  J.  Fixmer,  Assistant  Engineer,  Board  of  Local  Im- 
provements, Chicago,  111.,  from  various  and  it  is  believed  trustworthy 
sources.  The  cost  column,  while  necessarily  based  on  given  con- 
stants, shows  relative  costs  of  different  mixtures  which  are  fairly 
true  for  all  cases.  These  costs,  in  connection  with  the  ratio  of 
strength  figures,  show  almost  at  a  glance  the  economy  of  the  selected 
mixtures. 

Table  VIII  is  used  in  designing  slabs  and  girders.  Attention  is 
called  to  the  fact  that  the  value  h  is  used  and  that  the  value  d-h  is 
the  selected  thickness  of  the  fireproofing  only.  In  other  words  the 
depth  of  the  beam  is  the  value  h  plus  the  thickness  required  for  fire- 
proofing.  The  value  fc — 500  Ibs. — is  practically  the  universal  build- 
Ing  code  allowance.  The  value  fs  of  course  varies  with  the  percent- 
age of  steel  used.  A  little  study  of  the  table  shows  the  advantage 
of  using  not  less  than  1%%  of  steel  for  reinforcing. 

For  purposes  of  comparison  the  following  data  as  to  brickwork  are 
useful : 

Crushing  strength  Cost  per 
Ibs.  per  sq.  in.        cu.  ft. 

First-class  brickwork   in   cement   mortar 834  $0.44 

Good  brick  in  cement  mortar 486  0.35 

Ordinary   brick  in   lime  mortar 347  0.26 

1,000  brick  =  40  cu.  ft.  when  laid. 

Percentage  of  Water  Required  in  Mortar — A  good  rule  by  which 
to  determine  the  percentage  of  water  by  weight  for  any  given  mix- 
ture of  mortar  is  as  follows :  Multiply  the  parts  of  sand  by  8,  add 
24  to  the  product  and  divide  the  total  by  the  sum  of  the  parts  of 
sand  and  cement. 

Example:  Required  percentage  of  water  for  a  mortar  of  1 
cement  to  3  sand: 

SOLUTION. 

1  cement  =24% 

3  sand    X    8%        =24% 

4  parts    at    12%    =48% 

Hence  the  water  should  be  12%  of  the  combined  weight  of  the 
cement  and  sand.  For  a  1 :  1  mortar,  the  rule  gives  16%  water.  For 
1 :  2  mortar  the  rule  gives  13%%  water.  For  a  1:6  mor- 
tar the  rule  gives  10.3%  water.  Incidentally,  it  may  be 
added,  the  percentages  of  water  obtained  by  this  rule  give  a  mortar 
that  has  the  greatest  adhesion  to  steel  rods  (see  Falk's  "Cements, 
Mortars  and  Concretes,"  page  61). 

About  23  gals  of  water  are  required  per  cu.  yd.  of  1 :  3  :  6  concrete. 

Estimating  the  Cost  of  Steel  in  Reinforced  Concrete.— In  re- 
inforced concrete  the  amount  of  steel  is  usually  expressed  in  per- 
centages of  the  volume  of  concrete.  Thus  1%  of  steel  means  that 
one  one-hundredth  part  of  the  volume  of  reinforced  concrete  is  steel. 
In  a  cubic  yard  of  reinforced  concrete  there  is  1%  of  27  cu.  ft,  or 
0.27  cu.  It.  of  steel,  if  the  reinforcement  is  1%.  A  cubic-  foot  of  steel 
weighs  490  Ibs.,  but  for  all  practical  purposes  we  can  call  it  500  Ibs. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION. 


54? 


sr 


OOrHTHffOTj<«oC-C5t--     G       .2       £ 

W     o 


0000     'r-irH 


CO       W-H» 


w     fl 


(!)       .3 

I    s 


5    -Q  II- 

C      ^   ow 

1  a«. 


S  »  bj 
g|fl 


.  co  TH  o  05 1- us  eo  O 

^  05050500  00  000000 

odoooood 

^  t-eoot-eob-oo 

H  dodddodd 

.  cot-ocot-eooo 

H  dddddddd 


I'*"' 
o  £> 


§     o    T***     .£ 

2    ^     ."S-2rn   -2 


*J   «£[>  <U 


J OOOOOOOO 

oooooooo 

OOOOOOOO 


i2£<i5.2 


llo-^ 


,-S-s  o 
c'OJO 


<I>         G 

«     I 


o  5<M *^  t-i 

^«:^i 

£>C<f       w  "Q^Q 

ijw    o  o  «H 


648  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Hence  reinforced  concrete  containing  1%  of  steel  has  0.27X500  =  135 

Ibs.  of  steel  per  cu.  yd. 

Per  cent.  Lbs.  of  Lbs.  of 

of  Steel  Steel 
Steel.                                 Per  Cu.  Ft.                           Per  Cu.  Yd. 

0  20  1-00  27.0 

020  1.25  33.8 

0'30  1-50  40.5 

0.35  1-75  47.3 

040  2.00  54.0 

045  2.25  60.8 

050  2.50  67.5 

Oi55  2.75  74.3 

0  60  3.00  81.0 

0'65  3.25  87.8 

0  70  3.50  94.5 

0-75  3.75  101.3 

0.80  4.00  108.0 

0  85  4.25  114.8 

Oi90  4.50  121.5 

0.95  4.75           -  128.3 

1.00  5.00  135.0 

Knowing  the  price  of  steel  for  reinforcing,  it  is  a  simple  matter 
of  multiplication  to  estimate  the  cost  of  the  steel  for  any  percent- 
age of  reinforcement.  For  example  it  is  desired  to  know  the  cost  of 
steel  for  a  concrete  sewer  reinforced  with  twisted  "bars  %-in.  square, 
the  steel  amounting  to  0.30%.  According  to  the  table  there  would 
be  40.5  Ibs.  of  steel  per  cu.  yd.  in  concrete  reinforced  with  0.30%  of 
steel.  The  following  table  of  prices  is  given  in  a  catalog  of  Ran- 
some's  in  1906  : 

PRICE  OF  RANSOME  TWISTED  STEEL  BARS. 

Add  the  prices  given  below  to  the  prevailing  prices  for  plain  steel 
bars  f.  o.  b.  Pittsburg. 

Per  100  Ibs. 

Larger  than  %   inch  square  add 0.30 

Larger  than  11/16   inch  square  add 0.375 

Larger  than   %    inch  square  add 0.375 

Larger  than  9/16  inch  square  add 0.425 

Larger  than    ^   inch  square  add 0.425 

Larger   than    7/16    inch    square   add 0.65 

Larger  than   %    inch  square  add 0.70 

Larger   than    5/16    inch   square    add 0.75 

Larger  than  *4  inch  square  add 0.80 

Larger  than   *4xl  inch  add 0.425 

Larger  than   V8xy2   inch  add 1.20 

The  above  figures  are  for  carload  lots.  For  quantities  less  than 
carload  lots,  add  $0.05  per  100  Ibs.  For  quantities  less,  between 
1,000  Ibs.  and  2,000  Ibs.,  add  $0.10  per  100  Ibs. 

For  quantities  less  than  1,000  Ibs.,  add  $0.30  per  100  Ibs. 

If  the  present  price  of  plain  steel  bars  is  $1.50  per  100  Ibs.,  f.  o.  b. 
Pittsburg,  then  the  price  of  %-in.  Ransome  twisted  steel  bars  is 
$1.50 +  $0.70,  or  $2.20  per  100  Ibs.,.  or  2.2  cts.  per  Ib.  f.  o.  b.  Pitts- 
burg. Let  us  assume  that  the  freight  and  haulage  brings  the  price 
up  to  2%  cts.  per  Ib.,  delivered  on  the  job.  The  labor  cost  of  bend- 
ing and  placing  steel  in  reinforced  concrete  sewers  averages  about 
Va  ct.  per  Ib.  Hence  the  total  cost  of  the  steel  in  place  is  3  cts.  per 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  549 

Ib.  in  this  particular  case.  Since  there  are  40%  Ibs.  of  steel  per  cu. 
yd,  of  concrete  containing  0.30%  steel,  we  have  a  total  cost  of  40.5  X 
3  cts.  =  $1.22  per  cu.  yd.  for  the  steel. 

In  like  manner  all  similar  problems  may  be  solved.  To  facilitate 
rapid  estimates,  it  is  a  good  plan  to  keep  records  of  all  reinforced 
concrete  structures  in  such  form  as  to  show  the  percentage  of  steel 
used.  In  doing  this,  however,  be  careful  to  separate  the  founda- 
tions which  are  not  reinforced  from  the  superstructure  which  is  re- 
inforced. A  reinforced  concrete  arch  bridge  usually  rests  on  abut- 
ments which  are  not  reinforced.  Do  not  lump  together  all  the  con- 
crete in  making  an  estimate,  but  separate  the  arch  from  the  abut- 
ments. Frequently  engineers  have  failed  to  separate  the  yardage  of 
foundation  from  the  yardage  of  superstructure  of  reinforced  concrete 
bridges,  yet  without  such  a  separation  accurate  cost  estimates  are 
impossible. 

Cost  of  Sand. — The  cost  of  sand  may  be  estimated  by  adding 
together  the  cost  of  loading  in  the  pit,  the  cost  of  hauling  in 
wagons,  the  cost  of  freight  and  rehandling  if  necessary  and  the  cost 
of  washing.  On  page  553  are  given  data  on  the  cost  of  shoveling 
sand  into  wagons.  The  cost  of  wagon  hauling  is  given  on  page  125. 
Freight  rates  can  always  be  secured,  and  it  is  usually  safe  to  esti- 
mate the  weight  on  a  basis  of  2,700  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.,  provided  the 
sand  has  not  been  rained  upon  after  loading  in  the  car.  The  cost 
of  screening  sand  by  hand  is  the  cost  of  shoveling  it  up  against  an 
inclined  screen ;  but  if  a  large  amount  of  gravel  must  be  screened 
to  get  a  small  amount  of  sand,  care  must  be  taken  to  make  tests  in 
the  pit  to  ascertain  how  many  cubic  feet  of  gravel  and  sand  must 
be  shoveled  to  secure  one  cubic  foot  of  sand.  In  some  places  sand 
must  be  dredged  or  pumped  with  a  sand  pump  from  the  bottom  of  a 
river  or  lake.  In  other  places  sand  must  be  made  by  crushing  stone 
and  running  the  small  crushed  product  through  rolls.  At  Couders- 
port,  Pa.,  a  small  plant  for  making  artificial  sand  from  stone  has 
been  in  operation  for  many  years. 

Stone  was  crushed  and  passed  through  rolls  in  order  to  make  a 
sand  for  the  mortar  used  in  the  Lanchensee  Dam,  Germany.  A  jaw 
crusher,  driven  by  a  15-hp.  engine,  crushed  65  cu.  yds.  of  stone 
(graywacke)  per  10-hr,  day.  All  pieces  from  0.16  to  1.6  ins.  diam- 
eter were  passed  through  rolls.  The  rolls  were  14%  ins.  long  and 
34  ins.  diameter,  and  made  22  revolutions  per  minute,  requiring  12 
to  15  hp.  A  pair  of  these  rolls  produced  20  cu.  yds.  of  sand  per 
10-hr,  day.  The  rolls  had  chilled  bands  which,  when  worn,  were 
ground  true  with  an  emery  wheel  without  removing  the  rolls. 

Where  a  large  amount  of  concrete  is  to  be  made,  a  contractor  can 
seldom  afford  to  guess  at  the  source  of  his  sand  supply.  I  have 
known  several  instances  where  long  hauls  over  poor  roads  have  made 
the  sand  more  expensive  than  the  stone  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete. 
Each  job  should  be  estimated  in  detail,  using  the  data  given  else- 
where in  this  book. 

A  very  common  price  for  sand  in  cities  is  $1  per  cu.  yd.,  delivered 
at  the  work.  Sand  is  often  sold  by  the  load,  instead  of  by  the  cubic 


550  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

yard.  It  is  wise  to  have  a  written  agreement  denning  the  size  of  a 
load. 

Cost  of  Washing  Sand  in  a  Tank  Washer — Mr.  W.  H.  Roper 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  cost  of  washing  sand  for  U.  S.  Lock 
No.  3,  at  Springdale,  Pa.  The  sand  dredged  from  the  river  con- 
tained much  fine  coal  and  silt  which  was  removed  by  the  washer, 
which  consisted  of  a  circular  tank,  9  ft.  diam.  x  7  ft.  high,  provided 
with  a  sloping  false  bottom  perforated  with  1-in.  holes,  through 
which  water  was  forced.  A  7  V2  x  5  x  6-in.  pump  with  a  3-in. 
discharge  pipe  was  used  to  force  the  water  into  the  tank.  The 
paddles  for  keeping  the  sand  in  suspension  were  rotated  by  a  7-hp. 
engine.  A  charge  of  14  cu.  yds.  of  sand  was  washed  in  from  1  to  2 
hrs.,  at  a  cost  of  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  This  device  was  designed  by 
Capt.  W.  R.  Graham,  who  is  said  to  have  applied  for  a  patent.  It  is 
doubtful  whether  any  patentable  combination  exists  in  the  device. 
See  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction"  for  the  design  of 
this  washer,  and  also  for  the  design  of  the  one  described  in  the  next 
paragraph. 

Mr.  F.  H.  Stephenson  gives  the  following  data  relating  to  a  sand 
washer  designed  by  Mr.  Allen  Hazen,  which  consisted  of  a  wooden 
box  10  ft.  long,  2%  ft.  wide  and  2%  ft.  deep;  a  6-in.  pipe,  provided 
with  a  gate,  or  valve,  enters  at  one  end,  and  connects  with  three 
3-in.  pipes  capped  at  the  ends.  In  the  bottoms  of  these  3-in.  pipes 
are  V2-in.  holes,  spaced  6  ins.  apart,  through  which  water  discharges 
under  pressure  into  the  box.  Sand  is  shoveled  into  the  box  at  one 
end,  and  the  upward  currents  of  water  raise  the  fine  and  dirty  par- 
ticles until  they  escape  through  the  waste  troughs.  When  the  box 
becomes  filled  with  sand  a  sliding  door  is  raised  at  the  end,  and  the 
clean  sand  flows  out  through  a  3-in.  hole  in  the  box.  The  operation 
is  continuous,  so  long  as  sand  is  fed  into  the  washer.  By  manipu- 
lating the  door  the  sand  can  be  made  to  flow  out  with  a  very  Email 
percentage  of  water.  Sand  containing  7%  of  dirt  was  thus  washed 
so  that  it  contained  only  0.6%  dirt.  In  10  hrs.  the  washer  handled 
200  cu.  yds.  of  sand. 

If  sand  is  handled  to  and  from  the  washers  by  shovels  the  cost 
of  shoveling  is  the  largest  item  of  expense,  and  this  can  be  easily 
estimated.  If  the  sand  is  dumped  into  bins  which  feed  into  the 
washer  by  gravity,  and  is  finally  delivered  by  gravity  to  buckets  or 
cars,  the  cost  of  washing  is  mainly  the  cost  of  pumping,  plus  the 
interest  and  depreciation  of  plant.  The  amount  of  water  required  per 
cubic  yard  has  been  given  above,  so  that  a  close  estimate  of  cost  can 
readily  be  made  for  any  given  condition. 

Other  data  as  to  methods  and  costs  of  washing  sand  and  gravel 
will  be  found  in  "Concrete  Construction — Methods  and  Cost"  by 
Gillette  and  Hill. 

Cost  of  Washing  Sand  With  a  Hose.— Where  the  quantity  of  sand 
to  be  washed  is  not  very  large,  the  simplest  method  is  to  use  water 
from  a  hose.  Build  a  tank  8  ft.  wide  and  15  ft.  long,  the  bottom 
having  a  slope  of  about  8  ins.  in  the  15  ft.  The  sides  should  be 
about  8  ins.  high  at  the  lower  end,  rising  gradually  to  3  ft.,  the 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  55i 

height  of  the  upper  end.  The  lower  end  of  this  tank  should  be 
closed  with  a  board  gate  about  6  ins.  high,  sliding  in  guides  so 
that  it  can  be  removed.  Dump  about  3  cu.  yds.  of  the  dirty  sand  at 
the  upper  end  of  the  platform  and  play  a  stream  of  water  upon  it 
from  a  %-in.  nozzle,  the  man  standing  on  the  outside  of  the  lower 
end  of  the  platform.  The  water  and  sand  flow  down  the  platform 
and  the  dirt  passes  off  with  the  overflow  water  over  the  gate.  In 
about  an  hour  the  batch  of  sand  will  be  washed.  By  building  a  pair 
of  platforms  the  washing  can  proceed  continuously ;  and  one  man 
can  wash  30  cu.  yds.  a  day,  at  a  cost  of  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  his 
labor.  To  this  must  be  added  the  cost  of  shoveling  up  the  sand 
again,  say,  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  any  extra  hauling  due  to  the 
location  of  the  washer.  If  the  water  is  pumped,  about  10  cts.  more 
per  cu.  yd.  will  be  spent  for  coal  and  wages,  making  a  total  of 
25  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Washing  With  Sand  Ejectors.— Where  very  large  quantities  of 
sand  are  to  be  washed  more  expensive  apparatus  than  above  de- 
scribed may  be  used.  In  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction" 
will  be  found  detail  drawings  of  what  are  termed  "sand  ejectors," 
consisting  of  a  row  of  conical  hoppers  now  used  extensively  for 
washing  filter  sand.  From  the  bottom  of  each  hopper  the  sand  and 
water  are  forced  to  the  top  of  the  next  hopper  by  a  stream  of  water 
passing  through  an  ejector.  The  dirty  water  overflows  at  the  top 
of  each  hopper,  and  finally  clean  sand  is  discharged  into  receiving 
bins  or  buckets.  One  man  can  readily  attend  to  feeding  the  sand 
into  the  first  hopper  and  another  man  will  handle  the  discharge.  It 
requires  about  3,000  gals,  of  water  per  cu.  yd.  of  sand  washed, 
so  that  with  an  output  of  36  cu.  yds.  of  sand  in  10  hrs.,  the  amount 
of  water  to  be  pumped  is  108,000  gals.  A  gasoline  pump  may 
be  used. 

With  such  an  output  the  cost  would  be  about  as  follows: 

Per  Day.     Per  Cu.  Yd. 

2  laborers  at  $2 .. $4.00          $0.111 

1  man  on  pump 3.00  0.083 

Fuel,  etc.,  for  5  hp.  pump 1.00  0.028 

Total    $8.00         $0.222 

The  cost  of  pumping  can  be  greatly  reduced  where  a  larger  yard- 
age is  to  be  washed  daily. 

For  other  data  on  sand  washing  with  ejectors  see  the  part  of  the 
section  on  Waterworks  devoted  to  sand  filtering. 

Cost  of  Washing  Gravel.— In  the  Railway  Section  will  be  found 
data  on  the  cost  of  washing  gravel  for  railway  ballast. 

Cost  of  Transporting  in  Push  Carts. — For  hauling  concrete,  over 
comparatively  level  runways,  two-wheel  push  carts,  or  concrete 
buggies,  are  far  more  economic  than  wheelbarrows.  A  cart  having 
a  capacity  of  6  cu.  ft,  and  holding  about  0.2  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  is 
pushed  by  one  man.  With  wages  at  15  cts.  per  hr.,  and  man  trav- 
eling 200  ft.  per  min.,  the  cost  would  be  1%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  per  100 
ft.  of  distance  from  mixing  board  to  point  of  dumping  the  con- 


552  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

crete.    Two  lines  of  plank  should  be  laid  for  the  wheels  to  travel  on. 
Cost  of  Making  Concrete  by  Hand.— The  cost  of  making  concrete 
by  hand  may  be  divided  into  the  following  items: 

(1)  Loading  the  barrows,  buckets,  carts  or  cars  used  to  trans- 
port the  materials  (stone,  sand  and  cement)  to  the  mixing  board. 

(2)  Transporting  and  dumping  the  materials. 

(3)  Mixing  the  materials  by  turning  with  shovels  or  hoes. 

(4)  Loading  the  concrete  with  shovels  into  barrows,   buckets, 
carts  or  cars. 

(5)  Transporting  the  concrete  to  place. 

(6)  Dumping  and  spreading. 

(7)  Ramming. 

(8)  Forms,  runways,  cement  house,  bins,  etc. 

(9)  Finishing  the  surface  of  the  concrete. 
(10)     Superintendence  and  general  expenses. 

Unloading  the  Materials  From  Cars.— The  stone  and  sand  will 
ordinarily  be  delivered  bj'  wagons  or  cars  and  dumped  into  stock 
piles  as  near  the  proposed  work  as  possible,  without  being  in  the 
way  after  construction  begins.  The  contractor  should  use  fore- 
thought not  only  in  planning  the  location  of  his  stock  piles,  but  also 
in  providing  a  large  enough  storage  capacity  to  tide  over  irregu- 
larities in  the  delivery  of  materials,  especially  where  materials 
come  by  rail  from  a  distance.  It  is  usually  a  short-sighted  policy 
to  attempt  to  unload  direct  from  the  railway  cars  onto  the  mixing 
board,  without  providing  a  stock  pile ;  for  the  foreman  will  be 
spending  most  of  his  time  trying  to  get  the  railroad  to  deliver 
materials  promptly.  By  all  means  provide  stock  piles,  unless  there 
is  some  good  reason  to  the  contrary. 

Sand  can  be  dumped  directly  on  the  ground,  but  broken  stone 
(unless  it  is  very  small,  %-in.  or  less  in  size)  should  always  be 
dumped  upon  a  plank  floor,  well  made.  Such  a  floor  should 
consist  of  2-in.  plank  laid  on  4  x  6-in.  stringers,  firmly  bedded  in  the 
ground  and  spaced  about  3  ft.  apart.  Never  lay  a  lot  of  loose  plank 
directly  upon  the  ground,  without  stringers,  for  they  are*  sure  to 
settle  unevenly  under  the  load,  and  thus  make  it  difficult  to  shovel 
up  the  stone.  The  object  of  the  plank  is  to  provide  an  even  surface 
along  which  a  square  pointed  shovel  can  be  pushed  in  loading  bar- 
rows, carts,  etc.  I  find  that  a  man  can  load  18  or  20  cu.  yds.  of 
broken  stone  into  wheelbarrows  in  10  hrs.,  if  he  is  shoveling  off  a 
well-laid  plank  platform,  but  he  will  not  average  more  than  12  or 
14  cu.  yds.  a  day  shoveled  from  a  pile  without  a  plank  flooring.  The 
reason  is  that  a  shovel  can  be  shoved  with  difficulty  into  a  mass  of 
broken  stone  (2-in.  size),  J>»-*  -~>n  readily  be  shoved  along  a  plank 
floor  Incidentally  I  mas  vtad  rm^  broken  stone  delivered  in  hopper- 
bottom  cars  ean  be  shoveled  with  difficulty  as  compared  with 
shoveling  in  flat-bottom  cars;  the  ratio  being  about  14  cu.  yds.  per 
man  per  day  from  hopper-bottom  cars  as  compared  with  20  cu.  y^ 
from  flat  cars.  On  the  other  hand,  the  hopper-bottom  coal  car 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  553 

should  always  be  chosen  where  it  can  be  dumped  through  a  trestle. 
If  the  amount  of  work  to  be  done  will  justify  the  expense  a  trestle 
may  be  built.  Often,  however,  there  is  a  railroad  embankment 
which  can  be  dug  away  for  a  short  distance  and  stringers  placed  to 
support  the  track.  Then  the  cars  can  be  dumped  into  the  hole 
thus  made,  and  the  material  shoveled  out  and  down  the  slope. 

Many  foremen  for  railway  companies  waste  hundreds  of  dollars 
by  shoveling  the  materials  from  freight  cars  out  upon  the  earth — 
often  upon  the  side  of  an  embankment  where  shoveling  is  very 
difficult.  In  many  cases  it  would  have  paid  well  to  have  unloaded 
the  cars  by  the  aid  of  a  stiff-leg  derrick  and  iron  buckets  or  skips 
loaded  by  the  shovelers  in  the  cars  ;  these  skips  being  dumped  upon 
a  well-made  platform.  In  other  cases  chutes  lined  with  sheet  iron 
would  have  served  to  deliver  the  stone  upon  a  plank  flooring  at  the 
foot  of  the  embankment,  just  as  coal  is  delivered  into  a  cellar. 
Damp  sand  will  not  slide  down  a  chute  on. a  slope  of  iy2  to  1,  but 
coarse  broken  stone,  if  given  a  start  when  cast,  with  the  shovel,  will 
slide  on  an  iron-shod  slope  of  3  or  4  to  1. 

If  the  material  is  delivered  in  wagons  it  seldom  is  necessary  to 
have  large  stock  piles  provided  the  wagons  come  direct  from  the 
sand  pit  and  the  quarry. 

Cost  of  Loading  the  Materials. — A  man  who  is  a  willing  worker 
can  readily  load  20  cu.  yds.  of  sand  into  a  barrow  or  cart  in  10  hrs., 
but  under  poor  foremen,  or  when  laborers  are  scarce,  it  is  not  safe 
to  count  upon  more  than  15  cu.  yds.  a  day,  or,  say,  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
for  loading.  Practically  the  same  figures  hold  true  of  broken  stone 
shoveled  off  a  good  plank  floor  ;  but,  if  the  stone  is  shoveled  off  the 
ground,  estimate  15  cu.  yds.  a  day  under  good  management,  or  12 
cu.  yds.  a  day  under  poor  management.  Since  in  a  cubic  yard  of 
concrete  there  are  ordinarily  about  1  cu.  yd.  of  broken  stone  and 
about  0.4  cu.  yd.  of  sand,  the  cost  of  loading  the  materials  into 
wheelbarrows  and  carts  is  as  follows,  wages  being  15  cts.  per  hour: 

1    cu.    yd.    stone    loaded    for  11  cts. 
0.4    cu.    yd.    sand    loaded    for     4  cts. 

1  cu.  yd.  concrete  loaded  for  15  cts. 

The  cement  can  be  loaded  with  more  ease  than  the  other  materials, 
whether  it  is  in  barrels  or  in  bags,  and  the  cost  of  loading  it  into 
barrows  or  carts  will  be  not  over  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  thus 
making  a  total  of  17  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  loading  the  concrete  ma- 
terials into  barrows  or  carts. 

Cost  of  Transporting  the  Materials. — The  most  common  way  of 
transporting  the  materials  from  stock,  piles  to  the  mixing  board  is  in 
wheelbarrows  over  plank  runways.  A  wheelbarrow  is  usually  load- 
ed with  2  sacks  of  Portland  cement  (200  Ibs.),  or  with  2  cu.  ft.  of 
stone  or  of  sand,  if  a  steep  rise  must  be  made  to  reach  the  mixing 
platform ;  but,  if  the  run  is  level,  300  Ibs.  of  cement,  or  3  cu.  ft. 
of  sand  or  stone  is  a  common  wheelbarrow  load.  A  man  wheeling 
a  barrow  travels  at  the  rate  of  about  200  ft.  per  minute,  going  and 
coming,  and  loses  %  minute  each  trip  dumping  the  load,  fixing  run 


554  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

planks,  etc.  An  active  man  will  do  20  or  25%  more  work  than  this, 
while  a  very  lazy  man  may  do  20%  less.  With  wages  at  15  «;ts.  per 
hour,  the  cost  of  wheeling  the  materials  for  1  cu.  yd.  of  concrete 
may  be  obtained  by  the  following  rule : 

To  a  fixed  cost  of  4  cts.  (for  lust  time)  add  1  ct.  for  every  20  ft. 
of  distance  from  stock  pile  to  mixing  board  if  there  is  a  steep  rise  in 
the  runway,  but  if  the  runway  is  level  add  1  ct.  for  every  30  ft. 
distance  of  haul.  Since  loading  the  barrows  costs  17  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
the  total  fixed  cost  is  4  +  17  cts.  or  21  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  to  wnich  is 
added  1  ct.  for  every  20  or  30  ft.  of  haul,  according  to  the  character 
of  the  runway. 

I  have  frequently  seen  small  stock  piles  located  as  close  as  pos- 
sible to  mixing  boards,  so  that  wheelbarrows  were  not  used,  the 
materials  being  carried  in  shovels  direct  to  the  mixing  boards.  On 
work  of  any  considerable  size  this  is  a  very  foolish  plan,  as  we  can 
readily  see.  It  takes  from  100  to  150  shovelfuls  of  stone  to  make 
1  cu.  yd.  It  therefore  costs  at  the  rate  of  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  to 
carry  it  100  ft.  and  return  empty  handed,  for  in  walking  short  dis- 
tances the  men  travel  very  slowly — about  150  ft.  per  minute.  From 
this  it  appears  that  it  costs  more  to  walk  even  half  a  dozen  paces 
with  stone  carried  in  shovels  than  to  wheel  it  in  barrows.  Of 
course,  by  using  large  coal  scoops  the  cost  of  carrying  material  in 
shovels  could  be  reduced  to  one-half  or  one-third  the  cost  with  ordi- 
nary shovels ;  but  scoops  are  never  used  in  mixing  concrete. 

Another  mistake  that  is  very  commonly  made  by  foremen  is  to 
provide  no  plank  runways  from  the  stock  pile  to  the  mixing  board, 
but  instead  to  run  the  wheelbarrows  over  the  ground.  This  is  bad 
enough  even  in  dry  weather  over  a  very  hard  packed  earth  path, 
but  after  a  rain  or  on  a  soft  pathway  it  means  a  great  loss  of 
efficiency.  Had  I  not  seen  this  error  committed  repeatedly,  I  should 
not  mention  it,  for  it  would  seem  that  no  foreman  could  be  so  short- 
sighted as  not  to  provide  a  few  planks  for  runways. 

Where  the  runway  must  rise  to  the  mixing  board,  give  it  a  slope 
or  grade  seldom  steeper  than  1  in  8,  and  if  possible  flatter.  Make  a 
runway  on  a  trestle  at  least  18  ins.  wide,  so  that  men  will  be  in  no 
danger  of  falling.  See  to  it,  also  that  the  planks  are  so  well  sup- 
ported that  they  do  not  spring  down  when  walked  over,  for  a  springy 
plank  makes  hard  wheeling.  If  the  planks  are  so  long  between  the 
"horses"  or  "bents"  used  to  support  them,  that  they  spring  badly,  it 
is  usually  a  simple  matter  to  nail  a  cleat  across  the  underside  of 
the  planks  and  stand  an  upright  strut  underneath  to  support  and 
stiffen  the  plank. 

Materials  may  be  hauled  in  one-horse  dump-carts  for  all  distances 
more  than  50  ft.  (from  stock  pile  to  mixing  board)  at  a  cost  less 
than  for  wheelbarrow  hauling.  A  cart  should  be  loaded  in  4  mins. 
and  dumped  in  about  1  min.,  making  5  mins.  lost  time  each  round 
trip.  It  should  travel  at  a  speed  of  not  less  than  200  ft.  per  min., 
although  it  is  not  unusual  to  see  variations  of  15  or  20%,  one  way 
or  another,  from  this  average,  depending  upon  the  management  of 
the  work.  A  one-horse  cart  will  readily  carry  enough  stone  and 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  555 

sand  to  make  l/2  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  if  the  roads  are  fairly  hard  and 
level;  and  a  horse  can  pull  this  load  up  a  10%  (rise  of  1  ft.  in  10 
ft.)  planked  roadway  provided  with  cleats  to  give  a  foothold.  If  a 
horse,  cart  and  driver  can  be  hired  for  30  cts.  per  hour,  the  cost 
of  hauling  the  materials  for  1  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  is  given  by  the 
following  rule : 

To  a  fixed  cost  of  5  cts.  (for  lost  time  at  both  ends  of  haul) 
add  1  ct.  for  every  100  ft.  of  distance  from  stock  pile  to  mixing 
board.  Where  carts  are  used  it  is  possible  to  locate  the  stock  piles 
several  hundred  feet  from  the  mixing  boards  without  adding  ma- 
terially to  the  cost  of  the  concrete.  It  is  well,  however,  to  have  the 
stock  piles  in  sight  of  the  foreman  at  the  mixing  board,  so  as  to  in- 
sure promptness  of  delivery. 

Cost  of  Mixing  the  Materials. — This  element  of  cost  depends  upon 
the  number  of  times  that  the  materials  are  turned  over  With 
shovels.  I  have  seen  street  paving  work  where  the'  inspection  was  so 
lax  that  the  contractor  was  required  to  turn  over  the  mass  of  Band, 
cement  and  stone  only  three  times  before  shoveling  it  into  place. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  contractor  is  rarely  required  to  turn  over  the 
cement  and  sand  more  than  three  times  dry  and  three  times  wet  to 
make  the  mortar,  and  then  turn  over  the  mortar  and  stone  three 
times.  A  willing  workman,  under  a  good  foreman,  will  turn  over 
mortar  at  the  rate  of  30  cu.  yds.  in  10  hrs.,  lifting  each  shovelful 
and  casting  it  into  a  pile.  This  means  a  cost  of  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
of  mortar  for  each  turn ;  but  as  there  is  seldom  more  than  0.4 
cu.  yd.  of  mortar  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  we  have  a  cost  of  2  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  for  each  turn  that  is  given  to  the  mortar. 
So  if  the  mortar  is  given  6  turns  before  adding  the  stone,  we  have 
2  cts.  X  6  which  is  12  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  for  mixing  the 
mortar.  Then  if  the  mortar  and  stone  are  turned  three  times  we 
have  5  cts.  X  3,  or  15  cts.  more  for  mixing,  thus  making  a  total  of  27 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  mixing  the  concrete,  wages  being  15  cts.  per  hr. 

I  recall  seeing  one  specification  that  called  for  6  turns  of  the  mor- 
tar dry  and  3  turns  wet.  Under  such  a  specification  the  cost  of 
mixing  the  mortar  would  be  50%  more  than  I  have  assumed  in  the 
example  just  given.  Specifications  for  hand  mixing  should  always 
state  the  number  of  turns  that  will  be  required,  but  frequently  they 
do  not,  thus  leaving  the  contractor  to  guess  at  the  probable  require- 
ments of  the  inspector.  In  such  a  case  it  is  a  good  plan  to  use  hoes 
instead  of  shovels  for  mixing  the  mortar,  because  in  this  way  a  good 
mortar  can  be  mixed  with  much  greater  rapidity  than  when  an  in- 
spector insists  on  6  to  9  turns  with  shovels,  as  frequently  happens 
when  specifications  are  ambiguous. 

As  above  stated,  it  often  happens  that  on  city  pavement  work,  two 
turns  of  the  mortar,  followed  by  two  turns  of  the  mortar  and  stone, 
are  considered  sufficient.  In  such  a  case  the  cost  of  mixing  the 
mortar  is  2  cts.  X  2,  or  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete ;  to  which  is 
added  5  cts.  X  2,  or  10  cts.,  for  mixing  the  mortar  and  stone,  making 
in  all  14  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete.  When  concrete  is  mixed  very 
wet,  or  sloppy,  this  amount  of  mixing  appears  to  g/ve  good  results. 


556  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Where  a  given  number  of  turns  of  concrete  is  specified,  disputes 
often  occur  between  inspectors  and  foremen  as  to  whether  shoveling 
into  wheelbarrows  constitutes  a  "turn"  or  not,  and  whether  any  sub- 
sequent shoveling  in  getting  the  concrete  to  its  final  resting  place 
constitutes  a  "turn."  It  seems  but  fair  to  count  each  handling  with 
the  shovel  as  a  turn,  no  matter  when  or  where  it  occurs,  but  in- 
spectors will  not  always  look  upon  it  in  that  light. 

The  foregoing  costs  of  mixing  apply  to  work  done  by  diligent 
men ;  but  easy-going  men  will  make  the  cost  25  to  50%  greater. 
I  have  seen  this  latter  class  of  men  most  frequently  on  day  labor 
work  for  cities,  railways  and  other  companies  and  corporations 
who'se  foremen  have  little  or  no  incentive  to  secure  a  fair  day's  work 
from  the  men. 

Cost  of  Loading  and  Hauling  Concrete.— The  cost  of  loading  con- 
crete, after  it  is  mixed,  is  less  than  the  cost  of  loading  the  materials 
separately  before  mixing,  .because  while  the  weight  is  greater  (due 
to  the  added  water),  the  bulk  or  volume  of  the  concrete  is  much  less 
than  the  volume  of  the  ingredients  before  mixing.  Moreover  a 
smooth  mixing  board,  and  the  presence  of  the  foreman,  secures  more 
rapid  work.  In  shoveling  any  material  a  large  part  of  the  work 
consists  in  forcing  the  shovel  into,  or  under,  the  mass  to  be  lifted. 
With  wages  at  15  cts.  per  hour,  the  cost  of  loading  concrete  into  bar- 
rows or  buckets  should  not  exceed  12  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  cost  of 
wheeling  it  after  loading  is  practically  the  'same  as  for  wheeling 
the  dry  ingredients,  as  given  by  the  rule  on  page  272.  The  cost  per 
cubic  yard  of  loading  and  wheeling  is  therefore  given  by  this  rule  : 
To  a  fixed  cost  of  16  cts.  (for  loading  and  lost  time)  add  1  ct.  for 
every  30  ft.  of  level  haul. 

If  the  concrete  must  be  elevated,  a  gallows  frame,  or  a  mast  with 
a  pulley  block  at  the  top,  a  team  of  horses  and  a  rope  for  hoisting 
the  skip  load  of  concrete,  can  often  be  used  to  advantage. 

Another  method,  well  worthy  of  more  frequent  use,  consists  in 
wheeling  the  barrows  of  concrete  to  a  gallows  frame  where  they 
are  raised  by  a  horse,  and  when  wheeled  to  place. 

In  building  railway  abutments,  culverts,  and  the  like,  it  is  often 
desirable  to  locate  the  mixing  board  on  high  ground,  perhaps  at  some 
little  distance  from  the  forms.  If  this  can  be  done,  the  use  of  der- 
ricks may  be  avoided  as  above  suggested  or  by  building  a  light  pole 
trestle  from  the  mixing  board  to  the  forms.  The  concrete  can  then 
be  wheeled  in  barrows  and  dumped  into  the  forms.  If  the  mixing 
board  can  be  located  on  ground  as  high  as  the  top  of  the  concrete 
structure  is  to  be,  obviously  a  trestle  will  enable  the  men  to  wheel 
on  a  level  runway.  Such  a  trestle  can  be  built  very  cheaply,  espe- 
cially where  second-hand  lumber,  or  lumber  that  can  be  used  subse- 
quently for  forms  is  available.  A  pole  trestle  whose  bents  are  made 
entirely  of  round  sticks  cut  from  the  forest  is  a  very  cheap  structure, 
If  a  foreman  knows  how  to  throw  it  together  and  up-end  the  bents 
after  they  are  made.  I  have  put  up  such  trestles  for  25  cts.  per  lin. 
ft.  of  trestle,  including  all  labor  of  cutting  the  round  timber,  erecting 
It,  and  placing  a  plank  flooring  4  ft.  wide  on  top.  The  stringers  and 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  557 

flooring  plank  were  used  later  for  forms,  and  their  cost  is  not  in- 
cluded. A  trestle  100  ft.  long  can  thus  be  built  at  less  cost  than 
hauling,  erecting  and  taking  down  a  derrick ;  and  once  the  trestle 
is  up  it  saves  the  cost  of  operating  a  derrick. 

Concrete  made  with  Portland  cement  (but  not  with  natural  ce- 
ment) can  be  hauled  long  distances  in  a  cart  or  wagon  before  it 
begins  to  harden.  This  fact  should  be  taken  advantage  of  by  con- 
tractors far  oftener  than  it  is.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the 
extensive  use  of  natural  cement,  which  sets  too  quickly  to  admit  of 
hauling  far,  has  blinded  contractors  to  the  possibilities  of  saving 
money  by  hauling  Portland  cement  concrete  long  distances.  Since  a 
cart  is  readily  hauled  at  a  speed  of  200  ft.  a  minute,  where  there  are 
no  long  steep  hills,  it  is  evident  that  in  G1/^  minutes  a  cart  can  travel 
a  quarter  of  a  mile;  in  13  minutes,  half  a  mile;  and  in  26  min- 
utes, a  mile.  Portland  cement  does  not  begin  to  set  for  30  minutes  ; 
hence  it  may  be  hauled  a  mile  after  mixing  it.  The  cost  of  hauling 
concrete  with  one-horse  dump-carts  is  practically  the  same  as  the 
cost  of  hauling  its  dry  ingredients. 

Cost  of  Dumping,  Spreading  and  Ramming. — The  cost  of  dump- 
ing wheelbarrows  and  carts  is  included  in  the  rules  of  cost  already 
given,  excepting  that  in  some  cases  it  is  necessary  to  add  the  wages 
of  a  man  at  the  dump  who  assists  the  cart  drivers  or  the  barrow 
men.  Thus  in  dumping  concrete  from  barrows  into  a  deep  trench 
or  pit,  it  is  usually  advisable  to  dump  into  a  galvanized  iron  hopper 
provided  with  an  iron  pipe  chute.  One  man  can  readily  dump  all 
the  barrows  that  can  be  filled  from  a  concrete  mixer  in  a  day,  say 
150  cu.  yds.  At  this  rate  of  output  the  cost  of  dumping  would 
be  only  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  but  if  one  man  were  required  to  dump  the 
output  of  a  small  gang  of  men,  say  25  cu.  yds.,  the  cost  of  dumping 
would  be  6  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Concrete  dumped  through  a  chute  requires  very  little  work  to 
spread  it  in  6-in.  layers ;  and,  in  fact,  concrete  that  can  be  dumped 
from  wheelbarrows,  which  do  not  all  dump  in  one  place,  can  be 
spread  very  cheaply ;  for  not  more  than  half  the  pile  dumped  from 
the  barrow  needs  to  be  moved,  and  then  moved  merely  by  pushing 
with  a  shovel.  Since  the  spreader  also  rams  the  concrete,  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  separate  these  two  items.  As  nearly  as  I  have  been  able  to 
estimate  this  item  of  spreading  "dry"  concrete  dumped  from  wheel- 
barrows in  street  paving  work,  the  cost  is  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  If,  on 
the  other  hand,  nearly  all  the  concrete  must  be  handled  by  the 
spreaders,  as  in  spreading  concrete  dumped  from  carts,  the  cost  is 
fully  double,  or  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  And  if  the  spreader  has  to 
walk  even  3  or  4  paces  to  place  the  concrete  after  shoveling  it  up, 
the  cost  of  spreading  will  be  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  For  this  reason  it  is 
apparent  that  carts  are  not  as  economical  as  wheelbarrows  for 
hauling  concrete  up  to  about  200  ft.,  due  to  the  added  cost  of 
spreading  material  delivered  by  carts. 

The  preceding  discussion  of  spreading  is  based  upon  the  assump- 
tion that  the  concrete  is  not  so  wet  that  it  will  run.  Obviously 


558  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

where  concrete  is  made  of  small  stones  and  contains  an  excess  of 
water,  it  will  run  so  readily  as  to  require  little  or  no  spreading. 

The  cost  of  ramming  concrete  depends  almost  entirely  upon  its 
flryness  and  upon  the  number  of  cubic  yards  delivered  to  the  ram- 
mers. Concrete  that  is  mixed  with  very  little  water  requires  long 
and  hard  ramming  to  flush  the  water  to  the  surface.  The  yardage 
delivered  to  the  rammers  is  another  factor,  because  if  only  a  few 
men  are  engaged  in  mixing  they  will  not  be  able  to  deliver  enough 
concrete  to  keep  the  rammers  properly  busy,  yet  the  rammers  by 
slow  though  continuous  pounding  may  be  keeping  up  an  appearance 
of  working.  Then,  again,  I  have  noticed  that  the  slower  the  con- 
crete is  delivered  the  more  particular  the  average  inspector  be- 
comes. Concrete  made  "sloppy"  requires  no  ramming  at  all,  and 
very  little  spading. 

I  have  had  men  do  very  thorough  ramming  of  moderately  dry 
concrete  for  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  where  the  rammers  had  no  spread- 
ing to  do,  the  material  being  delivered  in  shovels.  It  is  rare  indeed 
that  spreading  and  ramming  can  be  made  to  cost  more  than  40  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.,  under  the  most  foolish  inspection,  yet  one  instance  is  re- 
corded below  of  even  higher  cost. 

If  engineers  specify  a  dry  concrete  and  "thorough  ramming"  they 
would  do  well  also  to  specify  what  the  word  "thorough"  is  to  mean, 
using  language  that  can  be  expressed  in  cents  per  cubic  yard.  It  is 
a  common  thing,  for  example,  to  see  a  sewer  trench  specification  in 
which  one  tamper  is  required  for  each  two  men  shoveling  the  back- 
fill into  the  trench ;  and  some  such  specific  requirement  should  be 
made  in  a  concrete  specification  if  close  estimates  from  reliable 
contractors  are  desired.  Surely  no  engineer  will  claim  that  this  is 
too  unimportant  a  matter  for  consideration  when  it  is  known  that 
ramming  can  easily  be  made  to  cost  as  high  as  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
depending  largely  upon  the  whim  of  the  inspector. 

Example  of  High  Cost  of  Tamping. — Mr.  Herman  Conrow  is 
authority  for  the  following  data :  1  foreman,  9  men  mixing,  1  ram- 
ming, averaged  15  cu.  yds.  a  day,  or  only  1%  cu.  yds.  per  man  per 
day,  when  laying  wet  concrete.  When  laying  dry  concrete  the  same 
gang  averaged  only  8  cu.  yds.  a  day,  there  being  4  men  ramming. 
With  foreman  at  $2  and  laborers  at  $1.50  a  day,  the  cost  was  $2.12 
per  cu.  yd.  for  labor  on  the  dry  concrete  as  against  $1.13  per  cu.  yd. 
for  the  wet  concrete.  Three  turnings  of  the  stone  with  a  wet  mortar 
effected  a  better  mixture  than  four  turnings  with  a  dry  mortar. 
The  ramming  of  the  wet  concrete  cost  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  whereas 
the  ramming  of  the  dry  concrete  cost  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  I  think 
this  is  the  highest  cost  on  record  for  ramming.  It  is  evident,  how- 
ever, that  the  men  were  under  a  poor  foreman,  for  an  output  of 
only  15  cu.  yds.  per  day  with  10  men  is  very  low  for  ordinary  con- 
ditions. Moreover,  the  high  cost  of  ramming  indicates  either  poor 
management  or  the  most  foolish  inspection  requirements. 

Cost  of  Rolling  and  Finishing  Concrete  Floors. — I  am  indebted  to 
Mr.  Ernest  L.  Ransome  for  the  following: 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  559 

When  concrete  floors  are  built  directly  on  the  ground,  there  is  no 
necessity  of  having  a  concrete  as  rich  in  cement  as  when  the  floor 
spans  an  opening.  A  mixture  of  1  part  Portland  cement,  4  parts 
sand  and  8  parts  gravel  or  broken  stone  is  strong  enough,  and  this 
requires  less  than  three-quarters  of  a  barrel  of  cement  per  cubic 
yard.  If  hand  mixing  is  used,  more  cement  is  needed,  but  we  are 
assuming  that  the  materials  are  thoroughly  mixed.  Actual  tests 
have  demonstrated  that  more  cement  is  required  with  hand  mixing 
than  with  machine  mixing. 

The  concrete  should  be  spread  in  a  layer  3  to  5  ins.  thick,  depend- 
ing upon  the  nature  of  the  subsoil  and  the  loads  the  floor  will  have 
to  support.  Then  the  concrete  should  be  rolled,  for  rolling  is  more 
effective  than  tamping  and  costs  far  less.  The  first  attempts  at 
rolling  were  unsuccessful  because  a  roller  of  too  great  weight  was 
used.  Mr.  Ransome  discovered  that  a  light  roller  should  be  used 
for  the  first  rolling,  followed  by  rolling  with  a  heavier  roller,  and 
finishing  with  a  roller  still  heavier. 

The  Ransome  Concrete  Machy.  Co.,  of  Dunellen,  N.  J.,  makes 
rollers  of  three  sizes  to  be  used  successively,  weighing:  No.  1,  290 
Ibs. ;  No.  2,  375  Ibs. ;  No.  3,  645  Ibs. 

One  laborer  will  readily  roll  7,500  sq.  ft.  in  a  9-hr.  day.  If  the 
floor  is  4  ins.  thick,  this  is  equivalent  to  nearly  100  cu.  yds.  With 
wages  at  $1.50  a  day,  the  cost  is  0.2  ct.  per  sq.  ft.,  or  1^  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  for  the  rolling. 

An  interesting  fact  about  rolling  concrete  is  this :  The  water  is 
flushed  to  the  surface  and  may  even  run  off  in  a  thin  stream,  but  the 
water  is  perfectly  clear,  carrying  no  cement  in  suspension.  Where- 
as, when  concrete  is  tamped,  the  water  is  milky,  due  to  the  cement 
that  is  flushed  to  the  surface. 

After  the  concrete  is  rolled,  a  finishing  coat  of  mortar  is  applied. 

Most  contractors  have  finished  floors  with  a  coating  of  cement 
mortar  immediately  following  the  laying  of  the  body  of  the  floor. 
There  are  several  objections  to  this  practice.  In  the  first  place, 
should  a  heavy  rain  fall  before  the  floor  is  roofed  over,  the  surface 
will  be  damaged.  This  objection,  however,  is  not  so  serious  as 
another.  Scaffolding  placed  on  green  concrete  mars  its  surface,  and, 
in  addition  to  this,  drippings  of  mortar  and  concrete  from  above 
spoil  the  surface.  Moreover,  it  is  very  difficult  to  put  a  finishing  coat 
on  reinforced  concrete  floors  when  they  are  still  soft.  To  escape 
these  objections  Mr.  Ransome  invented  "Ransomite,"  which  is  a 
liquid  that  causes  new  concrete  to  adhere  to  old.  The  body  of  a  con- 
crete floor  is  built,  as  above  described,  and  the  finishing  coat  is  not 
put  on  until  the  scaffolding  and  forms  are  removed  from  above. 
Then  the  floor  is  given  a  wash  of  "Ransomite,"  at  a  cost  of  approxi- 
mately %  ct.  per  sq.  ft.  for  material  and  labor.  Upon  the  floor  is 
spread  a  layer  of  cement  mortar  %  to  1  in.  thick,  the  mortar  being 
1  part  Portland  cement  to  2  parts  sand. 

A  skilled  finisher  at  $4  a  day,  with  a  helper  at  $2.50,  will  finish 
500  sq.  ft.  of  floor  in  a  day.  Considerably  more  than  1,000  sq.  ft 


560  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

a  day  have  been  finished  by  a  skillful  and  willing  man,  but,  assum- 
ing only  500  sq.  ft.  a  day,  the  cost  of  finishing  is  about  1%  cts. 
per  sq.  ft. 

For  further  data  on  finishing  floors,  see  the  part  of  the  section  on 
Roads  and  Pavements  where  costs  of  cement  walks  are  given. 

Cost  of  Superintendence.— This  item  is  obviously  dependent  upon 
the  yardage  of  concrete  handled  under  one  foreman  and  the  daily 
wages  of  the  foreman.  If  a  foreman  receives  $3  a  day  and  is  boss- 
ing a  job  where  only  12  cu.  yds.  are  placed  daily,  we  have  a  cost  of 
25  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  superintendence.  If  the  same  foreman  is 
handling  a  gang  of  20  men  whose  output  is  50  cu.  yds.,  the  super- 
intendence item  is  only  6  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  If  the  same  foreman  is 
handling  a  concrete-mixing  plant  having  a  daily  output  of  150  cu. 
yds.,  the  cost  of  superintendence  is  but  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  I  have 
given  these  elementary  examples  simply  because  figures  are  more 
impressive  than  generalities,  and  because  it  is  so  common  a  sight  to 
see  money  wasted  by  running  too  small  a  gang  of  men  under  one 
foreman. 

Of  all  classes,  of  contract  work,  none  is  more  readily  estimated  day 
by  day  than  concrete  work,  not  only  because  it  is  usually  built  in 
regular  shapes  whose  volumes  are  easily  ascertained  at  the  end  of 
each  day,  bftt  because  a  record  of  the  bags,  or  barrels,  or  batches 
gives  a  ready  method  of  computing  the  output  of  each  gang.  For 
this  reason  small  gangs  of  concrete  workers  need  no  foreman  at  all, 
provided  one  of  the  workers  is  given  command  and  required  to  keep 
tally  of  the  batches.  If  the  efficiency  of  a  gang  of  6  men  were  to  fall 
off,  say,  15%,  by  virtue  of  having  no  regular  non-working  foreman 
in  charge,  the  loss  would  be  only  $1.35  a  day — a  loss  that  would  be 
more  than  counterbalanced  by  the  saving  of  a  foreman's  wages.  In- 
deed, the  efficiency  of  a  gang  of  men  would  have  to  fall  off  25%, 
or  more,  before  it  would  pay  to  put  a  foreman  in  charge.  I  know 
by  experience  that  in  many  cases  the  efficiency  will  not  fall  off  at  all, 
provided  the  gang  knows  that  its  daily  progress  is  being  recorded, 
and  that  prompt  discharge  will  follow  laziness.  Indeed,  I  have  more 
than  once  had  the  efficiency  increased  by  leaving  a  small  gang  to 
themselves  in  command  of  one  of  the  workers  who  was  required  to 
punch  a  hole  in  a  card  for  every  batch. 

To  reduce  the  cost  of  superintendence  there  is  no  surer  method 
than  to  work  two  gangs  of  18  to  20  men,  side  by  side,  each  gang 
under  a  separate  foreman  who  is  striving  to  make  a  better  showing 
than  his  competitor.  This  is  done  with  marked  advantage  in  street 
paving,  and  could  be  done  elsewhere  oftener  than  it  is. 

In  addition  to  the  cost  of  a  foreman  in  direct  charge  of  the  labor- 
ers, there  is  always  a  percentage  of  the  cost  of  general  superintend- 
ence and  office  expenses  to  be  added.  In  some  cases  a  general 
superintendent  is  put  in  charge  of  one  or  two  foremen  ;  and,  if  he  is 
a  high-salaried  man,  the  cost  of  superintendence  becomes  a  very 
appreciable  item. 

Summary  of   Costs   of   Making  Concrete   by    Hand. — Having  thus 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  561 

analyzed  the  costs  of  making  and  placing  concrete,  we  can  under- 
stand why  it  is  that  printed  records  of  costs  vary  so  greatly.  More- 
over, we  are  enabled  to  estimate  the  labor  cost  with  far  more  accu- 
racy than  we  can  guess  it ;  for  by  studying  the  requirements  of  the 
specifications,  and  the  local  conditions  governing  the  placing  of  stock 
piles,  mixing  boards,  etc.,  we  can  estimate  each  item  with  consid- 
erable accuracy.  My  purpose,  however,  has  not  been  solely  to  show 
how  to  predict  the  labor  cost,  but  also  to  indicate  to  contractors  and 
their  foremen  some  of  the  many  possibilities  of  reducing  the  cost  of 
work  once  the  contract  has  been  secured.  I  have  found  that  an 
analysis  of  costs,  such  as  above  given,  is  the  most  effective  way  of 
discovering  unnecessary  "leaks,"  and  of  opening  one's  eyes  to  the 
possibilities  of  effecting  economies  in  any  given  case. 

To  indicate  the  method  of  summarizing  the  costs  of  making  con- 
crete by  hand,  let  us  assume  that  the  concrete  is  to  be  put  into  a 
deep  foundation  requiring  wheeling  a  distance  of  30  ft.  ;  that  the 
stock  piles  are  on  plank  60  ft.  distant  from  the  mixing  board  ;  that 
the  specifications  call  for  6  turns  of  gravel  concrete  thoroughly 
rammed  in  6-in.  layers ;  and  that  a  good  sized  gang  of,  say,  16  men 
(at  $1.50  a  day  each)  is  to  work  under  a  foreman  receiving  $2.70 
a  day.  We  then  have  the  following  summary  by  applying  the  rules 
already  given : 

*  Per  cu.  yd. 
concrete. 

Loading  sand,  stone  and  cement $  .17 

Wheeling  60  ft.   in  barrows   (4  +  2  cts. ) 06 

Mixing  concrete,   6  turns  at  5  cts 30 

Loading   concrete   into    barrows 12 

Wheeling  30  ft.    (4  +  1  ct.) 05 

Dumping  barrows    (1  man   helping  barrowman)  .  .      .05 
Spreading  and  heavy  ramming 15 

Total   cost   of  labor $  .90 

Foreman  at  $2.70  a  day 10 

Grand    total $1.00 

To  estimate  the  daily  output  of  this  gang  of  16  laborers  proceed 

„  thus:     Divide  the  daily  wages  of  all  the  16  men,  expressed  in  cents, 

by  the  labor  cost  of  the  concrete  in  cents,  the  quotient  will  be  the 

cubic  yards  output  of  .the  gang.  ,  Thus,  2,400  -j-  90  is  27  cu.  yds.  in 

this  case. 

In  street  paving  work  where  no  man  is  needed  to  help  dump  the 
wheelbarrows,  and  where  it  is  usually  possible  to  shovel  concrete 
direct  from  the  mixing  board  into  place,  and  where  half  as  much 
ramming  as  above  assumed  is  usually  satisfactory,  we  see  that  the 
last  four  labor  items  instead  of  amounting  to  12  +  5  +  5  +  15,  or  37 
cts.,  amount  only  to  one-half  of  the  last  item,  %  of  15  cts.,  or  7  Ms 
cts.  This  makes  the  total  labor  cost  only  60  cts.  instead  of  90  cts. 
If  we  divide  2,400  cts.  (the  total  day's  wages  of  16  men)  by  60  cts. 
(the  labor  cost  per  cu.  yd.),  we  have  40  which  is  the  cubic  yards  out- 
put of  the  16  men.  This  greater  output  of  the  16  men  reduces  the 
cost  of  superintendence  to  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 


562  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Mixing  Concrete  With  Machine — Care  must  be  taken  not 
to  confuse  the  cost  of  mixing  concrete  with  the  cost  of  delivering  ma- 
terials to  the  mixer  and  conveying  the  concrete  away  from  the  mixer. 
A  study  of  the  various  costs  given  on  subsequent  pages  will  show 
that  the  cost  of  mixing  alone  is  only  a  small  part  of  the  total  cost 
of  making  concrete. 

If  all  the  materials  are  delivered  to  the  machine  in  wheelbarrows, 
and  if  the  concrete  is  conveyed  away  in  wheelbarrows,  the  cost  of 
making  concrete,  even  with  machine  mixers,  is  high.  On  the  other 
hand,  where  the  materials  are  fed  from  bins  by  gravity  into  the 
mixer,  and  where  the  concrete  is  hauled  away  in  cars,  the  cost  of 
making  the  concrete  may  be  very  low. 

There  are  three  types  of  mixers :  (1 )  Batch  mixers  ;  ( 2 )  continu- 
ous mixers ;  ( 3 )  gravity  mixers.  Cube  mixers,  double-cone  mixers, 
and  drum  mixers  are  batch  mixers  in  which  a  charge  is  rotated 
for  10  or  15  turns  and  then  discharged  all  at  once.  The  con- 
tinuous mixers  have  paddles  or  plows  that  stir  up  the  materials  as 
fast  as  they  are  delivered,  a  continuous  stream  of  concrete  being 
discharged.  In  one  type  of  gravity  mixer  the  falling  materials  strike 
baffle  plates  which  perform  the  mixing.  In  the  more  common  type 
(the  Hains),  the  materials  pass  through  three  funnel-shaped  hop- 
pers, the  hour  glass  action  causing  the  mixing. 

Batch  mixers  are  commonly  made  in  three  sizes,  ^-yd.,  %-yd.  and 
1-yd.  It  is  generally  considered  sufficient  to  give  the  mixer  10  or 
15  turns,  occupying  1  to  1%  mins.,  after  charging  it  with  a  batch; 
but  as  some  time  is  consumed  in  charging  and  discharging,  etc.,  it  is 
safe  to  count  on  only  one  batch  every  3  mins.,  or  200  batches  in  10 
hrs.  If  each  batch  is  %-yd.,  the  daily  output  is  100  cu.  yds. ;  if 
the  batch  is  1  yd.,  the  daily  output  is  200  cu.  yds. 

Where  the  work  is  well  organized,  and  no  delays  occur  in  deliver- 
ing the  materials  to  the  mixer,  a  batch  every  2  mins.,  or  300  batches 
in  10  hrs.,  will  be  averaged ;  and  there  are  a  few  records  of  1  batch 
every  1%  mins.,  and  even  less. 

Not  more  than  12  hp.  are  required  to  run  a  %-yd.  mixer.  Where 
materials  are  delivered  from  bins  or  skips,  2  men  will  charge  a  %-yd. 
mixer  and  1  man  will  attend  to  dumping  it,-  and  a  gasoline  engine 
consuming  10  gals,  of  gasoline  per  10-hr,  day  at  12%  cts.  per  gal., 
will  represent  the  full  cost  of  labor  and  fuel  for  mixing  200  cu.  yds. 
If  the  2  men  are  paid  $1.50  each,  and  1  man  at  $1.75,  the  cost  of 
labor  and  fuel  is  only  $6.00,  or  3  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  It  is  not  in  the 
mixing,  therefore,  that  the  money  is  consumed,  but  in  conveying  ma- 
terials to  and  from  the  mixer,  in  ramming  the  concrete,  in  installing 
the  plant  for  mixing  and  conveying,  and  in  interest  and  depreciation 
charges. 

For  tables  of  sizes,  weights,  capacities,  etc.,  of  mixers  made  by  11 
different  manufacturers,  see  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construc- 
tion," p.  660.  etc. 

A  batch  mixer  will,  in  general,  require  the  following  engine  power: 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  563 

HP. 

%  cu.  yd.  batch  mixer 7 

%  cu.  yd.  batch  mixer 10    , 

%  cu.  yd.  batch  mixer 14 

1   cu.   yd.   batch  mixer. 20 

It  is  wise  to  provide  a  boiler  power  about  50%  in  excess  of  the 
engine  power. 

The  weights  of  batch  mixers,  with  and  without  engine  and  boiler, 
seldom  exceed  the  following: 

Size  of  batch,  cu.  yd %  %  %  1 

Weight  of  mixer  on  skids,  Ibs 3,500          3,800          6,000          0,700 

Ditto  with  engine  and  boiler,  Ibs 7,000         7,500       12,000       13,500 

Prices  vary  considerably,  but,  for  purposes  of  estimating,  assume 
about  10  cts.  per  Ib. 

The  above  sizes  of  "batches"  are  based  not  upon  the  loose  meas- 
ure of  the  materials,  but  of  the  concrete  rammed  in  place. 

Cost  of  Mixing  With  a  Gravity  Mixer.— Mr.  G.  B.  Ashcroft  states 
that  a  small  gravity  mixer  of  the  Hains  type  was  used  in  the  build- 
ing of  a  dock  for  The  William  Skinner  Ship-Building  &  Dry  Dock 
Co.,  of  Baltimore,  Md.  It  consisted  of  two  conical  hoppers,  one 
above  the  other,  and  above  these  were  four  small  pyramidal  hop- 
pers for  measuring  the  sand  and  stone,  and  above  these  were  small 
bins.  One  man  at  each  conical  hopper  tending  the  gates,  and  two 
men  at  the  pyramidal  hoppers  (4  men  in  all)  constituted  the  gang  on 
the  mixer.  A  scow  load  of  sand  and  another  of  broken  stone  were 
hauled  alongside  the  bulkhead  on  which  the  mixer  stood,  and  a 
clamshell  bucket  dredge  was  used  to  load  the  sand  and  stone  from 
the  scows  into  the  bins  of  the  mixer.  Each  batch  was  25  cu.  ft.  of 
1:2:5  concrete  rammed  into  place.  The  record  for  10  hrs.  was  110 
batches,  making  about  35  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  as  the  labor  cost.  Wages 
of  common  laborers  were  $1.50.  The  concrete  was  run  directly  into 
place  through  chutes ;  and  the  mixer  was  moved  from  place  to 
place  by  means  of  the  dredge  boom. 

On  the  Cedar  Grove  Reservoir,  built  for  Newark,  N.  J.,  a  large 
gravity  mixer  of  the  Hains  type  was  used.  The  best  day's  output 
was  403  cu.  yds.  ;  the  average  output  during  the  best  month  was 
302  cu.  yds.  ;  and  the.  average  of  the  whole  job  was  225  cu.  yds.  per 
10-hr,  day.  The  stone,  sand  and  cement  were  all  raised  by  'bucket 
elevators'  to  the  top  of  the  high  wooden  tower  that  supported  the 
bins  and  the  mixer.  There  were  10  men  operating  the  mixer,  so  that 
(exclusive  of  power,  interest  and  depreciation)  the  labor  cost  of 
mixing  averaged  only  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  ;  and  during  one  month  it 
was  as  low  as  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  This  does  not  include  delivering 
the  materials  to  the  men  at  the  mixer,  nor  does  it  include  conveying 
the  concrete  away  and  placing  it.  The  work  was  done  by  contract. 

On  the  Pittsburg  filter  construction  in  1906,  a  Hains  mixer  was 
used,  and  its  output  was  500  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day. 

Cost  of  Forms. — It  is  a  common  practice  to  record  the  cost  of 
forms  or  molds  in  cents  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete,  giving  separately 
the  cost  of  lumber  and  labor.  This  should  be  done,  but  the  analysis 
of  the  cost  of  forms  should  always  be  carried  a  step  farther.  The 


564  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

records  should  be  so  kept  as  to  show  the  first  cost  per  M  (i.  e.,  1,000 
ft.  B.  M.)  of  lumber,  the  number  of  times  the  lumber  is  used,  the 
labor  cost  of  erecting,  and  the  labor  cost  of  taking  down  the  forms 
each  time — all  expressed  in  M  ft.  B.  M.  Thus  only  is  it  possible 
to  compare  the  cost  of  forms  on  different  kinds  of  concrete  work, 
and  thus  only  can  accurate  predictions  be  made  of  the  cost  of  forms 
for  concrete  work  having  dimensions  differing  from  work  previously 
done.  It  is  well  also  to  make  record  of  the  number  of  square  feet 
of  exposed  concrete  surface  to  which  the  forms  were  applied.  There 
are  three  ways,  therefore,  of  recording  the  cost  of  forms:  (1)  In 
cents  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete;  (2)  in  cents  per  square  foot  of 
concrete  face  to  which  forms  are  applied ;  and  ( 3 )  in  dollars  per  M 
ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  used — in  all  three  cases  keeping  the  cost  of  ma- 
terials and  labor  separate.  Furthermore,  it  is  well  to  make  a 
sketch  of  the  construction  of  the  forms,  and  attach  the  sketch  to  the 
record  of  cost. 

In  estimating  the  probable  cost  of  forms  I  find  the  following 
method  most  reliable :  First,  after  ascertaining  the  time  limit  within 
which  the  work  must  be  completed,  determine  the  number  of  cubic- 
yards  of  concrete  that  must  be  laid  each  day,  after  allowing  liberally 
for  delays.  Knowing  the  number  of  cubic  yards,  estimate  the  num- 
ber of  thousand  feet  board  measure  of  forms  required  to  encase  the 
concrete  to  be  placed  in  a  day.  This  will  give  the  minimum  amount 
of  lumber  required,  for  it  is  never  permissible  to  move  the  forms 
until  the  concrete  has  hardened  over  night,  except  when  concrete  is 
in  a  small  arch,  as  in  a  sewer.  This  brings  us  to  a  very  important 
question  in  economics.  Thousands  of  words  have  been  written  on 
the  advantages  and  disadvantages  of  using  "Wet"  or  "dry"  con- 
crete, but  I  have  never  seen  mention  of  one  of  the  most  forceful  ob- 
jections to  the  use  of  concrete  mixed  so  wet  that  it  is  sloppy.  I 
refer  to  the  slowness  with  which  such  concrete  hardens.  Obviously, 
the  more  slowly  it  hardens,  the  longer  must  the  forms  be  left  in 
place ;  and  the  longer  the  forms  are  left  in  place  the  more  lumber 
will  be  required ;  the  more  the  lumber,  the  greater  the  cost  of  forms 
per  cubic  yard  of  concrete. 

A  concrete  mixed  "dry,"  and  rammed,  will  harden  over  night,  so 
that  in  retaining  wall  construction  it  is  safe  to  remove  the  forms 
the  next  morning ;  but,  where  the  concrete  has  been  mixed  "sloppy," 
I  have  seen  whole  sections  of  wall  fall  out  upon  the  removal  of  forms 
twelve  hours  after  placing,  the  concrete.  In  cold  weather  the  setting 
is  further  delayed,  and  in  very  cold  weather  it  may  cease  entirely 
unless  proper  precautions  are  taken.  Specifications  relating  to 
sloppy  concrete  usually  provide  that  wall  forms  shall  not  be  moved 
within  48  hrs.  after  placing  the  concrete;  but  in  hot  weather  it  is 
often  safe  to  remove  the  forms  in  24  hrs.  or  less. 

Forms  for  concrete  arches  or  beams  must  obviously  be  left  in 
place  longer  than  in  wall  work,  because  of  the  tendency  to  fall  by 
rupture  across  the  arch  or  beam.  Forms  for  small  circular  arches, 
like  sewers,  may  be  removed  in  18  to  24  hrs.  if  dry  concrete  is  used; 
but  in  24  to  48  hrs.  if  wet  concrete  is  used.  Forms  for  large  arch 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  565 

culverts  and  arch  bridges  are  seldom  taken  down  in  less  than  14 
days,  and  it  is  often  specified  that  they  must  not  be  struck  for  28 
days  after  placing  the  last  of  the  concrete.  This  last  requirement  is 
probably  necessary  where  the  backfilling  over  the  arch  is  put  on  at 
once ;  but,  except  in  the  case  of  arches  of  great  span,  there  appears 
to  be  no  sufficient  reason  for  keeping  the  centers  so  long  under  the 
arch,  provided  they  can  be  used  elsewhere.  Indeed,  I  am  inclined  to 
think  that  a  week's  time  is  ample  for  arches  having  a  span  of  40  ft. 
or  less,  provided  no  filling  is  placed  on  the  arch.  In  fact,  a  study  of 
the  compressive  strength  tests  given  in  Falk's  "Cements,  Mortars 
and  Concretes,"  pages  128,  131,  etc.,  shows  that  the  difference  of 
compressive  strength  between  7 -day  and  28-day  Portland  cement 
mortar  and  concrete  is  often  less  than  25%,  and  averages  about  50%; 
and  that  in  any  case  concrete  a  week  old  is  amply  strong  enough  to 
hold  its  own  weight  in  an  arch  of  moderate  size.  Progressive  set- 
tlement of  the  abutments  might  in  some  cases  be  given  as  a  reason 
for  leaving  centers  a  long  time  in  place,  but  abutments  founded 
on  rock  or  on  piles  do  not  show  progressive  settlement  after  the 
striking  of  centers,  unless  the  subsequent  jarring  of  trains  causes 
the  piles  to  go  down. 

Forms  supporting  concrete-steel  floors  and  beams  are  usually  left 
in  a  place  at  least  a  week. 

The  consideration  of  the  time  element  in  the  use  of  forms  is  es- 
sential in  making  an  accurate  forecast  of  the  quantity  of  lumber 
that  will  be  required  in  any  given  case.  A  few  additional  sugges- 
tions will  not,  therefore,  be  out  of  place. 

Often  the  uprights  of  studs  used  to  hold  the  sheeting  plank  are 
also  used  as  legs  for  a  trestle  to  support  a  track  or  runway  over 
which  the  concrete  is  transported.  In  such  a  case  the  amount  of 
timber  in  the  forms  is  considerably  more  than  would  be  indicated  by 
considering  merely  the  length  of  time  that  the  forms  must  stand  be- 
fore removal;  for,  so  long  as  the  uprights  stand,  it  is  impossible  to 
remove  the  sheeting  plank  where  ordinary  kinds  of  forms  are  used. 
I  have  seen  many  instances  of  unnecessary  expenditure  of  money  for 
forms  due  to  neglect  to  consider  this  fact.  Bear  in  mind,  therefore, 
that  it  may  be  cheaper  to  provide  a  movable  derrick,  or  to  use  a 
cableway  for  delivering  the  concrete,  rather  than  to  use  the  up- 
rights of  the  forms  as  posts  for  a  trestle. 

I  have  found  it  cheaper,  as  a  rule,  to  build  the  coping  of  retaining 
walls  after  finishing  the  wall  itself.  One  of  the  reasons  for  this  is 
that  a  projecting  coping  is  apt  to  fall,  due  to  its  own  weight,  if  the 
forms  are  not  left  in  place  longer  than  it  is  necessary  to  leave  the 
forms  for  the  wall  below  the  coping. 

This  leads  us  to  the  subject  of  building  forms  in  panels  that  can 
be  shifted  from  place  to  place  without  tearing  the  forms  to  pieces 
and  building  them  up  again.  When  panels  can  be  used,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  the  cost  of  labor  and  lumber  for  forms  may  be  reduced  to  a 
few  cents  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete.  Examples  of  low  cost  of  sewer 
work  where  the  forms  are  thus  shifted  in  sections  will  be  found  on 


566  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

subsequent  pages.  Even  high  retaining  walls  may  thus  be  built  with 
movable  forms. 

There  are  few  classes  of  concrete  work  where,  at  the  expense  of 
a  little  thought  in  designing  movable  forms,  a  great  expense  in  lum- 
ber may  not  be  saved. 

Having  estimated  the  quantity  of  lumber  required  for  any  given 
concrete  job,  and  the  number  of  times  that  it  can  be  used,  the  labor 
cost  of  framing,  erecting  and  taking  down  the  forms  may  be  calcu- 
lated thus:  With  carpenters'  wages  at  25  cts.  per  hour,  and  laborers' 
wages  at  15  cts.  per  hour,  working  1  laborer  to  2  carpenters,  my 
records  show  that  ordinary  forms  for  walls,  arches,  etc.,  can  be 
framed  and  erected  for  $6  per  M  ft.  B.  M.,  when  men  are  working 
for  a  contractor.  The  forms  can  be  carefully  torn  apart,  taken 
down  and  moved  a  short  distance,  for  $1.50  per  M;  making  the  total 
labor  cost  $7.50  per  -M  for  each  time  that  the  forms  are  built  up 
and  torn  down.  Where  the  forms  are  built  in  panels  and  are  not 
ripped  apart  and  nailed  together  again  at  every  move,  there  is  only 
the  cost  of  moving  them  each  time  after  they  have  once  been  built, 
and  this  may  not  exceed  50  cts.  per  M  for  each  move.  Moreover 
forms  used  in  panels  last  much  longer  since  the  lumber  is  not  in- 
jured by  being  repeatedly  torn  apart. 

Retaining  walls,  bridge  piers  and  abutments,  etc.,  are  commonly 
provided  with  forms  consisting  of  2-in.  plank  laid  in  horizontal 
courses  against  upright  studs.  The  studs  may  be  of  4  x  6-in.  stuff 
spaced  2  %  ft.  centers,  or  3  x  6-in.  spaced  2  ft.  centers.  In  either 
case  the  lumber  in  the  studs  is  about  40%  as  much  as  the  lumber  in 
the  2-in.  sheeting  plank.  Hence  there  are  2  ft.  B.  M.  of  plank  and 
0.8  ft.  B.  M.  of  studs,  or  a  total  of  2.8  ft.  B.  M.  for  each  square  foot 
of  surface  area  of  concrete.  If  telegraph  wire  is  used  to  hold  the 
studs  from  spreading  (No.  9  wire  weighing  0.06  Ib.  per  ft.),  no  other 
lumber  is  required  ;  but  in  some  designs  of  forms  there  are  inclined 
braces  against  the  stud,  frequently  containing  more  lumber  than  the 
studs  themselves.  Ordinarily  the  same  forms  are  used  several  times, 
so  that  the  2.8  ft.  B.  M.  per  sq.  ft.  does  not  then  mean  per  sq.  ft.  of 
concrete,  but  of  forms,  and  must  be  divided  by  the  number  of  times 
it  is  used  to  estimate  the  lumber  per  sq.  ft.  of  concrete  surface. 
Thus,  if  the  forms  are  used  4  times,  we  have  2. 8  -r  4  =  0.7  ft.  B.  M. 
per  sq.  ft.  of  concrete  surface. 

If  lumber  costs  $25  per  M,  the  cost  of  2.8  ft.  B.  M.  is  7  cts. 
It  can  usually  be  framed  and  erected  for  $8  per  M,  or  2^4  cts.  per 
sq.  ft.  of  forms  containing  2.8  ft.  B.  M.  Hence  if  the  lumber  is  used 
4  times,  we  have  7  -=-  4  —  1  %  cts.,  cost  of  lumber  per  sq.  ft.  of  con- 
crete, plus  2^4  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  for  labor  if  each  time  it  is  taken  down 
and  erected  costs  $8  per  M,  or  a  total  of  4  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  con- 
crete surface,  or  36  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  Hence  if  the  wall  is  3  ft.  thick 
and  requires  forms  on  two  faces  (front  and  rear)  it  will  cost  2  X  36 
cts.  =  72  cts.  for  forms  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete.  If  it  is  6  ft.  thick,  it 
will  cost  36  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete.  If  the  same  sizes  of  lum- 
ber were  used  for  a  wall  only  1  ft.  thick,  the  cost  would  be  $0.36  X 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  567 

S  =  $1.08  por  cu.  yd.  Based  upon  the  above  assumptions  as'  to 
amount  and  cost  of  lumber,  number  of  times  used  (4),  etc.,  we  have 
the  following  rule  : 

To  ascertain  the  cost  of  forms  per  cubic  yard  of  wall,  divide  $2.16 
bi/  the  thickness  of  the  wall  in  feet. 

This  rule  can  be  expressed  in  a  more  general  form  as  follows : 

To  ascertain  the  cost  of  forms  per  cubic  yard  of  wall,  divide  $3.80 
by  the  product  of  the  thickness  of  wall  in  feet  and  the  number  of 
times  the  forms  are  used,  to  estimate  the  cost  of  lumber,  and  to  this 
add  the  cost  of  labor  determined  by  dividing  $1.20  by  the  thickness  of 
the  wall  in  feet. 

In  the  case  of  a  3 -ft.  wall  where  forms  are  used  4  times,  this  rule 
would  give  us : 

$3.80  ^  (3  X  4)  =  $0.32  for  lumber,  to  which  add  $1.20  -^  3  =  $0.40 
for  labor,  making  a  total  of  $0.72  per  cu.  yd. 

For  any  other  price  and  amount  of  lumber  for  forms,  a  similar 
rule  can  readily  be  made.  Such  a  rule  shows  very  clearly  the  rea- 
son why  thin  concrete  walls  where  form  lumber  is  used  only  once  or 
twice  cost  so  much  per  cubic  yard.  Thus,  if  a  wall  were  only  1  ft. 
thick  and  lumber  were  used  but  once,  the  above  rule  would  give  us 
a  cost  of  $5  per  cu.  yd.  for  forms  alone. 

For  further  data  on  the  cost  of  forms  see  particularly  the  sections 
on  Buildings,  Bridges,  and  Sewers.  Consult  the  index  under  "Con- 
crete, Forms." 

Cost  of  Fortification  Work  at  Fort  Point,  Cal.— Mr.  George  H. 
Mendell  gives  the  following  data:  The  work  was  the  construction 
of  fortifications  at  Fort  Point,  near  San  Francisco.  The  following 
experiments  were  made : 


-Experiment- 


No.   1  No  2  No.   3 

cu.  ft.  cu.  ft.  cu.  ft. 

1  bbl.  Portland  cement  measured  loose 4.42  4.58  4.5* 

Water    added „ 2.00  1.75  1.92 

Volume  of  stiff  paste  resulting 4.00  3.80  3.82 

Moist    sand    added 10.12  11.40  13.50 

Water    added 2.00  2.50  2.00 

Volume  of  mortar  resulting. 10.12t  12.30  14.00 

Gravel    added$ 36.50  36.90        

Volume  of  loose  concrete 45.25  43.23        

Volume  of  concrete  tamped  in  place 37.50  

*This  barrel  measured  3%  cu.  ft.  packed. 

fThere  is  some  doubt  as  to  the  accuracy  of  this  measurement, 
for  it  was  recorded  as  9.12  cu.  ft.  although  it  was  probably  10.12. 

JThis  gravel  in  experiment  No.  1,  was  in  %-in.  sizes  down  to 
birdshot ;  in  experiment  No.  2  it  was  the  size  of  beans  and  smaller. 
There  was  a  con  si  ft  Arable  rwrcentage  of  what  should  be  called  sand 
in  the  gravel,  probably 


In  making  the  concrete  all  materials  were  measured  loose  and  a 
barrel  of  cement  was  assumed  to  measure  4%  cu.  ft.  The  propor- 
tions of  a  batch  were  1:3:8;  the  8  being  8X4%,  or  36  cu.  ft.  of 
stone  and  gravel.  In  making  a  mass  of  concrete  60  ft.  long,  40  ft. 


568  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

wide  and  30  ft.  high,  a  careful  record  was  kept  of  the  cost  of  sev- 
eral weeks'  work,  measuring  1,825  cu.  yds.  in  place : 

Cost,  per  cu.  yd. 

0.73  bbl.  cement  at  $2.50 $1.82 

0.83  cu.  yd.  stone 1.40 ; 

0.26  cu.   yd.  gravel 35 

0.31   cu.   yd.   sand 29 

Water     04 

Crushing  stone,*  mixing  and  placing  concrete 80 

Total     ,  $4.70 


*While  it  is  not  definitely  stated  I  infer  from  what  is  said  that 
the  labor  of  crushing  was  about  15  cts. 

Wages  were  $2  per  day  of  8  hrs.  for  laborers,  and  $4  for  foremen. 
The  cost  of  timbering  and  incidental  expenses  is  not  included,  other 
than  the  pay  of  the  men  and  the  foreman.  The  total  volume  of  all 
the  loose  materials,  exclusive  of  the  water,  was  2,767  cu.  yds.  before 
mixing;  after  mixing,  and  measured  in  cars  holding  20  cu.  ft.  each, 
the  volume  was  2,433  cu.  ft.  ;  after  being  rammed  in  place  the 
volume  was  1,825  cu.  yds.  The  shrinkage  of  the  concrete  under 
the  ramming  was  therefore  25%.  A  number  of  experiments  were 
made  on  single  carloads  which  showed  that  a  carload  of  20  cu.  ft. 
of  loose  concrete  made  15  to  15^  cu.  ft.  compacted  in  place. 

The  stone  was  quarried  at  Angel  Island,  and  delivered  on  the 
wharf  in  sizes  suitable  for  a  Gates  crusher,  hauled  in  wagons  to  the 
crusher,  which  delivered  it  to  the  mixer,  into  which  all  the  ingredi- 
ents were  fed  from  hoppers  automatically.  The  mixer  was  of  the 
cylindrical  continuous  type,  and  there  was  difficulty  in  delivering  the 
materials  to  it  automatically  and  in  the  desired  proportions.  The 
concrete  was  delivered  by  the  mixer  into  cars  holding  20  cu.  ft. 
When  a  car  was  filled,  the  door  of  the  mixer  was  closed  for  a  minute, 
during  which  minute  another  car  was  put  in  place,  the  concrete  in 
the  meantime  accumulating  in  the  mixer.  The  cars  were  pushed  by 
men  to  the  place  of  deposit,  a  variable  distance  of  300  to  600  ft., 
and  discharged  through  a  trestle  having  an  extreme  height  of  30  ft., 
gradually  diminishing  to  4  ft.  The  concrete  was  then  shoveled  into 
wheelbarrows  and  wheeled  20  to  40  ft. 

During  the  month  of  August,  1892,  concrete  was  mixed  by  hand  by 
a  gang  of  20  men  under  1  foreman.  The  average  8-hr,  output  was 
45  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  at  a  cost  of  $1  per  cu.  yd.  for  mixing  and 
placing,  wages  being  $2  a  day.  A  batch  consisted  of  4  bbls.  of 
cement  and  144  cu.  ft.  of  gravel  and  stone,  giving  144  cu.  ft.  of 
concrete.  The  materials  were  piled  conveniently  around  the  mixing 
platform.  The  stone  and  gravel  were  delivered  in  barrows  and 
spread  to  an  even  thickness  on  the  platform.  Upon  this  the  sand 
was  wheeled  and  spread  with  a  straight  edge.  The  cement,  also 
leveled,  formed  the  top  layer.  Water  was  added  in  the  turning. 
The  materials  were  turned  twice  with  shovels,  being  well  dispersed 
In  turning.  A  third  turning  resulted  from  shoveling  the  concrete 
into  wheelbarrows,  and  a  fourth  turning  in  distributing  the  concrete. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  569 

There   was   no    ascent   and   the   distances   were    short    in    wheeling 
the  concrete,  and  the  men  were  a  picked  lot. 

Cost  of  Fortification  Work.— Mr.  L.  R.  Grabill  is  authority  for 
the  following  cost  data:  The  work  was  upon  fortifications  built  in 
1899  for  the  U.  S.  Government,  and  was  done  by  contract,  working 
8  hrs.  per  day.  The  following  is  the  average  for  9,000  cu.  yds. : 

Per  day.       Per  cu.  yd. 

6  laborers  wheeling  materials  to  board $   7.50  $0.16 

8   laborers  mixing 10.00  .21 

8  laborers  wheeling  away 10.00  .21 

6  laborers  placing  and  ramming 7.50  .   .16 

1  pumpman    1.25  .02 

1  water  boy .  .      1.00  .02 

1   foreman    2.00  .04 

Total,  48  cu.  yds.  a  day .  .$39.25  $0.82 

Each  batch  contained  %  cu.  yd.  of  1:2-2:3  concrete,  and  was 
turned  four  times. 

The  cost  of  mixing  4,000  cu.  yds.  in  a  machine  mixer  by  day 
labor  (not  by  contract)  was  as  follows: 

Per  day.  Per  cu.  yd. 

32   laborers    $40.00  $0.34 

1  pumpman    1.25  .01 

1  teamster  and  horse 2.00  .02 

2  water  boys 2.00  .02 

1  engineman 1.70  .02 

1  derrick  tender   1.50  .01 

1  fireman    1.50  .01 

1  foreman     2.88  .03 

Fuel   (cement  barrels  largely)    1.25  .01 

Total,  118  cu.  yds.  per  day $54.08  $0.47 

The  average  8-hr,  day's  work  was  168  batches  of  0.7  cu.  yd.  each. 
The  best  day's  work  was  200  batches.  Seven  revolutions  of  the 
4-ft.  cubical  mixer  were  sufficient.  A  12-hp.  engine  operated  the 
mixer  and  served  also  to  hoist  the  material  cars  up  the  incline  to  the 
mixer.  These  cars  were  loaded  through  trap  doors  in  a  bin  contain- 
ing the  materials,  then  the  cement  was  placed  upon  the  load.  The 
material  cars  moved  up  one  incline,  dumped,  and  passed  down  an- 
other incline  on  the  opposite  side.  The  concrete  was  dumped  into  an 
iron  bucket  resting  on  a  car,  hauled  to  one  of  the  two  boom  der- 
ricks. These  derricks  had  80-ft.  booms  and  were  swung  by  bull- 
wheels.  This  plant  cost  about  $5,000.  The  concrete  was  rammed 
in  6-in.  layers  in  all  cases ;  and  it  was  found  advisable  to  have  one 
rammer  to  every  20  batches  deposited  per  day,  in  addition  to  the 
spreaders. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Breakwater,  Buffalo,  N.  Y.— Mr.  Emile  Low 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  cost  of  making  concrete  by  contract 
for  the  Buffalo  Breakwater,  in  1902 :  A  5-ft.  cubical  mixer  was 
mounted  on  a  scow  and  run  by  a  9  x  12-in.  horizontal  engine.  The 
concrete  was  1:2:1:4  cement,  sand,  gravel  and  stone.  The  voids 
in  the  sand  and  gravel  were  27%,  in  the  unscreened  limestone,  39%. 
A  bag  of  cement  was  assumed  to  be  0.9  cu.  ft.  The  materials  were 


570  ILIXDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

stored  in  canal  boats  alongside.  The  sand  was  loaded  by  3  shovelers 
into  wheelbarrows  holding  3.6  cu.  ft.  each,  and  wheeled  in  tandem 
to  a  steel  charging  bucket.  Two  more  barrows,  each  holding  2.7  cu. 
ft.  of  gravel,  were  loaded  and  also  dumped  into  the  charging 
bucket ;  then  6  bags  of  cement  ( 1  %  bbls. )  were  emptied  into  the 
bucket.  Another  bucket  was  loaded  with  21.6  cu.  ft.  of  stone  by  8 
shovelers.  These  two  buckets  were  hoisted  by  a  derrick,  in  rapid 
succession,  and  dumped  into  the  mixer.  The  dump  man  also  attended 
to  supplying  water.  A  charging  man  started  the  mixer.  The  con- 
crete was  dumped  from  the  mixer  into  a  skip  on  a  car  below,  by 
2  men  who  pushed  the  car  out  where  another  derrick  on  the  mixer 
scow  hoisted  it  to  the  wall.  There  were  2  tagmen  on  each  derrick 
to  swing  the  booms,  one  paying  out  a  tag  rope  while  the  other 
hauled  in.  A  parapet  wall,'  containing  841  cu.  yds.,  was  built  in 
46  hrs.  actual  work,  18.2  cu.  yds.  being  placed  per  hour,  each  batch 
containing  1.07  cu.  yds.  of  rammed  concrete.  A  parapet  deck,  con- 
taining 1,720  cu.  yds.,  was  built  in  88  hrs.,  or  19%  cu.  yds.  per  hr., 
each  batch  being  1.08  cu.  yd.  The  labor  cost  of  making  this  con- 
crete (common  labor  being  $1.75  per  10  hrs.)  was  as  follows: 

Concrete. 

Cost,  per         Cost,  per 
Loading  gang:  10-hr,  day.          cu.  yd. 

1  assistant  foreman    $   2.00  $0.011 

3  cement  handlers    5.25  0.029 

3  sand    shovelers    5.25  0.029 

2  gravel  shovelers    . 3.50  0.020 

8  stone  shovelers   14.00  0.076 

1  hooker-on    1.75  0.010 

Mixer  gang: 

1  dumpman 1.75  0.010 

1  charging  man    1.75  0.010 

2  car  men 3.50  0.020 

2  enginemen,  at  $3.25 6.50  0.035 

4  tag  men,  at  $2.00 8.00  0.044 

1  fireman    2.00  0.011 

Wall  gang : 

1   signalman 1.75  0.010 

1   dumper    1.75  0.010 

6   shovelers.  at  $2.00 12.00  0.065 

4   rammers    7.00  0.038 

1   foreman :  4.00  0.022 

Total  (182  cu.  yds.  per  day) $81.75  $0.450 

This  cost  of  45  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  does  not  include  fuel,  forms  or 
plant  rental. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Lock,  Upper  White  River.*— Maj.  Graham  .  D. 
Fitch  gives  the  following: 

A  lock  (No.  1)  was  built  on  the  Upper  White  River,  at  one  end 
of  a  dam.  The  lock  was  built  inside  a  cofferdam,  the  cost  of  which 
is  given  elsewhere  (see  index  under  Cofferdam).  Wages  of  com- 
mon laborers  were  $1.50  per  8-hr.  day.  Work  was  done  by  Govern- 
ment forces. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908.  p.  27!t. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  571 

The  locks  are  of  concrete  masonry,  175  ft.  long,  between  hollow 
quoins.  The  height  of  the  lock  walls  is  15  ft.  above  the  upper  miter 
sill,  29  ft.  above  the  lower  sill  and  30  ft.  above  the  lock  floor.  Being 
founded  on  solid  rock,  each  wall  acts  separately,  and  the  design  is 
that  of  a  retaining  wall.  The  land  wall  is  slightly  stronger  than  the 
river  wall,  but  its  top  is  narrow.  Opposite  the  chamber  it  is 
stepped  in  the  rear  with  1-ft.  offsets  every  3Va  ft.,  while  the  river 
wall  is  battered.  Both  walls  are  14%  ft.  thick  at  the  bottom.  At 
the  top  the  thickness  of  the  river  wall  is  6  ft.,  and  of  the  land  Wall 
is  4  ft.  9  ins.  The  ends  of  the  lock  walls  are  necessarily  thicker 
than  the  side  walls  of  the  chamber,  as  they  must  not  only  support 
the  pressure  from  the  gates  but  also  provide  work  room  for  the 
lock  tenders.  The  thickness  of  the  lock  walls  at  the  heels  of  the 
gates  was  accordingly  made  16  ft.  The  walls  are  in  conformity  with 
the  usual  practice,  without  batter  inside.  The  available  length  of 
the  lock  chamber  is  147  ft.  and  the  width  is  36  ft.  The  length  of 
the  wall  below  tl/e  lower  quoin  is  25  ft.  and  above  the  upper  quoin 
37.  The  total  length  of  the  lock  is  237  ft. 

The  hollow  quoins  are  shaped  directly  in  the  concrete,  a  form 
being  used  as  for  any  other  special  surface.  The  shape  is  that  of 
an  arc  of  the  same  radius  as  the  heel  of  the  gate,  namely,  10  ins.  ; 
they  are  110  degrees  in  length,  with  tangents  at  either  end  6  ins. 
long.  The  gate  recesses  are  22  ft.  long  and  2  ft.  deep.  The  miter 
walls  are  without  batter.  Part  of  the  lower  miter  wall  is  prolonged 
downstream  to  the  lower  end  of  the  lock,  so  as  to  protect  the  tail 
bay  from  being  scoured  out  by  the  discharge  from  the  culverts. 

The  upper  coffer  wall,  the  function  of  which  is  to  support  a  simple 
movable  dam  across  the  head  of  the  lock  when  the  upper  gates  or 
valves  need  repairing,  has  its  sill  1  ft.  below  the  upper  miter  sill. 
In  coffering  the  head  bay  this  sill  forms  the  lower  support  for  the 
needles  used,  the  top  support  being  a  trussed  beam,  the  ends  of 
Which  rest  in  slots  in  the  main  walls  at  such  an  elevation  that  the 
trussed  beam  will  be  as  low  as  possible  without  being  immersed 
at  ordinary  low-water  stages.  A  similar  arrangement  of  slot  and 
sill  is  provided  for  coffering  the  tail  bay.  With  the  object  of  pre- 
venting the  water  from  cutting  behind  the  land  wall,  its  upper  and 
lower  end  is,  in  each  lock,  provided  with  a  wing  wall  running  per- 
pendicularly back  into  the  bank  far  enough  to  join  the  rocky  bluff 
which  is  from  20  to  30  ft.  in  the  rear.  The  thickness  of  these  walls 
is  4  ft.  9  ins.  on  top,  increasing  downward  by  offsets  until  rock 
foundation  is  reached. 

There  are  two  filling  culverts  each  3  ft.  3  ins.  by  7  ft.,  which  are 
placed  in  the  gate  recesses  to  keep  them  from  filling  with  mud  ; 
these  culverts  discharge  into  a  large  cross  culvert  in  the  upper  miter 
Wall  and  thence  through  8  small  lateral  openings  into  the  lock  cham- 
ber, thus  dividing  the  water  into  small  streams  emptying  near  the 
lock  floor  so  as  to  cause  little  disturbance  to  boats.  For  emptying 
the  lock  there  are  two  side  culverts,  each  4  by  5  ft.,  which  puss 
around  the  heels  of  the  lower  gates  entering  near  the  gate  re- 


572  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

cess  and  discharging  below  the  miter  wall  into  the  tail  bay,  thus 
serving  to  prevent  deposits  there. 

The  forms  used  in  the  concrete  work  on  the  lock  were  of  the  usual 
type,  namely,  plank  or  lagging  laid  horizontally  and  held  rigidly  by 
outside  posts,  solidly  braced  to  the  ground  so  as  to  prevent  the  ram- 
ming from  springing  them.  Yellow  pine  lumber  was  used.  The  lag- 
ging was  2  ins.  thick  and  12  ins.  wide,  and  was  dressed  on  all  four 
sides.  The  posts  were  4  x  6-in.  scantling,  spaced  4  ft.  apart  and  were 
supported  at  about  8-ft.  intervals  by  inclined  braces  of  4  x  6-in. 
scantling.  The  forms  were  built  in  separate  alternate  sections,  the 
lagging  for  each  section  being  carried  to  the  full  height  before  con- 
creting was  started  in  that  section,  and  the  concreting  for  each 
section  of  wall  being  completed  before  another  section  was  toegun, 
as  the  work  was  in  two  8-hr,  shifts,  the  sections  are  not  monoliths. 
These  posts  of  the  forms  were  tied  together  at  the  top  of  two 
rows  of  %-in.  or  %-in.  round  iron  tie-rods.  Forms  were  left  in 
position  from  four  to  five  days  after  concreting  was  completed. 

Cost  of  Forms. — The  cost  of  the  forms  was  as  follows : 

FORMS. 

Materials :                                                Unit  Cost.  Total.  Per  M  ft. 

Lumber,    159   M  ft $11.40  $1,818  $11.40 

Iron   and   nails    360  2.26 


Labor  : 
Inspecting  lumber, 

15.6   M  

.3897 

6 

.04 

Hauling  lumber 

78 

.49 

Erecting,  etc     159 

M  f  t  

15.29 

2  430 

15.29 

Total 

$2  514 

$15.72 

Grand  total 

(159  M  ft.).., 

$4,692 

$29.38 

The  total  labor  time  in  days  in  erecting,  etc.,  was  1,218%  days, 
and  the  work  done  per  man  per  day  was  130.5  ft.  B.  M. 

Mixing. — The  concrete  mixer  was  a  4-ft.  cubical  box  of  %-in.  riv- 
eted steel  securely  fastened  at  diagonally  opposite  corners  to  a  3-in. 
steel  shaft  bored  for  abou\  half  its  length  with  a  1-in.  hole  for  the 
admission  of  water.  Near  one  corner  was  a  15  x  20-in.  hinged  door 
for  the  admission  of  the  dry  materials.  The  mixer  was  operated  by 
a  center  crank  engine  with  6  x  7-in.  cylinder  and  was  located  on  the 
bank  approximately  opposite  the  center  of  the  lock.  The  concrete 
was  placed  by  derricks.  A  Y  track  led  from  the  mixer  parallel  to 
and  about  18  ft.  back  of  the  land  wall  to  within  easy  reach  of  two 
stiff-leg  derricks,  so  located  as  to  command  the  entire  lock  wall. 
The  mixer  charge  was  dumped  into  skips,  which  were  taken  from 
the  cars  by  derricks  and  the  concrete  deposited  in  place  in  the  lock 
walls.  Upon  the  completion  of  the  land  wall  the  derricks  were 
placed  on  this  wall,  where  they  commanded  the  river  wall.  The  con- 
crete was  placed  in  layers  10  ins.  thick. 

In  the  concrete  work  Portland  cement  only  was  used,  the  brands 
being  Lehigh  and  Alpha.  The  cement  varied  in  price  from  $1.82  to 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  573 

$2.70  per  barrel  delivered  on  cars  at  Birds  Point,  Mo. ;  from  there 
it  was  transported  as  far  as  Newport,  Ark.,  over  a  land-grant  rail- 
road, and  from  Newport  to  Batesville,  the  freight  charges  were  ap- 
proximately 11  cts.  per  barrel.  The  sand  used  was  a  coarse,  sharp, 
clean  sand  from  the  Arkansas  River,  near  Little  Rock,  and  cost 
33  cts.  per  cubic  yard  delivered  at  Little  Rock.  To  this  sum  should 
be  added  26  cts.  for  freight  and  38  cts.  for  hauling  from  the  Bates- 
ville depot  to  the  lock  site. 

The  gravel  used  was  dredged  by  hired  labor,  from  the  river  near 
the  works ;  it  consisted  of  a  mixture  of  pebbles  of  all  sizes  with 
about  19%  sand.  It  was  not  washed,  as  bars  were  found  where  the 
gravel  contained  only  clean  sand.  This  river  gravel  contained 
usually  from  17  to  21%  of  voids.  It  cost  delivered  in  bin,  including 
all  charges,  35  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  stone  used  was  a  sandstone,  the 
so-called  bluestone  of  Cabin  Creek,  Arkansas,  which,  tested  at  Water- 
town  Arsenal,  had  shown  an  ultimate  strength  of  17,700  to  19,700 
Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  It  cost  70  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  at  Cabin  Creek ;  the  freight 
charges  amounted  to  25  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  and  the  hauling  from  the 
depot  to  the  works  60  cts.  a  cu.  yd.  All  stone  was  broken  into  frag- 
ments small  enough  to  pass  through  a  2-in.  ring.  The  voids  aver- 
aged 51%.  The  stone  was  required  to  be  screened,  though  the  run 
of  the  crusher  would  have  been  preferable. 

The  proportions  of  the  mix  varied,  the  concrete  being  richer  in  the 
foundations,  on  exposed  surfaces,  and  when  gravel  was  used.  It 
was  the  intention  to  use  crushed  stone  concrete  for  a  depth  of  4  ft. 
on  all  exposed  surfaces  and  gravel  concrete  elsewhere,  but  in  the 
construction  of  this  lock,  owing  to  the  irregularity  of  the  delivery 
of  the  stone,  gravel  concrete  was  used  whenever  necessary  to  avoid 
stopping  the  work.  Three  mixtures  were  used  in  the  walls,  depend- 
ing upon  the  supply  of  materials  on  hand,  viz. :  1  part  cement,  2  % 
sand,  and  6  %  gravel ;  1  part  cement,  3  sand,  6  %  gravel ;  1  part 
cement,  3  sand,  4  gravel  and  2  broken  stone.  Less  sand  was  used 
with  the  straight  gravel  mixture  than  with  the  broken  stone  because 
of  the  large  per  cent  of  sand  contained  in  the  river  gravel.  The 
amount  of  water  had  to  be  varied  frequently.  It  was  regulated  by 
judgment,  according  to  the  appearance  of  the  mortar. 

The  cost  of  mixing  and  placing  the  concrete  for  the  lock,  was  as 
follows : 

Per 
cu.  yd. 

Unit  Con- 

Materials.  Cost.       Total,     crete. 

Cement,  Lehigh,   4,051   bbls.. $2.45        $   9,925     $1.12 

Cement,  Lehigh,  841  bbls 1.97  1,657         .18 

Cement,   Alpha,    4,992    bbls 2.20          10,982        1.24 

Crushed  stone,  2,256  cu.  yds 70  1,579          .17 

Crushed  stone,  92  cu.  yds 3.25  299          .03 

Sand,   3,096  cu.  yds 35  1,022          .11 

Gravel,   12.9   cu.   yds 50  6 

Fuel     537          .06 

Illuminating  oils 314          .03 

•Total  materials..  ..^26,322     $2.94 


:,7t  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Per 

cu.  yd. 

Unit  Con- 
Labor.                                                                            Cost.  Total,  crete. 

Mixer  frame $  153  $0.017 

Insp.  of  cement,  9,884  bbls... $0.022  223  0.025 

Inspect'n  of  crushed  stone,  2,348  cu.  yds 101  238  .026 

Insp.  of  sand,  3,096  cu.  yds 069  212  .024 

Storing  cement,    2,500   bbls 079  199  .021 

Hauling  cement,  9,690  bbls 08  775  .086 

Hauling  crushed  stone,  2,078  cu.  yds 60  1,247  .140 

Hauling  sand,  3,053  cu.  yds 38  1,160  .130 

Dredging  gravel,  6,125  cu.  yds 105  646  .072 

Unloading  gravel   for   hand   mixed   concrete, 

385  cu.  yds 181  70  .008 

Hoisting  gravel  for  machine  mixed  concrete, 

5,025  cu.  yds. 473  2,378  .266 

Mixing  and  placing  machine  mixed  concrete, 

7,858  cu.  yds 568  4,464  .499 

Mixing    and    placing    hand    mixed    concrete, 

1,081  cu.  yds 1.83  1,981  .221 

Tamping     machine     mixed     concrete,      7,858 

cu     yds 328  2,581  .288 

Tamping  hand  mixed  concrete,  1,081  cu.  yds.     .443  479  .053 

Finishing  top  of  lock  wall,   548  cu.  yds 104  57  .006 


Total    labor $16,864      $1.88 

Grand  total,  8,939  cu.  yds.  concrete $43,186      $4.83 

Cost  of  concrete,  including  forms $5.36  per  cu.  yd. 

Some  of  the  labor  items  can  be  further  summarized  as  follows : 

Work 

Work        Labor      done 
done        time  in  per  man 
bbls.  days,  per  day. 

bbls. 

Inspection    of   cement 9,884  736/8     139.21 

Storing   cement 2,500  94  5/8       26.32 

cu.  yds.  cu.  yds. 

Inspection  of  crushed  stone 2,348  71  21.15 

Inspection  of  sand 3,096         111  23.63 

Dredging   gravel 6,125         306  2/8       20 

Unloading  gravel  for  hand  mixed  concrete.  .       385  41  9.39 

Hoisting  gravel  for  machine  mixed  concrete  5,025     1,308  3.84 

Mixing  and  placing  machine  mixed  concrete  7,858     2,384  3/8          3.29 
Mixing  and  placing  hand  mixed  concrete.  .  .    1,081     1,103  4/8  .98 

Tamping  machine  mixed  concrete 7,858     1,420  1/8          5.53 

Tamping  hand  mixed  concrete 1,081         283  3.82 

Finishing  top  of  lock  wall 548  295/8       18.27 

Valves,  Ladders,  Etc. — The  valves  in  the  culverts  previously 
mentioned,  are  butterfly  or  balanced  valves  of  steel  plates  and  angles 
turning  on  vertical  shafts.  There  are  two  valves  to  each  filling 
culvert  because  the  valves  had  to  be  of  low  height  in  order  to 
remain  submerged  during  low  water.  They  are  3  ft.  2  ins.  by  3  ft. 
2  ins.  in  size.  The  wicket  is  set  in  a  cast  iron  frame  bolted  to  the 
concrete  and  is  protected  from  debris  by  a  movable  screen  sliding 
vertically  in  guides  bolted  to  the  walls.  The  valve  operating  gear, 
which  is  set  in  a  covered  •  recess  in  the  coping,  consists  of  a  gear 
sector  keyed  to  the  top  of  the  valve  shaft  and  geared  with  a  pinion 
turned  by  a  rachet  wrench  and  wheel.  Two  recessed  ladders  are 
placed  in  each  chamber  wall  of  the  lock. 

The  cost  of  the  valves,  ladders,  etc.,  was' as  follows: 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  575 

Materials.                                                                         Unit  Cost.  Total. 

New  valves  and  foundry  work  on  same,  2 $267.00  $    534 

Iron,  wrought,  5.397  Ibs .06  324 

Iron,  cast,  7,737  Ibs .045  348 

Steel,    6,976    Ibs 065  543 


Total   materials $1,749 

Labor. 

Hauling,  iron,  etc ...  $16 

Placing  20,110  Ibs $0.02  406 

Total  labor , $    422 

Grand    total 2,171 

Summary  of  Lock  Work:  Unit 

Total.  Cost. 

Clearing  site    (4  acres) $      204  $51.00 

Cofferdam  (462  lin.  ft.) 8,487  18.37 

Excavation   (3,635  cu.  yds.) 5,758  1.58 

Forms   (159  M.  ft.) 4,692  29.38 

Concrete    (8,939  cu.   yds.) 43,186  4.83 

Gates  and  sills 5,569  .... 

Valves,   ladders,   etc 2,171  .... 

Filling  behind  land  wall   (4,262  cu.  yds.) 3,441  .805 

Grading  and  paving  same  (1,916  sq.  yds.) 1,553  .810 

Excavating  upper   approach.  .  .  . 388  .... 

Excavating  lower  approach 182  .... 

Upper  land  crib   (30  M.  ft.) 1,713  57.10 

Lower  land  crib  (9.3  M.  ft.) 806  86.66 

Lower  river  crib  (46.2  M.  ft.) 2,804  60.69 

Upper  river  crib  (47.6  M.  ft.) 2,761  58.00 

Total     $84,715 

For  the  cost  of  the  lock  gates,  see  the  section  on  Timberwork  and 
Piling.  Consult  the  index  under  "Timberwork,  Lock  Gates." 

Cost  of  Concrete  Locks,  Coosa  River,  Ala. — Mr.  Charles  Firth 
gives  the  following  on  the  concrete  locks  on  the  Coosa  River,  Ala, 
Lock  No.  31  has  a  length  of  322  ft.  between  hollow  quoins  and  a 
length  of  420  ft.  over  all,  with  a  width  of  52  ft.  in  the  clear. 
The  lock  walls  are  34.7  ft.  high  and  16  ft.  thick  at  the  base  The 
total  quantity  of  concrete  was  20,000  cu.  yds.,  requiring  21,500 
bbls.  of  cement,  half  Atlas  and  half  Alsen's.  It  was  mixed  1 :3  :5y2, 
the  stone  being  crushed  mica-schist.  Two  mechanical  4-ft.  cube 
mixers  were  used,  being  driven  by  a  10  X  16  engine.  Each  batch 
consisted  of  3  cu.  ft.  cement,  9  cu.  ft.  sand  and  16%  cu.  ft.  stone,  and 
was  turned  4  times  before  and  6  times  after  adding  the  water,  at  a 
speed  not  exceeding  8  revolutions  per  minute.  The  top  floor  of  the 
mixing  house  had  a  storage  capacity  of  2,000  bbls.  of  cement.  The 
sand  and  stone  were  delivered  in  side  dump-cars.  The  concrete  was 
delivered  into  bottom-dump  cars.  The  average  output  of  these  two 
mixers  was  200  cu.  yds.  in  8  hrs.,  or  100  cu.  yds.  per  mixer,  but  it  was 
limited  by  the  means  of  placing  the  concrete.  Each  batch  of  concrete 
measured  24  cu.  ft.  in  the  car,  but  it  shrank  20%  when  rammed  in 
place,  so  that  it  required  34  cu.  ft.  of  concrete  in  the  cars  to  make 
1  cu.  yd.  in  place.  The  concrete  was  mixed  quite  dry  and  rammed 
in  6  to  8-in.  layers,  using  30-lb.  iron  rammers  having  a  square  face 
6  ins.  on  a  side.  On  all  exposed  surfaces  a  1  :3  mortar  was  placed 
?.s  the  work  progressed,  making  a  thickness  of  6  ins.  of  mortar.  To 


576  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

do  this  2  X  12-in.  planks  were  placed  4  ins  away  from  the  forms, 
being  kept  at  that  distance  by  2  X  4-in.  strips  of  wood.  After 
the  backing  concrete  was  in  place  and  partly  rammed,  these 
planks  were  removed  and  the  6-in.  space  filled  with  mortar.  The 
walls  were  carried  up  in  lifts,  each  lift  being  completed  all  around 
the  dock  before  the  next  was  commenced.  The  first  was  10.7  ft. 
high ;'  each  succeeding  lift  was  6  ft.,  except  the  last  which  was 
4.5  ft.,  exclusive  of  the  18-in.  coping.  The  coping  was  5  ft.  wide 
and  made  in  separate  blocks  3  ft.  long,  which  were  placed  after 
the  walls  were  completed.  The  coping  was  1:2:3  concrete,  faced 
with  1 :1  mortar,  and  was  cast  in  blocks  face  down,  its  edges 
being  rounded  to  a  3-in.  radius.  The  sides  of  the  molds  for  these 
blocks  were  removed  3  days  after  making,  and  10  days  later  the 
blocks  were  stacked  away. 

In  building  the  forms  6  X  8-in.  posts  24  ft.  long  were  set  up 
on  the  inside  of  the  lock  in  line,  5  ft.  7  ins.  apart ;  and  a  similar 
row  of  posts  12  ft.  long  was  set  up  outside  of  the  lock.  The  posts 
were  capped  with  6  X  8-in.  caps  which  supported  the  track  stringers 
for  the  concrete  cars.  Each  line  of  posts  was  sheeted  with  3  X  10-in. 
plank  dressed  on  all  sides,  and  the  posts  were  well  braced  with 
inclined  struts.  After  the  first  lift  was  completed,  the  back  row  of 
posts  was  lifted  onto  the  offset  on  the  back  of  the  wall  by  the 
reduced  width  of  the  next  lift;  but  the  long  posts  on  the  front 
face  were  not  moved,  the  caps  being  simply  unbolted  from  them  and 
fastened  near  the  top  of  the  posts.  The  sheeting  plank  was  of 
course  moved  up.  No  tie  bolts  were  built  into  the  concrete  wall, 
which  made  the  bracing  of  the  forms  rather  elaborate  as  the  wall 
grew  higher. 

The  bottom-dump  concrete  cars  were  dumped  onto  wooden  plat- 
forms inside  the  forms,  as  it  was  found  that  even  a  slight  drop 
caused  the  larger  stones  to  separate  and  roll  to  the  outer  edges. 
These  stones  were  shoveled  back  into  the  pile,  and  then  the  concrete 
was  placed  with  shovels.  The  doors  of  the  cars  were  hung  at  the 
sides,  and  upon  dumping  they  would  strike  the  stringers  carrying 
the  track,  thus  jarring  the  forms  and  frequently  throwing  them 
out  of  line.  A  better  method  would  have  been  to  have  hinged 
the  doors  at  each  end  of  the  car.  It  was  found  advisable  to  have 
plenty  of  head  room  at  the  end  of  each  lift,  otherwise  the  spread- 
ing and  ramming  were  not  properly  done.  During  the  year  ending 
June,  1895,  there  were  only  90  days  when  work  was  carried  on 
uninterrupted  by  floods.  The  total  quantity  of  concrete  placed 
that  year  was  8,710  cu.  yds.,  the  work  being  done  by  day  laborers 
for  the  Government  (not  by  contract).  Negroes  at  $1  per  8-hr,  day 
were  employed.  The  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  I:3:5y2  concrete  Was 
as  follows  : 

1  bbl.  cement .  .$2.48 

0.88  cu.  yd.  stone,  at  $0.76.  .  •  67 

0.36  cu.  yd.  sand  at  $0.34 12 

Mixing,  placing  and  ramming 88 

Staging  and  forms ;•.      .42 

Total,  per  cu.  yd M .  $4.57 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  577 

Had  wages  been  $1.50  per  day  the  cost  would  have  been  $1.32  per 
cu.  yd.  instead  of  88  cts.  for  mixing. 

Cost  of  Locks,  Cascade  Canal. — In  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete 
Construction,"  Chapter  XI,  on  "Fortifications,  Locks,  Dams  and 
Breakwaters,"  the  methods  of  building  and  detailed  costs  are  given. 
It  will  suffice  here  to  state  that  the  cost  was  $8  per  cu.  yd.  for 
machine  mixed  concrete,,  and  $9  for  hand  mixed  concrete,  of  which 
cost  $5.50  was  for  materials,  and  $1.70  for  plant  and  superin- 
tendence. 

Cost  of  Locks,  III.  and  Miss.  Canal.— In  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Con- 
crete Construction,  pp.  196  to  197;  a  detailed  illustrated  description 
is  given  of  the  forms,  plant,  and  methods  of  building  these  locks. 
The  cost  of  two  of  the  locks  was  $9  per  cu.  yd.,  of  which  $2  to 
$2.40  was  labor  and  carpenter  work.  Cube  mixers  were  used.  For 
detailed  costs  consult  the  above  reference. 

Labor  Cost  of  Retaining  Walls. — In  canal  excavation,  in  subway 
work  in  cities,  and  the  like,  it  is  often  necessary  to  dig  trenches  and 
build  retaining  walls  in  the  trenches*  before  excavating  the  core 
of  earth  between  the  walls.  The  following  example  of  this  class 
of  work  is  taken  from  some  records  that  I  have :  A  Smith  mixer  was 
used,  the  concrete  being  delivered  where  wanted  by  a  Lambert 
cableway  of  400  ft.  span.  The  broken  stone  and  sand  were  delivered 
near  the  work  in  hopper-bottom  cars  which  were  dumped  through 
a  trestle  onto  a  plank  floor.  Men  loaded  the  material  into  one- 
horse  dump  carts  which  hauled  it  900  ft.  to  the  mixer  platform. 
This  platform  was  24  X  24  ft.  square,  and  5  ft  high,  with  a 
planked  approach  40  ft.  long  and  contained  7,500  ft.  B.  M.  The  stone 
and  sand  were  dumped  at  the  mouth  of  the  mixer  and  shoveled 
in  by  4  men.  Eight  men,  working  in  pairs,  loaded  the  broken 
stone  into  the  carts,  and  2  men  loaded  the  sand.  Each  cart  Was 
loaded  with  about  70  shovelfuls  of  stone  on  top  of  which  35  shovel- 
fuls of  sand  were  thrown.  It  took  3  to  5  mins.  to  load  on  the  stone 
and  1  min.  to  load  the  sand.  The  carts  traveled  very  slowly, 
about  150  ft.  a  minute — in  fact,  all  the  men  on  the  job,  including 
the  cart  drivers,  were  slow.  After  mixing,  the  concrete  was  dumped 
into  iron  buckets  holding  14  cu.  ft.  water  measure,  making  about 
%  cu.  yd.  in  a  batch.  The  buckets  were  hooked  on  to  the  cableway 
and  conveyed  where  wanted  in  the  wall.  Steam  for  running  the 
mixer  was  taken  from  the  same  boiler  that  supplied  the  cableway 
engine.  The  average  output  of  this  plant  was  100  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  per  10-hr,  day,  although  on  many  days  the  output  was 
125  cu.  yds.,  or  250  batches.  The  cost  of  mixing  and  placing  was 
as  follows,  on  a  basis  of  100  cu.  yds.  per  day: 

Per  day.  Per  cu.  yd. 

8  men  loading  stone  into  carts $  12.00  $  .12 

2  men  loading  sand  into  carts 3.00  .03 

1  cart  hauling  cement 3.00  .03 

8  carts  hauling  stone  and  sand 24.00  .24 

4  men  loading  mixer 6.00  .06 

1  man  dumping  mixer 1.50  .01 

2  men  handling  buckets  at  mixer 3.00  .03 

6   men  dumping  buckets  and    ramming  9.00  .09 

12   men  making  forms  at   $2.50 30.00  .30 


578  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


1    cable    engineman 3.00 

1   fireman 2.00 

1    foreman 6.00 

1  water-boy 1.00 

1   ton  coal  for  cableway  and  mixer.  .  .  4.00 


Total    $107.50          $1.07 

In  addition  to  this  cost  of  $1.07  per  cu.  yd.  there  was  the  cost 
of  moving  the  whole  plant  for  every  350  ft.'  of  wall.  This  required 
2  days,  at  a  cost  of  $100,  and  as  there  were  about  1,000  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  in  350  ft.  of  wall  16  ft.  high,  the  cost  of  moving  the 
plant  was  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  bringing  the  total  cost 
of  mixing  and  placing  up  to  87  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  As  above  stated,  the 
whole  gang  was  slow. 

The  labor  cost  of  making  the  forms  was  high,  for  such  simple  and 
heavy  work,  costing  $10  per  M.  of  lumber  placed  each  day.  The 
forms  were  2-in.  sheeting  plank  held  by  4  X  6-in.  upright  studs  2% 
ft.  apart,  which  were  braced  against  the  sides  of  the  trench.  The 
face  of  the  forms  was  dressed  lumber  and  all  cracks  were  carefully 
puttied  and  sandpapered. 

The  above  costs  relate  only  to  the  massive  part  of  the  wall  and 
not  the  cost  of  putting  in  the  facing  mortar,  which  was  excessively 
high.  The  face  mortar  was  2  ins.  thick,  and  about  3  %  cu.  yds.  of  it 
were  placed  each  day  with  a  force  of  8  men!  Two  of  these  men 
mixed  the  mortar,  2  men  wheeled  it  in  barrows  to  the  wall,  2  men 
lowered  it  in  buckets,  and  2  men  put  it  in  place  on  the  face  of  the 
wall.  If  we  distribute  this  labor  cost  on  the  face  mortar  over 
the  100  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  laid  each  day,  we  have  another  12  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  ;  but  a  better  way  is  to  regard  this  work  as  a  separate 
item,  'and  estimate  it  as  square  feet  of  facing  work.  In  that  case 
these  8  men  did  500  sq.  ft.  of  facing  work  per  day  at  a  cost  of 
nearly  2%  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  for  labor. 

The  building  of  a  wall  similar  to  the  one  just  described  was 
done  by  another  gang  as  follows :  The  stone  and  sand  were  deliv- 
ered in  flat  cars  provided  with  side  boards.  In  a  stone  car  5  men 
were  kept  busy  shoveling  stone  into  iron  dump  buckets  having  a 
capacity  of  20  cu.  ft.  water  measure.  Each  bucket  was  filled  about 
two-thirds  full  of  stone,  then  it  was  picked  up  by  a  derrick  and 
swung  over  to  the  next  car  which  contained  sand,  where  two  men 
filled  the  remaining  third  of  the  bucket  with  sand.  The  bucket  was 
then  lifted  and  swung  by  the  derrick  over  to  the  platform  of  the 
mixer  where  it  was  dumped  and  its  contents  shoveled  by  four  men 
into  the  mixer,  cement  being  added  by  these  men.  The  mixer  was 
dumped  by  two  men,  loading  iron  buckets  holding  about  %  cu.  yd. 
of  concrete  each,  which  was  the  size  of  each  batch.  A  second 
derrick  picked  up  the  concrete  bucket  and  swung  it  over  to  a  plat- 
form where  it  was  dumped  by  one  man;  then  ten  men  loaded  the 
concrete  into  wheelbarrows  and  wheeled  it  along  a  runway  to  the 
wall.  One  man  assisted  each  barrow  in  dumping  into  a  hopper  on 
the  top  of  a  sheet-iron  pipe  which  delivered  the  concrete.  The 
two  derricks  were  stiff-leg  derricks  with  40-ft.  booms,  provided 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  579 

with  bull- wheels,  and  operated  by  double  cylinder  (7  X  10-in.) 
engines  of  18  hp.  each.  About  1  ton  of  coal  was  burned  daily 
under  the  boiler  supplying  steam  to  these  two  hoisting  engines. 
The  output  of  this  plant  was  200  batches  or  100  cu.  yds.  of  concrete 
per  10-hr,  day,  when  materials  were  promptly  supplied  by  the 
railroad  ;  but  delays  in  delivering  cars  ran  the  average  output  down 
to  80  cu.  yds.  per  day. 

On  the  basis  of  100  cu.  yds.  daily  output,  the  cost  of  mixing  and 
placing  the  concrete  was  as  follows : 

Per  day.     Per  cu.  yd. 

5  men  loading  stone $   7.50          $0.07 % 

2  men  loading  sand 3.00  .03 

4  men  charging  mixer 6.00  .06 

2  men  loading  concrete  into  buckets...      3.00  .03 

1  man -dumping  concrete  from  buckets.  .  1.50  .01% 

10  men  loading  and  wheeling  concrete.  .  i5.00  .15 

1  man  dumping  wheelbarrows 1.50  .01  % 

3  men  spreading  and  ramming 4.50  .04  Vj 

2  enginemen 5.00  .05 

1   fireman 2.00  .02 

1  water-boy. 1.00  .01 

1    foreman 6.00  .06 

10  men  making  forms 25.00  .25 

1  ton  coal 4.00  .04 


Total    $85.00          $0.85 

In  addition  there  were  8  men  engaged  in  mixing  and  placing  the 
2-in.  facing  of  mortar  as  stated  above. 

Cost  of  Retaining  Walls,  Chicago  Drainage  Canal. — Mr.  James 
W.  Beardsley  gives  the  following  data  on  20,000  lin.  ft.  of  concrete 
wall,  built  by  contract.  The  work  was  let  in  two  sections,  Sees.  14 
and  15,  which  will  be  considered  separately.  In  both  cases  a  1:1^:4 
natural  cement  concrete  was  used,  and  it  was  faced  with  1 :3  Port- 
land mortar  3  ins.  thick,  also  coped  with  the  same  3  ins.  thick.  The 
average  height  of  the  wall  was  10  ft.  on  Sec.  14,  and  22  ft.  on 
Sec.  15,  the  thickness  at  the  base  being  half  the  height. 

On  Sec.  14,  the  stone  for  the  concrete  was  obtained  from  the 
spoil  bank  of  the  canal,  loaded  into  wheelbarrows  and  wheeled 
about  100  ft.  to  the  crusher  ;  some  was  hauled  in  wagons.  An  Austin 
jaw  crusher  was  used,  and  it  discharged  the  stone  into  bins  from 
which  it  was  fed  into  a  Sooysmith  mixer.  The  crusher  and  the  mixer 
were  mounted  on  a  flat  car.  Bucket  elevators  were  used  to  raise  the 
stone,  sand  and  cement  from  their  bins  to  the  mixer  ;  the  buckets 
were  made  of  such  size  as  to  give  the  proper  proportions  of  in- 
gredients, as  they  all  traveled  at  the  same  speed.  Only  two  laborers 
were  required  to  look  after  the  elevators.  The  sand  and  cement 
were  hauled  by  teams  and  dumped  into  the  receiving  bins.  There 
were  23,568  cu.  yds.  on  Sec.  14,  and  the  cost  was  as  follows: 

Typical  Wages  per  Cost  per 
General  force.  force.         10  hrs.        cu.  yd. 

Superintendent    .1.0          $5.00          $0.026 

Blacksmith    1.1  2.75  0.016 

Timekeeper 0.5  2.50  0.007 

Watchman 0.6  2.00  0.007 

Waterboys 3.9  1.00  0.022 


580 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Wall  force. 

Foreman    0.9 

Laborers    8.6 

Tampers     2.3 

Mixer  force. 

Foreman 1.2 

Enginemen    1.8 

Laborers 6.7 

Pump   runner 1.0 

Mixing  machines 1.7 

Timber  force. 

Foreman    0.6 

Carpenters 4.7 

Laborers    1.2 

Helpers    5.3 

Hauling  force. 

Laborers    .  .  . 2.6 

Teams    6.3 

Crushing  force. 

Foreman    0.5 

Engineman    1.7 

Laborers    3.5 

Austin  crushers 1.7 

Loading  stone. 

Foreman 1.7 

Laborers    32.9 

Total  for  crushing,  mixing  and  placing $0.975 

The  daily  costs  charged  to  the  mixers  and  crushers  include  the 

cost  of  coal,  at  $2  a  ton,  and  the  cost  of  oil. 

The  gang  "loading  stone"  apparently  did  a  good  deal  of  sledging 

of  large  Stones,  and  they  also  wheeled  a  large  part  of  it  in  barrows 

to  the  crusher. 

The  plant  cost  $9,600,  distributed  as  follows: 

2  jaw  crushers $3,000 

2    mixers 3  000 

Track   „  .  1,260 

Lumber    500 

Pipe 840 

Sheds    400 

Pumps    600 


2.50 
1.50 
1.75 

0.013 
0.073 
0.022 

2.50 
2.50 
1.50 
2.00 
1.25 

0.017 
0.025 
0.057 
0.010 
0.012 

2.50 
2.50 
1.50 
2.50 

0.008 

0.057 
0.010 
0.075 

1.75 
3.25 

0.026 
0.116 

$2.50 
2.50 
1.50 
1.20 

$0.007 
0.023 
0.032 
0.011 

2.50 
1.50 

0.023 

0.280 

?.  . 

,  .$0.975 

Total     $9,600 

If  this  first  cost  of   the   plant  were  distributed  over   the   23,658 
cu.  yds.  of  concrete  it  would  amount  to  41  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
The  cost  of  the  concrete  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Utica  cement,  at  $0.65  per  bbl .- $0.863 

Portland  cement,  at  $2.25  per  bbl 0  305 

Sand,  at  $1.3.5  per  cu.  yd 0.465 

Stone  and  labor,  as  above  given 0.975 

Total     .$2.608 

First  cost  of  plant. $0.407 

On  Sec.  15  the  conditions  were  much  the  same  as  on  Sec.  14,  just 
described,  except  that  the  limestone  was  quarried  from  the  bed  of 
the  canal,  and  was  crushed  in  a  stationary  crusher,  No.  7  Gates. 
The  stone  was  hauled  1,000  ft.  to  the  crusher  on  cars  drawn  by  a 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION. 


581 


cable  from  a  hoisting  engine.  The  output  of  this  crusher  averaged 
210  cu. .yds.  per  day  of  10  hrs.  The  crushed  stone  was  hauled  in 
dump  cars,  drawn  by  a  locomotive,  to  the  mixers.  Spiral  screw 
mixers  mounted  on  flat  cars  were  used,  and  they  delivered  the 
concrete  to  belt  conveyors  which  delivered  the  concrete  into  the 
forms. 

the  forms  on  Sec.  15  (and  on  Sec.  14  as  well)  consisted  of 
upright  posts  set  8  ft.  apart  and  9  ins.  in  front  of  the  wall,  held 
at  the  toe  by  iron  dowels  driven  into  holes  in  the  rock,  and  held 
to  the  rear  posts  by  the  rods.  The  plank  sheeting  was  made  up 
in  panels  2  ft.  wide  and  16  ft.  long,  and  was  held  up  temporarily 
by  loose  rings  which  passed  around  the  posts  which  were  gripped 
by  the  friction  of  the  rings.  These  panels  were  brought  to  proper 
line  and  held  in  place  by  wooden  wedges.  After  the  concrete  had 
set  24  hrs.  the  wedges  were  struck,  the  panels  removed  and  scraped 
clean  ready  to  be  used  again. 

The  cost  of  quarrying  and  crushing  the  stone,  and  mixing  the 
concrete  on  Sec.  15  was  as  follows: 

Typical  Wages  per  Cost  per 
General  force.  force.        10  hrs.        cu.  yd. 

Superintendent   1.0          $5.00          $0.024 

Blacksmith 0.9  2.75  0.011 

Teams     1.7  3.00  0.025 

Waterboy     4.5  1.00  0.022 

Wall  force. 

Foreman    1.1  2.50  0.010 

Laborers    14.4  1.50  0.105 

Tampers     0.1  1.75  0.001 

Mixer    force. 

Foreman    2.1  2.50  0.026 

Enginemen    2.1  2.50  0.022 

Laborers    23.1  1.50  0.180 

Mixing  machines 2.1  1.25  0.022 

Timber  force. 

Carpenters     0.8  3.00  0.013 

Laborers    0.7  1.50  0.005 

Helpers 10.2  2.50  0.125 

Hauling  force. 

Foreman    0.7  2.50  0.009 

Enginemen     1.4  2.50  0.019 

Fireman   0.4  1.75  0.003 

Brakeman    2.2  2.00  0.018 

Teams 0.4  3.25  0.007 

Laborers    1.5  1.50  0.010 

Locomotives    1.4  2.25  0.015 

Crushing  force. 

Foreman 1.0  2.50  0.014 

Enginemen    1.0  2.50  0.014 

Laborers     11.1  1.50  0.081 

Firemen   1.0  1.75  0.008 

Gyratory    crusher 1.0  2.25  0.011 

Quarry  force. 

Foreman     1.2  2.50  0.012 

Laborers    19.0  1.50  0.140 

Drillers     1.8  2.00  0.017 

Drill  helpers 1.8  1.50  0.013 

Machine    drills 1.8  1.25  0.011 

Total     .  $0.993 


582  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  first  cost  of  the  plant  for  this  work  on  Sec.  15  was  $25,420, 
distributed  as  follows: 

1  crusher,  No.   7  Gates $12,000 

Use  of  locomotive 2,200 

Cars    and    track 5,300 

3    mixers 3,000 

Lumber    1,200 

Pipe    720 

Small  tools 1,000 

Total    $25,420 

This  $25,420  distributed  over  the  44,811  cu.  yds.  of  concrete 
amounts  to  57  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

It  will  be  noted  that  2  mixers  were  kept  busy.  Their  average 
output  was  100  cu.  yds.  each  per  day,  which  is  the  same  as  for  the 
mixers  on  Sec.  14. 

The  total  cost  of  concrete  on  Sec.  15  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor  quarrying,  crushing  and  mixing $0.991 

Explosives 0.083 

Utica  cement,  at  $0.60  per  bbl 0.930 

Portland  cement,  at  $2.25  per  bbl 0.180 

Sand,  at  $1.35  per  cu.  yd .    0.476 

Total $2.660 

First  cost  of  plant $0.567 

It   is   not    strictly    correct    to    charge    the   full    first  cost   of    the 

plant  to  the  work  as  it  possessed  considerable  salvage  value  at  the 
end. 

For  the  purpose  of  comparing  Sees.  14  and  15  the  following  sum- 
mary is  given  of  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete : 

Sec.  14.  Sec.  15. 

General    force $0.078  $0.082 

Wall   force 0.108  0.116 

Mixing   force 0.121  0.250 

Timbering  force 0.150  0.140 

Hauling   force ; 0.142  0.081 

Crushing    force 0.073  0.12S 

Quarry  force 0.303  0.275 

Cement,    natural 0.863  0.930 

Cement,  Portland 0.305  0.180 

Sand 0.465  0.476 

Plant    (full  cost) 0.407  0.567 

Total    $3.015          $3.225 

It  should  be  remembered  that  on  Sec.  14  there  was  no  drilling 
and  blasting  of  the  rock,  but  that  the  "quarry  force"  not  only 
loaded  but  hauled  the  stone  to  the  crusher.  The  cost  of  mixing 
on  Sec.  15  is  higher  than  on  Sec.  14  because  the  materials  Were 
dumped  on  platforms  and  shoveled  into  the  mixer,  instead  of  being 
discharged  from  bins  into  the  mixer  as  on  Sec.  14. 

Cost  of  a  Retaining  Wall.— For  building  a  retaining  wall  7  ft. 
high,  forms  were  made  and  placed  by  a  carpenter  and  helper  at  $8 
per  M.,  wages  being  35  cts.  and  20  cts.  an  hour,  respectively.  Con- 
crete materials  were  dumped  from  wagons  alongside  the  mixing 
board.  Ramming  was  unusually  thorough.  Foreman  expense  was 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  583 

high,  due  to  small  number  in  gang ;  2  cu.  yds.  were  laid  per  hour 

by  the  gang. 

Per  day.     Per  cu.  yd.    ' 

7  mixers,   15  cts.  per  hr $10.50          $0.53 

2  rammers,  15  cts.  per  hr 3.00  0.15 

1  foreman,  30  cts.  per  hr.,  and  1  water 

boy,   5  cts 3.50  0.17 

Total    labor $17.00          $0.85 

The  total  cost  was  as  follows  per  cubic  yard : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.8  bbls.  Portland  cement,  at  $2 $1.60 

Sand   0.30 

Gravel 0.70 

Labor  mixing  and  placing 0.85 

Lumber  for  forms,  at  $16  per  M 0.56 

Labor  on  forms,  at  $8  per  M 0.28 

Total,  per  cu.  yd $4.29 

The  sheathing  plank  for  the  forms  was  2-in.  hemlock. 
Cost  of  Retaining  Walls,  Reference. — Different  methods  of  building 
walls,    designs  of  forms,   plant,   etc.,   together  with   costs  are  given 
in  "Concrete  Construction,"   by  Gillette  and  Hill. 

Cost  of  Filling  Pier  Cylinders  With  Concrete.— In  this  case  the 
gravel  and  sand  forming  the  concrete  were  wheeled  in  barrows  a 
distance  of  100  ft.  to  the  mixing-board  at  the  foot  of  steel  pier 
cylinders,  into  which  concrete  was  dumped  after,  raising  it  20  ft.  in 
wooden  skips.  Two  cu.  yds.  concrete  laid  per  hour  by  the  gang. 

Per  day.     Per  cu.  yd. 
6   men  wheeling   materials  and   mixing, 

15  cts.  per  hr $  9.00          $0.45 

2  men    dumping    skips    and    ramming, 

15  cts.  per  hr 3.00  0.15 

1  team  and  driver,  at  40  cts.  per  hr. .  .  .      4.00  0.20 

1  foreman,  at  30  cts.  per  hr 3.00  0.15 

Total    $19.00          $0.95 

Had  the  job  been  larger,  more  men  would  have  been  employed  to 
reduce  the  fixed  expense  of  team  time,  for  a  team  can  readily  raise 
10  cu.  yds.  an  hour,  using  a  mast,  or  ginpole,  with  block  and  tackle. 
The  foreman  worked  on  the  mixing-board  himself.  The  concrete 
was  perfectly  mixed.  The  men  worked  with  great  energy. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Harbor  Pier,  Superior  Entry,  Wis. — For  cuts 
showing  cross-section  of  this  pier,  the  forms  used  in  its  construc- 
tion, and  bucket  used  in  depositing  concrete  under  water,  see  Gillette 
and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction." 

The  pier  is  3,023  ft.  long  at  Superior  Entry,  Wis.  The  work  was 
done  by  day  labor  for  the  Government,  under  the  direction  of  Mr. 
Clarence  Coleman,  U.  S.  Assistant  Engineer. 

About  80%  of  the  concrete  was  deposited  in  molds  under  water, 
according  to  a  plan  devised  in  1902  by  Maj.  D.  D.  Gaillard,  Corps 
of  Engineers.  The  molds  consisted  of  bottomless  boxes,  built  in  four 
pieces,  two  sides  and  two  end  pieces,  held  together  by  1*4 -in.  turn- 
buckle  tie-rods.  Cast-iron  weights  were  attached  to  the  molds  to 


584  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

overcome  the  buoyancy  of  the  timber.  The  concrete  was  built  in 
place,  in  two  tiers  of  blocks,  the  lower  tier  resting  directly  on  piles 
and  entirely  under  water.  The  upper  tier  of  blocks  was  almost 
entirely  above  water.  A  pile  trestle  was  built  on  each  side  of  the 
proposed  pier,  and  a  traveler  for  raising  and  lowering  the  molds, 
spanned  the  gap  between  the  two  trestles.  After  the  mold  for  a 
block  of  concrete  had  been  placed  on  the  bottom,  it  was  filled  with 
concrete  lowered  in  a  bucket  with  a  drop  bottom.  Twelve  of  these 
buckets  were  used,  and  were  hauled  from  the  mixer  on  cars  to  a 
locomotive  crane,  which  lifted  each  bucket  from  the  car  and  lowered 
it  to  place.  The  locomotive  crane  was  elevated  on  a  gantry  frame 
so  that  a  train  of  cars  on  the  same  trestle  could  pass  directly  under 
it  without  interference.  This  enabled  two  of  these  locomotive 
.cranes  to  work  on  the  same  trestle. 

Each  concrete  bucket  was  provided  with  two  12-oz.  canvas  cur- 
tains or  covers  each  3X4  ft.,  quilted  with  110  pieces  of 
1/16  X  1  X  3-in.  sheet-lead.  The  curtains  were  fastened,  one  to 
each  side  of  the  top  of  the  bucket,  and  were  folded  over  the  concrete 
so  as  to  cover  it  completely  and  protect  it  from  wash  while  being 
lowered  through  the  water.  Occasionally,  when  an  opportunity 
occurred  to  allow  the  top  of  the  concrete  in  a  bucket  to  be  examined 
after  being  lowered  and  raised  through  23  ft.  of  water,  the  concrete 
was  invariably  found  in  good  condition.  Discoloration  of  the  water 
from  cement  was  seldom  noticed  during  the  descent  of  the  bucket. 
The  concrete  for  this  subaqueous  work  was  mixed  quite  wet. 

The  pebbles  for  the  concrete  were  delivered  by  contract,  and 
were  unloaded  from  the  scows  by  means  of  a  clam-shell  bucket  into 
a  hopper.  This  hopper  fed  the  pebbles  on  to  an  endless  conveyor 
which  delivered  them  to  a  rotary  screen.  Inside  this  screen  water 
was  discharged  under  a  pressure  from  a  4-in.  pipe,  to  wash  the 
pebbles.  From  the  screen  the  pebbles  passed  through  a  chute  into 
4 -yd.  cars,  which  were  hauled  up  an  incline  to  a  height  of  65  ft. 
by  means  of  a  hoisting  engine.  The  cars  were  dumped  auto- 
matically, forming  a  stock  pile.  Under  the  stock  pile  was  a  double 
gallery  or  tunnel,  provided  with  eight  chutes  through  the  roof ; 
and  from  these  chutes  the  cars  were  loaded  and  hauled  by  a  hoist- 
ing engine  up  an  inclined  trestle  to  the  bins  above  the  concrete 
mixer.  A  system  of  electric  bell  signals  was  used  in  handling  these 
cars. 

The  sand  was  handled  from  the  stock  pile  in  the  same  manner. 
The  cement  was  loaded  in  bags  on  a  car  at  the  warehouse,  hauled 
to  the  mixer  and  elevated  by  a  sprocket-chain  elevator. 

Chutes  from  the  bins  delivered  the  materials  into  the  concrete 
mixer  which  was  of  the  modified  cubical  type  revolving  on  trunnions 
about  an  axial  line  through  diagonal  corners  of  the  cube  (made  by 
the  Municipal  Engineering  and  Contracting  Co.,  Chicago,  111.).  It 
was  driven  by  a  7  X  10-in.  vertical  single  engine  with  boiler.  The 
mixer  demonstrated  its  ability  to  turn  out  a  batch  of  perfectly 
mixed  concrete  every  1%  mins.  It  discharged  into  a  hopper,  pro- 
vided with  a  cut-off  chute,  which  discharged  into  the  concrete 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  585 

buckets  on  the  cars.  Four  buckets  of  concrete  were  hauled  in  a 
train  by  a  locomotive  to  their  destination.  There  were  two  locomo- 
tives and  23  cars. 

In  the  operation  of  this  plant  55  men  were  employed,  43  being 
engaged  on  actual  concrete  work  and  12  building  molds  and  ap- 
pliances for  future  work.  The  work  was  done  by  day  labor  for  the 
Government,  and  the  cost  of  operation  was  as  follows  for  one 
typical  week  when,  in  6  days  of  8  hours  each,  the  output  was  1,383 
cu.  yds.,  or  an  average  of  230  cu.  yds.  per  day.  The  output  on  one 
day  was  considerably  below  the  average  on  account  of  an  accident 
to  plant  but  this  may  be  considered  as  typical. 

Pebbles  from  stock  pile  to  mixer.  Per  cu.  yd. 

4  laborers,  at  $2 $0.0348 

1  engineman,   at    $3 0.0131 

Coal,  oil  and  waste,   at  $1.03 0.0043 

Sand  from  stock  pile  to  mixer. 

5  laborers,  at  $2 -. 0.0434 

1  engineman,  at  $2.50 , 0.0109 

Coal,  oil  and  waste,  at  $0.82 0.0035 

Cemenffrom  warehouse  to  mixer. 

5  laborers,  at  $2 0.0434 

Mixing  concrete. 

1   engineman,   at  $2.50 0.0109 

1  mechanic,  at   $2.50 0.0108 

Coal,  oil  and  waste,  at  $1.29 0.0056 

Transporting  concrete. 

4   laborers,  at  $2 0.0348 

1  engineman,  at  $3 0.0130 

Coal,  oil  and  waste,  at  $0.66 0.0028 

Depositing  concrete  in  molds. 

4  laborers,  at  $2 0.0348 

1  engineman,   at   $3 ' 0.0130 

1  rigger,  at  $3 0.0130 

Coal,  oil  and  waste,  at  $1.18 0.0051 

Assembling,   transporting,   setting  and  remov- 
ing molds. 

4   laborers,  at  $2 0.0347 

1   engineman,  at   $3.25 0.0141 

1  carpenter,   at    $3 0.0130 

1  mechanic,   at   $2.50 0.0109 

Coal,  oil  and  waste,  at  $1.39 0.0060 

Care  of  tracks. 

1  laborer,  at  $2 0.0086 

1  mechanic,  at   $2.50 0.0109 

Supplying  coal. 

3  laborers,  at  $2 0.0260 

Blacksmith  work. 

1  laborer,  at  $2 0.0086 

1  blacksmith,  at  $3.25 • 0.0141 

Water  boy,  at  $0.75 0.0032 


Total  per  cu.  yd $0.4473 

Add  75%  of  the  cost  of  administration 0.1388 

Total  labor  per  cu.  yd.% $0.5861 


580  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  total  cost  of  each  cubic  yard  of  concrete  in  place  is  estimated 
to  be  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Ten-elevenths  cu.  yd.  pebbles,  at  $1.085 $0.9864 

Ten-twenty-seconds  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $0.00 0.0000 

1.26  bbls.  cement,  at  $1.77 2.2302 

Labor,  as  above  given 0.5861 

Cost  of  plant  distributed  over  total  average.  ...    0.8400 

Total   yardage $4.6427 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  sand  cost  nothing,  as  it  was  dredged 
from  the  trench  in  which  the  pier  was  built,  and  paid  for  as 
dredging.  The  cost  of  the  plant  was  distributed  over  the  South 
Pier  work  and  over  the  proposed  North  Pier  work,  on  the  basis 
of  only  20%  salvage  value  after  the  completion  of  both  piers.  It  is 
said,  however,  that  80%  is  too  high  an  allowance  for  the  probable 
depreciation. 

The  cost   of  the  trestles  was  included  in   the  cost  of  the  plant. 
The  Washington  fir  used  in  the  trestles  cost  $16  per  M.  delivered  in 
the  yard.     The  cost  of  framing  and  placing  the  timberwork   (exclu- 
sive of  the  piles)  was  $3.25  per  M. 
The  cost  of  the  plant  was  as  follows : 

Machinery    $30,055.98 

Piles  and  pile  driving 13,963.00 

Lumber  for  trestles  and  molds 12,094.26 

Iron  and  castings 7,572.36 

Labor  on  plant.  . 15,760.40 

Total    $79,446.00 

The  item  of  "labor  on  plant"  includes  all  work  in  building  trestles, 
laying  track,  building  molds,  mold  traveler  and  all  appurtenances  for 
performing  the  work.  The  cost  of  plant  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  was 
estimated  thus : 

First    cost $79,446 

20%   depreciation  during  use  on  South  Pier 15,889 

Estimated  increase  in   size  of  plant  for   use  on 

North   Pier 3,972 

Total  for  both  piers $99,307 

Salvage  value  of  plant  20% 19,861 

Net $79,446 

$79,446-7-94,000  cu.  yds.  =  $0.84  per  cu.  yd. 

The  proportions  of  the  subaqueous  concrete  were  1 :2.5 :5  by 
volume,  or  1 :2.73  :5.78  by  weight,  cement  being  assumed  to  weigh 
100  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  The  proportions  of  the  superaqueous  concrete 
were  1:3.12:6.25  by  volume,  or  1:3.41:7.22  by  weight.  The  dry 
sand  weighed  109.2  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.,  the  voids  being  35.1%.  The  peb- 
bles weighed  115.5  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft,  the  voids  being  31%. 

As  above  stated,  the  molds  were  bottomless  boxes  built  in  four 
pieces,  two  sides  and  two  ends,  held  together  by  tie-rods.  The 
1^4 -in.  turnbuckle  tie-rods  passed  through  the  ends  of  beams  that 
bore  against  the  outside  of  the  mold.  These  tie-rods  had  eyes  at 
each  end,  in  which  rods  with  wedge  shaped  ends  were  inserted. 
The  mold  was  erected  on  the  trestle  by  the  locomotive  crane,  and 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  587 

was  then  lifted  by  the  mold  traveler,  carried  and  lowered  to  place. 
The  largest  one  of  these  molds,  with  its  cast-iron  ballast,  weighed 
40  tons.  When  it  was  desired  to  remove  a  mold,  after  the  concrete 
block  had  hardened,  the  nuts  on  the  wedge-ended  rods  were  turned,- 
thus  pulling  the  wedge  end  from  the  eye  of  the  tie-rod,  and  releasing 
the  sides  of  the  mold  from  the  ends.  The  locomotive  crane  then 
raised  the  sides  and  ends  separately  and  assembled  them  ready  to  be 
lowered  again  for  the  next  block.  The  time  required  to  remove  one 
of  these  40-ton  molds,  reassemble  and  set  it  again  rarely  exceeded 
60  mins.,  and  had  been  accomplished  in  45  mins. 

As  already  stated,  the  concrete  was  built  in  alternate  blocks ; 
then  the  intermediate  blocks  were  built,  the  ends  of  the  concrete 
blocks  just  built  serving  as  end  molds  for  the  new  blocks.  The  two 
sides  of  the  mold  (without  the  end  pieces)  were  assembled  by  the 
aid  of  templates,  and  were  bolted  together  by  tie-rods.  To  hold 
the  sides  apart  when  the  templates  were  removed,  it  was  necessary 
to  surround  each  of  the  six  tie-rods  with  a  box  of  1-in.  plank.  These 
boxes  measured  4  ins.  square  on  the  inside;  and  were  left  buried 
in  the  concrete..  Their  purpose  was  to  act  as  horizontal  struts  to 
hold  the  sides  of  the  mold  apart,  and  to  permit  removal  of  the  tie- 
rods  after  the  concrete  block  had  been  built.  The  removal  of  these 
rods  was  accomplished  by  withdrawing  the  wedge-ended  rods. 

The  mold  traveler  deserves  a  brief  description.  It  was  provided 
with  a  four-drum  engine,  and  the  drums  were  actuated  by  a  worm 
gear  which  was  positive  in  its  movement  in  lowering  as  well  as  in 
raising.  The  drums  act  independently  or  together,  as  desired. 
The  hoisting  speed  was  6  ft.  per  min.,  and  the  traveling  speed,  100 
ft.  per  min.  The  load  was  suspended  on  four  hooks,  depending  by 
double  blocks  and  %-in.  wire  ropes  from  four  trolleys  suspended 
from  the  truss,  which  allowed  lateral  adjustment  of  the  mold.  The 
difficulty  of  using  so  broad  a  gage  as  31  ft,  on  a  curve  having  a 
radius  of  563  ft.,  was  overcome  by  using  a  differential  gear  in  the 
driving  shaft  of  the  propelling  gear,  thus  compensating  for  the 
greater  distance  traveled  by  the  wheels  on  the  outer  rail.  The  whole 
machine  was  carried  on  six  trucks  having  two  double-flanged  wheels 
each.  The  four  forward  trucks  were  swiveled  on  steel  bed  plates 
with  3-in.  king  bolts.  The  two  rear  trucks  were  fixed  to  the  chord 
and  had  idler  wheels,  which  slid  on  their  axles  so  as  to  accommodate 
themselves  to  the  curve. 

Rubble  Concrete  Data.— By  some  engineers  it  is  believed  that 
rubble  concrete,  particularly  for  dam  construction,  is  a  very  new 
form  of  masonry.  In  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  1875,  Mr.  J.  J.  R.  Croes 
describes  work  on  the  Boyd's  Corner  Dam  on  the  Croton  River,  near 
Isew  York.  This  work  was  begun  in  1867,  and  for  a  time  rubble 
concrete  was  used,  but  was  finally  discontinued,  due  to  the  impres- 
sion that  it  might  not  be  water-tight.  In  those  days  "sloppy"  con- 
crete would  not  have  been  allowed,  which  probably  accounts  for  the 
difficulty  of  getting  a  water-tight  rubble  concrete.  The  specifications 
called  for  a  dry  concrete  that  had  to  be  thoroughly  rammed  in  be- 
tween the  rubble  stones ;  and,  to  give  room  for  this  ramming,  the 


588  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

contractor  was  not  permitted  to  lay  any  two  stones  closer  together 
than  12  ins.  As  a  result,  not  more  than  33%  of  the  masonry  was 
rubble  stones,  the  rest  being  the  concrete  between  the  stones.  Mr. 
Croes  states  that  most  of  the  bidders  erred  in  assuming  that  66% 
to  75%  of  the  masonry  would  be  rubble  stones. 

The  form  of  the  rubble  stones  as  they  come  from  the  quarry 
should  be  considered.  Stones  that  have  flat  beds,  like  many  sand- 
stones and  limestones,  can  be  laid  upon  layers  of  "dry"  concrete, 
and  can  have  their  vertical  joints  readily  filled  with  concrete  rammed 
into  place.  But  granites  and  other  stones  that  break  out  irregularly, 
can  not  be  well  bedded  in  concrete  unless  it  is  made  so  soft  as 
to  be  "sloppy."  In  thin  retaining  walls,  small,  irregular  stones  may 
be  forced  into  concrete  by  jumping  upon  them,  men  wearing  rubber 
boots. 

When  stones  come  out  flat  bedded,  if  it  is  desired  to  economize 
cement,  make  the  bed  joints  of  ordinary  mortar  (not  concrete)  and 
fill  the  vertical  joints  with,  concrete. 

Generally  it   is  an   absurd  practice   to   break  up  large  blocks  of 
stone  in  a  crusher  for  the  purpose  of  making  the  whole  of  a  heavy 
wall  of  concrete,  since  rubble  concrete  requires  not  only  less  cement 
but  effects  a   saving  in   crushing.      There  are  exceptions,   however. 
For  example,  the  anchorages  of  the  Manhattan  Bridge  in  New  York 
City  were  specified  to  be  of  rubble  concrete,   doubtless  because  the 
designer  believed  this  sort  of  masonry  to  be  cheaper  than  concrete. 
In   this   case   an   economic   mistake   was   made,    for   all    the   rubble 
stone   must  be   quarried  up   the   Hudson   River,   loaded   into   scows, 
unloaded  onto  cars,  and  finally  unloaded  and  delivered  by  derricks. 
This    repeated    handling    of    large,    irregular    rubble    stones    is    so 
expensive  that  it  more  than  offsets  the  cost  of  crushing,  as  well  as 
the   extra   cost   of    cement    in   plain    concrete.      Crushed    stone   can 
be  unloaded  from  boats  by  means  of  clam-shell  buckets  at  a  low 
cost  (see  data  in  the  section  on  Rock  Excavation).     It  can  be  trans- 
ported on  a  belt  conveyor,  elevated  in  a  bucket  conveyor,  mixed  With 
sand  and   cement,   and   delivered  to   the  work,   all   with   very   little 
manual    labor   where   the    installation    of   a   very    efficient   plant    is 
justified  by  the  magnitude  of  the  job.     Large  rubble  stones,  on  the 
other    hand,    can    not    be    handled    so    cheaply    nor    with    as    great 
rapidity  as  crushed  stone.     Each  particular  piece  of  work,  therefore, 
must  be  treated  as  a  separate  problem  in   engineering  economics ; 
for  no  unqualified  generalization  as  to  the  relative  cheapness  of  this 
or  that  kind  of  masonry  is  to  be  relied  upon. 

In  the  construction  of  a  dry  dock  at  the  Charleston  Navy  Yard, 
rubble  concrete  was  used.  The  rubble  stones  averaged  about  %  cu. 
yd.  each,  and  were  spaced  about  18  ins.  apart.  About  67%  of  the 
masonry  was  1:2:5  concrete,  leaving  33%  of  rubble  stones. 

The  Spier  Falls  Dam  on  the  upper  Hudson  River  is  of  cyclopean 
masonry,  the  rubble  stones  being  very  large  pieces  of  granite, 
which  are  bedded  in  1:2%:5  concrete.  At  the  time  of  my  visit 
to  the  dam,  it  was  estimated  that  about  33%  of  the  masonry  was 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  589 

concrete.  1  have  recently  been  informed  by  Mr.  C.  E.  Parsons,  the 
chief  engineer,  that  about  1  bbl.  of  cement  was.  used  in  each  cubic 
yard  of  masonry.  This  high  percentage  of  cement  may  be  accounted 
for  by  the  fact  that  there  was  a  good  deal  of  plain  rubble  laid  in 
1  :  2  cement  mortar,  no  accurate  record  of  which  was  kept.  At  the 
time  of  my  visit,  three  Ransome  mixers  were  being  used,  two  for  con- 
crete and  one  for  mortar.  Each  concrete  mixer  averaged  200  batches 
in  10  hrs.,  of  23  cu.  ft.  of  concrete  per  batch.  I  am  inclined  to  think, 
from  inspection  of  the  masonry  during  the  time  it  was  being  laid, 
that  about  40%  of  the  dam  was  rubble  stones  and  the  remaining 
60%  was  concrete  and  mortar.  The  stones  and  concrete  were 
delivered  by  cableways  to  stiff-leg  derricks,  which  deposited  the 
material  in  the  dam.  There  were  two  laborers  to  each  mason  em- 
ployed in  placing  the  materials,  wages  being  15  cts.  and  35  cts.  per 
hr.  respectively.  The  labor  cost  of  placing  the  materials  was  60  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  masonry.  Mr.  Parsons  states  that  the  155,000  cu.  yds. 
of  cyclopean  masonry  actually  cost  $5.71  per  cu.  yd.,  exclusive  of 
the  plant  depreciation,  and  that  calling  the  plant  depreciation  40% 
of  its  first  cost,  it  would  add  10%  to  the  cost  of  the  masonry,  or 
57  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  making  a  total  of  $6.28  per  cu.  yd.  This  does  not 
include  the  cofferdam. 

For  a  rubble  concrete  dam  across  the  Chattahoochee,  17  miles 
north  of  Atlanta,  Ga.,  the  stone  was  a  local  gneiss  that  came  out  of 
the  quarry  in  large  slabs  with  parallel  beds,  some  stones  containing 
4  cu.  yds.  each.  About  40%  of  the  dam  was  of  this  rubble  and  60% 
of  concrete  between  the  rubble  stones.  The  concrete  was  a  1:2^:5 
mixture. 

The  breakwater  at  Marquette,  Mich.,  was  built  of  rubble  concrete, 
the  rubble  stones  amounting  to  27%  of  the  volume  of  the  breakwater 
masonry. 

The  Hemet  Dam,  California,  is  built  of  granite  rubble  concrete, 
the  concrete  being  a  1:3:6  mixture.  The  face  stones  of  the  dam 
were  laid  in  mortar.  There  were  31,100  cu.  yds.  of  masonry,  which 
required  20,000  bbls.  of  cement,  or  0.64  bbl.  per  cu.  yd.  The  cement 
was  hauled  23  miles  over  roads  having  grades  of  18%  in  places,  the 
total  ascent  being  3,350  ft.  The  cost  of  hauling  was  $1  to  $1.50 
per  bbl.  The  sand  was  conveyed  400  ft.  from  the  river  to  the  dam 
by  an  endless  double-rope  carrier  provided  with  V-shaped  buckets 
spaced  20  ft.  apart,  the  rise  of  the  conveyor  being  125  ft.  in  the 
400  ft.  This  was  a  simple  and  inexpensive  conveyor. 

The  Boonton  Dam,  Boonton,  N.  J.,  is  of  cyclopean  masonry,  that  is, 
of  large  rubble  stones  bedded  in  concrete.  The  concrete  was  made 
so  wet  that  when  the  stones  were  dropped  into  it  the  concrete  flowed 
into  every  crevice.  The  granite  rubble  stones  measured  from  1  to  2  % 
cu.  yds.  each.  The  materials  were  all  delivered  on  cars,  from  which 
they  were  delivered  to  the  dam  by  derricks  provided  with  bull- 
wheels.  On  the  dam  were  4  laborers  and  1  mason  to  each  derrick, 
and  this  gang  dumped  concrete  and  joggled  the  rubble  stones  into  it. 
A  derrick  lias  laid  as  much  as  125  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  in  10  hrs. 


590  HANDBOOK    OI<'   COST  DATA. 

With  35  derricks,  20  of  which  were  aying  masonry  and  15  either 
passing  materials  to -the  other  derricks,  or  being  moved,  as  much  as 
21,000  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  were  laid  in  one  month.  The  amount  of 
cement  per  cubic  yard  of  masonry  was  0.68  bbl.,  the  cyclopean  stone 
occupying  45  to  50%  of  the  volume  of  the  dam. 

Cost  of  the  Boonton  Dam,  Cyclopean  Masonry. — In  the  preceding 
paragraph  the  character  of  this  masonry  is  given.  Mr.  E.  L.  Harri- 
son informs  me  that  the  rock  was  syenitic  granite,  "not  quite  so 
hard  to  quarry  as  trap  rock."  About  50%  was  concrete,  mixed  1:9, 
and  0.68  bbl.  cement  was  required  per  cu.  yd.  of  the  masonry,  at 
$1.50  per  bbl.  Wages  of  common  laborers  were  $1.55  per  10-hr, 
day,  and  the  cost  to  the  contractor  would  have  been  $4  per  eu.  yd. 
had  he  furnished  the  cement. 

Mr.  J.  Waldo  Smith  has  stated  that  45%  of  the  dam  was  cyclopean 
stone  and  that  the  cost  to  the  contractor  was  $3.23  per  cu.  yd.  ex- 
clusive of  cement.  If  we  add  $1.05  for  cement,  we  have  $4.28 
per  cu.  yd. 

Some  English  Data  on  Rubble  Concrete.— The  following  is  an  ab- 
stract of  an  article  from  London  "Engineering"  :  Railway  work, 
under  Mr.  John  Strain,  in  Scotland  and  Spain,  involved  the  building 
of  abutments,  piers  and  arches  of  rubble  concrete.  The  concrete 
was  made  of  1  part  cement  to  5  parts  of  ballast,  the  ballast  consist- 
ing of  broken  stone  or  slag  and  sand  mixed  in  proportions  determined 
by  experiment.  The  materials  were  mixed  by  turning  with  shovels 
4  times  dry,  then  4  times  more  during  the  addition  of  water  through 
a  rose  nozzle.  A  bed  of  concrete  6  ins.  thick  was  first- laid,  and  on 
this  a  layer  of  rubble  stones,  no  two  stones  being  nearer  together 
than  3  ins.,  nor  nearer  the  forms  than  3  ins.  The  stones  were 
rammed  and  probed  around  with  a  trowel  to  leave  no  spaces.  Over 
each  layer  of  rubble,  concrete  was  spread  to  a  depth  of  6  ins.  The 
forms  or  molds  for  piers  for  a  viaduct  were  simply  large  open  boxes, 
the  four  sides  of  which  could  be  taken  apart.  The  depth  of  the  boxes 
was  uniform,  and  they  were  numbered  from  the  top  down,  so  that, 
knowing  the  height  of  a  given  pier,'  the  proper  box  for  the  base 
could  be  selected.  As  each  box  was  filled,  the  next  one  smaller 
in  size  was  swung  into  place  with  a  derrick.  The  following  bridge 
piers  for  the  Tharsis  &  Calanas  Ry.  were  built : 

Length         Height 

of                   of  Cu.  Yds.  Weeks 

Bridge.           Piers.  No.  of  in  to 

Name.                                     Ft.                Ft.  Spans.  Piers.  Build. 

Tamujoso    River 435                 28  12  1.737  14V2 

Oraque    423                 31  11  1,590  15 

Cascabelero    480  30  to  80  10  2,680  21 

No.     16 294  28  to  50  7  1,046 

Tiesa 165  16  to  23  8  420 

It  is  stated  that  the  construction  of  some  of  these  piers  in  ordi- 
nary masonry  would  have  taken  four  times  as  long.  The  rock 
available  for  rubble  did  not  yield  large  blocks,  consequently  the 
percentage  of  pure  concrete  in  the  piers  was  large,  averaging  70%. 
In  one  case,  where  the  stones  were  smaller  than  usual,  the  percentage 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  591 

of  concrete  was  76^%.  In  other  work  the  percentage  has  been  as 
low  as  55%,  and  in  still  other  work  where  a  rubble  face  work  was 
used  the  percentage  of  concrete  has  been  40.%. 

In  these  piers  the  average  quantities  of  materials  per  cubic  yard 
of  rubble  concrete  were : 

448  Ibs.   (0.178  cu.  yd.)  cement. 

0.36  cu.  yd.  sand. 

0.68  cu.  yd.  broken  stone  (measured  loose  in  piles). 

0.30  cu.  yd.  rubble  (measured  solid). 

Several  railway  bridge  piers  and  abutments  in  Scotland  are  cited. 
In  one  of  these,  large  rubble  stones  of  irregular  size  and  weighing 
2  tons  each  were  set  inside  the  forms,  3  ins.  away  from  the  plank 
and  3  ins.  from  one  another.  The  gang  to  each  derrick  was: 
1  derrickman  and  1  boy,  1  mason  and  10  laborers,  and  about  one- 
quarter  of  the  time  of  1  carpenter  and  his  helper  raising  the  forms. 
For  bridges  of  400  cu.  yds.,  the  progress  was  12  to  15  cu.  yds.  per 
day.  The  forms  were  left  in  place  10  days. 

To  chip  off  a  few  inches  from  the  face  of  a  concrete  abutment  that 
was  too  far  out,  required  the  work  of  1  quarryman  5  days  per  cu.  yd. 
of  solid  concrete  chipped  off. 

Concrete  was  used  for  a  skew  arch  over  the  River  Dochart,  on  the 
Killin  Ry.,  Scotland.  There  were  5  arches,  each  of  30  ft.  span  on 
the  square  or  42  ft.  on  the  skew,  the  skew  being  45°.  The  piers  were 
of  rubble  concrete.  The  concrete  in  the  arch  was  wheeled  300  ft.  on 
a  trestle,  and  dumped  onto  the  centers.  It  was  rammed  in  6-in. 
layers,  which  were  laid  corresponding  to  the  courses  of  arch  stones. 
As  the  layers  approached  the  crown  of  the  arch,  some  difficulty  was 
experienced  in  keeping  the  surfaces  perpendicular.  Each  arch  was 
completed  in  a  day. 

In  a  paper  by  John  W.  Steven,  in  Proc.  Inst.  C.  E.,  the  following 
is  given : 

Rubble  Per  Cent 

Concrete  Concrete  of  Rubble 

per  per  in  Rubble 

cu.  yd.  cu.  yd.  Concrete. 

Ardrossan    Harbor $6.00  $5.00              20.0 

Irvine    Branch 7.00  3.68              63.6 

Calanas  &  Tharsis  Ry 7.08  3.43              30.3 

Cost  of  a  Rubble  Concrete  Abutment. — Mr.  Emmet  Steece  gives 
the  cost  of  278  cu.  yds.  rubble  concrete  in  a  bridge  abutment  at 
Burlington,  la.,  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.82  bbl.  Saylor's  Portland  at  $2.60 $2.14 

0.22  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $1 0.22 

0.52  cu.  yd.  broken  stone,  at  $0.94 0.49 

0.38  cu.  yd.  rubble  stones,  at  $0.63 0.24 

Water 0.07 

Labor   (15  cts.  per  hr. ) 1.19 

Foreman    0.09 

Total     ..$4.44 


592  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  concrete  was  1:2^:4%,  laid  in  4-in.  layers,  on  which  wen 
laid  large  rubble  stones  spaced  about  6  ins.  apart.  Concrete  was 
rammed  into  the  spaces  between  the  rubble,  which  was  then  covered 
with  another  4-in.  layer  of  concrete,  and  so  on.  A  force  of  28  men 
and  a  foreman  averaged  nearly  40  cu.  yds.  of  rubble  concrete  per 
day.  The  cost  of  lumber  for  the  forms  is  not  included.  The  abut- 
ment was  3  ft.  wide  at  top,  9  ft.  at  the  base  and  30  ft.  high. 

Cost  of  a  Rubble  Concrete  Dam  in  the  Central  States.* — This 
article  describes  the  earthwork  and  concrete  construction  incident  to 
a  hydro-electric  development  in  the  middle  West.  Although  neither 
the  name  of  the  contractor  nor  the  locality  of  the  work  can  be  given, 
it  will  serve  all  statistical  purposes  to  state  that  the  work  was 
located  within  200  miles  of  Chicago  in  a  small  country  town,  whose 
population  was  made  up  almost  entirely  of  those  employed  on  the 
construction,  but  one  whose  railroad  facilities  were  all  that  could 
be  desired.  The  river  is  one  of  the  upper  tributaries  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi, draining  over  1,200  square  miles  of  densely  wooded  forest 
land,  flowing  through  a  series  of  broad  marshes  and  swift  rapids, 
deep  cut  in  the  narrow  valleys,  until  it  empties  into  the  mother 
stream.  At  the  chosen  site  there  is  an  average  depth  of  6  ft.  and 
flow  of  600  cu.  ft.  per  second,  which  will  impound  a  reservoir  with 
an  area  of  650  acres  and  a  maximum  .depth  of  50  ft.,  10  ft.  of  which 
is  available,  as  the  river  here  narrows  down  from  a  wide  marsh 
plain  to  a  deep  rocky  channel,  making  an  ideal  spot  for  water 
storage. 

The  dam  is  a  structure  of  cyclopean  masonry,  having  a  spillway  of 
490  ft.  flanked  on  each  side  b'y  abutments  of  the  same  material  and 
earth  dikes  extending  1,500  and  2,800  ft.  from  each  end.  The  dam 
itself  has  a  maximum  height  of  49  ft.  and  a  width  of  base  of  49  ft., 
its  section  being  of  a  standard  "ogee"  type.  The  earth  dikes  have 
an  extreme  height  of  31  ft.,  side  slopes  of  2  to  1,  4-ft.  berms,  and 
are  made  impervious  by  concrete  core  walls  founded  on  bedrock. 
These  have  a  thickness  of  2  ft.  at  the  top  and  a  batter  of  12  on  1  on 
each  side. 

The  preliminary  construction  work,  consisting  of  the  erection  of 
a  camp  for  the  working  force  of  400  men  and  the  clearing  of  the 
dam  site,  was  commenced  April  10,  but  it  was  not  until  the  follow- 
ing June  that  the  organization  was  complete  and  the  work  well  under 
way,  the  first  concrete  being  laid  July  9.  The  actual  work  of  har- 
nessing the  river  was  accomplished  by  building  above  the  dam  loca- 
tion a  timber  rock-filled  cofferdam,  500x150  ft.,  with  a  maximum 
height  of  16  ft.,  the  natural  bank  forming  one  side,  thereby  divert- 
ing the  water  into  the  east  half  of  the  river  channel  and  allowing 
the  excavation  to  be  carried  in  the  dry  to  bedrock. 

Concrete  mixing  plants  were  erected  on  each  side  of  the  river,  con- 
taining three  No.  4  Ransome  mixers.  An  excellent  granite  quarry 
was  opened  up  on  the  east  side  of  the  river,  where  a  crushing  plant 


Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  7,   1008. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  593 

of  considerable  capacity  was  erected,  the  broken  stone  being  carried 
from  there  to  the  bins  of  the  mixing  plants  by  construction  trains 
of  Western  dump  cars.  Sand  and  gravel  were  obtained  from  a 
nearby  borrow  pit  with  drag  scrapers,  screened  and  brought  to  the 
bins  in  dump-car  trains.  Cement  was  kept  in  an  adjacent  store- 
house and  wheeled  by  hand  to  chutes  immediately  above  the  mixers. 
The  mixture  was  in  1  cu.  yd.  batches  in  the  proportions  of 
1:2%:  5,  using  Atlas  Portland  cement.  About  150  cu.  yds.  is  the 
average  daily  output  of  each  mixer.  The  concrete  was  delivered  in 

1  cu.  yd.  tipping  buckets  and  placed  in  the  forms  by  means  of  push 
cars  and   5-ton,    60-ft.    boom,    guyed   derricks,    operated    by   Lidger- 
wood  and  American  double-drum  engines,   which  were  the  limiting 
factors  in  the  daily  progress.     Plum  stones  up  to  1  cu.  yd.  in  vol- 
ume were  bedded  in  the  concrete  and  formed  about  25%  of  its  mass. 
Lifts  of  3   to   8  ft.  a  day  were  secured,   care  being  taken  in  filling 
the  forms  to  complete  a  horizontal  course  over  the  whole  surface. 
Successive  fills  were  bonded  together  by  the  use  of  large  stones  im- 
bedded  so  as  to  project  half  way  above   the   surface  of  the   lower 
course  and  lock  with  the  subsequent  layer. 

The  forms  were  built  of  2-in.  dressed  pine  planks,  braced  with 
4  x  6-in.  studding,  spaced  3  ft.  apart  on  centers  and  stiffened  With 
6  x  8-in.  horizontal  waling  pieces  attached  every  4  ft.  The  forms 
were  anchored  with  heavy  iron  wire,  or  %-in.  band  iron,  and  were 
not  interchangeable,  being  knocked  down  as  each  section  was 
stripped,  and  rebuilt  for  the  next. 

The  dam  was  constructed  in  alternate  sections,  40  ft.  long,  bonded 
together  with  vertical  keys,  3  ft.  apart  in  the  clear  and  terminating 

2  ft.   below  the  upper  surface.     Upon  reaching  the  center,  the  end 
cofferdams  were  removed  and  rebuilt  across  the  east  channel,  send- 
ing the  water  through  five  10  x  10-ft.  sluiceways  left  temporarily  in 
the  structure.     The  excavation  was  then  pushed  forward  in  the  east 
channel,  and  on  Dec.  3  the  last  bucket  of  concrete  was"  placed  in  the 
closing  sluices. 

The  earth  dikes  were  filled  by  drag  and  wheel  scrapers  drawn  by 
Missouri  mules,   the  former  being  used  for  all  hauls  under  200   ft 
The  corewalls  were  first  constructed  on  bedrock,  the  concrete  being 
wheeled  in  barrows  an  average  of  200  ft.  from  construction  train  to 
forms.     Care  was  taken  to  bring  no  unnecessary  stress  on  the  walls 
by  maintaining  the  fill  at  equal  heights  on  each   side   of  the  core. 
Clay  puddle  and  riprap  protect  the  sides  from  erosion. 
The  plant  and  construction  costs  were  as  follows: 
Camp. — The  camp  consisted  of  the  following  buildings : 

Floor  Area, 

Sq.  Ft. 
8  dormitories  for  283  men 15,000 

2  mess  halls  for  80  men 3,000 

3  individual  shacks  for  3  men 864 

1  storehouse   1,136 

1   machine     shop 900 

1   blacksmith    shop : 100 


Total  floor  area 21,000 


594  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  constructing  these  buildings  was  as  follows: 
1  tern.  Cost. 

158,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  at  $22.50 $3,575 

15  carpenters  48  days  at  $3 2,160 

30  000  sq.  ft.  tar  paper  at  $0.0225 675 

Nails • 145 

Total  21,000  sq.  ft.  at  $0.31 $6.555 

Interest  and  depreciation 5,500 

The  cost  per  square  foot  of  building  was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  ft.     Per  cent. 

Lumber    $0.17 

Labor    0.10  32 

Roofing  and  hardware 0.14 

Total     $0.31  100 

The  carpenter  work  cost  $13.70  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  which  is  a  high 
cost. 

Hand  and  Gravel. — The  excavation  and  screening  of  the  sand  and 
gravel  required  th.e  following  plant:  One  screening  plant,  6  wheel 
scrapers,  7  spans  of  mules  and  harnesses,  6  living  tents,  2  mule 
tents,  %  dinkey  engine,  6  Western  dump  cars  and  %  mile  of  track. 
The  investment  cost  of  the  plant  was  $11,500  ;  the  daily  plant  charge 
was  as  follows  for  165  days: 

Per  day. 

Interest  and  depreciation,    $5,000 $30.30 

Coal    for    boiler 2.00 

Coal  for  %   dinkey 0.50 

Oil   for   engine 0.40       . 

Oil  for  %  dinkey '. 0.10 

Feed  and  care  of  mules 7.50 


Total     $40.80 

Broken  Stone. — The  plant  for  quarrying  and  crushing  the  broken 
stone  was  as  follows :  One  No.  5  Austin  crusher,  1  hoisting  engine 
and  boiler,  1  60-ft.  derrick,  4  steam  drills,  6  scale  boxes,  1,200  ft. 
track,  %  dinkey  engine,  6  Western  dump  cars,  1  blacksmith's  shop 
and  1  winch.  The  investment  cost  was  $13,000  ;  the  daily  plant 
charges  were  as  follows  for  170  days: 

Per  day. 

Interest  and  depreciation,   $5,500 $32.30 

Coal    for    boilers 5.50 

Coal  for  %   dinkey 1.00 

Oil  for  engines 0.30 

Oil   for  dinkey 0.20 

Explosives 22.50 

Total $61.80 

Mixing. — The  mixing  plant  consisted  of  2  mixing  plants  (3  No.  4 
Ransome  mixers,  1  cu.  yd.  batch),  3  cement  trucks,  700  ft.  of  track 
with  trestle,  2  cement  houses,  1  sand  chute  and  2  sand  cars.  The 
investment  cost  of  the  plant  was  $7,900  ;  the  daily  plant  charges 
were  "as  follows  for  168  days: 

Item.  Per  day. 

Interest  and  depreciation,  $2,900 $17.20 

Coal   2.10 

Oil 0.15 

Total,  180  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.10 .  .$19.45 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  o»o 

Placing. — The  plant  required  for  placing  concrete  was  as  follows? 
Six  hoisting  engines  and  boilers,  7  derricks,  9  tipping  buckets,  800 
ft.  of  track,  6  flat  cars,  500  ft.  of  trestle,  1  dinkey,  4  Western  dump 
cars,  15  wheelbarrows  and  18  shovels.  The  investment  cost  was 
$18,000  and  the  daily  plant  charge  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Per  day. 

Interest  and  depreciation,  $5,600 $31.75 

Coal   5.00 

Oil 1.00 

Total,  180  cu.  yda,  at  $0.21 $37~75      n 

Wages. — The  wages  paid  labor  were  as  follows : 

Class.  Per  day. 

Foremen    $3.00  to  $5.00 

Engineers $2.25  to  $3.50 

Firemen    $1.75  to  $2.75 

Tagmen     $2.00 

Carpenters   $2.00  to  $3.50 

Rivermen    $£.00 

Electricians    $3.00 

Riggers $2.50  to  $3.50 

Mechanics   $2.75  to  $3.50 

Cooks    $2.00 

Laborers    $1.75  to  $2.25 

Water  boys $1.50 

Main  Dam  and  Concrete. — The  cost  in  place  of  the  30,000  cu.  yds. 
of  rubble  concrete  in  the  main  dam  inclusive  of  labor  and  plant 
charges  was  as  -follows  : 


Stone    

Skilled 
Foremen.  Laborers 
3                  8 

.  Laborers. 
6 

Cost 
Per  cu.  yd. 

$1.26 

Sand 

1                   2 

10 

0.46 

2.31 

3                 25 

1 

0  62 

Mixing 

32 

0.58 

Placing  

3                   11 

46 

0.69 

Total   . 

.    $5.92 

Referring  to  the  forms,  the  cost  of  material  per  foot  board  meas- 
ure was : 

Perft.B.  M. 

Lumber     $0.022 

Nails 0.001 

Wire   .  0.005 


Total $0.028 

The  forms  were  used  three  times  and  the  average  cost  of  forms 
per  square  foot  of  surface  covered  was  24  cts.,  which  is  a  very  high 
cost. 

Concrete  Corewall,  East  Dike. — This  corewall  averaged  11.2  ft.  in 
height,  contained  2,893  cu.  yds.,  and  took  78  days,  including  Sun- 
days and  idle  days,  to  build  with  a  force  of  5  foremen,  10  skilled 
laborers  and  80  laborers.  Sectional  forms  4  x  12  ft.  of  1-in.  boards 
and  2  x  6-in.  studding,  were  used.  The  concrete  was  delivered  to 
trestle  running  1,000  ft.  by  train.  The  cost  of  the  corewall  was  as 
follows : 


596  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Item.  Total. 

3,350  bbls.  cement,  at  $2.31 $  6,675 

964  cu.  yds.  sand  and  gravel,  at  75  cts 725 

1,928  cu.  yds.  broken  stone,  at  $1.08 2,082 

Mixing  concrete  (2,983  cu.  yds.,  at  42  cts.) 1,215 

Placing  concrete  (2,893  cu.  yds.,  at  $1.01) 2,947 

22,400  sq.  ft.  forms,  at  43  cts 1,232 

Total $14,876 

1,450  cu.  yds.  excavation,  at  98  cts 1,424 

Grand   total    $16,300 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  work  proper  was  thus  $5.14 
and  the  cost  including  excavation  was  $5.66  per  cu.  yd. 

Earthwork. — The  cost  of  the  earthwork  in  the  dikes  was  as 
follows : 

East  dike:  Volume,  21,900  cu.  yds.,  sandy  loam;  force,  2  foremen, 
44  laborers,  60  mules;  lead,  600  ft.;  plant,  No.  2  wheel  scrapers; 
unit  cost,  28  cts.  t per  cu.  yd. 

West  dike:  8,900  cu.  yds.,  sandy  loam;  force,  1  foreman,  14 
laborers,  20  mules ;  lead,  60  ft.  ;  plant,  drag  scrapers ;  unit  cost, 
26  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Fence  Post. — Mr.  J.  A.  Mitchell  gives  the  fol- 
lowing : 

Fence  posts  need  not  contain  more  than  0.6  cu.  ft.  of  concrete,  if 
the  posts  are  made  tapering.  They  should  be  reinforced  with  gal- 
vanized wire,  for  the  metal  is  so  close  to  the  surface  of  the  con- 
crete that  it  is  likely  to  rust.  Two  men  will  make  100  such  posts 
per  day,  or  2.22  cu.  yds.;  while  three  good  men  have  made  200 
posts  per  day,  or  about  1.5  cu.  yds.  per  man.  A  double  mold  for 
making  two  parts  is  used,  and  should  be  collapsible,  so  that  it  can 
be  removed  in  24  to  48  hrs.  Wooden  molds  that  have  been  in  use 
three  years  are  still  in  service.  Such  posts  can  be  made  for  11  to 
12y2  cts.  each,  which  is  equivalent  to  about  $5.40  per  cu.  yd.,  prices 
being  as  follows: 

Cement,    per    bbl $1.50 

Gravel,   per   cu.   yd 0.40 

Galvanized  wire,  per  Ib 02  % 

Wages,   per  day 1.50 

Mixtures  of  1 :  3  and  1 :  "4  are  best. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Telephone  Poles.* — The  possibilities 
for  reinforced  concrete  poles  in  transmission  line  work  have  re- 
cently been  very  carefully  investigated  by  the  Richmond  (Ind. ) 
Home  Telephone  Co.,  which  has  constructed  a  line  across  the  White- 
water River,  using  poles  ranging  from  45  to  55  ft.  in  height  of  the 
construction  shown  by  Fig.  2,  invented  by  Mr.  Wm.  M.  Bailey,  Vice- 
President  and  General  Manager  of  the  company.  The  following 
account  of  these  investigations  and  of  the  studies  made  by  the 
American  Concrete  Pole  Co.,  Richmond,  Ind.,  which  has  been  organ- 
ized to  market  the  poles,  has  been  compiled  from  information  given 
us  by  Mr.  Bailey. 

For  poles  30  ft.  long  and  under,  the  molding  is  done  horizontally 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  March  11,  1908. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  59r 

on  the  ground  and  the  pole  erected  when  hard  like  a  wooden  pole ; 
for  poles  over  30  ft.  long  the  molding  is  done  in  forms  set  vertical  in 
the  pole  hole.  The  following  figures,  Table  IX,  are  given  as  the  cost 
without  royalty  of  concrete  poles  molded  as  described.  These  costs 
are  for  poles  erected  excluding  the  material  cost  of  steps  but  in- 


Fig.    2. — Concrete  Telephone  Pole. 

eluding  labor  cost  of  setting  steps,  and  they  are  based  on  the  fol- 
lowing wages  and  prices : 

Foreman,  per  day f  3.00 

Laborers,  per  day 1.75 

Cement,  per  barrel 2.00 

Stone,  gravel  or  sand,  per  cu.  yd 1.00 

For  sake  of  comparison,  the  cost  of  cedar  poles  has  been  added  to 
the  table ;  these  costs  include  poles,  unloading,  dressing,  gaining, 
roofing,  boring,  hauling  and  setting.  All  figures  are  as  furnished  by 
Mr.  Bailey.  Regarding  the  methods  of  constructing  concrete  poles, 
Mr.  Bailey  says : 

"All  of  the  larger  concrete  poles  (that  is,  poles  over  30  ft.  In 
height),  are  built  upright  in  position  ready  for  use,  the  forms  being 
set  perpendicularly  over  the  hole  in  which  the  pole  is  to  be  placed, 
the  hole  having  been  dug  to  conform  with  the  size  pole  prior  to  the 
Betting  of  form  ;  thus  when  the  concrete  is  poured  in  at  the  top  of 
form,  the  hole  is  entirely  filled  and  the  concrete  knit  firmly  to  the 


59* 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


is  I 


00000000 


TH  r    <M  oo 


£ °  2  06  2 


oooooooo 


jgc 


o  J 


*j* 

bct-i 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  599 

solid  earth  that  has  never  been  disturbed.     There  is  no  replacing  of 
earth  or  tamping  required. 

"All  poles  under  30  ft.  in  height,  up  to  the  present  time,  have 
been  built  on  the  ground  and  set  after  they  have  been  seasoned,  al- 
though there  is  some  doubt  in  my  mind  and  I  believe  that  with  the 
proper  equipment  and  a  little  practice  that  it  will  be  discovered  that 
even  the  smaller  poles  can  be  built  more  economically  upright.  As 
to  the  cost  of  setting  these  poles,  it  is  true  that  they  will  have  to  be 
handled  with  a  derrick  or  gin  pole,  but  with  this  equipment  they  can 
be  handled  very  rapidly,  and,  I  believe,  almost  as  cheaply  as  the 
wooden  pole.  One  can  readily  see  that  as  the  larger  poles  are  built 
upright  in  position  which  they  are  to  occupy,  that  there  is  no  heavy 
material  to  handle — consequently,  there  will  be  no  necessity  for  any 
heavy  rigging  or  equipment.  The  hole  is  first  dug  and  the  form  is 
set  directly  over  the  same.  After  the  form  has  been  placed,  the 
reinforcing  rods  and  binding  wires  are  placed  and  the  form  is  then 
ready  to  receive  concrete.  After  the  concrete  has  been  poured  in,  it 
is  left  for  about  three  or  four  days,  depending  on  the  weather,  be- 
fore the  forms  are  removed.  The  most  economical  way  of  handling 
concrete  is  with  a  small  mixer,  capable  of  mixing  2  or  3  cu.  yds.  per 
hour  and  the  old-fashioned  grain  elevator.  With  this  equipment,  the 
concrete  is  placed  as  rapidly  as  it  is  mixed  and  with  the  same  power. 
The  pouring  in  of  the  concrete  into  the  top  of  the  form  tamps  it 
thoroughly  and  it  shows  a  solid  compact  concrete. 

"This  proposition  is  like  a  great  many  others — at  first  sight  it  ap- 
pears impractical  on  account  of  first  cost,  but  on  investigation  we 
find  that  this  is  only  a  phantom  and  that  after  all  is  done  and  said, 
the  proposition  is  economy. 

"I  give  you  here  the  exact  cost  data  on  one  of  the  55-ft.  poles 
erected  over  the  Whitewater  river  at  Richmond,  Ind. : 

Materials: 

4   1-in.  steel  rods  40   ft.  long,  and  4   %-in.   steel 
rods,     15     ft.     long     including     "U"     bolts 

with  which  they  were  tied  together $13.34 

56  cu.  ft.  of  concrete 7.84 

1   set  of  binding  wires 1.80 

Total  materials    $22.98 

Labor: 

4  men  setting  form,  placing  rods,  and  binding 
wire,  guying,  truing  same  ready  for  con- 
crete, one  day : 

1  man,  at  $3.00 $   3.00 

1  man,  at  $2.50 2.50 

2  men,  at  $2.00 .      4.00 

4  men  and  one  horse  mixing  and  placing  concrete, 

2  hrs.  and  11  mins 2.28 

2  men  taking  down  form   and   touching  up  pole, 

3  hrs 1.35 

Total  labor $13.13 

Total  materials  and  labor $36.11 

"You  will  note  that  this  cost  is  $4.18  in  excess  of  my  tabulated 
statement  (Table  I).  This  was  due  to  the  location  of  the  lead. 


000  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

These  poles  were  set  in  over  rough  ground  and  in  a  river  bottom 
where  we  had  water  to  contend  with  and  the  conditions  were  very 
unfavorable  to  the  erection  of  any  kind  of  poles.  It  would  have  cost 
considerable  more  to  set  wood  poles  in  the  same  place.  We  were 
also  obliged  to  use  labor  inexperienced  on  this  class  of  work.  I  be- 
lieve that  after  the  men  are  properly  broken  in  and  equipment  work- 
ing properly,  that  concrete  poles  can  actually  be  built  for  less  than 
first-class  cedar  complete,  set  in  the  ground.  There  is  no  compari- 
son between  wood  and  concrete  when  we  take  into  consideration 
strength,  durability,  and  its  lack  of  destruction  from  other  causes, 
such  as  birds,  insects,  lightning,  etc.  The  more  thought  and  test 
that  the  writer  applies  to  this  method  of  construction,  the  more  en- 
thusiastic he  has  become  and  he  expects  to  see  the  day  when  no 
first-class  construction  will  consider  anything  but  steel,  iron  or 
concrete  poles." 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Poles.* — Mr.  F.  J.  Hunt  is  author  of 
the  following: 

The  prime  factors  in  the  construction  of  concrete  poles  are  the 
materials  forming  the  grout.  This  is  true  of  all  concrete  construc- 
tion, but  particularly  so  in  the  construction  of  concrete  poles,  where 
the  cross-section  is  small  and  the  greatest  possible  tensile  strength 
is  desired.  Unless  the  best  quality  of  crushed  stone  and  sand  is 
used,  desired  results  cannot  be  obtained.  Fig.  3  shows  the  method 
of  molding  concrete  poles  on  which  these  and  the  following  remarks 
are  based. 

The  steel  reinforcing  rods  are  placed  1  in.  from  the  surface  of  the 
pole  in  3  sets;  four  rods  extend  to  the  top  of  the  pole,  four  rods 
two-thirds  of  the  length  of  the  pole  and  four  rods  one-third  of  the 
length.  In  testing  the  finished  pole  to  destruction  this  distribution  of 
the  steel  was  found  to  be  practical,  giving  a  uniform  stress  from  top 
to  ground  line.  A  30-ft.  pole  with  6-in.  top  and  9-in.  base  deflected 
3  ft.  at  the  top  from  a  plumb  line,  and  straightened  when  the  load 
was  removed  without  any  apparent  damage  to  the  pole.  A  30-ft. 
pole  must  stand  a  strain  of  2,500  ft.  Ibs.,  at  the  groundline.  The  fea- 
ture to  be  reckoned  with  in  the  building  of  a  line  of  concrete  poles 
is  the  transportation  and  erection.  A  30-ft.  pole,  with  a  6-in.  top, 
will  weigh  2,000  Ibs.  It  is  a  practical  proposition  to  build  this  length 
pole  in  a  yard,  in  forms  on  the  ground.  A  pole  of  any  greater  length 
should  be  built  in  place,  from  the  ground  up,  although  I  have  erected 
4 5 -ft.  poles  that  weighed  5,600  Ibs.  The  30-ft.  reinforced  concrete 
pole  can  be  built  in  Chicago  for  $7.50  and  erected  with  proper  equip- 
ment for  $1  each. 

The  reinforced  30-ft.  concrete  pole  with  6-in.  top  and  10-in.  base, 
and  corners  chamfered  to  1-in.  radii  contains  ^  cu.  yd.  of  concrete 
and  200  Ibs.  of  steel,  the  cost  being  as  follows: 

200  Ibs.  of  steel,  at  $1.85  per  100  Ibs $3.70 

%   cu.  yd.  concrete,  at  $7.50  per  yd 3.75 

Total     .  .  .  $7.45 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  26,  1908. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION. 


601 


The  estimate  of  the  cost  of  the  finished  pole  is  based  on  the  fol- 
lowing prices:  Crushed  stone,  $1.25  per  cu.  yd. ;  sand,  $1.10  per  cu. 
yd.  ;  cement,  $1.75  per  bbl.,  and  labor,  20  cts.  per  hr.  In  erecting 
concrete  poles,  the  equipment  will  vary  to  suit  the  conditions.  On 
traction  lines,  where  the  poles  are  close  to  the  track,  the  most  con- 
venient method  of  erection  is  to  rig  a  hinged  stiff-leg  derrick  on  a  flat 
car,  with  a  boom  of  sufficient  length  to  pick  up  poles  on  cars  at 


Fig.   3.— Molding  Poles. 

either  end  of  the  derrick  car.  This  derrick  should  be  hinged  so  as  to 
be  conveniently  lowered  to  pass  under  grade-crossings  and  obstruc- 
tions of  any  nature.  On  steam  railway  construction,  where  the  pole 
line  is  often  60  to  70  ft.  from  the  track,  a  derrick  truck  with  jack- 
arms  is  used  in  the  same  manner  as  the  car,  picking  up  the  delivered 
poles  from  the  ground  instead  of  from  the  car. 

Bills  of  Materials  and  Cost  of  Concrete  Poles.*— The  increasing 
cost  of  wooden  poles  for  telephone,  telegraph,  trolley  line  and  other 
electric  transmission  line  work  is  leading  engineers  seriously  to 
search  for  some  substitute  material.  This  material  is  believed  by  a 
number  of  engineers  to  be  reinforced  concrete  and  within  the  last 
year  or  two  there  have  been  quite  extensive  studies  of  reinforced 
concrete  pole  construction.  The  results  of  some  of  these  studies 
are  given  in  the  succeeding  sections,  and  in  connection  with  them  the 
reader  will  do  well  to  consult  the  article  published  in  our  issue  of 
Nov.  20,  1907,  describing  the  construction  of  150-ft.  transmission  line 

^Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  29,  1908. 


602  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

poles  for  the  Lincoln  Light  &  Power  Co.  in  Ontario  and  giving  the 
methods  adopted  for  computing  the  stresses. 

Comparative  Strength  Tests  of  Concrete  and  Cedar  Poles. — In  1906 
two  forms  of  reinforced  concrete  poles  were  tested  in  comparison 
with  two  30-ft.  selected  cedar  poles  for  Mr.  G.  A.  Cellar,  Superin- 
tendent of  Telegraph,  Pennsylvania  Lines  west  of  Pittsburg.  The 
concrete  poles  were  made  and  the  tests  conducted  by  Mr.  Robert  A. 
Cummings  of  Pittsburg,  Pa.  Both  poles  were  8  ins.  in  diameter  at 
the  top  and  13  ins.  in  diameter  at  the  base  and  both  poles  were 
molded  hollow,  with  shells  from  1%  ins.  to  3  ins.  thick,  for  about 
two-thirds  of  their  height  and  solid  for  the  rest  of  the  height.  One 
pole  was  octagonal  in  section  and  one  was  square  in  section  with 
chamfered  corners.  Each  pole  weighed  approximately  3,500  Ibs. 
Both  poles  were  designed  to  carry  50  wires  each  coated  with  ice 
enough  to  make  it  1  in.  in  diameter,  and  to  resist  a  wind  load  of  30 
Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  The  poles  were  assumed  to  stand  100  ft.  apart  and 
were  made  30  ft.  high.  These  conditions  are  approximately  equiva- 
lent to  a  concentrated  load  of  1,000  Ibs.  applied  near  the  top  of 
the  pole.  The  reinforcement  for  both  poles  consisted  of  a  peripheral 
ring  of  eight  24-ft  bars  of  round  steel  and  alternately  %  in.  and 
%  in.  in  diameter.  Wooden  blocks  were  molded  into  the  potes  for 
attaching  clips  and  braces  and  through  holes  cored  for  cross-arm 
bolts.  Both  the  wooden  and  the  concrete  poles  were  set  approxi- 
mately 5  ft.  into  3x3x5  ft.  concrete  bases. 

Mr.  Cummings  describes  the  method  of  conducting  the  tests  as 
follows  : 

"The  load  was  applied  through  a  band  10  ins.  from  the  top  of  the 
pole  by  means  of  two  %-in.  wire  ropes  which  passed  over  two  12-in. 
sheaves  near  the  end  of  an  inclined  A-frame.  These  ropes  received 
the  hook  supporting  a  differential  chain  hoist  of  5  tons  capacity. 
The  base  of  the  A-frame  rested  freely  upon  the  front  edge  of  the 
concrete  foundation  and  inclined  away  from  the  poles  at  an  angle 
of  45°.  A  pulley  suspended  from  the  extreme  end  of  the  A-frame 
carried  the  differential  hoist,  the  lever  arm  and  counterweight.  The 
initial  load  applied  at  the  top  of  the  pole  was  thus  reduced  to  50  Ibs. 
The  total  amount  of  applied  load  was  measured  by  a  simple  lever. 
One  end  of  which  was  supported  on  the  platform  of  a  2,500-lb. 
capacity  weighing  scale,  while  the  other  end  was  attached  to  chain 
hoist.  The  two  acted  through  a  rocker  fulcrum  suitably  supported. 
The  load  was  applied  or  released  by  operating  the  differential  hoist, 
In  applying  the  load  the  hoist  would  reduce  the  distance  between  the 
hooks  aj:  any  rate  of  speed  desired.  A  graduated  rule  was  fastened 
at  the  top  of  the  pole  being  tested  and  extended  back  parallel  with 
the  line  of  poles  crossing  the  arm  containing  a  gage  pin,  from  which 
point  deflections  were  read.  This  arm  was  nailed  to  a  rigidly  braced 
upright  erected  near  the  rear  telegraph  pole.  Deflections  (Table  X) 
were  also  read  12  ins.  above  the  foundations  by  means  of  a  movable 
rule.  The  platform  for  supporting  the  observer  reading  deflections  at 
top  of  poles  was  suspended  from  a  nearby  bridge.  The  accompany- 
ing table  gives  the  loads  and  corresponding  deflections  of  four  poles 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION. 


503 


tested.  The  white  cedar  poles  broke  about  7  ft.  above  the  founda- 
tion. The  concrete  poles  failed  by  crushing  of  the  concrete  in  the 
base  of  poles  at  the  level  of  the  foundation." 

TABLE  X. — LOADS  AND  DEFLECTIONS  FOR  FOUR  POLES  TESTED. 
Deflection 


Deflection 
Test        "   at 
No.      top,  ins. 


11% 


18 
251/a 


4  a/16 

31 
3  4  ya 

211/4 

39 


20 

22^4 
29 
35 
36  V2 

50  a 

56 

66 


Load,        at  bot- 

Ibs.         torn,  ins. 

Time. 

Octagonal  Concrete  Pole 

1,830            1/32 

3:17 

2,230            1/16 

3:18 

50            1/32 

2,630               % 

3*:i9 

3,030            3/16 

3:20 

50            1/16 

.    . 

3,430              14 

3:24 

3.210               % 

3:25 

3,150               % 

3:26 

Square  Concrete 

Poles. 

50 

2:02 

1,830 

2:04 

2,230 

2:08 

50 

.... 

2,630 

2*16 

3,030            1/16 

2:11 

50 

.... 

3,290 

.... 

2,430               ft 

2  :14 

50 

.... 

3,690 


2:19 


Wooden  Pole  No.  1. 

1,830  11 :50 

2,230  ..  11:51 

2,630  ..  11:52 

2,870  ..  11:53 

2,950  ..  11:54 

3,030  . .  .  11:55 

3,370  ..  11:56 

3,430  ..  11:57 

3,494  ..  12:00 

Wooden  Pole  No.   2. 

172  ..                  

2,230  .         ..                  

2,630  ..  11:03 


Remarks. 


Temp,  deflec. — %  in. 

Crks.  Nos.  1  and  2. 

Temp,  deflec. — 2  in. 
Cracks  Nos.  3  and  4. 
Crk.  5  crshd.  at  bot. 
Pole  brk.  at  grnd.lev. 


Temp,  deflec.  —  I  in. 


Crk.  No.  1. 

Temp,  deflec. — 22  ins. 
Crks.  2,  3,  4,  pl.crshd. 
Crkd.  at  grnd.  lev. 


First  crack. 


Pole  brk.  suddenly. 


11:03     Pole  brk.  suddenly. 

Nashville,  Chattanooga  &  St.  Louis  Ry. — Fig.  4  shows  the  stand- 
ard reinforced  concrete  pole  designed  to  support  bridge  warnings 
by  Mr.  Hunter  McDonald,  Chief  Engineer,  Nashville,  Chattanooga 
&  St.  Louis  Ry.  Originally  the  pole  was  molded  with  pole,  cross- 
arm  and  brace  all  of  concrete  and  in  one  piece,  but  this  was  found 
too  expensive  and  the  gas  pipe  cross-arm  and  brace  were  substituted. 
One  pole  of  each  construction  has  been  in  use  over  three  years. 
The  one  with  the  concrete  cross-arm  shows  considerable  bending, 
but  the  other  does  not.  The  bill  of  materials  for  the  concrete  pole 
shown  by  Fig.  4  is  as  follows : 


604 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  -DATA. 


Fig.  4. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  605 

Shaft:  V3  cu.  yd.,  platform  screenings,  ^4  cu.  yd.  sand,  and  2*4 
bags  Portland  cement. 

Base :  1 V^  cu.  yds.  crushed  stone,  %  cu.  yd.  sand,  and  6  bags 
Portland  cement. 

Fort  Wayne  &  Wabash  Valley  Traction  Co. — This  company  oper- 
ating some  150  miles  of  street  and  interurban  trolley  line  proposes 
to  make  its  renewals  with  concrete  poles  of  the  construction  shown 
by  Figs.  5  to  8.  Fig.  5  shows  the  42-ft.  pole  complete  and  Figs.  6, 
7  and  8  show,  respectively,  the  32  and  30-ft.  pole  reinforcement.  The 
weight  and  dimensions  of  the  pole  and  the  bill  of  material  required 
are  given  for  each  size.  Regarding  the  construction  of  these  poles 
Mr.  H.  L.  Weber,  Chief  Engineer  of  the  road,  writes: 

"The  cost  of  constructing  concrete  poles  depends  so  much  upon 
the  location  of  the  materials  with  respect  to  the  points  where  the 
poles  are  to  be  erected  that  general  figures  are  difficult  to  state. 
Having  several  good  gravel  banks  at  convenient  points  along  our 
right  of  way,  which  is  120  miles  in  length,  and  having  our  road 
already  built  and  the  equipment  available  for  handling  materials 
and  poles,  we  have  been  able  to  build  concrete  poles  for  about  the 
same  cost  as  a  wooden  pole  all  fitted  up  and  painted.  We  figure 
that  a  33-ft.  pole  costs  $7.50  and  a  45-ft.  pole  costs  $15,  at  pit.  It  is 
difficult  to  figure  the  cost  of  molds,  as  one  mold  should  be  good  for  a 
number  of  poles,  depending  on  the  care  that  is  taken  of  it. 

BILL  OF  MATERIAL,  FIG.  5. 
Item.  Lbs. 

4  pcs.  %-in.  x  42  ft.  twisted  steel  bar 321.2 

8  pcs.   V2-in.  x  32  ft.  twisted  steel  bar 217.6 

8  pcs.    %-in.  x  16  ft.  twisted  steel  bar 61.2 

20  pcs.,  total  weight  of  steel 600.0 

Concrete,  237  cu.  ft.,  weight 3,030.0 

Approximate  weight  of  pole 3,630.0 

Surface  area  of  steel 14,176  sq.  in. 

Base  area  of  steel 5,375  sq.  in. 

BILL  OF  MATERIAL,  FIG.  6. 
Item.  Lbs. 

12  pcs.   %-in.  x  30-ft.  twisted  steel  bar 172.0 

8  pcs.    %-in.  x  20  ft.  twisted  steel  bar 76.6 

8  pcs.   %-in.  x  10  ft.  twisted  steel  bar 38.3 

28  pcs.,  total  weight  of  steel 286.9 

Concrete,  13.7  cu.  ft. 1,758.0 

Approximate  weight  of  pole 2,044.9 

Surface  area  of  steel 10,800.0  sq.  in. 

Base  area  of  steel 3.93  sq.  in. 

BILL  OF  MATERIAL,  FIG.  7. 
Item.  Lbs. 

4  pcs.    y2-in.   x  30-ft.  twisted  steel  bar 102.0 

12  pcs.   %-in.   x  20  ft.  twisted  steel  bar 114.7 

8  pcs.    %-in.  x   10-ft.  twisted  steel  bar 38.3 

24  pcs.,  total  weight  of  steel 255.0 

Concrete,  13.7  cu.  ft.,  weight 1,758.0 

Approximate  weight  of  pole 2,013.0 

Surface  area  of  steel 10,560  sq.  in. 

Base  area  of  steel 3,812  sq.  in. 

No  records  of  cost  were  kept. 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


r  J. 

./ 

h 

k 

*j          ,Q 

??  / 

•j 

j     /r  fi'Q" 
fi 

•*  —  Stress*  1,000  Jbs      a= 

!      I 

$             X 

-1  75^  Ll—  '      ^                                IF 

y^         \ 

,     .         _J  

,=  =» 

f 

B 

0= 

*o 

" 

4  -Top  of  32  'Po/e 

^  

=:  J 

F9.JKm        -f  

r«*i^; 

,| 

'         ^^^*-^               *= 

-,, 

it  tl     .iiq  :      ^ 

^^-< 

(J    -TOl   6<                     1 

"Tf     "             "^ 

^>» 

\Js. 

\l 

~-l-Stress=JOOO/b$    \       I 

6  e  fi 

P*^?        1  tf 
f                p 

j 

•H                                 ! 

1    0=  |, 

.^ 

Vj 

! 

f 

1 

j.  

1 
*-7'0'to  £  of  Tract  ^ 

^ 

:9 

^,._-  j—  I  ^_  , 

h 

vS^  ' 

'  '^li^v  

J 

Vi 

E,ll 

vo 

.  ^i     ix  • 

».   ,    o             D.  • 

1  :  L 

Ground 

Fig.  5. — Concrete  Trolley  Pole. 


CONCRE  TE    CONS  TR  UCTI  OX. 


60V 


'^                                                                              "^\ 

1 

u 

F 

w2^                 o 

J 

1  ^ 

q^?^'o"                          D 

^ 

1 

D                                              O 

o»             !  I 

*~ 

] 

o                                 a 

ill    1! 

hi 

a                                 a 

§ 

ull 

'i      $* 

aoaa       aaaa 

.-   I/-1'».'i'»;;| 
j                          -t    Hi 

Cnq.-Contr         L  g%*  j 

• 

Fig.  6. 

. 

r  " 

IbJ 

f                                    "\ 

i 

VO  ,  «  a  ,  ^    a    ^    a    D 

^ 
i 

u 

n  ^*-20'^/                             Q 

1      T 

--,-1      vi 

^5^f                     a 

i 
$ 

^W-w'o*                     o 

«. 
» 

HJi 

1st  L 

il 

q^-^'0'                        D 
q$'W0'                       a 

1 
! 

j$  ^ 

*P  11*' 

§    '| 

T   1^ 

Q    a    a     a     a    a    Q 

J' 

*  W 

zontr 

•^                                                                  ^/ 

ai-rf    __                    _.  J 

^                                                 ir-  -M    i;  jj"*-jiiKi   x    .JHIVM.  wiiuvi 

Fig.   7. 

. 

,-i  mio>  «, 

"^TT 
£ 

^ 

"n 

HwWe 

1 

/^5»                                                  "^ 

*U|5n^            a  a   D 

(—  |    «.  f     lit/)*                                                                   Q 

fe 

1  J 

q/'-f4'^                 a 

{  —  j 

4U 

% 

1 

\ 

i 

a                         a 
a                                a 

i 

c//wn  1  * 

£a  a  a          a  a  a 

j 

^ 

! 

vw                                                                                -^* 

J 

Enq.-Contr            I  /p*  •  .  J 

Fig.  8. 


riG8  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

BILL  OF  MATERIAL,  FIG.  8. 
Item.  Lbs. 

4  pcs.    i/2-in.  x  32-ft.  twisted  steel  bar 108.8 

8  pcs.    %-in.  x  24-ft.  twisted  steel  bar 163.2 

8  pcs.   %-in.  x  16-ft.  twisted  steel  bar 61.2 

20  pcs.,  total  weight  of  steel 333.2 

Concrete,  15.1  cu.  ft 1,960.0 

Approximate  weight  pole 2,293.2 

Surface  area  steel 9,546  sq.  in. 

area  steel 4.125  sq.  in. 


Pittsburg,  Ft.  Wayne  &  Chicago  Ry. — In  1906  this  company 
erected  53  poles  for  a  mile  of  telegraph  line  near  Maples,  Ind.  The 
general  construction  of  these  poles  is  shown  by  Fig.  9.  They  ranged 
in  height  from  25  to  34  ft.  The  2  5 -ft.  pole  shown  by  Fig.  9  was 
8  ins.  square  at  the  butt  and  6  ins.  square  at  the  top,  the  corners 
being  chamfered  to  a  face  2  ins.  wide,  so  that  above  ground  the  pole 
was  octagonal.  The  poles  were  set  4  ft.  into  the  ground,  and  packed 
around  with  stone  screenings.  Some  of  the  poles  were  erected 
within  five  days  after  molding. 

Marshall  Concrete  Pole. — The  following  is  a  description  of  a  test 
pole  mode  by  Mr.  Wallace  Marshall,  Lafayette  Engineering  Co., 
Lafayette,  Ind. 

"In  November,  1905,  I  made  a  box  form  of  three  sides,  having  the 
top  open,  for  a  test  pole.  It  was  35  ft.  long.  The  lower  5  ft.  was 
10  ins.  square;  commencing  at  that  point  it  tapered  on  all  sides  to 
5  ins.  at  the  top.  From  the  5-ft.  point  I  put  a  triangular  piece  In 
each  corner  of  the  form  of  about  iy2  ins.  wide  at  the  bottom  and  1 
in.  at  the  top  to  chamfer  the  corners  of  the  pole.  At  proper  places  of 
a  standard  line  pole  for  line  bracket,  cross-arms  and  telephone  box 
I  bored  holes  through  the  forms,  put  machine  bolts  through  it  and 
let  them  extend  about  2  ins.  in  the  forms,  screwing  the  nuts  the  full 
length  of  thread.  In  the  top  of  the  form,  which  was  brought  to  a 
round  point,  I  placed  a  1%-in.  pin  in  the  center  to  leave  a  hole  or 
an  insulator  pin.  I  then  filled  the  form  with  concrete  mixed  by 
hand  consisting  of  1  part  of  cement  to  6  parts  ordinary  gravel,  except 
a  facing  of  about  %  in.  of  cement  and  sand  1  to  3.  After  covering 
the  bottom  of  the  form  about  1%  ins.  I  laid  in  the  large  end  two 
%-in  Thatcher  bars  25  ft.  long,  and  in  the  top  part  two  %-in. 
Thatcher  bars,  lapping  them  about  4  ft.  I  left  them  in  the  form  six 
days.  At  the  expiration  of  30  days  we  tested  it  as  follows:  Wo 
planted  it  firmly  in  the  ground  5  ft.  deep.  At  25  ft.  distance  we 
planted  a  large  cedar  telephone  pole.  At  the  level  of  21  ft.  from  the 
ground  we  fastened  a  wire  cable  from- one  pole  to  the  other,  which  is 
about  the  height  of  a  trolley  wire.  In  the  center  of  this  cable  we 
suspended  a  barrel.  Into  this  barrel  we  loaded  steel  rivets  gradually 
and  watched  results.  The  two  poles  began  to  bend  as  the  load  was 
applied.  When  the  two  were  deflected  about  21  ins.  each  toward  the 
other  I  observed  a  small  check  come  in  the  concrete  pole  about  10  ft 
from  the  ground,  and  simultaneously  checks  appeared  from  the 
cable  to  the  ground.  We  immediately  stopped  loading,  took  off  the 
ballast,  weighted  it  and  calculated  the  horizontal  strain  and  found 
It  to  be  975  Ibs.  The  maximum  moment  would  be  at  the  ground, 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION, 


• 


4-  - 


la 

ij 

-1 


\ 


-  3*  -  J 


-t   . 


1 


Enq.-Conlr. 

Fig.    9. — Concrete   Telegraph   Pole. 


<n»  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

but  the  guess  at  size  we  made  was  about  right,  since  the  concrete 
cracked  from  ground  to  cable  at  almost  the  same  time.  When  the 
load  was  removed  the  pole  resumed  its  plumb  position  and  remains 
so  to-day,  although  being  used  for  heavy  guy  wires.  The  bolts  were 
unscrewed  before  moving  them,  leaving  the  nuts  imbedded  in  the 
pole.  After  concrete  set  we  screwed  the  bolts  into  the  nuts  and 
could  not  loosen  them  with  an  ordinary  wrench.  It  took  several 
heavy  blows  with  a  sledge  hammer  to  break  out  the  top  socket.  My 
conclusions  were,  however,  that  a  wire  ring  or  two  of  reinforcement 
should  be  placed  about  the  pin  for  safety.  Careful  estimates  Were 
made  as  to  costs  of  such  a  pole  35  ft.  long  if  made  in  quantities 
in  proper  forms  with  material  at  the  then  market  price,  and 
gravel  in  pit  at  $7  actual  cost.  Comparing  that  cost  with  present 
price  of  pine  poles  and  add  to  the  latter  the  cost  of  trimming, 
chamfering,  framing  and  painting,  the  concrete  pole  can  be  made 
for  less  money  than  the  wood,  provided  no  profit  is  paid  a 
contractor.  Figuring  the  moments  on  the  pole  tested  I  found  the 
concrete  failed  at  just  about  the  time  the  limit  of  elasticity  of  the 
steel  was  reached,  providing  that  it  would  be  of  no  value  without 
the  steel.  I  believe  that  the  concrete  pole  is  practicable,  and  the 
only  reason  I  have  not  put  it  to  practical  use  has  been  the  lack  of 
time  to  do  so." 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Piles  for  a  Building  Foundation.— In 
Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.  24,  1909,  a  paper  by  Sanford  E. 
Thompson  and  Benjamin  Fox  is  published,  of  which  the  following 
is  an  abstract. 

Arrange  molding  platform  if  possible  so  that  butts  of  pile  are 
placed  to  be  drawn  direct  by  pile  driver. 

Design  butt  so  that  pipe  connection  does  not  interfere  with  snatch 
ring.  Place  pipe  connection  so  that  hose  can  be  connected  before 
raising  pile  and  supporting  rope  will  not  interfere  with  derrick 
hook. 

If  piles  are  made  in  cool  weather  and  are  to  be  driven  in  30 
days,  strengthen  concrete  mix  at  butt  by  working  some  dry  cement 
into  it  while  ramming. 

Use  perfect  rolls  under  driver  to  facilitate  quick  moving.  The  plan 
found  best  at  Cambridge  with  the  4,700-lb.  hammer  was  to  begin 
driving  by  churning  and  water  jet,  using  this  method  as  long  as 
possible.  The  chain  connecting  pile  to  hammer  was  then  discon- 
nected and  driving  began  with  hammer  drop  of  about  2%  ft., 
increasing  drop  as  driving  became  harder ;  4  ft.  may  sometimes  be 
used  at  the  start. 

In  ground  not  too  hard  it  may  be  advisable  after  completing 
churning  to  give  the  chain  a  slack  for  a  %-ft.  drop,  and  raise  pile 
a  little  with  a  jerk  after  each  blow.  This  appears  to  be  effective 
only  in  ground  soft  enough  so  that  the  pile  can  be  readily  raised, 
and  as  it  takes  time  to  adjust  chain,  is  hard  on  engine,  and  tends 
to  start  head  crushing,  it  is  of  very  doubtful  value. 

As  tip  of  pile  should  have  good  bearing  on   ground  undisturbed 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  fill 

by  water  jet,  the  water  should  be  shut  off  before  the  pile  is  down 
to  grade. 

The  8x8-in.  tip  was  found  to  be  slightly  preferable  to  the  lOxlO-in. 
tip  in  time  of  driving.  The  2-in.  jetting  pipe  gave  the  best  results, 
and  it  is  suggested  for  future  use  that  this  be  reduced  to  1  in.  or 
1V4  ins.  for  the  last  12  or  18  ins.  at  the  tip. 

For  piles  of  30  ft.  or  less  length  the  longitudinal  reinforcement 
may  be  %-in.  rods  instead  of  7/g-in.,  but  for  piles  of  over  30  ft. 
computations  should  be  made  so  that  the  longitudinal  reinforcement 
will  be  strong  enough  to  stand  the  vibrating  weight  of  the  pile 
when  it  is  being  raised  to  the  gins  of  the  machine. 

Design. — The  piles  as  designed  by  Mr.  Fox  were  made  30  ft.  6  ins. 
long,  14  ins.  square  at  the  butt  end,  and  in  general  9  ins.  square  at 
the  tip.  A  number  of  soundings  were  taken  at  the  site  of  the 
power  house  which  indicated  a  fill  of  from  6  to  8  ft. ;  below  this  to  a 
depth  of  29  ft.  7  ins.  to  3iy2  ft.  from  the  surface,  fine  sand  and 
mud  (practically  all  may  be  considered  sand)  ;.and  below  the  sand 
a  clay  hard  pan  was  reached  which  was  tested  to  a  depth  of  13  ft. 
These  tests,  together  with  a  consideration  of  the  requirements, 
determined  the  length  of  the  pile. 

Of  the  48  piles  which  were  made,  6  were  8  ins.  square  and  6 
were  10  ins.  square  instead  of  9  ins.  at  the  tip.  The  object  of  this 
variation  in  size  of  the  tip  was  to  determine  which  size  gave  the 
best  results.  The  irregularity  of  water  pressure  proved  a  very 
great  handicap  to  making  accurate  comparisons  and  also  affected 
very  seriously  the  results  obtained  during  the  actual  driving  of  each 
pile.  Enough  piles  were  observed,  however,  to  give  fairly  good 
averages. 

Averages  of  the  time  of  actual  driving  the  piles  with  different 
sized  tips  give  the  following  results,  which  indicate  that  the  8-in. 
tip  is  slightly  preferable  in  time  of  driving.  The  variation  in  the 
character  of  the  ground  as  well  as  the  water  pressure  may  influence 
in  a  measure  the  relative  times. 

TIME  DRIVING  PILES  WITH  DIFFERENT  SIZED  TIPS. 

Range  in  Average 

Size  of  Tip.                       Time  Driving.  Time  Driving. 

Ins.                                        Mins.  Mins. 

8  26  to  107  66 

9  22  to  166  76 
10                                       40  to  130  85 

Piles  were  reinforced  with  four  %-in.  corrugated  steel  rods 
extending  to  within  2  ins.  of  the  ends  of  the  pile,  and  imbedded 
2  ins.  from  the  face  near  the  butt  and  1%  ins.  from  the  face  at  the 
tip.  Loops  of  ^-in.  corrugated  bars  were  placed  around  the 
principal  steel,  spaced  about  12  ins.  apart  except  near  the  butt, 
where  the  spacing  was  decreased  to  4  ins.,  there  being  34  loops  in 
all.  The  butts  of  the  piles  were  also  extra  reinforced,  some  with 
%-in.  and  some  with  %-in.  rods,  varying  in  length  from  2  to  3  ft. 
A  %-in.  rod  about  5  ft.  long  was  imbedded  in  the  concrete  with  a 
loop  sticking  out  through  the  concrete  near  the  top  of  the  pile 
on  one  side  for  hooking  with  derrick. 


612  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

A  galvanized  iron  pipe  was  cast  in  the  center  of  the  pile  for  the 
water  jet.  For  experimental  purpose  the  sizes  of  pipes  were  varied, 
being  2  ins.,  1^  ins.,  1*4  ins.  and  1  in.  To  carry  out  the  experi- 
ment still  further  some  of  the  piles  were  made  with  one  of  the 
larger  size  pipes  for  about  half  the  length  of  the  pile  and  there 
connected  with  one  of  the  smaller  pipes  which  extended  down  to 
the  tip. 

The  times  of  driving  piles  with  different  sizes  of  pipe  in  the 
interior  of  the  pile  were  plotted,  but  the  variation  in  each  due  to 
other  causes  was  so  great  that  no  practical  conclusion  could  be 
reached.  The  results  simply  indicate  that  the  pile  with  1-in.  pipe 
took  slightly  longer  to  drive  than  the  piles  with  larger  sized  pipe. 

The  friction  of  water  running  through  pipe  of  small  size  is  very 
great,  so  that  it  is  known  without  experimenting  that  the  largest 
size  of  pipe  which  it  is  practicable  to  insert  in  a  pile  will  give  the 
least  loss  of  head  and  therefore  be  the  best.  To  increase  the 
velocity  of  the  water,  and  thus  increase  its  power  to  loosen  earth 
(note  that  it  is  the  velocity,  not  the  pressure,  which  is  increased), 
the  size  of  the  tube  should  be  reduced  near  the  tip.  The  reduction 
must  be  made  far  enough  from  the  tip  of  the  pile  to  prevent 
clogging  under  heavy  blows.  There  is  no  danger  of  the  nozzle  filling 
while  the  water  is  flowing  freely,  and  therefore  no  danger  while  the 
pile  is  being  churned  down  in  the  first  few  blows.  The  danger 
is  apt  to  occur  when  the  driving  becomes  hard,  and  at  this  time 
the  penetration  per  blow  is  so  small  that  it  would  seem  that  a 
nozzle  12  ins.  long  would  be  sufficient  to  prevent  any  material  work- 
ing up  into  the  larger  pipe.  A  2-in.  pipe  is  probably  as  large  as  is 
practicable,  and  it  is  therefore  suggested  that  this  size  be  used 
to  within  12  ins.,  or  if  preferred,  24  ins.  from  the  tip,  and  there 
reduced  to  1  in. 

Methods  Employed  in  Making  Piles. — The  method  of  construction 
is  as  follows:  A  2-in.  platform  of  rough  plank  is  built  on  ground 
of  sufficient  area  to  hold  all  of  the  piles.  On  this  platform  chalk 
lines  are  struck  and  V  strips  to  form  a  1-in.  chamfer  nailed  so  that 
the  lines  of  the  piles  are  about  6  ins.  apart,  alternating  points  and 
butts.  The  casting  of  the  piles  with  tips  and  butts  alternating  is 
economical  of  space,  but  where  the  piles  are  cast  so  as  to  be  handled 
directly  by  the  pile  driver,  without  any  intermediate  handling,  it  is 
best  to  cast  them  all  with  the  butts  toward  the  machine  on  account 
of  the  saving  of  time  in  getting  the  pile  in  the  gins.  Two  8-in. 
unplaned  (to  assist  in  skin  friction)  spruce  planks  form  the  sides  of 
each  pile.  The  piles  are  made  in  lots  of  about  five.  The  outside 
form  i-s  cleated  with  2x4's,  and  the  other  sides  have  the  plank  simply 
set  on  edge  with  pairs  of  wedges  between  them.  There  are  seven 
cleats  or  wedges  in  the  length,  and  seven  pieces  2x4  nailed  across 
the  top  of  each.  After  setting  the  plank  sides,  beveled  pieces  are 
nailed  to  locate  the  upper  surface  and  form  a  chamfer. 

Steel  is  wired  together  on  a  table  consisting  of  plank  on  three 
horses.  The  reinforcement  when  made  is  suspended  in  form  by  two 
wires  attached  to  each  of  the  2x4  cross  pieces. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  613 

Two  days  were  usually  allowed  before  striking  the  forms. 
GANG  MAKING  PILES. 

One  foreman ..  • 

2  laborers  on  miscellaneous  work,  at $0.25 

4  laborers  wheeling  and  mixing  concrete,  at 0.25 

2  laborers  ramming,  at 0.25 

4  carpenters,    at • 0.43% 

4  steel  men    (2   carpenters  and  2  laborers),  aver- 
aging    r 0.40 

The  concrete  gank  mixed  and  placed  concrete  in  10  piles  in  10 
hours.  It  took  4  carpenters  3%  hours  each,  or  a  total  time  of  15 
hours,  to  set  up  sides  for  5  piles  (10  sides),  and  4  carpenters  %  hour 
each,  or  a  total  of  2  hours,  to  take  down  the  sides  for  5  piles. 
It  took  one  carpenter  and  one  laborer  10  hours  each  to  wire  up  5 
reinforcing  frames  and  place  them  in  form  ready  for  concreting. 

Each  frame  was  composed  of  four  %-in.  rods  in  corners  running 
full  length  of  pile,  ^-in.  hoops  12  ins.  on  centers  except  for  2  ft.  at 
the  top,  where  hoops  were  spaced  4  ins.  on  centers.  Four  additional 
%-in.  rods  2  ft.  long  and  a  %-in.  bent  rod  for  hooking  the  pile 
were  placed  at  this  same  end.  A  1%-in.  pipe  was  also  placed  in  the 
center  of  the  pile. 

The  concrete  was  mixed  by  hand  in  the  proportion  of  1-2-4,  using 
%-in.  trap  rock,  the  sand  and  cement  being  first  made  into  a  mortar 
and  the  stone  added.  A  thorough  mix  is  of  course  essential. 
Mixing  was  started  in  March,  precautions  being  taken  at  night 
against  possible  frost  and  the  piles  wet  down  every  day  for  two 
weeks. 

The  age  of  the  piles  when  driven  ranged  from  30  to  41  days,  the 
larger  part  of  them  being  nearer  the  shorter  age,  the  average 
being  33%  days.  The  first  pile  was  molded  on  March  24  and  driven 
on  April  24,  and  during  this  period  the  temperature  was  low, 
averaging  between  40°  and  50°  F.,  so  that  the  piles  had  not  attained 
nearly  their  full  strength.  After  the  driving  was  commenced  the 
weather  became  much  warmer,  and  the  piles  after  the  first  few 
were  noticeably  harder  and  entirely  satisfactory,  even  although  the 
age  was  practically  the  same,  that  is,  about  one  month.  The  first 
pile  driven  lost  its  water  pressure  when  about  6  ft.  below  the 
surface,  and  during  the  process  of  driving,  which  reached  700  blows, 
it  is  probable  that  it  broke  when  about  half-way  down.  The  head 
of  this  pile  was  badly  crushed,  whereas  subsequent  piles  which  had 
hardened  more  thoroughly  because  of  the  higher  temperature  were 
uninjured,  even  with  a  similar  number  of  blows  and  higher  drops 
of  the  hammer. 

It  may  be  said,  therefore,  that  a  period  of  one  month  for  season- 
ing piles  is  sufficient  during,  say,  the  months  between  May  1  and 
October  1,  but  during  the  colder  months  a  longer  period  should  be 
allowed  unless  artificial  heat  can  be  used  to  hasten  hardening. 

Pile  Driver  and  Hammer. — It  was  decided,  after  a  careful  in- 
vestigation of  records  of  concrete  pile  driving  both  in  this  country 
and  Europe,  to  use  a  4,700-lb.  hammer.  With  a  view  to  the  use 
of  the  heavy  hammer  and  the  side  strains  brought  to  bear  on  the 


614  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

machine  by  the  dragging  of  the  piles  from  the  casting  platform,  a 
special  driver  was  built.    The  driver  was  made  as  follows-: 

Long  leaf  hard  pine  was  used  throughout.  The  bed  timbers 
were  8x10  ins.,  18  ft.  in  length,  the  gins  8x8  ins.,  42  ft.  long.  The 
braces  of  8x8  ins.  timber  were  run  from  the  bed  timbers  to  the 
head  of  the  machine  with  intermediate  braces  and  ties  to  give  the 
necessary  rigidity.  The  sheave  was  of  extra  heavy  pattern  and  the 
whole  framework  was  bolted  up  and  tied  together  with  rods.  The 
cushion  head,  which  was  perhaps  the  most  essential  item,  as  it  was 
desired  to  avoid  fracture  of  the  pile  from  the  blows  of  the  4,700-lb. 
hammer,  consisted  of  a  plate  iron  collar  16  ins.  square  on  the  inside 
and  8  ft.  in  height,  which  incased  an  oak  block  16x16x18  ins.  on  to 
the  bottom  of  which  six  thicknesses  of  rope  and  four  layers  of 
rubber  belting  were  nailed.  The  cushion  head  was  held  in  place 
in  the  gins  of  the  machine  by  four  perpendicular  pieces  of  oak  on 
the  outside  of  the  collar  and  bolted  through  the  incased  oak  block. 
A  25-hp.  Lambert  engine  was  used  and  a  single  block  for  hoisting 
and  churning  the  piles. 

The  water  for  jetting  was  furnished  through  a  2% -in.  Bay  State 
hose,  using  a  compound  piston  pump  having  7xl2-in.  high  pressure, 
and  12xl2-in.  low  pressure  cylinders,  and  a  capacity  of  100  gallons 
per  minute.  This  was  the  most  unsatisfactory  part  of  the  entire 
work,  the  water  pressure  being  invariable  and  uncertain  and  125  Ibs. 
the  limit  of  pressure  obtainable  at  the  pump. 

Driving  Piles. — The  usual  process  of  driving  consisted,  after 
moving  the  pile  driver,  in  hooking  and  dragging  the  pile  and  lifting 
it  to  place  and  attaching  the  hose,  or  attaching  the  hose  first  and 
then  hoisting. 

As  already  shown  the  casting  of  the  piles  with  tips  and  butts 
alternating  is  economical  of  space,  but  where  the  piles  are  cast  so 
as  to  be  handled  directly  by  the  pile  driver,  without  any  inter- 
mediate handling,  it  is  best  to  cast  them  all  with  the  butts  toward 
the  machine  on  account  of  the  saving  of  time  in  getting  the  pile 
into  the  gins  of  the  machine.  When  the  pile  is  cast  with  the  butt 
end  toward  the  machine  the  pile  can  be  lifted  directly  into  the  gins, 
while,  when  the  pile  is  cast  with  the  tip  end  towards  the  machine, 
it  must  be  chained  and  dragged  in  front  of  the  machine  before  it 
can  be  hooked  in  the  usual  manner  and  lifted  to  place. 

Care  must  be  taken  when  making  the  pile  to  place  the  hook  for 
hoisting  in  relation  to  the  projecting  nozzle  for  jetting  so  that  the 
hoisting  rope  will  not  foul  the  hose  when  the  pile  is  being  raised 
into  position.  To  facilitate  setting  the  pile  into  the  gins,  a  crutch 
of  1-in.  iron  was  made  with  a  12xl2-in.  square  key  at  one  end  with 
a  long  handle  to  replace  the  peevy  or  cant  dog  ordinarily  used  for 
wood  piles.  As  soon  as  the  hose  was  attached  and  the  pipe  in  place, 
the  water  was  turned  on  and  the  pile  usually  penetrated  for  a  short 
distance  without  the  hammer.  The  hammer  was  then  placed  on 
the  cushion  and  the  pile  sank  further  to  a  depth  depending  upon 
the  nature  of  the  fill.  Next  the  hammer  was  attached  to  the  pile 
with  a  chain  and  the  churning  commenced.  There  was  enough  play 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  615 

in  the  chain  connection  between  the  hammer  and  the  pile  to  give 
about  a  10-in.  blow  of  the  hammer  each  time  the  pile  was  lifted. 
When  this  churning  became  ineffective,  the  chain  was  disengaged 
and  the  pile  was  driven  with  blows  in  the  usual  manner. 

GANG  ON  PILE  DRIVING. 

1  foreman,  at  $0.50  per  hr $  4.00 

1  engineman,  at  $0.50  per  hr 4.00 

1  pump  man,  at  $0.25 2.00 

7  men,  at  $2.50  per  8  hrs 17.50 

Total  gang  per  8  hrs $27.50 

In  addition  to  this  gang  2  carpenters  were  called  in  occasionally 
for  repairs,  and  2  other  laborers  were  busy  most  of  the  time  iu 
connection  with  cutting  off  piles,  digging  holes  and  odd  work. 

Gross  Times  Driving. — For  convenient  reference  gross  times  driv- 
ing piles  are  tabulated  in  Table  I  (not  reproduced  here)  together 
with  some  of  the  more  important  details.  The  times,  for  example, 
are  separated  into  "Moving  Driver,"  "Placing  Pile,"  "Driving"  and 
"Delays ;"  and  the  "Number  of  Blows,"  the  "Range  in  Drop"  of 
hammer,  and  the  drop  and  penetration  under  "Last  Blow"  are  also 
given. 

The  total  average  time  per  pile  is  2  hrs.  and  15  mins.,  of 
which  29  mins.  is  moving  driver,  23  mins.  placing  pile  and  83 
mins.  driving  (not  including  27  mins.  delays  from  various  causes). 
This  corresponds  to  an  average  of  3%  piles  per  8  hrs.,  which  agrees 
with  the  time  that  can  be  figured  directly  from  the  beginning  to 
end  of  the  job.  As  the  men  became  more  expert  in  moving  the 
driver  and  placing  the  piles,  it  was  possible  to  reduce  the  time  to 
iy2  hrs.,  as  shown  by  the  average  during  the  last  four  days.  Even 
this  includes  about  one-half  hour  moving  pile  driver,  which  was 
unnecessarily  long  because  of  imperfect  rolls. 

The  time  driving  was  greatly  increased  by  the  poor  water  pres- 
sure. Taking  an  average  of  16  piles  whose  time  was  less  than  60 
mins.  and  which,  therefore,  might  be  assumed  to  have  gone  down 
fairly  well,  the  time  during  the  driving  was  44  mins.,  thus  giving  a 
total  of  1  hr.  and  24  mins.  per  pile,  or  5.75  piles  per  day  instead  of 
3.5  piles  per  day. 

It  therefore  may  be  assumed  on  another  job  of  similar  character 
that  an  average  of  at  least  5%  piles  may  be  driven  per  day.  By 
using  perfect  rolls,  molding  piles  with  butts  toward  pile  driver, 
and  using  good  water  pressure,  this  number  may  be  still  further 
increased.  From  a  study  of  the  individual  items,  times  may  be 
selected  and  estimates  made  which  will  apply  to  other  locations  and 
other  conditions. 

Each  pile  received  an  average  of  589  blows. 

Instances  of  Hard  Driving. — One  of  the  first  piles  that  was  driven 
probably  struck  a  large  bowlder  at  18  ft.  below  the  surface.  The 
pile  was  given  735  blows,  using  drops  of  the  hammer  of  from 
18  to  30  in.  At  this  stage  the  head  was  so  badly  crushed  that  the 
driving  was  stopped  and  the  projecting  portion  of  the  pile  cut  off. 
To  see  what  effect  this  tremendous  pounding  with  a  4,700-lb.  hammer 


616  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

had  on  the  pile,  after  squaring  off  the  crushed  head  it  was  sent  to 
the  Watertown  Arsenal  to  be  tested.  The  Arsenal  report  was  as 
follows : 

TESTS  BY  COMPRESSION,  CONCRETE  PILE  No.  13,822. 

Length,  9  ft.  3  ins. 

Size  of  butt,  12.9  ins.  by  13.75  ins. 

Size  of  tip,  11.15  ins.  by  11.75  ins. 

Weight,  1,458  Ibs. 

Cross-sectional  area  (smaller  end),  128.59  sq.  ins. 

Ultimate  strength,  497,000  Ibs.  =  3,865  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 

Remarks.— Pile  failed  at  smaller  end,  opening  oblique  and  longi- 
tudinal cracks. 

Attention  should  be.  called  to  the  fact  that  the  pile  failed  at  the 
smaller  end  and  not  at  the  end  receiving  the  hammer  blows.  This 
indicates  that  the  pile  was  not  materially  damaged  by  the  severe 
hammering  it  received,  except  at  the  immediate  point  of  contact. 
An  examination  of  tests  of  reinforced  columns  at  the  Watertown 
Arsenal  shows,  for  columns  of  the  same  proportions  of  concrete  and 
same  age,  and  reinforced  with  four  longitudinal  rods  varying  from 
%  in.  to  1%  ins.  a  range  of  2,000  to  3,000  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  based  on 
the  total  cross  section  of  the  concrete  and  steel.  It  will,  therefore, 
be  seen  that  notwithstanding  the  severe  treatment  of  the  pile  in 
driving,  the  ultimate  strength  was  considerably  higher  than  the 
average  strength  of  similar  columns.  Evidently  the  strength  of  the 
pile  was  not  appreciably  affected  by  the  driving  or  by  the  crushing 
of  the  head. 

Cost. — The  cost  of  the  materials  and  the  labor  are  tabulated  in 
detail  in  Table  XI.  The  labor  costs  are  taken  from  the  timekeeper's 
record,  but  are  sufficiently  subdivided  to  be  useful  for  other  jobs 
of  a  different  character.  The  items  which  vary  directly  with  the 
number  of  piles  are  separated  from  the  costs  which  are  independent 
of  the  number  of  piles,  but  must  be  applied  to  any  job  as  a  constant 
expense.  Only  a  few  items  depend  upon  the  character  of  the  ground. 

The  lumber  for  the  forms  (except  the  platform)  is  assumed  to 
be  a  constant  for  any  job,  because  it  can  be  used  over  and  over. 
The  size  of  the  platform  must  vary  with  the  number  of  piles. 

The  pile  driver  for  any  one  job  is  figured  at  25  per  cent  of  the 
initial  cost  for  depreciation  and  interest,  but  the  cost  of  repairs  is 
included  in  the  items  which  vary  with  the  number  of  piles. 

The  costs  which  are  variable  are  given  per  linear   foot  of  pile 

for  subsequent  use.     It  will  be  seen  that  the  total  cost  per  linear 

foot  of  pile  on  this  particular  job  was  about  $1.63.     If  the  length 

of  piles  differed   greatly   from   those  given,    it  might   be  necessary 

still  further  to  separate  the  cost  to  provide  for  this. 

A  study  of  the  various  items  taken  in  connection  with  a  study 
of  the  detail  times  suggests  various  places  where  the  cost  may 
be  altered  for  other  jobs. 

.  For  example,  an  inspection  of  the  costs  shows  that  the  cost  of 
the  reinforcing  steel  is  over  one-third  the  cost  of  the  piles.  From 
the  fact  that  piles  withstood  the  severe  usage  given  by  the  pile 
driving,  it  is  probable,  if  the  piles  are  not  over  30  ft.  long,  that 
%-in.  steel  instead  of  %-in.  could  be  used  for  the  corner  rods, 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION. 


61V 


TABLE  XI. — COST  OF  DRIVING  PILES  ON  B.  W.  H.  &  R.  COMPANY  JOB. 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Total,     of  pile. 


(1)    6,000  ft.  B.  M.  plank  for  platform  @  $0.25.4.  .$ 

37.50 

$0.0256 

(Lumber  cost  $25  per  thousand  and  assumed 

to  be  used  for  four  times.) 

(2)    350  ft.  B.  M.  for  chamfer  @  $30  

10.50 

0.0072 

(3)    25  Ib.  spikes  for  platform  <g)    03 

(4)    20  Ib.  9d.  @  .03  

(5)    8  Ib.   4d.   @  .04  

1.67 

0.0011 

(6)    50  tons  crushed  stone  @   $1.50.. 

75.00 

0.0512 

(7)    18ya  yd.  sand  @    $1.00.  

18.50 

0.0126 

(8)    69  y2   bbl.  cement   @    $1.82  

126.49 

0.0864 

(9)    192  pcs.  %  in.  by  30  corrugated  bars,  15,333 

Ib.,    @    2.65c  

406.32 

0.2670 

(10)    34%-in.  bars,  by  48  piles  by  5  ft.  0  in.,  1,958 

Ib.,    @    3.00c.  

58.74 

0.0401 

(11)    8,160  ft.  No.  14  wire,  1631/5  Ib.,    @   $0.04% 

7.34 

0.0050 

(12)    4  pcs.   %-in.  bars  by  48  piles  by  2  ft.  6  in.  = 

480  ft.  =  408   Ibs.,    @    $2.85  

11.62 

0.0079 

(13)    48  2-in.  nipples,  12  in.  long,   @    $0.15  

7.20 

0.0049 

(14)    48  2-in.  by  iy2-in.  ells,  @   $0.12  

5.76 

0.0039 

(15)    1,440  ft.  g.  i.  pipe  @  $3.51  per  100.. 

50.56 

0.0346 

(16)    48  hooks,    @    $0.25  

12.00 

0.0082 

(17)   Bending  and   placing   reinforcement  

122.62 

0.0838 

(18)   Labor  on  pile  platform  

33.03 

0.0226 

(19)   Labor   on  forms  

83.72 

0.0572 

(20)   Labor  on  concrete  

111.07 

0.0751 

(21)    Superintendence     

31.20 

0.0213 

(22)   Pile  driving  labor  

399.42* 

0.2722f 

(23)   Cutting  slot  in  tip  of  pile  

3.00 

0.0020 

22.40 

0.0152f 

(25)   Cutting  off  broken  piles  

23.51 

o.dmt 

(26)   Rent  of  engine  

30.00 

0.0207 

(27)   Superintendence  

42.00 

0.0286f 

Total  cost $1,731.17 

Cost  per  ft.  varying  with  number  and  length 
of    piles 

Items  Constant  for  Each  Job. 

2,800  ft.  B.  M.  plank  for  pile  sides  @  25.4...$  17.50 

300  ft.  B.  M.  plank  for  ends  @  $25 7.50 

.    Pile  driver  25%  of  $198.21 49.55 

(31)  Getting  ready,  2  days,   @  $30 60.00 

(32)  Teaming,  pile  driver,  etc 34.55 

(33)  Removing    driver 3461 


$1.1705 


(28) 
(29) 
(30) 


Total  cost  per  job $    203.71     0.1391 


Total  estimated  net  cost  per  lin.  ft.  job  has  48  piles 

Add  25%   for  pumping,   connections,   contingencies 

and   profit 


$1.3096 
.3274 
$1.63 


*After  deducting  $60  assumed  as  constant  "getting  ready." 
tOnly  items  affected  by  character  of  ground. 

with  extra  reinforcement  near  the  butt,  as  in  the  present  case.  The 
size  of  these  rods  can  be  determined  by  figuring  the  stress  in  them 
during  the  process  of  raising  the  pile  to  place.  The  pile  is  then 
a  beam  supported  at  the  ends  and  carrying  its  own  weight,  Which 
must  at  least  be  doubled  to  provide  for  swaying  incident  to  the 


618  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

raising.  The  cost  of  the  item  of  steel  and  labor  would  in  such 
cases  be  varied  accordingly. 

The  labor  on  concrete  appears  large,  and  might  probably  be 
reduced  on  another  similar  job  from  $111  to  about  $74.  This  is 
based  on  the  fact  that,  while  on  the  average  only  6  piles  were 
made,  toward  the  latter  part  of  the  making  9  piles  were  made 
on  One  day  and  10  piles  on  another,  so  that  an  average  of  8  piles 
should  be  possible  with  the  given  gang.  This  is  especially  probable 
because  the  cost  of  making  and  placing  the  concrete  was  $2.32  per 
pile,  or  $2.25  per  cu.  yd.,  whereas  the  writer's  data  on  hand  mixing 
indicate  that  the  cost  should  not  have  exceeded  $1.50  per  yd. 

With  reference  to  the  time  and  cost  of  the  driving,  it  must  be 
taken  into  consideration  that  the  job  was  a  small  one,  only  48  piles 
being  needed ;  that  the  work  was  of  an  untried  character  ;  and  also 
that  the  conditions  were  unfavorable,  especially  as  regards  the  water 
pressure.  On  a  large  job,  in  ordinary  ground,  where  large  stones 
or  obstructions  are  not  likely  to  be  encountered,  the  number  of 
piles  driven  per  day  should  be  greatly  increased.  A  study  of  the 
detail  log  of  the  driving  tests  and  a  comparison  of  these  times  with 
detail  records  taken  on  other  jobs,  indicate  that  the  average  time  per 
pile  driven  with  the  aid  of  a  water  jet  may  be  easily  reduced  to 
one  hour,  while  if  the  ground  is  very  soft,  the  average  time  per  pile, 
including  the  moving  of  the  driver,  need  not  be  over  40  mins. 
One  hour  per  pile  corresponds  to  8  piles  per  eight-hour  day,  instead 
of  3^  piles  per  day.  The  estimated  time  on  the  items  near  the 
foot  of  the  cost  table,  which  is  inversely  proportional  to  the  total 
number  of  piles  given,  would  be  decreased  on  a  job  having  200 
piles  from  $0.139  to  $0.035  per  foot  of  pile.  This,  together  with 
the  reductions  noted  above,  and  the  assumption  of  8  piles  driven 
per  eight  hours,  would  bring  the  estimated  cost  per  linear  foot 
down  to  $1  net,  or,  with  25  per  cent  allowance  for  pump  hose 
connections,  incidentals  and  profits,  to  $1.25  per  linear  foot.  In  soft 
ground,  and  where  conditions  are  specially  favorable,  a  still  lower 
estimate  is  possible. 

A  few  of  the  items,  such  as  the  nipples  and  short  bars,  are 
constant  per  pile,  that  is,  are  independent  of  the  lengths  of  the 
pile,  so  that  in  a  close  estimate  for  longer  or  shorter  piles  they 
should  be  separated  out  or  allowed  for  by  inspection. 

As  it  assumed  in  the  estimate  in  the  last  column  that  5%  piles 
are  driven  in  8  hrs.,  the  total  cost  for  harder  or  softer  ground 
can  be  estimated  by  assuming  the  number  of  piles  to  be  driven 
per  day  and  varying  the  items  marked  with  a  f  accordingly. 

Records  of  six  of  the  typical  piles  are  plotted  and  the  curves 
are  shown  on  the  diagram  (Fig.  10). 

The  full  curves  in  Fig.  10  show  the  portion  of  the  driving  where 
the  water  pressure  was  on  and  the  dotted  lines  the  driving  after 
it  had  been  cut  off  by  the  filling  of  the  pipe  at  the  tip  of  the  pile. 
This  stoppage  was  not  necessarily  due  to  the  design  of  the  pile  or 
to  the  method  of  driving,  but  chiefly  to  the  insufficient  capacity  of 
the  pump. 

The  flattening  out  of  the  curves  indicates  difficulties  in  driving, 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION. 


619 


PENETRATION   IN   FCCT. 


10. — Records  of  Pile  Driving. 


629  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

usually  because  of  the  poor  water  pressure.  In  certain  cases  irreg- 
ularities indicate  the  striking  of  obstructions,  and  when  the  pile  is 
slightly  jerked  ground  is  lost  instead  of  gained. 

Curves  of  piles  N,  F  and  Y  are  given  to  show  good  driving,  the 
pressure  remaining  on  most  of  the  time,  and  the  total  net  time, 
omitting  all  unnecessary  delays,  being  from  23  to  30  mins. 

Piles  F  and  Y  show  also  that  if  a  greater  drop  of  hammer  had 
been  used  at  the  start  they  would  probably  have  approached  nearer 
the  N. 

In  driving  pile  N  at  24-ft.  depth,  the  hammer  was  allowed  just  to 
tap  the  top  of  the  pile  with  no  impact,  and  the  pile  being  slightly 
churned,  the  loss  of  progress  is  shown  by  slight  drop  in  curve.  Then 
by  increasing  the  height  of  the  blow  it  started  down  again.  Time,  23 
mins.  with  118  blows. 

On  pile  F  they  first  began  jerking  the  pile  after  each  blow,  and 
this  method  appears  to  be  effective  provided  ground  is  soft  enough 
actually  to  lift  pile  readily.  In  hard  ground  it  is  ineffective.  Drop 
of  hammer  was  increased  from  0.5  to  finally  4  ft.  Time  driving, 
24  minutes  with  185  blows. 

Pile  Y  was  not  churned  or  lifted  after  first  blow  or  two,  but 
went  down  with  light  blows.  Time,  30  mins.,  225  blows.  Pres- 
sure good. 

The  curve  of  pile  B  is  given  to  illustrate  hard  driving,  due  to 
lack  of  water  pressure.  The  water  pressure  stopped  at  11% -ft,  as 
shown  by  the  sudden  break  in  curve  at  this  point.  Total  time 
driving  pile  was  83  mins.  with  895  blows. 

In  the  curve  of  pile  O  there  is  an  interesting  break  at  the  depth 
of  about  20  ft.,  where  an  effort  was  made  to  assist  the  pile  by 
churning  or  jerking,  and  ground  was  lost  by  doing  so,  and  the 
pipe  was  also  allowed  to  plug.  As  soon  as  the  hammer  was  allowed 
to  drop  in  the  usual  way  the  penetration  began  again,  but  647  blows 
and  70  mins.  by  net  time  were  required  to  carry  it  to  its  full 
depth.  At  a  depth  of  2%  ft.  an  obstruction  was  met,  as  indicated 
by  the  curve,  and  a  small  broken  piece  of  timber  came  up  beside  the 
pile.  Another  reason  for  the  flat  curve  of  pile  O  is  that  the  ground 
was  unusually  hard. 

Pile  17  was  driven  in  an  experimental  fashion  to  determine  the 
effect  of  the  jerk  at  the  end  of  each  blow.  The  curve  is  uniform 
throughout,  showing  that  this  jerk  is  absolutely  ineffective  in  hard 
ground.  In  this  pile,  as  noticed,  the  height  of  drop  was  increased 
to  8V2  ft. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Piles  for  an  Ocean  Pier.* — In  re- 
constructing in  reinforced  concrete  the  old  steel  pier  at  Atlantic 
City,  N.  J.,  some  116  reinforced  concrete  piles  12  ins.  in  diameter 
were  molded  in  air  and  sunk  by  jetting.  The  piles  varied  in  length 
with  the  depth  of  the  water,  the  longest  being  34  y2  ft.  Their  con- 
struction is  shown  by  the  accompanying  drawing  (for  these  draw- 
ings see  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction"),  which  also 

*  Engineering  Contracting,  Nov.  28,  1906. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  621 

show  the  floor  girders  carried  by  each  pair  of  piles  and  forming 
with  them  a  bent,  and  the  struts  bracing  the  bents  together.  In 
molding  and  driving  the  piles  the  old  steel  pier  was  used  as  a 
working  platform. 

The  forms  for  the  piles  were  set  on  end  on  small  pile  platforms 
located  close  to  the  positions  to  be  occupied  by  the  piles  and  were 
braced  to  the  old  pier.  The  forms  were  of  wood  and  the  bulb 
point,  the  shaft  and  the  knee  braces  were  molded  in  one  piece. 
Round  iron  rods  were  used  for  reinforcement.  The  concrete  Was 
composed  of  1  part  Vulcanite  Portland  cement,  2  parts  of  fine  and 
coarse  sand  mixed  and  4  parts  of  gravel  1  in.  and  under  In  size. 
The  mixture  was  made  wet  and  was  puddled  into  the  forms  with 
bamboo  fishing  rods,  which  proved  very  efficient  in  working  the 
mixture  around  the  reinforcing  rods  and  in  getting  a  good  mortar 
surface.  The  concrete  was  placed  in  small  quantities ;  it  was  mostly 
all  hand  mixed.  The  forms  were  removed  in  from  5  to  7  days, 
depending  on  the  weather. 

The  piles  were  planned  to  be  sunk  by  water  jet  and  to  this 
end  had  molded  in  them  a  2-in.  jet  pipe  as  shown.  They  were  sunk 
to  depths  of  from  8  ft.  to  14  ft.  into  the  beach  sand.  Water  from 
the  city  water  mains  at  a  pressure  of  65  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  was  used 
for  jetting ;  this  water  was  furnished  under  special  ordinance  at  a 
price  of  $1  per  pile,  and  a  record  of  the  amount  used  per  pile  was 
not  kept.  The  piles  were  swung  from  the  molding  platforms  and 
set  by  derricks  and  block  and  fall.  The  progress  of  Jetting  varied 
greatly  owing  to  obstructions  in  places  in  the  shape  of  logs,  old 
iron  pipes,  etc.  In  some  cases  several  days  were  required  to  get  rid 
of  a  single  pipe.  In  clear  sand,  with  no  obstructions,  a  12-in.  pile 
could  be  jetted  down  at  the  rate  of  about  8  ft.  per  hour,  working  1 
foreman  and  6  men.  The  following  is  the  itemized  actual  cost  ot 
molding  and  sinking  a  26-ft.  pile  with  bulb  point  and  knee  braces 
complete : 

Cost  per 
Forms.  Total,      pile. 

Lumber,  340  ft.  B.  M.   @   $30 $10.20       

Labor  (carpenters  @   $2.50  per  day) 12.00       

Oil,  nails,  oakum,  bolts,  clamps,  etc 1.20       .... 

$23.40   $   3.90 
Times    used 6       .... 

Reinforcement. 
275  Ibs.  of  plain  %-in.  steel  rods  @  2  cts. 

per  Ib $   5.50       

Preparing  and  setting,  4/10  ct.  per  Ib 1.10       6.60 

Jet  Pipe. 
26y2   ft.  of  2-in.  pipe  @   10  cts.  per  ft.  in 

place    2.65 

Setting  Forms. 
6  men  @   $2.50  per  day  =  $15,  set  4  piles       .  . .        3.75 

Material. 

90/100  cu.  yds.  gravel  @  $1.50  per  yd 1.35  .... 

45/100  cu.  yds.  sand   @   $1.50  per  yd .67  .... 

1.50  bbls.  cement  @   $1.60 2.40  4.42 


622  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Labor. 

Concrete  and  labor  foreman 3.00      ...» 

6   laborers,   mixing  and  placing  by  hand, 

$1.75    each 10.50       

$13.50  $  3.38 
Average  number  of  piles  concreted  per  day          4       .... 

Removing  Forms. 
4  men  @    $2.50  remove  and  clean  in  half 

day   4   columns 1.25 

1    man    @    $2.25    plastering   column    with 

cement  grout  (4  per  day) 56 

Jetting  10  ft.  into  Sand. 

Foreman $   3.00       

4    men,    $2.25    each,    handling    hose    and 

traveler 9.00       


$12.00   $   3.00 

Average  number  of  piles  jetted  per  day. . .  4       .... 

City   water   pressure   used   for   jetting    @ 

$1.00  per  pile 1.00 

Superintendence  @   $5.00  per  day 1.25 

Caring  for  trestle,  traveler,  material,  etc.       ...       4.84 

Total  cost  per  pile $36. GO 

The  pile  being  26  ft.  long,  the  cost  in  place  was  $1.41  per  foot. 
Subtracting  the  cost  of  sinking,  amounting  to  $7.09  per  pile,  we  have 
the  cost  ©f  a  26-ft.  pile  molded  and  ready  to  sink  coming  to  about 
$1.10  per  foot.  It  should  be  noted  that  this  is  the  cost  for  a  pile 
of  rather  complicated  construction ;  a  plain  cylindrical  pile  should  be 
less  expensive. 

During  a  visit  to  Atlantic  City  one  of  the  editors  of  this  journal 
took  occasion  to  examine  closely  these  12 -in.  piles.  They  were 
then  about  four  or  five  months  old,  and  were  in  all  respects  as 
sound  and  smooth  examples  of  concrete  work  as  could  be  wished. 
The  surface  texture  of  the  piles  was  notably  good ;  the  piles  appeared 
to  have  a  surface  film  or  skin  which  he  then  took  to  be  some  saline 
incrustation  coming  from  the  sea  water.  A  statement  since  received 
from  Mr.  D.  A.  Keefe  Consulting  Engineer,  Athens,  Pa.,  who  was 
resident  engineer  of  the  pier  work,  and  to  whom  we  are  indebted 
for  the  figures  of  cost  given  above,  mentions  that  the  piles  are  cov- 
ered With  a  coating  of  organic  and  inorganic  nature  which  fills  the 
pores  of  the  concrete  and  will  in  time  form  a  coating  of  considerable 
thickness  which  should  have  the  effect  of  shutting  out  the  sea  water 
and  preventing  any  disintegration.  In  conclusion,  it  should  be  noted 
that  the  design  of  the  concrete  steel  work  employed  in  reconstruct- 
ing this  pier  was  worked  out  by  the  Concrete  Steel  Engineering  Co., 
of  New  York  City,  and  that  the  contractors  for  the  work  were  C.  W. 
Snyder  &  Co.,  of  Atlantic  City,  N.  J. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Pile  Dike.*— The  work  described 
is  a  reinforced  concrete  pile  dike  built  opposite  St.  Joseph,  Mo., 
on  the  Missouri  River  improvement  work.  This  is  the  first  dike  of 
reinforced  concrete  to  be  constructed  on  the  Missouri  River  and 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  20,  1909. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  623 

is  an  experiment  to  secure  a  better  and  more  durable  structure 
than  is  provided  by  the  usual  timber  pile  dike  having  a  life  of  from 
7  to  10  years.  Several  plans  were  considered  and  are  described  by 
Maj.  Edward  H.  Schulz. 

The  plans  considered  besides  the  one  adopted  were:  (1)  Sinking 
a  core  with  shell,  withdrawing  core,  and  filling  the  shell  with 
concrete;  (2)  casting  the  pile  in  place,  the  form,  being  gradually 
removed  as  the  filling  proceeds;  (3)  rolling  and  making  the  pile 
on  the  ground  by  special  machine.  The  adopted  plan  was  to  use 
cast  piles  of  rectangular  or  octagonal  section  and  to  drive  them 
by  hammer  and  water  jet  combined.  Bids  were  asked  for  supervis- 
ing the  work  and  furnishing  forms  and  reinforcement,  the  Govern- 
ment to  furnish  all  other  materials,  to  make  the  piles  and  to  drive 
them.  The  lowest  bid  was  80  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pile. 

The  dike  structure  consists  of  3-pile  bents  connected  at  tops  of 
piles,  and  at  about  water  level  with  horizontal  transverse  and  longi- 
tudinal braces.  The  length  of  the  dike  is  150  ft.,  of  which  40  ft. 
at  the  shore  end  consists  of  timber  piles.  A  length  of  110  ft.  was 
constructed  of  concrete  piles.  The  bracing  was  all  wood  except  in 
two  panels,  where  as  an  experiment  concrete  braces  were  used. 
The  total  number  of  concrete  piles  was  36,  varying  in  length  from  32 
to  50  ft.,  and  having  a  total  length  of  1,457  lin.  ft.  The  piles  were 
14  ins.  square  at  top  and  8  ins.  square  at  the  point.  Each  was 
reinforced  with  4  1-in.  bars  tied  every  18  ins.  with  1*4 -in.  bars.  The 
concrete  was  a  1:2:4  mixture,  using  Ash  Grove  ^Portland  cement 
and  1-in.  stone.  The  piles  were  driven  at  the  age  of  10  days ;  the 
average  penetration  was  21  ft. 

The  piles  were  cast  on  a  foreshore  at  an  elevation  of  about  6  ft 
above  the  deck  of  a  barge  in  the  river.  Skids  were  placed  from 
the  foreshore  to  the  barge,  and  as  the  forms  were  removed  the  piles 
were  slid  on-board,  somewhat  similar  to  the  handling  of  wooden 
timbers  of  "like  size.  The  *  approximate  weight  of  a  50-ft.  pile  is 
8,700  Ibs. 

On  account  of  the  excessive  weight  of  these  piles  over  wooden 
piles  of  the  same  length,  wire  cable  was  used,  using  a  single  and 
double  block  for  increasing  the  purchase.  The  hitch  for  raising  the 
head  of  the  pile  was  placed  about  8  ft.  from  head.  The  ordinary 
pile  line  was  used  to  raise  the  point  of  pile,  the  sling  being  placed 
about  15  ft.  from  the  small  end  of  pile.  This  arrangement  takes 
the  spring  out  of  the  pile.  The  catenary  of  a  50-ft.  pile  is  about 
5  ins.  without  injury  to  pile. 

A  device,  known  as  a  guide,  was  placed  around  the  pile  near  the 
head  in  such  manner  as  to  hold  the  pile  squarely  in  the  leads.  The 
pump  used  was  a  single  cylinder,  double  action,  6-in.  suction,  3-in. 
discharge,  1^4 -in.  nozzle,  60  strokes  per  min.,  and  80  Ibs.  steam  pres- 
sure. A  piece  of  1%-in.  pipe  was  placed  in  the  end  of  the  pile,  to 
which  the  jet  was  attached.  Other  than  this  the  method  of  sinking 
was  the  same  as  for  wooden  piles  of  like  size. 

The  piles  were  driven  near  shore,  where  unusual  difficulties  ex- 
isted, due  to  parts  of  old  dike  and  rock  buried  in  river  bed.  Under 


624  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

normal  conditions,  where  only  sand  is  encountered,  the  pile  was 
jetted  in  3  to  5  mins. ;  no  hammer  was  used,  but  occasionally  the 
pile  itself  was  lifted  and  dropped  to  hasten  the  work.  It  is  believed 
a  judicious  use  of  jet  and  hammer  will  be  found  advisable  for  future 
work. 

This  dike  was  examined  after  going  through  an  ice  and  flood 
season  and  was  found  to  have  stood  very  satisfactorily.  Not  a  pile 
or  concrete  brace  was  injured,  though  several  wooden  braces  were 
broken.  Should  results  continue  with  similar  success,  it  is  probable 
that  concrete  dikes  will  receive  serious  consideration  as  a  permanent 
substitute  for  timber  piles  on  river  regulation. 
The  cost  of  the  dike  was  as  follows: 

Per 
Item.  Total.        lin.  ft. 

Supervising,  forms  and  steel  rods $1,200.00     $0.8236 

86%  bbls.  cement  at  $1.25 108.44       0.0743 

55.9  tons  crushed  stone  at  $1.30 72.67       0.0498 

32  cu.  yds.  sand  at  20  cts 6.40       0.0043 

Labor  on  forms 117.00       0.0803 

Labor  making  piles 257.70       0.1768 

Labor  driving  piles 215.00       0.1475 

Total     $1,977.21     $1.3566 

In  regard  to  these  figures  Mr.  Schulz  says :  "The  actual  cost,  de- 
ducting profit  of  contractor  and  cost  of  special  supervision,  would  be 
$1  per  ft.  On  extensive  work  this  could  probably  b/3  reduced  to 
40  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pile,  as  compared  to  20  cts.  for  long-leaf  yel- 
low pine." 

Cost  of  Raymond  Concrete  Piles.* — The  following  figures  of  the 
cost  of  constructing  concrete  piles  by  the  Raymond  process  have 
been  computed  from  records  obtained  in  constructing  the  pile  founda- 
tions for  the  concrete  laundry  building  of  G.  L.  Hooper  &  Sons,  of 
Salem,  Mass.  The  building  is  of  concrete  throughout,  the  walls 
being  of  concrete  block  and  the  columns,  floors  and  roofs  of  re- 
inforced concrete.  There  are  four  stories  and  the  general"  dimensions 
are  60  x  100  ft.  The  floor  and  wall  loads  are  transferred  to  wall 
columns  and  to  two  rows  of  interior  columns.  The  columns  are 
spaced  14  ft.  apart  on  centers  in  one  direction  and  19  ft.  in  the 
other  direction.  Each  column  and  its  footing  rests  upon  four  con- 
crete piles  spaced  3  ft.  apart  on  centers  in  the  form  of  a  square. 
The  spandrels  between  wall  columns  are  reinforced  concrete.  The 
groups  of  four  piles  are  each  capped  with  a  concrete  slab  5  ft.  6  ins. 
square  and  24  ins.  thick,  making  the  projection  of  the  capping  be- 
yond the  center  of  the  piles  15  ins.  Each  pile  was  finished  so  as  to 
allow  a  projection  into  the  capping  of  6  ins.  A  concrete  chimney, 
48  ins.  in  diameter  and  100  ft.  high,  located  at  one  corner  of  the 
building,  is  supported  upon  a  group  of  nine  piles.  Each  of  these 
piles  has  embedded  in  it  a  steel  rod  which  projects  into  the  walls  of 
the  chimney,  forming  an  anchorage. 

As  firm  bearing  soil  was  some  distance  below  the  ground,  piling 
of  some  sort  was  necessary,  and  wood  piles  were  originally  consid- 


' *  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  13,  1907. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  625 

ered.  This  would  have  made  it  necessary  to  cut  off  the  wood  piles 
below  low  tide,  a  distance  of  12  ft.  below  the  level  of  the  ground 
floor,  and  using  a  large  amount  of  concrete  in  the  stepped  footings 
above.  Instead,  concrete  piles  were  used  which  were  cut  off  5  ft. 
below  the  ground  floor,  effecting  considerable  saving  of  concrete 
foundations.  Another  feature  which  made  the  use  of  concrete  piles 
desirable  in  this  instance  was  the  fact  that  the  site  of  the  building 
was  formerly  occupied  by  an  old  wharf,  the  timbers  of  which  were 
many  of  them  yet  in  the  ground.  Had  wood  piles  been  used,  difficul- 
ties would  probably  have  been  experienced  due  to  the  "brooming"  of 
the  piles  when  striking  such  obstructions.  With  the  steel  driving 
form  used  for  the  concrete  piles,  delays  from  this  source  were 
avoided.  The  piles  are  designed  for  a  load  of  30  tons  each,  and  each 
takes  the  place  of  two  wooden  piles  in  the  original  design.  They 
are  6  ins.  in  diameter  at  the  small  end  and  have  a  uniform  taper 
each  side  of  the  center  of  ys  in.  to  a  foot,  making  a  21-ft.  pile  20  ins. 
in  diameter  at  the  top. 

In  constructing  concrete  piles  by  the  Raymond  process,  as  many 
of  our  readers  will  remember,  a  thin  steel  shell  enveloping  a  metal 
core  is  driven  and  then  the  core  is  collapsed  and  withdrawn,  leaving 
the  shell,  which  is  afterwards  filled  with  concrete  in  which  metal 
is  embedded  if  a  reinforced  pile  is  desired.  In  this  particular  work 
no  reinforcement  was  used  in  the  piles. 

The  piles  were  driven  by  means  of  a  No.  2  Vulcan  steam  hammer, 
with  a  plunger  having  a  weight  of  3,000  Ibs.  and  a  fall  of  about  3  ft, 
delivering  60  blows  per  min.  A  steel  driving  form  encased  in  a  shell 
of  about  No.  20  gage  iron  was  first  driven  to  the  required  depth;  the 
steel  driving  form  was  then  withdrawn,  leaving  the  shell  in  place, 
and  the  concrete  afterwards  deposited  in  this  shell.  A  total  of  172 
piles  were  driven,  the  minimum  length  being  14  ft.  and  the  maxi- 
mum 37  ft.,  the  average  being  about  20  ft.  Sixteen  working  days 
were  occupied  in  driving  the  piles  after  the  driver  was  in  position, 
driving  being  commenced  Aug.  17  and  completed  Sept.  6,  1906.  The 
greatest  number  driven  in  one  day  was  20,  and  the  average  was  11 
piles  per  day.  When  in  position  for  driving  the  average  time  re- 
quired to  complete  driving  was  12  mins.  The  total  number  of  blows 
varied  from  about  310  to  360,  the  average  being  about  350.  The 
piles  were  driven  until  the  penetration  produced  by  8  to  10  blows 
equalled  1  in.  When  in  full  operation,  a  crew  of  5  men  operated 
the  pile  driver.  Seven  men  were  engaged  in  making  the  concrete 
and  5  men  working  upon  the  metal  shells. 

Assuming  the  ordinary  organization  and  the  wages  given  below, 
we  have  the  following  labor  cost  per  day : 

1  foreman  at  $5 $  5.00 

1  engineman  at  $3 3.00 

4  laborers  on  driver  at  $1.75 7.00 

6  laborers  making  concrete  at  $1.75 10.50 

5  laborers  handling  shells  at  $1.75 8.75 

Total     $34.25 

As  172  piles  averaging  20  ft.  in  length  were  driven  in  16  days, 


626  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

the    total    labor    cost    of    driving,    given    by    the   figures    above,    is 
16  X  $34.25  =  $548,  or  practically  16  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pile  driven. 

The  concrete  used  in  the  piles  was  a  1 :  3 :  5  Portland  cement,  sand 
and  1%-in.  broken  stone  mixture.  A  20-ft.  pile  of  the  section  de- 
scribed above  contains  about  20  cu.  ft.  of  concrete,  or  say  0.75  cu.  yd. 
We  can  then  figure  the  cost  of  concrete  materials  per  pile  as  follows : 

0.85  bbl.  cement  at  $1.60 $1.36 

0.36  cu.  yd.  sand  at  $1 0.36 

0.60  cu.  yd.  stone  at  $1.25 0.75 

Total  per  pile $2.47 

The  steel  shell  has  an  area  of  about  72  sq.  ft.,  and  as  No.  20  gage 
steel  weighs  1.3  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  its  weight  for  each  pile  was  about 
94  Ibs.  Assuming  the  cost  of  coal,  oil,  etc.,  at  $2.50  per  day,  we  have 
the  following  summary  of  costs: 

Per  lin.  ft. 
of  pile. 

Labor  driving  and  concreting $0.16 

Concrete  materials 0.123 

94  Ibs.  steel  shell  at  3  cts 0.145 

Coal,  oil,  etc 0.011 

Total .$0.439 

This  cost  does  not  include  interest  on  plant,  cost  of  moving  plant 
to  and  from  work  and  general  expenses,  nor  royalty  on  the  Ray- 
mond patent. 

The  contract  was  awarded  for  a  fixed  number  of  lineal  feet  of  pile 
at  the  rate  of  $1.50  per  lin.  ft,  with  a  provision  for  additional 
length  of  piling  to  be  furnished  at  $1.40  per  lin.  ft.,  the  contractors 
providing  all  tools,  machinery,  material  and  labor  required  for  the 
work.  The  owners,  through  the  contractor  for  the  building  proper, 
made  the  necessary  excavations  and  provided  clear  and  level  space 
for  the  pile  driver,  braced  all  trenches. 

For  the  cost  of  Raymond  piles  at  another  place,  see  "Concrete 
Construction"  by  Gillette  and  Hill. 

Cost  of  Rolled  Concrete  Piles.*— The  abutments  of  the  Chicago 
&  Northwestern  Ry.  bridge  over  the  Root  River  at  Racine,  Wis.,  are 
founded  on  reinforced  concrete  piles  manufactured  by  the  Cheno- 
weth  rolling  process.  The  cost  of  these  piles  is  given  by  Mr.  L. 
C.  Winkelhaus  as  follows:  "The  contract  price  for  these  piles  was 
60  cts.  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $9.60  per  pile  16  ft.  long.  The  railway  com- 
pany furnished  all  the  materials,  costing  $6.46  per  pile,  or  40  cts. 
per  ft.  The  general  contractor  received  50  cts.  per  ft.  for  driving,  or 
$8.  Hence,  the  cost  to  the  railway  company  was  $24.06  per  pile  in 
place,  or  $1.50  per  ft.  The  cost  to  the  American  Concrete  Co.  for 
rolling  was  25  cts.  per  ft.,  or  $4  per  pile,  approximately.  The 
machine  and  plant  cost  the  concrete  company  about  $3,000.  How- 
ever, this  machine  can  be  moved  from  place  to  place  and  used  a 
great  many  times,  as  it  is  all  bolted  together." 

• Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  18,  1909. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  627 

The  method  Of  making  concrete  piles  by  rolling,  and  detailed  cost, 
will  be  found  in  "Concrete  Construction"  by  Gillette  and  Hill. 

Cost  of  Simplex  Piles. — Mr.  Constantine  Shuman  gives  the  fol- 
lowing relative  to  work  done  in  Pittsburg  in  1904: 

One  gang  working  on  Simplex  piles  30  ft.  long  averaged  450  lin. 
ft.  per  day,  or  15  piles,  but  the  best  day's  work  was  31  piles,  or 
930  lin.  ft.  The  crew  was  as  follows,  and  I  have  assumed  rate  of 
wages,  etc. : 

Per  day. 
1  foreman    $  4.00 

1  engineman    3.00 

2  winch  head  men,  at  $1.75 3.50 

3  riggers,  at  $2.00 6.00 

Total  pile  driver  gang $16.50 

6  concrete  mixers,  at  $1.75 10.50 

Total  gang   $27.00 

Rent  of  driver  and  apparatus,  and  fuel 18.00 

Total,  exclusive  of  materials $45.00 

This  is  equivalent  to  10  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

The  piles  are  17  ins.  diameter,  composed  of  1:2%:  5  mixture. 
There  are  1 .58  cu.  ft.,  or  0.059  cu.  yd.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pile. 

For  description  of  methods  of  making  Simplex  piles  and  the  spe- 
cial pile  points,  see  Reid's  "Concrete  and  Reinforced  Concrete  Con- 
struction." 

Cost  of  Concrete  Oil  Tank.*— Mr.  C.  F.  Leonard  gives  the  fol- 
lowing data: 

The  wall  forms  a  building  housing  a  circular  steel  oil  tank ;  it  is 
42  ft.  inside  diameter,  25  ft.  high  and  12  ins.  thick.  The  reinforce- 
ment consists  of  %-in.  twisted  steel  rods  located  2  ins.  inside  the  ex- 
terior face  and  spaced  apart  from  3%  ins.  at  the  bottom  to  30  ins. 
at  the  top.  Vertical  rods  9  ft.  apart  around  the  wall  held  the  hori- 
zontal rods  in  place.  To  tie  the  wall  to  the  bottom  L-shaped  %-in. 
rods  7  ft.  long  were  used.  Lap  splices  33  ins.  long  were  employed. 

The  forms  were  made  in  panels  6x8  ft.,  of  %-in.  spruce  boards 
6  ins.  wide  dressed  on  one  side  and  both  edges  and  nailed  to  three 
segments  of  2  x  12 -in.  plank  cut  to  curve.  For  the  first  three  shifts 
the  forms  were  braced  on  both  sides.  A  %-in.  rope  with  turnbuckles 
was  passed  around  the  steel  tank,  and  the  forms  were  drawn  against 
spacing  blocks,  set  between  the  steel  tank  and  the  inside  form  and 
also  between  forms,  by  wire  ties  fastened  to  the  wire  rope.  The  out- 
side panels  were  also  braced  from  the  ground.  Above  this  level 
the  panels  were  held  in  position  by  bolts  through  the  concrete  wall. 

The  concrete  for  the  bottom  15  ft.  of  the  wall  was  a  1:2:3% 
1-in.  stone  mixture ;  above  this  level  the  cement  content  was  re- 
duced. It  was  mixed  wet  by  hand  and  wheeled  up  inclines  to  the 
tops  of  the  forms.  The  first  ring  5%  ft.  high,  was  concreted  in  one 
day  ;  afterwards  the  forms  were  shifted  for  about  one-third  the  cir- 
cumference at  a  time  and  the  concreting  was  done  in  a  spiral  course. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  21,  1908. 


628  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Grooved  joints  were  made  whenever  work  was  stopped.  Frames  for 
windows  and  doors  were  cast  separately  and  set  in  place  as  the 
concreting  progressed.  The  wall  was  painted  with  two  coats  of  neat 
cement  both  inside  and  outside. 

The  cost  of  the  wall  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement  at  $1-70  per  bbl $  2.81 

Sand  at  $1.35  per  cu.  yd 0.66 

Stone  at  $1.20  per  ton 1.42 

Labor  at  $1.75  per  9  hrs 4.25 

Reinforcement    1.65 

Lumber,  nails  and  supplies 1.46 

Carpenters'    labor 5.25 

Total     $17.50 

The  cost  of  carpenter  work  was  over  twice  what  it  should  have 
been,  owing  to  local  conditions. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Tanks,  References. — See  section  on  Waterworks 
for  data  on  this  subject.  Also  see  Chapter  XXI,  Methods  and  Cost 
of  Construction  Reservoirs  and  Tanks,  in  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Con- 
crete Construction." 

Cost  of  Small  Cement  Pipes.*— Mr.  Albert  E.  Wright  is  author 
of  the  following:  The  pipe  discussed  here  was  6  to  12  ins. 
inside,  made  of  Portland  cement  and  clean,  sharp  sand  of  all 
sizes  up  to  very  coarse.  The  mortar  was  mixed  rather  dry,  but  very 
thoroughly,  using  14.1  cu.  ft.  of  sand  to  1  bbl.  of  cement,  or  very 
closely  a  1  to  4  mixture.  From  six  to  seven  buckets  of  water  were 
used  to  each  barrel  of  cement,  except  for  the  6-in.  pipe,  for  which 
the  mortar  had  to  be  made  somewhat  stiffer  in  order  to  remove 
the  inner  form,  which  is  not  made  collapsible  as  in  the  larger  sizes. 

The  forms  were  sheet  iron  cylinders  with  a  longitudinal  lap  joint 
that  could  be  expanded  after  molding  the  pipe,  and  removed  with- 
out injuring  the  soft  mortar.  The  inner  form  was  self-centering, 
so  that  there  was  little  variation  in  the  thickness  of  the  pipe. 

Four  men  are  required  in  making  cement  pipe  by  hand ;  one  mixes 
the  mortar,  and  wheels  it  to  the  place  of  work ;  another  throws  it 
into  the  form  a  little  at  a  time  with  a  hand  scoop  ;  a  third  rams 
it  with  a  tamping  iron,  and  a  fourth  keeps  the  new  pipe  sprinkled, 
and  applies  a  coat  of  neat  cement  slurry  to  the  inside  when  it  is 
sufficiently  hard.  In  molding,  the  form  of  the  bell  at  the  bottom  is 
secured  by  an  iron  ring  that  is  first  dropped  into  the  form,  and 
the  reverse  or  convex  form  at  the  top  is  made  with  a  second  ring. 
While  still  in  its  form  the  pipe  is  rolled  or  lifted  into  its  place  in  the 
drying  yard,  and  the  form  is  then  carefully  removed.  A  very  slight 
blow  in  removing  the  form  will  destroy  the  pipe,  and  a  considerable 
number,  especially  of  the  larger  sizes,  collapse  in  this  way,  and 
have  to  be  remolded.  To  avoid  handling,  the  pipe  is  stacked  on  end 
a  few  feet  from  the  place  of  mixing,  the  form  being  moved  as  the 
yard  fills  with  pipe.  One  crew  of  four  men  can  make  about  259 
joints  or  500  lin.  ft.  of  pipe  a  day. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  4,  1907. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION,  629 

As  soon  as  hard  enough,  the  pipe  is  turned  end  for  end,  and  is  then 
kept  wet  for  several  weeks  before  being  laid.  The  coating  of  neat 
cement  on  the  inside  is  applied  with  a  short  whitewash  brush,  and  is 
a  small  item  in  the  cost.  In  laying,  the  trench  is  carefully  finished 
to  grade  in  order  to  have  the  joints  close  nicely,  and  the  ends  are 
well  wet  with  a  brush.  The  mason  then  spreads  mortar,  mixed  1  to 
2,  on  the  end  of  the  pipe,  and  lays  a  bed  of  mortar  at  the  bottom  of 
the  joint.  He  then  jams  the  section  into  place,  and  swabs  out  the 
inside  of  the  joint  with  a  stiff  brush,  to  insure  a  smooth  passage  for 
the  water.  A  band  or  ring  of  mortar  is  spread  round  the  outside  of 
the  joint  as  an  additional  reinforcement.  One  barrel  of  cement  will 
joint  about  300  sections  of  pipe.  The  materials  cost  as  follows: 
Portland  cement,  per  bbl.,  $4.45  ;  labor,  per  day,  $2  ;  foremen,  per 
day,  $2.50  to  $3;  hauling,  per  load  mile  (1  cu.  yd.),  20  cts.  ;  sand, 
free  at  pit  ;  water,  free. 

The  pipe  was  all  of  a  1:4  sand  and  cement  mortar,  and  the 
amount  of  cement  in  one  foot  of  pipe  is  arrived  at  by  assuming  as 
in  Gillette's  "Hand  Book  of  Cost  Data"  that  where  the  sand  has 
voids  in  excess  of  the  cement  used,  the  mortar  will  occupy  1.1  times 
the  space  of  the  dry  sand,  which  yields  the  following  formula: 
Where— 

oncost  per  bbl.  of  cement,  or  $4.45. 

n  =  cu.  ft.  in  one  bbl.  (taken  at  3.5  here). 

s  =  ratio  of  sand  to  cement,  or  .4. 

d  =  inside  diameter  in  inches. 

t  =  thickness  of  pipe  in  inches. 

I  =  length  of  pipe  considered,  or  1  ft.  here. 

Then: 

Cement-cost  per  foot  = 
which  gives  here  = 


nXsXl.  1X144 
4.45XlX3.142(df+t2) 


3.5X4X1.1X144 
=  0.00631  (dt  +  t2). 

This  gives  the  following  cement  costs  per  lineal  foot  : 
Diameter,  Thickness,  Cost 

ins.  ins.  per  foot 

6  ....................    1%    .................  $0.0571 

8  ....................    1%    .................    0.0730 

10  ....................    is/8    .................    0.0998 

12  ....................    1%    .................    0.1278 

The  sand  cost  is  based  on  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  loading,  and  a 
haul  of  two  miles  of  1  cu.  yd.  to  the  load,  making  five  trips  per  day, 
at  $4  for  man  and  team.  It  bears  a  constant  ratio  to  cement  cost, 
being  11.2%  of  the  cement  cost.  The  labor  cost  of  making  is  based 
on  the  foreman's  estimate  that  a  foreman,  tamper,  mortar  mixer, 
and  water  man  should  finish  250  joints  a  day  of  6  or  8-in.  pipe.  For 
the  10  and  12-in.  pipe,  the  labor  is  assumed  to  be  greater  in  pro- 
portion to  the  material.  The  foreman  is  taken  at  $3,  one  man  at 
$2.50  and  two  at  $2.  The  cement  for  painting  the  inside  is  neglected. 
Hauling  the  pipe  to  place  is  taken  at  twice  the  cost  of  hauling  the 


630  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

sand  per  mile,  and  a  haul  of  4  miles  is  assumed.  The  cost  of  laying 
is  based  on  a  foreman's  estimate  of  2  cts.  per  foot  for  trench,  and 
that  one  man  to  lay,  one  man  to  plaster  the  joints,  one  helper  and 
one  man  to  backfill  will  lay  600  ft.  per  day  of  6  or  8-in.  pipe.  The 
larger  sizes  are  assumed  to  cost  more  in  proportion  to  their  material. 
These  various  costs  give  the  following  results  for  small  size  pipe 
as  made  and  laid  at  Irrigon,  Ore.,  for  the  Oregon  Land  &  Water  Co. : 


6-in. 
pipe. 
$0.057 

8-in. 
pipe. 
$0.073 

10-in. 
pipe. 
$0.099 

12-in. 
pipe. 
$0.128 

0.006 

0.008 

0  Oil 

0  014 

0.019 

0.019 

0.026 

0.034 

Hauling 

0.024 

0  032 

0  044 

0  056 

0.024 

0.024 

0.032 

0  042 

0.020 

0.020 

0.020 

0.020 

Totals    $0.15        $0.18       $0.23       $0.29 

The  above  costs  show  that  the  pipe  in  place  costs  about  twice  as 
much  as  pipe  in  the  yard,  even  with  cement  at  $4.45,  and  illustrates 
the  danger  of  accepting  cement  manufacturers'  estimates  without 
examining  local  conditions,  especially  as  to  handling. 

(For  further  data  on  cement  pipes,  see  the  sections  on  Water- 
works and  on  Sewers.) 

Ccst  of  Concrete  Pipe.* — The  following  estimates  of  cost  of  con- 
crete pipe  manufactured  by  force  account  on  the  Shoshone  Project 
are  based  on  the  results  of  five  days'  work  in  November,  1907.  The 
cost  of  cement  was  $3.05  per  bbl.,  of  sand  about  $1.40  per  cu.  yd., 
and  of  labor  $5  per  day  for  1  foreman,  $3  per  day  each  for  2  men 
and  $2.75  per  day  each  for  2  men.  Plant  depreciation  and  admin- 
istrative expenses  are  not  included  in  the  unit  costs  given.  The 
concrete  was  made  of  1  part  cement  and  3  parts  sand.  The  size  and 
the  thickness  of  the  pipe,  the  weight  and  the  unit  cost  per  linear  foot 
thereof  and  the  number  of  linear  feet  manufactured  in  the  five  days 
are  tabulated  below: 

Diam.  Thicks      Wt.  per  lin.  ft.     No.  ft.  Cost 

Ins.  Ins.  Lbs.  made  per  ft. 

12  1%  56  144  $0.25 

18  1%  94  248  0.37 

24  2  143  56  0.57 

36  3  366  54  1.15 

Cost  of  Cement  and  Concrete  Pipes  and  Sewers,  References.— See 
the  sections  on  Waterworks  and  on  Sewers.  See  Chapter  XXI, 
Methods  and  Cost  of  Aqueduct  and  Sewer  Construction  in  Gillette 
and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction." 

Cost  of  a  Band  Stand.— Mr.  W.  F.  Creighton  gives  the  following 
data : 

The  band  stand  was  built  much  like  a  mushroom,  the  roof  being 
32  ft.  in  diameter,  supported  by  a  central  post.  The  floor  was 
concrete  also.  The  concrete  was  a  1:2:4  stone  dust,  %  to  1%-in. 
broken  stone  mixture.  It  was  mixed  by  hand  and  hoisted  in  wheel- 

^Engineering-Contracting,  March  18,  1908. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  631 

barrows  by  means  of  a  gallows  frame  and  snatch  block  operated  by  a 
mule.  The  forms  for  the  shaft  and  underside  of  the  stand  consisted 
of  steel  plates  nailed  to  vertical  radial  ribs  built  to  the  designed 
curve.  These  ribs  were  made  of  2-in.  lumber.  Toward  the  upper 
ends  where  the  radial  spread  between  ribs  was  largest  cross-struts 
were  built  between  ribs.  The  outer  ends  of  the  ribs  were  supported 
by  staging ;  they  were  also  braced  at  the  tangent  points-  on  the 
center  column  or  stem.  The  amount  of  concrete  was  80  cu.  yds.  and 
it  cost  as  follows : 

Materials.  Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

119  bbls.  cement  at  $2.65 $    319.95     $3.95 

40  cu.  yds.  stone  dust  at  $1-10 44.00          0.55 

80  cu.  yds.  broken  stone  at  $1.10 88.00          1.10 

5,500   Ibs.    reinforcement 229.00          2.86 

2,500  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  and  shopwork.  .         76.21          0.95 

Total     .  ......$    754.16     $  9.41 


Labor. 
Mixing  and  placing  concrete  

.$     171.00 

$   2.14 

Bending  and  placing  steel 

40  00 

0.50 

Falsework  and  wood  forms  

113.90 

1.43 

164  00 

2  05 

12-in.  pipe  (furnishing  and  erecting)  . 
Unloading  and  hauling  stone  y%  mile. 
Finishing 

86.'25 
60.00 
12  00 

1.08 
0.75 
0  16 

Excavating      

5.00 

0.06 

Total 

$     652  15 

$   8.17 

Superintendence     , 

42.00 

0.53 

Foreman 

39  00 

0  48 

Total 

$       81  00 

$   1  01 

Grand  total   . 

.    1.487.31 

18.59 

Cost  of  Sylvester  Wash  and  Sylvester  Mortar.— Mr.  W.  C.  Haw- 
ley  is  authority  for  the  following:  A  covered  concrete  clear  water 
well  of  the  Apollo  Water-Works  Co.  leaked,  so  it  was  plastered 
with  a  Sylvester  mortar.  A  light-colored  soft  soap  was  dissolved  in 
water,  1*4  Ibs.  soap  to  15  gals,  of  water,  luen  3  Ibs.  of  powdered 
alum  were  mixed  with  each  bag  of  cement.  The  mortar  was  1 :  2. 
Two  coats  of  this  plaster  were  applied  to  the  dry  walls,  giving  a 
total  thickness  of  ^  in.  Leaking  was  thus  stopped  completely.  The 
cost  was : 

2  Ibs.  soap  (with  24  gals,  water),  at  7y2  cts $0.15 

12  Ibs.  alum,  at  3  y2  cts 0.42 

Total     $0.57 

Or  57  cts.  for  soap  and  alum  per  barrel  of  Portland  cement. 
In  repairing  the  bottom  of  a  reservoir  lined  with  4  to  6  ins.  of  con- 
crete which  leaked,  a  Sylvester  wash  was  used.  The  soap  solution 
was  %  Ibs.  of  Clean  soap  to  1  gal.  of  water,  and  the  alum  solution 
was  y2  Ib.  alum  to  4  gals,  water  ;  both  well  dissolved,  soap  solution 
being  boiled.  On  the  clean  dry  concrete  the  boiling  hot  soap  solu- 
tion was  applied  ,  24  hrs.  later  the  alum  wash  ;  24  hrs.  later  the 
soap  wash ;  24  hrs.  later  the  alum  wash.  Two  men  applied  the 
solutions,  using  whitewash  brushes,  while  a  third  man  carried  pails 
of  the  solution.  In  making  the  soap  solution  2  men  attended  4 


632  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

kettles,  1  man  kept  up  fires,  2  men  carried  solution  to  men  applying 
it.  The  alum  solution  required  fewer  men,  being  made  cold  in  bar- 
rels. After  applying  the  second  soap  wash  to  the  concrete  slopes, 
men  had  to  be  held  by  ropes  to  keep  from  slipping.  The  rope  was 
placed  around  two  men,  who  started  work  at  top  of  the  slope,  a  third 
man  paying  out  on  the  rope.  The  work  was  done  in  8^  days,  and 
the  cost  as  follows : 
Labor. 

1,140  hrs.  labor  at  15  cts $171.00 

83  hrs.  foremen  at  30  cts 24.90 

83  hrs.  waterboy  at  6   cts 4.98 

Add  for  supt.   15% 30.13 

Total  labor... $231.01 

Materials. 

900  Ibs.  Clean  soap  at  4%  cts $   39.00 

210  Ibs.  alum  at  3  cts 6.30 

6  whitewash  brushes  (10-in.),  at  $2.25 13.50 

6  stable  brushes,   $1.25 7.50 

Total  materials $  66.30 

Total  labor  and  materials 297.31 

This  covered  131,634  sq.  ft,  hence  the  cost  of  the  two  coats  of 
eoap  and  alum  was  $2.26  per  1,000  sq.  ft.,  or  0.23  ct.  per  sq.  ft 
All  leaks  but  one  from  a  slight  crack  were  stopped. 

The  concrete  lining  of  a  new  reservoir  near  Wilmerding  was 
waterproofed  by  using  caustic  potash  and  alum  in  the  finishing 
mortar  coat.  The  stock  solution  was  2  Ibs.  of  caustic  potash,  and  5 
Ibs.  of  alum  to  10  qts  of  water.  This  was  made  in  barrel  lots,  from 
which  3  qts.  were  taken  for  each  batch  of  finishing  mortar,  which 
consisted  of  2  bags  of  cement  mixed  with  4  bags  of  sand ;  a  batch  of 
mortar  covered  an  area  6  ft.  x  8  ft.  1  in.  thick.  The  extra  cost  of 
Mais  waterproofing  was: 

100  Ibs.  caustic  potash  at  10  cts $10.00 

70  Ibs.  caustic  potash  at  9  cts 6.30 

960  Ibs.  alum  at  3%,  3%  and  4  cts 34.38 

60  hrs.  mixing  at  15  cts 9.00 

Freight,  express  and  hauling 11.50 


Total  for  74,800  sq.  ft $71.18 

So  the  cost  was  95  cts.  per  1,000  sq.  ft.,  or  less  than  0.1  ct.  per 
sq.  ft.  Hence  the  cost  was  less  than  by  using  Sylvester's  wash  and 
the  result  was  better,  for  with  Sylvester's  wash  the  penetration  is 
only  1/16  to  %-in.  It  was  found  that  if  less  than  2  parts  of  sand  to 
1  part  of  cement  were  used  the  mortar  cracked  in  setting.  Clean 
Band  was  imperative  as  any  organic  impurities  soon  decomposed, 
leaving  soft  spots.  Do  not  use  an  excess  of  potash ;  a  slight  excess 
of  alum,  however,  does  not  decrease  the  strength  of  the  mortar. 

Cost  of  Waterproofing  With  Tar  Felt  and  Asphalt.*— The  follow- 
ing data  relate  to  the  «ost  of  waterproofing  the  concrete  on  the  Long 
Island  R.  R.  subway : 

The  specifications  for  the  waterproofing  will  be  found  in  Gillette 
and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction." 

* Engineering-Contracting,  July   18,   1906. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  633 

During  the  year  1903  there  were  laid  9,056  sq.  yds.  of  this  water- 
proofing on  the  roof  of  the  subway.  The  labor  cost  of  placing  the 
two  layers  of  felt  and  the  three  coats  of  tar  pitch  was  as  follows: 
206  days  labor  at  a  cost  of  $498  (or  an  average  of  $2.41  per  day) 
for  the  9,056  sq.  yds.,  which  is  equivalent  to  5V2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for 
the  labor.  Since  this  is  for  two  layers  of  felt,  the  labor  cost  was 
2%  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  sing-le  layer,  which  is  a  high  cost  as  we  shall 
see  presently. 

The  labor  cost  of  mixing  and  placing  the  1-in.  layer  of  cement 
mortar  over  the  felt  was  as  follows:  It  required  589  days,  at  a  cost 
of  $1,306  (or  an  average  of  $2.22  per  day)  to  place  this  9,056  sq. 
yds.  of  cement  plaster,  which  is  equivalent  to  14^  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

The  total  cost  of  labor  for  the  two  layers  of  tar  felt  and  the  layer 
of  cement  mortar  was,  therefore,  20  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  on  this  Long 
Island  R.  R.  work. 

For  comparison,  we  will  now  repeat  some  of  the  cost  data  given  in 
our  February  issue,  relating  to  the  New  York  Subway.  On  the 
New  York  Subway,  the  specifications  were  somewhat  similar,  ex- 
cept that  no  mortar  coat  was  specified.  The  roof  of  the  New  York 
Subway  was  waterproofed  with  four  layers  of  asphalt  felt  and 
asphalt.  The  floor  of  the  subway  made  two  layers  of  asphalt  felt 
placed  between  two  layers  of  concrete.  We  may  say,  therefore,  that 
the  average  number  of  layers  of  felt  used  in  waterproofing  the  New 
York  Subway  was  three.  The  records  of  cost  for  this  work  were 
kept  in  terms  of  one  layer  of  felt,  so  that  it  is  necessary  to  multi- 
ply the  following  costs  by  three  in  order  to  get  the  cost  of  the 
three  layers.  For  estimating  the  quantities  of  materials  used,  the 
following  rules  were  deduced: 

Reduce  the  area  to  square  yards,  and  add  15%  for  laps,  to  obtain 
the  square  yards  of  asphalt  felt  per  single  layer. 

Multiply  the  square  yards  by  0.37  to  get  the  number  of  gallons 
of  asphalt  per  single  layer  of  felt. 

Where  brick  are  laid  in  asphalt,  allow  650  brick  per  cu.  yd. ;  and 
multiply  the  number  of  cubic  yards  of  brick  by  0.3  to  get  the  num- 
ber of  tons  of  mastic. 

The  cost  of  some  98,000  sq.  yds.  waterproofing  on  the  New  York 
Subway,  was  as  follows  per  single  thickness  of  felt: 

Per  sq.  yd. 

(single). 

cts. 

1.11  sq.  yds.  asphalt  felt  at  4  %  cts 5 

0.37  gal.  asphalt  at  12  cts 4ya 

Labor    5  % 

Total    15~~ 

This  is  for  one  thickness  of  felt,  so  that  for  3  thicknesses  the 
cost  would  be  45  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  for  labor  and  materials.  Both  the 
labor  and  materials  were  high  in  cost.  The  labor  was  high  because 
the  men  were  poorly  supervised.  There  were  2  waterproof  "fore- 
men" at  $3  per  8-hr,  day,  and  7  waterproofers  (laborers)  at  $1.50 
per  day,  so  that  the  average  wage  was  $1.83  per  day.  The  "fore- 
men" were  skilled  waterproofers  who  worked  with  the  gang. 


634  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  material  was  high  priced,  because  asbestos  felt  dipped  in 
asphalt  was  specified.  The  felt  weighed  10  Ibs.  per  100  sq.  ft. 

To  illustrate  how  unusually  inefficient  the  waterproofers  were,  the 
following  records  are  given.  These  records  were  kept  by  the  writer. 
and  relate  to  the  waterproofing  of  brick  walls.  The  wall  was  built 
up  one  brick  thick  (4  ins.),  and  was  then  waterproofed  with  three 
layers  of  tar  felt  mopped  with  tar  pitch.  The  layers  lapped  on  one 
another  like  the  shingles  of  a  roof,  the  exposed  face  of  each  layer 
being  1  ft.  wide.  Three  men  were  engaged  in  the  work :  one  man 
melted  and  carried  the  tar  in  buckets,  one  man  mopped  it  on,  and  the 
third  man  laid  the  tar  felt.  The  bricks  were  first  mopped  with  tar, 
then  the  felt  was  laid  on  and  mopped  with  tar ;  then  a  second  layer 
of  felt,  and  so  on.  The  two  men  mopping  and  laying  felt  easily 
averaged  120  sq.  yds.  in  8  hrs.  Since  this  was  3-layer  work,  the 
men  averaged  360  sq.  yds.  of  single  layer  per  day.  Skilled  roofers 
were  employed  placing  and  mopping  the  felt  at  $3.75  a  day,  and  the 
laborer  helping  them  received  $2  a  day,  so  that  the  gang  received 
$9  for  360  sq.  yds.,  or  2%  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  wages  averaging  $3  per 
8-hr,  day  per  man  engaged.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  only  one  skilled 
man  was  needed ;  and,  had  there  been  enough  work  to  do,  one 
laborer  could  have  melted  and  delivered  enough  tar  for  two  gangs. 
It  usually  requires  about  %  gal.  tar  per  layer  of  felt,  which  would 
mean  120  gals,  of  tar  per  day  per  gang  of  two  men  laying.  Tar 
weighs  about  as  much  as  water,  or  8^  Ibs.  per  gal.,  hence  1,000  Ibs. 
tar  would  be  used  by  the  gang  of  two  men  in  a  day.  [In  the  Water- 
works section  of  this  book  will  be  found  the  cost  of  waterproofing  a 
large  reservoir.  This  work  was  done  on  a  large  scale.  Two  men 
heated  and  delivered  the  asphalt  to  one  man  who  spread  it  with  a 
mop  made  of  twine.  The  man  with  the  mop  spread  5,000  Ibs.  of 
asphalt  per  day  of  10  hrs.,  covering  an  area  of  1,000  sq.  yds.,  which 
is  equivalent  to  0.6  gal.  per  sq.  yd.  Sirice  two  men  boiled  and  de- 
livered the  asphalt,  each  of  these  two  men  averaged  2,500  Ibs.  or  300 
gals,  per  day.  It  took  one  cord  of  wood  to  boil  about  20,000  Ibs.,  or 
2,400  gals.,  from  which  it  will  be  seen  that  the  item  of  fuel  is  prac- 
tically negligible.] 

While  men  engaged  in  mopping  tar  or  asphalt  over  layers  of  felt 
cannot  be  expected  to  accomplish  as  much  work  as  men  mopping 
tar  over  an  extended  area,  still  comparisons  such  as  the  above  are 
valuable  because  they  show  where  money  may  be  saved.  In  this  in- 
stance the  comparison  shows  that  a  man  boiling  and  delivering  tar 
is  not  kept  busy  unless  he  is  handling  at  least  300  gals,  a  day. 

When  one  man  is  mopping  on  the  tar  and  a  second  man  is  laying 
the  felt,  one  of  the  two  is  usually  idle  while  the  other  is  busy. 
Provided*each  man  works  with  great  rapidity  when  he  is  actually 
working,  very  little  time  is  really  lost;  but,  if  left  to  themselves, 
the  workmen  will  take  a  very  slow  gait,  and  thus  more  than  double 
the  cost. 

Finally,  unless  labor  unions  interfere,  there  is  really  no  need  of 
high-priced  labor  on  work  of  this  character.  Common  laborers  can 
be  used  for  all  work  except  laying  the  felt,  and,  even  in  that  work, 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  635 

a  grade  of   skill   only   slightly  above  the   average  of   the  common 
laborer  is  needed. 

As  for  the  felt  itself,  there  is  no  necessity  of  anything  better  than 
a  good  grade  of  tar  felt  weighing  about  15  Ibs.  per  100  sq.  ft.,  and 
costing  about  1%  cts.  per  lb.,  or  2  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  We  are  speaking 
now  of  felt  for  waterproofing,  not  of  felt  for  roofing  that  is  exposed 
to  the  air. 

The  writer  has  seen  felt  that  had  been  laid  in  coal  tar  pitch ;  and, 
after  32  years  service,  it  was  as  flexible  as  the  day  it  was  laid.  This 
felt  had  been  used  to  waterproof  the  outside  of  the  masonry  arch 
forming  the  roof  of  the  Park  Avenue  Tunnel,  N.  Y.  C.  &  H.  R.  Ry., 
built  in  1872.  The  felt  was  laid  in  two  layers  and  covered  With 
2  or  3  ft.  of  earth.  Wherever  it  had  been  covered  it  was  in  perfect 
condition  when  taken  out  in  1904.  Mr.  A.  B.  Corthell,  Terminal 
Engineer,  New  York  Central  Ry.,  New  York  City,  has  specimens  of 
this  old  felt.  As  the  process  of  making  coal  gas  has  not  changed  in 
the  last  30  years,  it  is  obvious  that  as  good  coal  tar  pitch  is  to  be 
had  to-day  as  ever.  There  are  petroleum  residues  that  are  sold  as 
pitch  which  are  not  of  a  durable  nature,  and  such  products  have, 
perhaps,  given  a  black  eye  to  pitch  in  general. 

Let  us  see  what  two  layers  of  tar  felt  can  be  laid  for : 

Two  layers 

per  sq.  yd. 

cts. 

2  sq.  yds.  tar  felt  at  2 %  cts 5 

%^gal.  asphalt  at  12  cts 8 

Labor   ( $2  a  day) 3 

Total  for  2  layers  felt 14 

This  is  equivalent  to  7  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  single  layer.  In  the 
above  estimate,  12%  has  been  added  to  the  price  of  the  tar  felt  to 
allow  for  laps.  The  labor  .is  assumed  at  a  lower  rate  than  would 
probably  be  paid  in  cities  where  labor  unions  control  such  work,  but 
it  is  as  high  as  would  be  paid  outside  of  cities. 

Cost  of  Waterproofing  Batteries  With  Coal  Tar  and  Sand.* — Coal 
tar  and  sand  was  used  in  waterproofing  the  superior  crests  of  three 
batteries  at  Fort  Mott,  N.  J.  The  tar  was  applied  hot  and  was 
spread  over  the  concrete  surfaces  with  rubber  squeegees  and  then 
sanded.  Joints  were  filled  with  hot  tar.  A  surplus  of  sand  was  put 
on  and  left  for  a  few  days  and  was  then  swept  off.  Two  coats  were 
put  on  over  the  traverses  and  one  coat  over  the  parapets.  The  total 
surface  covered,  two  coats,  was  14,700  sq.  ft.,  and  one  coat,  19,600 
sq.  ft;  21%  bbls.  of  coal  tar  were  used,  or  about  1  bbl.  per  2,279 
sq.  ft.  The  tar  cost  $4.25  per  bbl.  delivered,  and  the  cost  of  the 
waterproofing,  including  materials  and  labor,  was  $0.0074  per  sq.  ft., 
one  coat.  In  two  of  the  batteries  practically  all  percolation  was 
stopped. 

Cost  of  Waterproofing  Bridge  Floor,  Pennsylvania  Ry.f— Mr.  A.  L. 
Bowman  is  author  of  the  following: 


* Engineering-Contracting,  April  3,  1907. 
'(Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  4,  1908,  p.  290. 


636 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Met  nod  of  Applying  Waterproofing. — First.  The  steel  floor  plate 
was  thoroughly  cleaned  and  painted  with  one  coat  of  red  lead 
and  oil. 

Second.  A  filler  of  mastic  asphalt  was  placed  along  the  webs 
of  the  girders. 

Third.  Five  layers  of  Hydrex  felt  cemented  together  with  Hydrex 
compound  were  then  put  on  the  floor  plate  and  carried  as  far  as 
possible  up  under  the  flashing  angles,  which  were  fastened  along  the 
webs  and  around  the  stiffeners  and  the  ends  of  the  girders.  The  felt 
was  not  cemented  to  the  floor  plate  but  was  thoroughly  cemented 
to  the  webs  of  the  girders. 

Fourth.  A  layer  of  brick  laid  flat  was  then  placed  on  the  felt 
in  a  hot  layer  of  compound,  the  brick  being  laid  lengthwise  of  the 
bridges. 

Fifth.  The  joints  between  the  brick  were  thoroughly  poured 'with 
compound  and  the  whole  surface  mopped  with  compound. 

Sixth.  The  stone  ballast  ties  and  rails  were  then  placed  on  the 
bridge  (Fig.  11). 

Labor  and  Time  on  Waterproofing  After  Steel  Work  Was  Erected. 


EnpContr. 


Fig.  11.  —  Waterproof  Bridge  Floor. 


— The  skilled  and  common  laborer  employed  per  square  (100  sq.  ft.) 
was  as  follows:  Foreman,  1.66  hrs. ;  waterproof ers,  11.71  hrs. ; 
laborers,  7.75  hrs.  The  overtime  to  complete  a  floor  of  750  sq.  ft. 
was  1.4  days  of  10  hrs.  The  best  time  for  one  track,  750  sq.  ft.,  was 
one  day  of  10  hrs. 

Cost. — The  cost  of  waterproofing  materials  per  square  foot  of  floor 
surface  was  20%  cts.  The  cost  of  labor  per  square  foot  was  10% 
cts.  Materials  Per  Square  (100  sq.  ft). — Brick,  440;  Hydrex  com- 
pound, 41.2  gals.;  Hydrex  felt,  1.46  rolls  (400  sq.  ft.  per  roll). 

Result. — The  bridges  are  watertight  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
points  immediately  over  columns. 

During  a  severe  storm  the  water  leaks  down  to  some  extent,  be- 
tween the  main  and  side  walk  girders.  It  seems  impossible  to 
keep  these  points  absolutely  tight. 

The  vibration  and  reflection  of  the  girders  break  the  bond  of  any 
material  which  is  placed  between  the  ends  of  the  girders.  From  a 
close  observation  of  these  bridges  it  seems  impossible  to  make  the 
compound  adhere  to  the  steel  for  any  length  of  time,  due  to  the 
vibration  of  the  steel  work  and  the  hardening  of  the  material  during 
cold  Weather. 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  637 

It  is  necessary  to  protect  the  edges  of  the  waterproofing  along 
the  girders  from  water  running  down  behind  after  the  waterproofing 
has  broken  loose.  This  was  done  by  means  of  the  flashing  angles 
referred  to  above. 

No  attempt  should  be  made  to  fit  the  brick  along  the  web  of 
brackets,  the  brick  being  simply  shoved  as  tight  as  possible  and  then 
''he  openings  poured  with  the  compound.  Afterward  the  opening 
under  the  flashing  angles  should  be  filled  with  concrete  to  keep  the 
edges  of  the  felt  from  curling  over. 

The  felt  was  carried  well  over  and  down  the  back  walls,  drainage 
being  had  by  putting  the  bridges  on  a  grade  and  allowing  the  water 
to  run  behind  the  abutments,  which  were  drained  by  pipes  running 
through  the  abutments  to  the  gutters. 

Cost  of  Waterproofing,  References.— For  further  data  on  this  sub- 
ject consult  the  index  under  "Waterproofing."  See  Chapter  XXV, 
Methods  and  Cost  of  Waterproofing,  in  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete 
Construction." 

Cost  of  Removing  Efflorescence  With  Acid.— Efflorescence,  or 
"whitewash,"  on  a  concrete  bridge  at  Washington,  D.  C.,  was  re- 
moved by  using  hydrochloric  (muriatic)  acid  and  common  scrubbing 
brushes;  30  gals,  of  acid  and  36  scrubbing  brushes  were  used  to 
clean  250  sq.  yds.  of  concrete.  The  acid  was  diluted  with  4  or  5 
parts  water  to  1  of  acid ;  and  water  constantly  played  with  a  hose 
on  the  concrete  while  being  cleaned  to  prevent  penetration  of  the 
acid.  One  house-front  cleaner  and  5  laborers  were  employed,  and 
the  total  cost  was  $1.50,  or  60  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  This  high  cost  was 
due  to  the  difficulty  of  cleaning  the  balustrades.  It  is  thought  that 
the  cost  of  cleaning  the  spandrels  and  wing  walls  did  not  exceed  20 
cts.  per  sq.  yd.  The  cleaning  was  perfectly  satisfactory.  An  experi- 
ment was  made  with  wire  brushes  without  acid,  but  the  cost  was 
$2.40  per  sq.  yd.  The  flour  removed  by  the  wire  brushes  was  found 
by  analysis  to  be  silicate  of  lime.  Acetic  acid  was  tried  in  place  of 
muriatic,  but  required  more  scrubbing. 

For  further  data  on  cleaning  with  acid,  see  the  section  on  Stone 
Masonry.  Consult  the  index  under  "Masonry,  Cleaning." 

Cost  of  Bush- Hammering  Concrete. — Mr.  C.  R.  Neher  states  that 
a  concrete  face  can  be  bush-hammered  by  an  ordinary  laborer  at  the 
rate  of  100  sq.  ft.  in  10  hrs.,  at  a  cost  of  1%  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  The 
cost  of  forms  saved  by  using  rough  lumber  goes  a  long  way  toward 
covering  the  cost  of  bush-hammering.  The  front  of  the  Dakota 
elevator  in  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  was  bush-hammered.  Bush-hammering 
removes  stains  due  to  efflorescence. 

Ransome  says  that  bush-hammering  concrete  costs  1%  to  2%  cts. 
per  sq.  ft.,  wages  of  common  laborers  being  15  cts.  per  hr.  The 
Ransome  Concrete  Mchy.  Co.,  Dunellen,  N.  J.,  make  a  toothed  ax 
especially  designed  for  bush-hammering  concrete. 

The  walls  of  the  Pacific  Borax  Co.  factory  at  Bayonne,  N.  J.,  were 
dressed  by  hand  at  the  rate  of  100  to  200  sq.  ft.  per  day  ;  but  most 
of  the  dressing  was  done  with  a  pneumatic  hammer,  with  which  a 
man  was  able  to  dress  300  to  600  sq.  ft.  per  day. 


638  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

At  the  Harvard  Stadium  I  timed  men  working  with  pneumatic 
hammers,  using  a  tool  like  an  ice  chopper  with  a  sawtooth  cutting 
blade.  One  man  dressed  a  wall  at  the  rate  of  50  sq.  ft.  per  hr.,  but 
I  was  told  that  200  sq.  ft.  was  a  10-hr,  day's  work.  I  am  inclined  to 
think,  however,  that  much  more  than  200  sq.  ft.  a  day  could  be  aver- 
aged. Common  laborers  are  used  for  this  sort  of  work. 

For  the  cost  of  operating  pneumatic  hammers,  when  gasoline  ia 
used  for  power  consult  the  index  under  Pneumatic  Hammer. 

A  common  method  of  finishing  concrete  surfaces  is  to  remove  the 
forms  before  the  concrete  is  very  hard,  say  in  24  hrs.,  and  scour 
the  surface  with  a  wire  brush  to  as  much  as  half  the  depth  of  the 
pebbles  of  gravel  or  stone.  This  can  be  done  for  7  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

The  average  cost  of  bush-hammering  the  concrete  blocks  for  the 
Connecticut  Ave.  Bridge,  at  Washington,  was  26  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 
The  work  was  done  by  stonecutters  who  received  $4  per  day,  which 
partly  accounts  for  the  high  cost.  Moreover  a  very  high  grade  of 
work  was  required.  The  cost  ranged  from  14  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  to  47 
cts.  per  sq.  ft.,  and  is  given  in  detail  in  Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete 
Construction." 

Cost  of  Excavating  Concrete.-^-Mr.  Ernest  W.  Shader  gives  the 
following.  A  hole  was  cut  through  a  concrete  dam  10  yrs.  old  at 
Ithaca,  N.  Y  The  concrete  was  crushed  shale,  and  a  mixture  of 
natural  and  Portland  cement  had  been  used.  The  concrete  was  soft 
but  tough.  A  pneumatic  plug  drill  was  used,  and  the  concrete  was 
chipped  out  with  flat  chisels  1%  ins.  wide.  A  narrower  chisel  was 
not  so  good,  and  plug  and  feathering  was  impracticable  because  the 
drill  would  stick  in  the  hole.  (Perhaps  a  water  jet  would  have  over- 
come this  difficulty.)  Two  Italian  laborers  alternated  in  holding  the 
pneumatic  machine,  and  they  averaged  exactly  1  lin.  ft.  of  hole 
5ya  ft.  diameter  per  9-hr,  day,  for  16  days.  The  air  pressure  was 
70  Ibs.  This  is  equivalent  to  22%  cu.  ft.,  or  0.83  cu.  yd.  per  day 
by  two  men  with  a  pneumatic  machine. 

A  liberal  supply  of  sharp  chisels  was  provided.  The  chisel  was 
sunk  into  the  concrete  until  the  blows  of  the  hammer  caused  a 
piece  to  chip  off.  The  time  per  chip  ranged  from  a  few  seconds  to 
10  minutes.  When  the  men  become  experienced  they  drove  two  or 
three  chisels  along  a  line  and  thus  wedged  off  as  much  as  %  cu.  ft. 
of  concrete.  This  worked  well  when  the  lower  part  of  the  hole  was 
advanced  ahead  of  the  upper  part. 

For  comparison  with  the  data  above  given,  see  Gillette  and  Hill's 
"Concrete  Construction,"  p.  107,  where  it  is  stated  that  it  took  a 
quarryman  5  days  to  chip  off  1  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  from  the  face 
of  a  concrete  abutment  that  projected  too  far.  Also  see  p.  653,  etc., 
of  the  same  book  for  methods  and  cost  of  blasting  concrete. 

For  cost  of  excavating  a  concrete  pavement  base  see  the  section 
on  Roads  and  Pavements. 

Cross  References  and  References. — In  other  sections  of  this  book 
will  be  found  data  on  concrete  costs,  for  which  see  the  index  under 
Concrete.  The  cost  of  quarrying  and  crushing  stone  for  concrete 


CONCRETE    CONSTRUCTION.  639 

will  be  found  in  the  section  on  Rock  Excavation.  In  estimating  the 
cost  of  forms  the  data  in  the  section  on  Timberwork  will  be  of  aid. 

The  following  books  on  concrete  cover  different  parts  of  this 
great  subject: 

"Concrete  Construction — Methods  and  Cost,"  by  Gillette  and  Hill, 
is  a  700-page  treatise  devoted  solely  to  the  methods  and  cost  of  con- 
crete and  reinforced  concrete  work  of  every  variety.  While  intended 
primarily  as  a  treatise  for  contractors  and  for  engineers  engaged  in 
actual  field  work,  it  will  aid  the  designer  also  if  he  aims  to  design 
and  specify  construction  on  which  low  bids  will  be  assured.  I  can- 
not too  often  repeat  the  statement  that  no  designer  is  thoroughly 
competent  unless  he  has  a  thorough  knowledge  of  every  detail  of 
actual  cost. 

"Concrete  and  Reinforced  Concrete  Construction"  by  Homer  A. 
Reid,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  is  a  900-page  treatise  written  primarily  for 
the  designing  engineer  and  the  engineering  student,  but  it  is  full  of 
illustrations  of  forms,  arch  centers,  and  text  matter  of  value  to  the 
contractor  also.  There  is,  in  my  opinion,  no  single  book  that  so  well 
covers  both  theory  of  concrete  design  and  practice  of  construction, 
as  does  this  book,  when  the  whole  field  of  concrete  is  considered. 
The  field,  however,  is  so  great  that  in  addition  to  one  such  treatise 
covering  the  whole  field,  most  engineers  and  contractors  need  special 
treatises  on  special  branches,  such  as  the  one  by  Gillette  and  Hill, 
above  mentioned,  and  such  as  the  others  mentioned  below.  Reid's 
work  contains  more  than  700  drawings  and  half-tones.  A  state- 
ment of  this  number  alone  gives  some  idea  of  the  wide  scope  of  the 
work. 

"Engineers'  Pocketbook  of  Reinforced  Concrete"  by  E.  Lee 
Heidenreich,  contains  374  pages  of  tables  and  data  for  the  engineer 
who  is  designing  reinforced  concrete  structures.  I  know  of  no  book 
that  is  its  equal  for  this  purpose.  The  author  is  an  experienced 
designer,  indeed,  one  of  the  first  American  civil  engineers  to  make 
reinforced  concrete  designing  a  specialty. 

"Reinforced  Concrete,  A  Manual  of  Practice,"  by  Ernest  McCul- 
lough,  is  a  book  which  presents  the  subject  of  designing  reinforced 
concrete  in  the  simplest  manner  possible ;  also  the  principles  of  safe 
and  good  construction  are  set  forth  in  an  equally  lucid  manner. 
The  author  has  had  a  very  extensive  experience  in  concrete  work 
both  as  an  engineer  and  as  a  contractor. 

"Theory  and  Design  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Arches/'  by  Arvid 
Reuterdahl,  is  self-explanatory  in  its  title.  The  author's  aim  has 
been  to  present  the  theory  in  a  perfectly  complete  form,  leaving  no 
gaps  to  be  supplied  by  reference  to  other  books. 

"Concrete  Bridges  and  Culverts/'  by  H.  G.  Tyrrell,  is  a  272-page 
treatise  in  which  the  author  presents  the  formulas  to  be  used  without 
giving  the  mathematical  derivation,  thus  making  it  a  very  useful 
book  for  any  engineer,  other  than  the  student  of  engineering.  The 
author  gives  many  tables  of  dimensions  for  standard  railway  and 
highway  bridges  and  culverts,  also  tables  of  quantities  and  esti- 
mates of  cost. 


640  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

"Practical  Cement  Testing,"  by  W.  P.  Taylor,  is  the  work  of  a 
practical  cement  tester,  and  I  think  that  In  that  respect  it  is  unique 
among  books  or  parts  of  books  on  cement  testing.  It  covers  the  sub- 
ject in  its  330  pages. 

"Concrete  Inspection"  by  Charles  S.  Hill,  is  a  pocket-size  book  of 
186  pages,  in  which  no  extraneous  matter  is  contained.  It  is  a 
manual  on  cement  inspection  written  by  the  author  of  the  first 
American  treatise  on  reinforced  concrete  construction,  and  an  engi~ 
neer  who  has  a  wider  acquaintance  with  the  literature  of  cement 
and  concrete  than  anyone  I  have  met.  My  close  association  with 
Mr.  Hill  in  the  production  of  our  joint  book,  and  in  our  editorial 
work,  is  the  basis  for  the  foregoing  statement,,  in  the  breadth  of 
which  I  may  be  unwittingly  doing  injustice  to  others  who  have 
attempted  to  keep  pace  with  the  literature  on  cement  and  coricrete. 

"Diagrams  for  Designing  Reinforced  Concrete  Structures/'  by  G. 
F.  Dodge.  The  diagrams  are  plotted  on  logarithmic  paper,  and  are 
so  devised  that  results  are  read  direct  for  any  condition  that 
occurs  in  ordinary  practice. 

Summary. — In  this  connection  I  may  say  that  not  since  engineer- 
ing began  has  there  ever  been  a  subject  that  has  brought  forth,  in  so 
short  a  time,  so  many  articles,  scientific  papers,  and  books  as  have 
appeared  on  this  subject  of  cement  and  concrete.  This  literature  has 
had  a  profound  influence  upon  the  growth  of  the  cement  and  con- 
crete industry.  Had  it  not  been  for  the  extensive  literature  on  the 
subject,  engineers  would  have  been  a  generation  longer  in  acquiring 
sufficient  knowledge  of  concrete  and  its  economic  merits  to  lead  them 
to  the  extensive  use  that  concrete  now  enjoys.  Authors  of  books  and 
editors  of,  and  contributors  to,  technical  periodicals  have  been  the 
educators  who  have  made  the  use  of  concrete  well  nigh  exclusive  for 
some  classes  of  construction,  and  a  large  factor  in  nearly  every 
class  that  can  be  mentioned.  In  this  process  of  education  their  work 
has  been  supplemented  by  that  of  intelligent  manufacturers  of 
pement  and  of  concrete  machinery,  likewise  to  a  degree  never  before 
witnessed  in  the  technical  advertising  world.  So,  in  concluding  my 
references,  I  can  do  no  better  than  to  urge  upon  every  engineer  and 
contractor  the  importance  of  securing,  and  keeping  up  to  date,  a 
small  library  of  the  catalogs  of  manufacturers  of  cement  and  of 
concrete  machinery,  tools  and  appliances. 


SECTION  VII. 
WATE  R  -  W  O  RK  S. 

Definitions.— Backfill,  the  excavated  earth  that  is  put  back  into 
a  trench. 

Ball  Joints. — A  cast  iron  pipe  with  special  ends  that  permit  of 
deflection  of  the  pipe  line,  after  the  lead  has  been  poured,  is  said 
to  have  "ball  joints"  or  "flexible  joints." 

Bell. — The  flaring  end  of  a  cast  iron  pipe,  as  distinguished  from 
the  smaller  end,  or  spigot,  which  fits  into  the  bell. 

Bell  Holes. — After  cast  iron  pipe  are  placed  in  a  trench,  it  is 
customary  to  enlarge  the  trench  somewhat  by  digging  away  the 
bottom  and  sides  around  the  bells  of  the  pipes,  at  each  joint.  The 
excavation  thus  made  is  called  a  bell  hole. 

Bend. — A  short  curved  length  of  pipe.  Bends  are  sold  as  "spe- 
cials" at  a  price  higher  than  for  ordinary  pipe.  See  Frye's  "Civil 
Engineers'  Pocketbook"  for  dimensions  and  weights  of  bends  and 
other  specials. 

Brace. — A  horizontal  timber  across  a  trench.  Also  an  iron  pipe 
with  a  telescopic  end  is  called  an  "extensible  brace." 

Bracing. — The  timber  used  to  support  the  sides  of  a  trench. 

Branch. — A  Y-shaped  piece  of  pipe  sold  as  a  "special." 

Calk. — To  fill  the  joints  of  a  pipe  to  prevent  leakage.  In  cast 
iron  pipe,  yarn  is  first  inserted ;  then  lead  is  poured  into  the  joint. 
The  operation  of  driving  the  lead  home  is  often  called  "calking," 
although  the  entire  process  of  making  a  joint  water  tight  is  also 
termed  calking. 

Corporation  Cock. — A  cock  or  valve  joining  the  main  water  pipe 
to  the  service  pipe,  so  that  the  water  may  be  shut  off  from  any 
consumer. 

Depreciation. — The  loss  of  value  due  to  lost  life.  If  the  straight 
line  formula  of  depreciation  is  used,  the  annual  depreciation  is  the 
reciprocal  of  the  life  in  years ;  thus  a  life  of  20  years  gives  a  depre- 
ciation of  5%  per  annum.  Depreciation  should  not  be  confused 
with  current  repairs  and  renewals  of  parts. 

Duty. — A  term  applied  to  pumping  engines  to  express  amount 
of  work  done.  The  Am.  Soc.  M.  E.  definition  is  number  of  foot 
pounds  of  work  done  by  the  expenditure  of  1,000,000  B.  T.  U. 
(British  thermal  units).  The  duty  therefore  depends  upon  the 
character  of  engine  employed. 

Dynamic  Head. — The  actual  head  of  water  in  a  pipe  plus  the 
friction  head. 

641 


642  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Electrolysis. — The  destruction  of  a  metal  due  to  chemical  action 
developed  by  an  electric  current. 

Faucet. — The  flaring  or  "bell"  end  of  a  cast  iron  pipe. 

Filter. — A  "slow  sand  filter"  consists  of  a  large  "filter  bed"  of 
sand,  underlaid  with  gravel  or  broken  stone,  through  which  water 
passes  and  enters  the  drains  that  lead  off  the  clear  water.  A 
"mechanical  filter"  (often  called  an  "American  filter"),  consists 
of  a  small  tank  containing  a  bed  of  sand  through  which  the  water 
passes,  after  having  been  dosed  with  some  coagulent,  such  as  lime. 
The  sand  is  cleaned  at  short  intervals  by  reversing  the  current  of 
wate"r. 

Flume. — A  trough  for  carrying  water ;  usually  made  of  lumber. 

Forebay. — The  reservoir  from  which  water  passes  immediately 
to  a  water  wheel. 

Friction  Head. — The  head  of  water  necessary  to  overcome  the 
friction  developed  by  passing  through  a  pipe. 

Frost  Box. — A  box  surrounding  a  waterpipe  and  containing  some 
heat  insulator,  like  mineral  wool,  excelsior  or  sawdust,  to  prevent 
the  water  from  freezing. 

Gallon. — The  U.  S.  gallon  contains  8  pints,  or  4  quarts,  or  231  cu. 
ins.,  or  0.13368  cu.  ft.,  or  3.7855  litres,  or  0.03175  liquid  barrels. 
A  cu.  ft.  contains  7.48052  (7%  nearly)  gallons.  A  gallon  of  water, 
at  39.2°  F.,  weighs  8.33888  (8%  nearly)  Ibs.  ;  or  1  Ib.  of  water 
=  0.12  gals.  British  Imperial  gallon  =  1.20032  U.  S.  gallons. 

Gate. — A  stop  valve  placed  in  water  mains,  usually  at  intervals 
of  300  to  900  ft.,  to  shut  off  water  from  any  section  during  repairs, 
etc. 

Infiltration. — The  flow  of  ground  water  into  a  well ;  or  the  flow 
of  water  through  the  ground,  from  a  nearby  lake  or  river,  into  a 
gallery. 

Mains. — The  system  of  large  water  pipes  that  supply  the  smaller 
laterals  or  service  pipes. 

Mineral  wool,  or  slag  wool,  is  fibrous  slag,  often  used  for  pack- 
ing around  water  pipes  to  prevent  freezing. 

Miners'  Inch. — Usually  the  amount  of  water  that  will  flow,  in 
24  hrs.,  through  an  opening  1  in.  square  in  a  plank  2  ins.  thick, 
under  a  head  of  6  ins.  measured  from  the  upper  edge  of  the  open- 
ing. Such  an  opening  will  discharge  11.625  gals,  or  1.554  cu.  ft. 
per  minute,  or  0.026  cu.  ft.  per  sec.  This  is  the  Colorado  miners' 
inch.  The  California  miners'  inch  is  0.02  cu.  ft.  per  second. 

Oakum. — Material   obtained   by  picking  to  pieces  old  hemp  rope. 

Packing. — Oakum  with  long  fibres  twisted  into  strands  and  used 
in  filling  pipe  joints. 

Pouring  Clamp. — A  device  often  used  instead  of  the  ordinary 
clay  "roll"  for  holding  in  the  molten  lead  used  to  form  a  joint  in 
a  cast  iron  pipe. 

Puddle. — A  mixture  of  gravel  and  clay,  wet  and  compacted,  and 
so  deposited  as  to  prevent  leakage  through  more  porous  soil. 

Ranger. — A  long  horizontal  timber  along  the  side  of  a  trench, 
against  which  the  "braces"  abut. 

Reducer. — A  short  funnel   shaped  section  of  pipe. 


WATER-WORKS.  64.> 

Roll. — A  roll  of  clay  placed  temporarily  around  a  pipe  to  retain 
the  molten  lead  poured  into  the  joint. 

Runner.— Same  as  ranger. 

Service  Pipe. — A  short  lateral  pipe  of  small  diameter,  usually  of 
wrought  iron  or  lead,  extending  from  a  "main"  to  a  house,  store, 
or  the  like. 

Sheeting,  or  Sheathing. — Plank  used  to  face  the  sides  of  a  trench 
to  prevent  its  caving  in.  When  the  planks  are  sharpened  and 
driven,  they  are  called  sheet  piles. 

Shoring. — Braces  used  temporarily  to  support  any  structure  while 
excavating  near  it.  Also  used  to  designate  the  braces  and  rangers 
in  a  trench,  for  which  it  is  preferable  to  use  the  term  bracing. 

Skeleton  Bracing. — A  system  of  braces  and  rangers,  without  any 
sheeting ;  or  merely  a  system  of  braces  abutting  against  short 
lengths  of  plank. 

Specials. — Bends,  branches,  tees,  crosses,  reducers,  and  all  sim- 
ilar castings,  other  than  the  regular  12  ft.  lengths  of  pipe,  are  called 
specials,  and  are  sold  (by  the  pound)  at  a  higher  price  than  the 
regular  pipe. 

Spigot  End. — The  small  end  of  a  cast  iron  pipe  as  distinguished 
from  the  bell  end. 

Stand  Pipe. — A  high,  vertical  pipe  of  large  diameter  holding  a 
supply  of  water. 

Ton. — Cast  iron  pipe  is  sold  by  the  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.  Pig  iron  is 
sold  by  the  ton  of  2,240  Ibs. 

Yarn. — Same   as   packing. 

Cost  of  Complete  Water  Works  Systems. — For  purposes  of  rough 
preliminary  estimates  of  cost,  and  more  frequently  for  purposes  of 
comparison  and  generalization,  an  engineer  often  wishes  to  know 
the  approximate  first  cost  of  a  complete  waterworks  system  for  a 
city  or  town  of  given  size. 

Table  I  is  taken  from  a  report  by  Mr.  Paul  Hansen,  Assoc.  M. 
Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Assistant  Engineer  Ohio  State  Board  of  Health, 
and  printed  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  15,  1909.  The  author 
has  the  following  to  say  about  the  table : 

"The  matter  that  most  interests  the  taxpayer  in  connection  with 
the  installation  of  public  water  supplies  is  cost,  and  to  this  end  I 
have  prepared  a  table  giving  unit  costs  for  construction  and  opera- 
tion. These  figures  are  necessarily  very  general,  as  they  cover  a 
wide  range  of  conditions.  They,  however,  are  suggestive  and  give 
an  approximate  idea  of  expenditures  involved." 

Average  Cost  of  Constructing  and  Operating  Water  Works  in 
Massachusetts.— Mr.  Freeman  C.  Coffin  gives  the  following  costs 
of  constructing  and  operating  39  water  works  systems  in  Mass.,  for 
the.  year  1893.  The  systems  were  all  owned  by  the  municipalities, 
and  in  every  case  the  water  was  pumped.  Total  cost  of  operation, 
including  an  allowance  of  4%  for  interest  on  the  first  cost  of  the 
water  works  system,  and  1%%  for  depreciation,  averaged  $115  per 
million  gallons;  the  minimum  cost  being  $65  in  one  city;  and  the 
maximum  cost  being  $257.  The  average  per  capita  cost  was  $2.58 


344  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA- 


•9m 
_      •**  u  * 

-sn  uosaed  -led 
sasuadxe  Suiye 
-aedo 


S8SU8d 


•«9TTtc«n     una  iarf        u5<?5«ce«5iMecco« 
'SUtsn    uosaet        Oaicot-o>ooeo 
s8S 
-}B.i8do 


~Blt 

5  -d^o    aad    sesuad      ^ 

b>  -xa  S 

"  i  -B  n  u  u  ^ 

o 

m  oo  1-1  r-  oo  eo  t-  o  O 

£  ^.^""SS 

fe      -ITB       l"BW     8SBJ9AV 

o 

§ 

J-i  ^f  OOOlrt  5OOOO 

ooi-HOiaiecioajo 

•Suisn    uosaad      «5  u~  <^  d  06  oo  d  eo 
S    aad     ^soo 
E 
O 

Q 

^    aad    ^soo 

I 

u 

p  ,  OOOOOOOO 

05  "B^td.'BO        us  '^  LO  <M  -^  irt  t-;  eo 

^    aad   }soo    utnuitxBj\[  co  06  c^i  oi  <M'  uj  d  eo 

O 

O 

[V,  (M  (M  t-l  rH  ITS  O  O  O 

••BdBO    aed      ^l80.^0.10.*?^ 


JO         }SOO 

it 

^^X\*s.-.^s-A/— s  <-*>  <— »  ..-«     Q) 


§1 


jsoo  bio)  «9BJ»Av  »V;««g55gs     || 


t  ...-...•:     8I 

...'...•  <B  O 


H  .    .    .    •      oo 

g  3§  :  :o2§§§ 

H  mt5 


c8p,  »»       oOO-'-'*J2          ^^ 

Sf  Lfl£*i*-»«"     fe^ 


00 
00000 


, 
0) 


>  > 

<J<{ 


WATER-WORKS.  64c 

per  year;  the  minimum  being  $1.25  ;  and  the  maximum  being  $5.62. 
The  average  daily  per  capita  consumption  was  62.3  gals. ;  the  min- 
imum being  23,  and  the  maximum  227  gals.  The  water  was  pump- 
ed to  an  average  height  of  188  ft.  dynamic  head,  which  was  about 
10%  greater  than  the  static  head.  The  coal  consumption  per  mil- 
lion gallons  was: 

Tons. 

Minimum .0.75 

Average    1.67 

Maximum    7.00 

The  number  of  gallons  pumped  1  ft.  high  (dynamic  head)  per 
pound  of  coal  was: 

Minimum     8,040 

Average    56,344 

Maximum    132,550 

These  cities  may  be  divided  into  three  groups:  Group  I,  22  cities 
under  15,000  population,  and  averaging  5,880  population  (or  con- 
sumers) on  the  pipe  lines;  Group  II,  8  cities,  15,000  to  26,000  popu- 
lation, with  an  average  of  21,250  on  the  pipe  lines;  and  Group  III, 
8  cities,  31,500  to  85,000  population,  with  an  average  of  56,000  on 
the  pipe  lines. 

The  first  cost  of  the  water  systems  and  the  cost  of  operation,  etc., 
for  each  of  these  three  groups  was  as  follows: 

Group  I. — Twenty-two  cities,  total  population.  129,300,  on  the 
pipe  lines,  consume  2,556,300,000  gals,  per  year,  or  55  gals,  per 
capita  per  day.  The  pumping  plants  consumed  6,500  tons  of  coal 
per  year,  or  2%  tons  per  million  gallons.  There  were  472  miles  of 
pipe  line,  and  the  cost  of  the  water  systems  was  $4,720,000,  or 
$10,000  per  mile  of  pipe  line,  including  the  cost  of  the  pumping 
plants.  There  were  3,800  hydrants  and  22,000  services;  or  8  hy- 
drants and  46  services  per  mile  of  pipe  line.  The  cost  of  the  water 
systems  was  $36.50  per  capita,  or  $1,850  per  million  gallons  annually 
consumed.  The  annual  cost  of  operation,  etc.,  was  as  follows : 

Per 
Million 
Total  Gals. 

Pump   station   expense $  49,200  19.30 

Other   expense   of  maintenance   and   operation.  .      58,400  22.80 

Interest,   4%  on    $4,720,000    188,800  74.00 

Depreciation,  iy2%  on  $4,720,000 70,800  27.70 

Total     .$367,200          $143.80 

In  this  group  there  were  two  cities  where  the  cost  was  $85  per 
million  gallons,  and  there  was  one  where  the  cost  was  $252. 

Group  II. — Eight  cities,  total  population  170,000,  on  the  pipe 
lines,  consumed  4,330,000,000  gals,  per  year,  or  70  gals,  per  capita 
per  day.  The  pumping  plants  consumed  5,339  tons  of  coal  per 
year,  or  1.23  tons  per  million  gals.  There  were  425  miles  of  pipe 
line,  and  the  cost  of  the  water  systems  was  $6,200,000,  or  $14,600 
per  mile  of  pipe  line.  There  were  3,270  hydrants  and  24,944  serv- 
ices, or  nearly  8  hydrants  and  60  services  per  mile  of  pipe  line. 
The  cost  of  the  water  systems  was  nearly  $37  per  capita,  or  $1,430 


646  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

per  million  gallons  annually  consumed.     The  annual  cost  of  opera« 
tion  was  as  follows : 

Per 
Million 
Total.  Gals. 

Pump    station    expense    $   S?'tS2         ?   iH!l 

Other    expenses 90,100  20.72 

Interest  4%  on  $6,200,000    248,000  57.04 

Depreciation,   1%%  on   $6,200,000 93,000 

Total     $493,500          $113.50 

Group  ///.—Eight  cities,  total  population  448,500,  on  the  pipe 
lines,  consumed  10,750,000,000  gals,  per  year,  or  66  gals,  per  capita 
per  day.  The  pumping  plants  consumed  10,835  tons  of  coal,  or  1 
ton  per  million  gallons.  There  were  675  miles  of  pipe  line,  and 
the  cost  of  the  water  systems  was  $16,300,000,  or  $24,100  per  mile 
of  pipe  line.  There  were  5,400  hydrants  and  57,848  services,  or 
8  hydrant  and  86  services  per  mile  of  pipe  line.  The  cost  of  the 
water  systems  was  $36.30  per  capita,  or  $1,516  per  million  gallons 
annually  consumed.  The  annual  cost  of  operation  was  as  follows : 

Per 
Million 
Total.  Gals. 

Pump    station   expense    $    101,700         $     9.40 

Other    expenses 203,300  18.75 

Interest,   4%    651,900  61.12 

Depreciation,    1%%    244,500 

Total $1,201,400          $111.84 

In  this  group  there  was  one  city  of  44,000  population  where  the 
cost  was  only  $65  per  million  gallons,  distributed  thus: 

Per 

Million 
Total.  Gals. 

Pump    station    expense $13,466          $7.43 

Other    expenses    17,656  9.80 

Interest,    4%    63,605  35.12 

Depreciation,    1%% 23,851  13.14 

Total $118,578         $65.49 

The  coal  consumption  was  0.7  ton  per  million  gallons,  the  dyna- 
mic head  being  130  ft.  (static  head,  125  ft.).  The  cost  of  the 
system  was  $36.10  per  capita,  or  $25,000  per  mile  of  pipe  line,  or 
$880  per  million  gals,  consumed  annually.  This  low  first  cost  of 
plant  per  million  gallons  annually  consumed  is  not  due  to  supe- 
rior design  of  plant,  but  to  the  large  consumption  of  water,  which 
was  112  gals,  per  capita  per  day.  The  per  capita  cost  of  water 
was  $2.69  per  annum,  which  is  above  the  average  cost  of  this 
group. 

Prices  of  Cast  Iron  Pipe. — Figure  1  shows  the  prices  paid  for 
cast  iron  pipe  in  cities  and  towns  of  the  Central  West,  centering 
about  Chicago,  according  to  data  collected  by  J.  W.  Alvord  from 
various  pipe  contracts. 

The  prices  of  pipe  are  per  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.,  and  are  from  $7  to 
$10  above  the  prices  for  pig  iron  per  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.  in  the  same 
localities  at  the  same  time. 


WATER-WORKS. 


647 


Prices  of  Cast  Iron  for  Thirteen  Years  in  Chicago. — The  average 
cost  of  cast  iron  pipe  per  ton  since  1894  to  the  Water  Pipe  Ex- 
tension Division  of  the  City  of  Chicago,  111.,  has  been  as  follows: 

Per  Cent 
Cost 
Per  Ton. 

1895      $26.00 

1896  23.00 

1897 19.00 

1898  25.00 

1899  25.50 

1900  25.50 

1901  23.50 

1902  28.00 

1903  33.00 

1904  30.00 

1905  27.50 

1906  30.00 

1997  37.20 


Variation 
in  Cost. 
100 

88.4 

73.0 

96.1 

98.0 

98.0 

90.4 
107.7 
126.9 
115.4 
105.8 
115.4 
143.1 


10 


40 


30 


m 


Fig.   1. — Prices  of  Cast  Iron  Pipe. 

Weight  of  Cast  Iron  Pipe.— Pipe  from  3  ins.  to  60  ins.  diameter 
is  cast  in  12-ft.  lengths,  that  is  in  lengths  that  require  440  pipe 
lengths  to  lay  a  mile  of  pipe  line;  iy2-in.  and  2-in.  pipes  are  not 
often  used,  but  when  used  are  cast  in  shorter  lengths. 

Table  la  gives  the  approximate  weights  of  cast  iron  pipes.  It  Is 
customary  to  paint  the  weight  of  each  pipe  inside  the  pipe.  As 
variations  in  single  pipes  of  5%  from  the  listed  weight  are  com- 
mon, it  is  well  to  specify  the  maximum  average  variation  allow- 
able. 


348 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


C5 

f 


PQ 


l    UT   '3ClT,J 

jo   -UIBJQ  'apisuj 


'luioC  aad  duiajj 


Head,  400 
Pressure,  17 


s 

co 


00 
86 


H 
Pre 


,  100 
re,  43 


H 
Pre 


gs  -s 


t  i 


«      • 

3 


•sstpui  UT  'adifj 
jo   -UIBIQ  apisuj 


«OMO»t^»OeOOOOOOr-icO«O^H^T*<Ttiic< 


:§ss 


o  o  oo  to  •*  <M  o  os  co  10  •<»<  o>  co  eo  oo  co  b-  o 


JlO  •<!<  COTl« 
s^iOr-cOl 


•*•**< -«»<iOiOCOCOf~t^OOO>O»-i! 


)•»*<  lOt^O 
li-lT-Hr-ie<l 


^«DO«OOJ- 


i-ilMIMCOiO!OOOO(MiO 


t~--^I^COOOr-<O5O 


>O5-<«<O<Mt^(NO>t^t^OJOO— <COC^«OcD 


WATER-WORKS.  649 

Lead  Required  for  Joints.— Billings  states  that  the  theoretical 
amount  of  lead  required  for  joints  in  pipe  used  in  Boston  was  given 
.by  the  formula,  p  =  2d,  in  which  p  =  Ibs.  of  lead  per  joint,  ana 
d  =  diameter  of  pipe  in  inches.  Actually,  however,  the  following 
amounts  were  used : 

Size  Actual     Theoretical  No.  Libs,  lead 

of  pipe.       Ibs.  lead.      Ibs.  lead.  ©f  ft.  per  ft. 

ins.  per  joint,     per  joint.       pipe  laid  of  pipe. 

6  7.7  12  3,112  0.64 

8  9.1  16  1,997  0.76 

16  21.0  32  550  1.75 

16  23.7  32  10,000  1.97 

In  the  following  examples  of  cost,  data  will  be  found  as  to  the 
amount  of  lead  used  in  different  cases. 

Items  of  Cost  of  Pipe  Laying  and  Materials.— The  expression, 
"cost  of  laying  pipe,"  is  usually  used  to  include  all  labor  costs  of 
trenching,  distributing  and  placing  pipe,  calking  and  backfilling. 
Sometimes  the  cost  of  lead  and  yarn  is  included  as  "cost  of  lay- 
ing." Every  carefully  kept  record  of  cost  should  contain  the  fol- 
lowing items  of  cost,  expressed  in  terms  of  the  lin.  ft.  of  pipe  ol 
stated  size  and  weight: 
Materials : 

Cast  iron  pipe. 

Lead  for  joints. 

Yarn. 

Wood   blocks,    if   any.  i 

Labor : 

Labor  loading  wagons  from  cars. 

Teams  hauling. 

Labor  unloading. 

Labor   distributing  along   the   trench. 

Teams  trenching. 

Labor  excavating  trench. 

Labor  digging   bell   holes. 

Labor   backfilling  holes. 

Teams  backfilling  holes. 

Labor  pumping. 

Labor   placing  pipe   in   trench. 

Labor  placing  yarn  in  joints. 

Labor  melting  and  pouring  lead. 

Labor  calking  joints. 

Foremen,  water  boy,   watchman. 

General   superintendence,   timekeeping  and  office   expense. 
Supplies  and  Tools : 

Timber,   etc.,  for  bracing. 

Fuel. 

Repairs   and   depreciation   of  tools. 

Explosives. 
Miscellaneous : 

Pay  roll  insurance    (accident). 

Insurance    of    public    (accident). 

Premium  on  contractors'  bond. 


650  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

While  the  lineal  foot  is  the  common  unit  used  in  expressing  the 
cost  of  a  pipe  line,  it  should  be  remembered  that  the  principle 
item  of  labor  cost  is  trenching,  which  is  better  reduced  to  the  cubic 
yard  of  excavation  as  the  unit.  The  cost  of  loading  and  hauling 
the  pipe  should  also  be  reduced  to  the  ton  and  the  ton-mile,  as 
the  best  units  for  comparing  costs. 

The  material  and  labor  cost  of  "specials,"  valves,  hydrants, 
meters,  service  pipes,  etc.,  should  be  recorded  separately,  and  not 
lumped  in  with  the  cost  of  the  main  pipe  line. 

The  length  of  the  job  should  be  recorded,  for  usually  there  is  a 
certain  amount  of  time  required  to  organize  the  gang  of  men,  to 
weed  out  incompetents,  etc.  Then,  too,  there  is  generally  a  "fixed 
expense"  (independent  of  the  length  of  the  job),  involved  in  get- 
ting the  materials,  plant  and  men  onto  the  job,  ready  for  work. 
The  effect  of  these  items  is  well  shown  in  some  cost  records  given 
on  page  663. 

The  cost  of  removing  an  existing  pavement  and  relaying  the 
pavement  should  be  recorded  as  a  separate  item,  expressing  it  in 
terms  of  the  square  yard  of  pavement.  See  the  section  on  Roads, 
Pavements  and  Walks. 

Cost  of  Loading  and  Hauling  Cast  Iron  Pipe. — Three  men  assisted 
by  a  driver  averaged  5  lengths  of  12-in.'  pipe  loaded  from  a  flat  car 
onto  a  wagon  in  12  mins.  Planks  were  laid  from  the  car  to  the 
wagon  and  the  pipe  was  rolled  down  the  plank  runway.  This  same 
gang  would  unload  a  wagon  in  6  mins.  As  each  length  of  pipe 
weighed  nearly  %  short  ton,  the  wagon  load  was  2^  tons.  It, 
therefore,  cost  5  cts.  per  ton  to  load  and  2%  cts.  per  ton  to  unload 
the  wagons,  wages  of  men  being  15  cts.  per  hr. ;  but  this  does  not 
include  the  lost  time  of  the  two  horses  during  loading  and  unload- 
ing, which  is  equivalent  to  about  2  cts.  per  ton.  The  total  fixed 
cost  of  loading  and  unloading  was  10  cts.  per  ton,  including  team 
time,  to  which  must  be  added  the  hauling  costs  of  12  cts.  per  ton 
per  mile,  where  2%  tons  are  the  load  (wages  of  team  and  driver  35 
cts.  per  hr.),  and  the  team  returns  empty.  Good,  hard,  level  roads 
are  required  for  so  large  a  load.  If  the  haul  is  short  and  this  load- 
ing gang  of  3  men  walks  along  with  the  wagon,  the  cost  of  hauling 
becomes  25  cts.  per  ton  mile,  instead  of  10  cts. 

Pipe  should  never  be  shipped  in  hopper-bottom  cars,  for  the  dif- 
ficulty of  unloading  adds  very  much  to  the  cost.  I  have  had  a  gang 
of  6  men  who  unloaded  only  75  lengths  of  12-in.  pipe  in  10  hrs. 
from  a  hopper  gondola,  into  wagons.  Each  length  weighed  800  Ibs., 
making  20  tons  the  day's  work,  at  30  cts.  per  ton.  This  work  was 
by  hand,  no  derrick  being  available. 

Water  Pipe  Trenches. — Trenches  for  water  pipes  in  the  northern 
part  of  America  are  usually  5  ft.  deep  from  the  surface  of  the 
street  to  the  axis  of  the  pipe.  In  the  South,  trenches  are  only  3 
ft.  deep.  Water-pipe  trenches  are  usually  dug  not  less  than  18 
to  24  ins.  wider  than  the  inside  diameter  of  the  pipe ;  and  just  be- 
fore the  pipes  are  laid  a  gang  of  men  enlarges  and  deepens  the 
trench  for  a  short  space  where  each  pipe  joint  is  to  come ;  this  is 
called  digging  the  "bell-holes."  The  bell-holes  enable  the  yarners 


WATER-WORKS.  651 

and  calkers  to  make  the  joints  properly.  It  is  usually  not  necessary 
to  brace  the  sides  of  a  trench  that  is  only  5  or  6  ft  deep,  to  pre- 
vent caving  in.  The  shallow  depth  and  the  absence  of  bracing 
make  waterpipe  trenching  cheaper  than  sewer  trenching. 

The  backfilling  is  often  done  entirely  by  hand,  the  earth  being 
rammed  in  thin  layers.  This  is  far  more  expensive  than  backfill- 
ing with  a  drag  scraper  pulled  by  horses,  as  is  shown  in  the  ex- 
amples that  follow. 

The  reader  is  referred  to  the  Sewer  Section  for  additional  data 
on  trench  work. 

There  are  several  excellent  makes  of  trench  excavating  ma- 
chines on  the  market.  Where  enough  work  exists  to  warrant  the 
purchase  of  one  of  these  machines,  and  where  neither  boulders  nor 
numerous  buried  pipe  lines  occur,  trenching  with  these  machines 
is  far  cheaper  than  hand  work. 

The  cost  of  excavating  a  water  pipe  trench  with  one  make  of 
trench  machine  is  given  in  the  next  paragraph.  Costs  of  similar 
work  in  sewer  trenching  and  in  tile  ditching  will  be  found  in  the 
Sewer  Section  and  in  the  Miscellaneous  Section.  See  also  the  sections 
on  Earth  Excavation  and  Rock  Excavation.  All  data  relating  to 
trenching  will  be  found  by  consulting  the  index  under  Trenching. 

Cost  of  Digging  a  36-Mile  Trench  With  a  Buckeye  Traction 
Ditcher.* — A  wooden  pipe  line  is  used  to  bring  the  water  from  the 
mountains  for  the  new  water  system  of  the  city  of  Greeley,  Colo. 
This  line  is  36  miles  long.  Of  this  distance  2,000  ft.  was  in  rock. 
This  part  was  excavated  by  hand  and  the  rest  of  the  trench  was 
excavated  by  a  Buckeye  traction  ditcher,  manufactured  by  the 
Buckeye  Traction  Ditcher  Co.  of  Findlay,  O. 

For  eight  miles  the  trench  ran  through  a  stratum  of  gravel,  con- 
taining many  stones ;  some  of  the  gravel  was  also  cemented  to- 
gether. The  material  in  the  rest  of  the  trench  was  clay,  rather 
hard,  but  the  machine  dug  it  with  great  ease.  In  a  ten  hour  day 
the  machine  in  the  gravel  would  dig  from  600  to  1,000  ft,  while 
in  the  clay  as  much  as  2,500  ft.  of  trench  was  dug  in  10  hours.  The 
style  of  machine  used  is  shown  in  the  accompanying  cut.  It  was 
a  28-in.  by  7% -ft.  drainage  machine.  Such  a  machine  is  designed 
for  digging  ditches  for  draining  land,  the  type  meant  for  con- 
tractors' use  in  heavy  trench  work  being  more  substantially  con- 
structed and  of  greater  weight.  This  machine  weighed  17  tons, 
while  a  contractor's  machine  of  the  same  size  would  weigh  24  tons 
and  cost  $1,300  more  than  this  machine  did  when  new. 

The  Buckeye  ditcher,  Fig.  2,  being  a  traction  engine  as  well  as  a 
ditch  digger,  moves  along  automatically  as  it  digs  the  trench.  It 
throws  the  excavated  material  into  the  conveyor  belt  alongside  of 
the  wheel,  and  this  belt  dumps  the  earth  clear  of  the  ditch,  so  that 
the  earth  does  not  interfere  with  the  pipe  laying  and  other  work 
that  may  have  to  be  done  in  the  trench.  The  bottom  of  the  trench 
is  rounded  by  the  buckets  on  the  wheel,  so  that  pipe  laid  in  the 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  12,  1908. 


652 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


WATER-WORKS.  653 

trench  does  not  roll  from  side  to  side.  Two  men  can  operate  the 
machine  under  favorable  circumstances.  In  backfilling  the  mate- 
rial can  be  pushed  into  the  trench  by  the  ditcher,  used  as  a  trac- 
tion engine,  by  fastening  a  plank  to  an  outrigger,  which  acts  in  a 
manner  similar  to  a  snow  plow.  A  drag  scraper  can  also  be  used 
in  backfilling.  The  fact  that  the  machine  pulverizes  the  earth  to  a 
great  extent  in  digging  makes  the  backfilling  easier  than  when  the 
earth  is  in  chunks. 

The  trench  dug  at  Greeley  was  throughout  its  entire  length  30  ins. 
wide  and  4  ft.  deep.  This  meant  that  a  lineal  foot  of  trench  con- 
tained 10  cu.  ft.  of  earth  or  .37  cu.  yd.  As  the  total  length  of 
trench  dug  by  the  machine  was  188,080  lin.  ft.,  in  all  69,659  cu. 
yds.  of  earth  were  excavated.  All  the  work  of  excavating  with  the 
machine  was  done  by  4  men.  The  man  running  the  ditcher  was 
paid  $5  per  day,  and  the  other  three  $3  per  day  of  10  hours.  The 
men  worked  300  days.  The  ditcher  when  new  cost  $5,200,  but 
this  machine  had  been  used  before,  and  was  bought  by  the  con- 
tractors as  a  second  hand  machine. 

In  the  summary  of  cost  given  below  we  have  allowed  $6  per  day 
for  repairs  and  renewals  and  interest  and  depreciation,  which  is 
30  per  cent  per  annum  on  the  original  cost  of  the  machine.  We 
are  informed  by  the  contractors  that  this  machine  used  on  an  aver- 
age of  1  ton  of  coal  per  day,  the  coal  costing  $5  per  ton. 
The  cost  of  digging  the  trench  was: 

300  days,  engineer   .  .  $1,500.00 

900    days,    helpers     2,700.00 

300    tons    coal     1,500.00 

300  days,  plant  charges  at  $6 1,800.00 

Total $7,500.00 

This  cost,  as  will  be  seen,  does  not  include  any  general  expenses, 
the  cost  of  getting  the  machine  to  and  from  the  job  or  the  cost  of 
backfilling. 

The  cost  of  water  used  for  one  of  these  machines  is  nominal,  as 
they  use  about  1  gallon  of  water  for  each  pound  of  coal. 
The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  trench  for  each  item  was: 

Engineer     $0.008 

Helpers    0.014 

Coal    0.008 

Plant 0.010 

Total     $0.040 

The  average  number  of  lineal  feet  dug  per  day  was  627,  al- 
though, as  previously  stated,  much  more  than  this  was  done  when 
the  ditcher  was  actually  working.  The  average  given  includes  all 
lost  time.  This  machine  is  speeded  to  dig  3  lin.  ft.  of  trench  3  ft. 
deep  per  minute,  and  2  lin.  ft.  of  4% -ft.  trench  per  minute.  In« 
good  material  better  speed  than  this  was  obtained,  but  naturally  it 
could  not  be  made  continuously.  The  same  thing  may  be  said  in 
regard  to  the  yardage  excavated.  On  some  days  more  than  900 
cu.  yds.  of  material  were  excavated,  but  the  average  yardage  per 
day  for  the  entire  job  was  232. 


654  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  for  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Engineer     $0.021 

Helpers    0.040 

Coal    0.021 

Plant    0.025 

Total     $0.107 

This  is  low  cost  for  trench  excavation,  even  for  a  ditch  only  41/& 
ft.  deep. 

The  contractors  for  this  work  are  the  Jacobsen-Bade  Co.  of 
Portland,  Oregon. 

Trenching  in  Quicksand,  Using  a  Heim  Trench  Machine.* — The 
work  comprised  the  placing  of  a  20-in.  main  in  trench  from  5  ft. 
to  13%  ft.  deep  connecting  two  reservoirs  at  Madison,  Wis.  The 
conditions  were  quite  different.  The  new  reservoir  was  located  in  a 
low  marshy  soil  with  its  bottom  5  ft.  below  the  surface,  the  bottom 
of  the  old  reservoir  was  16  ft.  below  the  surface.  The  main  con- 
necting the  two  reservoirs  was  1,068  ft.  long. 

Beginning  at  a  depth  of  5  ft.  at  the  new  reservoir,  the  trench 
curving  to  the  rise  in  the  ground  surface  increased  to  a  depth  of 
10  ft.,  at  425  ft.  from  the  starting  point.  Here  an  old  lake  bed 
of  6%  ft.  of  quicksand  and  a  stream  of  running  water  was  encoun- 
tered. This  quicksand  and  water  had  to  be  contended  with  to  the 
end  of  the  pipe  line  and  with  an  increasing  depth  of  trench  to  13% 
ft.  Besides  the  unstable  soil  there  were  several  interfering  pipe 
lines. 

Work  was  begun  with  an  ordinary  derrick,  but  this  was  soon 
abandoned  for  a  four-leg  saw-horse  derrick  with  a  traveler.  For 
the  more  difficult  portions  of  the  work  still  another  derrick  or 
trench  machine,  that  shown  in  Fig.  3,  was  devised.  This  machine 
was  used  for  handling  excavation  and  pipe.  It  was  36  ft.  long, 
with  four  buckets  and  two  crank  gears  to  raise  and  lower  them. 
The  same  apparatus  was  used  to  handle  the  pipe,  a  12 -ft.  length 
of  which  weighed  a  ton.  These  men  did  the  excavating  and  low- 
ered the  pipe.  The  trench  had  to  be  sheeted  to  from  2  to  3  ft. 
below  the  bottom  with  3-in.  plank  braced  every  3  ft.  The  rate 
of  progress  was  one  length  of  pipe  laid  every  1%  days.  Toward  the 
end  of  the  saw-horse  derrick  work  it  took  three  days  to  lay  a  length 
of  pipe  and  by  the  ordinary  methods  it  is  stated  that  the  same  work 
would  have  required  seven  days.  The  machine  also  reduced  the 
excavating  force  by  15  men.  Mr.  John  B.  Heim,  superintendent, 
under  whose  direction  the  work  was  done,  estimates  the  saving 
per  length  of  pipe  due  to  the  machine  $168.50,  or  for  23  lengths 
of  pipe  laid  at  $3,775.50.  He  writes  further  regarding  the  work 
as  follows : 

"We  had  to  pump  day  and  night  and  dare  not  pump  any  faster 
tjiaji  to  keep  the  water  down  for  fear  of  drawing  the  quicksand 
back  of  the  sheeting  into  our  trench  and  undermining  the  dirt. 

"The  buckets  were  on  a  swivel  and  held  by  a  spring,  and  were 
emptied  on  the  pipe  as  we  moved  along.  It  took  us  over  three 

^Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   29,   1909 


WATER-WORKS. 


655 


months  to  lay  645  ft.  of  main  with  from  fourteen  to  eighteen  men 
at  times  used  to  trim  the  street  after  us.  We  did  not  interfere 
with  the  street  or  street  railway  traffic.  It  was  a  macadamized 
street,  and,  in  spite  of  the  treacherous  soil  working  in  at  the  back 
of  the  sheathing,  we  left  the  street  in  a  passable  condition  for  the 
winter.  There  was  only  slight  settling  here  and  there  in  the  spring. 
During  the  whole  siege  we  had  to  contend  with  the  water,  gas  and 
sewer  laterals,  and  towards  the  end  we  had  to  cut  diagonally  across 
the  street.  Here  we  had  to  go  under  a  6-in.,  an  8-in.  and  a  12-in. 
water  main,  a  16-in.  suction-main  from  the  artesian  wells,  a  gas 
main,  two  sewer  mains  and  the  street  railway  tracks,  at  a  depth 


Fig.   3. — Trench  Machine. 

of  13%  ft.,  with  6%  ft.  of  quicksand  and  a  continuous  stream  of 
water  to  fight.  Our  trenching  machinery  did  away  with  building 
platforms  to  bring  the  soil  to  the  top,  saving  us  at  least  fifteen 
men  to  do  this  labor,  besides  requiring  only  three  men  to  lower 
the  pipe,  so  easy  to  handle,  blocked  to  grade,  as  our  fall  is  only  1 
ft.  in  a  distance  of  1,068  ft.,  towards  the  old  storage  reservoir  by 
gravity.  With  the  saw-horse  derrick,  towards  the  end,  when  our 
depth  increased,  it  required  three  days  to  lay  a  pipe,  so  that  we 
gained,  besides  the  fifteen  men,  one  and  a  half  days  for  each  length, 
not  figuring  at  an  increased  depth  to  lay  the  same.  Where  we  en- 
countered so  many  pipes  going  across  the  street  and  at  times  the 
different  laterals,  we  had  to  lower  the  pipe  at  a  slant  and  at  times 
perpendicular.  The  work  was  accomplished  with  ease.  I  do  not 


656  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

see  how  we  could  have  got  along  without  this  machine,  and  without 
the  machine  we  could  not  have  accomplished  the  work  before  the 
cold  weather  set  in,  besides  working  at  a  greater  expense." 

The    trench   machine    illustrated   was    designed    by    Mr.    John    B. 
Heim,   superintendent  Department  of  Water  Works,  Madison,  Wis., 
who  gives  the  cost  of  the  main  as  follows. 
Pipe,    specials,    valves,    lead,    hemp,    coke,    etc.,    with   freight 

and  cartage    $  5,800 

Lumber,  machinery,  braces,  blocks,  pumps,  etc 1,676 

Labor    4,870 

Total $12,346 

This  gives  a  cost  per  foot  of  $12, 346  -±- 1,060  =  $11.647. 

Cost  of  Trenching  at  Corning,  N.  Y. — A  trench  for  a  10-in.  water 
pipe  was  excavated  2%  ft.  wide  X  5  ft.  deep  X  1,500  ft.  long  =  600 
cu.  yds.  In  4  Mi  days  by  24  men,  or  at  the  rate  of  6  cu.  yds.  per 
man  per  10-hr,  day,  equivalent  to  11  cts.  a  running  foot  or  25  cts. 
a  cu.  yd.  The  backfilling  was  done  in  3  days  by  2  men  and  1 
horse  with  driver,  using  a  drag  scraper  and  a  short  length  of  rope 
BO  that  the  horse  worked  on  one  side  of  the  trench  while  the  two 
men  handled  the  scraper  on  the  opposite  side,  pulling  the  scraper 
directly  across  the  pile  of  earth.  In  this  way  the  backfilling  was 
made  at  a  cost  of  1.1  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  or  2^  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  there 
being  no  ramming  of  the  backfill  required.  This  is  a  remarkably 
low  cost  for  backfilling,  and  one  not  ordinarily  to  be  counted  upon. 
The  material  was  a  loamy  sand  and  gravel. 

At  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  with  the  size  of  trench  and  kind  of  ma- 
terial practically  the  same  as  above: 

1  man  excavated  8  cu.  yds.  a  day  at  cost  of  19  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

1  man  backfilled  16  cu.  yds.  a  day  at  cost  of  9  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Total  cost  of  excavation  and  backfill,  28  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  of  laying  the  10-in.  pipe  was  as  follows,  800  ft.  being 
laid  per  10-hr,  day  by  the  gang: 

3   laborers  digging   bell   holes  at   $1.50..  $450 

3  laborers  laying  pipe  at  $1.50 .    4-.50 

1  man  hemping  joints  at  $2.50 250 

2  men  pouring  lead  at  $2.50 5'00 

3  men  calking  joints  at    $2.50 '    7*50 


Total,    800  ft.   at   3   cts .- $24.00 

This  does  not  include  trenching  nor  hauling  and  distributing 
pipe. 

Cost  of  Trenching,  Great  Falls,  Mont.— The  Great  Falls  (Mon- 
tana) Water  Co.  excavated  25,500  cu.  yds.  of  earth,  1,900  cu.  yds. 
of  loose  rock,  and  1,500  cu.  yds.  of  solid  rock,  in  trenching  for  a 
6-in.  water  pipe.  The  work  was  done  by  company  labor  (not  by 
contract),  wages  being  $2.25  for  laborers,  and  the  cost  was  34  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  for  excavation  and  3%  cts.  more  per  cu.  yd.  for  back- 
filling and  tamping.  If  wages  had  been  $1.50  a  day  the  cost  would 
have  been  23  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  excavation  and  2y2  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
for  backfilling. 

Cost  of  Trenching,  Astoria,  Ore.— Mr.  A.  L.  Adams  states  that 
In  trenching  for  the  Astoria  (Oregon)  Waterworks,  in  1896,  the 


WATER-WORKS. 


657 


first  contractor  averaged  only  7  to  8  cu.  yds.  per  man  per  day. 
Later  on  another  contractor,  even  in  the  rainy  season,  averaged 
nearly  10  cu.  yds.  per  man  per  10-hr,  day  of  trenching  (including 
backfilling),  at  a  cost  (including  foreman)  of  17*4  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
wages  being  $1.70  a  day.  The  material  was  yellow  clay  dug  with 
mattocks  and  shovels. 

Cost  of  Trenching,  Hilburn,  N.  Y.— Mr.  W.  C.  Foster  gives  the 
following  data  on  17,000  ft.  of  trenching  for  water  pipe  at  Hil- 
burn, N.  Y.  The  trench  was  4  ft.  deep,  for  4-in.  to  8-in.  pipe. 
The  digging  was  hard,  the  banks  being  full  of  cobbles  and  fre- 
quently caved  in.  The  streets  were  not  paved.  The  cost  of  trench- 
ing and  backfilling  was  10.1  cts.  per  lin.  ft,  wages  being  $1.35  for 
laborers  and  $3  for  foremen. 

Cost  of  Pipe  Laying,  Providence,  R.  I.— Mr.  E.  B.  Weston,  Engi- 
.neer  Water  Department,  Providence,  R.  I.,  gives  the  following 
tables  based  upon  many  miles  of  trench  work  done  prior  to  1890: 

EAST  DIGGING  SAND. 
Size  of  pipe,  ins. . . 

1.  Trenching*   . 

2.  Laying     

3.  Foreman    0130 

4.  Tools,   etc 

5.  Calking    

6.  Lead,  5  cts.  Ib. . 

7.  Teams     

8.  Carting     0078 

9.  Total     : 1200 

MEDIUM 
Size    of   pipe,    ins. . .        4. 

1.  Trenching*    0597 

2.  Laying    0189 

3.  Foreman     0180 

4.  Tools,    etc 0056 

5.  Calking     0106 

6.  Lead,   5   cts.  Ib..  .   .0224 

7.  Teams     0070 

8.  Carting    0078 


4. 
.0422 
.0129 
.0130 
.0041 
.0106 
.0224 
.0070 
.0078 

6. 
.0518 
.0162 
.0158 
.0050 
.0107 
.0328 
.0090 
.0149 

8. 
.0611 
.0191 
.0188 
.0059 
.0108 
.0431 
.0115 
.0208 

10. 
.0707 
.0219 
.0216 
.0069 
.0111 
.0553 
.0136 
.0275 

12. 
.0798 
.0249 
.0244 
.0078 
.0118 
.0683 
.0160 
.0346 

16. 
.1445 
.0370 
.0303 
.0134' 
.0159 
.0950 
.0203 
.0518 

20. 
.2088 
.0497 
.0360 
.0191 
.0301 
.1203 
.0216 
.0746 

.1554  .1911  .2286  .2676  . 
DIGGING,  GRAVEL,  ETC. 

6.  8.  10.  12.  16. 
.0697  .0790  .0883  .0974  .1700 
.0220  .0249  .0279  .0307  .0440 
.0206  .0234  .0265  .0294  .0350 
.0065  .0075  .0084  .0093  .0154 
.0107  .0108  .0111  .0118  .0159 
.0320  .0431  .0553  .0683  .0950 
.0090  .0115  .0136  .6160  .0203 
.0149  .0208  .0275  .0346  .0518 


4082     .5602 


20. 
.2400 
.0577 
.0373 
.0214 
.0301 
.1203 
.0216 
.0746 


24. 
.3019 
.0639 
.0396 
.0602 
.0757 
.1600 
.0228 
.1317 


9.   Total     1500  .1854  .2210  .2586   .2975  .4474   .6030  .8639 


*Including  backfilling,  and  in  all  cases  the 
was  such  that  the  center  of  the  pipe  was  4  ft. 
surface. 

HARD  DIGGING,  HARD  OR  MOIST 
Size  of  pipe,  ins. . . 

1.  Trenching*    .... 

2.  Laying     

3.  Foreman     

4.  Tools,  etc 

5.  Calking 

6.  Lead,  5  cts.  Ib.  . 

7.  Teams    

8.  Carting     


depth 
8  ins. 


of  the  trench 
below  ground 


16. 
.2261 
.0530 
.0428 
.0201 
.0159 
.0950 
.0203 
.0513 


20. 
.3264 
.0669 
.0452 
.0283 
.0301 
.1203 
.0216 
.0746 


9.   Total 1950     .2304     .2661      .3036     .3508     .5250     .7134 


*Including  backfilling,  and  in  all  cases  the  depth  of  the  trench 
Was  such  that  the  center  of  the  pipe  was  4  ft.  8  ins.  below  ground 
surface. 


658  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Wages  in  all  cases  above  were  $1.50  a  day  for  laborers  trench- 
ing and  laying,  $3  a  day  for  foreman,  $2.25  for  calkers,  and  $2.25 
for  teams  which  probably  refers  to  team  without  driver.  Carting 
was  in  all  cases  $1  a  ton.  Allowance  for  tools,  item  4,  was  made 
on  a  basis  ef  7.2%  of  items  1  and  2. 

-Tap  and  stop - Lead  service  pipe  per  lin.  ft.- 


Diam. 
in 
ins. 

Tap,  stop,  etc. 
including 
tapping. 

Diam. 
in 
ins. 

V\A    0CsA    V  *\^t/     ILF1IJC 

Weight 
in 
Ibs. 

}JUL     1111.    J.  L.  

Cost  of  pipe 
trenching 
laying,  etc. 

% 

$e.ao 

3.00 

$0.34 

% 

6.23 

4.00 

.40 

% 

6.81 

4.75 

.45 

% 

8.67 

1 

6.00 

.52 

1 

10.71 

1% 

9.00 

.70 

1% 

10.00 

.7fi 

In  the  above,  lead  pipe  was  assumed  at  6  cts.  per  Ib. ;  labor  of 
trenching  and  laying,  16  cts.  per  ft. 

Short  lengths,  15  to  50  ft.,  of  6-in.  pipe  cost  34  cts.  per  ft.  in  easy 
digging  to  45  cts.  in  hard  digging  for  excavation,  laying  and  back- 
filling, wages  being  as  above  stated. 

The  trench  for  a  24-in.  pipe,  19,416  ft.  long  and  6.6  ft  deep  cost 
32  cts!  per  cu.  yd.  for  excavation  and  backfill,  with  wages  at  $1.50 
a  day. 

A  4  8-in.  main  was  laid  for  $1.65  per  ft.  including  digging,  laying, 
calking  and  backfilling. 

A  16-in.  pipe,  374  ft.  long  passed  under  two  railway  tracks, 
and  the  cost  of  trenching,  laying  and  backfilling  was  50  cts.  per  ft. 

An  8-in.  pipe  was  laid  across  a  bridge,  and  the  cost  of  boxing, 
laying  pipe,  etc.,  was  $1.32  per  ft.,  while  for  a  12-in.  pipe  the  cost 
was  $1.50  per  ft. 

Trenches  were  ordinarily  2  ft.  wider  than  the  pipe  and  5  ft. 
plus  half  the  diameter  of  the  pipe  deep.  Such  trenches  were  dug, 
the  pipe  laid  and  backfilling  made  at  the  following  rate  per  laborer 
engaged : 


6-in  pipe,  easy  earth 21.0  lin.  ft.  per 


6-in. 

6-in. 

8-in. 
12-in. 
20-in. 
24-in. 


medium    earth 17. i 

hard    earth 10.3 

easy   earth 19.3 

medium  earth 13.4 

easy  earth 9.0 

medium   earth 4.4 


day 


Earth  excavation  in  trenches  where  digging  is  easy  costs  20  cts. 
per  cu.  yd. ;  rock  excavation  averages  $2  per  cu.  yd.  and  runs  as 
high  as  $3,  wages  being  $1.50  a  day  for  labor. 

Cost  of  Laying  107,877  Feet  of  Water  Mains  at  Cleveland,  O.*— 

During  1907  the  Pipe  Laying  Department  of  the  Division  of  Water 
Works  of  Cleveland,  O.,  laid  107,877  ft.  of  watermains,  the  sizes  of 
pipe  and  lengths  laid  being  as  follows: 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  4,  1908. 


WATER-WORKS.  65T 

30-in.  5,330  ft. 

24-in  11,164  ft. 

20-in 1,665  ft. 

12-in  17,362  ft. 

10-in.  1,181  ft. 

8-in  .15,099  ft. 

6-in.  53,415  ft. 

4-in  439  ft. 

3-in 2,222  ft. 

Table  II,  prepared  by  M.  E.  Bemis,  superintendent  of  water 
works,  shows  the  unit  cost  of  laying  these  watermains. 

Mr.  Bemis  states  that  the  costs  were  rather  high,  owing  to  the 
unusually  high  prices  of  materials  prevailing  during  the  year. 
The  prices  for  materials  at  Cleveland,  during  1907  were  as 
follows : 

Per  ton. 
All    sizes    of    cast    iron    pipe,    delivered    on 

streets,  for  the  first  half  of   1907 $36.25 

For    the    second    half    of    1907 36.00 

Miscellaneous  castings  and   special  castings, 
from    3-in.    to    16-in.,    inclusive,    first    half 

of     1907     54.00 

Miscellaneous  castings  over   16-in.,  first  half 

of     1907     60.00 

Miscellaneous    castings,    second    half    1907..    59.90 
Special    castings,    from    3-in.    to    16-in.,    in- 
clusive,    second    half     1907 65.00 

Special    castings,    over    16-in.,    second    half 

1907     75.00 

Each. 

3-in.  valves     $      6.53 

4-in.  valves    7.63 

6-in.  valves 12.60 

8-in.  valves    18.90 

10-in.  valves 26.25 

12-in.  valves    34.50 

16-in.  valves    66.15 

20-in.  valves    134.25 

24-in.  valves    217.50 

3-in.  hydrants     20.00 

4-in.  hydrants 27.75 

6-in.  hydrants     46.25 

Pig  lead,  first  half  of  1907 

$123.30  per  ton  f.  o.  b.  point  of  shipment 

Pig  lead,  second  half  of  1907. 

$101.00  per  ton  f.  o.  b.  cars  at  Cleveland 
Packing   4%c  per  lb.- 

The  wages  paid  for  labor  were  as  follows: 

Per  hour. 

Foreman    $0.42 

Assistant   foreman    0.33 

Calkers    0.27ya 

Labor    0.22 

Team    0.50 

Cost  of  Water  Pipes  Laid  at  Boston.— Mr.  C.  M.  Saville  gives  the 
following  data  relative  to  62  miles  of  pipe  work  done  by  contract 
for  the  city  of  Boston :  The  costs  are  averages  of  the  actual  costs 
under  21  contracts,  from  1896  to  1903.  As  a  general  rule  the 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


OSrHOlON     I    t-CO         CO         O     I   05    1 

sssgo-  i£s  §  s  Is ! 


-4J   COIM05005  I  COU5       00       I-    I  O 

.       c-«w  cococoioeo  oo^<      co      o      S 

b-       .5^,^0000  COO       O       5    'S 

o       «  a>     '  ••*.!. 

os     ^  ftae.  \-ttL 


G~  c-oooo  j  oso     o     M. 


f^hj 


^ 

^     dd 


<n     eo   i  o   I  oo 
oo     co   I  05      co 

O       O       ^    jtfl    <00 


»1S     S 


r*  •*-*    O  O  < 

^fe  ^i^' 


OSCO  U5  CO  •*  I  03 
*OS  O  rH  rH  CO 
00  rH  00  O  I  O 


COrH  (M 
OOCD  t- 
rHO  0 


IS 


g     cC  «o65^oo  |££    ^    S    S    S 

'7  t.    B*«»O*««    J  rHO       tH       to       00       O 

OJ       o«M>-<-_J'        .•  .1.°. 


O  •  *J 

U  £«w 

H  4  S 

tn  NO, 

H 


OS  (M  OJOO 
rH  OO  O3OO 
00  O  rHt> 


00  WS 


I       Ife 


o  I  os        ~ 

10        rH  « 

os  |d>.       > 


X! 
CO 


K 

-o  '% 


B8li?jj  1 1 

irrg  *  I 


Orrj 

003 


WATER-WORKS.  661 

pipes  were  laid  with  the  axis  of  the  pipe  5  ft.  below  the  surface. 
The  pipes  were  usually  placed  in  the  trench  by  a  hand  operated 
derrick  spanning  the  trench.  In  practically  all  cases  the  streets 
were  macadamized.  Just  how  many  feet  of  each  kind  of  pipe  were 
laid  is  not  stated ;  but  there  were  not  less  than  the  following 
amounts : 

12-in.  pipe     15,500  ft. 

16-in.  pipe     44,600  ft. 

20-in.  pipe     21,200  ft. 

24-in.  pipe 19,600  ft. 

30-in.  pipe 7,200  ft. 

36-in.  pipe     : 36,800  ft. 

48-in.  pipe     .• 97,900  ft. 

The  first  item  in  Table  III  of  $30  per  ton  for  pipe  was  calcu- 
lated by  adding  12%  to  the  actual  cost  of  $26.80  per  ton,  this  12% 
being  added  to  cover  incidentals.  These  incidentals  are  as  fol- 
lows, by  percentages  : 

Per  cent. 
Small  pipes  for  blow-offs  and  connections....    1% 

Special    castings     .......... -.;...   4  % 

.  Valves     5 

Miscellaneous  materials    1 

Total  percentages   to   be   added  to   the  cost 
per  short  ton  of  straight  pipe 12 

The  cost  of  teaming  on  21  contracts  previous  to  1898  was  26  cts. 
per  ton  per  mile,  the  average  haul  being  2.4  miles  from  the  pipe 
yards  ;  but,  in  order  to  be  liberal,  30  cts.  per  ton  per  mile  for  a 
2% -mile  haul  is  assumed  as  an  average;  wages  of  two-horse  team 
and  driver  being  45  cts.  per  hr. 

The  lead  is  estimated  at  5  cts.  per  lb.,  and  each  joint  requires 
about  as  many  pounds  of  lead  as  2  times  the  diameter  of  the  pipe 
In  inches,  according  to  Mr.  Saville,  but  other  authorities  do  not 
agree  with  him. 

The  column  headed  "miscellaneous  expenses"  is  based  upon 
actual  experience,  and  includes  cost  of  tools,  insurance  of  men, 
lumber,  yarn,  and  incidental  expenses.  The  tools  depreciate  about 
50%  on  any  contract.  It  was  estimated  that  4%  of  the  cost  of 
laying  the  pipe  should  be  added  to  cover  the  cost  of  tools.  The 
cost  of  accident  insurance  was  3%  of  the  pay  roll.  The  contract- 
or's bond  cost  %%  of  the  bond.  Incidental  expenses  were  about 
1%  of  the  pay  roll.  It  was  estimated  that  these  three  items 
amounted  to  3.2%  of  the  cost  of  laying  the  pipe.  The  cost  of  lum- 
ber, yarn,  etc.,  averaged  2.8%  of  the  cost  of  hauling  and  laying. 
Hen^e,  the  total  cost  of  "miscellaneous  expenses"  was  4%  +  3.2%-f- 
2.8%,  which  is  10%  of  the  cost  of  laying  the  pipe.  The  word  "lay- 
ing" is  here  used  to  include  the  cost  of  hauling  the  pipe,  the  cost 
of  lead,  the  cost  of  trenching  and  backfilling,  and  the  cost  of 
placing  the  pipe  in  the  trench  and  calking  it. 

The  column  headed  "labor"  includes  the  cost  of  trenching  in 
earth  (there  was  very  little  rock),  and  the  cost  of  placing  the 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


1 

la 

coot 

OS  CO 

«l> 

.OtM 

OS  CO 

COCO 

tot^ 

II 

ooto 

osr~ 

OS  CO 

3§j 

|£ 

*» 

1-1 

1-1 

rH^H 

~™ 

s 

.OCD 

co£ 

0£ 

cooo 

coco 

OCO 

oo  co 

ooco 
coos 

CM  CM 

55 

COCO 

S2 

a 

s° 

00 

00 

00 

oo 

00 

oo 

oo 

^H^H 

r-HO 

"~"~l 

i-l  CM 

-i   3   <2 

oo 

oo 

00 

II 

oo 

00 

00 

OtO 

coco 

ss 

100 

t^oo 

OtO 

CM  CM 

too 
t^-co 

CM  CM 

too 

CM  CO 

coco 

sj| 

00 

oo 

oo 

oo 

00 

00 

oo 

00 

oo 

oo 

oo 

oo 

•o-^ 

go 

oo 

CM  CM 

00 

coco 

00 

00 

00  OO 

00 
00 

00 

00 

00 

00 

00 
00 

ss 

oo 

ss 

^1 

8° 

OO 

00 

00 

00 

00 

00 

00 

oo 

00 

00 

oo 

|S 

CM  CO 
00 

00 

oo 

00 

oo 

oo 

00 

oo 

00 
00 

oo 

CO  OS 
00 

00 

00 

OtO 

CM  OO 

oo 

to5 

oo 

OtO 

050 

T-ICO 

oo 

too 

coos 

CM  CO 
00 

too 
oo 

0 

0     JH 

2% 

CO  to 

ss 

go 

,-iCM 

ooo 

JO  JO 

t-CO 

gg 

10  CO 

T-HCO 

00  *-H 

CO  CM 

cooo 

CO-.* 

2S 

©a 

S-< 

I-*""1 

^.CN 

rHCM 

tMtM 

<MW 

CO  tO 

•*** 

coot 

t»CM 

05  tO 

i-l  CO 

^1            § 

S3 

00 

00 

oo 

00 

00 
00 

ooo 
tooo 

00 
00 

00 

to  to 

OOCM 
O  i^ 

00 

oo 

ss 

00 

CM  CO 
00 

II 

oo 

CM  CO 

co  to 

00 

ooo 
coo 
oo 

&   ^           -i 
+>$         12 

•as  § 

00 

000 

00 

oco 

CMO 

Is 

2§ 

CO  CM 

00 

too 

00 

coco 

00 

00 
CM  CM 
OSt~ 

00 

»-H   t>. 

00 

00 

§2 

1 

"o     1 

2     ^ 
c/5 

*  * 

CM 

t 

CO 

00 

T 

? 

r 

CO 
CO 

CM 

00 

to 

§ 

WATER-WORKS.  663 

pipe  in  the  trench  and  calking  it.     Wages  paid  for  labor  were  as 
follows : 

Foreman    .$100.00  per  month 

Sub-foreman    3.00  per  day 

Calkers  and  yarners 2.50 

Laborers,    1st  class 1.75 

Laborers,  2d  class 1.60 

Double  team  and  driver 0.45  per  hour 

Single  team  and  driver 0.30 

A  considerable  amount  of  extra  work  was  done  by  force  ac- 
count on  38  miles  of  the  pipe  lines,  averaging  12  cts.  per  ft.  of 
line,  due  to  obstructions  encountered  causing  changes  of  loca- 
tion, etc.  , 

Cost  of  Laying  Main  Water  Pipe  in   Boston,  Mass.,  1878-1907.* — 
The  gradual  increasing  average  labor  cost  of  laying  water  pipe 


/30V  1000 


Fig.  4.  —  Effect  of  Length  of  Job  on  Cost. 

in  Boston  is  made  the  subject  of  one  of  the  reports  prepared  by 
Metcalf  &  Eddy,  consulting  civil  engineers  to  the  Boston  Finance 
Commission.  Nearly  all  the  pipe  laid  was  8-in.  pipe  ;  but  some 
6-in.  and  10-in.  pipe  is  included  and  a  little  12-in.  pipe.  Since, 
however,  this  range  in  sizes  involves  substantially  no  change  in 
trench  dimensions  the  cost  per  foot  should  be  directly  comparable. 
The  average  labor  costs  per  lineal  foot  of  laying  water  pipe,  taken 
from  the  city  engineer's  records  for  the  years  1878  to  1907,  in- 
clusive, are  given  in  Table  IV.  These  are  the  figures  on  which  the 
engineers'  computations  which  follow  are  based. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  table  that,  during  the  period  covered, 
wages  advanced,  the  hours  of  labor  decreased  and  the  labor  per- 
formed per  hour  also  advanced. 

Figure  4  shows  the  general  relation  of  the  cost  per  foot  to  the 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.    18,    1909. 


664 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


(°w  oo s)  Q°f    f°.Ti!c£!t>.  •°-'~-t^^^^2j 

JO  m3U9J   *AB       ^^MCO    :cocococococococoMfroeocococo^ioiOM<LO<oioLO«o«oio 

uiaojtun.      o^ 

p90np9J    J91U 

-anj    isoa    'Ay 

•J199M.     J9d  <OL« 

•sail    09    'A^P      "**' 
J9<3  Zt  J°  SIS 
-•eq    uuojmn 
o  i    paonp 

-9J        ^SOO        "Ay 

_     .COt-COOOCOrHOOrHC<IO5e<lOOOt--CXJ  CO?OCOLO  COrHr-JOOiJ<t--lOlOCOO 

IT3n}OB   -AV" 

C3 

eoe<i(M 

•rt<CO'*OailO«OlOCOOTflOOOt~r-lTj<Oie<JC^r-l'*«Dt-r-IOO 

«   ^  'UIH^^^S  i? 

6 

•*   CO 
,    Cg  CO(Mt-CO   •  -<*l  t^  C-  ^  O  rH  O  O  O5  -f  «O  rH  OO  OO  rH  OS  ^*<  OS  CO  OO  C^  Oi  •*  CO  < 

3  ^ 

fS 

i 

«      JOU5^U9tM"W^^^^ 

fi  ' 

O  oo  O  OO  t-     •  t-  OlO?OCOCOlO«DOOt-COt^« 

U      •/'iaaT\      arTrrl       orHioio    •oorH«oioi«j<orHOe<ic<ioicoiot-rHeNiooot-ooeoOTi<t~t- 

VT        »'  CO1™^^^     •ts-t^OOCSC<JC<3COT^lOlOOCOC5CO^<dO^*<t>-t*-t--t*rHO5 

§  r-l  rH  rH        C-7  T-H         rH  rH  rH        rH  rH  rH 

^  'SqoC       oj-^ww    •ioo^«Tiooooooo-<*<a5coio«oosrHe<jrH«nrHTj<a505(Me<ico 

J 

i 

WlTSWlOl^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 
t-t^t-t-t-0000000000000000000000000 

I 

I 

UBOi 


WATER-WORKS.  665 

tength  of  the  job  for  five  of  the  years  under  consideration,  viz. : 
1886,  1891,  1896,  1902  and  1906.  It  will  be  seen  that  the  form 
of  curve  is  substantially  similar  in  all  cases.  From  these  curves 
was  computed  the  increase  in  labor  cost  per  foot  for  shorter  jobs 
as  compared  with  the  cost  for  1,000  ft.,  in  percentages,  and  the 
results  shown  by  the  dotted  curve  on  the  same  diagram.  This 
curve  shows  that  the  increased  cost  per  foot  of  a  piece  of  work 
100  ft.  long,  over  what  it  would  have  been  if  1,000  ft.  long,  is  90 
per  cent.  The  increased  cost  for  a  200-ft.  job  is  55  per  cent ;  for 
300  ft.,  34  per  cent;  for  400  ft.,  21%  per  cent;  for  500  ft.,  13 
per  cent,  and  for  600  ft.,  8  per  cent. 

From  the  same  line  of  reasoning  it  is  readily  apparent  that  in 
years  when  the  average  length  of  job  is  high,  the  corresponding 
cost  per  foot  should  be  less  than  when  the  average  length  is  low. 
From  their  study  of  the  relations  of  average  length  to  average 
total  cost  per  foot,  partly  by  mathematical  work  and  partly  by  the 
exercise  of  judgment,  the  engineers  deduced  factors  by  which  the 
costs  can  be  reduced  to  an  average  annual  length  of  job  of  500 
ft. ;  the  labor  cost  so  reduced  is  given  in  the  last  column  of  the 
table.  In  others  words,  this  column  is  intended  to  show  costs  which 
should  be  absolutely  comparable  in  all  particulars,  having  been  re- 
duced not  only  to  a  uniform  basis  of  wages  and  hours  of  labor, 
but  also  to  a  uniform  basis  of  average  length  of  job. 

The  results  are  indicated  somewhat  more  clearly  by  Fig.  5, 
showing  by  the  light  line  the  average  labor  cost  as  computed  by 
the  city  engineer  for  uniform  conditions  of  wages  and  hours  of 
labor,  and  by  the  heavy  line  the  further  reduction  for  a  uniform 
length  of  job.  This  latter  line  shows,  under  the  assumed  basis,  the 
average  labor  cost  of  about  33  cts.  per  foot  to  and  including  1893, 
and  a  rapidly  increasing  cost  up  to  1906.  On  this  diagram  the 
dotted  lines  show  the  effect  of  omitting  the  work  done  by  contract 
in  1904,  1905,  1906  and  1907,.  which  had  been  included  by  the  city 
engineer.  On  .this  basis  it  is  seen  that  the  cost  in  1906  and  1907 
was  somewhat  less  than  in  1905,  although  greater  than  in  any  pre- 
ceding year. 

Further  comment  upon  these  diagrams  is  perhaps  superfluous. 
Metcalf  &  Eddy  emphasize  the  statement  that  the  increased  labor 
cost  can  be  charged  to  nothing  but  inefficiency  of  labor. 

This  inefficiency  is  due  to  various  causes.  The  engineers  else- 
where reported  in  some  detail  showing  the  effect  of  age  upon  effi- 
ciency. Other  causes  which  doubtless  have  greater  or  less  effect 
are  lack  of  discipline,  political  appointments,  and  more  or  less 
inefficient  organization. 

Comparative  Cost  of  Pipe  Laying  in  New  England  Cities.*— As  a 
part  of  the  report  by  the  special  Boston  Finance  Commission, 
which  recently  completed  its  labors,  there  has  been  published  a 
volume  of  some  1,200  pages  comprising  solely  the  reports  (nearly 
60  in  number)  of  Metcalf  &  Eddy  of  Boston,  consulting  civil  engi- 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  July  28,   1909, 


666 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 


In  their  investigation  of  the  Boston  Water  Department  the  engi- 
neers made  a  careful  study  and  analysis  of  the  cost  of  pipe  laying 
and  for  the  purpose  of  comparison  also  investigated  the  cost  of 
laying  pipe  .by  day  labor  in  neighboring  cities  of  Massachusetts. 
The  basis  of  actual  cost  differs,  in  some  cases  considerably,  since 
the  trenches  are  not  of  the  same  dimensions  and  since  wages  and 


60 


I" 


to 


10 


*78/88O  f88S  /6SO  /89S 

£/?g-  Canty.  Y^F/r/f 

Fig.  5. — Increasing  Cost  of  Pipe  Laying  in  Boston. 

hours  of  labor  vary  more  or  less.  The  engineers  attempted,  how- 
ever, to  reduce  the  cost  to  a  uniform  basis,  so  far  as  possible. 
Since  the  data  for  adjoining  cities  are  based  on  present  costs,  or 
at  least  costs  within  a  period  of  a  year  or  two  previous  to  the  date 
of  the  report,  they  took  the  average  labor  cost  of  pipe  laying  in 
Boston  for  the  2%  years  from  1905  to  July  1,  1907,  inclusive,  for 
comparison. 


WATER-WORKS.  667 

In  Table  V  are  given,  following  the  name  of  each  city,  the 
wages  and  hours  of  common  labor  during  the  period  under  dis- 
cussion ;  the  length  of  pipe  included  in  making  up  the  average 
cost ;  the  years  in  which  this  pipe  was  laid ;  the  actual  labor  cost 
per  foot ;  the  depth  of  trench ;  the  corresponding  cost  per  foot  for 
a  trench  6  ft.  deep,  such  as  is  used  in  the  city  of  Boston ;  and, 
finally,  the  corresponding  cost  for  a  6-ft.  trench,  if  the  wages  hac? 
been  uniformly  $2  per  day  and  the  hours  60  per  week. 

In  making  the  computations,  it  was  assumed  that  a  trench  6  ft 
deep  would  cost  20  per  cent  more  per  foot  than  one  5  ft.  deep.  As 
a  matter  of  fact  the  actual  increase  in  cost  would  probably  be 
something  less  than  20  per  cent,  since  there  would  be  very  little 
if  any  increased  cost  of  placing  the  pipe,  making  joints,  etc.,  and 
no  increase  in  the  cost  of  teaming.  On  the  other  hand,  the  cost 
of  excavation  for  the  lowest  foot  might  be  a  little  greater  than  one- 
fifth  of  the  average  cost,  but  in  most  cases  probably  not  enough 
greater  to  offset  the  practically  unchanged  cost  of  the  items  men- 
tioned above.  The  addition  of  20  per  cent  is,  therefore,  probably 
more  than  ample  to  allow  for  the  increased  depth  of  trench. 

In  reducing  the  actual  costs  to  what  they  would  have  been  had 
the  wages  been  $2  per  day  and  the  hours  60  per  week,  it  has  been 
assumed  that  the  actual  efficiency  of  labor  per  hour  was  unaffected 
by  the  change  in  hours  and  wages. 

The  figures  in  the  last  column  of  the  table  should  be  absolutely 
comparable.  The  greater  difficulties  encountered  in  Boston  on  ac- 
count of  many  obstructions,  etc.,  do  not  enter,  since  all  jobs  involv- 
ing such  difficulties  have  been  rigidly  excluded  from  the  computa- 
tions and  comparisons. 

From  them  it  is  evident  that  the  pipe  laying  cost  in  the  city  of 
Boston  is  69  per  cent  greater  than  that  of  the  average  of  the  other 
seven  cities,  and  nearly  44  per  cent,  greater  than  the  cost  in 
Worcester,  where  it  is  the  highest  of  any  of  the  seven. 

In  the  case  of  Cambridge,  besides  data  showing  the  cost  in  1905, 
average  labor  cost  per  foot  was  furnished  of  laying  4,  6,  8  and 
12-in.  pipe  from  1894  to  1903.  The  fluctuations  in  these  costs  are 
not  remarkable  and  there  was  no  wide  divergence  from  the  average 
during  Uiis  period  of  ten  years.  After  adding  20  per  cent  to  make 
the  figures  comparable  with  those  for  6-ft.  trench  in  Boston,  the 
average  for  the  ten  years  was  40.4  cts.  per  foot  for  all  sizes,  or, 
separating  the  figures,  31.4  cts.  for  4-in.  pipe,  35.1  cts.  for  6-in., 
43.4  cts.  for  8-in.  and  51.6  cts.  for  12-in.  In  1905,  however,  as 
already  noted,  the  average  cost  on  the  comparative  basis  was  50.3 
cts.  per  foot,  an  increase  of  49  per  cent  over  the  average  for  the 
ten  years  1894-1903.  No  data  were  furnished  which  explained  this 
sudden  increase. 

Reducing  40.4   cts.  per  foot  to  the  $2  per  day  and   60  hours  per' 
week  basis,  the  comparative  labor  cost  of  pipe  la,ying  in  Cambridge 
prior  to  1904  was  found  to  be  31.6  cts.  per 'foot.     During  this  same 
period,    1894-1903,    the   labor   cost   in   Boston   reduced   to    the   same 
basis  was  rapidly  increasing  and  ranged  from  37.3  cts.   at  the   be- 


668 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


•daap    -}j    9    , 

3{99A\.     J9d      0  9 

pin?     %$     S9S13M.       lTi._ 

adid  jo   -}j  aad  aoq^j       <^ 
jo'  ;SOD    SuipuodsaajOQ  u 


^ 

0} 


5   : 


"S 


jo    ^soo    pa^nduioo  ® 


2S332SS 


•IIOU9J)    JO 


<u      <»  us  10  10  10  «o  m  la 


|8 

£1 
S5 

S  - 


•adid   jo    -}j 
jo     ;SOD 


5          w 


ai  us  if>  •*!•«*<  m  co  oo 


O— '0000000 

i  3o>ar 

|r. 


o 

3 


-AB  Sunnduioo  uipa 
-pnpui  9dtd  jo 


s  - 


o     -uioo    jo  _sanoq 


UQJJJ  -^  OO  t>-  OO  b-  00  OO  < 

o 


Is 

0)  0) 


OOOOOlOOOO  -»->     • 

ooooot-ooo         >i-G 


o  o  w 

X  C--1 

O  4_> 

S  ^  o 


WATER-WORKS.  663 

ginning  of  the  period  to  59.3  cts.  at  the  end,  or  from  18  per  cent 
to  88  per  cent  more  than  the  cost  in  Cambridge. 

Metcalf  &  Eddy  show  that  from  the  foregoing  information  it  can 
only  be  concluded  that  under  labor  conditions  as  they  exist  in 
other  neighboring  cities,  a  fair  average  labor  cost  for  pipe  laying 
work,  reduced  to  the  uniform  basis  of  $2  per  day  and  60  hours  per 
week,  would  be  about  42  cts.  per  foot,  with  50  cts.  as  a  maximum. 
Of  course  individual  pieces  of  work  would  often  exceed  the  aver- 
age and  others  would  frequently  fall  considerably  below  it.  As 
against  these  fair  costs,  this  work  cost  the  city  of  Boston,  on  the 
same  basis  of  hours  and  wages,  about  70  cts.  per  foot  for  the  three 
years  prior  to  July,  1907.  or  from  10  to  70  per  cent  in  excess  of  its 
reasonable  cost. 

Reduced  to  the  basis  of  hours  and  wages,  at  the  time  of  the 
report  (i.  e.,  44  hours  per  week  and  $2.25  per  day),  the  fair  aver- 
age labor  cost  as  estimated  upon  the  basis  of  cost  in  other  cities 
would  be  63.7  cts.  per  foot,  with  76.6  cts.  as  a  reasonable  maximum, 
against  which  the  average  cost  for  the  previous  2%  years  (on  the 
same  basis)  was  equivalent  to  $1.081  per  foot,  an  excess  of  44.2 
cts.  per  foot,  or  69  per  cent,  over  the  fair  average  cost. 

It  is  difficult  to  estimate  the  total  excess  cost  resulting  from  this 
inefficiency  of  labor.  The  lengths  of  pipe  laid  from  which  the 
average  costs  were  computed — including  only  those  jobs  on  which 
there  were  no  special  difficulties  which  might  render  them  not 
comparable  with  other  jobs,  and  including  no  rock  excavation — 
constitute  but  a  small  part  of  the  total  pipe  of  these  sizes  (6  to 
12  ins.)  actually  laid.  It  is  probable  that  on  the  jobs  involving 
special  difficulties,  where  the  actual  labor  costs  must  have  been 
greater,  the  excess  over  a  reasonable  cost  was  also  larger ;  and  on 
contract  jobs,  which  have  usually  been  done  at  a  less  cost  than 
the  day  labor  jobs,  the  excess  over  a  reasonable  cost  would  be  less. 
The  total  length  of  6-in.  to  12-in.  pipe  laid  in  the  year  1906-7,  as 
stated  in  the  last  annual  report  of  the  Boston  Water  Department, 
was  57,949  ft.  If  the  excess  labor  cost  on  all  of  this  may  properly 
be  taken  as  44.2  cts.  per  foot  on  the  $2.25  per  day  basis,  equiva- 
lent to  39.2  cts.  on  the  $2  per  day  basis,  then  the  city  actually  paid 
$22,000  more  than  it  should  have  done  for  labor  alone,  in  laying 
pipe  of  6-in.  to  12-in.  diameter  in  1907. 

The  total  length  of  main  pipes  laid  in  the  year  1906-7  was  71,307 
ft.  Since  the  inefficiency  of  labor  is  not  confined  to  work  upon 
small  sizes  of  pipe,  and  is  experienced  in  some  degree  upon  the 
contract  work  as  well  as  upon  that  done  by  day  labor,  the  engi- 
neers estimate  that  this  inefficiency  resulted  in  a  total  excess  of 
cost  of  pipe  laying,  for  labor  alone,  amounting  to  something  like 
$20,000,  and  possibly  much  more,  for  the  year  ending  January 
31,  1907. 

Cost  of  Water  Pipe  Laying  and  Placing  Hydrants  at  Atlantic 
City.— Mr.  Kenneth  Allen  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  the 
laying  of  pipe  at  Atlantic  City,  N.  J.,  in  1905.  The  work  was 
done  by  the  Water  Department.  A  4-in.  pipe  line,  5,000  ft  long, 


670  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

was  laid  in  a  trench  40  ins.  deep,  in  sand  requiring  no  shoring  or 
pumping. 

The  average  force  employed  was  as  follows: 

Per  8  hr. 

Day. 
Trenching   and   back   filling: 

10  men    at    $1.50  ..........................  $15.00 

%   foreman  at  $2.00    .....................      1.00 

Total,  292  lin.  ft.  at  5.5  cts  ............  $16.00 

Pipe   Laying: 

4  pipe    handlers    at    $1.75  .................  $   7.00 

2  calkers  at   $2.50    .......................      5.00 

1  lead  man  at   $2.00    .....................      2.00 

%    foreman    at    $2.00  .....................      1.00 


Total,   292   lin.  ft.   at  5.1   cts  ..........  .$15.00 

The  total  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  4-in.  pipe  was: 

Cts.  per  ft. 

19.66    Ibs.    cast   iron   pipe   at   1.11    cts  ........  21.59 

Specials,  at  2  %  cts.  per  Ib  .................  1.69 

Valves  and  boxes   ........................  6.26 

0.45    Ibs.    lead    at    4.9    cts.    per    ton  ........  2.22 

0.024   Ibs.    Jute,    5V2    cts.   per   ton  ..........  0.13 

0.28   Ibs.    coke    ...........................  0.08 

Hauling  at  75   cts.   per  ton  ................  0.80 

Trenching,   as  above  detailed    .............  5.50 

Pipe   laying,    as   above   detailed  ............  5.10 

Watchman    ...............................  0.60 

Superintendence     ........  .  ................  1.25 

Total     ..............................      45.22 

The  average  cost  of  setting  10  hydrants   (4  in.)  was  as  follows 
per  hydrant: 

Material     .................................  $3.26 

3    days    (24    hrs.)    at    $1.50  ................    4.58 

Total     ................................  $7.76 

The  following  was  the  cost  of  4,300    ft.   of   8-in.  pipe: 

Per.  ft. 
46.5  Ibs.  pipe  at  $22  ton..  ____  .  .....  $0.511 

1.04   Ibs.   lead  at   4.9   cts  ...................    0.054 

Jute  at  5%  cts  ...........................   0.023 

Specials,   valves,   hauling,   etc  ..............   0.217 

Labor    .  .    0.299 


Total    $1.095 

The  following  was  the  cost  of  3,200  ft.  of  10-in.  pipe: 

Per  ft 

68.7    Ibs.    pipe    $0.762 

2.04    Ibs.    lead    0.098 

Jute     0.046 

Specials,  valves,  hauling,  etc 0.124 

Labor    0.560 

Total     ,  ..$1.590 


WATER-WORKS.  671 

The  following  was  the  cost  of  3,600  ft.  of  12 -in.  pipe: 

Per  ft. 

84.3    ibs.    pipe    ...$0.936 

2.77    Ibs.    lead    0.123 

Jute 0.043 

Specials,    valves,    hauling,    etc 0.273 

Labor 0.790 

Total     $2.165 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  for  the  8,  10  and  12-in.  pipe 
was  abnormally  high,  said  to  be  due  to  expensive  crossings  of  other 
pipe  lines  and  to  the  presence  of  adjacent  gas  pipes,  etc.,  which 
had  to  be  cared  for. 

Cost  of  Laying  a  14-In.  Pipe  Line,  Wilkes-Barre,  Pa.*— The  work 
consisted  of  laying  750  ft.  of  14  in.  bell  and  spigot  pipe 
at  Wilkes-Barre,  Pa.,  in  October,  1905.  The  work  was  done  by 
company  labor  and  the  digging  was  easy.  The  pipe  was  distribut- 
ed with  a  truck  on  a  narrow  gage  track  along  the  trench. 
The  pipes  were  placed  in  the  trench  by  a  hand-operated  derrick 
spanning  the  trench.  The  cost  of  the  pipe  line  was  as  follows: 

Materials :  Total.  Per  ft 

62  pieces  14-inch  pipe,  77,773  Ibs $    937.16  $1.25 

6   pieces  14-inch  bends,   2,852   Ibs 74.87  10 

Freight    on    pipe    and    bends 50.39  .067 

1,421    Ibs.    lead    at     $0.05 72.05  .096 

68    Ibs.    hemp    at    $0.09 6.12  .008 

Total  cost  of  material $1,140.59         $1.521 

Labor :  Total.  Per  ft. 
Excavating  and  distributing  pipe,  64  days  at 

$1.74  $  111.36  $0.148 

Laying  and  calking,  213/9  days  at  $1.74 37.12  .050 

Covering  over,  122/9  days  at  $1.74 23.01  

Covering  over,  2  days  at  $1.79  3.58  .035 

Superintendence  and  engineering  12.20  .016 

$    187.27          $0.249 
Total  cost  of  material  and  labor $1,327.86         $1.770 

For  the  above  information  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Douglas  Bunt- 
Ing,  Chief  Engineer,  Lehigh  &  Wilkes-Barre  Coal  Co. 

Cost  of  Water  Pipe  Laid  at  Alliance,  O.— Mr.  L.  L.  Tribus  gives 
the  following  costs  of  work  done  in  1894,  the  material  being  loam 
and  clay  excavated  to  such  a  depth  that  4  ft.  of  earth  would  be 
left  on  top  of  each  class  of  pipe  after  backfilling: 

Size  of  pipe  in  ins 46  8  10  12 

Wt.   of  pipe,  Ibs.  per  ft...       19           30y2  44  62  79 

Lbs.   special  per   ft 0.4            0.76  1.1  1.55  1.9 

Lbs.    lead   per   ft 0.4            0.66  1.0  1.25  1.5 

Lbs.    yarn    per    ft 0.02          0.025  0.05  0.08  0.1 

Total    length    in    ft 2,890         9,760  1,860  3,320  2,930 

^Engineering-Contracting,    Nov.    7,    1906. 


672 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Cost  Per  Lin. 
.  .  .    4 

Foot. 
6 

Laid. 
8 

10 

12 

...$0.2360  $0 

.3780 

$0.5350 

$0.7470 

$0.9400 

Specials  and  valves. 

...   .0120 
...   .0056 

.0189 
.0078 

.0268 
.0110 

.0374 
.0145 

.0470 
.0190 

.0020 

.0330 

.0500 

.0630 

.0750 

Yarn  

...   .0014 

.0018 

.0035 

.0056 

.0070 

.1240 

.1210 

.1287 

.1480 

.1902 

...   .0370 

.0346 

.0313 

.0542 

.0463 

Total     $0.4360     $0.5951      $0.7863      $1.0697      $1.3245 

This  work  was  done  by  laborers  and  men  employed  by  the  water 
company  and  does  not  include  cost  of  superintendence.  The  4-ft. 
cover  over  the  pipe  was  in  some  cases  exceeded.  The  digging  was 
comparatively  easy  with  little  ground  water  to  bother.  Mr.  Tribus 
informs  me  that  the  wages  paid  were:  Laborers,  $1.25;  pipe  han- 
dlers/ $1.50  ;  and  calkers,  $2.25,  per  10 -hour  day. 

Cost  of  Water  Pipe  and  Service  Connections  at  Porterville,  Cal.— 

Mr.  P.  E.  Harroun  gives  the  following  data  on  laying  4,  6,  8  and 
10-in.  water  pipe  and  making  service  connections,  at  Porterville, 
Cal.,  in  1904.  The  work  was  done  by  company  labor,  and  the 
workmen  were  very  inefficient.  All  trenches  were  iy2  ft.  wide  and 
3%  ft.  deep  in  a  heavy  adobe  (clay),  except  for  short  stretches 
in  sand  as  hereafter  noted.  The  streets  were  not  paved,  but  cov- 
ered with  4  ins.  of  hard  rolled  clay  and  gravel  which  required  a 
4-horse  plow  to  break  through.  In  backfilling,  a  "go  devil"  was 
used  to  throw  the  material  into  the  trench  wherever  practicable, 
and  water  from  street  hydrants  was  used  to  consolidate  the  back 
fill. 

Cost  of  4-in.  water  pipe  line   (2,846  ft.  long,  of  which  900  ft.  were 
in  sand)  : 

Per  ft. 

Labor  trenching,   at   20   cts.   per  hr $0.070 

Two    horses    trenching,    at    15    cts.    per    hr 0.001 

Labor  digging  bell-holes,   at   20   cts.   per  hr 0.015 

Labor  laying  pipe,  at  20  cts.  per  hr. . . . 

Yarners,  at  22  %  cts.  per  hr 

Labor  pouring  lead,   at   20    cts.    per  hr 
Calkers,   at   25    cts.    per  hr 


0.010 
0.005 
0.004 
0.008 


Labor  backfilling,  at  20  cts.   per  hr 0.011 

Two  horses   backfilling,    at   15    cts.   per  hr 0.004 

Distribution  of  materials,   at   60   cts.   per  ton 0.005 

Miscellaneous  labor    0.004 

Foreman,  at  40  cts.   per  hr 0.017 

Timekeeper 0.002 

Total  cost  of  laying  per  ft $0 J 56 

The  cost  of  materials  for  this  4-in.  pipe  line  was  as  follows: 

Per  ft. 

Pipe    (2,820   ft,    30    short   tons),    $44.40 $0.461 

Specials    (4,462   Ibs.),   at   3%    cts 0.051 

Valves    (9),   at    $9.40 0.030 

Hydrants    (5),   at    $28.60 0.050 

Lead  (2,010  Ibs.),  at  5.3  cts 0.038 

Yarn    (105  Ibs.),    at    5.4    cts 0.002 

Tools     0.015 

Miscellaneous    0.006 

Total  materials  per  ft $0.653 


WATER-WORKS.  673 

Cost  of  6-in.  water  pipe  line    (838  ft.  long,  of  which  300  ft.  were 
in  sand)  : 

Per  ft. 

Labor  trenching,  at  20  cts.  per  hr $0.075 

Two  horses  trenching,  at  15  cts.  per  hr 0.001 

Labor  digging  bell-holes,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.017 

Labor  laying  pipe,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.013 

Yarners,  at  22%   cts.  per  hr 0.005 

Labor  pouring,   at  20   cts.  per  hr 0.007 

Calkers,    at   25    cts.   per   hr 0.010 

Labor  backfilling,  at  20  cts.   per  hr 0.012 

Two  horses  backfilling,  at   15  cts.  per  hr 0.004 

Miscellaneous     0.005 

Distribution  of  materials,  at  60  cts.   ton 0.012 

Foreman*  at  40  cts.   per  hr 0.018 

Timekeeper    0.002 

Total  cost  of  laying  per  ft $0.181 

The  cost  of  materials  for  this  6-in.  pipe  line  was  as  follows: 

Per  ft 

Pipe  (816  ft,  13.12  tons),  at  $43.40  per  ton $0.679 

Specials    (1,420   Ibs.),   at   3*4    cts .    0.055 

Valves    (10),    at    $15.65 0.187 

Hydrants  (9),  at  $29.85 0.320 

Lead    (804    Ibs.),    at    5.3    cts 0.052 

Yarn   (42  Ibs.),  at  5.4   cts 0.003 

Tools     0.016 

General    0.011) 

Total    materials   per   ft $1.322 

Cost  of  8-in.  water  pipe  line  (2,558  ft  long,  of  which  806  ft.  were 
in  sand)  : 

Per  ft. 

Labor  trenching,  at  20  cts.  per  hr $0.071 

Labor  digging  bell-holes,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.016 

Labor  laying  pipe,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.016 

Yarners,   at   22%    cts.   per   hr 0.006 

Labor  pouring,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.006 

Calkers,    at    25    cts.    per    hr 0.013 

Labor  backfilling,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.012 

Two  horses  backfilling,   at   15    cts.   per  hr 0.004 

Miscellaneous     0.004 

Distributing   materials,   at    60    cts.    per   hr 0.016 

Foreman,   at  40  cts.   per  hr 0.017 

Timekeeper    0.002 

Total  cost  of  laying  per  ft $0.183 

The  cost  of  materials  for  this  8-in.  pipe  line  was  as  follows: 

Per  ft 

Pipe    (2,512    ft,    57.61    tons),    at    $43.40 $0.978 

Specials    (4,056   Ibs.),   at   3&    cts 0.052 

Valves    (5),    at    $24 0.047 

Lead    (3,618    Ibs.),    at   5.3    cts 0.076 

Yarn    (189    Ibs.),    at    5.4    cts 0.004 

Tools 0.01ft 

Miscellaneous         0.00! » 

Total  materials  per  ft $1.1S< 


674  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  10-in.  water  pipe  line    (124  ft.   of  pipe,   14  ft.   ef  specials; 
total,   138  ft.)  : 

Per  ft. 

Labor  trenching,  at  20  cts.  per  hr $0.174 

Labor  digging  bell-holes,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.015 

Labor  laying  pipe,  at  20   cts.  per  hr 0.022 

Labor  yarning,   at   20   cts.   per  hr 0.002 

Labor   pouring,  at   20   cts.  per  hr 0.002 

Labor  calking,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.015 

Labor  backfilling,  at  20  cts.  per  hr.' 0.060 

Labor  miscellaneous,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.015 

Distribution  of  materials,  at  60  cts.  ton 0.020 

Foreman,  at  40  cts.  per  hr 0.016 

Timekeeper 0.002 


Total   labor   per   ft $0.343 

The  cost  of  materials  for  this  10-in.  pipe  line  was  as  follows: 

Per  ft. 

Pipe    (124  ft.   3.74  tons),  at   $43.40 $1.179 

Specials    (603    Ibs.),    at    3%    cts 0.178 

Valves    (1),    at    $34.60 0.251 

Lead    (268    Ibs.),   at   5.3   cts 0.105 

Yarn    (14   Ibs.),  at  5.4   cts 0.005 

Tools     , 0.015 

Miscellaneous    0.009 


Total  materials  per  ft $1.742 

Cost  of  service  connections    (%-in.   screw  pipe): 

Each. 

Labor  trenching,  at  20  cts.  per  hr $0.613 

Tapping  and  making,  at  40   cts.   per  hr 1.003 

Tapping  and  helper,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.289 

Backfilling,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.206 


Total  labor  per   connection $2.111 

The  cost  of  materials  for  each  service  connection  was  as  follows: 

Each. 

Goosenecks   and   cocks    ..$2.48 

Fittings     0.40 

Tools    ($68)     t.88 

Tapping   machine    ($81) 1.03 

Total  materials  and  tools  per  connection $4.79 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  full  cost  of  the  tools  and  tapping  ma- 
chine is  charged  to  these  78  connections,  making  the  cost  of  each 
unusually  high. 

Assuming,  as  above  stated,  that  the  trenches  averaged  1%  ft. 
wide  and  Z%  ft.  deep,  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  trench  work  was 
as  follows: 

Cents. 

Digging    trench     38 

Digging  bell-holes .    8  Va 

Backfilling    g% 

Total  per  cu.  yd ,55 

An  Unusually  Expensive  Piece  of  Work.— "G.  S.  W.  '88"  in  The 
Technic  of  1896,  gives  the  following,  the  material  in  all  cases  being 
clay:  Wages  of  laborers  15  cts.,  pipe  handlers  16  to  17%  cts.,  fore- 
man 20  cts.  per  hour ;  depth  of  trench,  4  to  5%  f t. : 


WATER-WORKS. 


675 


Example    A 

Size  of  pipe,  ins 24 

Length  of   pipe,    ft .      2,550 

Excavation,    cu.    yds 2,710 

Surplus  earth,*  cu.  yds.  .  1,300 
Cost  of  excavation  per  ft.  .$0.2725 
Cost  of  pipe  laying,  per  ft  .2480 
Cost  of  bell  holes,  per  ft..  .1500 
Cost  of  backfilling,  per  ft  ,1790 
Cost  of  ramming,  per  ft.  .  .792?t 
Cost  of  tile,  hose  work,  per 

ft.    .  . 

Cost     of     loading     excess 

earth,    ft 0895 

Cost     of      carting     excess 

earth,   ft 0636 

Total    labor    cost    per 

ft $1.7953 

Cost  of  excavation,   cu.  yd.  0.2562 
Cost  of   backfilling,   cu.  yd.   0.1684 
Cost   of   ramming    cu.    yd..    0.7461f 
Cost   of    tile,    hose     work, 

cu.    yd 

Swelling    of   material      on 

loosening    44% 


B 
24 

2,200§ 
1,963 
862 
$0.333 
.182 
.128 
'  .191 
.107$ 

.074 
.046 
.055 


$1.116$ 
0.373 
0.216 


C 

12-16 
6,241 
3,441 
1,033 
$0.2061 
.2089 
.0954 
.1228 
.2896t 


.0358 
.0635 

$1.0318|1 
.3736 
.2226 
.5434f 


D 

10 

8,969 
4,508 

$6.2416 
.0939 
.0098 
.1360 
.1322f 

.0200 
.0025 
.0046 

$0.6433 
.4807 
.2706 
.8618t 


0.084 
30.  to  44  1/2%* 


20% 


*This  surplus  earth  was  hauled  away  in  wagons,  after  filling  the 
trenches  and  leaving  a  4-in.  crown  to  provide  for  settlement. 

§1,400  feet  of  this  trench  was  backfilled  without  ramming,  using 
water  instead ;  ramming,  however,  was  much  more  effective  in 
compacting  the  clay. 

fRammed  dry  in  4-in.  layers. 

JRammed  wet;  the  portion  that  was  rammed  dry  cost  $1.40  per 
ft.  total. 

1 1  This  total  does  not  check  with  the  items,  so  there  must  be  an 
error  somewhere. 

With  labor  at  $1.25  for  8  hours  and  material  clay  as  before, 
streets  paved  with  wood.  "G.  S.  W."  also  gives  the  following: 

Example     E.  F.               G.             H. 

Size  of  pipe  in  ins 12  12              10                8 

Depth  of  trench,  ft 5  5                 5                 5 

Length  of  trench,   ft 1,048  2,475          2,592          2,049 

Cost  of  excavation,  per  ft $0.186  $0.134     $0.1920     $0.1442 

pipe  laying,  per  ft 257  .162         .1218         .0678 

backfilling,    per    ft 450  .390         .3949         .3632 

hauling   surplus,    per   ft 014  .011         .0101         .0194 

Total  labor  cost  per  ft $0.907     $0.697     $0.7188     $0.5746 

The  two  most  striking  features  in  the  foregoing  data  are  (1) 
the  enormous  swelling  of  the  clay  upon  loosening  and  casting  it  out 
of  the  trenches,  and  (2)  the  extraordinary  high  cost  of  ramming 
the  clay  in  backfilling.  It  is  difficult  to  explain  either  of  these  items 
except  upon  the  assumption  that  the  loosened  clay  dried  out  when 
exposed  to  the  sun  and  air,  forming  hard  rock-like  clods  which 
no  amount  of  ramming  seems  to  have  consolidated  effectually. 
Adding  water  as  in  Example  B  seems  to  have  had  no  very  good 
effect  in  consolidating  the  backfill,  although  it  was  less  expensive 
than  ramming.  But  it  is  a  well-known  fact  that  water  makes  dry 
clay  swell,  and  it  does  not  cause  layers  of  hard  lumpy  clay  to 


676  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

settle  in  a  trench  except  as  a  result  of  weeks  of  slow  seepage  of 
rains. 

It  will  be  noted  that  all  this  work  was  extraordinarily  expensive. 
£jven  the  pipe  laying  cost  double  the  usual  amount.  We  may  infer 
that  this  work  was  not  done  by  contract  but  by  day  labor  for  a 
municipality  or  a  company,  and  that  the  foreman  did  not  secure  "a 
day's  work"  from  the  men — which  is  so  often  the  case  in  municipal 
day-labor  work. 

Cost  of  a  6- in.  Pipe  Line  in  Ohio.— Mr.  E.  H.  Cowan  has  given 
me  the  following  data:  A  6-in.  pipe  line,  1%  miles  long,  was  laid 
in  an  Ohio  city  by  contract,  the  cost  per  foot  of  pipe  line  to  the 
contractor  being  as  follows: 

Per  ft. 

33.74  Ibs.  of  6-in.  pipe,  at  $24  per  short  ton $0.405 

0.67  Ib.  of  specials,  at  2%   cts.  per  Ib 0.018 

Hydrant    connections,    4-in 0008 

Hydrants,    $26    each 0.066 

Gates    ($12.60  each)    and  gate  boxes    ($3.09   each) 0.054 

0.74  Ib.  lead,  4%  cts.  per  Ib 0.033 

0.07  Ib.  jute  packing,  3%  cts.  per  Ib 0.003 

Labor,  18%  to  26  cts.  per  ft.  averaging 0.211 

Teaming,  49  y2  cts.  per  short  ton 0.009 

Miscellaneous  items    0.008 

Total $o~8l5 

The  working  force  was  as  follows: 

1  foreman,  at  $2.50  per  10-hr,  day $  2.50 

2  sub-foremen,   at   $2.00 4.00 

9  men  in  pipe  gang  (including  2  calkers),  at  $1.75 15.75 

32  laborers   digging   trench,   at    $1.50 48.00 

12  laborers   backfilling,   at    $1.50 18.00 

1  waterboy,   at  $1.00 1.00 

Total,   423  lin.  ft.,  at  $0.211 $89.25 

At  times  the  back  filling  gang  was  engaged  in  trench  digging. 
Trenches  were  5  ft.  2  ins.  deep.  The  digging  ranged  from  the 
easiest  spading  to  the  hardest  picking,  the  average  being  "average 
earth."  Could  the  contractor  have  been  present  all  the  time,  the 
cost  might  have  been  less.  The  backfilling  was  done  by  hand,  and 
it  was  not  rammed,  but  the  trench  was  flushed  with  water.  No 
material  was  hauled  away.  The  work  was  done  in  August  and 
September,  1903,  and  there  was  very  little  rain.  It  was  not  neces- 
sary to  brace  the  trench  except  at  a  few  spots. 

Cost  of  Water  Main  and  Service  Pipe  Laid  in  a  Southern  City.— 
Mr.  C.  D.  Barstow  gives  cost  of  shallow  trenching  and  pipe  lay- 
ing in  a  southern  city,  where  negro  laborers  were  used.  From 
the  data  given  by  him  I  have  compiled  the  following  tables  of  cost : 
For  the  most  part  the  trenches  were  15  ins.  wide  at  bottom  and 
20  ins.  at  top,  and  3  ft.  deep.  Some  trenching  was  done  using  a 
team  on  a  drag  scraper,  20  ins.  wide;  then  the  trench  was  made 
3  ft.  wide  at  top.  Using  teams  was  more  economical,  as  may  be 
seen  by  comparing  C  with  D  in  the  foregoing  table.  After  a  rain, 
however,  the  scrapers  could  not  be  used  to  advantage.  In  using  a 
plow  for  loosening  the  earth,  several  feet  of  chain  are  fastened  to 
the  end  of  the  plow  beam,  and  one  or  more  men  ride  the  beam ;  in 


WATER-WORKS.  677 

this  way  plowing  may  be  done  in  a  trench  4  ft.  deep,  one  horse 
walking  on  one  side  and  one  on  the  other  side  of  the  trench.  A 
blacksmith  was  kept  busy  sharpening  about  60  picks  a  day.  There 
was  a  night  watchman.  The  pipe  was  distributed  by  contract  at 
34  cts.  per  ton. 


TABLE  OF  COST  OF  TRENCHING  AND  PIPELAYING  IN  THE  SOUTH. 
Wages  per  10-hr,  day  for  negro  laborers,  $1.25  ;  for  calkers,  $1.75  ; 
for   white   foremen,    $3.00  ;   for   teams,    $3.25  ;    for   horse   ridden   by 

boy,  $1.50. 

Job     

A. 

B. 

c. 

D. 

B. 

F. 

Pipe,   ins  

101 

6 

8 

10 

88 

Length,   ft  

11,000 

6,000 

6,215 

11,352 

2,636 

21,856 

Width   trench    ft 

2 

Depth    trench,    ft  

3.5 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

Material     

a 

4 

8 

No.   laborers  digging  

33 

30 

40 

31 

45 

46 

No.   teams   plowing  

3% 

5 

2V2 

Team  time,   cts.   per  ft  

0.80 

0.62 

0.60 

Labor,   digging,   cts.   ft  

6.66 

2.74 

5.19 

2.68 

2.12 

4.00 

Foreman,  digging,   cts.   ft  .... 
Labor,  pipelaying,   cts.   ft  

0.50 
2.04 

0.23 

0.31 
0.63 

0.21 
0.77 

0.12 
0.94 

0.20 
1.12 

Foreman,    pipelaying,    cts.    ft. 

0.39 

0.17 

0.21 

0.18 

0.24 

Bell  hole  digging,  cts.  ft  
Bell    hole    digging,     foreman, 

2.70 

.... 

0.77 

0.98 

0.93 

1.16 

cts.   per   ft  

0.27 

0.16 

0.21 

0.18 

0.18 

Calking,    cts.    per   ft  

1.30 

0.52 

0.64 

0.63 

0.75 

Backfill  and  tamp  : 

Labor,  cts.,  per  ft  

4.32s 

l.OO5 

1.018 

2.09 

1.42* 

0.959 

Foreman,   cts.  per   ft  

0.36 

0.22 

0.22 

0.32 

0.18 

0.18 

Team,*   cts.   per    ft  

0.36 

0.41 

Horse  ridden  by  boy,  cts.  ft.  . 

0.07 

0.09 

Total  cost,   cts.   per  ft  

18.54 

4.19 

9.46 

8.91 

7.41 

9.79 

*Backfill  with  drag  scraper. 

drenching  in  an  old  street,  1,200  ft.  in  very  muddy  ground.  Two 
rainy  spells  in  18  days  of  work.  Then  10-in.  pipe  was  laid  for  3,440 
ft.;  then  4,038  ft.  of  12-in.  pipe  were  laid  for  1^4  cts.  per  ft.  less 
than  it  cost  for  the  10-in.  pipe;  then  3,270  ft.  of  8-in.  pipe  were  laid 
for  2*4  cts.  per  ft.  less  than  it  cost  for  the  10-in. 

2Cemented  clay  and  gravel  requiring  hard  picking.  Frequent 
rains. 

3The  backfilling  and  tamping  were  done  most  thoroughly,  a 
stretch  of  2,550  ft.  requiring  3  days  for  30  men. 

<Sand  and  loam,  bottom  land,  very  easy  digging. 

5Very' easy  shoveling  and  no  tamping;  11  men  7  days  backfilled 
9,620  ft.  of  trench. 

6Dragscrapers  used  to  backfill ;  boy  riding  horses  to  tamp,  gang 
22  men,  3  teams,  1  boy  and  horse,  2  days  on  5,447  ft. 

7Backfilled  1,670  ft.  in  one  day  by  19  men,  using  1  boy  and  horse 
on  tamping. 

8Half  the  pipe  was  3-in.  at  cost  here  given,  half  was  6-in.  costing 
%-ct.  less  per  ft.  for  laying. 

•Ground  wet  and  often  muddy.  Backfilling  11,433  ft.  done  by  12 
men  and  2  teams  on  scrapers  in  7  days ;  no  tamping. 

The  lead  and  yarn  consumed  per  foot  of  pipe  (pipe  in  lengths  of 
12  ft.)  was: 

1.3     Ibs.   of  lead  and  .04   Ib.   of  hemp  for  12-in.   pipe. 

.96  Ib.     of  lead  and  .04   Ib.  of  hemp  for   10-in.  pipe. 

.95  Ib.     of  lead  and  .03  Ib.   of  hemp  for     8-in.   pipe. 

.66  Ib.     of  lead  and   .02   Ib.   of  hemp   for     6-in.   pipe. 

Some    6,000    ft.    of    2-in.    wrought-iron    service   pipe    was    laid    in 


678  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

trenches  2  ft.  deep,  at  a  cost  of  1.9  cts.  for  trenching,  6.24  ct.  for 
laying  pipe,  and  0.71  ct.  for  backfilling — there  was  no  tamping 
done. 

For  a  distance  of  373  ft.  a  trench  2  ft.  wide  and  3  ft.  deep  passed 
through  a  street  paved  with  brick  laid  on  7^  ins.  of  concrete.  The 
•brick  was  removed  for  a  width  of  3  ft.  and  the  cost  was  as 
follows : 

Men,       Cts.  per 
days.         lin.  ft. 
Removing  brick  and  concrete — Foreman 0.5 

Laborers   7.0  2.61 

Excavating    trench — Foreman    0.5 

Laborers     18.0  6.30 

Backfilling  and  tamping  well — Foreman 1.0 

Laborers     10.6  4.09 

Labor    relaying   concrete 7.8  2.61 

Labor  relaying  bricks 4.5  ] 

Professional    brick    pavers 4.0  \  4.59 

Professional   brick  helpers 2.0J 

Hauling  away  23  loads  surplus  earth 1.23 

15    cu.    yds.    sand    cushion 4.02 

1,700  new  bricks   6.92 

18 ya  bbls.  cement  to  relay  concrete 6.20 

Total 38.58 

Cost  of  Hauling,  Distributing  and  Joining  Wrought  Iron  Pipe  In 
Maryland.*— Mr.  L.  B.  Abbott,  Chief  Engineer  The  Consolidated 
Coal  Co.,  Frostburg,  Md.,  gives  the  following  cost  for  hauling, 
distributing  and  joining  pipe,  in  the  construction  of  an  8,000-ft. 
long  pipe  line.  The  work  was  done  in  connection  with  the  in- 
stallation of  a  water  supply  for  one  of  the  mines  of  the  above- 
mentioned  company. 

The  pipe,  consisting  of  4,000  ft.  of  6-in.  and  4,000  ft.  of  8-in. 
double-strength,  wrought-iron  pipe,  was  hauled  a  distance  of  eight 
miles  over  roads  that  had  to  be  practically  rebuilt  in  many  places. 
From  the  main  road  to  the  pumping  station,  a  distance  of  %  mile, 
a  new  road  had  to  be  cut  and  graded  for  the  heavy  loads  to  be 
hauled  over  it.  It  took  five  days  to  haul  the  pipe  to  the  two  dis- 
tributing points,  from  12  to  15  teams  being  used,  each  team  making 
one  trip  a  day.  Teams  were  paid  for  at  the  rate  of  $4. 50.  per  day 
for  a  2-horse  team.  The  4-horse  teams,  of  which  there  were  but 
two  or  three  used  per  day,  were  furnished  by  the  company,  and 
charged  at  the  rate  of  $8  per  team.  The  teams  started  to  load  at 
7  o'clock,  and  by  time  the  12  or  15  teams  were  loaded  it  was  gen- 
erally 10  o'clock.  It  took  from  four  to  five  hours  to  go  to  the  dis- 
tributing points.  It  was  found  that  a  2-horse  team  hauled  five 
lengths  of  pipe,  or  about  96  ft.  per  load,  while  a  4-horse  team 
hauled  nine  lengths,  or  about  170  ft.,  nine  lengths  being  all  that 
could  be  loaded  into  the  wagon.  The  cost  of  hauling  the  pipe  a 
distance  of  eight  miles  was  4.7  cts.  per  lineal  foot. 

From  the  distributing  points  a  team  dragged  each  length  of  pipe 
to  its  place  in  the  line,  the  average  cost  of  distributing  being  nearly 
1  ct.  per  foot. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   17,  1906. 


WATER-WORKS.  679 

While  the  pipe  was  being  distributed  a  force  of  12  men  started 
to  join  it  up.  The  men  joining  and  distributing  pipe  worked  about 
eight  hours  per  day.  The  greater  part  of  the  time  they  drove  to 
their  work.  The  joining  gang  was  paid  as  follows:  One  man  at 
$2.25  ;  three  men  at  $2.20,  and  eight  men  at  $1.75  per  day.  The 
pipe  was  not  buried,  but  was  blocked  up  about  a  foot  from  the 
ground.  The  entire  8,000  ft.  was  laid  in  ten  days.  In  many  places 
the  ground  was  very  rough,  and  cribs  6  and  7  ft.  high  had  to  be 
built  to  hold  the  pipe.  The  average  cost  to  lay  and  block  up  the 
pipe  was  2.9  cts.  per  foot.  This  included  putting  in  stay  rods 
every  300  or  400  ft,  to  keep  the  pipe  from  jumping  when  the  pump 
was  running,  and  the  placing  of  drain  cocks  in  all  low  places. 

Cost  of  Taking  Up  an  Old  Pipe  Line.— Mr.  E.  E.  Fitzpatrick 
furnishes  the  following  data  relative  to  taking  up  more  than  3 
miles  of  pipe  line  at  Greenburg,  Kansas.  There  were  10,200  ft.  of 
4-in.  pipe;  4,310  ft.  of  6-in. ;  2,050  ft.  of  8-in.,  and  890  ft.  of  10-in. 
After  digging  the  trenches,  the  8-in.  and  10-in.  pipes  were  raised  a 
little,  and  fires  built  under  the  joints  until  the  pipe  expanded ;  then 
the  pipes  were  unjointed  by  working  them  up  and  down  with  a 
three-leg  derrick.  The  4-in.  and  6-in.  pipes  were  raised  bodily  in 
long  sections  onto  the  bank,  heated  a  little,  and  unjointed  by  means 
of  jack-screws  and  clamps.  The  time  required  to  do  all  the 
trenching,  backfilling  and  unjointing,  was  equivalent  to  the  work 
of  1  man  for  425  days;  and,  assuming  wages  at  $1.50  a  day,  the 
cost  was  only  3%  cts.  per  foot  of  pipe. 

Cost  of  Constructing  and  Laying  Cement  Lined  Water  Pipe,  Ply- 
mouth, Mass.,  and  Portland,  Me.* — Two  general  methods  of  building 
wrought-iron,  cement-lined  pipe  have  been  used  in  this  country ; 
the  first,  known  as  the  Goodhue  &  Birnie  pipe,  the  second,  known 
as  the  Phipps  patent. 

The  Goodhue  &  Birnie  pipe  was  generally  made  by  riveting  up 
sheets  of  wrought  iron,  single  riveted  with  cold  rivets,  without  any 
attempt  to  make  the  joints  wateY-tight,  and  lining  this  wrougnt- 
iron  shell  with  from  %  to  1  in.  of  neat  Rosendale  cement,  or 
cement  mortar  mixed  1  part  of  cement  to  1  part  of  sand.  This 
work  was  generally  done  in  a  central  plant,  or  at  different  points 
along  the  pipe  line,  from  which  the  pipe  was  carried  to  the  trench, 
there  imbedded  in  Rosendale  cement  mortar  laid  along  the  bottom 
of  the  trench,  and  then  covered  over  the  sides  and  top  with  a  %  to 
1-in.  layer  or  casing  of  Rosendale  cement  mortar  plastered  on  with 
rubber  gloves  or  trowel  in  the  hands  of  the  pipe  maker.  The 
trench  was  generally  backfilled  immediately  or  shortly  after  laying 
the  pipe. 

The  pipes  were  made  in  lengths  of  9  ft.,  and  the  joints  between 
the  pipes  were  made  by  means  of  a  sleeve  of  wrought  iron  with 
inner  and  outer  casing  of  cement,  or  by  making  the  pipe  tapering  so 
that  the  end  of  one  pipe  was  fitted  into  the  end  of  the  next.  In  the 

*Extract  from  a  paper  by  Leonard  Metcalf,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E., 
presented  to  the  New  England  Water  Works  Association,  Dec.  9, 
1908,  and  reprinted  in  Engineering-Contracting^  Apr.  7,  1909. 


680  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

larger   mains   the  joints  were  often   plastered   on   the   inside  after 
laying ;  in  the  smaller  ones,  this  was,  of  course,  not  attempted. 

The  Phipps  patent  pipe  was  generally  made  and  coated  without 
as  well  as  within  with  a  %  to  1-in.  layer  of  cement  or  cement 
mprtar,  the  outer  coating  being  held  in  place  by  a  thin  sheet  of 
wrought  iron  which  subsequently  rusted  out  in  the  trench.  This 
outer  sheet  was  of  distinct  advantage,  however,  as  a  protection  to 
the  outer  cement  coating  in  the  handling  and  laying  of  the  pipe. 

In  a  few  cases  cast-iron  bells  and  spigots  have  been  riveted  to  the 
wrought-iron  sheets  before  making  the  pipe,  and  the  joints  have 
then  been  made  in  the  ordinary  manner  with  lead  tightly  calked  in 
place  or  by  the  use  of  cement  mortar. 

More  recently  under  the  Phipps  patent,  a  type  of  cast-iron  ring 
has  been  developed  which  is  driven  home  in  each  end  of  the  pipe, — 
one  of  the  rings  being  a  female  ring,  the  other  a  male  ring — thus 
more  rigidly  holding  the  end  of  the  pipe  and  preventing  injury  to 
it  in  transportation  and  laying,  and  incidentally  making  more  con- 
venient the  placing  of  the  outer  cement  coating  of  the  pipe,  which 
is  made  of  grout  poured  into  the  mold  between  the  inner  and  outer 
sheets,  with  the  pipe  standing  on  end.  The  joint  between  pipes  is 
made  finally  by  the  use  of  a  sleeve  as  heretofore. 

So  far  as  the  writer  is  aware  no  cast-iron  has  thus  far  been 
developed  which  has  proven  thoroughly  satisfactory  and  advan- 
tageous from  the  standpoint  of  economy. 

It  is  perhaps  worthy  of  note  that  while  blue  enameled  wrought- 
iron  sheets  imported  from  England  were  used  in  many  of  the  early 
installations,  in  making  the  later  ones  steel  has  been  substituted 
at  some  saving  in  cost,  though  not  in  durability. 

Plymouth^  Mass. — Plymouth  is  a  town  of  about  11,000  inhabitants 
and  has  had  a  water  supply  since  1776.  Until  1855  the  water  was 
supplied  to  the  town  by  a  private  company  and  the  pipes  used  were 
wooden  logs  with  holes  bored  in  them.  In  1855  the  town  pur- 
chased the  plant  from  the  company,  and  the  use  of  cement-lined 
pipe  dates  from  that  period. 

At  that  time  about  16,000  ft.  of  10-in.  pipe  was  laid  and  several 
thousand  feet  of  8-in.,  6-in.  and  4-in.  pipe  were  laid  for  the  distri- 
bution system.  Practically  all  of  the  pipe  laid  at  that  time  is  still 
in  use. 

The  pipe  as  then  manufactured  consisted  of  a  sheet-iron  shell 
about  9  ft.  in  length,  lined  on  the  inside  with  about  %  in.  of 
cement  mortar,  composed  of  cement  and  sand  in  proportions  of 
1  to  1.  The  pipe  was  then  laid  in  a  bed  of  cement  mortar  in  the 
trench,  ends  butted  together,  with  a  steel  sleeve  or  collar  at  each 
joint.  The  top  and  sides  of  the  pipe  were  then  covered  with  two 
or  more  inches  of  cement  mortar,  all  of  the  same  proportions  as 
used  for  the  lining,  and  a  cement-mortar  joint  was  made  at  each 
joint  of  the  pipe. 

This  pipe  is  still  in  use  and  withstands  a  varying  pressure  in 
different  sections,  from  a  few  pounds  to  about  50  Ibs. 

In    1900,   somewhat   over   40   miles  of  pipe   from   4   to   20   ins.    in 


WATER-WORKS.  681 

diameter  was  in  use.  At  this  time  a  change  in  the  method  of 
making  the  pipe  was  introduced,  and  for  the  past  seven  years  all 
extensions  have  been  made  with  a  pipe  manufactured  in  the  local 
water-works  shop,  which  is  furnished  with  mechanical  devices  and 
power  machinery  necessary  for  economical  manufacture. 

The  following  description  will  make  the  present  method  of  con- 
struction clear.  The  pipe  consists  of  a  shell,  a  jacket,  male  and 
female  rings,  and  sleeves.  The  shells  and  jackets  are  of  soft  steel 
and  are  received  at  the  shop  in  flat  rectangular  sheets  of  proper 
size  and  gage.  For  the  shells  of  18-in.  pipe  about  30  tons  of  steel 
sheets  of  No.  13  gage  were  used,  at  a  cost  of  about  $50  per  ton 
for  the  sheets. 

The  gage  of  the  sheets  used  for  the  shells  of  pipes  of  different 
sizes  is  as  follows: 

24-in 12  gage  10-in 17  gage 

18-in 13  gage  8-in 18  gage 

16-in 13  gage  6-in 19  gage 

12-in 15  gage  4-in 20  gage 

The  jackets  are  all  No.  26  gage  iron.  The  operation  of  making 
the  pipe  is  as  follows : 

The  shells  are  punched  in  a  punching  machine.  The  spacing  of 
the  rivet  holes  is  %-in.  c.  to  c.,  the  edge  of  the  rivet  hole  being 
%-in.  from  the  edge  of  the  sheet.  The  sheets  are  then  put  into 
the  rolls  and  given  a  semi-circular  form,  as  two  sheets  are  used 
for  the  manufacture  of  one  shell  for  the  18-in.  pipe.  After  being 
rolled,  the  shells  are  riveted  by  hand,  using  816  rivets  with  a 
3%-lb.  hammer,  on  a  stake,  so-called,  which  is  simply  a  bar  of  iron 
about  10  ft.  long,  the  upper  surface  of  which  is  curved  to  approxi- 
mately the  same  radius  as  the  shell  of  the  pipe  which  is  to  be 
riveted.  The  jackets  are  punched,  rolled  and  riveted  in  precisely 
the  same  manner  as  the  shells  and  are  1  y%  ins.  larger  in  diameter. 

The  rings  are  of  cast-iron,  a  male  ring  f  i-  one  end  of  the  shell 
and  a  female  ring  for  the  other,  the  female  ring  being  concave  and 
the  male  ring  convex,  thus  enabling  a  very  tight  joint  to  be  made 
when  the  pipes  are  fitted  together  in  the  trench.  About  thirty  tons 
of  these  rings  were  used  in  the  manufacture  of  16  and  18-in.  pipf 
during  the  past  year  and  the  cost  of  the  rings  was  4  cts.  per  Ib. 

The  next  operation,  after  tho  shells  are  riveted,  is  the  fitting  in 
of  the  rings,  and  as  they  are  made  just  for  a  driving  fit  into  the 
shell  they  are  driven  in  by  use  of  the  maul.  After  the  rings  are  in 
place  the  shells  for  the  18-in.,  16-in.  and  14-in.  pipes  are  lined  by 
hand,  and  the  smaller  sizes  of  shell  from  12-in.  to  4-in.  are  lined 
by  means  of  a  revolving  cone.  Neat  Rosendale  cement  is  used  in 
lining.  About  3,000  bbls.  of  cement  have  been  used  during  the  past 
year  in  the  manufacture  of  pipe,  and  the  cost  was  $1.20  per  bbl., 
delivered  at  our  shop. 

When  the  shells  are  ready  to  be  lined  by  hand  they  are  placed 
horizontally  on  two  horses.  A  man  stands  at  each  end  of  the  pipe 
with  a  long-handled  pallet  knife,  so-called,  to  spread  the  cement 
smoothly  in  the  pipe.  This  knife  is  simply  a  flat  blade  about  1% 
ins.  wide  and  4  ins.  in  length,  with  a  handle  about  4  ft.  long.  The 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


tnC  as  eg  co  in  as  •**<  co  I-H 

O  <D  ddodd  rHi-H  I-H 
ft  ««• 

ooasas^ooosoo 
^  ascoeg^ooco-^eg 

P   0  00  CO  t-  00  0^00 

eg"     co"         «Teg"d 

8/9-                         rH        rH 

•  oininasooegego 
£  co  eg  T»<  o  o  •<*<  t-  co 

to.d    r+J 

!-.  -X>    —  < 
03     .    CO0 

Joeg 
i-H  rH 

02                  <J 

Includes  4  hydran 
and  changing  2 
services. 

rrt  rH  oo  oo  t—  t-  in  co  in 
j  in  eg  oo  I-H  I-H  as  in  •* 

§     |d  S!o 

rH  os  eg  in  ^  «o  «^i 
-*  os  o  o  eg  m  rH 

.2  i-iin«ococoooo 

H?             U   OJ    rHrH 
£                      ft   >»• 
P 

rH  d  rH  rH  C<5  rH  C<l 

O  eg  rH  as  in  t~  ^ 

$  r^  rH  d  eg  eg  in  in  oo 
PH  e/Sh     I-H          rH     T-I 

U                  "rf    ^«^ 

2            •  <->  coco 
p^              O  int- 

t-  os  -^  co  co  rH  in 
egc-ooosc-OL 
oo  os  in  t-  co  ^  °° 

fi  co  rH  m  rf  eg  o  co  o 
2  co  eg  I-H  in  I-H  06  TJ<  co 

U  »9-                  ,_f     ,-4 

w  ooasegcooooo 
+->  aseg  ^f  oooscoo 
>>  in  eg  CD  d  t^  I-H  co  as 

H                    6'*' 
H           ^       °°° 

&        ^cd  ^^ 
|        v^'oo 

eg  as  in  eg  o  °  o 
eg  as  in  oo  co  o_  fo 

TJH  eg  t^  in  co  to  as 

in  t-  co  oo  eg  °°  t- 

oooooooo 

< 

oj  t~«  as  t—  oo  eg  in  o  o 

H                S  l-o 

c^  ^  ^  ^  d  •*  o 

in  as  co  as  f  w  ^ 

•rj  in  rt<  in  m  m  co  I-H  co 
K  rH      eg          cocoTt< 

s/9"                       rH*      iH 

^^ 

co  o  oo  co  in  ^  ^ 
t-  in  eg  rH  •*  o  oo 

) 

1 

<JJ  int-egegt-ooo 
>  eg  -o-*i  oomooo 

U             aJ  ooco 
ft  egoo 

§      s  :•£ 

co  co  co  co  06  in  •* 
in  o  co  co  eg  as  eg 
i-H  in  as  os  eg  NO 

! 

4 

^  T*<  rH  oo  rH  eg  co  m  as 
CQ  t&                eo     eg 

^         g'^^rHrH 
•^   ^   M    °°.  ^ 

eg  t-  co  oo  o  o  tM 

t-  CO  CO  CO  O  O  i-H 

5 

4 

9 

3 
I 

H 
> 

£J 
q 

q 

i< 

oj  egoo  oooinasas 

1-5    CO  i-H  ^  rH  rH  00  rH  00 

^3  os  eg  o  co  eg  oo  -*f  co 
"3  dco  CD  rH  incgco"i-H 
43  in  oo  Tt<  eg  o  eg  m  in 
02  co  T-H  iH  eg  co  c-  as  t- 
e^"                  co      co 
43 
ti      eg  I-H  c-  1-  T-I  as  co  o 
ry-.j  oocoas  oooooooo 

fa    _  O  -°  g  oo  eg 
O               .  ooo 

O            '  AX 

M                    &    £™ 
^                   ^    00^ 

H          4J 

5                   ^4-5     ^^ 

0  t-  rH  05  CO  •*  rH 

rH  eg  TJ<  rt<  eg  rH  -f 

rH 

•*  CD  as  eg  oo  in  o 
06  in*  ^  "^  06  eg  o 
in  co  co  in  •*  in  e-i 
•<*i  o  rH  oo  eg  in  oo 

eg  t-  co  o  in  I-H  I-H 
as  o  T*I  in  •*  co  as 
egoinininooo 

«<w  eg  •*  o  o  as  TH  I-H  co 

rH  co  eg  <*  co  eg  oo 

j       megineg     oocgt- 

V  OT  co  •*  o  co  eg  co  •*  oo 

eg  oo  co  co  oo  •*  co 

rH                  rHrHr-l 

a>     

Q  oooooooo 

osasasaiasasasas 

as  as 

ooooooo 
as  as  as  as  as  os  a> 

WATER-WORKS.  683 

cement  for  lining  is  mixed  by  hand  in  mixing  boxes,  and  there  are 
two  men  to  mix  for  the  two  men  who  line.  As  the  pipe  lies  on  the 
horses  it  is  lined  for  its  whole  length  and  half  way  up  each  side. 
Then  the  cement  is  allowed  to  set,  after  which  the  pipe  is  rolled 
over  and  the  remaining  half  lined.  After  the  cement  has  been 
smoothly  spread  about  ^-in.  thick,  on  the  inside  of  the  pipe,  and 
irregularities  which  appear  are  corrected  by  the  use  of  the  "nigger- 
head,"  which  is  a  stiff  brush  on  the  end  of  a  long  handle.  This 
brush  in  the  hands  of  a  skillful  workman  can  bring  the  interior 
of  the  cement  pipes  to  a  very  smooth  surface. 

At  this  point  it  may  be  well  to  describe  the  operation  of  lining 
the  smaller  sizes  of  pipe.  The  shells  having  been  punched,  rolled 
and  riveted,  and  rings  put  in  in  precisely  the  same  manner  as  pre- 
viously described,  are  stood  upright  on  an  elevator  which  descends 
into  a  pit.  In  this  pit  is  the  cone,  so-called,  which  has  an  external 
diameter  equal  to  the  internal  diameter  of  the  shell  when  lined — in 
other  Words,  about  an  inch  smaller  in  diameter  than  the  shell — 
placed  and  held  directly  over  it  on  the  elevator.  The  cone  revolves 
on  a  vertical  axis  and  cement  mixed  by  machinery  is  put  in  at  the 
top  of  the  shell  as  it  stands  on  the  elevator  over  the  cone.  The  top 
of  the  cone,  extending  for  a  few  inches  into  the  bottom  of  the 
shell,  holds  the  cement  from  falling  through  into  the  pit.  The 
elevator  holding  the  shell  is  then  lowered  and  the  cone  revolving  at 
the  same  time  spreads  the  cement  smoothly  and  uniformly  on  the 
inside  of  the  shell. 

The  next  operation  is  filling  and  grouting  the  pipe.  The  shells 
are  stood  on  end  around  the  edge  of  a  platform  which  is  about 
6  ft.  above  the  floor.  A  clamp  is  placed  around  the  bottom  of  the 
shell  about  8  ins.  from  the  lower  end,  and  the  jacket  lowered  from 
above  fits  into  the  clamp  at  the  bottom.  The  jacket  is  kept  sym- 
metrical with  the  shell  at  the  bottom  by  means  of  this  clamp,  and 
at  the  top  by  means  of  four  wedges.  The  grout  is  merely  a  mixture 
of  neat  cement  and  water,  mixed  to  such  a  consistency  that  it  will 
pour  readily,  and  is  mixed  by  machinery  in  a  cylindrical  mixer 
which  has  four  paddles.  After  being  thoroughly  mixed,  the  grout 
is  poured  into  a  metal  bucket  which  is  suspended  by  a  chain  with  a 
wheel  and  is  carried  on  a  track  around  the  platform.  The  grout 
is  poured  from  the  bucket  between  the  shell  and  jacket  of  the 
pipe  that  has  been  stood  around  the  edge  of  the  platform.  After 
the  grout  has  been  poured,  the  pipes  are  allowed  to  set  twelve  hours, 
when  the  cement  is  usually  hard  enough  to  permit  of  handling 
them.  The  pipes  are  then  loaded  upon  a  truck,  taken  to  the  yard, 
cleaned,  and  painted  with  a  coal-tar  paint.  After  staying  in  the 
yard  about  two  weeks  they  are  sufficiently  hard  to  permit  of  being 
loaded  upon  a  wagon  and  carted  to  the  trench. 

Tables  VI  and  VII  show  respectively  the  cost  of  making  and 
laying  the  largest  cement-lined  pipes  which  have  been  ma  at 
Plymouth.  Town  labor,  only,  is  used,  and  $2  is  the  wage  pa,  or 
a  working  day  of  eight  hours,  for  each  laborer.  The  foreman  re- 
ceives $3. 

The   pipe-making   gang   numbers   about    16   men,    but   only   4   are 


684 


HAXDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


TABLE  VIII. — COST  OF  BUILDING   60,221    FT.    24-lN.   WROUGHT   IRON 
CEMENT-LINED  SUPPLY  PIPE  IN   1878-9. 

Rights  of  way,   land  damages,   etc $     1,579.14 

Cast-iron   pipe,    special,   castings,   valves,   etc 5,024.08 

Wrought-iron  sheets  for  pipe : 

441,502   Ibs.    at    2.43    cts... $10,728.50 

1,449,562   Ibs.    at    2.30    cts 33,339.92 

44,068.42 

Making  pipes  9   ft.  long: 
1,593  pieces  at  $2.15  and 

5,073  pieces    at     $2.00 13,570.95 

Making  joint  rings,   inside  rings  and  special  rings : 

7,061    rings,    weighing    646,310    Ibs.,    at    1.95    cts.,    ap- 
proximately,  per   Ib 12,615.14 

Total  labor,  24,775  days,  at  $1.28,  approximate  average; 
day   labor    being   paid   from    $1    to    $1.25  ;     foremen, 

$3.50 '. ...      31,807.11 

Cement,    20,621    bbls.    Rosendale 20,180.50 

Freight,    cartage,    etc 4,148.91 

Engineering,     incidentals     and     miscellaneous     expenses, 

amounting   to    8.32    per   cent,   approximately 10,919.67 

$143,913.92 
Deduct   land   damages    1,579.14 

Net    amount    $142,334.78 

Cost  per  foot    $2.36 

Equivalent  cost  per  foot  for  year   1908    (estimated)  ....  $3.02 


TABLE    IX. — COST    OF    BUILDING    18,450    FT.    26-lN.    WROUGHT-IRON 


CEMENT-LINED    PIPE. 


Per  Ib., 

cts. 

Wrought-iron    sheets,    No.    12,    Bir- 
mingham gage,    635,679   Ibs.,   at..    3.32 
Trimming,  rolling,   riveting  and  fin- 
ishing   2,066    pipe    9    ft.    long,    at 

$2.50,   equivalent  to    0.78 

Rings     0.90 


Total,    1875-6     

Total,  1908  

Cement  (Rosendale),  74,071 

$1.36  and  $1.53%  per  bbl 

Contract  for  laying 

Valves  

Specials  

Lumber  

Contract  work  . 


5.0 

4.4 

bbls.,    at 


Total    

Cost   per   foot    (including   11.4    per   cent 
for  engineering  and  contingencies) 


Actual  cost 
in  1875-6. 

$21,230 


5,020 
5,590 


10,170 

28,310 

237 

85 

608 

141 

$71,391 
$3.87 


Equivalent 

prices 
as  of  1908. 

$18,670 


4,430 
4,920 


7,500 

42,465 

237 

85 

1,074 
150 

$79,531 
$4.31 


kept  on  the  regular  gang  and  the  others  are  hired  as  they  are 
needed. 

Portland,  Me. — In  the  years  1868-9  the  Portland  Water  Co.  laid 
a  20-in.  wrought-iron  cement-lined  supply  main,  about  15.2  miles 
long,  from  Sebago  Lake  to  the  city  of  Portland.  Data  as  to  the 
cost  of  this  main  are  unfortunately  lacking. 

In    the    years    1875-9,    however,    a    second   wrought-iron    cement- 


WATER-WORKS. 


685 


TABLE  X. —  ESTIMATE  OF  COST  OF  REPRODUCING  CEMENT-LINED  PIPE 
IN   PORTLAND. 


Cw  Ctf  C  -jj 

3  3  £  C 

tJo-  || 

•«         H 

26-in. 

Cost  of  sheets,  per  lb.. $0.0342     $0.0275 


Cost  of  cement,   per  bbl  1.40 

Cost    of    joint    castings 

per    lb 0.0280 

Cost    of    making      pipe, 

per  lb 0.00756 

Weight  per  ft.,   Ibs 37.0 

Bbls.  cement  per  foot..   0.405 

Weight  joint  rings,  lb..71.0 

Weight  joint  rings,  per 
ft 8.3 

Cost  per  linear  foot  of: 

Sheets    $1.26 

Making  pipe   0.28 

Joint   castings    0.23 

Cement    0.57 

Gates,   valves,   etc 0.05 

Labor  and   laying....    1.48* 


Sum 


,$3.87 


1.00 
0.0275 


0.0125 


$1.02 
0.46 
0.23 
0.40 
0.04 
2.22 

$4.37 


Total  actual  cost,  in- 
cluding all  special 
obstacles,  engineer- 
ing and  contingen- 
cies   $3.86 

Ratio  of  total  cost  to 
sum  of  items  above 
given  1.00 

Total  estimated  cost, 
including  engineering 
and  contingencies 

Fair  value  to  use  is 
estimate  on  which 
14%  for  engineer- 
ing and  contingen- 
cies is  to  be  added 


$4.37 


3.85 


|§ 


24-in. 20.-in.— 

$0.0233   $0.0275   $0.0275 


0.98 
0.0195 

0.00718 
31.4 

0.342 
91.0 

10.7 

$0.73 
0.23 
0.21 
0.33 
0.08 
0.53 

$2.11 


1.00 

0.0275 

0.0125 


$0.86 
0.39 
0.29 
0.34 
0.07 
0.80 

$2.75 


1.00 
0.0275 

0.0125 
21.0 

0.310 
70.0 

8.2 

$0.58 
0.26 
0.23 
0.31 
0.06 
1.25 

$2.69 


$2.39          

1.13         $1.06 

$3.10  2.85 

2.72  2.50 


*The  contract  price  at  ordinary  depths  of  cut,  and  exclusive  of 
rock,  was  70  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  The  difference,  78  cts.  per  ft.,  repre- 
sents the  additional  allowances  for  extra  depth  and  for  rock  and 
for  tunnel,  and  for  all  contingencies  because  of  the  character  of 
the  ground.  These  additional  costs  would  naturally  be  somewhat 
higher  on  the  26-in.  line  than  on  the  24-in.  line,  and  the  route  of  the 
20-in.  line  covers  substantially  the  same  space  as  that  occupied  by 
both  the  26-in.  and  24-in.  lines. 


686  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

lined  supply  main  was  laid  from  the  lake  to  the  city.  The  upper 
portion  of  this,  approximately  3^  miles  in  length,  was  26  ins.  in 
diameter ;  the  lower  portion,  approximately  11.4  miles  in  length, 
24  ins.  diameter.  The  actual  cost  of  this  compound  main  was. 
fortunately  developed  from  the  books  of  the  company  and  is  given 
in  Tables  VIII  and  IX,  as  some  of  the  unit  costs  to  be  derived 
therefrom  are  interesting  and  valuable. 

It  should  be  stated  that  the  static  pressures  upon  this  supply 
main  are  approximately  as  follows : 

4      miles,  under       0 —  40  Ibs.  per  sq.   in. 

2.7  miles,   under     40 —  60  Ibs.  per   sq.  in. 

4.9  miles,  under     60 —  80   Ibs.  per  sq.   in. 

2.3  miles,   under     80 — 100  Ibs.  per  sq.   in. 

0.9  miles,  under  100—120  Ibs.  per   sq.   in. 

The  main  is  stated  ,to  have  been  built  with  a  factor  of  safety  of 
approximately  3,  out  the  computation  of  the  factor  of  safety  under 
several  assumed  heads  indicates  that  the  actual  factor  of  safety  is 
probably  not  in  excess  of  1.5  at  the  points  of  maximum  pressure, 
assuming  always  static  pressures,  and  ignoring  alike  the  decrease 
in  pressure  due  to  friction  and  the  increase  in  pressure  due  to 
water  hammer  or  other  causes. 

The  cost  of  this  26-in.  pipe  line  was  excessive,  owing  to  deep 
cut  work,  a  considerable  amount  of  which  was  in  quicksand. 

Mr.  Allen  Hazen,  who  was  one  of  the  engineers  retained  by  the 
Water  District  in  the  valuation  of  the  Portland  waterworks,  made 
the  interesting  analysis  of  these  items  of  cost  given  in  Table  X. 

Cost  of  Lining  Iron  Service  Pipes  With  Cement. — Mr.  Fayette  F. 
Forbes  gives  the  following  relative  to  lining  wrought  iron  serv- 
ice pipes  with  cement.  The  pipe  is  bought  in  short  lengths,  16  ft., 
and  is  1  to  2  ins.  diam.  before  lining.  The  lining  reduces  the  diam- 
eter a  little  less  than  ^  in.  Such  pipes  have  given  perfect  satis- 
faction for  25  years  in  Brookline,  Mass.  In  1900  the  cost  of  lining 
a  1-in.  pipe  was  1%  cts.  per  ft.  ;  a  2-in.  pipe,  3  cts.  per  ft.  A  gang 
of  6  men  will  line  4,000  to  5,000  ft.  of  1-in.  pipe  per  day.  The  gang 
is  as  follows: 
1  man  mixing  cement. 
1  man  filling  press  and  overseeing. 

1  man  working  pipes  to  the  press  and  from  the  press  to  the  con- 
ing  frames. 

2  men   (one  at  each  end  of  pipe)   doing  the  coning. 

In  1898  the  cost  of  labor  and  cement  for  lining  9,000  ft.  of  1-in. 
and  3,000  ft.  of  2-in.  pipe  was  as  follows: 

Labor : 

Preparing    pipes    $65.79 

Cementing     66.65 

Grouting     22.66 

Reaming 39.98 

Materials : 

23   bbls.  natural  cement  at  $1.10 25.30 

Coal    for    heating    shop     6.00 

Grand    total    .  .  .$226738 


WATER-WORKS.  687 

Which  gives  1.5  cts.  per  ft.  for  lining  the  1-in.  pipe,  and  3.03  ct& 
per  ft.  for  the  2-in.  pipe. 

A  barrel  of  cement  will  line  and  ground  the  following  lengths : 

1-in.  pipe,  700  ft. 

1^4 -in.  pipe,  500  ft. 

2-in.  pipe,   300  ft. 

Extreme  care  must  be  used  to  get  uniformly  good  results.  The 
following  methods  are  best  :•  Use  wrought  iron  pipe  in  16  ft.  lengths. 
Straighten  all  bent  pipes.  Remove  couplings,  turn  them  around 
and  screw  on  the  other  end,  to  avoid  trouble  in  putting  lengths  to- 
gether. Examine  for  defective  welds.  Run  a  cutting  tool  through 
pipe  'to  remove  scale,  dirt,  and  projections  of  iron  from  the  welds. 
Use  American  natural  cement  for  lining  (Portland  is  too  heavy), 
and  use  it  neat.  Sift  all  cement  to  remove  pieces  of  unground  rock, 
wood,  paper,  etc.  Use  cement  quickly  after  wetting.  One  man 
mixes  cement  and  water,  preparing  only  enough  for  6  pipes  at  a 
time,  and  constantly  working  it  over  to  keep  at  right  thickness. 
If  any  of  the  batch  is  left  over,  throw  it  away.  The  pipes  are 
filled  full  of  the  cement  mortar,  using  a  press  made  by  the  Union 
Water  Meter  Co.,  of  Worcester,  Mass.,  who  also  make  the  cones  and 
other  tools.  Cones  are  passed  through  the  pipe  twice,  and  the 
cement  that  is  pushed  out  is  used  in  the  next  pipe,  except  that 
from  the  last  pipe  filled  by  the  batch  of  cement,  which  is  thrown 
away.  While  the  cone  is  being  drawn  through,  the  pipe  is  slowly 
revolved  to  keep  the  cone  as  nearly  in  the  center  of  the  pipe  as 
possible.  However,  results  are  satisfactory  even  if  the  lining  is 
quite  uneven  in  thickness.  The  cones  are  washed  after  each  pipe  is 
lined.  Before  the  cones  are  drawn  through,  a  piece  of  pipe  12  to 
18  ins.  long  is  screwed  to  each  end  of  the  pipe  to  be  lined,  to  en- 
sure a  perfect  lining  at  the  ends.  After  the  pipes  have  been  lined 
3  to  5  days,  until  the  cement  is  quite  hard,  a  thin  grout  of  cement 
is  run  through  them,  by  elevating  one  end  of  the  pipe  and  pouring 
the  grout  in.  A  rubber  cone  is  then  drawn  through,  leaving  a 
smooth,  impervious  lining.  The  ends  of  the  pipe  are  then  reamed 
out  to  fit  the  composition  ferrules,  and  the  threads  are  cleaned. 
Ferrules  are  made  of  best  steam  metal,  %-in.  diam.  on  the  inside 
(for  a  1-in.  pipe).  Double  ferrules  are  used  where  pipes  are 
screwed  together,  and  single  ferrules  for  connections  at  the  main. 
These  pipes  can  be  bent  without  damage  to  the  lining,  if  care  is 
used. 

Cost  of  Setting  Meters  and  Laying  Service  Pipes.* — Mr.  W.  H. 
Shillinglaw  gives  the  cost  of  setting  water  meters  during  1908 
by  the  Water  Works  Department,  Brandon,  Manitoba,  as  follows : 

Crown    meters    %  in.          %  in.  1  in.        1%  in. 

No.    of    meters    set 499  20  5  2 

Cost   of   labor    $295.85          $20.55          $5.97          $2.60 

Cost   per   meter    0.593  1.02  1.20  1.30 

Cost  of   materials    145.73  10.24  1.84          

Cost   per    meter    0.282  0.51  0.37  

Total   cost  per   meter 0.875  1.53  1.57 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.   20,   1909. 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


These  meters  were  all  set  in  basements  by  day  labor  by  city  em- 
ployes. The  cost  for  %-in.  meters  varied  fiom  20  cts.  to  $2  for 
labor.  A  large  number  of  these  meters  were  installed  on  old  serv- 
ices and  entailed  considerable  alteration  in  service  pipes  and  addi- 
tional expense.  The  cost  of  setting  meters  on  new  services  varied 
from  20  cts.  to  50  cts.  for  labor. 

The  cost  of  laying  water  service  pipes  during  1908  was  as  fol- 
lows : 

%  inch.        % 

No.    of   services    92 

No.   of  feet  laid    3,051 

Cost   of   labor    $1,030.73          $ 

Cost  per  ft 0.34 

Cost  per   service   11.38 

Cost  of  supplies    857.38 

Cost  per  service    9.32 

Average  length  of  service,   feet 33 

These    services    were    laid    in    10-ft.    trenches    in    sand, 


inch. 
7 

290 

96.69 

0.333 

13.81 

121.90 

17.41 

41 

gravel, 


some  dry  and  a  considerable  number  very  wet  and  requiring  pump- 


CITY  ENGINEER'S  OFFICE. 

installing.  .  . 

I  beg  to  report  the  following 
.     .  .              .       ...  New  Service  .  . 

Brandon,  June  23,  1908. 
labor  and  material  used  in 
for  Premises  

repairing 
No  

.  .  ,16th... 

.  .  Street 

for  Mr.....  . 
Installed  by 

.  .  .  .Giddings  &  Wymi 
Walker 

in  .  .  . 

Ser.  No  1162  

Labor 

131  hrs.  at  25          % 

3  .37 

59 

hrs.  at  17  $        $ 

10\.32 

Length  of  trench 

44  it. 

Materials 

44     ft. 

in. 

J     lead  pipe      $ 

6  .16 

ft. 

in. 

lead  pipe 

ft. 

in. 

iron  pipe 

ft. 

in. 

iron  pipe 

/ 

Jin. 

Corp'n  Cocks 

.99 

/ 

J  in. 

Kerb  Cocks 

1  .85 

1 

Service  Box 

1\.87 

in. 

Unions 

in. 

Elbows 

in 

Check  Valve 

* 

in.  Lead  Pipe  —  6  Ibs. 

per  yd. 

in.  Lead  Pipe  —  10  Ibs. 

per  yd. 

I 

24\.56 

Signed  

Wm.  Smith,  Per 

R.M.... 

Foreman. 

Fig.  6.    Blank  for  Reporting  Cost  of  Setting  Water  Meters. 


WATER-WORKS.  689 

ing.  Refilling  was  well  rammed.  The  cost  of  labor  includes  mak- 
ing up  service,  tapping  main,  etc.  All  work  was  done  by  day  labor 
by  city  employes.  The  cost  of  labor  varied  from  26  to  50  cts.  per 
lin.  ft.  The  %-in.  services  were  all  made  up  for  two  Mj-in. 
branches  to  serve  two  premises. 

The  form  employed  for  reporting  costs  is  shown  in  Fig.  6  ;  this 
form  was  used  for  both  services  and  meters,  the  foreman  simply 
filled  in  the  proper  words. 

Cost  of  Meters  and  Setting,  Cleveland,  O. — Mr.  Edward  W.  Bemis 
gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  setting  %-in.  Trident 
meters  in  Cleveland,  Ohio,  during  1903.  Some  20,000  meters  of 
this  size  had  been  set  during  1902  to  1903  inclusive.  A  %-in.  meter 
costs  $6.50,  and  the  cost  of  setting  13,400  meters  in  1903  averaged 
$6.87,  making  a  total  cost  of  $13.37.  These  meters  were  set  as 
follows : 

857  meters  in  brick  vaults. 

3,174    meters  in   basement   settings. 

9,378  meters  in  sewer  pipe  settings. 

The  cost  of  these  different  types  of  settings  was  as  follows: 

Sewer  Pipe  Setting. 

4  ft.  of  15  in.  sewer  pipe $1.46 

Frost    cover    0.18 

Ring  and   cover    1.42 

2  ells 0.12 

2     couplings 0.08 

7  ft.  of   %-in.  pipe   0.35 

Labor 4.01 

Total     .$7.62 

Basement  Setting. 

Brick $0.12 

Cement     0.05 

Cover    0.30 

Fittings     0.25 

Labor     ....    3.23 


Total     $3.95- 

Brick  Vault  Setting. 

350    brick    $2.45 

1%    sacks    cement    0.38 

2    couplings 0.08 

2    ells     0.12 

1  nipple 0.06 

1   union    0.24 

1  ring  and  cover    3.21 

Labor    2.92 

Total     $9.46 

One  meter  reader  is  employed  for  every  1,000  meters,  and  he  is 
accompanied  by  a  laborer,  when  reading  meters,  to  turn  off  the 
water  where  there  appears  to  be  waste,  while  the  meter  reader 
waits  at  the  meter  to  detect  running  water.  Each  meter  is  read 
every  6  weeks  from  Mar.  1  to  Dec.  1.  The  cost  of  operation  per 
meter  was  as  follows  in  1903 : 

Interest  and  depreciation,   estimated  at   8%  of  $13.37 $1.07 

Reading   meters   and   clerical    work    1.10 


Total     $2.27 


690  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

The  prices  of  meters  were: 

%-in.   meter    $6.5G 

%-in.    meter 9.45 

1-in.    meter 13.50 

The  gang  for  basement  setting  is  composed  of  4  meter  setters  (at 
27%  cts.  per  hr.),  and  4  laborers  (at  21  cts.  per  hr.),  and  a  horse 
and  vehicle  with  driver  (at  30  cts.),  under  a  foreman  (at  42  cts.). 
These  men  work  in  pairs,  2  men  at  each  meter,  and  set  a  meter  in 
4  hrs.  on  the  average,  the  range  being  1  to  6  hrs.,  depending  on 
the  arrangement  of  the  plumbing,  etc.  The  opposition  of  plumbers 
to  the  use  of  laborers  and  meter  setters  was  overcome  by  employ- 
ing plumbers  to  wipe  all  lead  joints.  The  cost  of  setting  meters 
in  1907  was  as  follows: 

No.  set.     Av.  cost. 

j-in.   meter  in  basement    2,929         $  4.22 

s-in.   meter  on   sewer  pipe.......         1  5.00 

i.    meter    in    brick    vault 4,368  13.47 

i.    meter    in    basement 14  6.44 

_.-in.    meter    in    brick    vault 9  18.01 

L-in.   meter   in   basement 50  7.13 

1-in.    meter  in   brick  vault 37  15.71 

1%-in.   meter  in   basement 10  7.94 

1%-in.   meter   in   brick  vault 10  24.42 

2-in.  meter  in  basement 6  9.96 

2-in.    meter   in   brick  vault. 27  21.97 

3-in.    meter   in  basement 3  30.71 

3-in.  meter  in  brick  vault 10  31.36 

4-in.   meter  in   basement 2  23.83 

4-in.  meter  in  brick  vault 8  46.78 

6-in.   meter   in   brick   vault 1  58.01 

Cost  of  Setting  Meters  and  Maintenance,  Rochester,  N.  Y.— Mr. 
George  W.  Rafter  gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  set- 
ting and  resetting  meters  and  their  maintenance  in  Rochester,  N. 
Y.  The  cost  of  setting  11,500  new  meters,  during  1893  to  1905, 
averaged  $3.24  per  meter,  although  there  were  many  years  when 
the  average  was  $2.25  or  less.  The  cost  includes  the  proportion- 
ate part"  of  the  salary  of  superintendent  and  meter  clerk,  and,  as 
the  average  was  only  800  new  meters  set  per  year,  this  element  of 
cost  would  naturally  form  a  large  percentage  of  the  total. 

About  once  in  12  years  a  meter  has  to  be  removed  and  repairs 
made.  The  cost  of  removing,  repairing  and  resetting  11.000  met- 
ers averaged  $4-80  per  meter,  which  is  equivalent  to  about  40  cts. 
per  year  per  meter.  This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  current 
maintenance  and  inspection  of  meters  in  place,  which  averaged  37 
cts.  per  meter  per  year  for  12  years,  although  during  the  last  6 
years  it  averaged  only  14  cts.  per  meter  per  year,  the  year  of  1904 
being  only  9  cts.  per  meter. 

The  first  cost  of  each  meter  appears  to  have  been  about  $10. 
From  this  it  appears  that  repairs  and  resetting  have  averaged  7.7% 
(77  cts.)  of  the  first  cost  of  each  meter  per  year. 

During  the  year  1905,  there  were  36,100  meters  in  use  In  Albany, 
Kansas  City,  Lowell,  and  Rochester,  and  4,100,  or  11%,  of  these 
were  removed,  repaired  and  reset. 


WATER-WORKS.  691 

Cost  of  Operating  and  Maintaining  Meters,  Reading,  Pa.*— The 
cost  of  operating  and  maintaining  the  meter  system  of  Reading, 
Pa.,  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  April,  1908,  was  $3,568.12,  for  an 
average  of  2,012  meters  in  service.  This  is  at  the  rate  of  $1.77  per 
meter  per  year;  in  the  preceding  fiscal  year  the  rate  was  $1.75  per 
meter.  The  unit  costs  for  the  several  sub-divisions  of  operation 
and  maintenance  are  given  by  Mr.  Emil  L.  Nuebling,  superintendent 
and  engineer  of  water  works,  as  follows: 

Repairs    $0.878 

Clerical  service    553 

Reading     193 

Delivering  bills    087 

General    test    039 

Sundry   work    015 

Stationery,    etc 009 

Total $1.774 

The  cost  of  repairs  increased  84  per  cent  over  the  previous  year, 
due  principally  to  extensive  repairs  to  large  meters.  All  other  costs 
were  lowered  considerably. 

Cost  of  Placing  Hydrants,  Chicago.t  —  The  standard  hydrant 
adopted  by  the  city  of  Chicago  is  the  Creiger ;  it  constitutes  about 
80  per  cent  of  the  total  number  of  hydrants  in  use  in  that  city. 
These  hydrants  are  made  by  the  city  at  its  own  shops.  The  fol- 
lowing data  relate  to  the  placing  of  several  double  hydrants  of  the 
above  type,  the  work  being  done  in  1906  by  city  forces.  The  costs 
include  excavating  for  the  connection  with  the  main,  excavating  for 
the  hydrant  base,  placing  hydrant,  backfilling,  and  making  the 
connections.  The  trench  as  a  usual  thing  averaged  about  5  ft.  in 
depth.  The  wages  of  labor  per  8-hour  day  and  cost  of  materials 
were  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

Assistant   foreman    $3.62 

Timekeeper     3.50 

Calker     3.00 

Laborers    2.50 

Double  teams  were  hired  at  the  rate  of  $4.50  per  day.  Single 
teams  were  usually  furnished  by  the  city  and  charged  for  at  the 
rate  of  $1  per  day. 

The  prices  paid   for  materials  were  as  follows: 

Pipe,   6  in 49c  per  lin.  ft. 

Lead     6  %c  per  Ib. 

Gaskets     5c-per  Ib. 

Coal    14  c  per  Ib. 

Special    castings    2^c  per  Ib. 

The  coal  was  used  in  the  furnace  for  melting  the  lead  for  the 
joints. 

•Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   21,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Am-il  24.   1907. 


)2  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

Hydrant  at  Commercial  Ave.,  N.  E.,  and  83d  PI. : 

Labor :  Total. 

1  Assistant  foreman    $  3.62 

%    Timekeeper    87 

2  Calkers    6.00 

6   Laborers    15.00 

I  Single  team    1.00 

Total  labor  $26.42 

Material  : 

Pipe,  12  ft.  of  6  in $  5.88 

50    Ibs.   lead    3.25 

Gaskets 10 

Coal,    50  Ibs 12 

Specials,  220  Ibs 5.50 

Total    material     ..$14.85 

Grand  total    $41.27 

The  excavation  was  in  clay,  which  was  hard  digging. 
Hydrant  at  21st  St.,  between  Blue  Island  and  Ashland  Aves.: 
Labor :  Total. 

Assistant   foreman $  3.62 

Calker 3.00 

II  Laborers    27.50 

Total    labor    $34.12 

Material : 

Pipe,    14   ft.   6   in $  6.86 

Lead,    90    Ibs 5.85 

Gaskets    25 

Coal,    100    Ibs 25 

Specials,   237   Ibs 5.92 


Total    material     $19.13 

Grand   total    $53.25 

The  excavation  was  in  clay,  and  was  hard  digging. 
Hydrant  at  Rosemont  Ave.,   140  ft.   south  of  Clark: 
Labor :  Total. 

Assistant   foreman    $  3.62 

*4    Timekeeper    87 

2     Calkers     6.00 

5   Laborers    12.50 

Double   team    4.50 


Total    labor    $27.49 

Material : 

Pipe,  32  ft.  6  in $15.68 

Lead,   70   Ibs 4.55 

Gaskets     .15 

Coal,    25    Ibs 06 


Total    material    $20.44 

Grand   total    $47.93 

The  excavation  was  in  sand,   which  was  easy  digging. 
Hydrant  at  northeast  corner  24th  PI.  and  Stewart  Ave.; 
Labor :  Total 

2    Calkers    $6.00 

6   Laborers    15.00 

%    single   team    .50 


Total    labor    $21, 50 


WATER-WORKS.  698 

Material : 

Pipe,  38  ft.   8  in          $18.62 

Leau,    180   Ibs 11.70 

Gaskets    50 

Coal,    150    Ibs 37 

Specials,    543   Ibs 13.57 

Total    material     $66.26 

Grand    total     $87.76 

The  excavation  was  in  clay,  which  was  hard  digging. 

Hydrant  at  Winona  and  Winchester  Ave. : 

Labor :  TotaL 

%   Timekeeper   $  0.87 

Calker    3.00 

3   Laborers    7.50 

Va    Single  team    50 

Total   labor    $11.87 

Material : 

Pipe,    5    ft.    6    in $  2.45 

Lead,    30  Ibs.    1.95 

Gaskets 05 

Coal,    25    Ibs 06 

Specials,    290    Ibs 7.25 

Total  material    $11.76 

Grand    total     $23.63 

The  excavation  was  in  sand,  and  was  easy  digging. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Vaults  for  Valves.*— Mr.  Carroll  Beale  gives  the 
following : 

The  system  of  concrete  construction  for  valve  casing  founda- 
tions described  and  illustrated  here  has  been  in  successful  opera- 
tion in  the  District  of  Columbia  for  nearly  a  year.  The  founda- 
tion, Fig.  7,  consists  of  concrete  rings  3  ft.  in  diameter,  8  ins.  and 
4  ins.  high,  3  ins.  thick  and  reinforced  with  16-gage  expanded 
metal.  These  rings  have  proven  to  be  not  only  more  economical 
than  the  old  brick  construction,  but  the  department  is  now  enabled 
to  build  a  foundation  in  fiv  minutes,  whereas  with  the  brick  con- 
struction one  whole  day  wata  required  by  a  bricklayer  and  his  force 
to  construct  a  foundation  4  ft.  deep. 

To  illustrate  the  economy  of  these  rings,  take  for  example  a 
masonry  foundation  4  ft.  deep  of  brick.  This  required  the  services 
of  a  bricklayer  and  force  one  day  of  eight  hours.  The  bricklayer's 
force  account  and  material  used  were  as  follows: 

1  bricklayer   at    $5    per   day $  5.00 

2  laborers  at  $1.75   per   day 3.50 

Cart  and   driver    $2.25    per   day 2.25 

420  red  brick  at   $9  per  M 3.78 

%   bbls.  of  Portland  cement  at  $1.79 1.31 

%  cu.  yd.  sand  at  $1.20 ^0.40 

Total     ,  $16.24 


•Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   18,    1908. 


6i>4  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

For  a  4-ft.  foundation  of  concrete,  six  8-in.  rings  are  required. 
These  rings  in  place  cost  50  cts.  each  ;  therefore  the  cost  would  be 
$3,  as  against  $16.24  for  the  brick  construction.  It  is  therefore 
demonstrated  that  the  cost  of  the  concrete  foundation  is  less  than 
20  per  cent  the  cost  of  the  old  brick  construction,  not  taking  into 
consideration  the  time  lost  by  the  bricklayer  in  moving  about  the 
city. 

The  ring,    8   ins.   high,   cares   for  a  height  formerly  occupied   by 


Grade 


. 

-T 


JP  Gacje  Expanded  Metal 


Concrete  Rinqs 


•  .61  o 


Wrier  Mam 


Fig.  7. — Concrete  Vault. 

6  sq.  ft  of  brickwork  9  ins.  thick,  or  72  brick,  which  at  $9  per  M 
is  equal  to  65  cts.,  so  it  may  readily  be  seen  that  the  cost  of  these 
rings  is  less  than  the  cost  of  the  brick  alone  without  mortar  and 
without  labor,  which  last  item  amounted  to  ?10.75  per  day  current 
expense. 

An  itemized  cost  of  the  rings  is  as  follows: 
0.0767  bbl.   of  cement  =   1/13  bbl. 
0.048   cu.   yd.   gravel  =   1/20  yd. 
0.024  cu.  yd.  sand  =  1/40  yd. 


WATER-WORKS. 


695 


The  cost  of  one  ring  therefore  is: 

Cts. 

Concrete     25 

Labor     " 

Steel    16 

Total 48 

Placing    

Total  for  ring  in  place 50 


-i—  •»—  — — np 

ill 


Elevation  on  C~C 


Use  at  B. 

4  Req. 
Fig.  8. — Cast  Iron  Forms. 

To  sum  up  the  relative  merits  of  the  brick  and  concrete  con- 
struction the  use  of  concrete  saves  the  department  a  current  ex- 
pense of  $10.75  per  day,  avoids  the  delays  attending  brick  construc- 
tion, is  as  readily  removed  as  the  brick,  and  is  much  stronger. 

These  rings  are  made  in  the  cast-iron  forms  shown  by  Fig.  8,  on 
a  smooth  platform,  and  one  man  is  able  to  make  four  8-in.  rings 
in  one  hour. 

As  illustrative  of  the  economy  in  reinforced  concrete  vault  con- 
struction, the  accompanying  drawings,  Figs.  9  to  11,  and  Table  XI, 
give  examples  of  the  types  of  vaults  now  being  constructed  in  the 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


District  of  Columbia.  Three  of  these  vaults,  5  ft.  10  ins.  by  5  ft. 
6  ins.  by  11  ft.  7  ins.,  5  ft.  9  ins.  by  5  ft.  by  9  ft.,  and  6  ft.  2  ins.  by 
8  ft.  10  ins.  by  6  ft.,  have  just  been  completed  at  New  Jersey  Ave. 
and  B  St.,  just  north  of  the  United  States  Capitol,  at  a  cost  of  $50 
each,  excluding  the  cost  of  the  lumber  which  will  be  reused.  The 
roofs  of  these  vaults  have  an  ultimate  strength  of  about  3,500  Ibs. 
per  sq.  ft.,  and  the  flat  construction  permits  of  at  least  2  ft.  more 


Cnq-Contr 
Fig.  9. — Concrete  Vault  for  Horizontal  Valve. 

This  last  is  a  very  important  item  where  the  mains  are  shallow 
head  room  than  can  possibly  be  had  where  a  brick  arch  is  used, 
and  where  every  inch  of  head  room  counts.  The  vaults  may  be 
constructed  for  approximately  one-third  the  cost  of  the  brick  vaults 
and  have  a  much  greater  factor  of  safety  than  the  old  brick  vaults 
using  13-in.  walls.  The  drawings  and  tables  explain  fully  the 
method  of  construction  without  further  description. 

Cost  of  Dipping  Pipes. — In  a  very  interesting  article  by  Thomas 


WATER-WORKS. 


697 


INFORCED 
N,  D.  C. 


TIE 

WA 


MENSIONS  AND  QU 
HORIZONTAL  VAL 


Horizont 
in  W 


'UOI^BA 

jo  -spX  'no 


^ABJQJO'SpA  '1 


-SPA  ' 


-uoD  jo  -SPA   "no 


'SUl  ' 

'jo  Su 


.9 


•sui  'joo-g  uispo-g 


•^.j  'apisuj 

P 


«D  t^  O5  ?O  OO  O'IM  •*  O  W  ^O'OJ1 


'^rriveo 


10  "3  Ifl  CO  <n  CO  C 


JO      SUOIS 
U301IQ      ['BUI 


uio;^og  o; 


698 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


H.  Wiggin,  in  the  Journal  of  the  Association  of  Engineering  So- 
cieties, 1899,  Vol.  22,  on  the  Manufacture  and  Inspection  of  Cast- 
iron  Pipes,  the  following  data  are  given  as  to  the  cost  of  dipping 
pipes.  To  coat  one  12-ft.  length  of  48-in.  cast-iron  pipe  costs  ap- 
proximately as  follows  for  different  coating  materials : 

3%   gals,  crude  tar  at  $3  per  bbl.  of  52  gals $0.22 

5       gals,  pitch  at   $5   per   bbl.   of   52   gals 0.50 

iya  gals,  tar  varnish  at   10    cts 0.15 

The   first   two   are   applied   by   dipping,   but   the   tar  varnish    Is 
applied  with  a  brush. 

Busty  pipes  will  not  hold  a  coating. 


Li_^Li  n 

EntpContr 
Fig.   10. — Concrete  Vault  for  Vertical  Valve. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Water  Pipe,  Pittsburg,  Pa.— Mr.  J.  D.  Under- 
wood gives  the  following:  An  8-in.  cast-iron  water  pipe  at  Pitts- 
burg  became  coated  with  0.32  in.  of  scale  during  14  yrs.  of  use  so 
that  the  pressure  at  the  end  was  34  Ibs.  below  the  theoretical  static 
head.  The  contract  price  for  cleaning  3,300  ft.  of  pipe  was  24  cts. 
per  ft.,  at  which  price  the  contractor  made  a  very  large  profit, 
as  will  be  seen  from  the  following  data. 

The  pipe  was  cleaned  in  lengths  averaging  about  800  ft,  the 
range  being  400  to  1,200  ft.  depending  on  local  conditions.  The 
pipe  was  cut  at  intervals  of  800  ft.  (average),  and  a  special  Y 


WATER-WORKS. 


699 


connection  inserted,  into  which  the  cleaner  could  be  introduced, 
These  special  Ys  are  so  made  that  a  cover  can  be  bolted  to  them, 
should  an  emergency  arise  necessitating  putting  the  pipe  line  into 
service.  In  order  to  get  a  wire  cable  through  the  pipe,  a  "go-devil" 
is  first  run  through.  It  consists  of  two  cones  on  an  iron  rod,  each 
cone  about  12  ins.  long,  and  spaced  8  ins.  apart.  The  cones  are 
Inserted  blunt  end  foremost.  To  the  "go-devil"  is  fastened  a  No. 


.-  Corrte 

Fig.   11. — Concrete  Vault  for  Vertical  Valve. 

22  flexible  wire  cable.  The  water  is  turned  on  and  forces  the 
"go-devil"  through  the  pipe  to  the  next  special  Y.  The  water  is 
then  shut  off  and  a  %-in.  Wire  cable  is  drawn  back  through  the 
pipe  by  means  of  a  one-man  winch.  The  cleaner,  or  scraper,  is 
fastened  to  the  cable  and  is  drawn  through  the  pipe  by  a  four-man 
winch,  the  water  washing  the  broken  scale  out  of  the  pipe  ahead 
of  it. 


700  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  time  required  to  clean  an  800-ft  section  was  as  follows: 

Mins. 

Running    the    "go-devil"    through 3 

Pulling    cable    through 38 

Pulling    cleaner    through 48 

Total     89 

The  following  gang  was  engaged  for  6  days,  the  wages  being 
assumed : 

Per  day. 

7  laborers   at    $1.50 110.50 

1  mechanic 3.50 

1  foreman     5.00 

Total     119-00 

The  labor,  therefore,  cost  less  than  $120  for  3,300  ft.  cleaned, 
or  less  than  3.7  cts.  per  ft.  It  is  stated  that  even  this  cost  could 
have  been  cut  almost  in  two  had  it  been  possible  to  shut  off  the 
water  continuously,  but,  as  the  pipe  line  was  the  main  source  of 
water  supply  for  a  considerable  district,  the  water  had  to  be  turned 
on  at  intervals,  delaying  the  work  2  or  3  days. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Water  Pipe,  Halifax.— Mr.  E.  H.  Keating  gives 
the  following  costs  of  cleaning  water  pipes  in  1881  at  Halifax, 
Canada. 

A  24-in.  main,  19  yrs.  in  use,  and  13,400  ft.  long,  was  cleaned 
for  4.4  cts.  per  ft.,  the  items  being: 

Labor     $121 

Materials,  including  scraper 333 

Manholes  of  brick  and  stone 139 

Total    $593 

A  20-in.  main,  13  yrs.  in  use,  and  6,000  ft.  long,  was  cleaned  for 
5.4  cts.  per  ft.,  the  items  being: 

Labor    $85 

Materials,  including  scraper 193 

Manholes    of    stone 48 

Total $326 

A  15-in.  main,  half  13  yrs.  and  half  25  yrs.  old,  29,500  ft.  long, 
was  cleaned  for  1.7  cts.  per  ft.,  the  items  being: 

Labor     $248 

Materials,  including  scraper 162 

Manholes 84 

Total $493 

A  12-in.  pipe,  19  yrs.  in  use,  3,700  ft.  long,  was  cleaned  for*  4.9 
cts.  per  ft.,  the  items  being: 

Labor    ' $   34 

Materials    (not  including  scraper,   but  includ- 
ing   2    batch   boxes) 50 

Manholes    99 

Total     $183 

All  told,  some  62,800  ft.  of  24,  20,  15  and  12-in.  pipe  were  cleaned 
at  a  cost  of  $1,769,  or  2.82  cts.  per  ft.,  not  including  cost  of  man- 


WATER-WORKS.  701 

holes,  which  amounted  to  $430,  or  0.7  ct.  per  ft.,  additional,  making 
a  total  of  3.52  cts.  per  ft. 

Manholes  and  "batch  boxes"  were  built  at  intervals  to  insert  the 
cleaners,  which  were  scrapers  provided  with  pistons,  driven  through 
the  pipes  by  water  pressure. 

The  incrustation  on  the  pipes  was  %  to  1^  ins.  thick. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Water  Pipe,  St.  John,  N.  B.— Mr.  Wm.  Murdoch 
gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  scraping  water  pipe  at 
St.  John,  N.  B.,  in  1897: 

Special  iron  "hatch  box-es,"  were  made,  consisting  of  short  lengths 
of  cast-iron  pipe,  provided  with  a  flanged  opening  and  a  flanged 
cover,  bolted  together.  Through  the  "hatch,"  or  opening,  the 
scraper  was  inserted  or  removed.  There  were  9  "hatch  boxes"  in 
4.3  miles  of  24-in.  pipe.  Each  box  weighs  3,300  Ibs.  and  costs  $167. 
Hence  the  first  cost  of  these  hatch  boxes  was  $350  per  mile  of  pipe, 
or  nearly  7  cts.  per  ft. 

The  scraper  weighs  263  Ibs.,  and  consists  of  an  iron  shaft  about 
6  ft.  long,  made  of  a  3-in.  wrought-iron  pipe,  at  the  front  end  of 
which  is  the  scraper,  and  at  the  other  end  a  "piston"  ;  there  is  a 
second  piston  at  the  middle  of  the  shaft.  The  scrapers  are  12  steel 
blades,  arranged  in  two  sets  of  six  each,  one  set  back  of  the  other 
on  the  shaft.  The  blades  are  bent  back  and  are  springy  enough 
to  pass  over  such  obstructions  as  cannot  be  removed.  This  scraper 
cost  $40.  It  was  forced  through  the  pipe  by  the  water  pressure. 
To  remove  an  incrustation  about  %  in.  thick  required  22  trips  of 
the  scraper,  and  the  labor  cost  of  cleaning  the  4.3  miles  of  24-in. 
pipe  was  $64  per  mile,  or  12  cts.  per  ft.  The  working  force  con- 
sisted of: 

6  men    (at  the  valves). 

1  mechanic. 

2  men    (watching   scraper). 
2  teams. 

1  foreman. 

The  teams  were  used  to  transport  the  men  and  the  scraper  back 
to  the  starting  point.  The  laborers  were  stationed,  2  each,  at  the 
valves  close  by  the  flushing  stations. 

The  2  men  who  watched  the  progress  of  the  scraper  through  the 
pipe  could  do  so  by  listening  to  the  noise  that  it  made. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Water  Pipe,  Boston,  Mass. — Mr.  Dexter  Brackett 
gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  scraping  pipes  in  Boston 
in  1886.  Tubercles  %  to  1*4  ins.  thick  were  removed.  The  pipes 
were  not  supply  mains  but  distributing  pipes,  6  and  12  ins.  diam- 
eter. Nearly  4  miles  of  12-in.  pipe  were  cleaned  for  15.6  cts.  per 
lin.  ft.,  and  12  miles  of  6-in.  pipe  for  9  cts.  per  ft.,  not  including 
5  cts.  royalty  per  ft.  paid  for  the  use  of  the  scraper.  The  scraper 
is  a  flexible  center  shaft,  3%  ft.  long,  composed  of  coiled  steel 
springs,  connecting  small  castings,  to  which  are  hinged  two  sets 
of  steel  scrapers  arranged  radially  around  the  shaft  about  12  ins. 
apart.  These  scrapers  are  held  against  the  sides  of  the  pipe  by 
coiled  springs.  Back  of  the  scrapers  are  two  rubber  pistons,  2  ft. 
apart,  so  as  to  insure  water  pressure  on  the  machine  when  passing 


702 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


branches.  No  "hatch  boxes"  were  used,  as  above  described,  but  a, 
section  was  cut  out  of  the  pipe,  every  1,000  ft.,  and  the  scraper 
inserted.  The  section  was  replaced,  clamp  sleeves  being  used,  and 
lead  joints  poured.  The  water,  at  30  Ibs.  pressure,  forced  the 
scraper  through  the  pipe.  In  some  cases  the  displaced  rust  was 
forced  into  the  service  pipes,  but  this  was  removed  by  applying  a 
force  pump  to  the  house  plumbing  and  forcing  the  rust  back 
into  the  main.  In  a  test  of  a  section  of  6-in.  pipe  that  had  been 
laid  38  yrs.  the  discharge  was  doubled  by  the  removal  of  the 
tubercules  or  rust. 

Cost  of  Water  Pipe  Maintenance.*— The  diagram,  Fig.  12,  and 
Table  XII,  give  some  interesting  data  on  the  percentage  vari- 
ations in  cost  of  maintenance,  labor  and  cast-iron  pipe  for  the 
water  pipe  systems  of  Chicago,  111.,  for  the  period  from  1895  to 


1301 
1201 
111* 
100% 
90* 
80% 
70*4 
60% 
50* 


110% 
100% 


90  % 


70* 


fTAVIT—  *» 


I    I    3    I    |    I    g    §    I    I 
Fig.  12. — Cost  of  Pipe  Maintenance. 


^ 


1906.     The  data  were  compiled  by  the  Division  of  Water  Pipe  Ex- 
tension, Mr.  W.  A.  Devering,   superintendent 


TABLE  XII. 


I  . 

"w  O 
aJH 
O 


1895 1612 

1896 1691 

1897 1730 

1898 1801 

1899 1846 

1900 1872 

1901 1890 

1902 1918 

1903 1939 

1904 1978 

1905 2038 

1906..      .  2073 


$217.09 

183.'68 
240.89 
226.95 
144.04 
132.59 
144.27 
151.83 
141.73 
123.66 
117.37 


100.0 

68.7 

84.6 

110.6 

104.5 

66.3 

61.1 

66.5 

69.9 

5  6.' 9 
54.0 


$26.00 
23.00 
19.00 
25.00 
25.50 
25.50 
23.50 
28.00 
33.00 
30.00 
27.50 


100.0 
88.4 
73.0 

98lo 
98.0 
90.4 

126^9 

losis 

115.4 


P 

$2.25 
2.25 
2.25 

2^25 
2.25 
2.25 
2.25 
2.25 
2.25 
2.25 
2.50 


^Engineering-Contracting,  July  24,   1907. 


WATER-WORKS.  703 

Cost  of  Hydrant  Maintenance  in  Winter.*— The  accompanying 
table,  abstracted  from  the  report  of  Metcalf  &  Eddy,  engineers, 
Boston  Finance  Commission,  shows  the  cost  of  hydrant  maintenance 
in  Boston,  Mass.,  and  in  neighboring  cities,  from  the  beat  informa- 
tion available,  giving  both  the  estimated  total  cost  and  the  costs 
per  hydrant.  The  figure  for  Boston  represents  the  actual  cost  as 
charged  upon  the  books  of  the  department.  The  costs  for  the 
other  cities  are  estimated  on  the  basis  of  the  best  information  that 
could  be  obtained  as  to  methods,  wages  and  duration  of  work. 

Cost  of  hydrant  maintenance  in  winter  in  Boston  and  other  New 
England  cities: 

No.  Total  Cost  per 

City.  Hydrants.  Cost.  Hydrant. 

Boston,   Mass 7,772  $19,643  $2.53 

Cambridge,   Mass 1,046  2,496  2.39 

Chelsea,    Mass 319  468  1.47 

Worcester,    Mass 2,012  2,574  1.28 

Lowell,  Mass 1,272  806  .63 

Newton,   Mass d V  6  234  .24 

Cost  of  Thawing  Water  Pipes  by  Electricity.!— On  the  basis  of 
125  house  services  thawed  by  electricity  in  Rutland,  Vt,  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1904,  the  cost  of  the  thawing  per  service  was  as  follows: 

Electricity     $1.68 

Labor     1.85 

Teams    and    drivers 0.58 

Total     $4.11 

On  the  average  17  amperes  of  alternating  current  at  2,200  volts 
were  required,  and  at  10  cts.  per  kw.-hour  the  current  cost  was 
$1.68,  as  shown  above.  The  average  time  consumed  was  27 
minutes. 

Cost  of  Stop  Cock  Box  Repairs,  Etc.$ — From  May  13  to  December 
31,  1907,  the  Water  Department  of  Cleveland,  O.,  put  9,290  stop 
boxes  to  grade,  besides  replacing  1,803  old  boxes  with  new  ones. 
In  addition  330  new  stop  cock  boxes  were  put  in  and  10  new  stop 
cock  bottoms.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Labor.      Materials. 

Boxes    put    to    grade 9,290  $0.409  

New   boxes  put   in 1,803  0.839  $1.786 

New   tops   put    in 330  0.419  0.879 

New    Bottoms    put    in 10  0.342  0.920 

Dug   up  and   cleaned   out .  ..         639  0.839  

The  wages  paid  for  labor  in  Cleveland  in  1907  were  about  as 
follows : 

Per  Hour. 

Foreman     $  .42 

Assistant    foreman    33 

Labor 22 

Team    50 

Cost  of  Subaqueous  Pipe  Laying. — A  line  of  12-in.  water  pipre 
was  laid  in  a  trench  dredged  across  a  river  500  ft.  wide,  as  follow*: 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  22,  1909. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  March  20.  1907. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  4.   1908. 


<v*  HANDBOOK    Ob    COST   DATA. 

The  water  in  the  river  averaged  4  ft.  deep  and  the  trench  was  dug 
6  ft.  deep,  making  a  depth  of  10  ft.  from  water  surface  to  bottom 
of  the  trench.  The  small  home-made  dredge,  described  in  my  book 
on  "Earthwork,"  was  used  for  the  dredging.  To  lower  the  pipe 
into  the  trench  A-frame  bents  were  built  of  4x6-in.  timber,  the 
legs  of  the  bents  straddling  the  trench,  and  each  pipe  was  sup- 
ported by  an  iron  rod  passing  through  a  hole  bored  in  the  hori- 
zontal member  of  the  A-frame.  These  rods  were  about  12  ft.  long, 
%-in.  diameter,  and  threaded  their  full  length.  Each  rod  was 
provided  with  a  hook  at  its  lower  end  to  hook  into  an  iron  ring 
around  the  pipe.  The  pipe  was  ordinary  cast-iron  pipe,  and  was 
leaded  and  calked  while  suspended  from  the  A-frames.  Then  it 
was  the  intention  to  lower  the  500  ft.  of  pipe  all  at  one  time  by 
putting  a  man  with  a  monkey-wrench  at  each  rod,  to  give  the  nut 
on  the  rod  a  turn  at  a  given  signal  from  a  whistle.  There  were 
43  bents,  12  ft.  apart,  and  it  was  decided  that  a  force  of  10  men 
could  lower  the  pipe  satisfactorily  by  giving  a  few  turns  of  the 
nuts  on  10  rods,  then  moving  to  the  next  10  rods,  and  so  on. 
Through  carelessness  or  mischief,  some  of  the  men  gave  more 
turns  to  the  nuts  than  the  signals  called  for.  This  threw  the 
weight  of  several  pipes  upon  two  or  more  rods,  and  broke  one  of 
them  at  the  hook,  which  was  the  weak  spot.  Immediately  all  the 
other  rods  broke  in  rapid  succession,  dropping  the  pipe  line  into 
the  river.  The  pipe  settled  to  the  bottom  without  breaking  in  two 
anywhere,  and  only  one  joint  showed  any  leakage  of  air  when  I 
inspected  the  line  immediately  after  the  accident.  This  joint  was 
calked  by  a  man  who  dived  down  repeatedly,  and  struck  a  few 
blows  each  time  he  was  down.  However,  a  diver  was  sent  for  to 
examine  every  joint,  and  his  inspection  showed  the  pipe  line  to  be 
intact  from  end  to  end.  The  cost  of  building  the  A-frames,  placing 
and  calking  the  pipe  line  was  as  follows : 

10  men,  3  days,  at  $1.75 $  52.50 

1  foreman,  3  days,  at  $3.00 9.00 

10  men,  1  day  at  work  lowering  pipe,  at  $1.75 17.50 

1  foreman,  1  day  at  work  lowering  pipe,  at  $3.00 3.00 

1  diver,  1  day  inspecting  line 25.00 

Traveling  expenses  of  diver 15.00 

Total  for  516  ft.  of  pipe $122.00 

The  above  does  not  include  th%  cost  of  the  iron  rods,  nor  the 
timber  used  in  the  bents,  nor  the  building  of  a  small  raft  from 
which  to  erect  the  A-frame  bents. 

From  this  experience  I  believe  it  would  be  safe  to  dispense  with 
the  threaded  iron  rods  for  lowering  such  a  line  of  pipe.  The 
pipe  could  be  held  just  above  the  water  surface  by  small  manila 
ropes,  until  calked.  Then  upon  cutting  one  or  two  of  the  ropes,  the 
rest  would  break  and  allow  the  pipe  to  settle  into  the  water.  As  a 
12-in.  pipe  line  is  quite  buoyant,  when  filled  with  air,  it  settles  down 
gently  upon  the  bottom  of  the  trench.  In  case  a  break  should 
occur  in  Jhe  line,  threaded  rods  could  be  made,  and  the  pipe  raised 
and  repairs  made  at  but  slightly  greater  expense  than  would  have 
been  incurred  had  rods  been  used  in  the  first  place.  When  pipe 


WATER-WORKS. 


705 


is   lowered   as  above   described,   one  flexible  pipe  joint  is  usually 
provided  at  each  end  of  the  pipe  line. 

Cost  of  Laying  a  Submerged  Pipe  Across  Deal  Lake,  N.  J.* — The 
following  account  of  the  methods  and  cost  of  laying  370  ft.  of  6-in. 
cast-iron  pipe  across  Deal  Lake,  between  Interlaken  and  Loch 
Arbor,  N.  J.,  has  been  furnished  us  by  Mr.  James  B.  McCord,  Civil 
Engineer,  of  New  York  City.  The  water  in  the  lake  at  the  point 
of  crossing  averages  5  ft.  deep,  and  as  the  bottom  is  fairly  uni- 
form no  dredging  was  necessary.  The  pipe  was  laid  parallel  to  a 
line  of  old  bridge  piles  and  these  were  used  as  supports  for  a  tem- 
porary platform  on  which  the  pipe  was  laid  and  connected  prepara- 


S^T^?^^5' 


Fig.  13.— Laying  Subaqueous  Pipe  Line. 

tory    to    sinking.      The    arrangement   of   the    platform    is    shown   in 
Fig.    13. 

In  connecting  up  the  pipe  six  ball  joints  were  inserted  at  inter- 
vals corresponding  to  changes  in  profile  of  the  bottom;  all  other 
joints  were  calked.  After  the  pipe  was  connected,  six  light  A-frame 
derricks  were  set  astride  the  pipe,  as  shown  by  the  sketch ;  these 
derricks  were  rigged  with  6-in.  blocks  and  %-in.  rope.  At  inter- 
vals between  the  derricks  2x8-in.  braces  were  nailed  to  the  piles, 
as  shown  in  the  sketch.  There  were  nine  of  these  braces  used  and 
each  had  an  iron  thimble  fastened  to  the  outer  end.  Ropes  tied 
around  the  pipe  passed  through  the  thimbles  and  back  to  the  piles 
around  which  they  were  given  several  turns  and  fastened.  The 
ropes  at  the  derricks  and  braces  being  made  taut,  the  platform  was 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  6,  1907. 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


cut  away,  leaving  the  370  ft.  of  pipe  suspended  from  the  derricks 
and  braces.  Two  men  were  then  placed  at  each  derrick  and  brace, 
who  on  signal  simultaneously  lowered  away  until  the  pipe  rested 
on  the  lake  bottom.  An  examination  of  the  pipe  after  lowering 
showed  that  it  had  suffered  no  injury.  The  pipe  was  standard 
6-in.  cast-iron  pipe  weighing  32^  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The  itemized 
cost  of  the  work  exclusive  of  the  cost  of  the  pipe  and  the  ball 
joints  was  as  follows: 

Platform. 

Per  day.  Total. 

1  foreman     $4.00  $  6.00 

6  laborers     1.75  22.24 

Lumber  at  $30  per  M 40.00 

Total     $68.24 

Distributing  and  Connecting  Pipe. 

Per  day.  Total. 

1  foreman    $4.00  $  4.00 

6  laborers     2.0U  14.48 

Rent  of  raft 25.00 

Total     $43.48 

Calkina  Pipe. 

Per  day.  Total. 

I  foreman     $4.00  $  4.00 

6  laborers     2.uu  28.96 

Lead  at   6 %    cts.   per  Ib 27.00 

Yarn 0.75 

Total $60.71 

Derricks,,  Braces  and   Slinging  Pipe. 

Per  day.  Total. 

1  foreman     $4.00  $13.07 

4  laborers     2.00  13.05 

Rope    9.96 

Clevis,    bolts,    etc 6.00 

Lumber 22.20 

Total     $64.28 

Lowering. 

Per  day.  Total. 

20    men     $2.00  $32.72 

In  noting  the  small  cost  of  the  platform  it  will  be  observed  that 
the  piling  was  already  in  place,  thus  cutting  out  an  expensive  item 
of  the  work.  Summarizing  the  several  items,  we  have  the  fol- 
lowing : 

Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Platform     $68.24  $0.1844 

Distributing  and   connecting   pipe 43.48  0.1175 

Calking    60.71  0.1641 

Derricks,  braces  and  rigging 64.28  .0.1737 

Lowering    32.72  0.0884 

Total    for    370    ft $269.43  $0.7281 

Cost  of  Laying  Pipe  Across  the  Susquehanna. — Mr.  James  P. 
Herdic  gives  the  following  data  relating  to  laying  10-in.  cast-iron 
pipe  across  the  Susquehanna  River,  at  Montoursville,  Pa.,  a  distance 
of  600  ft.,  average  depth  of  water  being  13  ft.  A  %-in.  manilla 


WATER-WORKS.  707 

rope  was  first  stretched  across  the  river,  to  act  as  a  ferry  line  for 
the  scows.  The  scows  were  loaded  with  pipe.  The  crew  of  8  men 
and  foreman  were  engaged  1  day  in  this  preliminary  work,  and 
then  laid  the  600  ft.  of  pipe  line  in  the  next  2y2  days.  One  ball  and 
socket  joint  was  used  to  every  six  ordinary  joints.  The  pipe  line 
was  lowered  between  the  two  scows,  by  means  of  chain  pulleys 
suspended  from  a  heavy  sawhorse  that  spanned  the  gap  between 
the  two  boats.  The  pipe  was  laid  in  a  gentle  curve,  bowed  up 
stream,  so  as  to  form  an  arch  to  resist  the  stronger  currents.  This 
is  certainly  an  excellent  record  for  economic  work. 

On  another  place  in  the  Susquehanna  River,  where  the  current 
was  so  swift  that  it  would  swamp  a  scow  if  held  sidewise  in  the 
current  by  a  cable,  as  above  described,  the  following  method  was 
used :  A  scow  was  held  in  the  current  with  its  nose  up  stream,  but 
at  an  angle  with  the  current ;  ropes  from  bow  and  stern  to  the 
nearest  shore  serving  to  hold  it.  In  this  way  the  current  kept  the 
ropes  taut,  and  the  scow  remained  steady  while  the  lead  joints  were 
poured.  The  pipe  line  lay  across  the  middle  of  the  scow,  which 
was  moved  out  from  under  each  joint  as  fast  as  made.  Six  com- 
mon joints  to  each  ball  and  socket  joint  were  used. 

Cost  of  Laying  a  Submerged  6-in.  Pipe,  New  Jersey  to  Ellis 
Island.— About  5,100  ft.  of  6-in.  pipe  were  laid  from  the  New  Jersey 
shore  to  Ellis  Island  under  10  to  17  ft.  of  water.  A  trench  was  dug 
5  ft.  deep  by  10  ft.  wide  in  the  mud,  using  a  clam-shell  bucket. 
Heavy  pipe,  weighing  800  Ibs.  per  length,  provided  with  Ward 
flexible  joints,  was  used.  Two  scows,  each  26  x  80  ft,  were  fastened 
together,  6  ft.  apart,  and  provided  with  two  skids  of  10  x  10-in. 
timbers  55  ft.  long,  leading  down  between  the  scows  to  the  bottom 
of  the  trench.  The  skids  could  be  lowered  in  rough  weather.  Two 
lengths  of  pipe  were  placed  at  one  time  on  the  skids,  a  derrick 
being  used  for  the  purpose,  and  then  the  scows  were  warped  ahead 
24  ft.  The  whole  work  occupied  just  a  month,  using  a  force  of  10 
laborers,  2  calkers  and  1  diver  to  calk  any  leaks,  etc.  The  best 
day's  work  was  516  ft.  The  line  was  tested  under  80  Ibs.  pressure, 
and  leaked  only  5  cu.  ft.  in  %  hr. 

Cost  of  Submerged  Pipe  Laying  in  Massachusetts. — In  a  paper 
entitled  "Submerged  Pipe  Crossings  of  the  Metropolitan  Water 
Board,"  Journal  of  the  Association  of  Engineering  Societies,  1901, 
Vol.  27,  Mr.  C.  M.  Saville  gives  in  detail  the  methods  of  laying 
submerged  pipes  and  the  following  cost  data,  rates  of  wages  and 
details  of  cost  not  being  given.  The  work  was  done  in  1897  in 
Massachusetts  by  contract,  but  the  costs  are  the  actual  costs  to  the 
contractor,  plant  rental  being  included. 

Mystic  River  Crossing. — Two  lines  of  3  6-in.  pipe  were  laid  in  a 
dredged  trench,  5  ft.  9  ins.  c.  to  c.  The  trench  averaged  8  ft.  deep, 
in  mud,  and  35  ft.  wide  on  top,  and  was  1,200  ft.  long.  A  clam- 
shell dredge  was  used  for  most  of  the  work,  and  averaged  27  lin. 
ft.  of  trench,  or  250  cu.  yds.,  per  day,  loading  scows,  which  were 
dumped  half  a  mile  away.  After  the  pipes  were  laid,  the  material 
was  reloaded  into  the  scows  by  the  dredge,  at  the  rate  of  500  cu. 


708  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

yds.  per  day.  The  cost  of  excavating  the  trench  was  54  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  for  the  11,000  cu.  yds.  The  cost  of  backfilling  was  23  cts. 
per  cu.  yd. 

The  river  is  a  tidal  stream,  with  tide  fluctuations  of  10  ft.,  and 
is  9  ft.  deep  at  low  water. 

A  pile  foundation  was  built  in  the  bottom  of  the  trench  to  lay 
the  pipe  on.  The  piles  were  driven  in  bents  of  2  piles  per  bent, 
bents  being  12  ft.  apart,  and  piles  6  ft.  apart  in  each  bent.  They 
were  driven  23  ft.  into  the  mud,  sawed  off  under  water  and  capped 
witu  10  x  10-in.  spruce  by  a  diver.  The  cost  of  sawing  off  and 
capping  was  $3  per  pile. 

Some  of  the  36-in.  pipes  were  made  with  a  spherical,  or  flexible, 
joint,  and  weighed  8,260  Ibs.  per  12^-ft  length,  costing  $24  per 
ton  (ordinary  pipe  cost  $18  a  ton),  and  required  248  Ibs.  of  lead 
per  joint  8  ins.  deep.  These  flexible  joints  were  only  used  where 
the  pipe  line  curved  vertically. 

Six  lengths  of  pipe  were  joined  together  on  shore,  and  lowered 
onto  the  pile  foundation  from  a  scow  provided  with  two  derricks. 
The  pipes  were  slung  from  the  lower  chord  of  a  light  truss  75  ft 
long,  to  which  the  derrick  tackle  was  fastened.  The  scow  was 
23  x  70  ft.,  and  the  pipes  were  lowered  over  the  side.  On  the  op- 
posite side  of  the  scow  was  a  smaller  scow,  loaded  with  gravel, 
Which  was  fastened  to  the  pipe-laying  scow  and  thus  served  to 
counterweight  the  pipes.  There  was  a  4-in.  centrifugal  pump  on 
the  scow  for  jetting  out  the  trench  if  it  become  filled  with  mud. 

To  join  the  sections  of  pipe  under  water  (every  sixth  pipe),  a 
special  joint  was  designed.  The  spigot  end  was  turned  smooth  in 
a  lathe  to  a  taper,  and  had  no  head.  The  bell  was  grooved  and 
designed  for  a  lead  joint  5  ins.  deep.  On  shore,  a  spigot  was  tem- 
porarily inserted  in  a  bell,  and  the  lead  joint  cast ;  then  the  spigot 
was  pulled  out,  leaving  the  lead  joint  in  the  bell.  To  re-make  this 
joint  under  water,  a  diver  guided  the  spigot  to  place  ;  near  the  end 
of  the  truss  (above  referred  to)  was  fastened  a  hydraulic  cylinder, 
to  the  piston  of  which  was  fastened  an  iron  rod  with  a  hook  at 
the  end.  A  chain  having  been  fastened  back  of  the  bell  of  the  last 
pipe,  this  hook  was  fastened  into  the  chain,  and,  when  oil  was 
forced  into  the  hydraulic  cylinder,  the  truss  was  drawn  forward 
and  the  spigot  forced  home  into  the  bell.  Fastened  to  the  bell 
was  an  iron  collar,  which  guided  the  spigot  into  the  bell,  and  also 
prevented  the  lead  from  being  displaced  by  any  carelessness  on 
the  part  of  the  diver.  The  pipe  line  was  tested  by  compressed  air, 
and  leaks  were  calked  by  divers. 

The  total  cost  to  the  contractor,  including  the  pipe,  which  cost 
$6.75  per  ft,  was  $13.25  per  lin.  ft.  of  pipe,  including  the  pile 
foundation  and  the  dredging. 

Since  the  trench  averaged  4%  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pipe,  at 
77  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  excavation  and  backfill,  the  cost  of  the 
trench  was  $3.45  per  lin.  ft.  of  pipe.  This  leaves  $3.05  per  lin.  ft. 
for  the  remaining  items:  piling,  lead,  timber  and  pipe  laying.  If 
the  piles  were  45  ft.  long,  there  were  7%  ft  of  pile  per  lin.  ft  of 
pipe,  which  probably  cost  the  contractor  about  10  cts.  for  ma- 


WATER-WORKS.  709 

terial  and  10  cts.  for  labor  (including  the  $3  for  cutting  off),  or 
$1.50  per  lin.  ft.  of  pipe.  At  82  Ibs.  of  lead  for  the  ordinary  joints, 
the  load  probably  cost  about*  30  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pipe.  The  spruce 
cap  on  the  piles  probably  cost  about  $18  per  M,  or  10  cts.  per  lin. 
ft.  of  pipe.  Hence  these  three  items  would  total  $1.90  per  lin.  ft., 
leaving  about  $1.15  per  lin.  ft.  as  the  cost  of  laying  the  pipe.  The 
assumptions  and  conclusions  in  this  paragraph  are  mine  and  not 
Mr.  Saville's. 

Cost  of  Laying  a  Submerged  Pipe  at  Vancouver,  B.  C.* — Mr.  J. 
Causley  gives  the  following  relative  to  a  12 -in.  main  across  the  Nar- 
rows at  Vancouver,  B.  C.,  in  1906 : 

There  have  been  seven  12-in.  mains  placed  across  the  Narrows 
at  various  times  during  the  past  19  years.  The  last  one  has  just 
been  put  in  position,  and  of  the  method  of  accomplishing  this  the 
writer  purposes  giving  a  short  description,  trusting  that  it  may 
prove  of  some  interest,  for  the  reason  that  it  differed  from  the 
method  usually  followed  (with  variations  to  suit  particular  cases) 
in  such  work,  viz.,  that  of  building  a  staging,  or  anchoring  a  string 
of  rafts  along  the  line  to  be  followed,  slinging  the  pipes  over  the 
position  they  are  intended  to  occupy,  jointing  them  up  and  lower- 
ing the  connected  line  into  place. 

This  method  would  not  have  been  suitable  in  the  cases  under 
consideration  on  account  of  the  water  varying  from  66  ft.  deep 
at  low  tide  to  75  ft.  deep  at  ordinary  high  tide.  The  tide  is  very 
strong,  running  at  speeds  up  to  8  knots  per  hour  ;  also,  and  per- 
haps the  most  important  of  all,  nearly  the  whole  of  the  shipping 
trade  of  Vancouver,  including  ocean  passenger  and  freight  steamers, 
from  8,000  tons  downwards,  sailing  ships  towed  in  and  out  by 
tugs,  coast  steamers,  rafts,  coal  barges,  transfers  towed  by  tugs, 
etc.,  passes  through  these  Narrows.  A  system  of  hauling  the  pipes 
across  was  first  put  into  practice  by  the  Water  Works  Company, 
this  system  being  greatly  improved  by  the  late  City  Engineer, 
Colonel  Tracy,  M.  Can.  Soc.  C.  E.,  and  the  Water  Works  staff. 

About  three  years  ago  it  was  intended  to  place  another  main 
across  the  Narrows,  and  in  the  early  part  of  1904  a  contract  was 
made  with  Messrs.  Robertson,  Godson  &  Co.,  of  Toronto  and  Van- 
couver, for  the  supply  of  cast-iron  pipes  for  a  submerged  main,  in 
accordance  with  the  following  specifications: 

To  be  12  ins.  in  diameter  internally,  1  in.  in  thickness,  lengths  to 
lay  12  ft.  each,  of  the  best  cast  iron,  strong,  tough  gray  metal,  cast 
vertically  with  the  hub  end  down,  the  bell  end  to  be  bored  spher- 
ically, and  the  spigot  end  to  be  turned  where  it  fits  in  contact  with 
the  bored  surface.  To  be  tested  to  a  pressure  of  500  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 
and  hammered  under  pressure.  To  be  coated  with  Dr.  Angus 
Smith's  preparation,  or  preferably  with  Wartz,  Dove  &  Co.'s 
bitulithic  solution. 

The  pipes  were  obtained  from  Stavely,  near  Glasgow,  in  Scotland, 
and  weighed  between  1,725  and  1,800  Ibs.  each. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  April   22,   1908. 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


The  half  section,  Fig.  14,  at  a  flexible  joint  shows  the  latest  form 
of  the  bell  and  spigot  of  a  pipe.  The  shape  of  the  bell  has  been 
altered  from  that  of  the  earlier  forms  to  cause  the  pipes  to  offer 
as  little  resistance  as  possible  in  sliding  along  the  bed  of  the  Inlet. 

The  pipes  were  delivered  at  Vancouver  in  August,  1905,  but  it 
was  not  convenient  to  place  them  in  position  till  the  latter  part  of 
1906,  when  it  was  decided  that  they  should  be  laid  directly  by  the 
city,  under  the  superintendence  of  Mr.  S.  Maddison,  the  manager 


Fig.   14.— Flexible  Joint. 

01'  the  water  works,  who  had  had  much  experience  in  tne  work  of 
laying  previous  mains.  Captain  Westcott,  who  was  contractor  for 
laying  two  of  the  previous  mains,  and  foreman  on  laying  the  steel 
main,  was  engaged  as  foreman  of  the  work.  This  main  was  to 
take  the  place  of  No.  3  pipe  line,  the  pipes  of  which  were  taken 
apart  by  a  diver  and  brought  to  the  bank. 

A  chute,  Fig.  15,  was  constructed  of  14-in.  x  2-in.  dressed  plank. 

With  4-in.  x  1-in.  battens  on  each  side — i.  e.,  projecting  2  ins.  above 

'the  plank — supported  at  every  6  ft.  by  cross  pieces  of  3-in.  x  4-ln. 


Enq-Contr 


Fig.  15.— Chute. 


quartering,  each  on  2  posts  of  3  in.  x  4  in.,  from  low  water  on  the 
north  side  of  the  Narrows  extending  back  the  length  of  the  main. 
Each  length  of  pipe  was  tested  separately  under  a  pressure  of  350 
Ibs.  to  the  square  inch.  The  pipes  were  then  placed  on  the  chute 
spigot  ends  to  the  south,  with  a  piece  of  14-in.  x  2-in.  plank,  about 
2  ft  long,  on  the  bed  of  the  chute  running  between  the  side  battens 
under  each  pipe  at  the  bell  end.  The  piece  of  plank  was  notched 
out  at  the  top  side  and  upper  end,  so  as  to  go  under,  support,  and 
steady  the  bell,  and  keep  the  pipe  in  the  center  of  the  chute.  The 


WATER-WORKS, 


711 


under  skids  of  these  blocks  were  well  greased.  The  spigot  of  each 
pipe  was  pressed  home  in  the  beil  of  the  next  one,  lead  run  in  and 
calked  to  make  a  tight  joint.  No  gaskets  were  used,  as  the  bells 
and  spigots  were  bored  and  turned  to  make  tight  and  flexible  joints. 
Each  joint  required  from  60  to  70  Ibs.  of  lead,  making  about  3^ 
tons  of  lead  used  in  all.  The  pipes,  after  being  put  together  and 
jointed,  were  tested  collectively  under  a  pressure  of  150  Ibs.  per 
square  inch. 

A  line  was  pushed  through  the  pipes  with  a  rod  made  of  a 
number  of  long  slats  of  wood  nailed  together  and  a  1%-in.  steel 
wire  cable  hauled  through  them. 

Over  the  lower  or  south  end  of  the  string  of  pipes  a  cast-iron 
cap  1  in.'  thick,  with  strengthening  ridges  on  the  outer  side,  and 
flange  overlapping  the  end  of  the  pipe,  was  placed,  leaded  and 
calked.  This  cap  had  a  2-in.  circular  hole  in  the  center  with  a 
stuffing-box.  Through  this  was  passed  a  2-in.  turned  rod  3  ft.  6  ins. 


Cap. 
Fig.  16. — Arrangement  of  Hauling  Cables. 


long,  and  the  hemp  packing  was  well  tightened  up  around  it.  On 
the  inner  end  of  the  rod  was  an  eye  through  which  the  end  of  the 
1%-in.  steel  wire  cable,  which  went  through  the  line  of  pipes,  was 
passed,  doubled  back  on  the  cable,  and  secured  with  four  clips.  The 
outer  end  of  the  eye-bar,  on  which  a  screw  thread  was  cut,  went 
through  a  stirrup-shaped  ring  and  was  made  fast  to  it  with  two 
nuts.  To  this  stirrup  one  of  the  hauling  cables  was  attached  and 
secured  in  the  same  manner  as  the  cable  inside  the  pipes  was 
secured  to  the  other  end  of  the  bar.  By  these  means  the  cable  had 
no  tension  on  the  front  end  of  the  string  of  pipes. 

The  end  length  of  pipe  carrying  the  cap,  etc.,  was  covered  with 
a  wooden  lagging,  bound  at  three  places  with  %-in.  wire  rope. 
Figure  16  readily  explains  the  arrangements  made. 

The  cable  on  the  west  side  of  the  pipes  was  attached  to  the  40th 
pipe  by  taking  two  turns  round  the  pipe,  bringing  the  end  back  to 
the  cable,  and  fastening  it  with  4  clips.  The  cable  on  the  east  side 
of  the  pipes  was  secured  to  the  13th  pipe  by  means  of  a  chain, 
which  had  a  round  turn  round  the  pipe,  and  the  ends  made  fast 


712 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


to  the  cable  with  clips.  Iron  bands  were  put  round  the  pipe  and 
cables  fastened  at  intervals  to  enable  a  fair  pull  to  be  taken. 

On  the  upper,  or  north  end  of  the  pipe  a  cap  similar  to  the  one 
at  the  south  end  was  placed,  with  the  exception  that  the  2-in. 
circular  hole  in  the  center  was  through  a  plain  boss.  A  2-in.  round 
bar  passed  through  this  hole.  The  inner  end  of  this  bar  had  an  eye 
to  which  the  cable  through  the  pipes  was  attached  in  the  same  way 
as  the  other  end  of  the  cable  was  fastened  to  the  bar  through  the 
cap  at  the  south  end  of  the  pipes.  On  the  outer  end  of  this  bar 
a  screw  thread  was  cut,  and  the  cable  through  the  pipes  was  tight- 
ened up  with  a  nut.  A  second  was  placed  above  the  first  one  for 
the  sake  of  security.  A  length  of  12-in.  pipe,*4  ft.  long,  was  fitted 
into  the  bell  of  the 'last  pipe  for  the  flange  of  the  cap  to  fit  on  to. 
The  whole  was  leaded  and  thoroughly  calked.  This  was  completed 
on  Aug.  19. 

It  had  taken  about  a  month  to  do  this  work,  with  a  gang  of 
about  seven  men,  under  the  superintendence  of  Captain  Westcott. 
There  were  109  pipes,  making  1,308  ft.  of  pipes,  whose  weight 


cup 


Fig.   17. — Arrangement  of  Gripper. 

.varied  from  1,725  Ibs.  to  1,800  Ibs.  each,  giving  a  total  weight  of 
about  96.05  tons.  Including  lead  caps,  internal  cable,  etc.,  the  total 
weight  would  be  about  102  V^  tons. 

1,800  ft.,  1%  ins.  diameter,  and  1,800  ft,  1%  ins.  diameter,  fresh 
steel-wire  cables  had  been  bought.  These  cables  were  not  new,  but 
had  been  used  for  hoisting  in  the  mines.  Also  four  new  6-in.  (cir- 
cumference) 120  fathom  manila  ropes  nad  been  purchased  at 
%  160.00  each,  for  tackle.  Six  new  3-sheave  blocks  and  two  new 
single-sheave  blocks  had  been  made  in  the  water  works  shops. 
The  cables,  on  their  reels,  had  been  taken  across  to  the  north  shore 
of  the  Narrows. 

The  end  of  a  line  was  taken  across,  attached  to  the  end  of  one  of 
the  cables,  and  the  cable  was  hauled  across,  a  snatch  block  and 
four  horses  being  used.  No  power  tackle  was  used,  as  the  hauling 
had  to  be  done  in  the  space  of  about  15  minutes  at  slack  water. 

One  cable  was  hauled  across  at  slack  water  on  Aug.  15,  one  on 
the  18th,  and  one  on  the  19th.  By  Aug.  23  everything  was  ready 
to  begin  hauling.  The  cables  had  been  examined  by  the  diver  and 
tightened  up  with  their  blocks  and  tackles. 

By  means  of  a  gripper,  Fig.  17,  to  each  of  two  of  the  cables  was 
attached  a  tackle  consisting  of  a  pair  of  3-sheave  blocks  with  one 


WATER-WORKS. 


713 


of  the  120-fathom  6-in.  manila  ropes  rove  through  them  worked 
by  a  capstan  to  each  tackle  driven  by  one  or  two  horses.  The 
other  cable  had  two  tackles,  with  a  pair  of  3-sheave  blocks  at- 
tached to  each  tackle,  each  tackle  worked  by  a  capstan.  See  Fig. 
18.  The  drum  of  the  capstan,  Fig.  19,  was  18  ins.  in  diameter,  and 
the  lever  arms  11  ft.  each.  The  cable,  however,  with  the  two 
tackles  attached,  had  been  left  taut  too  long ;  the  flood  tide  caught 
it  and  carried  it  up  channel  about  100  ft.  at  the  center,  drawing 
two  lengths  of  pipe  slightly  out  of  line  before  it  could  be  loosened. 
It  was  necessary  to  draw  it  back  to  the  north  side  and  haul  it 
across  afresh.  This  had  been  done  by  Aug.  25,  and  everything 
found  to  be  in  order.  Passing  vessels  had  caused  some  incon- 
venience when  getting  the  lines  across. 

Monday,  August  27. — Hauling  began  at  mid-day  at.  low  water 
with  four  horses,  i.  e.,  one  at  each  capstan,  and  was  also  con- 
tinued on  the  slack  water  in  the  evening,  lasting  altogether  about 


Fig.   18. — Arrangement  of  Capstans. 

five  hours,  and  moving  the  main  about  178  ft.  The  work  could  not 
be  carried  on  longer  as  the  tide  when  stronger  would  have  caught 
the  cables  and  carried  them  out  of  line.  After  the  first  hauling  the 
manager  went  down  in  diving  dress,  examined  the  pipes  that  had 
moved,  found  that  they  had  been  drawn  straight,  and  that  the 
joints  were  uninjured. 

Tuesday,  August  28. — Hauling  was  carried  on  from  noon  to  2 
p.  m.,  and  from  5  to  8  p.  m.  The  main  was  hauled  194  ft. ;  in  all, 
372  ft.  Four  horses  had  been  used,  i.  e.,  one  at  each  capstan. 

Wednesday,  August  29. — Up  to  7  p.  m.,  only  about  35  ft.  had  been 
hauled.  The  horses  had  been  doubled  on  two  capstans  and  had 
not  pulled  well  together ;  the  tide  also  had  not  served  well. 
Hauling  was  carried  on  from  7 :10  to  7 :30  p.  m.,  when  it  was 
stopped  by  a  signal  from  the  other  side  (the  light  put  out).  It 
was  found  that  one  side  of  the  chute  had  sunk  where  swampy 
ground  was  crossed,  and  that  the  pipes  were  slipping  off.  About 
91  ft.  had  been  hauled;  in  all  450  ft. 

Thursday,  August  SO. — The  chute  was  strengthened  early  in  the 


714 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


day.  In  the  morning  the  tide  was  not  favorable  for  hauling,  which 
was  not  begun  till  about  6  :30  p.  m.  Only  one  capstan  was  doubled 
till  about  9  :30  p.  m.,  when  a  second  horse  was  put  on  No.  1  cap- 
stan. Hauling  was  stopped  about  1  a.  m.,  as  the  horses  were 
unable  to  work  longer.  About  300  ft.  had  been  hauled;  in  all 
750  ft. 

Friday,  August  81. — In  the  morning  the  pipe  was  examined  by 
the  diver,  who  went  right  along  the  part  under  water  from  end  to 
end,  and  found  everything  in  good  order.  There  is  a  soft  shingle 
bank  extending  from  the  north  side  to  within  about  five  hundred 
feet  from  the  south  side  of  the  Narrows,  and  the  pipes  had 


Fig.  19. — Plan  and  Elevation  of  Capstan. 

ploughed  into  this  for  a  depth  of  about  two  feet  and  moved  boulders 
that  were  in  their  way.  Further  south  the  bottom  is  a  sandy 
hardpan. 

Hauling  began  about  5  p.  m.,  and  one  fleet  (the  length  of  travel 
of  the  moving  blocks,  about  75  ft.)  was  hauled  by  about  7  p.  m. 
The  tackles  were  then  overhauled.  Hauling  was  continued  again 
from  about  8  to  8:20  p.  m.,  when  the  gripper  on  the  eastern  cable 
gave  way.  It  was  got  in  order  again  and  operations  were  con- 
tinued. About  12:30  a.  m.,  the  central  cable  slipped  in  the  gripper 
and  work  was  suspended  for  the  night.  About  150  ft.  hauled;  in 
all  900  ft. 


WATER-WORKS.  715 

The  pull  was  now  becoming  heavier. 

Saturday,  September  1. — The  diver  went  down  in  the  morning 
and  found  everything  in  good  shape. 

Hauling  began  about  4  :30  p.  m.  The  pipe  would  not  start  at 
once,  and  the  gripper  on  the  central  cable  (No.  1  capstan)  slipped 
at  about  4  :45  p.  m.  It  had  to  be  loosened  and  a  fresh  grip  taken, 
when  the  pipe  was  started.  The  fleet  was  finished  at  6  :15  p.  m. 
It  was  found  from  measurement  that  162  ft.  still  required  to  be 
hauled.  The  tackles  were  overhauled ;  a  sheave  in  one  of  the 
blocks,  which  was  found  to  be  cutting  (the  hole  had  become  en- 
larged about  %  in.)  was  replaced  by  another,  and  hauling  was 
begun  again  about  7:45  p.  m.  About  9  p.  m.  it  was  found  that  the 
head  of  No.  2  capstan  was  giving  way,  and  work  had  to  be  sus- 
pended till  a  new  drum  could  be  made,  169  ft.  were  hauled;  in 
all  1,069  ft;  155  ft.  remained  to  be  hauled. 

Monday,  September  3. — A  new  capstan  barrel  had  been  made 
and  placed  in  position,  and  hauling  was  begun  at  8:15  a.  m.  The 
main  was  moved  about  40  ft.,  but  the  tide  was  found  to  be  running 
out  too  strongly,  and  work  was  stopped.  The  pull  had  become  very 
heavy,  as  so  much  of  the  main  was  on  the  ground  and  part  of  it 
was  coming  up  hill.  Six  horses  were  used  this  day,  viz.,  two  each 
on  Nos.  1  and  2  capstans,  and  one  each  on  Nos.  3  and  4. 

Hauling  was  begun  again  at  11 :10  a.  m.  A  gripper  slipped  soon 
after  starting.  A  fresh  pin  was  put  in  and  tightened  up,  and  haul- 
ing was  continued.  Before  long  the  rope  of  the  tackle  of  No.  2 
capstan  got  under  the  barrel  of  the  capstan  and  had  to  be  cleared. 
The  fleet  was  finished  at  12  :25  p.  m.  Seventy  feet  still  required  to 
be  hauled. 

The  tackle  was  overhauled  and  work  begun  again  at  1  p.  m. 
The  rope  got  under  the  barrel  of  No.  2  capstan  again  and  had  to 
be  cleared.  The  hauling  was  heavy,  but  the  pipe  moved  steadily. 
The  work  was  finished  at  2  :45  p.  m.,  the  front  end  of  the  pipe  being 
above  low  water.  Total  distance  hauled,  1,224  ft. 

The  main  was  tested  on  September  5,  under  a  pressure  of  125 
Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  and  found  to  be  perfectly  tight. 

Captain  Westcott  employed  11  men  during  hauling,  as  well  as 
the  diver  and  the  drivers  of  the  teams. 

The  cost  of  the  1,308  lin.  ft.  of  submerged  pipe  in  place  was  as 
follows : 

Materials. 

965.05   tons  12-in.   pipe  at  wharf f 3, 842. 00 

Removing    to    site   of    work 200.00 

Lead,  -7,000   Ibs 491.93 

8,040  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  for  chute,  at   $18 144.72 

2,436  ft.   B.   M.  lumber  for  platform,   at   $17 41.41 

3  kegs  nails,  at  ?4 ." 12.00 

Labor. 
Building  chutes  and  platform,  putting  up  capstans,  placing 

and  jointing  pipe,  July  2  to  Aug.  11 1,002.69 

Hauling  pipe  across  the  narrows   (Aug.  25  to  Sept    8)  ....    1,163.23 


710  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Miscellaneous. 
Materials,  provisions,  cartage,  incidentals,  etc 470.00 


Grand  total,  1,308  ft.,  at  $6.35 $8,297.98 

The  above  $930  worth  of  plant  purchased  for  this  work  consisted 
of  the  following  items: 

2,000  ft.    %-in.   new   steel   cable,   at   7   cts $140.00 

2,800  ft.   iy2-in.  and  1%-in.  old  steel  cable 150.00 

2,880  ft.   6-in.   (circumference)  Manila  rope 640.00 

Total     $930.00 

This  does  not  include  the  blocks. 

The  wages  paid  were  high,  being  25  to  30  cts.  per  hr.  A  team 
and  driver  received  $8  per  day;  diver,  $15  per  day.  Of  the  $1,163 
item  of  hauling  the  pipe  across  the  Narrows,  $328  was  for  team 
and  driver  time. 

The  foregoing  costs  do  not  include  the  cost  of  taking  up  and  re- 
moving the  old  pipe  line,  which  was  as  follows: 

Labor     $1,652.77 

Materials  and  general   expense 403.59 

Total ,$2,056.36 

Cost  of  Laying  Pipe  Across  the  Willamette  River. — A  32-in.  pipe 
across  the  Willamette  River,  Oregon,  was  laid  in  1895.  Two  scows 
and  an  inclined  cradle  were  used.  The  gang  was  16  men  and  1 
diver,  and  they  laid  80  ft.  of  pipe  per  day  in  a  trench  23  ft.  below 
the  water  surface.  The  plant  and  methods  are  described  in  the 
Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  33,  p.  257. 

Cost  of  a  Wood  Stave  Pipe  Line  at  Denver. — Mr.  James  D.  Schuy- 
ler,  in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  31  (1894),  describes  and  illus- 
trates very  fully  the  building  of  a  wooden  pipe  line  for  Denver, 
Colo.  The  pipe  was  30  ins.  diameter,  made  of  staves  of  Texas 
pine  1%  ins.  thick,  with  %-in.  round  iron  bands.  A  pipe  laying 
gang  consisted  of  8  to  16  men  according  to  the  number  of  bands 
per  unit  of  length,  half  the  gang  being  employed  in  back  cinching. 
On  a  34-in.  pipe  a  gang  placed  700  to  1,000  bands  per  day,  laying 
from  150  to  300  lin.  ft.  of  pipe.  On  a  44-in.  pipe  the  rate  was 
500  bands  per  day.  The  cost  of  erection  was  from  5  cts.  per  band 
on  a  30-in.  pipe  to  10  cts.  per  band  on  a  48-in.  pipe.  The  cost 
of  16.4  miles  of  30-in.  pipe  was  $1.36  per  ft.,  distributed  as  follows: 
1,869  M  Texas  pine,  at  $27.50..  ..$  51,399 

271,900  steel   bands   (%-in.)   and  shoes 54,300 

Erection  of  pipe,  5.1  cts.  per  band,  by  contract 13,866 

$1-19,565 
In   addition    the    trenching   and   backfilling   cost   48    cts.    per    ft., 

Which  was  unusually  expensive. 

Cost  of  Wood  Stave  Pipe,  Astoria,  Oregon. — Mr.  John  Birkinbine 

gives  the  following: 

An  18-in.  wooden  stave  pipe  at  Astoria,  Oregon,   7%   miles  long, 

cost    $0.90   per   ft,   in   place   including  appurtenances,    with   lumber 


WATER-WORKS.  717 

at  $35  per  M  and  steel  bands  at  4.8  cts.  per  Ib.  Mr.  A.  L.  Adams 
gave  the  details  as  follows :  Including  all  appurtenances  the  cost 
was  90  cts.  per  ft.,  but  it  was  76  cts.  excluding  appurtenances. 
The  labor  cost  as  follows: 

Building  and    spacing  bands 55% 

Back-cinching     26 

Repainting    iron    bands 3 

Backfilling  to  depth  of  6   ins.   over  pipe....  8.75 

Placing    specials 3.50 

Placing   air   valves 0.75 

Unclassified    labor     3.00 

Total     100.00 

In  Colorado  5%  miles  of  28-in.  wooden  stave  pipe,  under  a  head 
starting  at  20  ft  and  ending  at  150  ft.,  cost  $1.67  per  ft.,  exclu- 
sive of  ditching.  The  cost  of  6y2  miles  of  36-in.  to  44-in.  pipe  was 
$2.60  per  ft.  exclusive  of  ditching.  In  1903  nearly  2  miles  of  42-in. 
wooden  stave  pipe  was  laid  at  Absecom  .N.  J.,  for  Atlantic  City, 
at  $2.25  per  ft.  in  place.  It  was  laid  on  the  hydraulic  grade  line,' 
requiring  no  heavy  banding. 

Estimated  Cost  of  Wood  Stave  Pipe.— In  1898  Mr.  A.  L.  Adams 
made  the  following  estimates  of  cost  per  foot  of  wood  stave  pipe 
in  Chicago,  exclusive  of  contractors'  profits.  The  cost  includes  lay- 
ing the  pipe,  but  does  not  include  hauling.  Unfortunately  the  de- 
tails, upon  which  the  estimate  is  based,  are  not  given.  Apparent- 
ly the  costs  do  not  include  trenching. 

Diam.,  25-ft.  50-ft.    '  100-ft.  200-ft. 

ins.  head.  head.  head.  head. 

12  $0.42  $0.49  $0.63  $0.85 

18  0.60  0.80  1.02  1.46 

24  0.79  0.91  1.14  1.61 

30  0.96  1.12  1.44  2.06 

36  1.19  1.40  1.82  2.65 

42  1.40  1.68  2.23  3.33 

48  1.55  1.85  2.46  3.67 

54  2.23  2.62  3.43  5.02 

60  2.85  3.35  4.37  6.40 

66  3.21  3.81  5.00  7.38 

72  3.65  4.38  5.83  8.73 

Cost  of  Wood  Stave  Pijje  Line  at  Atlantic  City.— Mr.  Kenneth 
Allen  and  Mr.  C.  J.  Myers  give  the  following  data  relative  to  a 
wood  stave  pipe  built  by  contract  for  Atlantic  City,  N.  J.,  in  1904. 

The  pipe  is  42  ins.  diameter,  of  Washington  fir,  the  staves  being 
cut  from  2  x  6-in.  lumber,  and  measuring  1  9/16  ins.  thick.  The 
bands  are  spaced  12  ins.  apart,  and  are  of  %  in.  round  steel.  The 
bands  were  bent  by  winding  them  around  a  cylinder  38  ins.  in 
diameter.  After  bending  they  were  wired  together  in  bunches  of 
five,  and  dipped  in  hot  (400°  F.)  Mineral  Rubber  Field  Paint  for 
about  3  mins.  About  750  bands  were  bent  and  dipped  per  day  by 
a  gang  of  7  men  and  a  foreman,  using  20  gals,  of  mineral  rubber. 

Trenching  was  begun  Feb.  4,  and  the  9,800  ft.  of  pipe  was  com- 
pleted Apr.  16.  The  material  was  largely  sand.  The  pipe  was 


718  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

laid  in  the  bed  of  an  old  canal,  sections  of  which  were  dammed  off 
and  pumped  out  with  two  3-in.  gasoline  pumps. 
The  pipe  gang  was  as  follows: 

1  foreman. 

2  men  handling  material. 
2  men  driving  staves. 

2  men  tightening  bands. 

1  man  rounding  out  pipe  by  hammering  inside. 

2  men   back-cinching. 

1  boy  painting  bands. 

2  men  tamping. 
There  were  also : 

2  day  men  on  gasolene  pumps. 
2  night  men  on  gasolene  pumps. 
2  men  on  diaphragm  pumps. 
3"5  men  backfilling. 

The  first  26%  of  the  work  cost  considerably  more  than  the  last 
74%,  due  to  the  colder  weather  that  prevailed  in  February. 

The  labor  cost  of  the  first  26%  done  during  Feb.  4  to  Mar.  5, 
was  as  follows,  per  lin.  ft. : 

Excavation   and   Backfill : 

4.92    hrs.   labor   at   15   cts $0.74 

0.28  hrs.  foreman  at  40  cts 0.11 

Making  Pipe: 

1.05    hrs.   labor   at   20   cts $0.21 

0.13   hrs.   labor  at   40   cts 0.05 

During  Mar.  5  to  Apr.  16,  the  labor  cost  was  as  follows  per  lin. 
ft: 

Excavation  and  Backfill: 

4.91    hrs.    labor   at    15    cts ?0.74 

0.18  hrs.  foreman  at  40  cts 0.07 

Making  Pipe: 

0.73  hrs.  labor  at  20  cts $0.15 

0.07   hrs.   foreman   at   40   cts 0.03 

During  tne  first  period  there  was  less  excavation  per  lin.  ft. 
and  less  water  to  handle. 

The  freight  on  the  staves  from  Washington  was  $300  per  car. 
The  contract  price  for  the  4  2 -in.  pipe  was  $2.25  per  lin.  ft.  exclu- 
sive of  earthwork. 

Labor  on  a  Wooden  Stave  Pipe  at  Ogden.— Mr.  Henry  Goldmark 
gives  the  following  relative  to  6  ft.  wood  stave  pipe  line,  27,000  ft. 
long,  built  in  1896  near  Ogden,  Utah.  The  pipe  is  laid  in  a  trench 
8%  ft.  wide  and  9%  ft.  deep.  The  maximum  hydrostatic  pressure 
is  50  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  The  lumber  was  Douglas  fir,  the  staves  meas- 
uring 2  y2  x  8  ins.  before  final  dressing,  and  2x7  %  ins.  dressed. 
Sills,  6x8  in.  x  8  ft.,  were  laid  8  ft.  apart,  with  6  x  6-in.  chocks 
or  cradles  on  top.  The-  bands  were  %  to  %  in.,  and  there  were 
two  shoes  to  each  band.  A  gang  of  20  men  built  about  70  lin.  ft. 
per  day;  10  of  these  men  assembled  the  pipe  and  put  on  enough 
bands  to  hold  the  staves  together ;  the  other  10  men  put  on  the  re- 
maining bands  and  did  the  back-cinching.  There  were  1,500,000  ft 


WATER-WORKS.  719 

B.   M.  of  lumber  and  2,500,000  Ibs.  of  steel  in  bands  and  shoes  of 
this  27,000  lin.  ft.  pipe  line. 

Labor  on  a  Wooden  Stave  Pipe  at  Lynchburg.— A  wood  stave 
pipe  line  was  laid  in  1906  at  Lynchburg,  Va.  The  pipe  is  30  ins. 
diam.,  made  of  2  x  6-in.  redwood  staves,  banded  with  %-in.  steel 
rods.  The  cast  shoes  weigh  1  Ib.  each;  320,000  bands  were  used 
for  2,000,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  staves.  A  gang  of  18  men  averaged  150 
ft.  of  pipe  built  per  day;  12  of  these  men  fit  up  and  assemble  the 
pipe,  and  6  men  back  cinch.  The  trench  was  6  ft.  wide,  the  upper 
part  being  excavated  with  drag  scrapers. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Conduit. — To  Mr.  G.  C.  Woollard, 
engineer  for  James  Stewart  &  Co.,  contractors,  I  am  indebted  for 
the  following  data  relating  to  the  construction  of  a  5-ft.  concrete- 
steel  conduit  in  the  Cedar  Grove  Reservoir,  near  Newark,  N.  J. 
Two  conduits,  side  by  side,  were  built  across  the  bottom  of  the 
reservoir  from  the  gate  house  to  a  tunnel  outlet.  Since  the  con- 
duits are  to  be  submerged,  a  small  amount  of  leakage  at  end  joints 
is  not  objectionable. 

Trial  sections  of  the  conduits  were  tested  under  hydrostatic  pres- 
sure ;  one  of  the  conduits  broke  under  an  internal  pressure  of  15 
Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  rupture  taking  place  at  a  joint  near  the  springing 
line  of  the  arch  where  work  had  been  stopped  over  night  during 
construction.  Another  section,  in  which  no  stopping  had  occurred, 
resisted  a  pressure  of  34  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. ;  but  the  leakage  of  the 
wooden  bulkhead  used  in  the  test  prevented  applying  a  greater 
pressure. 

The  concrete  was  1  :  2  :  5,  no  stone  exceeding  1%  ins.  being  used. 
Expanded  metal,  No.  10  steel  with  a  3-in.  mesh,  weighing  0.56  Ibs. 
per  sq.  ft.,  made  by  the  Associated  Expanded  Metal  Companies,  was 
used.  When  construction  was  begun  the  sheets  of  expanded  metal 
were  bent  up  into  the  middle  wall,  but  it  was  found  that  the  in-, 
clined  part  of  the  metal  acted  as  a  screen  to  separate  the  mortar 
from  the  stone.  Hence  the  form  of  the  metal  was  made  as  in  Fig. 
20. 

"The  particular  thing  that  was  insisted  upon  by  both  Mr.  M.  R. 
Sherrerd,  the  chief  engineer  of  the  Newark  Water  Department, 
and  Mr.  Carlton  E.  Davis,  the  resident  engineer  at  Cedar  Grove 
Reservoir,  in  connection  with  these  conduits,  was  that  they  be 
built  without  sections  in  their  circumference,  that  the  whole  of  the 
circumference  of  any  one  section  of  the  length  should  be  construct- 
ed at  one  time.  f  They  were  perfectly  willing  to  allow  us  to  build 
the  conduit  in  any  length  section  we  desired,  so  long  as  we  left  an 
expansion  joint  occasionally  which  did  not  leak. 

"The  good  construction  of  these  conduits  was  demonstrated  later, 
when  the  section  stood  40  Ibs.  pressure  to  the  square  inch,  and,  in 
addition,  I  may  say  that  these  conduits  have  not  leaked  at  all  since 
their  construction.  This  shows  the  wisdom  of  building  the  conduit 
all  around  in  one  piece,  that  is,  in  placing  the  concrete  over  the 
centers  all  at  one  time,  instead  of  building  a  portion  of  it,  and  then 


720 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


completing  that  portion  later,  after  the  lower  portion  had  had   an 
opportunity  to  set. 

"The  centers  which  I  designed  on  this  work  were  very  simple 
and  inexpensive,  as  will  be  gathered  from  the  cost  of  the  work, 
when  I  state  that  this  conduit,  which  measured  only  0.8  cu.  yd.  of 
concrete  to  the  lineal  foot  of  single  conduit,  cost  only  $6.14  per  cu. 
yd.,  built  with  Atlas  cement,  including  all  labor  and  forms  and 
material,  and  expanded  metal.  The  forms  were  built  in  16  ft. 
lengths,  each  16  ft.  length  having  five  of  the  segmental  ribbed  cen- 
ters such  as  are  shown  in  Fig.  20.  viz.,  one  center  at  each  end  and 
three  intermediate  centers  in  the  length  of  16  ft.  These  segments 
were  made  by  a  mill  in  Newark  and  cost  90  cts.  apiece,  not  includ- 


Form  Boards  IO"xZ"x8'o"Long 
<e*/^sfs,  every  g'o" 

Fig.  20. — Centers  for  Concrete  Conduit. 

Ing  the  bolts.  We  placed  the  lagging  on  these  forms  at  the  reser- 
voir, and  it  was  made  of  ordinary  2x4  material,  surfaced  on  both 
sides,  with  the  edges  bevelled  to  the  radius  of  the  circle.  These 
pieces  of  2  x  4  were  nailed  with  two  lOd.  nails  to  each  segment 
The  segments  were  held  together  by  four  %-in.  bolts,  which  passed 
through  the  center,  and  1%-in.  wooden  tie  block.  There  was  no 
bottom  segment  to  the  circle.  This  was  left  open,  and  the  whole 
form  held  apart  by  a  piece,  B,  of  3x2  spruce,  with  a  bolt  at  each 
end  bolted  to  the  lower  segment  on  each  side. 

"The  outside  forms  consisted  of  four  steel  angles  to  each  16  ft. 
f>t  the  conduit,  one  on  each  end,  and  two,  back  to  back,  in  the  mid- 
dle of  each  16  ft.  length.  These  angles  were  2x3,  with  the  2-in. 


WATER-WORKS.  721 

side  on  the  conduit,  and  the  3-in.  side  of  the  angle  had  small  lugs 
bolted  on  it  at  intervals,  to  receive  the  2x12  plank,  which  was 
slipped  down  on  the  outside  of  the  conduit,  as  it  was  raised  in 
height.  The  angles  were  held  from  kicking  out  at  the  bottom  by 
stakes  driven  into  the  ground,  and  held  together  at  the  top  by  a 
Ms -in.  tie-rod. 

"The  conduit  was  10  ins.  thick,  save  at  the  bottom,  where  it  was 
12  ins.  The  reason  for  the  12  ins.  at  the  bottom  was  that  the 
forms  had  to  have  a  firm  foundation  to  rest  on,  in  order  to  put  all 
the  weight  required  by  the  conduit  on  them  in  one  day  or  at  one 
time,  without  settling.  We  therefore  excavated  the  conduit  to 
grade  the  entire  length,  and  deposited  a  4-in.  layer  of  concrete  to 
level  and  grade  over  the  entire  length  of  the  conduit  line.  This 
gave  us  a  good,  firm  foundation,  true  and  accurate  to  work  from, 
and  this  is  the  secret  of  the  good  work  which  was  done  on  these 
conduits.  If  you  examine  them,  you  will  say  that  they  are  one  of 
the  neatest  jobs  of  concrete  in  this  line  that  has  been  built,  especi- 
ally with  regard  to  the  inside,  which  is  true,  level  and  absolutely 
smooth.  [The  author  can  confirm  this  statement.]  When  the  con- 
duit is  filled  with  water,  it  falls  off  with  absolutely  no  point  where 
water  stands  in  the  conduit  owing  to  its  being  out  or  the  proper 
amount  of  concrete  not  being  deposited. 

"The  centers  were  placed  jn  their  entirety  on  a  new  length  of 
conduit  to  be  built,  resting  upon  four  piles  of  brick,  frwo  at  each  end 
as  shown.  The  first  concrete  was  placed  in  the  forms  at  the  point 
marked  X  and  the  next  concrete  was  dropped  in  through  a  trap 
door  cut  in  the  roof  of  the  conduit  form  at  the  point  marked  Y. 
This  material  was  dropped  in  to  form  the  invert,  and  this  portion 
was  shaped  by  hand  with  trowels  and  screened  to  the  exact  radius 
of  the  conduit.  The  concrete  was  then  placed  continuously  up  the 
sides,  and  boards  were  dropped  in  the  angles  which  I  have  men- 
tioned, and  which  served  as  outside  form  holders  till  the  limit  was 
reached  at  the  top,  where  it  was  impossible  to  get  the  concrete  in 
under  the  planking  and  thoroughly  tamped.  At  this  point  the  top 
was  formed  by  hand  and  with  screeds. 

"Each  16-ft.  length  of  this  concrete  was  made  with  opposite 
ends  male  and  female  respectively,  that  is,  we  had  a  small  form 
which  allowed  the  concrete  to  step  down  at  one  end  to  3  ins.  in 
thickness  for  8  ins.  back  from  the  end  of  the  section,  and  on  the 
other  end  of  the  section  it  allowed  it  to  step  down  to  3  ins.  in  thick- 
ness in  exactly  the  opposite  way,  making  a  scarf  joint.  Thia  was 
not  done  at  every  16  ft.  length,  unless  only  16  ft.  were  placed  in 
one  day.  We  usually  placed  48  ft.  a  day  at  one  end  of  the  conduit 
with  one  gang  of  men.  This  was  allowed  to  set  24  hours,  and, 
whatever  length  of  conduit  was  undertaken  in  a  day,  was  absolute- 
ly completed,  rain  or  shine,  and  the  gang  next  day  resumed  opera- 
tions at  the  other  end  of  the  conduit  on  another  48  ft.  length.  This 
was  completed,  no  matter  what  the  weather  conditions  were,  and, 
towards  the  close  of  this  day  the  forms  placed  on  the  preceding 
day  were  being  drawn  and  moved  ahead. 


722  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DAT 4. 

"The  method  used  in  moving  these  forms  ahead  for  another  day's 
work  is  probably  one  of  the  secrets  of  the  low  cost  of  this  work, 
and  it  is  one  which  we  have  never  seen  employed  before.  The 
bolt  at  A,  Fis.  20.  was  taken  out,  and  the  tie  brace  B  thrown  up. 
We  had  hooks  at  the  points  C.  A  turnbuckle  was  thrown  in,  catch- 
ing these  hooks,  and  given  several  sharp  turns,  causing  the  entire 
form  to  spring  downward  and  inwards,  which  gave  it  just  enough 
clearance  to  be  carried  forward,  without  doing  any  more  striking 
of  forms  than  pulling  the  bolt  at  A.  This  method  of  pulling  the 
forms  worked  absolutely  satisfactorily,  and  never  gave  any  trouble, 
and  we  were  able  to  move  the  forms  very  late  in  the  day  and  get 
them  all  set  for  next  day's  work,  giving  all  the  concrete  practical- 
ly 24  hours'  set,  as  we  always  started  concreting  in  the  morning  at 
the  furthest  end  of  the  form  set  up  and  at  the  greatest  distance 
from  the  old  concrete  possible  in  the  48  ft.  length,  as  the  furthest 
form  had,  of  course,  to  be  moved  first,  it  being  impossible  to  pass 
one  form  through  the  other. 

"Six  16-ft.  sections  of  these  forms  were  built,  and  three  were 
used  each  day  on  each  end,  as  shown  by  the  diagram  MN,  Fig. 
20,  which  gives  the  day  of  the  month  for  the  completion  of  each 
of  seven  48-ft.  sections. 

"A  gang  of  men  simply  shifted  on  alternate  days  from  end  to  end 
of  the  conduit,  although  several  sections  were  in  progress  at  one 
time ;  and  of  course,  finally,  when  a  junction  was  made  between 
any  division,  saV  of  1,000  ft.,  to  another  1,000  ft.,  one  small  form 
was  left  in  at  this  junction  inside  of  the  conduit,  and  had  to  be 
taken  down  and  taken  out  the  entire  length  of  the  conduit. 

"The  centers  for  a  16-ft.  length  of  this  conduit  cost  complete 
for  labor  and  material,  $18.30,  but  they  were  used  over  and  over 
again ;  and,  after  this  conduit  was  completed,  they  were  taken 
away  for  use  at  other  points,  so  that  the  cost  is  hardly  appreci- 
able, and  the  only  charge  to  centers  that  we  made  after  the  first 
cost  of  building  the  centers,  was  on  account  of  moving  them  daily. 
Part  of  this  conduit  was  built  double  (two  6-ft.  conduits)  and  part 
single,  the  only  difference  being  that,  where  the  double  conduit 
was  built,  two  forms  were  placed  side  by  side,  and  not  so  much  was 
undertaken  in  one  day. 

"These  conduits,  when  completed  and  dried  out,  rung  exactly 
like  a  60-in.  cast-iron  pipe,  when  any  one  walked  through  them  or 
stamped  on  the  bottom." 

Mr.  Woollard  gives  the  .following  analysis  of  the  cost  per  cubic 
yard  of  the  concrete-steel  conduit  above  described: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

1.3  bbl.   cement    $1.43 

10  cu.  ft.   sand 0.35 

25  cu.    ft.    stone 1.10 

26  sq.  ft.  expanded  metal,  at  3  cts 0.78 

Loading  and  hauling  materials  2,000  ft.  to  the  mixing  board 

(team    at    $4.50)      0.50 

Labor  mixing,  placing,  and  ramming 1.38 

Labor  moving  forms 0.60 

Total     . $6.14 


WATER-WORKS.  723 

Wages  were  17%  cts.  per  hr.  for  laborers  and  50  cts.  per  hr.  for 
foremen.  The  concrete  was  1  :  2  :  5,  a  barrel  being  assumed  to  be 
3.8  cu.  ft.  The  concrete  was  mixed  by  hand  on  platforms  along- 
side the  conduit.  The  cost  of  placing  and  ramming  was  high,  on 
account  of  the  expanded  metal,  the  small  space  in  which  to  tamp, 
and  to  the'  screeding  cost.  When  forms  were  moved  they  were 
scraped  and  brushed  with  soft  soap  before  being  used  again. 

From  Mr.  Morris  R.  Sherrard,  Engr.  and  Supt.  Dept.  of  Water, 
Newark,  N.  J.,  I  have  received  the  following  Qata  which  differ  slight- 
ly from  those  given  by  Mr.  Woollard.  The  differences  may  be  ex- 
plained by  the  fact  that  the  cost  records  were  made  at  different 
times.  Mr.  Sherrerd  states  (Sept.  26,  1904)  that  each  batch  con- 
tains 4  cu.  ft.  of  cement,  8  cu.  ft.  of  sand,  and  20  cu.  ft.  of  stone, 
making  22  cu.  ft.  of  concrete  in  place.  One  bag  of  cement  is  as- 
sumed to  hold  1  cu,  ft.  He  adds  that  a  10-hr,  day's  work  for  a 
gang  is  63  lin.  ft.  of  single  5-ft.  conduit  containing  47.4  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  and  1,260  sq.  ft.  of  expanded  metal.  This  is  equivalent 
to  %  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  per  lin.  ft.  The  total  cost  of  material  for 
one  complete  set  of  forms  64  ft.  long  was  $160 ;  and  there  were 
7  of  these  sets  required  to  keep  two  gangs  of  men  busy,  each  gang 
building  63  lin.  ft.  of  conduit  a  day.  Since  the  total  length  of  the 
conduit  was  3,850  ft,  the  first  cost  of  the  material  in  the  forms  was 
18  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

Cost   of  Labor   on    5-ft.    Conduit : 

Per  day.     Per  cu.  yd. 
1    foreman   on   concrete    $   3.35  $0.07 

1  water  boy    0.75  0.01 

11  men  mixing  at  $1.75 19.25  0.39 

5  men  mixing  at  $1.50 7.50  0.16 

4  men  loading  stone  at   $1.40 5.60  0.12 

4  men   wheeling   stone   at   $1.40 5.60  0.12 

2  men   loading   sand   at    $1.40 2.80  0.06 

2  men  wheeling  sand  at  $1.40 2.80  0.06 

1  man  placing  concrete  at  $1.75 1.75  0.04 

6  men  placing  concrete  at   $1.50 9.00  0.19 

2  men  supplying  water  at   $1.50 3.00  0.06 

1  man  placing  expanded  metal  at  $2 2.00  0.04 

1  man  placing  expanded  metal  at  $1.50 1.50  0.03 

Total   labor  on   concrete    $64.90  $1.35 

Cost  of  Labor  Moving  Forms : 

Per  day.  Per  cu.  yd. 

4    carpenters  placing  forms    $13.00  $0.27 

2  .helpers  placing  forms 4.00  0.08 

1  carpenter  putting  up  boards  for  outside  forms     2.75  0.06 

1  helper  putting  up  boards  for  outside  forms.  .  .  .  2.25  0.05 

2  helpers  putting  up  boards  for  outside  forms.  3.50  0.07 

1    team  hauling   lumber 4.50  0.09 

1  helper  hauling  lumber    1.75  0.04 


Total   labor   moving   forms $31.75  $0.66 

It  will  be  noted  that  -it  required  two  men  to  bend  and  place  the 
700  Ibs.,  or  1,260  sq.  ft,  of  expanded  metal  required  for  63  lin.  ft 
of  conduit  per  day,  which  is  equivalent  to  0.5  ct  per  lb.,  or  0.3  ct^ 
per  sq.  ft.,  for  the  labor  of  shaping,  placing  and  fastening  the 
metal. 

Reference  to  Other  Concrete  Conduits, — In  the  section  on  Sewen? 


724  HANDBOOK   OF   COS1    DATA. 

Will  be  found  more  data  on  reinforced  concrete  conduits.     See  also 
Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction — Methods  and  Cost." 

Cost  of  Brick  Conduit. — A  conduit  of  horseshoe  shape,  7y2  ft. 
in  diameter,  was  built  with  a  brick  arch  8  ins.  thick  and  a  con- 
crete invert  lined  with  brick  4  ins.  thick.  The  following  relates  to 
the  brickwork.  Work  was  done  by  contract,  in  1884,  in  Massachu- 
setts. Mr.  Henry  A.  Carter  gives  the  cost  of  960  M  of  brickwork 
was  as  follows: 

Labor: 

Foreman,    39    days,    at   $5.00 $  195.00 

Laborers,    320    days,    at    $1.25 400.00 

Laborers,   1,752  days,  at  $1.50 2,628.00 

Masons,    753   days,   at   $4.90 3,601.50 

Carpenters,    4    days,    at    $2.50 10.00 

Horse  and  car,   90  days,  at  $3.15 283.50 

Miscellaneous    labor    23.75 

Materials: 

Brick,    960,000,    at   $8.40   per   M 9,024.00 

Cement,    315    bbls.    Portland,    at    $3.20 1,00800 

Cement,    1,681    bbls.    natural,    at    $1.26 2,118.06 

Sand,  571  cu.  yds.,  at  $1.20 685.20 

Plant: 

Boiler,    15   days,   at   $1.00 15.00 

Pumps,    101    days,    at    $0.25 25.25 

Cars  and  tools   79.00 

Forms  and  centers   304.00 

Coal,   12   tons,   at   $6.00 72.00 

Office    building    57.00 

Total     $20,529.26 

General  expense,  timekeeper,  watchman,  etc.      1,038.36 

Grand    total    $21,567.62 

These  960  M  of  brick  made  1,600  cu.  yds.  of  masonry,  or  570 
bricks  per  cu.  yd.  About  5%  were  culled  and  rejected.  It  took 
1.23  bbls.  of  cement  per  cu.  yd.  Masons  each  averaged  1,250  bricks 
per  day,  which  was  a  poor  average  for  men  paid  such  high  wages. 
The  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  this  brick  masonry  was : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Masons    laying,    at    49    cts.    per    hr $"  2.38 

Laborers    tending,    including    unloading,    etc.,    15 

cts.    per   hr 2.07 

Brick,   570   at   $8.40   per  M 5.59 

Sand,   0.35  cu.  yd.,  at  $1.20 0.42 

Cement,    1.23    bbls 1.55 

Forms    0.19 

General   expense  and  miscellaneous    1.05 

Total    per    cu.    yd $13.25 

The  cost  of  2,500  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  foundation  and  in- 
vert was  as  follows: 

Labor:  Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman,     at     $2.75 $0.16 

Laborers,    20   at   $1.65 1.22 

Carpenters,    2   at   $2.25 0.15 

Horse   and   car,    at    $3.15 0.15 

Miscellaneous    labor    0.01 

Total    labor    .  .'.$1.69 


WATER-WORKS. 


725 


Materials  for   concrete    $3.34 

Lumber   for    forms    0.05 

Cement   shed    0.04 

Tools,     pumping,     etc 0.09 


Grand   total    $5.21 

Weight  of  Iron  or  Steel  Stand  Pipes. — With  iron  or  steel  assumed 
to  have  a  safe  tensile  stress  of  12,500  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  assuming  that 
single  riveted  joints  have  66%  of  the  strength  of  the  solid  sheet  and 
that  double  riveted  joints  have  75%,  each  sheet  to  build  5  ft. 
Table  XIII  was  calculated  by  Mr.  A.  H.  Rowland  in  1886. 


TABLE  XIII. 


1' 


3* 


|* 

gc 


lif 

y 


i 


5 

147.0 

6 

211.5 

7 

287.9 

8 

376.0 

9 

475.9 

10 

587.5 

12 

846.1 

14 

1, 

151.5 

15 

1, 

325.9 

16 

1, 

504.0 

18 

1, 

903.6 

20 

2, 

350.0 

22 

2, 

843.5 

25 

3, 

672.0 

27% 

4, 

442.7 

30 

5, 

304.0 

33 

6, 

398.2 

35 

7, 

197.0 

40 

9, 

400.0 

45 

11, 

897.0 

50 

14, 

688.0 

0.1455 
0.1494 
0.1455 
0.1554 
0.1500 
0.1525 
0.1670 
0.1940 
0.2080 
0.1989 
0.2192 
0.2218 
0.2440 
0.2425 
0.2681 
0.2496 
0.2754 
0.2917 
0.3332 
0.3127 
0.3465 


105 
90 
75 
70 
60 
55 
50 
50 
50 
45 
40 
40 
40 
35 
35 
30 
30 
30 
30 
25 
25 


g*fe 

w  2  C 


65 
55 
50s 
45 
40 
35 
30 
30 
30 
25 
25 
25 
25 
20 
20 
20 
20 
15 
15 
10 
10 


IS*  .>rf 


0.0069 
0.0083 
0.0097 
0.0111 
0.0125 
0.0139 
0.0167 
0.0194 
0.0208 
0.0221 
0.0249 
0.0277 
0.0305 
0.0347 
0.0383 
0,0418 
0.0459 
0.0486 
0.0555 
0.0625 
0.0693 


From  this  table  the  details  of  any  iron  stand  pipe  can  be  deter- 
mined and  tabulated.  Then  from  such  a  tabulation  calculate  the 
weight  of  the  metal  as  follows :  Figure  the  superficial  area  of  the 
stand  pipe  of  given  diameter  for  a  ring  5  ft.  in  height,  multiply  this 
by  the  weight  of  a  square  foot  of  metal  of  the  thickness  of  each 
ring,  add  them  all  together  and  add  the  weight  of  the  bottom,  and 
then  add  10%  for  laps  and  rivets. 

Cost  of  a  Standpipe,  Quincy,  Mass.— Mr.  C.  M.  Saville  gives  the 
following  r-elative  to  a  300,000  gal.  steel  standpipe  built  in  1900,  at 
QuiBcy,  Mass.  The  pipe  is  30  ft.  diam.  and  64  ft.  high.  The  lowest 
plates  are  9/16  in.  thick,  and  the  top  plates  are  %  in.  thick.  The 
bottom  is  of  %  in.  plates.  The  bottom  or  floor  plates  and  the  first 
course  were  assembled  and  riveted,  resting  on  rivet  kegs  directly 


726  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

over  their  final  location  in  the  concrete  foundation,  and  then  low- 
ered to  place  with  hydraulic  jacks. 

In  erecting,  the  contractor  used  inside  and  outside  platforms 
swung  from  the  top  of  the  last  plates  set  up,  and  for  hoisting  the 
plates  he  used  a  gin  pole  bolted  to  seams  in  this  course.  This  pole 
was  of  such  a  length  that  a  block  at  its  top  was  9  ft.  above  the 
top  of  the  plate  to  which  the  pole  was  bolted.  The  hand  winch 
was  located  on  the  ground.  Riveting  and  calking  were  done  with 
pneumatic  machines,  a  12  HP.  Clayton  air  compressor  (a  larger 
compressor  should  have  been  used)  and  25  HP.  boiler  being  used. 
For  calking  a  thick  edged  tool  was  required,  as  it  made  a  better 
joint  than  a  thin  edged  tool. 

The  side  plates  were  first  set  up  with  bolts,  and,  when  all  were  in 
place,  the  riveting  was  begun  at  the  top  and  worked  down,  except 
in  the  case  of  the  lowest  two  or  three  courses,  when  riveting  kept 
pace  with  erection.  The  space  between  the  bottom  of  the  pipe  and 
the  concrete  foundation  was  filled  with  neat  cement  grout,  by 
means  of  a  force  pump,  through  grooves  left  for  the  purpose  in  the 
concrete  foundation.  During  this  process,  6  ft.  of  water  were  put 
into  the  standpipe  to  prevent  its  being  lifted. 

The  actual  cost  (to  the  contractor)  of  the  labor  on  the  stand- 
pipe  was  nearly  0.9  ct.  per  lb.,  as  follows: 

Per  lb. 

Assembling   plates    $0.33 

Riveting 0.42 

Calking     0.10 

Painting     0.40 


Total     $0.89 

The  contractor's  plant   cost   about   $1,600.     The   gang  employed 
was: 

1  foreman  at  $3.50. 
1  calker  at  $3.00. 
1  riveter  at  $2.50. 

1  engineman  at  $2.50. 

2  heaters  at  $2.00. 

3  helpers  at  $1.80. 

The  contract  price  for  the  standpipe  was  3.8  cts.  per  lb      The  ac- 
tual cost  to  the  contractor  was  3.88  cts.  per  lb.,  as  follows: 
Materials : 

55-tons  steel  plates  at  $50 $2,750.00 

1  ton  L,  iron  at   $107 107.00 

70   kegs   rivets  at    $2.75 192.50 

Bolts    used    in    erection 10.00 

Moving  materials  to  and  from  shope  and 

cars     250.00 

Freight    and    materials    180.00 


Total     $3,489.50 

Labor : 

Assembling  plates $    383.33 

Riveting    488  38 

Calking     111.95 

Painting 47.36 


Total     $1,031.02 


WATER-WORKS.  727 

Since  the  total  weight  of  the  standpipe  was  116,450  Ibs.,  the  cost 
per  pound  was : 

Materials     2.99  cts. 

Labor 0.89  cts. 

Total     3.88  cts. 

The  steel  standpipe  rests  on  a  concrete  foundation  and  is  sur- 
rounded by  a  masonry  tower.  At  contract  prices  the  total  cost  was 
as  follows : 

Foundation : 

1,355   cu.    yds.    excavation $      514.90 

284  cu.  yds.  concrete  (48  ft.  diam.  X  5  ft. 

thick)      : 1,704.00 

Grouting  under   standpipe   133.26 

Total,    foundation    $  2,352.16 

Standpipe     4,529.72 

Masonry    tower     24,790.00 

Pipe    connections     339.37 


Grand  total    $32,011.25 

The  masonry  tower  is  77  ft.  high,  4%  ft.  thick  at  the  base,  3y2  ft. 
thick  at  a  point  10  ft.  above  the  base,  2  ft.  thick  at  the  top.  The 
following  are  principal  items  in  the  tower : 

925   cu.   yds.   rubble  masonry    (granite). 

275   cu.   yds.   dimension   stone    (granite). 

14  tons  iron  and  steel  work. 

90    sq.    yds.    granolithic   observation   roof. 

The  so-called  rubble  was  laid  in  courses  with  %-in.  joints  at  the 
face.  Between  the  tower  and  the  standpipe  the  contractor  erected  a 
staging.  Across  me  top  of  the  standpipe  were  placed  two  pairs 
of  4  x  12-in.  timbers,  30  ft.  long  and  trussed  with  1*4 -in.  rods. 
These  timbers  rested  partly  on  the  standpipe  and  partly  on  the 
staging.  A  platform  was  laid  on  these  timbers  and  a  guy  derrick 
with  a  20  ft.  mast  and  a  30-ft.  boom  was  mounted  on  the  platform. 

Cost  of  Steel  Stand  Pipe  Encased  in  Brick. — Mr.  Edward  Flad 
gives  the  following  data  relative  to  a  standpipe  built  in  1895  at  St. 
Charles,  Mo. 

The  tank  is  25  ft.  diam.,  70  ft.  high,  and  holds  250,000  gals.  It 
is  of  steel  plates  (%  to  %  in.  thick)  encased  in  brick,  a  space  of 
2  ft.  being  left  between  the  brick  and  the  steel.  It  rests  on  a 
foundation  of  natural  cement  concrete  5  ft.  thick.  The  .roof  is  of 
steel  covered  with  slate.  There  are  six  horizontal  circular  girders 
riveted  to  the  steel  casing,  to  provide  for  wind  pressure,  acting  like 
the  stiffeners  of  a  plate  girder.  The  brick  work  is  9  ins.  thick  for 
the  upper  30  ft.  and  13  ins.  thick  for  the  lower  40  ft.,  and  bears 
upon  the  circular  girders  just  referred  to.  Eight  •  brick  pilasters 
(30  ft.  high)  were  built  for  architectural  effect,  brick  arches  join- 
ing the  tops  of  the  pilasters.  There  is  a  steel  cornice  with  a  hand 
rail  around  the  top.  A  light  scaffold  was  built  inside  the  tank,  and 
a  cage  swung  on  the  outside,  the  plates  being  raised  by  a  gin  pole. 
A  forge  was  placed  on  the  cage  and  rivets  were  driven  from  the 
inside.  After  the  iron  work  was  in  place,  the  brick  casing  was  built 
from  a  scaffold. 


728  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  work  was  done  by  contract  at  the  following  prices : 

Steel    $4,450 

Brick    casing 2,807 

_         Foundation    678 

Total     $7,935 

Brick  Casing  Around  Stand  Pipe.— Mr.  W.  J.  Laing  gives  the 
following  data  relative  to  a  brick  casing  built  in  1898  around  an 
iron  standpipe  to  prevent  ice  formation.  The  iron  standpipe  is  25 
ft.  diam.  and  90  ft.  high.  It  rests  on  a  concrete  pedestal  62  ft. 
high,  7  ft.  of  which  is  below  ground  level.  This  pedestal  contains 
1,200  cu.  yds.  concrete.  The  top  of  the  standpipe  is  145  ft.  above 
ground  level.  The  masonry  casing  around  the  standpipe  is  162  ft. 
high,  and  contains  1,275  tons  of  broken  stone,  13  cars  of  cement, 
500,000  brick,  and  5,000  Ibs.  of  iron.  It  required  45,000  ft.  B.  M. 
of  staging,  and  16  men  were  three  months  building  the  casing. 

Cost  of  a  Steel  Tank  and  Tower,  Ames,  la.— Mr.  A.  Marston 
gives  the  following  relative  to  162,000  gallon  water  tank  mounted 
on  a  steel  tower  110  ft.  high,  built  at  Ames,  la.,  in  1897.  The  steel 
work  is  24  ft.  diam.  x  40  ft.  high  (excluding  the  height  of  a  hemi- 
spherical bottom).  The  curved  roof  is  of  galvanized  iron  on  a  steel 
frame  work.  The  tank  is  supported  by  a  tower  composed  of  8 
Z-bar  columns  (12  in.)  resting  on  8  concrete  pedestals.  Bach  ped- 
estal is  10  ft.  square  at  the  base,  and  4  ft.  square  on  top,  capped 
with  stone  18  ins.  thick.  The  height  of  each  pedestal  is  7  ft.  be- 
low the  stone  cap,  and  each  contains  nearly  19  cu.  yds.  of  con- 
crete. The  contract  price  for  the  foundations  was  $1,150.  The 
contract  price  for  the  steel  tank  and  tower  was  $8,966,  making  a 
total  of  $10,116. 

Cost  of  Steel  Tank  and  Tower,  Porterville,  Calif.— Mr.  Phifip  E. 
Harroun  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  a  75,000  gal.  tank  on 
a  tower,  built  in  1904  for  the  waterworks  at  Porterville,  Calif. 

The  tank  is  of  steel,  20  ft.  diam.  x  25  ft.  high,  plates  being  *4 
to  5/16  in.,  and  has  a  hemi-spherical  bottom.  The  tower  has  four 
legs  108  ft.  long,  resting  on  concrete  pedestals.  The  foundation 
work  was  done  by  day  labor  at  20  cts.  per  hr.  The  tower  and 
tank  wers  erected  by  contract.  The  cost  was: 
157  cu.  yds.  excav.  at  64%  cts...  ..$  101.74 

52  eu.  yds.  backfill  at  12^4  cts 6.40 

105  cu.  yds.  loaded  and  hauled   %  miles  at  20 % 21.35 

104.7   cu.   yds.   concrete    (-materials  at   $5.86,   and   labor  at 

$1.88).   at  $7.74    810.53 

65    cu.    ft.    granite  capstones    231.55 

78,532  Ibs.  steel,  tow§r  and  tank,  in  place  at  0.066 5,191.00 

102  ft.  screw  pipe,   10  in.   riser £69.23 

Miscellaneous 19.51 

Total .  $6Y6loJsi 

Cost  of  Steel  Tank  and  Tower,  Fairhaven,  Mass. — An  elevafed 
water  tank  was  built  at  Fairhaven,  Mass.,  In  1593.  Its  capacity  is 
383,000  gals,  and  its  cost  was  $19,000.  The  ste.el  tank  is  35  ft. 
diam.  x  50  ft.  high,  with  a  conical  bottom,  and  is  supported  by  12 
steel  posts,  97  ft.  high,  surmounted  by  a  ginder  3  ft.  high,  tote? 


WATER-WORKS.  729 

100  ft.  Each  post  rests  on  a  masonry  pedestal  9  X  9  ft.  at  the  base 
6X6  ft.  at  the  top,  5  y2  ft.  high,  capped  with  a  4  X  4  ft.  stone  1  ^ 
ft.  thick. 

Cost  of  Steel  Tank  and  Tower,  Providence,  R.  I.— Mr.  F.  M.  Bow- 
man gives  the  following  relative  to  a  steel  water  tank  and  tower 
built  in  1904  for  East  Providence,  R.  I.  The  cost  was  a  little  less 
than  $100,000.  The  tower  is  135  ft.  high  from  base  of  column  to 
base  of  tank;  the  steel  tank  is  50  ft.  diam.  X  70  ft.  high,  and  holds 
1,000,000  gals.  The  foundations  are  of  concrete  resting  on  solid 
rock. 

Cost  of  Scraping  and  Painting  a  Stand  Pipe.  —  Mr.  Byron  I. 
Cook  says  that  it  is  practice  to  scrape  and  paint  the  interior  of  a 
stand  pipe  every  two  years.  An  old  flat  file,  ground  to  a  chisel 
edge,  is  used  for  scraping,  and  it  costs  less  than  0.1  ct.  (1  mill) 
per  square  yard  for  scraping.  He  prefers  novices  to  regular  paint- 
ers. The  cost  of  painting  with  two  coats  of  Durable  Metal  Coating 
was: 

1  Paint    $0.049  per  sq.  yd.  v 

Labor   0.042  per  sq.  yd. 

Total     $0.091  per  sq.  yd. 

The  outside  of  the  pipe  is  not  painted  oftener  than  once  in  five 
years,  with  Dixon  graphite  paint. 

Weight  of  Wooden  Tank  and  Steel  Tower.— A  steel  tower  80  ft. 
high  and  supporting  a  wooden  water  tank  28  ft.  diam.  X  22  ft.  high 
(100,000  gals)  weighed  100,000  Ibs.  This  weight  of  steel  includ- 
ed 25,000  Ibs.  of  steel  I  beams  (24  ins.)  forming  part  of  the  plat- 
form on  which  the  tank  rested.  Brick  arches  between  these  I 
beams  formed  the  platform.  The  dead  load  was  as  follows: 

Lbs. 

Tank    25,000 

Water     830,000 

Platform     (brick)      70,000 

Platform   steel   J    beams 25,000 

Tower     75,000 

Total     ..1,025,000 

Cost  of  a  Wooden  Water  Tank,  La  Salle,  III.*— The  following 
figures  of  cost  of  constructing  a  wooden  water  tank  are  given  by 
Mr.  C.  H.  Nicolet,  of  La  Salle,  111.  The  tank  was  built  to  replace 
a  tank  which  failed  on  March  29,  1905,  because  of  the  rusting  and 
bursting  of  the  iron  bands  or  hoops.  This  old  tank  was  30  ft.  in 
diameter  and  24  ft.  high,  and  was  mounted  on  a  circular  stone 
tower  77  ft.  high.  It  was  built  of  Louisiana  red  gulf  cypress,  the 
stairs  and  bottom  being  3  ins.  thick  and  the  hoops  3/16  X  6  ins.  and 
14  X  6  ins.,  with  the  usual  spacing.  The  new  tank  was  of  the 
same  dimensions  and  type,  but  with  changes  in  details.  The  grade 
of  the  lumber  was  raised  by  limiting  the  amount  of  bright  sap  on 
any  one  edge  to  '  1  %  ins.  T^his  change  increased  the  cost  of  the 
wood  Work  about  1-1%.  The  mdst  Important  change,  however,  was 

*  Engineering-Contracting,   Sept.   26,    1906, 


730  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

in  the  style  of  band  used.  Round  rods  were  used.  There  were  29 
hoops  of  1%  in.  diameter  and  six  at  the  top  1  in.  in  diameter,  all 
of  mild  steel.  They  were  spaced  5  ins.  apart  on  centers  at  the  bot- 
tom and  varying  up  to- 21  ins.  at  the  top.  The  hoops  were  made 
of  three  30-ft.  rods  with  a  short  filling  piece,  this  being  the  limit- 
ing length  obtainable  from  stock.  The  rods  were  bent  to  the 
proper  curve  before  being  placed.  The  joints  were  made  by  means 
of  malleable  iron  lugs  of  the  type  commonly  used  in  built-up  stave 
pipe  in  the  West.  The  cost  of  the  tank  as  described  was  as  fol- 
lows: 

Materials : 
Tank  complete  at  mill   (wood  work  only)    "Tank  grade".. $    698.00 

Added  for  raising  grade  of  lumber    76.00 

Freight     39.00 

$    813.00 

Rods,    1%    in.    round 10,046  Ibs. 

Rods,    1        in.    round 1,734  Ibs. 


11,780  Ibs. 
11,780  Ibs.,  at   $1.85   Chicago 217.95 


Lugs,  116 — iy8-in.  at  43y2c $41.76 

Lugs,      24— 1-in.    at    36c 8.64 


50.40 


Total   materials    $1,081.35 

Labor : 

Machinists  and  helpers — threading  and  bending  rods,  grind- 
ing lugs,   etc.,   214  hours $      45.00 

Carpenters  and  helpers,   removing   debris   of   old   tank  and 

erecting  new  tank  and  roof;  also  painting,  907  hours.  .  . .       200.00 

Laborers — mainly   removing   debris   of   old   tank 10.00 

Total  labor $  255.00 

Grand  total  $1,336.35 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  labor  of  putting  on  the  roof  is  in- 
cluded above,  but  not  the  material.  This  consisted  of  a  flat  cover 
made  of  1%  in.  tongued  and  grooved  plank  resting  on  2  X  12  in. 
joists  tops  flush  with  top  of  tank,  supported  on  two  trucks  with 
cup!.,  and  two  6X6  in.  posts,  each  set  on  tank  bottom. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Standpipes.*— Mr.  George  H.  Snell,  Mr.  Frank  A. 
Barbour,  and  Mr.  Leonard  C.  Wason  give  the  following  data  relative 
to  a  reinforced  concrete  standpipe  built  in  1904  at  Attleborough, 
Mass.  The  standpipe  is  50  ft.  diam.  x  100  ft.  high,  and  holds  1,500,- 
000  gals.  The  experience,  gained  with  a  former  standpipe  of  iron 
indicated  that  a  steel  pipe  would  have  a  life  of  only  20  years,  because 
the  water  contained  carbon  dioxide  (CO-;).  Two  tons  of  rust 
had  been  removed  annually  from  a  wrought-iron  standpipe  30 
ft.  in  diam.  x.125  ft.  high.  The  bid  on  a  steel  standpipe,  50 
ft.  x  100  ft,  was  $37,135.  The  bid  of  the  Aberthaw  Construction 
Co.  on  the  reinforced  concrete  standpipe  and  gate  house  was  $34,000, 
which  was  accepted. 

The  concrete  wall  is  18  ins.  thick  at  the  bottom  and  8  ins.  thick 
at  the  top.  The  bottom  is  of  concrete  1  ft.  thick,  and  the  concrete 
foundation,  18  ins.  thick,  rests  on  hardpan  7  ft.  below  the  ground 

*Engineering-Cqntracting,  Dec.   26.  1906. 


WATER-WORKS. 


731 


level.  The  concrete  foundation  is  of  1 :  3  :  6  concrete.  The  walls  are 
of  1:2:4  concrete,  reinforced  with  round  steel  rods  (0.40  carbon). 
Rods  of  riiilder  steel  would  have  been  better,  for  it  was  difficult  to 
bend  them  so  that  they  would  hold  their  shape,  on  account  of  their 
springiness.  Twisted  steel  rods  could  not  be  bent  in  true  planes 
and  had  to  be  abandoned.  The  rods  were  pulled  through  a  tire 
bender  around  a  curved  form  by  a  steam  engine.  The  rods  were  in 
56%-ft.  lengths,  and  were  spliced  by  overlapping  30  ins.,  using  three 
Crosby  guy-rope  clips  without  which  it  would  have  been  very 
difficult  to  secure  a  satisfactory  splice.  It  was  at  first  attempted 
to  support  these  hoops,  or  rings,  with  vertical  rods  of  twisted  steel, 
but,  due  to  lack  of  rigidity  of  these  rods,  4-in.  channels  were  sub- 
stituted, spaced  11  ft.  apart.  It  would  have  been  better  had  the 
channels  been  closer.  Holes  were  punched  through  the  flanges  of 
the  channels  at  proper  intervals,  and  %-in.  pins  inserted  to  sup- 
port the  hoops  or  rings  as  in  Fig.  21.  Up  to  a  height  of  60  ft. 
there  were  two  rings  of  1%-in.  bars  spaced  3%  to  8  ins.  vertically. 
There  were  2%  ins.  of  concrete  outside  of  the  outer  ring,  and  4  ins. 
between  the  two  rings.  From  60  to  81  ft.  there  was  but  one  ring, 


Fig.   21. 


spaced  as  shown  in   Fig.    22.     Above   81   ft.   the   diameter  was  re- 
duced to  1%  ins. 

The  labor  of  bending  and  placing  the  steel  actually  cost  $9  per 
ton,  or  0.45  ct.  per  Ib.     The  Crosby  clips  cost  37  cts.  each. 
The  cost  of  the  1:2:4  concrete  in  the  walls  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement     $  4.80 

Sand   and   stone 3.90 

Mixing   concrete    0.40 

Placing  concrete    2.f " 

Forms,    labor    and   lumber 

480   Ibs.   steel,   assumed  at  2   cts 

Bending   and   placing   480   Ibs.,   at   0.45 

4   Crosbv  clips,  at  0.37 

fowl     $27~19 

There  are  770  cu.  yds.  in  the  walls,  which,  at  $27.19,  gives  an 
actual  cost  of  $20,936.  This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  plastering 
and  waterproofing. 


2.65 
9.60 
2.16 
1.48 


732 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Fig.  22. — Reinforced  Concrete  Standpipe. 


WATER-WORKS.  733 

There  are  nearly  90  ou.  yds.  in  the  floor,  which  are  included  in 
the  770  cu.  yds.  above  given.  There  are  about  280  cu.  yds.  of 
1:3:6  concrete  in  the  foundation. 

The  standpipe  has  an  ornamental  concrete  cornice  and  a  dome* 
shaped  roof  of  Guastavino  tile. 

A  timber  tower  60  ft.  high  was  erected  inside  the  standpipe  and 
a  derrick  with  a  40-ft.  boom  was  mounted  on  the  tower,  the  derrick 
being  operated  by  an  engine  on  the  ground.  When  the  standpipe 
had  reached  a  height  of  60  ft,  the  height  of  the  tower  was  in- 
creased to  110  ft.  and  the  derrick  raised.  The  cost  of  this  tower 
and  of  raising  the  derrick  was  $1,700,  which  is  equivalent  to  $2.20 
per  cu.  yd.  This  is  charged  against  the  item  of  forms  and  of 
placing  concrete. 

The  plant  included  a  Sturtevant  roll  jaw  crusher,  bucket  elevator 
and  rotary  screen,  and  a  Smith  mixer. 

The  floor  and  a  section  of  wall  2^  ft.  high  were  molded  in  one 
operation,  after  which  the  wall  was  built  up  in  sections  1%  ft. 
high.  The  reinforcing  was  first  built  up  to  a  height  of  7^  ft.  and 
then  the  forms  were  placed.  The  forms  were  made  in  sections  11  ft. 
long.  The  lagging  of  the  outside  forms  was  boards  nailed  vertically 
to  wooden  ribs.  The  lagging  of  the  inside  forms  was  boards  placed, 
one  at  a  time,  horizontally,  as  the  wall  was  built  up,  so  that  the 
concrete  was  always  easily  accessible.  The  sections  of  forms  were 
locked  together  by  iron  clamps.  Two  sets  of  forms  were  used,  so 
that  one  set  was  left  in  place  while  the  other  was  being  raised  and 
made  ready  to  receive  the  concrete.  The  batter  of  the  outside  of 
the  tank  increased  the  difficulty  of  the  work,  for  they  had  to  be 
adjusted  from  time  to  time  to  provide  for  the  decreasing  circum- 
ference. It  is  questionable  whether  the  cost  of  this  adjusting 
did  not  exceed  the  saving  of  concrete  effected  by  the  use  of  a 
batter. 

Fig.  23  shows  the  timber  tower  and  the  standpipe  partly  built. 

Fig.   22   shows  the  design  of  the  standpipe. 

Since  the  wall  was  built  in  sections  7%  ft.  high,  great  care  was 
taken  to  secure  a  perfect  joint  between  the  sections.  At  the  top 
of  each  concrete  section  a  groove  was  formed  by  a  2  x  3-in.  strip  of 
beveled  wood.  When  this  was  removed,  the  top  surface  was  well 
scrubbed  with  water  and  coated  with  neat  cement.  This  joint 
proved  very  effective.  The  operation  of  placing  steel  and  raising 
forms  for  a  new  section  took  three  days,  so  that  the  concrete  sur- 
face was  quite  hard  when  concreting  was  resumed. 

The  concrete  was  dumped  on  platforms  on  the  tower  and  shoveled 
into  the  forms.  Care  was  taken  not  to  make  the  concrete  so  wet 
that  spading  and  ramming  would  drive  the  stone  to  the  bottom  and 
leave  porous  spots.  The  mixture  must  not  be  more  wet  than  will 
enable  the  mortar  to  support  the  broken  stone.  Atlas  Portland 
cement  was  used  throughout. 

After  the  wall  had  reached  a  height  of  20  ft.,  the  tank  was  filled 


734  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

with  water,  and  it  was  kept  filled,  as  the  work  progressed,  to  the 
elevation  of  the  bottom  of  the  lowest  set  of  forms.  Considerable 
leakage  developed  at  first,  but  this  gradually  grew  insignificant, 
although  the  waterproof  coat  had  not  yet  been  placed.  At  no  time 
was  more  than  1  to  2  per  cent  of  the  exterior  surface  wet  by  leak- 
age. During  the  winter  some  of  the  concrete  scaled  off  near  the 
bottom  on  the  outside,  apparently  due  to  cavities  outside  the  steel 
reinforcement,  probably  caused  by  a  slight  moving  of  the  forms 


i?ig.  23.— Erecting  Concrete  Standpipe. 

when  the  concrete  was  being  placed.  Repairs  were  made  by  digging 
around  the  outside  rows  of  steel  reinforcement,  putting  on  iron 
clips  (%  x  %  in.)  of  iron  bolted  through,  and  then  forcing  cement 
into  the  cavities  around  the  clips  by  throwing  it  a  distance  of  4  ft. 
against  the  wall.  Expanded  metal  was  then  fastened  to  the  clips, 
and  covered  with  cement  plaster,  and  then  more  expanded  metal 
was  put  on  over  this  and  plastered. 

The  inside  of  the  tank  was  plastered  after  roughening  the  sur- 
face of  the  concrete  with  a  pick.     The  plastering  seemed  to  have 


WATER-WORKS,  735 

little  effect  in  absolutely  stopping  the  leakage.  The  lower  25  ft. 
were  subsequently  given  5  more  coats  of  plaster  without  entirely 
stopping  leakage.  Finally  the  surface  was  treated  by  the  Sylvester 
process,  as  follows: 

Thoroughly  dissolve  %  Ib.  pure  Castile  olive  oil  soap  to  each  gal- 
lon of  water.  Thoroughly  dissolve  1  Ib.  of  pure  alum  in  8  gals,  of 
water.  Thoroughly  clean  the  wall  and  dry  it.  Apply  the  soap  solu- 
tion boiling  hot,  with  a  flat  brush,  taking  care  not  to  form  a  froth. 
Wait  24  hours  so  that  the  solution  will  become  dry  and  hard  upon 
the  walls,  then  apply  the  alum  solution  in  the  same  way,  at  a  tem- 
perature of  60  to  70°  F.  Wait  24  hours,  and  repeat  with  alternate 
coats  of  soap  and  alum. 

In  1870  this  process  was  used  successfully  to  waterproof  brick 
walls  on  the  Croton  reservoir,  4  coats  of  each  solution  being  suffi- 
cient;  1  Ib.  of  soap  covered  37  sq.  ft.,  and  1  Ib.  of  alum  cov- 
ered 95  sq.  ft. 

After  applying  four  coats  of  each  solution  to  the  concrete  stand- 
pipe,  up  to  a  height  of  35  ft,  water  was  admitted  to  a  height  of 
100  ft.,  and  only  four  leaks  developed.  Then  four  more  coats  were 
applied  to  this  35-ft.  section,  and  above  that  only  four  coats  were 
used. 

It  was  found,  by  tests  at  the  Watertown  Arsenal,  that  three 
Crosby  clips  developed  the  full  tensile  strength  of  the  iy2-in.  re- 
inforcing rods. 

The  design  of  this  tank  and  further  details  are  given  in  "Concrete 
Construction"  by  Gillette  and  Hill. 

Materials  In  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Stand  Pipe. — Mr.  J.  L.  H. 
Barr  gives  the  following  relative  to  an  81-ft.  standpipe  of  reinforced 
concrete  built  in  1903  at  Milford,  Ohio. 

The  outside  diameter  is  15%  ft.  The  shell  is  9  ins.  thick  for  the 
lower  30  ft,  7  ins.  thick  for  the  next  25  ft,  and  5  ins.  thick  for  the 
remaining  26  ft  The  concrete  foundation  is  octagonal,  20  ft  diam- 
eter of  inscribed  circle,  and  6  ft  thick.  The  shell  is  made  of  1:3 
mortar  (no  stone)  reinforced  with  1  x  1  x  %-in.  T  bars.  The  ver- 
tical bars  are  18  ins.  c.  to  c.  ;  the  horizontal  bars  are  spaced  6  to 
the  foot  for  the  lower  30  ft.,  5  to  the  foot  for  the  next  25  ft,  and 
4  to  the  foot  for  the  remaining  26  ft 

The  forms  were  3-ft.  staves  (1%  x  3  ins.)  nailed  to  circular  ribs 
(4x4  in. ) ,  the  topmast  rib  extending  1  in.  above  the  tops  of  the 
staves  so  as  to  form  a  rabbit  to  receive  the  next  form.  Three  sets 
of  forms  were  used,  each  3  ft.  high.  Each  set  consisted  of  an  inner 
and  an  outer  form,  each  divided  into  8  segments  for  ease  of 
handling.  This  standpipe  required: 

68  cu.  yds.  gravel  containing  40%  sand  (for  base). 
90  cu.  yds.  sand  (for  shell). 
270  bbls.  cement. 
25,000  Ibs.  steel. 


736  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

There  would  appear  to  be  Insufficient  steel  in  the  horizontal  rings, 
since  the  tensile  stress  at  the  bottom  is  nearly  22,000  Ibs.  per 
SQ.  in. 

The  amount  of  gravel  for  the  base  or  foundation  appears  to  be 
approximately  correct,  since  it  would  be  about  70  cu.  yds.  of  con- 
crete; but  the  amount  of  sand  appears  to  be  overestimated,  as  the 
shell  would  contain  but  60  cu.  yds.  The  base  inside  the  shell  was 
covered  with  1 :  3  mortar  6  ins.  deep,  which  would  require  about  3 
cu.  yds. 

It  is  stated  that  the  contract  price  for  this  standpipe  was  $200 
less  than  the  lowest  bid  for  a  steel  standpipe. 

Cost  of  12-in.  Well,  Portersville,  Calif.— Mr.  Philip  E.  Harroun 
gives  the  following  cost  of  12-in.  well,  216  ft.  deep,  driven  in  1904 
at  Portersville,  Cal.  The  material  penetrated  was  clay.  The  con- 
tract price  for  drilling  the  well  and  driving  the  casing  was  $2  per 
lin.  ft.  The  well  had  a  double  casing,  the  inner  casing  being  No.  14 
gage,  and  the  outer  being  No.  16  gage,  in  2-ft.  lengths.  The  casing 
cost  $1  per  ft.  thus  making  the  total  cost  $3  per  ft.  Various  inci- 
dentals added  $50  to  the  cost  of  the  well. 

Relative  Cost  of  Waterworks  and  of  Filters.— When  it  is  gener- 
ally known  that  it  costs  about  $100  to  produce  a  million  gallons  of 
water  in  the  average  city,  and  less  than  $10  to  purify  it  by  filtra- 
tion— including  plant  interest  and  depreciation  in  both  cases — there 
is  certain  to  be  far  less  hesitancy  about  incurring  the  expense  of 
providing  filter  plants.  Somehow  the  impression  prevails  that  pump- 
ing water  and  delivering  it  through  pipes  is  very  cheap,  and  that 
filtering  is  exceedingly  expensive,  whereas  it  costs  ten  times  as 
much  to  supply  water  as  it  does  to  filter  it  under  ordinary  condi- 
tions. The  expensive  system  of  piping  that  underlies  the  streets 
of  a  city  costs  about  $35  per  capita  of  population,  whereas  a  slow 
sand  filter  plant  capable  of  supplying  100  gals?  per  capita  per  day 
costs  only  $3.50  per  capita,  and  a  mechanical  filter  plant  costs  less 
than  $2.70  per  capita.  In  other  words,  by  an  expenditure  of  about 
10%  more  than  the  first  cost  of  a  piping  and  pumping  system  for  a 
city  of  less  than  100,000  population  a  filter  plant  can  be  added  to 
the  existing  water  supply  system. 

It  is  true  that  the  cost  of  operating  a  filter  plant  is  not  corre- 
spondingly small,  but  it  is  a  relatively  small  item  nevertheless.  As 
will  be  seen  from  the  data  subsequently  given,  the  principal  cost 
of  operating  a  sand  filter  is  the  scraping  and  cleaning  the  sand, 
and  replacing  it  on  the  filter  bed.  Year  by  year,  improved  methods 
have  been  develop^  lor  washing  and  handling  the  sand,  and  the 
end  of  this  development  is  by  no  means  reached  yet. 

Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Ashland,  Wis.— Mr.  William  Wheeler 
gives  the  following  relative  to  a  slow  sand  filter  built  in  1895  at 
Ashland,  Wis.  This  was  the  first  sand  filter  plant  in  America  to  be 
covered  with  masonry.  The  3  filter  beds  have  an  area  of  %  acre. 
They  are  so  located  on  the  lake  shore  that  it  was  necessary  to 


WATER-WORKS.  737 

build  a  pile  bulkhead  around  three  sides  of  the  filter  beds.  The 
walls  are  of  concrete  and  brick,  3  ft.  thick  at  the  bottom  and  2  ft. 
at  the  top.  The  beds  are  roofed  with  groined  elliptical  brick 
arches  (15%  ft.  span),  resting  on  brick  pillars,  and  backed  with 
concrete.  Two  courses  of  brick  laid  flat  form  the  arch  rings  (6 
ins.  thick).  The  floor  is  of  concrete  only  3  ins.  thick.  It  is  below 
the  lake  level,  which  necessitated  building  a  cofferdam  during  con- 
struction. The  sand  beds  are  4  ft.  thick  resting  on  9  ins.  of 
gravel.  The  work  of  construction  was  entirely  by  day  labor.  The 
cost  was  as  follows: 

470  lin.  ft.  cofferdam  (not  with  earth  filling) $  1,720 

Handling  water 493 

6,943  cu.  yds.  earth  excavation 3,233 

340,400  bricks,  laid  in  walls 6,237 

45,000  bricks,  laid  in  piers 827 

349,550  bricks,  laid  in  roof  arches 6,755 

Centers  for  roof  arches  (labor  and  materials) 1,157 

37  manholes  724 

House  over  effluent  chamber  and  sump  well 627 

1,000  cu.  yds.  concrete 5,977 

Vitrified  collecting  pipes,  laid 116 

Cast-iron  collecting  pipes,  laid 639 

Cast-iron  supplying  pipes,  laid 725 

Pipe,  pipe  connections,  pump,  etc 729 

880  cu.  yds.  gravel  in  filter  beds 1,949 

3,385  cu.  yds.  sand  in  filter  beds 4,201 

Sundries 2,268 

Engineering  and  superintendence 1,800 

Total     $40,178 

This  is  equivalent  to  about  $80,000  per  acre,  but,  had  it  not  been 
for  the  difficult  conditions  and  winter  work,  the  cost  would  have 
been  $5,000  less,  or  $70,000  per  acre,  including  pump  well,  sump 
well,  effluent  chamber,  piping  and  housing.  A  further  reduction  of 
10  to  15  per  cent  in  cost  could  be  effected  where  building  stone  and 
suitable  sand  and  gravel  were  near  at  hand. 

This  plant  filtered  1,100,000  gals,  per  day,  or  at  the  rate  of 
2,200,000  gals,  per  acre  per  day.  It  required  10  scrapings  of  sand 
per  year,  removing  610  cu.  yds.  of  sand,  which  was  equivalent  to 
1.52  cu.  yds.  of  sand  scraped  per  million  gallons.  The  cost  of  this 
scraping  was  62  cts.  per  million  gallons,  or  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of 
sand,  the  cost  of  scraping  a  bed  of  one-sixth  acre  being  as  follows : 

3  men  scraping,    %   day,   at  $1.50 $2.25 

2  men  wheeling  in  filter,   %  day,  at  $1.50 1.50 

1  man  tending  bucket  at  bottom,   ^  day,  at  $1.50 0.75 

2  men  load  and  dump  at  bottom,    %   day,  at   $1.50 1.50 

1  man  wheeling  away  at  top 0.75 

1  single   team   to   hoist   bucket 2.50 

Tools  and  sundries 0.50 

Total  for  1/6  acre ... 8.58 

There  were  21  cu.  yds.  of  sand  (plus  the  mud)  removed  at  each 
cleaning  of  a  bed,  making  the  cost  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  dirty 
sand  was  not  washed,  but  new.  clean  sand  was  delivered  by  contract 
and  placed  for  $1  per  cu.  yd.  Hence  the  cost  of  scraping  sand  and 
of  replacing  with  new  sand  cost  $1.40  per  cu.  yd.  of  sand  scraped, 


738  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

or  $213  per  million  gallons.  Adding  13  cts.  to  this  for  superin- 
tendence,  etc.,  the  total  cost  of  filtering  was  $2.26  per  million  gals. 
At  5  per  cent  interest  on  the  first  cost  of  the  plant,  the  capital 
charges  are  $5.05  per  million  gallons,  making  a  total  of  $7.31  per 
million  gallons. 

Cost  of  Filter,  Berwyn,  Pa. — Mr.  J.  W.  Ledoux  gives  the  fol- 
lowing data  relative  to  a  small  ( y2  acre)  sand  filter  plant  built  in 
1898  at  Berwyn,  Pa.  It  has  a  nominal  filtering  capacity  of  1,500,- 
000  gals,  per  day.  The  filters  are  built  in  3  compartments  (not 
roofed)  each  having  7,500  sq.  ft.  effective  filtering  area,  or  about 
85  ft.  square.  A  vertical  section  through  the  filter  beds  shows  30 
ins.  of  sand,  6  ins.  of  gravel,  3  ins.  of  concrete  floor  and  8  ins.  of 
puddle.  The  main  drains  are  12-in.  vit.  sewer  pipe ;  the  laterals  are 
4-in.  tile,  spaced  6  ft.  apart,  set  in  depressions  in  the  concrete.  The 
side  walls  are  of  rubble,  outside  of  which  is  the  embankment.  The 
cost,  including  a  $2,000  gate  house  and  accessories,  was  as  follows: 

6,7715  cu.  yds.  excavation,  at  $0.241 $  1,630.80 

528.3  cu.  yds.   stone  masonry,  filter  basin,  at  $5.541 2,927.31 

2.4  cu.  yds.  brick  masonry,  filter  basin,  at  $9.16 21.98 

304.5  cu.  yds.  concrete,  filter  basin,  at  $6.153 1,873.43 

2,432  sq.  yds.  plastering  and  forming  gutters,  at  $0.243...  591.60 

3,200  lin.  ft.  4-in.  tile  drain,  in  place,  at  $0.065 207.20 

246  lin.  ft.  12-in.  collecting  drain,  at  $0.654 160.80 

286  lin.  ft.  12-in.  clean-out  drain,  at  $1.198 342.64 

281  lin.  ft.  12-in.  cast-iron  inlet  and  outlet  pipes,  at  $1.571  441.57 

200  lin.  ft.   14-in.   cast-iron  filter  discharge,   at  $2.192 438.36 

542  cu.  yds.  puddle,  at  $0.709 384.63 

655.55  tons  gravel  in  filter  bottom,  at  $2.115 1,386.62 

2,696.83  tons  sand  in  filter  bottom,  at  $1.639 4,420.10 

97.2  cu.  yds.  stone  masonry,  gate  house,  at  $7.234 703.07 

10.75  cu.  yds.  brick  masonry,  gate  house,  at  $7.38 79.33 

125.3    cu.    yds.    excavation   and   back   fill,    gate   house,   at 

$0.985     123.43 

Roofing   (slate),  woodwork  and  painting,  gate  house 210.81 

9,584  Ibs.  flange  pipe   (12-in.),  gaskets,  etc.,  at  $0.031 296.26 

Registering    and    weir    apparatus 272.45 

Valves  (6  to  12-in.),  with  boxes  and  band  wheels 254.69 

Superintendence   and   engineering 729.00 

Incidentals   1,000.00 

Total     $  1 8,535.59 

Since  the  filter  bed  has  a  total  area  of  22,500  sq.  ft,  the  cost  was 
about  82  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  (including  cost  of  the  gate  house),  or 
$35,700  per  acre.  This  cost  is  equivalent  to  $12,000  per  million 
gallons  of  daily  capacity.  The  "superintendence  and  engineering" 
was  4  per  cent  of  the  total  cost. 

Cost  of  Filter,  Nyack,  N.  Y.— Mr.  G.  N.  Houston  gives  the  fol- 
lowing relative  to  a  slow  sand  filter  plant  built  in  1899  at  Nyack,  N. 
Y.  The  filter  beds  are  not  roofed.  There  are  two  beds  74  x  116  ft. 
each,  having  a  combined  filtering  area-of  0.38  acre.  The  maximum 
consumption  of  water  at  Nyack  was  630,000  gals,  per  day,  which 
would  require  a  filtering  capacity  of  3,300,000  gals,  per  acre  per 
day,  if  only  one  bed  were  used,  but,  in  practice,  both  beds  are  used 
except  when  one  is  being  cleaned.  The  raw  water  is  drawn  by 
gravity  from  a  nearby  creek.  The  filter  is  located  in  a  swamp, 


WATERWORKS.  739 

adjacent  to  the  cre«k,  which  made  its  construction  expensive.  In 
order  to  deliver  the  creek  water  by  gravity  to  the  filter,  it  was  nec- 
essary to  excavate  for  the  filter  beds  to  a  depth  of  10  ft.  The  ma- 
terial was  a  wet  tenacious  clay  whose  banks  would  crack  and  slip, 
so  Chat  it  was  necessary  to  support  the  side  walls  on  piles.  The 
clay  was  spaded  out  in  chunks  that  were  lifted  by  hand  into  wagons. 
Temporary  plank  roads  had  to  be  laid.  Sheet  piles  were  driven  all 
around  the  filter  beds  and  left  in  place.  Bents  of  bearing  piles 
were  driven  underneath  the  retaining  walls,  capped  and  floored 
with  plank.  On  this  pile  foundation,  which  cost  $3  per  lin.  ft.  of 
wall,  was  built  a  small  concreted  retaining  wall  for  a  height  of  3  ft. 
8  ins.,  the  top  of  this  wall  being  about  the  same  elevation  as  the  top 
of  the  sand  in  the  filter  bed.  The  earth  slope  above  the  retaining 
wall  was  paved  with  8  ins.  of  concrete  and  vitrified  brick  for  a 
length  of  about  6  ft.  measured  up  the  1%  to  1  slope.  The  division 
wall  was  also  supported  on  a  pile  foundation,  and  was  of  concrete 
up  to  the  level  of  the  surface  of  the  filter  sand,  and  above  that  it 
was  of  vitrified  brick  2  ft.  thick.  The  work  was  done  by  contract 
at  the  following  cost  to  the  village: 

Excavation   (10y2  ft.  deep  and  about  7,000  cu.  yds.) $  5,270 

Grading   and    soiling    1,500 

Sheet   piles,    66,000    ft.    B.   M.,    at   $50 3,300 

Bearing    piles,    352,    at    $4.42 1,558 

Hemlock   caps   and   floor 838 

Yellow  pine  caps  and  floor * 465 

Concrete  floor,   10y2   ins.    thick    ($1.50  per   sq.  yd.) 2,738 

Concrete  walls,   430  cu.  yds.,   at   $4.40 1,892 

Concrete    slope    paving 484 

Brick  slope  paving,   13.45   cu.   yds.,   at   $8.40 113 

Blue-stone    curb    250 

Vitrified   pipe  drains    (about   1,400   lin.    ft.    of   6-in.    and   230 

ft.    of    15-in.) 347 

Gravel  (12  ins.)  and  sand  (36  ins.),  2,570  cu.  yds.,  at  $2.15.  5,524 

House    over    regulating   chamber 150 

Pipe  laying 58 

Miscellaneous     250 


Total     $24,737 

Engineering  ($3,644)   and  inspection   ($713) 4,357 

Total,    0.38   acres,   at   $76,553 ; $29,094 

This  is  an  unusually  high  cost,  due  to  the  conditions  above  given, 
and  to  the  fact  that  the  work  was  dragged  along,  which  made  the 
expense  of  engineering  and  inspection  high.  The  price  of  filter 
gravel  and  sand  was  high,  as  it  was  brought  by  scow  from  Long 
Island. 

The  above  costs  include  a  clear  water  well  25  ft.  in  diameter, 
with  side  walls  12  ft.  high,  and  a  dome-shaped  roof  of  concrete. 

The  plank  "floor"  includes  not  only  the  floor  laid  on  the  bearing 
piles,  but  a  1-in.  hemlock  floor  laid  over  the  entire  bottom  of  the 
filter  bed  on  which  the  concrete  was  placed. 

Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Superior,  Wis.— Mr.  R.  D.  Chase 
gives  the  following  data  relative  to  a  sand  filter  and  aeration  plant 
built  in  1899  for  Superior,  Wis.,  to  remove  the  iron  from  water  from 


740  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

driven  wells.  There  are  3  filter  beds,  each  67  x  108  ft.,  and  with 
these  in  operation  there  is  0.5  acre  filtering  area,  with  a  capacity 
of  5,000,000  gals,  daily,  or  10,000,000  gals,  per  acre  per  day.  This 
rapid  rate  of  filtration  is  justified  because  there  is  no  mud  or 
bacteria. 

The  pure  water  reservoir  is  39  x  108  ft.  The  floor,  sides  and  i-oof 
are  of  concrete,  the  piers  supporting  the  roof  being  of  brick  20  ins. 
square  and  12  ft.  high.  The  floor  is  of  inverted  groined  arches,  and 
the  roof  is  of  groined  arches,  12  ft.  span  and  2%  ft.  rise,  6  ins. 
thick  at  the  crown.  The  roof  is  covered  with  2  ft.  of  earth. 

The  excavation  was  red  clay,  expensive  to  handle,  the  actual  cost 
being  55  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Each  filter  bed  has  20  manholes,  3  ft.  diam.,  3  ft.  high,  of  concrete 
8  ins.  thick,  with  double  covers  of  steel  plates. 

The  outside  walls  of  the  filter  beds  are  2%  ft.  thick  at  the  top, 
and  3  %  ft.  thick  at  the  base. 

The  construction  of  the  pure  water  reservoir  is  similar  to  that  of 
the  filters,  and  the  reservoir  has  a  capacity  of  300,000  gals. 

The  main  underdrains  are  20-in.  tile,  laid  in  concrete  beneath  the 
floor.  The  lateral  drains  are  of  6-in.  tile,  12  ft.  apart.  The  gravel 
was  dredged  from  the  lake.  Under  normal  conditions  4  ft.  of  water 
is  kept  on  top  of  the  sand. 

The  outside  dimensions  of  the  3  filter  beds  and  the  pure  water 
reservoir,  all  under  one  roof,  are  116  ft.  x  255  ft. 

The  construction  was  done  by  day  labor,  working  under  a  con- 
tractor who  was  paid  a  percentage  for  supervision.  Laborers  were 
inefficient,  yet  received  $2  a  day.  The  actual  cost  was  as  follows : 

Filters  and  pure  water  reservoirs: 

14,000  cu.   yds.    excavation,   at   $0.55+ $  7,630 

2,000  cu.  yds.  backfill   (roof,  etc.),  at  $0.30+ 600 

3,000  cu.   yds.   concrete,    at   $7.85+ 23,500 

Arch   centering    1,910 

120  cu.  yds.  brickwork,  at  $10.00 1,200 

Tile    pipe     860 

600  cu.  yds.  filter  gravel,  in  place,  at  $4.95 2,970 

1,600  cu.  yds.  filter  gravel,  in  place,  at  $3.04 4,864 

800  cu.  yds.  filter  gravel,  in  place,  at  $0.97 776 

Aerator    470 

Miscellaneous  charges    2,350 

Engineering  and  percentage  to  contractor 9,204 

Total     $56,334 

Land 6,280 

Iron  pipe,  pump,  pump  house,  etc 26,870 

Grand   total    $89,484 

Since  the  total  area  was  116  x  zo&  =  29,580  sq.  ft.  (0.68  acre), 
the  excavation  must  have  averaged  about  13  ft.  deep. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  filter  gravel  was  exceedingly  expensive, 
as  was  most  of  the  filter  sand.  The  sand  for  one  bed,  however, 
was  obtained  without  dredging  and  at  a  cost  of  only  97  cts.  per 
eu.  yd. 


WATER-WORKS.  741 

The  cost  of  cleaning  a  filter  bed  is  as  follows: 

5  men  scraping,  3  hrs.,  at  20  eta $  3.00 

1  team  hoisting,  2  hrs.,  at  40  cts 0.80 

5  men  hoisting,   2   hrs.,  at  20  cts 2.00 

5  men  smoothing,  2  hrs.,  at  20  cts 2.00 

Total,   labor,   10  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.78 $   7.80 

10  cu.  yds.  new  sand  to  be  replaced,  at  $1 10.00 

Grand  total,  10  cu.  yds.,  at  $1.78 $17.80 

About  12,000,000  gals,  are  filtered  through  each  bed  (0.25  acre) 
between  scrapings,  so  that  0.83  cu.  yd.  of  sand  is  scraped  per  mil- 
lion gallons,  and  the  cost  per  million  gallons  is : 

Labor  scraping  and  removing  sand $0.65 

Clean  sand  replaced 0.83 

Total     $1.48 

The  dirty  aand  is  hoisted  in  tugs  by  a  team,  a  tripod  with  a  block 
and  tackle  being  placed  temporarily  over  each  manhole  during 
hoisting. 

Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Washington,  D.  C.— Mr.  Allen  Hazen 
and  Mr.  E.  D.  Hardy  give  the  following  data : 

This  is  a  slow  sand  filtration  plant  treating  70,000,000  gals,  daily, 
and  its  cost  was  $3,356,300  (including  $619,900  for  land),  or  $47,950 
per  million  gallons  daily  capacity.  Assuming  interest  and  depreci- 
ation at  5  per  cent  per  annum,  the  capital  charge  is  $7  per  million 
gallons,  for  an  average  of  67,000,000  gals,  per  day,  and  the  operat- 
ing expense  is  about  $2  per  million  gallons,  making  a  total  of  $9 
per  million  gallons  filtered. 

The  summarized  cost  of  the  plant  is  as  follows: 

Pumping  station,  etc $    183,600 

29    filters,    29   acres,   at   $75,758 2,197,000 

Filtered  water  reservoir 150,000 

Lower  gate  house  and  pipe  line 24,300 

Land    619,900 

Engineering  and  clerical    181,500 

Total,  29  acres,  at   $115,735 $3,356,300 

Total,  exclusive  of  land 2,736,400 

The  detail  cost  was  as  follows: 

Pumping  Station : 

Intake,  with  gates  and  building ...                         $  11,500 

Venturi  meters,   72-in.  and  54-in 5,000 

Electric   lighting,    engines,   etc 7,000 

Four   200-hp.   boilers,  in  place 14,800 

Four  Roney  stokers 4,100 

Two  Green  fuel  economizers,   in  place 5,100 

Three  36-in.  centrifugal  pumps  and  engines 42,000 

Two    sand-washer   pumps 8,100 

Piping,    valves,    etc 13,100 

Coal,  oil  and  running  tests 3,500 

Traveling  crane   1,600 

Chimney    (with    foundation) 5,800 

Building    (with    foundation    and    well) 51,000 

Total,    pumping  station $183,600 


742  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Twenty-nine  Filters : 

862,700  cu.  yds.  excavation,  at  30  cts $  258,800 

299,500  cu.  yds.  filling,  at  30  cts 89,900 

Sodding  and   seeding   slopes 7,300 

Roads  and  drains  outside  of  filters 16,200 

Concrete  tunnel   under   First  St 3,100 

Concrete    (including  cement)  : 

36,563   cu.  yds.,  floors,   at   $6.75 246,800 

19,038  cu.   yds.,  walls,   at   $7.35 139,900 

6,964  cu.   yds.,   piers,   at   $8.25 57,500 

34,920  cu.  yds.,  roof   (vaulted),  at  $8.75 305,500 

Ramps  leading  to  tops  of  filters 6,800 

Court  paving 43,000 

7,900  ft.  Central  underdrains,  at  $1.65 13,000 

Interior   drainage   system,    29   filters,  at   $500 14,500 

Drainage  of  roofs,  29  filters,  at  $266 7,700 

Materials  placed  in  concrete,  29  filters,  at  $200 5,800 

157,725  cu.  yds.   filter  sand,  at  $2.65 418,000 

36,500  cu.  yds.   filter  gravel,   at  $2.75 100,400 

Cast-iron  pipe  and  specials 117,000 

Steel  rising  main  and  concrete  backing 76,800 

Pressure    pipe    system    2,600 

Sand-washer   pipe    system 24,000 

Sand  washers,   19  washers  and  8   ejectors 4,800 

Elevated  sand  bins,  29,  capacity  250  cu.  yds.  each 60,800 

Exterior    drainage    system 25,300 

Venturi  meters  and  indicating  apparatus 11,400 

Sluice    gates   and   gate   valves 19,900 

Regulator    houses 27,300 

Office    and    laboratory 19,700 

Shelter   house   for   workmen 4,800 

Water  and  gas  lines  to  buildings 11,200 

Electric  lighting  for  courts  and   filters 41,900 

Cleaning    up    and    miscellaneous 11,600 

Total,  filters,   29  acres,   at  $75,758 $2,197,000 

Filtered  Water  Reservoir: 

83,500  cu.   yds.    excavation,   at   30   cts $  25,100 

18,000  cu.  yds.   filling,   at   30   cts 5,400 

15,290  cu.   yds.   concrete,    at    $7.60 116,000 

Gate    house    superstructure 3,500 


Total,  reservoir .  $150,000 

Lower  Gate  House: 

Pipelines $     6,000 

Gate  house    18,300 


Total,  gate  house $  24,300 

Engineering  and  Clerical : 

General    plans $  36,000 

Surveying    32,000 

Field    office    force 21,000 

Main  office  force 67,000 

Watchmen     4,500 

Temporary    office     1,000 

Total  engineering    $181,500 

The  engineering  was  6.65  per  cent  of  the  total  cost  of  construc- 
tion, which  is  a  high  percentage  on  so  large  a  contract. 

This  Washington  filter  plant  is  similar  to  the  Albany  plant,  bur 


WATER-WORKS.  743 

it  cost  65  per  cent  more  per  acre,  due  principally  to  the  higher  con- 
tract prices,  especially  the  price  for  filter  sand  which  cost  $2.65  per 
cu.  yd.  at  Washington  as  compared  with  $1  per  cu.  yd.  at  Albany. 
It  was  anticipated  by  the  Washington  contractors  that  the  cost  of 
producing  filter  sand  of  specified  cleanliness  would  be  far  greater 
than  it  really  was. 

Cost  of  Filtering  at  Washington,  Albany  and  Philadelphia.— Mr. 
J.  A.  Vogleson  gave  the  following  table  of  cost  of  cleaning  filter 
sand  per  cubic  yard : 


Wa 
( 

shington     Albany 
;i906).    (1899-1901). 
$0.05               $0.13 
0.16                 0.25 
0.05                 0.30 
0.13                 0.25 

$0.39               $0.93 
$1.50               $1.50 
$0.60               $1.66 

Belmont 
(1905). 
$0.21 
0.23 
0.30 
0.25 

$0.80 
$1.75 
$1.25 

Upper 
Roxboro' 
(1905). 
$0.18 
0.22 
0.09 
0.30 

$0.79 
$1.75 
$0.63 

Removing     , 

Washing 

Replacing     ... 

Total,   per  cu. 
Rate  of  wages,  pe 
Cost,  per  million 

yd  

r  8  hrs. 
gals.  .  . 

The  low  cost  of  cleaning  Washington  filters  is  due  to  the  method 
used.  After  scraping  the  sand  into  piles,  it  is  shoveled  into  an 
ejector  and  carried  through  a  hose  to  a  4-in.  pipe,  and  thence  to  the 
sand  washers,  and  thence  through  pipes  to  the  sand  bins,  from 
which  it  is  drawn  off  into  carts  and  dumped  through  the  roof  of 
the  filter  into  a  rotatable  chute  which  discharges  it  where  desired. 

The  cost  of  30  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  "replacing"  the  sand  at  Upper 
Roxboro,  Philadelphia,  is  the  contract  price,  the  work  being  done 
with  wheelbarrows.  Before  the. replacing  was  done  by  contract,  it 
cost  the  city  52  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  by  day  labor,  thus  furnishing  an- 
other one  of  the  numberless  examples  of  the  greater  efficiency  of 
contract  labor. 

Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Albany,  N.  Y.— Mr.  Allen  Hazen 
describes  the  slow  sand  filter  plant  built  at  Albany,  N.  Y.,  in  1898- 
1899,  giving  the  following  data: 

The  plant  has  a  capacity  of  14,700,000  gals,  per  day,  and  its  first 
cost  was  $500,000,  including  the  pumping  plant.  There  are  8 
filter  beds  of  0.7  acre  filtering  area  each  (121  x  258-ft.  bed),  and 
with  one  bed  out  of  use  for  the  purpose  of  being  cleaned  the  yield 
of  the  7  beds  is  14,700,000  gals,  daily,  or  3,000,000  gals,  per  acre 
of  bed  in  active  service.  The  water  is  pumped  from  the  Hudson 
River  into  a  5-acre  (14,600,000-gal.)  sedimentation  basin  (380  x 
600  ft.),  9  ft.  deep,  the  2  centrifugal  pumps  having  a  total  capacity 
of  24,000,000  gals,  per  24  hrs.  against  a  lift  of  24  ft.  Half  of  the 
pumping  plant  is  capable  of  supplying  the  ordinary  consumption. 
The  clean  water  reservoir  holds  only  600,000  gals.,  being  very  small 
because  the  old  distributing  reservoirs  are  used  to  store  the  filtered 
water  after  it  is  pumped  from  the  clear  water  reservoir. 


744  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  this  plant,   in  round  numbers,  was  as  follows : 

Sedimentation    basin    $  60,000 

Clear   water   reservoir 9,000 

Filters    (at    $45,600   per   acre) 255,000 

Pumping  station    50,000 

Conduit  from  filter  to  pumping  station 87,000 

Engineering,    laboratory   equipment,    etc 31,000 


Total     $492,000 

Land 8,000 

Grand  total   $500,000 

This  is  equivalent  to  nearly  $35,000  per  million  gallons  of  daily 
capacity.  Strictly  speaking,  the  conduit  from  the  filter  to  the  pump- 
ing station  should  not  be  included,  and,  if  its  cost  ($87,000)  is  de- 
ducted, we  have  a  cost  of  about  $30,000  per  million  gallons  of  daily 
capacity. 

The  plant  was  built  by  contract,  and  the  following  is  a  more  de- 
tailed statement  of  the  cost  to  the  city: 

Filters,  Sedimentation  Basin  and  Pure  Water  Reservoir : 

Preliminary   draining $  1,956.71 

70,672   cu.  yds.   excavation,  at  $0.308 21,761.64 

16,040  cu.  yds.  rolled  embankment,  at  $0.52 8,340  80 

22,851  cu.  yds.  silt  and  loam  filling,  at  $0.15 .. 3,427-65 

23,439  cu.  yds.  general  filling,   road,  at  $0.18 4,219.02 

12,550  cu.  yds.  puddle,  at  $0.715 8,973.25 

1,775  cu.  yds.  gravel  lining,  at  $0.85 1,508.75 

2,257   sq.  yds.   split  stone  lining,  at   $0.82 1,850.74 

11,737  cu.  yds.  concrete  in  floors,  at  $2.31 27,112.47 

7,792  cu.  yds.  concrete  in  roof  vaulting,  at  $3.85 29,999.20 

3,147  cu.  yds.  all  other  concrete,  at  $2.13 6,703.11 

4,382  cu.   yds.  brick  work,   at   $8.125 35,603.75 

31,715   bbls.   Portland  cement,   at   $1.935 61,368.53 

7,281  cu.  yds.  filter  gravel,  at  $1.05 7,645.05 

36,488  cu.  yds.  filter  sand,  at  $1.00 36,488.00 

Cast-iron   pipes   and   specials 21,841.25 

Gates  and  valves 6,714.23 

672  filter  manhole  covers,  at  $4.40 2,956.80 

8  sand-run  fixtures,   at   $407.50 3.260.00 

8  regulator  houses,  at  $862.24 6,897.92 

1  office   and    laboratory 4,881.00 

Vitrified    brick    paving 2,158.00 

Iron   fence   about   court 1,704.00 

Extra  work  and  minor  items 9,692.01 


Total     $324,217.20 

The  excavation  averaged  4  ft.  deep.  The  6-in.  vitrified  drains 
were  placed  14  ft.  apart.  The  main  vitrified  drains  (12  to  30  ins.) 
were  placed  beneath  the  concrete  floor,  being  bedded  in  concrete. 

The  price  for  concrete  does  not  include  the  Portland  cement, 
which  is  a  separate  item.  The  concrete  was  mixed  1:3:5,  a  barrel 
being  3.8  cu.  ft.,  and  required  1.26  bbls.  cement  per  cu.  yd. 

The  actual  cost  of  the  concrete  is  given  on  p.  748. 

The  floor  of  the  filter  was  of  concrete,  built  in  the  form  of  in- 
verted grained  arches  to  distribute  the  pressure  over  the  subsoil. 
The  roof  was  of  concrete,  groined  arches  (6  ins.  thick  at  crown, 
span  12  ft.,  rise  2y2  ft),  supported  by  brick  piers  21  ins.  square  by 


WA  TER-WORKS.  745 

9%  ft.  high.     The  outside  walls  were  of  concrete  lined  with  8  ins. 
of  brick,  and  the  division  walls  were  of  brick. 

The  gravel  and  sand  were  dredged  from  the  river  with  a  dipper 
dredge  having  a  daily  capacity  of  500  cu.  yds.,  but  the  average  out- 
put was  300  cu.  yds.  The  sand  was  pumped  into  a  stock  pile. 

According  to  Mr.  W.  B.  Fuller  the  cost  of  roofing  the  filter  was 
about  30  per  cent  of  the  total  cost  of  the  filters,  or  $13,700  per  acre, 
or  31^  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  This  includes  not  only  the  brick  piers  and 
earth  covering  over  the  roof,  but  the  extra  thickness  of  the  floor 
necessary  to  carry  the  added  load. 

The  cost  of  one  section  of  concrete  floor,  brick  piers  and  concrete 
roof,  13  ft.  8  ins.  square  (187  sq.  ft),  at  contract  prices  was: 

4.85  cu.  yds.   floor,  at  $4.75 $23.04 

1.24  cu.   yds.    brick,   at   $9.67 11.99 

5.40  cu.   yds.    roof,    at    $6.30 34.02 

Total,  187  sq.  ft,  at  36.9  cts $69.05 

This  gives  an  average  thickness  of  7  ins.  of  concrete  in  the  floor. 
Deducting  the  cost  of  the  floor,  we  have  left  25  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 
as  the  cost  of  the  piers  and  the  roof.  This  does  not  include  the 
cost  of  the  2 -ft.  earth  fill  over  the  concrete  roof,  which  added  about 
10  cts.  per  sq.  ft,  the  price  of  the  silt  fill  being  only  15  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  This  roof  was  entirely  effective  in  preventing  freezing.' 

A  reinforced  concrete  roof  was  considered,  but  was  not  adopted 
because  the  city  water  board  objected  to  anything  "experimental." 

The  cost  of  operating  the  filter  plant  from  September   5  to  De- 
cember   25,    1899    (118    days),    was    $1.67   per   million   gallons,    for 
12,500,000  gals,  per  day. 
The  following  was  the  ordinary  force  of  men : 

Per  day. 

10  laborers,  at  $1.50  for  8  hrs $15.00 

1  foreman    2.75 

1  watchman 1.50 

Total    labor    $19.25 

1  chemist     3.00 

Total     $22.25 

The  cost  of  pumping  was  $2.52  per  million  gals.,  the  following 
being  the  daily  cost: 

3   engineers,    at    $2.48 $7.44 

3  firemen,    at    $1.98 5.94 

3  tons  coal,  at   $2.72 8.16 

1  laborer,   at  $1.50 1.50 

9  gals,   engine  oil,  at   $0.09 0.81 

2  gals,    cylinder   oil,   at   $0.11 0.22 

5  gals,    kerosene,   at    $0.10 0.50     , 

5  Ibs.  waste,   at  $0.07 0.35 

Steam    packing,    sheet    rubber,    soap,     soda, 

maps,    cloths,    etc 6.58 

Total $31.50 

Neither  of  the  above  costs  for  filtering  or  pumping  include  in- 
terest, depreciation  and  repairs. 


746  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  amount  of  sand  scraped  and  cleaned  was  0.7  cu.  yds.  per  mil- 
lion gallons.  The  labor  cost  was  as  follows  per  cubic  yard : 

1.44  hrs.  of  man  scraping,  at  18%  cts $0.270 

2.63  hrs.  of  man  wheeling,  at  18%   cts 0.493 

2.44  hrs.  of  man  washing,  at  18%  cts 0.458 

1.92  hrs.  of  man  refilling,  at  18%  cts 0.360 

.8.43         Total     $1.581 

This  is  equivalent  to  $1.19  per  million  gallons,  exclusive  of  fore- 
man's time,  cost  of  wash  water,  etc.  The  volume  of  water  for  wash- 
ing the  sand  was  about  13  times  the  volume  of  the  sand.  About 
%  in.  of  sand  (not  including  the  mud)  was  scraped  off  at  each 
ecraping,  requiring  76  hrs.  of  a  man's  time  to  scrape  an  acre.  The 
sand  was  wheeled  out  in  barrows  averaging  only  1  cu.  ft.  per  barrow 
load,  the  average  haul  being  300  ft.  from  point  of  loading  to  the 
sand  washer.  The  filters  yielded  66,600,000,000  gals,  per  acre  be- 
tween scrapings. 

The  sand  is  washed  in  sand  washers  of  the  ejector  type,  there 
being  5  ejectors  in  each  sand  washer  through  which  the  dirty  sand 
must  pass. 

Mr.  Geo.  I.  Bailey  gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of 
filtering  through  slow  sand  filters  at  Albany,  N.  Y.,  and  at  .Law- 
rence, Mass.,  both  being  for  the  year  1899: 

Albany  Lawrence 

(3,817  million        (1,170  million 

gals. )  gals. ) 

Ice  cutting  and  snow ....  $1.91 

Scraping  sand    $0.25 

Scraping  and  replacing  sand ....  3.18 

Wheeling  out    0.50  

Washing    sand    0.59  1.25 

Conveying  sand    ....  1.31 

Refilling 0.39  

Incidentals     0.20  0.43 

Repairing  elevator  and  tools.... ....  0.11 

Cleaning  basin    0.06  

Total     $1.99  $8.19 

Interest  and  depreciation  are  not  included,  nor  is  pumping.  The 
Lawrence  plant  makes  a  miserable  showing.  Scraping  and  replac- 
ing includes  scraping  the  beds,  wheeling  to  a  roadway,  and  carry- 
ing the  sand  back  from  the  washing  machine  and  spreading  on  the 
beds.  Conveying  sand  means  loading  and  transporting  it  (470  ft.) 
from  the  roadway  to  the  washing  machine.  Wages  were  25  cts. 
per  hr. 

The  Albany  plant  was  operated  319  days  (July  26,  1899,  to  July 
1,  1900),  giving  nearly  12,000,000  gals,  per  day.  Labor  was  paid 
18%  cts.  per  hr.  The  daily  average  was  2,630,000  gals,  per  acre. 
The  average  run  was  65,500,000  gals,  per  acre  between  cleanings. 
There  were  5,200  cu.  yds.  of  sand  and  mud  wheeled  out  (yielding 
3,687  cu.  yds.  washed  sand),  and  3,500  cu.  yds.  of  washed  sand 
wheeled  back.  Each  barrow  wheeled  out  contained  2  cu.  ft.  (71,702 
wheelbarrow  loads),  and  each  barrow  wheeled  back  contained  1.6 
cu.  ft  (59,590-  barrow  loads).  Hence  there  were  practically  1  cu. 


WATER-WORKS.  747 

yd.  of  washed  sand  per  million  gallons,  and  the  above  costs  pei 
million  gallons  at  Albany  are  also  practically  the  costs  per  cubic 
yard  of  sand  handled. 

The  following  is  the  cost  for  the  319  days  at  Albany  (add  15 
per  cent  for  a  full  year's  cost  of  wages,  etc.,  but  also  add  15  per 
cent  to  the  amount  filtered)  : 

Labor. .' $5,107.62 

Superintendence    1,392.68 

Tools    and    supplies 377.75 

Half  the  cost  of  miscellanies 304.75 

Wash  water  for  sand  at  1  ct.  per  100  cu.  ft 209.06 

Total,  at  $1.94  per  million  gals $7,391.76 

(Add  5  cts.  per  million  gals,  for  cleaning  sedimentation  basin.) 
Pumping : 

Engineers    and    firemen $4,258.65 

Laborers     387.00 

Coal   and   supplies 3,497.84 

Oil,    packing,    etc 799.06 

Half  cost  of  miscellanies 304.75 

Total,  at  $2.42  per  million  gals. . $9,247.30 

Laboratory : 

Chemist     $    999.96 

Laborer     69.38 

Laboratory   supplies 245.15 

Total,  at  $0.34  per  million  gals $1,314.49 

Total   cost  per  million  gals.,   incl.   pumping,  but  not  incl. 

capital  charges $        4.75 

Mr.  John  H.  Gregory  gives  the  following  relative  to  the  Albany 
filter  plant  operation,  during  1899  to  1900,  covering  a  period  of  500 
days. 

Scraping  required  0.69  hrs.  labor  per  cu.  yd.,  or  13  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
of  sand.  There  were  1.23  cu.  yds.  of  sand  scraped  (to  a  depth  of 
0.66  in.)  per  million  gallons,  so  that  the  cost  of  scraping  was  16  cts. 
per  million  gallons.  This  covers  only  the  labor  cost  of  scraping  the 
dirty  sand  into  piles. 

Wheeling  out  the  sand  includes  shoveling  it  into  barrows,  wheel- 
ing it  250  ft.,  and  raking  and  screeding  the  filter  bed.  Its  cost  was 
1.29  hrs.  labor,  or  25  cts.,  per  cu.  yd. ;  and,  since  there  were  1.23  cu. 
yds.  per  million  gals.,  the  cost  of  wheeling  was  30  cts.  per  mil- 
lion gallons.  The  raking  and  screeding  of  the  bed  consumed  about 
25  per  cent  of  the  time  of  the  men  engaged  in  shoveling  and  wheel- 
ing, one  man  raking  and  screeding  11,000  sq.  ft.  per  day. 

Washing  the  sand  includes  handling  the  dirty  sand  from  the 
storage  piles  to  the  sand  washer,  attendance  on  the  washer,  and 
removing  the  washed  sand  to  a  storage  pile.  The  ejector  type  of 
washer  was  used.  The  cost  was  1.57  hrs.  labor,  or  30  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  of  sand,  or  27  cts.  per  million  gallons  filtered. 

Refilling  filter  beds  with  clean  sand  includes  removal  from  stor- 
age piles  to  filter  bed,  loosening  the  top  layer  of  sand  about  6  ins. 
deep,  and  leveling  the  new  sand.  Its  cost  was  1.31  hrs.  labor,  or 
25  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  22  cts.  per  million  gallons. 


748  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Mr.  George  I.  Bailey  gives  the  cost  of  filtering  at  Albany,  for  the 
year  1900: 

Labor $  6,131.63 

Incidentals    574.92 

Lost  time 451.32 

Superintendence ' 2,161.43 

Supplies     552.25 

Supplies,  miscel 604.84 

Wash   water    226.92 

Total    ,;. $10,703.31 

Per  million 

Hours.  Total.  gals. 

Scraping    5,481  $1,532.70  $0.24 

Wheeling  out 10,238  2,863.20  0.45 

Refilling    7,437  2,081.66  0.32 

Incidentals... 3,009  841.25  0.13 

Lost  time    2,365  662.10  0.10 

Washing    8,923  2,722.40  0.42 

Total     37,453  $10,703.31  $1.66 

The  equiv.  cost  per  cu.  yd.  of  sand  was : 

Wheeling  out    $0.36 

Refilling    0.37 

Washing 0.48 

Wages  are  $1.50  per  8-hr.  day. 

The  round  trip  is  500  ft.  from  the  filter  bed  to  the  storage  piles. 

In  scraping,  a  long-handled  shovel  with  a  blade  12  ins.  wide 
enables  a  man  to  scrape  more  than  100  sq.  yds.  per  hr. 

It  was  found  that  one  run  plank  14  ins.  wide  gives  better  service 
than  two  10  to  12-in.  planks,  and  it  takes  half  as  long  to  place  the 
single  plank. 

The  wheels  of  the  ordinary  wheelbarrows  were  readjusted  so  as 
not  to  put  so  much  weight  on  the  arms  of  the  men  in  ascending 
grades. 

The  men  shovel  the  dirty  sand  from  the  storage  pile  into  a  mov- 
able hopper,  whence  the  sand  is  carried  by  a  current  of  water 
through  a  pipe  to  the  washer,  thus  saving  wheeling  it  to  the  washer. 
Men  wheel  the  sand  away  from  the  washer. 

The  average  run  is  26  days  between  scrapings,  or  70,000,000  gals, 
per  acre,  12%  parts  of  water  to  1  part  of  sand  are  used  in  washing, 
costing  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  sand. 

Cost  of  Groined  Arches  and  Forms  on  the  Albany  Filter  Plant. 
— The  following  data  are  given  by  Mr.  Allen  Hazen  and  Mr.  Wil- 
liam B.  Fuller.  The  concrete  was  mixed  in  5-ft.  cubical  mixers  in 
batches  of  1.6  cu.  yds.  at  the  rate  of  200  cu.  yds.  per  mixer  day. 
One  barrel  of  cement,  380  Ibs.  net,  assumed  to  be  3.8  cu.  ft.,  was 
mixed  with  three  volumes  of  sand  weighing  90  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.,  and 
five  volumes  of  gravel  weighing  100  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  and  having 
40%  voids.  On  the  average  1.26  bbls.  of  cement  were  required  per 
cu.  yd.  The  conveying  plant  consisted  of  two  trestles  (each  900  ft. 
long)  730  ft.  apart,  supporting  four  cableways.  The  cables  were 
attached  to  carriages,  which  ran  on  I-beams  on  the  top  of  the 
trestles.  Rope  drives  were  used  to  shift  the  cableways  along  the 
trestle.  Three-ton  loads  were  handled  in  each  skip.  The  installa- 


WATER-WORKS.  749 

tion  of  this  plant  was  slow,  and  its  carrying  capacity  was  less  than 
expected.  It  was  found  best  to  deliver  the  skips  of  concrete  to  the 
cableway  on  small  railway  track,  although  the  original  plan  had 
been  to  move  the  cableways  horizontally  along  the  trestle  at  the 
same  time  that  the  skip  was  traveling. 

The  cost  of  mixing  and  placing  the  concrete  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu  yd. 

Measuring,    mixing    and    loading $0.20 

Transporting  by   rail  and  cables 0.12 

Laying  and    tamping   floors   and   walls,    including 
setting  forms   0.22 

Total     $0.54 

The  cost  of  laying  and  tamping  the  concrete  on  the  vaulting  was 
14  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  vaulting  is  a  groined  arch  6  ins.  thick  at 
the  crown  and  2y2  ft.  thick  at  the  piers. 

The  lumber  of  the  centering  for  the  vaulting  was  spruce  for  the 
ribs  and  posts,  and  1-in.  hemlock  for  the  lagging.  The  centering 
was  all  cut  by  machinery,  the  ribs  put  together  to  a  template,  and 
the  lagging  sawed  to  proper  bevels  and  lengths.  The  centers  were 
made  so  that  they  could  be  taken  down  in  sections  and  used  again. 
The  cost  of  centering  was  as  follows : 

Labor  on  centers  covering   62,560  sq.  ft. : 

Foreman,   435  hrs.  at   35   cts $    152.25 

Carpenters,   4,873  hrs.   at  22y2   cts 1,096.42 

Laborers,    3,447    hrs.    at    15    cts 517.05 

Painters,   577  hrs.  at  15  cts 86.55 

Teaming,   324   hrs.   at  40   cts 121.60 


Total  labor  building  centers  313  M  at  $6.37.$1,973.87 

Materials  for  centers  covering  62,560  sq.  ft. : 

313,000  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  $18.20 $5,700.00 

3,700  Ibs.  nails,  at  3  cts 111.00 

8   bbls.   tar,   at   $3 24.00 


Total $5,835.00 

These  centers  covered  two  filters,  each  having  an  area  of  121%  x 
258  ft.  There  were  six  more  filters  of  the  same  size,  for  which 
the  same  centers  were  used.  The  cost  of  taking  down,  moving 
and  putting  up  these  centers  (313  M)  three  times  was  as  follows: 

Foreman,   2,359   hrs.   at  35  cts $     825.65 

Carpenters,   12,766  hrs.  at  22  %   cts. 2,872.35 

Laborers,   24,062  hrs.   at  15  cts.... 3,609.30 

Team,  430  hrs.  at  40  cts 172.00 

3,000   ft.    B.   M.   lumber,   at   $20 60.00 

3,000  Ibs.  nails,  at  3  cts 90.00 

Total  cost  moving  centers  to  cover  196,660 

sq.    ft $7,629.30 

The  cost  of  moving  the  centers  each  time  was  $8.10  per  M,  show- 
ing that  they  were  practically  rebuilt;  for  the  first  building  of 
the  centers,  as  above  shown,  cost  only  $6.37  per  M.  In  other  words, 
the  centers  were  not  designed  so  as  to  be  moved  in  sections  as 
they  should  have  been.  Although  the  centers  were  used  four  times 
in  all,  the  lumber  was  in  fit  condition  for  further  use.  The  cost 
of  the  labor  and  lumber  for  the  building  and  moving  of  these  cen- 


750  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ters  for  the  8  filter  beds,  having  a  total  area  of  259,220  sq.  ft.,  was 
$15,438,  or  6  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Lawrence,  Mass.  —  Mr.  Morris 
Knowles  and  Mr.  Charles  G.  Hyde  give  the  following  data  relative 
to  the  slow  sand  filter  plant  built  in  1892  at  Lawrence,  Mass.  The 
plant  was  built  by  day  labor  and  cost  $80,000.  It  consists  of  25 
filter  beds,  having  a  total  filtering  area  of  2.36  acres,  so  that  the 
cost  of  the  plant  was  $34,000  per  acre.  The  raw  water  enters  the 
filter  from  the  Merrimac  River  by  gravity.  The  filters  are  not 
roofed,  although,  as  will  be  seen  later  on,  the  cost  of  roofing  is  abun- 
dantly .justified  by  the  cost  of  ice  removal. 

Between  the  years  1897  and  1900,  inclusive,  the  beds  were  scraped 
15  times  yearly.  The  average  depth  of  sand  removed  at  each  scrap- 
ing was  %  in.,  making  a  total  of  about  3,500  cu.  yds.  of  sand  yearly 
over  the  entire  surface.  About  1,200,000,000  gals,  per  year,  or 
3,500,000  gals,  per  day,  were  filtered  during  this  period,  which  is 
equivalent  to  only  1,400,000  gals,  per  acre  per  day,  or  about  half 
what  a  modern  slow  sand  filter  delivers.  Nearly  3  cu.  yds.  of  sand 
were  scraped  per  million  gallons  filtered,  which  is  far  in  excess  of 
amount  ordinarily  scraped. 

The  cost  per  million  gallons  for  the  year  1900,  which  was  typical, 
was  as  follows: 

Scraping  sand   $1.75 

Sanding:     1.02 

Conveying  sand   1.16 

Washing   sand    1.25 

Removing  snow  and  ice 1.92 

General     0.60 

Total    $7.70 

Add  (5%  of  $80,000)  -i-  2,100  mill,  gals 1.90 

Total $9.60 

The  capital  charge  of  $1.90  per  million  gallons  is  none  too  high, 
and  takes  into  consideration  no  charge  for  "special  repairs." 

In  this  year  of  1900,  3,000  cu.  yds.  of  sand  were  scraped  off  In 
filtering  2,100  million  gals.,  or  2.48  cu.  yds.  per  million  gallons, 
hence  the  above  figures  of  cost  per  million  gallons  if  divided  by 
2.48  will  give  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  sand  handled,  or: 

Scraping     $0.70 

Conveying     0.46 

Washing    0.50 

Sanding   0.40 

Total  per  cu.  yd $2.06 

Scraping  includes  not  only  scraping  off  the  dirty  sand  and  throw- 
ing it  into  small  piles,  but  loading  and  wheeling  (75  to  150  ft.) 
in  barrows  to  a  temporary  dump  just  inside  the  filter  bed.  It  also 
includes  smoothing  the  beds  after  cleaning. 

Conveying  including  loading  the  dirty  sand  from  the  temporary 
dumps  into  carts  and  hauling  and  depositing  in  a  permanent  dump 
near  the  washer. 

Washing  includes  screening  dirty  sand,  washing  and  transporting 
to  the  stock  pile  of  clean  sand. 


WATER-WORKS.  751 

Sanding  includes  cost  of  loading  and  wheeling  in  the  clean  washed 
Band  and  spreading  it. 

Wages  of  laborers  were  $2  per  9-hr.  day. 

The  sand  washer  consists  of  4  hoppers.  The  sand  drops  to  the 
bottom  of  each  hopper,  where  it  strikes  a  horizontal  jet  of  water 
and  is  carried  into  a  pipe  that  leads  up  into  the  next  hopper.  The 
water  required  is  about  10  times  the  volume  of  sand,  or  270  cu.  ft. 
of  water  per  cu.  yd.  of  sand.  Four  men  attend  to  screening  and 
wheeling  to  the  washer,  washing  and  taking  the  sand  away  in  dump 
cars;  they  can  thus  wash  21  cu.  yds.  of  sand  daily  at  a  cost  of  $8 
for  labor,  or  38  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  but  delays  due  to  shifting  of  the 
washer,  etc.,  and  cost  of  repairs  make  a  total  cost  of  50  cts.  per 
cu.  yd. 

Mr.  M.  F.  Collins,  superintendent  of  the  plant,  states  that  the 
average  depth  to  which  the  sand  is  scraped  is  greater  for  an  un- 
roofed filter  than  for  one  that  is  roofed,  due  to  the  fact  that  when 
there  is  any  snow  on  the  filter  bed  the  men  usually  scrape  too  deep 
with  their  shovels,  and  when  the  bed  is  frozen  slightly  they  neces- 
sarily must  take  off  an  excess  of  sand  to  get  below  the  frost.  Pos- 
sibly this  accounts  largely  for  the  abnormally  great  amount  of  sand 
scraped  at  Lawrence ;  possibly  the  method  of  scraping  is  itself  not 
what  it  should  be. 

Mr.  John  H.  Gregor>  gives  the  following  additional  information 
for  1900.  The  cost  per  million  gals,  was  as  follows,  labor  being  sep- 
arated from  materials,  supplies,  etc.,  and  from  superintendence: 

Scraping     (labor) $1.50 

Conveying  (labor)    1.02 

Washing    (labor) 0.94 

Sanding   (labor)    0.90 

Removal    of   snow    and   ice    (labor) 1.56 

General    (labor)    0.38 

Superintendence     0.91 

Materials,    supplies,    etc 0.52 

Total    $7^73 

He  states  that  1.94  cu.  yds.  were  scraped  per  million  gals,  filtered^ 
requiring  3.53  hrs.  labor  per  cu.  yd.,  or  77  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages 
being  $2  for  9  hrs.,  average  thickness  scraped  being  Vz  in. 

He  states  that  3,000  cu.  yds.  were  washed  in  1900,  at  a  cost  of  38 
cts.  per  cu!  yd.  for  labor,  requiring  1.72  hrs.  labor  per  cu.  yd. 

He  states  that  3,400  cu.  yds.  of  clean  sand  were  put  on,  at  a  cost 
of  32  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  labor,  or  1.47  hrs.  labor  per  cu.  yd. 

From  the  year  1896  to  1900,  inclusive,  the  average  cost  of  snow 
and  ice  removal  was  $2.20  per  million  gals.,  or  nearly  $1,100  per 
acre  per  annum.  Since  an  acre  could  be  roofed  for  about  $15,000, 
It  is  evident  that  It  would  be  much  cheaper  to  pay  interest  on  a  roof. 
However,  the  Lawrence  filters  show  about  half  the  ordinary  output 
of  water  per  acre  attained  by  well  designed  beds,  so  that  if  their 
filtering  capacity  per  acre  were  doubled,  the  cost  of  snow  and  ice 
removal  would  be  $1.10  per  million  gals. 

Cost  of  Filter  and  Filtering,  Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y.— A  slow  sand  filter 
was  built  at  Mt.  Vernon,  N.  Y.,  in  1894,  at  a  cost  of  about  $25,000. 
The  area  of  the  filter  beds  is  1.1  acres,  and  about  1,900,000  gals, 


752  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

?vere  filtered   per   day.      The   average   cost   of   filtering   during   th« 
years  1897  to  1900  was  as  follows  per  million  gals.: 

Scraping  and  removing  sand $1.63 

Washing  sand   0.58 

Replacing  sand    0.58 

Removing    ice    0.42 

Miscellaneous    0.10 

Total    $3.31 

6%  interest  on  filter  plant   ($1,500  -=-  680  million  gals.) 2.20 

Grand   total $5.51 

An  average  of  1,300  cu.  yds.  of  sand  was  cleaned  per  year  (there 
being  about  15  scrapings  a  year),  or  nearly  2  cu.  yds.,  cleaned  per 
million  gals.  Hence  by  taking  half  of  the  above  figures  we  have 
the  cost  of  cleaning  the  sand  per  cubic  yard,  or  a  total  of  nearly 
$1.40  per  cu.  yd.  The  scraping  is  done  with  shovels,  the  sand  being 
removed  in  wheelbarrows.  The  sand  washers  are  like  those  used  at 
Albany  (hoppers  with  ejectors).  It  is  estimated  that  12,000  gala, 
of  water  are  used  to  wash  each  cubic  yard  of  sand. 

Cost  of  Filtering,  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y.— Mr.  Charles  E.  Fowler 
gives  the  following  relative  to  the  operation  of  the  Poughkeepsie 
filter  in  1900. 

The  sand  is  not  scraped  into  heaps,  but  is  shoveled  direct  into 
barrows.  The  back  of  a  rake  is  used  to  level  the  surface  after 
scraping.  It  takes  23  men  2  days  of  8  hrs.  each  to  scrape  1H 
acres,  wages  $1.50  a  day,  cost  $49  per  acre.  This  includes  wheeling 
to  the  corners  of  the  filter  bed,  throwing  up  to  top  of  coping  and 
trimming  back  the  pile. 

The  sand  is  stored  and  washed  in  October  and  replaced  all  at 
one  time  (16  days).  Washing  costs  32  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  replac- 
ing costs  26  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  for  a  total  of  910  cu.  yds. 

The  total  number  of  scrapings  per  year  is  not  stated,  but  if  there 
were  15  the  cost  was  $1.20  per  cu.  yd.  for  scraping,  added  to  $0.58 
for  washing  and  replacing;  total  $1.78  per  cu.  yd.  (Mr.  Gregory 
gives  the  cost  of  scraping  at  $1.30  per  million  gals,  in  1900.) 

The  cost  of  ice  removal  varied  from  $146  to  $613  a  year,  and  aver- 
aged $364  for  four  years  prior  to  1901,  or  $273  per  year  per  acre. 
To  remove  a  16-in.  layer  of  ice  in  1901  cost  $408  per  acre  of  filter- 
Ing  area,  wages  being  $1.50  per  8-hr.  day.  The  ice  was  sawed  in 
parallel  lines  in  one  direction  and  broken  by  chisels  in  the  other 
direction.  The  cakes  were  floated  to  a  run  at  the  side  of  the  basin 
and  pulled  up  by  men  with  pikes.  The  water  level  was  about  1  ft. 
below  the  top  of  the  coping.  The  cakes  were  then  pushed  on  nearly 
horizontal  runs  to  the  place  of  deposit,  which  costs  about  half  of  the 
total  cost  of  ice  removal.  The  cost  of  ice  removal  was  94  cts.  per 
million  gals,  filtered  that  year,  and  there  was  only  this  one  re- 
moval. 

Cost  of  Washing  Filter  Sand,  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y.— Mr.  Charles 
E.  Fowler  gives  the  following  relative  to  sand  washing  at  the 
Poughkeepsie  filters  in  1897.  With  two  hoppers,  and  an  upwarfl 
water  jet  in  each,  the  cost  of  washing  the  sand  was  24  cts.  per  eu 


WATER-WORKS.  753 

yd.,  laborers  being  paid  18  cts.  per  hr.  The  sand  was  delivered 
through  a  pipe  to  a  tank  130  ft.  away,  and,  after  the  remaining 
silt  had  flowed  over  the  top  of  this  tank,  the  sand  was  drawn  off 
through  a  valve.  Fifty  cu.  yds.  of  sand  were  washed  per  10-hr,  day, 
requiring  18  cu.  ft.  of  water  to  each  cu.  ft.  of  sand,  the  water 
costing  3  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  sand. 

Cost  Ice  Removal  From  Filters.— Mr.  John  H.  Gregory  gives  the 
following  costs  of  snow  and  ice  removal  from  filter  beds  per  million 
gallons : 

Lawrence  (average  1896  to  1900) ^....$2.20 

Poughkeepsie   (average   1898  to  1900) 0.48 

Mt.  Vernon  (average  1897  to  1900) 0.28 

Estimated  Cost  of  Filters  and  Filtering,  Cincinnati,  O.  —  Mr. 
George  W.  Fuller  made  the  following  comparative  estimates  of  the 
cost  of  slow  sand  filtering  and  mechanical  filtering  for  the  city  of 
Cincinnati,  O.,  in  1899.  A  year's  work  with  an  experimental  plant, 
of  100,000  gals,  daily  capacity,  preceded  the  estimate.  The  plant 
designed  for  Cincinnati  is  to  have  a  daily  capacity  of  80,000,000 
gals.  The  estimated  cost  includes  no  allowance  for  cost  of  land, 
and  covers  only  the  expense  from  the  time  the  water  is  discharged 
Into  the  subsiding  basins  until  it  leaves  the  clear  water  reservoir 
by  gravity.  The  clear  water  reservoir  is  to  hold  20,000,000  gals. 
The  settling  reservoirs  are  to  hold  320,000,000  (48  hrs.  subsidence 
or  96  hrs.  capacity).  The  rate  is  to  be  3,000,000  gals,  per  acre  per 
day  in  the  slow  sand  filter,  and  125,000,000  in  the  mechanical  filter. 
The  following  are  the  estimated  first  costs  per  million  gallons  daily 
capacity : 

Filter  Plant. 

Slow  sand.    Mechanical. 

Reservoirs    $16,000          $16,000 

Pipe   connections    500  500 

Filter  beds,  chemical  devices,   piping,  labora- 
tory, etc. 16,667  7,500 

Clear  water  reservoir 1,250  1,250 

Coagulating     and     supplementary     subsiding 

reservoir    (20,000,000   gals.) 1,500 

Total  cost  per  million  daily  gals .  .      $34,417          $26,750 

Interest  and  sinking  fund  (5%  per  year)    per 

million    gals $4.72  $3.67 

The  cost  of  operation  of  the  slow  sand  filter  plant  is  estimated 
thus: 

Pear  year. 

1  superintendent $  4,000 

1  assistant    superintendent     2,400 

2  analysts,   at    $1,500 3,000 

3  assistants,   clerks  and  janitor,   at  $600 1,800 

1  night   watchman    '. 720 

3  reservoir   attendants,   at   $720 2,160 

3  filter  attendants,  at  $720 2,160 

1   storekeeper     720 

5  chemical  attendants  for  6  mos.  each  year,  at  $360 1,800 

Extra  labor    1,500 


Total,   29,200  million  gals.,   at  $0.72 $20,860 


754  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cest  per  million  gallons  is  estimated  thus: 

Salaries    (as  above   given) $  0.72 

Ice   removal,    etc 0.30 

Scraping  20   times  a  year,   325  man-hrs.   per  scraping,  at   20 

cts.  per  hr 1.19 

Washing  sand,  1.75  cu.  yds.,  at  40  cts 0.70 

Replacing  sand,  1.75  cu.  yds.,  at  20  cts 0.35 

Sulphate  of  alumina,  0.95  gr.  per  gal.,  at  1.4  cts.  per  Ib 1.90 

Repairs,  0.5%  cost  per  yr 0.47 

Total  operating  expense $  5.63 

Capital  charges   (as  above) 4.72 

Grand  total. $10.35 

The  estimated  cost  of  salaries  for  a  mechanical  filter  plant  of  the 

same  capacity  is  as  follows: 

15  attendants  for  filters  and  chemical  devices,  at  $720 $10,800 

3  firemen,  at  $720 2,160 

1  mechanic  1,440 

3  engineers,  at  $1,440 4,320 

1  superintendent 4,000 

1  assistant  superintendent   2,400 

2  analysts     3,000 

3  assistants,  clerks,  etc 1,800 

1  night  watchman    720 

3  reservoir   attendants    2,160 

Extra  labor 1,500 

Total,  29,200  million  gals.,  at  $1.17 $34,300 

The  estimated  cost  of  operating  the  mechanical  filter  plant  is  as 
follows  per  million  gallons: 

Salaries    (as   above) $1.17 

Wash  water,  5%  of  filtered  water,  at  $15  per  million  gals 0.75 

Coal  for  power  and  light 0.15 

Sulphate  of  alumina,  1.6  grs.  per  gal.,  at  1.4  cts.  per  Ib 3.20 

Repairs    and    replacements,    machinery   and    chemical    devices, 

10%  per  yr.  on  $2,500 0.69 

Other  repairs,  0.5%  of  first  cost  per  yr 0.33 

Total  operating  expense $6.29 

Capital  charges    (as  above) 3.67 

Grand  total    $9.96 

For  the  turbid  water  of  the  Ohio  River  at  Cincinnati,  Mr.  Fuller 
recommended  a  mechanical  filter  plant. 

Cost  of  Filtering  and  Ice  Removal,  Reading,  Pa.* — The  water 
supply  of  Reading,  Pa.,  is  obtained  by  gravity  systems  and  by 
pumping.  Two  of  the  gravity  supplies — the  Antietam  supply  and 
the  Egelman  supply — are  filtered.  Mr.  Emil  L.  Neubling,  Superin- 
tendent and  Engineer  of  Waterworks,  gives  data  for  the  fiscal  year 
ending  April  6,  1908. 

Antietam  Filters. — The  Antietam  supply  is  obtained  from  a  drain- 
age area  of  5.44  square  miles.  The  storage  reservoir  capacity  is 
101,000,000  gallons.  During  the  year  this  supply  was  treated  with 
copper  sulphate  in  order  to  remove  the  organism  anabaena  and  to 
lighten  the  work  of  scraping  at  the  Antietam  filters.  Two  treat- 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  28,  1908. 


WATER-WORKS.  755 

ments  were  given  and  the  effect  upon  the  operation  of  the  filters 
was  to  reduce  the  total  number  of  scrapings  from  62  in  the  previous 
year  to  48  during  the  past  year. 

The  Antietam  niters  consist  of  three  open  sand  beds,  108x144  ft 
each,  the  capacity  of  each  bed  being  1,750,000  gallons  per  day.  The 
filters  were  put  into  service  on  May  11,  1905.  The  total  cost  of 
operation  and  maintenance  was  $3,909.46  or  $474.76  less  than  the 
previous  year.  Owing  to  the  decreased  efficiency  of  labor  the  cost 
of  refilling  the  beds  was  42  per  cent  higher  per  cubic  yard  than 
during  the  previous  year.  The  cost  of  washing  sand,  however,  was 
very  materially  reduced  on  account  of  placing  the  filter  keeper  in 
charge  of  the  washing,  thereby  saving  the  services  of  an  engineer. 
The  cost  of  washing  sand  was  reduced  11  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

During  February  and   March,   1908,   835  cu.  yds.   of   ice  was  re- 
moved  from   the  filter.      The   mean   thickness   of   the   ice   was   4.35 
ins.,    and    the    greatest    average    thickness    was    5.3    ins.    in    Feb- 
ruary,  when   three  beds  were  cleared.     In    March    one    bed    was 
cleared,  the  average  thickness  of  ice  being  1.5  ins.     The  cost  of  re- 
moving the  ice  was  as  follows: 

Total.      Per  cu.  yd. 
Labor,    238    hours  .............  .  ...............  $51.69  $0.062 

Superintendence     ..............................      6.80  .007 

Supplies     ......................................  90  .001 

Total     .........  .  .......................  $59.39  $0.070 

It  will  be  noticed  common  labor  was  paid  about  21  cts.  per  hour. 
The  'cost  of  scraping  and  wheeling  out  sand  was  as  follows,  1,818 
cu.  yds.  being  removed  : 

Total.      Per  cu.  yd. 
Labor,    3,589%   hours  .............  .  ..  .........  $711.77  $0.391 

Superintendence     .............................      38.82  .021 

Supplies    ....................................      70.29  .039 

Sulphate  treatment   ......................  '.  .  .  .      42.77  .024 

Total   ......  .  .....................  '  .....  $863.65  $0.475 

The  cost  of  washing  sand,   1,831  cu.  yds.  being  washed,  was  as 
follows  : 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor,    1,539%    hours  ...............  .  .........  $282.38  $0.154 

Superintendence    .........................  :  .  .  .      30.43  .017 

Supplies   and    repairs.  .*.  .  .  ^  ..................    794.49  .433 

Total    ...............................  $1,107.30  $0.604 

The  cost  of  refilling  the  beds  was  as  follows,   1,921  cu.   yds.  of 
sand  being  used  for  refilling  : 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor,   4,838   hours    ..........................  $917.95  $0.478 

Superintendence     ...........................  .  .      37.03  .020 

Supplies    ....................................      18.36  .010 


Total     ................................  $973.34 

The  total  number  of  gallons  of  water  filtered  during  the  year 
was  1,182,557,923.  The  average  quantity  of  water  filtered  between 
scrapings  was  73,909,870  gallons  or  at  the  rate  of  69,626,123  gallons 
per  acre.  The  average  quantity  of  water  filtered  per  day  was 


756  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

3,231,033   gallons,  or  at  the  rate  of  3,043,765   gallons  per  day  per 
acre.    The  cost  of  filtering  water  per  million  gallons  was  as  follows : 

Per 
Total,     million  gals. 

Removing   ice    $      59.39  $0.050 

Scraping  and  wheeling  out  sand 863.65  .730 

Washing  sand  H 1,107.30  .936 

Refilling   beds 973.34  .823 

Care  of  grounds 513.86  .434 

Analyses    37.38  .030 

Watching 150.09  .130 

Operation  and  general  maintenance 204.45  .180 

Total    $3,909.46  $3.313 

The  cost  of  filtering  water  per  million  gallons,  excluding  analyses 
and  care  of  grounds  was  $2.84. 

Engelman  Filters. — The  Engelman  supply  has  a  drainage  area  of 
0.6  square  miles  and  a  storage  reservoir  capacity  of  6,900,000  gal- 
lons. The  Engelman  filter  consists  of  two  open  sand  beds,  40  x  55  ft. 
each ;  the  capacity  of  each  bed  is  250,000  gals,  per  day.  The  filters 
were  put  into  service  on  July  11,  1903. 

On  account  of  not  washing  sand  and  refilling  beds  during  the 
year,  the  cost  of  operation  was  considerably  less  than  for  the  pre- 
vious year.  The  unit  cost  of  scraping  and  wheeling  out  sand  was 
3  cts.  per  cubic  yard  more  than  for  the  previous  year,  and  the  cost 
of  ice  removal  2  cts.  per  cubic  yard  less. 

A  total  of  147  cu.  yds.  of  ice  was  removed  from  these  filters,  the 
mean  thickness  of  the  ice  being  3.6  ins.  The  greatest  thickness  was 
5.2  ins.  in  February,  1908.  The  cost  of  removing  ice  was  10  cts. 
per  cubic  yard,  the  work  requiring  67  hours  labor  at  a  total  cost  of 
$11.05. 

The  cost  of  scraping  and  wheeling  out  sand  was  as  follows : 

Total. 

Labor,  450V2  hours $82.82 

Superintendence     1.70 

Total    $84.52 

A  total  of  122  cu.  yds.  of  sand  was  removed,  the  cost  per  cubic 
yard  being  $0.69. 

The  total  number  of  gallons  of  wafer  filtered  during  the  year 
was  79,784,796.  The  average  quantity  of  water  filtered  between 
scrapings  was  4,693,234  gallons,  or  at  the  rate  of  48,675,541  gallons 
per  acre.  The  average  quantity  of  water  filtered  per  day  was  217,- 
992  gallons,  or  at  the  rate  of  2,260,888  gallons  per  acre  per  day. 

The  cost  of  filtering  the  water  per  million  gallons  was  as  follows : 

Per 
Total,    million  gals. 

Removing  ice $  14.05  $0.177 

Scraping  and  wheeling  out  sand 82.82  1.038 

Operation  and   general   maintenance.... 109.56  1.373 

Analyses 31.10  .391 

Care   of  grounds 45.25  .567 

Total    . $284~48  ?3:546 


WATER-WORKS.  757 

The  cost  of  filtering  water  per  million  gallons,  exclusive  of  cost 
of  analyses  and  care  of  grounds  was  $2.61. 

Cost  of  Filtering,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y.— Mr.  I.  M.  de  Varona  gives  the 
following  data  relative  to  4  filter  plants  in  Brooklyn,  2  mechanical 
and  2  slow  sand  filters.  The  mechanical  filter  plant  at  Baiseleys  Is 
of  the  gravity  type  and  has  a  normal  capacity  of  5,000,000  gals, 
per  day.  It  has  circular  wooden  tanks ;  air  is  used  to  agitate  the 
sand  during  washing. 

The  mechanical  filter  plant  at  Springfield  is  similar  to  that  at 
Baiseleys,  but  its  normal  capacity  is  only  3,000,000  gals,  per  day, 
For  the  12  mos.  of  1905  the  cost  of  operating  these  plants  was  as 
follows : 

Baiseleys.        Springfield. 

Inspection     $    484.80  $    462.79 

Operation   4,714.08  3,182.91 

Laboratory     443.68  409.23 

Repairs     507.78  232.53 

Interest  and  sinking  fund. 3,218.64  2,366.28 


Total     $9,363.98  $6,653.74 

Million    gals,    filtered 1,435.5  694.6 

Cost  per  million  gals $6.53  $9.58 

The  Forest  Stream  slow  sand  filter  plant  has  two  sand  beds  hav- 
ing a  daily  capacity  of  6,000,000  gals.,  the  area  of  the  bottom  of 
the  beds  being  2  acres.  The  beds  have  no  covering  and  have  no 
impervious  bottom,  nor  side  walls.  Collecting  pipes  are  laid  below 
the  ground  water  level,  so  there  is  practically  no  loss  of  water  by 
this  form  of  construction.  The  bed  is  underlaid  by  gravel,  and  the 
6-in.  underdrains  are  12^  ft.,  c.  to  c. 

The  Hempstead  slow  sand  filter  plant  is  similar  to  the  Forest 
Stream  plant,  but  the  two  beds  have  an  area  of  only  0.9  acre  and  a 
daily  capacity  of  3,000,000  gals. 

The  cost  of  operating  these  plants  during  1905  was  as  follows: 

Forest  Stream.     Hempstead. 

Inspection    $    348.91  $    214.76 

Laboratory 335.12  419.26 

Labor  and  materials 710.00  239.47 

Interest  only 1,058.40  330.00 


Total    $2,452.43  $1,203.49 

Million  gals,  filtered 1,075.3  416.8 

Cost  per  million  gals $2.28  $2.89 

At  Hempstead  a  new  method  of  cleaning  the  beds  was  used, 
which  consists  in  washing  the  beds  instead  of  scraping  them.  The 
cost  of  this  cleaning  by  washing  was  40  cts.  per  million  gals,  instead 
of  $1  by  scraping.  The  beds  are  divided  into  channels  20  ft.  wide, 
by  means  of  boards  set  vertically,  extending  8  ins.  above  the  sur- 
face and  6  ins.  below  the  bottom  of  the  sand.  The  boards  are  laid 
to  within  ^5  ft.  of  tee  ends  of  the  beds,  and  boards  can  be  placed 
across  the  ends  of  the  channel  ways  so  as  to  cause  a  flow  of  water 
through  any  desired  c&annel  way.  When  the  bed  is  ready  to  be 
cleaned  it  is  drained  so  that  only  4  or  5  ins.  of  water  are  left  on 
the  bed,  and  waste  pipe  gate  is  opened ;  then  a  gate  on  the  pipe 


758  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

between  the  two  beds  is  opened  to  allow  the  raw  water  in  the  ad- 
joining bed  to  flow  into  the  bed  to  be  cleaned.  The  velocity  of  the 
water  as  regulated  so  that  it  will  not  quite  carry  the  sand.  Men 
with  rakes  stir  up  the  surface  of  the  bed,  so  that  the  dirt  is  carried 
away  in  suspension.  The  men  work  from  the  head  of  the  bed 
toward  the  outlet.  When  one  channel  is  cleaned,  stop  planks  are 
placed  across  its  end,  and  a  second  channel  is  cleaned.  One  bed 
(0.45  acres)  is  cleaned  by  8  men  in  4  hrs.,  using  250,000  gals,  of 
water.  The  quantity  of  water  filtered  between  cleanings  is  about 
25%  less  when  the  beds  are  washed  instead  of  scraped. 

At  the  Forest  Stream  plant,  60,000,000  gals,  are  filtered  between 
scrapings. 

Output  of  Sand  Washers.* — In  a  sand  filtration  plant  the  sand  is, 
in  a  way,  the  most  important  part  of  the  filters.  It  is  important, 
therefore,  to  secure  the  best  sand  that  can  be  reasonably  obtained. 
The  following  method  of  securing  and  preparing  filter  sand  was 
used  in  the  construction  of  the  water  filtration  plant  of  Washing- 
ton, D.  C..  and  was  described  by  Mr.  Allen  Hazen  and  Mr.  E.  D. 
Hardy,  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  1906. 

The  contractor  furnished  sand  from  a  bank  at  Laurel,  Md.,  on 
the  main  line  of  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  .R.  R.,  half  way  to  Baltimore. 
This  bank  was  probably  of  tertiary  origin,  and  consisted  of  layers 
of  clay  and  sand.  The  sand  in  the  sand  layers  was  of  good  quality, 
except  that  more  or  less  clay  was  distributed  through  it.  The  layers 
of  clay  ranged  in  thickness  from  a  few  inches  to  several  feet,  and 
the  mixture  was  such  that  it  was  not  possible  to  take  the  sand  with- 
out the  clay. 

The  method  of  securing  and  preparing  filter  sand  of  the  requisite 
cleanliness  and  of  the  quality  specified  was  as  follows:  The  sand 
was  excavated  from  the  bank  with  steam  shovels,  taking  the  mixed 
material,  to  a  depth  often  reaching  20  ft.  The  material  obtained  in 
this  way  consisted  mostly  of  sand,  but  large  and  small  lumps  of 
clay  were  always  mixed  with  it,  and  the  top  soil  was  not  separated. 
The  proportion  of  the  material  which  could  not  form  part  of  the 
filter  sand  was  rather  large.  The  sand  was  loaded  on  cars,  which 
carried  it  on  temporary  tracks  to  the  screening  and  washing  plant 
built  close  to  the  main  line  of  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  R.  R. 

The  material  was  first  dumped  from  the  cars  through  a  coarse 
grating  which  separated  many  of  the  largest  lumps  of  clay.  It 
then  passed  through  a  revolving  screen,  with  holes  about  2  ins.  in 
diameter,  which  removed  further  quantities  of  clay  in  lumps.  It 
was  then  taken  by  a  link-belt  elevator  to  the  top  of  a  timber  trestle, 
and  discharged  into  a  revolving  screen,  with  round  holes  having  af 
size  of  separation  of  about  4  mm.  Water  jets  played  upon  this1 
screen  and  facilitated  the  passage  of  sand  through  it,  while  much 
fine  gravel  and  some  additional  lumps  of  clay  were  removed.  The 
specifications  provided  that  the  sand  must  be  free  from  particles 
more  than  5  mm.  in  diameter,  and  the  screen  secured  this  result. 
The  material  passing  through  the  screen  consisted  of  the  sand,  to- 

'Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  20,  1907. 


WATER-WORKS.  759 

gether  with  a  large  quantity  of  clay,  partly  pulverized  and  partly 
in  lumps,  all  carried  by  a  considerable  quantity  of  water.  The 
mixture  then  passed  to  a  series  of  pug-mills.  The  revolving  arms 
in  these  broke  up  and  pulverized  the  remaining  clay  lumps.  This 
treatment  was  necessary  for  a  material  containing  clay  in  lumps, 
but  would  be  unnecessary  for  sand  not  containing  such  material. 

The  pug-mills  incidentally  served  to  separate  a  portion  of  the 
clay  from  the  sand,  for  an  excess  of  water  entered  them,  and  ex- 
tremely dirty  water  was  constantly  wasting  over  their  tops,  while 
the  sand  was  drawn  out  from  points  near  the  bottoms  in  much  the 
same  way  as  it  was  subsequently  drawn  from  the  sand  washers. 

The  mixture  of  sand,  clay  and  water  leaving  the  pug-mills  next 
passed  to  the  washers.  These  washers,  Fig.  24,  consisted  of  three 
long,  narrow  boxes  with  bottoms  having  slopes  of  1  in  6  to  the  point 
of  discharge.  The  boxes  were  16  ft.  long,  24  in.  wide  and  18  In.  ^ 
deep  at  the  upper  end.  There  were  four  pipes,  perforated  for  their" 
entire  length,  in  the  bottom  of  each  box,  the  holes  opening  directly 
downward.  Water  was  forced  through  these  pipes  at  a  rate  of 
about  1  cu.  ft.  per  min.  per  sq.  ft.  of  box  area.  This  water  went 
upward  and  overflowed  into  a  trough  running  lengthwise  of  the  box 
at  the  top.  The  mixed  materials  entered  this  box  at  the  upper  end, 
flowed  through  it,  and  were  discharged  at  the  lower  end  from  the 
bottom.  There  were,  therefore,  two  movements  in  each  box ;  first, 
a  movement  of  wash-water  upward  from  the  bottom  of  the  box 
to  the  top  and  out  through  the  waste  overflow ;  and  second,  a  for- 
ward movement  of  sand  from  one  end  of  the  box  to  the  other.  The 
upward  movement  of  water,  starting  from  the  whole  area  of  the 
bottom  and  overflowing  from  most  of  the  area  of  the  top,  kept  the 
sand  in  a  semi-suspended  state  and  practically  in  the  condition  of 
quicksand. 

Under  these  conditions  the  larger  particles  of  sand  rapidly  sank 
to  the  bottom  while  the  finer  particles  were  carried  to  the  top. 
The  sand  at  the  bottom  was  in  contact  with  the  clean  water  as  it 
first  entered  the  box,  while,  by  controlling  the  quantities  of  sand 
let  in  and  drawn  out,  the  finer  particles  could  be  forced  to  the  top 
and  out  through  the  waste  overflow  to  any  desired  extent.  The 
level  of  the  sand  in  the  box  was  usually  carried  not  more  than  about 
6  in.  below  the  surface  of  the  water. 

As  the  sand  in  the  box  was  in  the  state  of  quicksand,  it  was  pos- 
sible to  draw  it  out,  through  a  gate  placed  just  above  the  bottom 
at  the  lower  end  of  the  washer,  in  the  form  of  a  fluid  containing 
very  little  water.  Generally,  10  parts  of  the  mixture  drawn  from 
the  outlet  contained  9  parts  of  solid  sand.  The  mixture  fell  into  a 
large  hopper,  from  which  a  gate  allowed  it  to  flow  from  time  to 
time  into  cars  on  a  side-track  below,  often  without  further  separa- 
tion of  water,  except  as  it  gradually  drained  out  through  the  cracks 
in  the  hopper  and  in  the  bottoms  of  the  cars. 

In  general,  it  was  found  that  1  cu.  yd.  of  sand  per  hour  could 
be  washed  for  each  square  foot  of  box  area,  and  sometimes  a  larger 
quantity  was  passed. 


760 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


ttr= 

-7~n  —  '  pr 

=H 

&  ' 

n 

r".    <sJ 

! 
j 

K' 

i 

a 

f 

1  1    1  1   t        r   ll    1  1 
-J  '  

! 

Sffl 

15 

H-H  —  M  —  f 
t    i       .1 

3) 

c 

>U—  U— 

£/ 

^TJ 

, 


WATER-WORKS.  761 

A  washing  box  of  this  character  was  first  designed  by  one  of  the 
Writers  for  use  in  preparing  filter  sand  at  Yonkers,  N.  Y.  The 
same  type  of  box  was  used  in  preparing  all  the  sand  placed  in  the 
filters  at  Providence,  R.  I.,  and  has  also  been  used  elsewhere. 

The  separation  of  the  clay  from  the  sand  in  such  large  quantities 
and  so  cheaply  was  an  achievement  which  would  hardly  have  been 
regarded  as  possible  at  the  time  the  contract  for  filter  sand  was 
made,  and  the  use  of  this  process  cheapened  the  sand  washing  very 
greatly,  the  actual  cost  to  the  contractor  being  far  below  the  con- 
tract price. 

Although  exact  figures  are  not  at  hand,  it  appears  that  the  vol- 
ume of  water  used  in  washing  the  sand  was  not  more  than  five  or 
six  times  that  of  the  sand.  The.  wash-water  was  obtained  from 
a  small  creek  nearby,  and  was  pumped  through  a  10-in.  pipe.  After 
rains  the  water  in  this  creek  was  quite  turbid,  but  this  turbidity 
did  not  interfere  materially  with  the  washing,  or  with  the  quality 
of  the  sand  produced. 

In  a  working  day  of  10  hours  more  than  900  cu.  yds.  of  filter 
sand  were  frequently  produced,  and,  had  it  been  possible  to  handle 
the  sand  at  the  filters  more  rapidly,  the  .plant  could  have  worked 
at  night,  with  a  greatly  increased  output. 

The  specifications  provided  that  the  filtering  sand  should  be  en- 
tirely free  from  clay.  The  specification  had  proved  sufficient  in 
securing  sand  from  river  deposits  and  from  sand  banks  of  glacial 
origin.  It  did  not  prove  satisfactory  in  the  case  of  this  sand,  as 
tlie  raw  material  contained  large  quantities  of  clay.  The  clay 
stuck  to  the  particles  of  sand  on  drying,  and  the  ordinary  mechan- 
ical analysis,  by  sifting  the  material  in  a  dry  state,  was  inadequate 
to  show  its  presence  or  amount. 

It  becomes  apparent  at  once  that  a  method  of  measuring  the 
amount  of  clay  in  the  sand  must  be  found  and  used,  and  definite 
limits  set  to  the  amount  of  clay  that  could  be  present,  which  should 
be  substantially  equivalent  to  the  requirements  of  the  specifications. 

The  method  adopted  of  determining  the  amount  of  clay  was  as 
follows:  A  weighed  quantity  of  sand,  usually  25  g. — but  less  if 
there  was  considerable  clay  in  it,  and  more  if  there  was  but  lit- 
tle—was agitated  for  some  minutes  with  several  times  its  volume 
of  water.  The  sand  for  this  purpose  was  taken  directly  from  the 
washers  and  was  not  dried,  as  drying  increased  the  difficulty  of 
getting  the  clay  in  suspension.  If  the  sand  had  dried  before  test- 
ing, It  was  necessary  to  keep  it  moist  and  agitate  it  for  some  time 
to  get  all  the  clay  loose.  When  this  was  accomplished  the  mixture 
was  made  up  to  a  volume  of  1  liter  in  a  graduated,  glass.  This  was 
allowed  to  stand  for  1  min.  The  turbidity  of  the  supernatant  fluid 
was  then  taken  by  observing  the  depth  below  the  surface  that  a 
platinum  wire  could  be  seen,  by  the  method  of  the  U.  S.  Geologi- 
cal Survey. 

These  observations  were  taken  in  the  graduated  glass  for  con- 
venience. This  was  not  strictly  in  accordance  with  the  official  in- 
structions, but  it  was  more  convenient,  and  the  comparative  re- 


762  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

suits  were  good.  Jackson's  turbidimeter  was  used  with  good  results 
for  night  work,  but  the  rod  was  preferred  by  the  inspectors  when 
it  could  be  used.  The  turbidity  of  the  water  thus  found  was  multi- 
plied by  the  ratio  of  the  volume  of  the  mixture  to  the  weight  of 
sand  taken.  That  is  to  say,  for  the  quantities  above  stated  it  was 
multiplied  by  40.  The  figures  thus  represent  approximately  the 
turbidity  in  the  sand  in  parts  per  million  by  weight.  One  part  of 
clay  by  weight  actually  produces  about  two  parts  of  turbidity,  be- 
cause the  particles  of  clay  are  much  finer  than  the  particles  of 
standard  turbidity,  but  this  matter  is  overlooked,  and  the  results 
are  expressed  as  standard  turbidity  in  parts  per  million.  To  get 
the  actual  weight  of  the  clay,  therefore,  the  figures  should  be  divid- 
ed by  two. 

It  was  decided  after  study  that  a  reasonable  interpretation  of 
the  specification,  expressed  in  terms  of  turbidity,  was  represented 
by  4,000  parts  per  million,  and  this  limit  was  rigidly  insisted  upon. 
Generally,  the  sand  contained  less  than  3,000  and  frequently  less 
than  2,000  turbidity,  the  last  figure  corresponding  to  less  than  0.1 
per  cent  of  actual  clay  by  weight  in  the  sand  as  delivered.  That 
this  result  could  be  regularly  secured  from  a  bank  where  a  consid- 
erable percentage  of  the  total  material  was  clay  is,  the  writers 
think,  a  very  remarkable  result,  indicating  both  an  excellent  ap- 
paratus and  most  efficient  management,  on  the  part  of  the  con- 
tractor, and  by  the  sand  inspectors. 

Part  of  the  sand-washing  plant  was  duplicated.  This  was  done 
before  the  full  capacity  of  the  part  first  built  was  realized.  It 
was  intended  to  insure  against  delay  in  case  of  accident  and  to 
allow  an  increased  output,  but  the  first  part  did  so  well  that  the 
second  part  was  used  hardly  enough  to  test  it. 

The  sand  was  taken  in  cars  to  an  elevated  siding  near  the  filters, 
and  dumped  into  hoppers.  These  hoppers  were  provided  with 
sand-gates,  and  carts  were  driven  underneath  and  loaded  from 
them.  These  carts  were  taken  over  the  roofs  of  the  filters,  and  the 
sand  was  dumped  through  the  manholes.  Chutes  were  arranged 
under  the  manholes,  upon  which  the  sand  fell.  This  broke  the  force 
of  the  fall  which,  otherwise,  might  have  compacted  the  sand  to 
an  undesirable  extent,  and  also  threw  it  to  a  considerable  dis- 
tance horizontally.  The  chutes  were  revolved,  and  in  this  way  most 
of  the  filter  sand  was  placed  directly  where  it  was  wanted  without 
further  handling.  It  was  necessary  to  place  only  a  small  part  of 
it  with  shovels.  This  method  of  placing  the  sand  in  the  filters  is 
so  simple  and  cheap  that  it  has  been  adopted  for  regular  use  in 
replacing  the  washed  sand  in  the  filters. 

The  sand  settled,  on  an  average,  about  5  per  cent  when  it  was 
wet  and  the  filters  were  placed  in  service.  The  average  depth  of 
the  sand  in  the  filters  after  settling  was  38  ins.,  but  different 
filters  were  filled  to  differen-t  depths,  so  that  when  sand  is  re- 
placed frpm  the  washers  in  the  filters  it  will  go  first  to  the  filters 
having  initially  the  least  sand,  and  a  regular  regime  is  thus  estab- 
lished from  the  start. 


WATER-WORKS.  763 

Cost  of  Filter,  Lambertville,  N.  J.— Mr.  Churchill  Hungerford 
gives  the  following  relative  to  a  small  slow  sand  filter  at  Lambert- 
ville, N.  J.,  built  in  1876.  There  are  two  filter  beds,  each  60x100 
ft,  giving  a  total  of  0.28  acre,  and  the  cost  was  $5,600,  or  at  the 
rate  of  $20,000  per  acre.  They  were  built  in  clay  and  not  lined 
with  concrete,  but  the  side  slopes  and  bottom  were  riprapped  with 
stone.  A  puddle  trench  4  ft.  wide  runs  beneath  all  the  embank- 
ments, averaging  about  10  ft.  deep.  The  basins  are  9  ft.  deep.  A 
12-in.  vitrified  pipe  runs  the  entire  length  of  each  basin,  on  one 
side,  and  is  fed  by  4-in.  vitrified  pipes  spaced  2  ft.  c.  to  c.  Gravel 
was  placed  around  and  over  the  pipes,  and  a  layer  of  sand  2%  ft. 
thick.  The  filter  delivers  225,000  gals,  per  day,  but  has  a  much 
greater  capacity. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Roof  for  Filter,  Indianapolis. — Mr. 
William  Curtis  Mabee  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  the  cost 
of  covering  4.8  acres  of  filter  beds  with  a  reinforced  concrete  roof 
resting  on  steel  beams  and  cast-iron  posts,  built  in  1905,  for  the 
Indianapolis  Water  Co.,  by  day  labor. 

The  filter  beds  had  been  in  operation  for  a  year  or  more,  but 
ice  and  algae  had  caused  so  much  trouble  that  it  was  decided  to 
roof  them,  disturbing  the  filter  sand  as  little  as  possible.  The 
roofing  cost  35^  cts.  per  sq.  ft.,  including  2  ft.  of  cinders  and  a 
concrete  parapet  wall  all  around  the  roof  to  hold  the  cinders.  The 
concrete  for  the  roof  was  mixed  1:2:4,  and  amounts  to  0.017  cu. 
yd.  per  sq.  ft.  The  roof  is  a  continuous  slab  3  ins.  thick,  reinforced 
with  }4 -in.  corrugated  rods  spaced  3  ins.  c.  to  c.  in  parallel  lines, 
and  with  cross  rods  of  the  same  size  spaced  similarly.  The  roof 
slab  is  supported  by  concrete  girders,  8  ins.  wide,  with  a  depth  of 
10  ins.  below  the  roof  slab,  and  spaced  6  ft.  9  ins.  c.  to  c.  Each 
girder  is  designed  as  a  continuous  beam,  reinforced  with  four  %-in. 
corrugated  rods,  each  bar  being  so  bent  that  for  three-quarters  of 
its  length  it  is  near  the  bottom  of  the  beam,  and  then  passes 
along  the  top  of  the  beam  and  over  the  supporting  I-beam  for  about 
a  quarter  span  ;  hence  each  bar  has  a  length  of  about  1  *4  times  the 
length  of  the  beam.  These  reinforced  concrete  beams  are  sup- 
ported by  steel  I-beams.  The  I-beams  are  18-in.  (55  lb.),  spaced 
19^  ft.  c.  to  c.,  and  are  embedded  in  concrete  10  ins.  thick.  The 
I-beams  are  spliced  at  the  quarter  point  of  the  span.  The  I-beams 
are  supported  by  7-in.  cast-iron  columns  spaced  20  ft.  c.  to  c., 
filled  with  concrete.  The  columns  rest  on  concrete  pedestals,  the 
top  of  which  is  6  ins.  above  the  surface  of  the  filter  sand.  The 
excavation  for  these  columns  was  accomplished  by  the  aid  of  light 
steel  cylinders  that  were  sunk  through  4  ft.  of  filter  material, 
and  then  filled  with  concrete.  The  cast-iron  columns  are  11*4  to 
12  ft.  long.  Being  only  7  ins.  diam.  and  spaced  20  ft.  apart,  there 
is  a  gain  of  more  than  1  per  cent  in  the  effective  filtering  area 
under  the  roof,  as  compared  with  the  ordinary  brick  columns  20  ins. 
square  and  spaced  14  ft.  c.  to  c. 

The  use  of  cinders   instead  of  earth  effects  a   decided   saving   in 
the  amount  of  material   required  for   the  roof,   and  the   cinders,   in 


764 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


this  case,  cost  no  more  than  earth.  The  roof  was  designed  to 
support  the  cinders  and  such  water  as  they  would  hold.  A  factor 
of  safety  of  3  was  adopted  for  the  roof  reinforcement,  based  upon 
50,000  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  elastic  limit  of  steel,  and  using  1  per  cent 
reinforcement. 

The  iron,  steel  and  concrete  were  handled  by  a  movable  cableway 
spanning  the  filter  beds. 

The  centering  was  supported  from  the  steel  I-beams,  by  U-bolts, 
and  was  left  in  place  10  to  14  days,  or  until  the  concrete  would 
ring  under  a  hammer  when  struck  lightly. 

Cost  of  Seven  Mechanical  Filters. — Table  XIV  gives  the  first  cost 
of  7  mechanical  filter  plants  of  the  Jewell  type: 

TABLE  XIV. 


When 
Locality.  finished. 

Terre   Haute,    Ind 1891 

Chattanooga,    Tenn. ...  1893 

Burlington,    la 1894 

Ottumwa,    la 1895 

Danville,    Pa 1895 

Lexington.    Ky 1895 

Cedar    Rapids,    la 1896 


Capacity 
per  day, 
gals. 
4,000,000 
3,000,000 
3,500,000 
2,000,000 
1,000,000 
2  000  000 

Cost 
without 
buildings 
or  clear 
reservoir. 
$30,000 
30,000 
33,000 
13,500 
6,000 

Cost- 
with 
buildings 
and  clear 
reservoir. 
$45,000  (1) 
32,000  (2) 
75,000  (3) 
21,500  (4) 
14,000  (5) 
27  000  (6) 

4,000,000 

32,000 

47,000  (7) 

Total 


19,500,000 


$261,500 


Notes. —  (1)  The  buildings  cost  $5,000  and  the  clear  water  reser- 
voir cost  $10,000. 

(2)  There  is  no  clear  water  reservoir. 

(3)  The  clear  water  reservoir  holds  500,000  gals. 

(4)  The  settling  tanks  are  combined  with  the  filtering  tanks,  be- 
ing  below   the   filtering   material.      The    6    filters   are   housed    in    a 
brick  building,  41  x  95  ft. 

(5)  Extra  pumps,   $1,000;    clear  water  reservoir  of  90,000  gals, 
(roofed),  $7,000;    it  is  not  clear  whether  a  building  is  included  in 
the  $14,000. 

(6)  The  clear  water  reservoir  holds  330,000  gals. 

(7)  Brick    building,    40x140    ft.,    clear   water    reservoir   beneath. 
The  cost  includes  two  3,000,000-gal.  low  service  pumps. 

Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter,  Danville,  III.— A  mechanical  filter  plant 
built  at  Danville,  111.,  in  1903,  cost  $75,000  for  buildings,  filters, 
coagulating  basins,  clear  water  reservoir,  and  the  operating  ma- 
chinery. The  capacity  of  the  plant  is  6,000,000  gals,  per  day.  The 
filter  beds  have. a  capacity  of  125,000,000  gals,  per  acre  per  day. 
The  coagulant  is  lime  and  sulphate  of  iron  specified  not  to  cost 
more  than  $1.10  per  million  gallons  when  the  water  has  "average 
turbidity." 

Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter  and  of  Filtering,  Norfolk,  Va. — Mr.  Ed- 
mund B.  Weston  gives  the  following  relative  to  a  mechanical  filter 
plant  built  in  1899  at  Norfolk,  Va.  The  plant  has  a  capacity  of 
8,000,000  gals,  per  day.  There  are  16  filters,  each  15  ft.  in  diam- 
eter. At  a  rate  of  127.000,000  gals,  per  acre  per  day,  each  filter  has 
a  daily  capacity  of  500,000  gals.  The  cost  of  the  filter  plant,  ex- 
clusive of  a  5,000,000-gal.  subsiding  reservoir  and  a  1,000,000-gal. 
clear  water  reservoir,  was  as  follows : 


WATER-WORKS.  765 

Filter  buildings  and  foundations.  .  $23,342 

Filters  and   auxiliaries    74,083 

Pump   for    supplying   filters 1,690 

Electric   light    equipment,    etc 693 

Total     $   99,808 

Work  upon  subsiding  reservoir  including  drainage  pump..         4,690 

Total $104,498 

The  subsiding  reservoir  was  already  in  existence,  being  an  old 
reservoir. 

The  cost  of  operation  during  the  month  of  March.  1900,  which 
was  typical,  was  as  follows,  per  million  gallons : 

Labor   $1.13 

Coal  at  $3  per  ton 0.86 

Clearing  subsiding  reservoir 0.08 

1.95  grains  of  sulphate  of  alumina  per  gal.,  at  1.2  cts.  per  Ib. .  .    3.40 

Total    $5.47 

Additional  labor  if  pumping  station  were  not  adjacent  to  filter 
building    0.33 

Total    $5.80 

This  does  not  include  interest,  depreciation  and  repairs,  which 
\t  is  safe  to  say,  would  amount  to  at  least  $3  per  million  gallons, 
if  the  cost  of  the  subsiding  reservoir  and  clear  water  reservoir 
q.re  included. 

Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter  and  of  Filtering,  Walkes-Barre,  Pa.— 
A  mechanical  filter  plant  (of  the  Jewell  type)  was  built  in  1895 
at  Wilkes-Barre,  Pa.  The  cost  was  $122,400,  including  a  brick 
building  having  11,200  ft.  floor  area.  There  are  20  filter  tanks, 
having  a  combined  area  of  2,260  sq.  ft.,  and  a  daily  capacity  of 
10,000,000  gals.  There  are  two  50-hp.  boilers,  a  10  x  10  x  12-in. 
pump  for  raising  filtered  water  for  washing  the  filters,  a  15-hp. 
engine  for  driving  the  sand  agitators,  a  6  x  10  x  12-in.  air  com- 
pressor for  agitating  the  solution  in  the  coagulant  tank,  and  a 
dynamo  for  lighting.  Sulphate  of  alumina  is  used  as  a  coagulant, 
the  maximum  being  %  gr.  per  gal. 

The  cost  of  operation  per  day  was : 

2  engineers,  at  $2.15 $  4.30 

2  foremen,    at    $1.75 , 3.50 

2  laborers,  at  $1.50 3.00 

Coal    0.78 

Hauling  coal 0.75 

250  Ibs.  alum  (for  7,000,000  gals.),  at  1.75  cts 3.82 

Total,  7,000,000  gals,  at  $2.31 $16.15 

In  1896  the  labor  and  fuel  cost  of  filtering  9,000,000  gals,  per  day 
was  reduced  to  the  following  daily  cost  : 

2  engineers,  at  $2.15 ..$4.30 

2  washers,   at   $1.62  y2 3.25 

Fuel 1.30 

Oil,   Waste,   etc 0.11 

Total $8.96 


7(10  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

This  is  $1  per  million  gals,  exclusive  of  the  coagulent  and  of 
interest  and'  depreciation  of  plant.  The  first  cost  of  the  plant 
was  $12,200  per  million  gals,  of  daily  capacity. 

Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter,  Asbury  Park,  N.  J. — A  mechanical 
filter  (Continental)  was  built  in  1894  at  Asbury  Park,  N.  J.,  for 
removing  the  iron  from  artesian  well  water.  Its  capacity  is  2,000,- 
000  gals,  per  day,  and  its  cost  was  $20,000,  not  including  a  brick 
building  45x45  ft.  (2,025  sq.  ft.),  estimated  to  cost  $1,500.  This 
does  not  include  a  12-ft.  standpipe  125  ft.  high,  which  receives 
the  clear  water.  About  10  per  cent  of  the  total  pumpage  is  used 
for  washing  the  filters. 

Cost  of  Mechanical  Filter  and  Filtering,  Elmira,  N.  Y.— Mr.  J.  M. 
Divens  states  that  the  mechanical  filter  plant  at  Elmira,  N.  Y., 
has  a  capacity  of  6  million  gals,  daily,  and  its  cost  was  $66,000, 
including  building.  The  cost  of  filtering,  $2.80  per  million  gals., 
to  which  $0.70  should  be  added  for  interest  and  depreciation ; 
total,  $3.50. 

Cost  of  Water  Softening. — Mr.  W.  B.  Gerrish  gives  the  follow- 
ing relative  to  a  water  softening  plant  built  in  1905  at  Oberlin,  O. 
The  plant  cost  $12,000,  and  treats  165,000  gals,  per  day.  The  water 
is  softened  by  the  use  of  lime  and  soda.  From  6  to  17  grains  of 
lime  and  2  to  6  grains  of  soda  are  used  per  gallon.  The  two 
(7x7  f t. )  pressure  filters  are  washed  twice  a  week.  The  cost  of 
treatment  averages  as  follows  per  million  gallons : 

Chemicals $10 

Labor,    interest    and    depreciation 15 

Total $25 

Cost  of  Concrete,  Asphalt  and  Brick  Reservoir  Lining. — Mr.  Ar- 
thur L.  Adams  gives  the  following  data  on  the  Astoria  (Ore.)  City 
Water  Works:  The  reservoir  bottom  is  lined  with  6  ins.  of  con- 
crete (laid  with  expansion  joints),  %-in.  of  cement  mortar,  one 
coat  of  liquid  asphalt,  and  one  harder  asphalt  coat.  The  lining 
of  the  slopes  is  the  same  except  that  a  layer  of  brick  laid  flat, 
after  dipping  each  brick  in  hot  asphalt,  was  laid  on  the  concrete. 
The  bricks  were  laid  on  an  asphalt  coating  and  given  a  final 
asphalt  coat.  The  actual  cost  per  sq.  ft.  was : 

Slope.  Per  sq.  ft. '         Bottom.  Per  sq.  ft. 

6-in.    concrete .$0.1187       6-in.    concrete     $0.1031 

1st   coat   asphalt 0.0100       Cement    mortar    finish...    0.0113 

Brick   in   asphalt 0.0889       1st   coat    asphalt 0.0077 

2d  coat  asphalt 0.0131       2d  coat  asphalt 0.0082 

Chinking     crevices     with 

asphalt* .    0.0030 

Ironing 0.0035 


Total     $0.2372  Total $0.1303 

*These  crevices  developed  near  the  top  of  the  slope,  due  to  sliding 
of  the  brick  slope. 

The  detailed  cost  of  this  lining  work  was  as  follows: 

The  concrete  was  composed  of  basalt  rock,  quarried  and  crushed 


WATER-WORKS.  767 

near  the  work,  of  river  gravel,  sand  and  imported  Portland  cement. 
One  cubic  yard  of  concrete  contained  0.9  cu.  yd.  stone,  0.5  cu.  yd. 
gravel,  0.1  cu.  yd.  sand  and  1  bbl.  cement.  There  were  603  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  on  slopes  and  678  cu.  yds.  on  the  bottom.  The  work 
was  well  managed,  each  man  averaging  1.84  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  day, 
mixed  and  placed  on  the  slopes,  and  2.35  cu.  yds.  on  the  bottom. 
The  men  were  Italians.  The  rock  was  quarried  and  crushed  and 
delivered  at  the  work  (800  ft.  haul)  for  95  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Sand 
and  gravel  were  bought  at  86%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  cement  at  $2.45 
per  bbl.  All  mixing  was  done  by  hand.  There  were  three  gangs 
of  mixers,  6  men  in  a  gang,  supplied  with  materials  by  9  wheel- 
barrow men  (5  on  rock,  3  on  gravel  and  sand  and  1  on  cement). 
The  18  mixers  placed  the  concrete  for  6  men  to  rake  and  ram. 
Beside  this  force  of  33  men,  there  were:  1  helper  at  the  cement, 
1  man  tending  water,  1  man  sprinkling  concrete  already  laid,  1 
water-boy  and  1  foreman.  The  gravel,  sand  and  cement  were 
mixed  dry,  then  mixed  wet,  and  stone  added ;  the  concrete  was 
then  turned  three  times,  and  once  more  when  deposited.  On  the 
slopes  a  rough  finishing  coat  of  mortar  was  applied  by  taking  a 
little  mortar  from  the  next  batch.  The  concrete  was  mixed  with 
very  little  water.  By  raking  the  coarse  rock  down  the  slopes  and 
by  using  a  straight  edge  before  ramming,  even  slopes  were 
secured. 

On  the  bottom  the  %-in.  mortar  (1:2)  coat  was  applied  by  two 
finishers  using  smoothing  trowels,  and  they  were  served  by  4  men 
mixing  and  carrying  the  mortar. 

On  the  slopes  the  concrete  was  placed  in  sheets  10  ft.  wide  from 
top  to  bottom  ;  and  on  the  bottom  it  was  laid  in  squares,  20  ft.  on 
a  side ;  2  x  6-in.  planks  being  used  to  hold  the  free  sides  of  the 
concrete.  When  a  new  square  was  laid  adjoining  an  old  square,  the 
2x6  pieces  were  removed,  and  replaced  by  a  piece  of  %  x  4-in. 
weather  boarding.  Two  weeks  later  these  %-in.  strips  were  re- 
moved so  that  the  grooves  could  be  run  full  of  asphalt.  The  %-in. 
strips  should  be  beveled  and  laid  with  the  wide  edge  up,  or  they 
will  be  removed  with  difficulty.  The  labor  cost  of  concreting  was 
$1.07  per  cu.  yd.  on  the  slopes  and  67  cts.  on  the  bottom,  wages 
being  15  cts.  an  hour. 

Two  grades  of  Alcatraz  asphalt  were  used:  the  L  and  the 
XXX,  or  paving  brand.  The  L  grade  is  a  natural  liquid  asphalt, 
and  the  XXX  grade  is  the  product  of  refining  the  natural  rock 
asphalt  with  about  20  per  cent  of  the  liquid  as  a  flux  ;  they  are 
sold  in  barrels  holding  400  Ibs.  No  asphalt  was  placed  on  the  con- 
crete until  it  had  been  in  place  two  weeks  and  was  dry  on  the  sur- 
face. On  the  bottom  of  the  reservoir  the  first  coat  applied  was  the 
L  grade,  the  second  coat  was  the  XXX  grade.  On  the  slopes  none 
of  the  L  grade  was  used,  because  of  its  tendency  to  creep  ;  moreover 
the  harder  asphalt  when  at  the  proper  temperature  runs  readily 
and  fills  all  crevices.  The  only  advantage  of  the  L  grade  is  that 
it  will  adhere  to  a  damp  surface  where  the  XXX  will  not. 


768  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

For  best  results  all  work  should  be  done  in  the  dry  summer 
months.  All  dust  must  be  carefully  swept  off  the  concrete  as  it 
prevents  bonding  with  the  asphalt.  The  asphalt  applied  with  mops 
made  of  twine,  was  delivered  in  sheet-iron  buckets  by  attendants 
who  carried  it  from  two  melting  kettles  holding  3,000  Ibs.  each. 

The  bricks  used  on  the  slopes  were  half  vitrified  and  half  com- 
mon, due  to  inability  to  get  the  full  number  of  vitrified  bricks. 
They  were  submerged  in  a  bucket  of  hot  asphalt  and  placed  on  the 
slope  with  iron  tongs ;  a  common  laborer,  after  a  little  practice, 
readily  averaged  2,300  bricks  laid  in  10  hrs.  A  push  joint  was 
made.  To  secure  close  joints  and  consequent  economy  in  asphalt, 
the  asphalt  must  be  kept  hot  enough  to  run  like  water. 

The  asphalt  finishing  coat  followed  the  brick  laying  as  closely 
as  possible,  to  avoid  delays  due  to  rain-water  standing  in  open 
joints.  The  slope  was  ironed  with  hot  irons  to  improve  the  ap- 
pearance. Overheating  of  the  irons  is  apt  to  injure  the  asphalt. 
During  hot  weather  the  brick  slid  on  the  slope  somewhat  by  closing 
up  thick  joints  laid  in  colder  weather ;  but  all  motion  ceased  in  a 
few  weeks.  The  advantage  of  asphalt  lies  in  retarding  the  pas- 
sage of  water  through  brick  or  concrete ;  it  does  not  exclude 
water,  for  an  asphalt  coated  brick  submerged  in  water  will  eventu- 
ally absorb  as  much  water  as  an  uncoated  brick. 

Cost  of  First  Asphalt  Coat  on  Concrete  Slopes   (29,637  sq.  ft.). 

Total  Cost  per 

Labor :  cost.  sq.  ft. 

Building    sheds    $     5.00  $0.00017 

Spreading,   91   hours  at  20  cts 18.20  0.00061 

Boiling,   91 1/2   hours  at   15   cts 13.72  0.00046 

Helpers,   73%   hours  at   15   cts 11.02  0.00037 

Sweeping,  49  %  hours  at  15  cts 7.43  0.00025 

Materials : 

Asphalt,    19,243   Ibs.   at   $0.1225 235.73  0.00795 

Fuel,  1  cord  wood  at  $2.50 2.50  0.00009 

Hauling  9.6  tons  asphalt  at  $0.47 4.50  0.00015 

Totals $298.10  $0.01005 

Cost  of  Asphalt  Finishing  Coat  on  Slopes  (29,637  sq.  ft). 

Total  Cost  per 

Labor :  cost.  sq.  ft. 

Building    sheds     „  .  $     5.00  $0.00017 

Spreading,   95%   hours  at  15  cts 14.36  0.00049 

Boiling,   73^4   hours  at  15  cts 10.99  0.00037 

Helpers,   144%    hours  at   15   cts 21.68  0.00073 

Sweeping,  20  hours  at  15  cts 3.00  0.00010 

Foreman,   60  hours  at  25  cts 15.00  0.00051 

Materials : 

Asphalt,  25,230  Ibs.  at  $0.01225 309.07  0.01042 

Fuel,    1   cord    2.50  0.00008 

Hauling,    12.6   tons  at   $0.47 5.92  0.00020 


Totals $387.52  $0.01307 

Cost  of  Ironing  Asphalt   Slope    (29,637   sq.   ft). 

Total  Cost  per 

Labor :                                                                             cost.  sq.  ft. 

Ironers,   295.5  hours  at   15   cts $   44.33  $0.00150 

Heaters,   75  hours  at   15   cts 11.25  0.00038 

Helpers  and  sweeping,  34 %  hrs.  at  15  cts 5.18  0.00017 

Foreman,  49 V2  hours  at  25  cts 12.37  0.00042 


WATER-WORKS.  769 

Materials  : 

Irons,   20  at   $1.50..                              30.00                0.00101 

Fuel,    1   cord  at    $2.50 2.50                 0.00008 


Totals     $105.63  $0.00356 

Cost  of  First  Asphalt  Coat  on  Concrete  Bottom   (34,454  sq.  ft.). 

Total  Cost  per 

Labor :                                                                              cost.  sq.  ft. 

Building  sheds,  25  hours  at  20  cts $     5.00  $0.00015 

Spreading,   38  hours  at  20  cts 7.60  0.00022 

Boiling,  37  hours  at  15   cts 5.55  0.00016 

Helpers,  43  hours  at  15  cts 6.45  0.00019 

Sweeping,  44  hours  at  15  cts 6.60  0.00019 

Materials : 

Asphalt,    18,490  Ibs.   at   $0.01225 226.50  0.00658 

Fuel,    1    cord 2.50  0.00012 

Hauling,   9.25   tons  at   $0.47 4.35  0.00007 

Totals      $264.55  $0.00768 

Cost  of  Second  Asphalt  Coat  on  Bottom    (34,454  sq.  ft.) 

Total  Cost  per 

Labor :                                                                              cost.  sq.  ft. 

Building    sheds     $     5.00  '  $0.00015 

Spreading,   35  hours  at  15  cts 5.25  0.00015 

Boiling,  30  hours  at  15  cts 4.50  0.00013 

Helpers,   52%   hours  at   15   cts 7.88  0.00023 

Sweeping,   44%    hours  at  15   cts 6.68  0.00020 

Foreman,    17%    hours   at    25    cts 4.38  0.00013 

Materials : 

Asphalt,    19,591   Ibs.   at   $0.01225 239.99  0.00702 

Fuel,    1   cord  at   $2.50 2.50  0.00007 

Hauling,    9.8    tons    at    $0.47 4.61  0.00013 

Totals     $280.79  $0.00821 

Cost  of  Laying  Brick  on  Slopes   (132,000  Bricks  Dipped,  in  Asphalt 
and    Laid    Flat;     29,637    sq.    ft). 

Total  Cost  per 

Labor :                                                                                  cost.  M. 
Unloading  brick  from  barge,  290  hrs.  at  15  cts; 

foreman,   22  hrs.  at  25  cts $       49.00  $   0.37122 

Hauling  and  storing,   160  hrs.  at  35  cts.  and  140 

hrs.   at  55   cts 152.43  1.15473 

Laying,   561  hrs.   at  15   cts. 84.15  0.63750 

Attendance,    1,341   hrs.   at   15    cts 201.15  1.52387 

Boiling  asphalt,   220   hrs.   at  15   cts 33.00  0.24500 

Foreman,  96   hrs.  at  25  cts , 24.00  0.18180 

Materials : 

Brick,   132   M  at  $7.00 924.00  7.00000 

Asphalt,   93,372   Ibs.   at  $0.01225 1,143.81  8.66516 

Asphalt  haul,  46.7  tons  at  $0.47 * 21.95  0.16628 

Totals $2,633.49  $19.95055 

Cost  of  Lining  a  Reservoir  With  Asphalt.— In  Trans.  Am.  Soc. 
C.  B.,  1892,  Vol.  27,  p.  629,  Mr.  James  D.  Schuyler  discusses  the 
use  of  California  asphalt  for  lining  two  reservoirs  of  the  Citizens' 
Water  Co.,  at  Denver,  Colo. 


77(1  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

The  earth  slopes  of  a  reservoir  were  first  sprinkled  and  rolled 
with  a  5 -ton  slope  roller,  operated  by  a  hoisting  engine  mounted 
on  rails  on  top  of  the  embankment.  Slopes  were  1%  to  1,  and  depth 
of  water  was  20  ft.  Beginning  at  the  bottom  the  asphalt  was  laid 
on  the  earth  slopes  in  horizontal  strips  10  ft.  wide,  1%  ins.  thick, 
spread  with  hot  rakes,  tamped  with  hot  tampers,  and  ironed  with 
hot  smoothing  irons.  Asphalt  was  hauled  2%  miles  and  delivered 
at  a  temperature  of  250°.  While  the  asphalt  sheet  was  still  warm, 
anchor  spikes,  of  %  x  1-in.  strap  iron  8  ins.  long,  were  driven 
through  the  asphalt  into  the  bank  in  rows  1  ft.  apart.  Every  other 
row  was  driven  flush,  the  alternate  rows  being  temporarily  left 
projecting  1%  ins.,  to  serve  as  a  rest  for  2  x  4-in.  strips  of  lumber, 
forming  steps  for  the  workmen.  When  the  finishing  coat  came  to 
be  applied  these  spikes  were  driven  in  flush. 

The  bottom  was  coated  with  asphalt  1  in.  thick,  and  after 
tamping  was  rolled  with  a  cold  5-ton  steam  roller.  The  finishing 
coat  of  refined  Trinidad  asphalt,  fluxed  with  residuum  oil,  was 
poured  on  hot  from  buckets  and  ironed  with  smoothers  heated  to 
cherry  red.  When  first  applied  the  irons  produced  a  yellow  smoke, 
and  had  to  be  moved  rapidly,  but  thus  only  could  a  good  bond  be 
secured  with  the  first  coat. 

The  cost  of  asphalting  a  reservoir  having  a  bottom  area  of 
87,300  sq.  ft.  and  a  side-slope  area  of  65,300  sq.  ft.,  or  a  total  of 
152,600  sq.  ft.,  was  as  follows: 

1,304  tons,   20%  asphalt  mastic,   80%  sand,  at  $12 $15,648.00 

15  tons,   15%  asphalt  mastic,  85%  sand,  at  $10 58000 

86.21  tons  liquid  asphalt  fluxed  with  oil,  at  $40 3,448.40 

Fuel  for  heating  irons  and  for  steam  roller 276.02 

Lights     3600 

Tools     179.75 

Pegirons,    material   and   labor   of   cutting  and    dipping   in 

asphalt 650.00 

Labor    1,921.50 

Use  of  roller   6   days 60.00 


Total  for  152,600  sq.  ft,  at  14.94  cts.  per  sq.  ft $22,799.67 

Mr.  Schuyler  informs  me  that,  as  nearly  as  he  can  remember, 
men  were  paid  $1.75  per  10-hr,  day,  although  possibly  the  rate  was 
$2  a  day.  .  . 

The  second  reservoir  was  lined  in  a  manner  similar  to  the  first, 
just  described.  The  total  area  of  bottom  and  slopes  was  143,670  sq. 
ft.,  which  required  1,156  short  tons  of  the  asphalt  and  sand  mix- 
ture for  the  first  coat;  and  as  this  mixture  weighed  127  Ibs.  per 
cu.  ft.  after  compression,  the  average  thickness  was  1.53  ins.,  re- 
quiring 16  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  The  finishing  coat  was  %  to  %-in.  thick, 
and  required  1.24  Ibs.  of  asphalt  per  sq.  ft.  The  cost  of  lining 
this  reservoir  was  as  follows : 

Cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Materials   for   first   coat 8.98 

Materials   for   second   coat 2.48 

Labor,   fuel,   spikes,    etc 1.99 


Total   cost   of   both   coats 13.45 


WATER-WORKS.  771 

In  preparing  the  mastic  for  the  flrst  coat  78%  of  La  Patera 
asphalt  and  22%  of  Las  Conchas  flux  were  boiled  together  in  open 
kettles  for  12  hrs.,  at  250°  to  300°,  with  frequent  stirring.  Then 
20%  (by  weight)  of  this  mastic  was  mixed  with  80%  of  sand  heated 
to  300°,  a  cylinder  with  strong  paddles  being  used  for  the  mixing, 
which  took  about  2  mins.  The  charge  was  dumped  into  a  cart, 
hauled  to  the  reservoir  and  dumped  upon  a  wooden  platform,  and 
thence  taken  in  hot  scoops,  spread  and  raked.  Hot  rollers  were 
then  used,  and  they  were  superior  to  tamping  and  ironing.  These 
rollers  were  made  from  sections  of  cast  iron  pipe,  turned  smooth  on 
the  outside,  and  fitted  inside  with  a  hanging  basket  in  which  a  fire 
was  maintained.  For  the  bottom  rolling  a  30-in.  pipe  was  used ; 
for  the  slopes  a  14-in.  pipe,  Dulled  with  a  %-in.  wire  cable  passing 
over  a  pulley  at  the  top  of  the  slope,  was  used. 

Asphalt  as  a  reservoir  lining  possesses  several  advantages:  It 
will  not  crack  even  when  there  is  considerable  settlement  of  the 
embankment.  If  cracks  do  occur  it  is  easily  patched,  the  new 
material  uniting  perfectly  with  the  old. 

To  prevent  earth  from  crumbling  and  rolling  down  upon  the 
partly  completed  asphalt,  it  is  often  wise  to  plaster  the  earth  with 
a  mortar  of  sand,  cement  and  lime  to  a  thickness  of  nearly  1  in., 
which  will  cost  about  %  ct.  per  sq.  ft.  On  this  should  be  spread 
a  thin  coat  of  liquid  asphalt  as  a  binder,  which  would  have  the 
additional  advantage  of  protecting  the  asphalt  from  ground  water. 
To  prevent  accumulated  ground  water  from  forcing  off  the  asphalt 
lining,  when  the  water  in  a  reservoir  is  drawn  down,  it  is  often 
necessary  to  provide  broken  stone  drains  back  of  the  lining.  These 
drains  may  be  led  to  a  receiving  well  connected  with  the  reservoir 
by  pipes  provided  with  valves  opening  automatically  into  the 
reservoir. 

Ice,  18  ins.  thick,  has  been  frozen  fast  to  the  asphalt  lining 
all  around,  and  the  water  lowered  and  raised  again  3  or  4  ft.  with- 
out damaging  the  lining  in  the  least. 

I  am  informed  (September,  1904)  by  Mr.  Geo.  S.  Prince,  Asst. 
Ch.  Engr.  the  Denver  Union  Water  Co.,  that  this  asphalt  lining  has 
not  been  durable.  "It  has  run  considerably  on  the  slopes  and  this 
has  resulted  in  the  cracking  and  disintegrating  of  the  asphalt  so 
that  considerable  expense  has  been  involved  in  keeping  it  in  any- 
thing like  serviceable  condition  and  we  would  not  consider  using 
it  again  in  this  connection,  preferring  rather  to  employ  concrete 
linings." 

Cost  of  Lining  a  Reservoir  With  Concrete. — Mr.  G.  L.  Christian 
gives  the  following:  In  laying  3,000  cu.  yds.  of  1:3:6  concrete, 
6  ins.  deep,  over  the  bottom  of  a  reservoir,  the  wages  paid  were: 
Foreman,  $2.50 ;  laborers,  $1.35,  and  teams,  $4  a  day.  The  cost 
of  blasting  the  rock  is  not  included,  but  the  cost  of  loading,  haul- 
ing and  crushing  is  included  : 


772  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Sand     $  -37 

Natural  cement 1.10 

Loading  and  hauling  stone  to  crusher 25 

Labor  at  crusher,  at  $1.35  a  day 20 

Rent    of     crusher 01 

Coal  for  crusher 05 

Hauling   stone  from   crusher 15 

Foreman   of   concrete   gang 05 

Laborers  concreting,   at  $1.35 50 

Teams  concreting,    at    $4 08 

Total $2.76 

9%  for  supt.,  timekeeper,   office  help,  etc 24 

Total     $3.00 

The  concrete  was  mixed  very  wet. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  Reservoir  Floor  at  Pittsburg,  Pa. — Mr.  E'mile 
Low  gives  the  following  data  : 

The  floor  of  the  Highland  Ave.  Reservoir  at  Pittsburg,  Pa.,  was 
covered  in  1884  to  a  depth  of  5  ins.  with  concrete,  laid  on  a  clay 
puddle  foundation.  The  concrete  mortar  was  made  of  1  bbl.  natural 
cement  to  2  bbls.  sand,  mixed  to  a  thin  grout  in  wooden  boxes  stand- 
ing on  legs.  Five  barrels  of  stone  (standstone)  were  spread  on  a 
platform  of  2-in.  plank,  10  x  16  ft.,  and  the  grout  was  poured  over 
it,  the  whole  mass  being  then  turned  over  three  times  with  shovels, 
then  deposited  to  the  depth  of  5  ins.  and  rammed.  The  stone  was 
quarried  and  hauled  20  miles  by  rail,  then  unloaded  into  small 
cars  and  hauled  %  mile  to  the  reservoir.  The  sand  was  obtained  in 
the  reservoir  limits,  and  cost  merely  the  work  of  excavation,  or 
1^4  cts.  per  bushel. 

The  following  was  the  cost  of  two  days'  work : 

27  laborers,   2   days,   at   $1.25 $72.90 

1  foreman,   2   days,  at  $2.50 • 5.00 

Total,   101  cu.  yds.,  at  77   cts $77.90 

During  one  month  the  labor  cost  was: 

Total  cost. 

642  days,  laborers    at     $1.35 $866.70 

17  days,  water-boy,   at  60   cts 10.20 

22  days,  foreman,    at     $2.50 55.00 


Total,  1,302  cu.  yds.,  at  71  %  cts $931.90 

During  another  month  1,425  cu.  yds.  were  laid  at  95  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.,  wages  being  $1.25  a  day. 

The  average  cost  of  the  7,680  cu.  yds.  of  1:2:5  concrete  was: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Quarrying  stone    $  .45 

Transporting  stone    50 

Breaking   stone    (2%-in.   ring) 35 

IVs   bbl.   natural  cement 1.80 

8   bu.    sand 10 

Water     05 

Labor   (wages  $1.25  a  day),  mixing  and  laying 75 

Incidentals    .  05 


Total     $4.05 

The   contract  price  was  $6  per  cu.   yd. 


WATER-WORKS.  773 

Cost  of  Reservoir,  Forbes  Hill,  Mass.— Mr.  C.  M.  Saville  gives 
the  following  relative  to  a  small  reservoir  (Forbes  Hill)  at  Quincy, 
Mass.,  holding  5,000,000  gals.  The  bottom  is  100x280  ft.,  and  the 
sides  slope  1  to  1%.  The  lining  is  concrete.  The  excavated  earth 
was  used  to  build  the  banks,  which  are  17  ft.  wide  on  top. 

The  cost,  at  contract  prices,  was  as  follows : 

30,100  cu.  yds.  earth  excavation,  at  $0.38 $11,438 

Rock  excavation,   at   $2.50 52 

2,337  cu.  yds.  concrete,  at  $5.25  to  $8 15,045 

6,822   sq.    yds.    plastering,    at    $0.25 1,706 

695   sq.    yds.    granolithic   walk,    at    $0.21 1,313 

Seeding    21 

Railing     .  .  425 

Miscellaneous  extras    462 


Total $30,462 

For  detailed  cost  of  the  concrete  lining  and  plastering,  see  the 
following  section. 

The  gate  chamber  cost  $7,765. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Lining  and  Plastering  a  Reservoir,  Forbes  Hill, 
Mass. — Mr.  C.  M.  Saville  is  authority  for  the  following  cost  data 
on  the  Forbes  Hill  Reservoir,  Quincy,  Mass.,  built  by  contract  in 
1900-1901.  Common  laborers  were  paid  $1.50  per  10-hr,  day.  There 
were  four  classes  of  concrete  used,  and  their  itemized  costs  were  as 
follows : 

Class  "A"  ;  Concrete  1 :  2%  :  4. 

1.35  bbl.   Portland   cement,   at   $2.23 $3.01 

0.46  cu.    yd.    sand,    at    $1.13 52 

0.74  cu.  yd.  stone,   at  $1.13 84 

25  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  for  forms,  at  $20.00  per  M.  .      .50 

Labor,  on   forms 59 

Labor,  mixing    and    placing 1.15 

Labor,  general    expenses    20 

Total    (279  cu.  yds.)   per  cu.  yd.. $6.81 

Class  "B"  ;  Concrete  1:3:6. 

1.07  bbl.   Portland  cement,  at   $2.23 ......$2.39 

0.44  cu.   yd.    sand,   at   $1.13 50 

0.88  cu.   yd.   stone,   at   $1.13 99 

6V2  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  for  forms,  at  $20.00  per  M.  .      .13 

Labor,  on  forms    21 

Labor,  mixing  and  placing    97 

Labor,  general    expenses    15 

Total    (284   cu.  yds.)   per  cu.   yd $5.34 

Class  "C"  ;    Concrete  1:2:5. 

1.25  bbl.    natural  cement,    at    $1.08 $1.35 

0.34  cu.   yd.    sand,   at   $1.02 35 

0.86   cu.   yd.   stone,  at   $1.57 1.35 

4  %   ft.   B.  M.   lumber,   at   $20.00  per  M 09 

Labor,   on    forms     10 

Labor,   mixing   and    placing 1.17 

Labor,  general    expenses     08 


Total    (400  cu.  yds.)   per  cu.   yd $4.49 


774  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Class   "D"  ;    Concrete   1 :  2%  :  6%. 

1.08  bbl.  Portland  cement,  at  $1.53 $1.65 

0.37  cu.    yd.    sand,    at    $1.02 38 

0.96  cu.  yd.   stone,  at  $1.57 1.51 

1  ft.  B.  M.   lumber,  at  $20.00  per  M 02 

Labor,  on    forms    12 

Labor,  mixing  and  placing    1.21 

Labor,  general  expenses 18 

Total   (615  cu.  yds.)   per  cu.  yd $5.07 

Class  "E"  ;  Concrete  1:2%:  4. 

1.37  bbl.   Portland   cement,   at  $1-53 $2.09 

0.47  cu.   yd.   sand,   at   $1.02 48 

0.75  cu.    yd.    stone,    at    $1.57 1.1T 

12%  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  in  forms,  at  $20.00  per  M. .  .      .25 

Labor,  on  forms    26 

Labor,  mixing   and   placing 1.53 

Labor,  general    expenses 15 

Total   (1,222  cu.  yds.)   per  cu.  yd $5.93 

In  all  cases  the  lumber  was  used  more  than  once,  so  that  the  cost 
of  the  labor  on  the  forms  cannot  be  computed  per  M  ft.  B.  M. 

Class  "A"  was  used  for  walls  and  floors  of  gate  vault  and  gatf 
chamber,  and  for  cut-off  walls. 

Class  "B"  was  used  for  the  foundations  of  a  standpipe. 

Class  "C,"  the  only  natural  cement  concrete  on  the  work,  was 
used  for  the  lower  layer  of  the  bottom  of  the  reservoir.  Then 
came  a  layer  of  Portland  cement  plaster  %-in.  thick,  on  which  was 
placed  the  top  layer  of  Portland  cement  concrete,  Class  "E."  The 
slopes  of  the  reservoir  were  lined  in  a  similar  manner,  except  that 
Class  "D"  was  substituted  for  Class  "C."  The  upper  layer  of 
concrete  was  laid  in  10  ft.  squares,  alternate  squares  being  laid 
and  allowed  to  harden,  and  then  the  other  squares  were  laid. 

The  cement  was  mostly  Atlas,  delivered  in  bags,  four  of  which 
made  a  barrel,  and  assumed  to  be  3.7  cu.  ft.  All  concrete,  except 
on  the  sides,  was  made  rather  wet,  and  was  kept  wet  for  a  week. 
The  cost  of  laying  with  the  ordinary  concrete  gang  was  as  follows, 
wages  being  $.1.50  per  10-hr,  day: 

Cost  per 
cu.  yd. 

2  men    measuring    materials $  .15 

2  men  mixing    mortar     15 

3  men  turning  concrete    (3   times) 22 

3  men  wheeling    concrete     23 

1  man  placing   concrete    07 

2  men  ramming   concrete    15 

1   sub-foreman     ($2.50)      13 

Total    (20   cu.   yds.   per  day) $1.10 

In  addition  to  this  gang  there  were  3  plasterers  and  3  helpers 
working  on  the  slopes.  The  %-in.  layer  of  plaster  between  the  con- 
crete layers  was  put  down  in  strips  4  ft.  wide  and  finished  similar 
to  the  surface  of  a  granolithic  walk.  This  plaster  was  mostly  1 :  2 
mortar  with  finishing  surface  of  1:4.  Strips  of  coarse  burlap 
soaked  in  water  were  used  to  keep  this  layer  wet  and  cool ;  in  spite 


WATER-WORKS.  775 

of   which   some   cracks  appeared.      This    plastering    gang   averaged 
2,100  sq.  ft.  per  day,  the  cost  being  as  follows  for  %-in.  plaster: 

-Cost  per 

100  sq.  ft.        Sq.  yd.  Cu.  yd. 

Cement,   at   $1.53    per  bbl $1.15  $U.103  $7.42 

Sand,    at    $1.02 13  0.012  .86 

Burlap     .    ! 02  0.002  .14 

Labor 92  0.083  6.00 

Totals      $2.22  $0.200  $14.42 

Although  plastering  work  is  usually  measured  in  square  yards, 
I  have  computed  it  in  areas  of  100  sq.  ft,  and  in  cubic  yards  for 
purposes  of  comparison.  It  will  be  seen  that  it  took  more  than  5 
bbls.  of  cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  this  1 :  2  mortar,  and  that  it  cost 
$6  per  cu.  yd.  for  the  labor. 

Returning  again  to  the  concrete,  the  stone  was  cobbles  picked 
out  of  the  hardpan  excavated  to  make  embankments.  It  was 
washed  before  crushing,  and  had  to  be  gathered  up  from  scat- 
tered piles,  which  accounts  in  part  for  the  high  cost.  It  was 
crushed  with  a  9  x  15  Farrel  crusher  operated  by  a  12-hp.  engine. 
The  crusher  was  rated  at  125  tons  a  day,  but  averaged  only  about 
40  tons.  The  bin  had  a  capacity  of  30  cu.  yds.,  divided  into  three 
compartments,  one  for  stone  less  than  1  %  ins.  diameter,  one  for 
stone  between  1%  and  2%  ins.,  and  the  third  for  stone  over  2%  ins. 
which  had  to  be  recrushed.  The  stone  had  about  46%  voids  and 
weighed  95  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  Lined  Reservoir,  Canton,  III. — Mr.  G.  W. 
Chandler  gives  the  following  relative  to  a  small  reservoir  built  in 
1901  at  Canton,  111.  The  reservoir  has  a  capacity  of  1,140,000  gals., 
and  cost  $7,900.  It  is  80  x  160  ft.,  and  13  ft.  deep,  7  ft.  being  ex- 
cavation, and  carries  12  ft.  of  water.  The  concrete  bottom  is  10  ins. 
thick,  including  %-in.  coat  of  cement  mortar.  The  footings  and 
copings  of  the  side  walls  are  of  concrete,  but  the  walls  are  of  brick. 
Concrete  was  mixed  1:3%:  7%.  The  cement  was  0.9  cu.  ft.  per 
95-lb.  sack.  The  cost  of  the  concrete  was: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.856   bbl.  cement,  at  $2.50 $2.14 

0.857  cu.  yd.  broken  stone,  at  $2.17 1.86 

10.1  bu.  sand   (100  Ibs.  per  bu.),  at  5%  cts 0.58 

Labor,  at  19  cts.  per  hr '.  .  .    0.80 

Total     $5.38          .   ' 

No.  1  paving  bricks  (at  $6.50  per  M)  were  laid  in  1:  2%  cement 
mortar  for  the  walls,  which  were  30  ins.  thick  at  the  base  and 
13  ins.  at  the  top.  The  concrete  footing  was  36  ins.  wide  x  2  ft. 
thick.  The  coping  was  6  ins.  thick.  There  were  brick  pilasters 
20  ft.  c.  to  c. 

Cost  of  Covered  Reservoirs  of  Various  Sizes. — Mr.  Freeman  C. 
Coffin  gives  the  following  relative  to  a  covered  reservoir  built  by 
contract  in  1898  at  Wellesley,  Mass.  The  reservoir  is  circular.  82 
ft.  diam.,  15  ft.  deep,  and  its  capacity  is  600,000  gals.  The  floor  is 
lined  with  concrete,  4  ins.  thick  ;  the  roof*  is  of  concrete  (groined 
arches)  resting  on  brick  pillars.  The  walls  are  15  ft.  high  from 


776 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


floor  to  spring  line,  2  ft.  thick  for  5  ft.  below  the  spring  line  and 
3.33  ft.  thick  at  the  base.  The  roof  arches  have  a  12  ft.  clear  span, 
2% -ft.  rise,  and  are  6  ins.  thick  at  the  crown.  The  earth  covering 
on  the  roof  is  2  %  ft.  thick  at  the  walls  and  3  ft.  thick  at  the  center. 
The  centers  used  in  building  the  concrete  roof  cost  the  contractor 
22^  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  if  used  only  once.  He  attempted  to  use  them 
several  times,  but  the  braces  against  some  of  the  brick  piers  were 
carelessly  removed  after  a  portion  of  the  centers  had  been  taken 
down,  and  the  lateral  thrust  of  the  concrete  arches  overthrew  the 
piers  and  caused  a  loss  of  part  of  the  roof.  The  cost  of  the  reser- 
voir to  the  city  was  $10,415. 

Some  of  the  items  were  as  follows : 

3,446  cu.  yds.  earth   excavation. 
310  cu.  yds.  rubble  masonry. 
503  cu.  yds.  concrete  masonry. 

61  cu.  yds.  brick  masonry. 
143  cu.  yds.  gravel  on  roof. 
439  cu.  yds.  loam  on  roof. 

A  steel  ring  was  embedded  in  the  circular  wall.     The  weight  re- 
quired for  such  a  steel  ring  is  given  by  the  following  formula : 
W=  0.912  D2. 

D  being  the  diameter  of  reservoir  in  feet,  and  W  being  the  total 
weight  in  pounds,  including  an  allowance  of  25%  for  splicing  and 
rivets. 

In  Table  XV,  Mr.  Coffin  gives  the  estimated  cost  of  covered  reser- 
voiis  built  with  economic  dimensions,  and  of  the  same  general  de- 
sign as  the  one  at  Wellesley,  Mass. 

TABLE  XV. — COST  OF  COVERED  RESERVOIRS. 

— Square  Reservoirs. — 


Capacity 

—  Round  Reservoirs.-  — 

Gallons. 

Diam. 

Depth. 

Cost. 

250,000 

60 

12 

$   4,700 

500,000 

75 

16 

7,800 

750,000 

88 

17 

10,500 

1,000,000 

98 

18 

12,900 

1,250,000 
1,500,000 

106 
115 

%        19 

1/2        19 

15,200 
17,600 

1,750,000 

120 

21 

20,000 

2,000,000 

125 

22 

22,000 

2,500,000 

134 

24 

26,200 

3,000,000 

144 

25 

30,200 

4,000,000 

166 

*           25* 

37,900 

5,000,000 

186 

*          25* 

45,600 

Side. 
54.5 
69.5 
79.5 
88.5 
99.5 
106.0 
111.5 
118.5 
130.0 
142.5 
153.5 
165* 


Depth. 
11 

14 

16 
17 
17 
18 
19 
19 
20 
20 
23 
25' 


Cost. 
$  4,800 
8,100 
11,000 
13,600 
16,000 
18,400 
21,700 
22,900 
27,300 
31,500 
39,500 
47,400 


*  These  are  not  exactly  the  most  economic  dimensions. 

The  above  estimates  are  based  upon  the  following  unit  prices: 
Earth  excavation,   per   cu.   yd  ..............................  $  0.50 

Concrete  walls,   floors  and  pier  foundations  .................      6.00 


Concrete   roof,   per   cu.   yd  ..................................  6.50 

.....    13.00 

0.25 
......      0.15 

1.00 
0.05 
0.15 


Brickwork  in  piers,   per  cu.   yd. 

Plastering    walls,    per    sq.    yd , 

Plastering  floor,   per  sq.   yd 

Gravel  on  roof  arches,  per  cu.  yd. 

Steel   ring,   per   Ib 

Centers,  per  sq.  ft.  of  reservoir  area 


WATER-WORKS.  777 

Cost  of  Small  Covered  Reservoir,  Portersville,  Calif. — Mr.  Phillip 
E.  Harrows  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  a  100,000-gal.  reser- 
voir built  in  1904  for  the  waterworks  at  Portersville,  Cal. 

The  work  was  done  by  day  labor,  at  20  cts.  per  hr.  The  reser- 
voir is  50  ft.  diam.,  7  ft.  deep,  lined  with  4  ins.  of  concrete  on  the 
bottom  and  12  ins.  on  the  sides.  It  is  roofed  with  2  x  10-in. 
stringers,  4  ft.  apart,  supporting  iy2-in.  plank.  The  ends  of  the 
stringers  rested  on  the  concrete  walls  and  on  an  8  x  10-in.  girder 
which  ran  across  the  center  of  the  reservoir  and  was  supported  on 
a  pier  at  the  center.  The  excavated  material  was  a  heavy  clay, 
loaded  with  picks  and  shovels  into  wagons.  The  excavation  aver- 
aged 4  ft.  deep,  and  the  embankment  was  4  ft.  high. 

The  cost  was  as  follows: 

330  cu.  yds.  excavation,   at   58.6   cts $    191.08 

300  cu.  yds.  hauled   %   mi.,  at  20.4  cts 63.98 

75  cu.  yds.  concrete    (labor,   $3.03,   and  materials,   $5.31), 

at    $8.34    624.74 

35  squares  plaster   finish   at   $2.92 102.45 

4,000  ft.  B.  M.   roof,  at  $45.49 181.96 

Trimming    outer     slopes 18.70 

Total      $1,172.91 

The  plaster  labor  cost  $0.57  per  square  on  the  bottom  and  $1.12 
on  the  vertical  sides. 

The  roof  labor  cost  $12.43  per  M,  wages  of  carpenters  being  $3 
to  $4.37. 

Cost  of  a  Covered  Reinforced  Concrete  Reservoir. — In  Gillette 
and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction — Methods  and  Cost,"  pp.  589  to 
597,  the  design  of  a  small,  square,  covered  reservoir  (30x31  ft.)  is 
given,  together  with  detailed  costs  and  methods  of  construction,  of 
which  the  following  is  a  very  brief  abstract.  The  reservoir  is  12  ft. 
deep  and  holds  75,000  gals.  There  were  580  cu.  yds.  of  earth  exca- 
vation and  83  cu.  yds.  of  concrete.  The  cost  of  the  concrete  was : 

IVs    bbls.    cement,    at    $1.12 $   1.49 

1    cu.    yd.    stone 1.86 

V2    cu.    yd.    sand 0.60 

Steel     for     reinforcement 4.76 

Forms,    100   ft.    B.    M.,    at   $18.30 1.85 

Labor     on    forms 2.41 

Labor  on   concrete   and   steel 2.65 

Total     $15.62 

The  excavation  cost  the  contractor  90  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  total  cost  of  the  reservoir  to  the  contractor  was  $2,362,  but 
it  leaked  so  badly  that  he  was  subsequently  compelled  to  excavate 
all  around  and  build  a  brick  wall  (1  brick  thick)  a  few  inches 
from  the  concrete  and  fill  in  between  with  rich  cement  mortar. 
This  additional  and  unexpected  work  cost  $1,240  for  labor  and 
materials. 

Cost  of  a  Covered  Reinforced  Concrete  Reservoir,  Fort  Meade, 
S.  D.* — Mr.  Samuel  H.  Lea  gives  the  following: 

The  construction  of  a  500,000-gallon  reinforced  concrete  reservoir 


'Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.   27,    1907. 


778  HANDBOOK    OF   COST    DATA. 

at  Fort  Meade,  S.  D.,  while  not  comprising  any  features  of  unusual 
interest,  was,  nevertheless,  an  interesting  work  from  an  engineering 
as  well  as  an  economical  point  of  view.  The  writer,  who  was  in 
direct  charge  of  the  work,  believes  that  an  analysis  of  the  various 
items  of  cost  and  a  brief  description  of  the  methods  employed  will 
be  of  interest  to  engineers  and  others  interested  in  concrete  work. 
The  general  design  of  the  structure  was  furnished  by  the 
Quartermaster-General,  U.  S.  Army,  and  the  details  of  reinforcement 
were  worked  out  by  the  firms  offering  bids.  The  successful  bidder 
submitted  a  design  embodying  the  use  of  expanded  metal  and  cor- 
rugated bars,  this  form  of  reinforcement  being  furnished  by  the 


Sec-Hon          A-B 

Fig.  25. — Reinforced  Concrete  Reservoir. 


St.  Louis  Expanded  Metal  Fireproofiing  Co.,  of  St.  Louis,  Mo.  As 
shown  in  Fig.  25,  the  reservoir  comprises  two  compartments  of 
equal  size,  divided  by  a  partition  wall.  Each  compartment  is  50  x 
60  ft,  inside  dimensions,  with  rounded  corners.  The  roof  is  a  flat 
slab,  3  ins.  thick,  resting  upon  girders,  these  girders  being  supported 
by  columns  of  a  square  cross-section. 

Reinforcement. — The  reinforcement  is  rather  heavy,  especially  for 
the  walls.  As  the  latter  are  thin,  the  metal  reinforcement  occupies 
u  relatively  large  portion  of  the  wall  space.  The  reinforcement  con- 
sists of  corrugated  bars  for  the  footings,  floor,  walls,  columns,  beams 
and  roof  girders,  and  expanded  metal  for  the  roof  slab.  The  bars 
were  of  four  different  sizes:  Va-in.,  %-in.,  %-in.  and  1-in.,  and  of 
different  lengths,  varying  according  to  the  location  where  used.  In 


WATER-WORKS.  779 

the  floor  the  reinforcement  consisted  of  %-in.  bars  laid  crosswise  in 
two  layers  and  spaced  12  ins.  apart  in  each' layer.  In  the  walls  the 
reinforcement  was  placed  close  to  both  inner  and  outer  faces.  Near 
the  inner  face  a  row  of  upright,  %-in.  bars,  spaced  12  ins.  between 
centers,  extended  the  entire  length  of  enclosing  and  partition  walls. 
Horizontal  Vj-in.  bars,  24  ins.  between  centers,  were  placed  against 
these  uprights.  Near  the  outer  wall  face  %-in.  upright  bars  were 
used,  spaced  9  ins.  between  centers ;  and  the  horizontal  reinforce- 
ment was  of  i^-in.  bars,  24  ins.  between  centers.  In  the  footings 
two  layers  of  %-in.  bars  were  used.  These  were  laid  crosswise  and 
spaced  6  ins.  apart  in  each  layer. 

Concrete. — The  specifications  required  broken  stone  of  hard  con- 
sistency, not  larger  than  9,  %-in.  cube,  and  clean,  sharp  sand,  the 
composition  of  the  concrete  to  be  one  cement  to  two  sand  and  four 
stone.  These  proportions  were  used  throughout  the  work.  Colo- 
rado Portland  cement  was  used  for  the  greater  part  of  the  work. 
Towards  the  finish  a  carload  of  lola,  Kansas,  Portland  cement  was 
used.  Both  cements  showed  up  well  under  frequent  tests  and  gave 
excellent  results  in  the  work.  The  sand  was  obtained  from  a  pit 
about  three  miles  distant ;  it  was  of  medium  quality  and  fairly 
clean.  The  stone  used  was  obtained  partly  from  a  limestone  quarry 
situated  at  some  distance  from  the  reservoir  site  ;  but  the  greater 
'portion  of  the  supply  was  obtained  from  boulders  found  on  the 
surface  in  the  vicinity. 

Excavation. — The  reservoir  was  built  so  that  about  half  of  its 
height  was  below  the  natural  level  of  the  ground.  The  excavation 
was  made  in  coarse  gravel  mixed  with  some  sand  and  clay,  the 
material  being  handled  with  teams  and  scrapers.  The  force  em- 
ployed in  excavating  consisted  usually  of  four  or  six  teams  and 
about  the  same  number  of  men  in  addition  to  the  drivers.  The 
men  were  paid  |2.50  per  10-hour  day  and  the  wage  for  team  and 
driver  was  $5  per  day.  A  portion  of  the  material  was  removed  by 
drag  scrapers,  but  the  bulk  of  the  excavation,  consisting  of  com- 
pact gravel  mixed  with  small  boulders,  required  the  use  of  wagons. 
The  material  was  loosened  by  plow  for  scraper  work  for  the  upper 
portion  of  the  excavation.  It  was  found  later,  however,  that  better 
headway  could  be  made  by  loosening  the  material  with  picks  and 
shoveling  it  into  wagon  by  hand.  The  total  volume  of  material  ex- 
cavated was  2,275  cu.  yds.  at  a  cost  of  $1,114.75,  or  49  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.,  divided  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Loosening    and    loading     20  cts. 

Hauling    and    depositing • 25   cts. 

Supervision,     tools,    etc 4   cts. 

Total     49  cts. 

After  the  excavation  was  completed  the  bottom  of  the  pit  was 
compacted  with  a  heavy  roller,  then  the  excavations  for  wall  and 
column  footings  were  carefully  made  by  hand. 

Concrete  Work. — The  concrete  was  mixed  by  hand  on  a  movable 
platform  ;  its  composition  is  given  above. 


780  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

A  concrete  gang  consisted  of  four  men  who  were  each  paid  $2.75 
per  day.  They  wheeled  the  materials  from  the  supply  piles  to  the 
mixing  platform,  mixed  the  concrete  and  deposited  it  in  place. 
During  the  construction  of  the  footings  and  floor  two  concrete  gangs 
were  employed,  but  after  the  walls  were  started  one  gang  only  was 
required  for  concrete  work  ;  the  other  gang  was  then  put  to  work 
assisting  the  carpenters. 

The  sand  and  stone  were  wheeled  to  the  platform  in  iron  wheel- 
barrows of  2^  cu.  ft.  capacity.  The  cement  was  in  ^4-bbl.  sacks 
and  each  sack  was  taken  as  1  cu.  ft.  Each  batch  of  concrete  con- 
tained the  following  quantity  of  material : 

2  ^    sacks    of    cement 2  %   cu.  ft. 

2  wheelbarrows    of    sand 5       cu.  f t. 

4  wheelbarrows    of   stone 10       cu.  ft. 

The  quantities  of  sand  and  stone  were  adjusted  so  as  to  form  the 
proper  proportion  for  making  a  dense  concrete.  From  time  to  time 
as  the  work  progressed,  experiments  were  made  by  the  writer  to  de- 
termine the  percentage  of  voids  both  in  the  sand  and  the  crushed 
stone ;  and,  in  this  way,  uniformity  in  composition  was  secured  for 
the  concrete.  The  mixture  was  made  quite  wet  in  order  to  insure  a 
free  flow  around  the  reinforcing  bars.  On  account  of  the  narrow 
space  inside  the  forms  and  the  number  of  reinforcing  bars  therein 
care  was  taken  to  cause  the  mixture  to  be  well  distributed  through- 
out. The  wet  concrete  was  well  spaded  in  an  effort  to  secure  a 
smooth  surface  next  to  the  forms.  This  was  generally  accom- 
plished, but  some  rough  places  which  showed  after  the  removal 
of  the  forms  required  patching  up. 

In  constructing  the  footings  some  concrete  was  first  deposited  in 
place  and  the  metal  reinforcement  was  embedded  therein.  For  the 
floor  reinforcement  the  lower  bars  were  carefully  embedded  in  the 
concrete  after  it  had  been  brought  to  a  suitable  height ;  the  upper 
bars  were  then  placed  crosswise  upon  the  lower  ones  and  kept  in 
position  until  the  remainder  of  the  concrete  had  been  deposited 
around  and  over  them.  In  the  wall  footings  a  depression  or  groove, 
several  inches  deep,  was  left  under  the  wall  space  for  its  entire 
length.  This  insured  a  good  bond  between  the  wall  proper  and  the 
footing. 

The  concrete  floor  in  each  compartment  was  built  in  one  con- 
tinuous operation,  the  object  being  to  secure  a  practically  monolithic 
construction.  The  lower  reinforcing  bars  in  the  floor  were  em- 
bedded at  the  proper  depth  in  the  fresh  concrete  and  the  upper 
bars  were  then  placed  crosswise  upon  the  lower  ones  ;  the  two  sets 
were  then  wired  together  at  a  sufficient  number  of  places  to  pre- 
vent displacement  while  the  remaining  concrete  was  being  deposited  I 
around  and  over  them. 

Placing  Reinforcement. — The  reinforcement  for  the  walls  and  col- 
umns was  erected  in  place  upon  the  footings  and  formed  a  steel 
skeleton  around  which  the  forms  were  erected.  The  upright  bars  in 
the  walls  were  held  together  and  at  the  proper  distance  apart  by 
means  of  templets  consisting  of  wooden  strips  in  which  holes  were 
bored  at  suitable  intervals  to  receive  the  bars.  These  templets 


WATER-WORKS.  781 

were  maintained  in  a  horizontal  position  and  were  moved  upward  as 
the  concrete  advanced  in  height.  The  horizontal  reinforcing  bars 
were  wired  in  place  to  the  upright  bars ;  they  were  placed  in  posi- 
tion ahead  of  the  concreting  as  the  wall  was  built  up. 

The  corrugated  bars  in  beam  and  girders  were  placed  in  position 
in  the  forms  and  held  up  by  blocks  which  were  removed  as  the 
forms  were  filled  with  concrete.  The  expanded  metal  reinforcement 
for  the  roof  slab  was  placed  so  as  to  be  close  to  the  lower  face  of 
the  slab,  but  far  enough  up  to  be  entirely  enveloped  in  the  concrete. 

Form  Construction. — The  wall  forms  were  made  of  2-in.  planks, 
surfaced  on  the  inner  side  and  placed  horizontally  on  edge.  They 
were  held  in  place  by  4  x  4-in.  posts  spaced  at  intervals  of  about 
4  ft.,  in  pairs  on  opposite  sides  of  the  wall.  The  posts  were  firmly 
braced  on  the  outside ;  they  were  prevented  from  spreading  by  con- 
necting wires  passing  through  the  wall  space  between  the  edges  of 
adjacent  planks.  At  the  rounded  corners  of  the  reservoir  the  pairs 
of  posts  were  spaced  about  two  feet  apart  and  the  curve  was  made 
by  springing  thin  boards  into  place  to  fit  the  curve  and  nailing  them 
to  the  posts.  The  posts  were  high  enough  to  reach  to  the  top  of  the 
wall ;  the  siding  was  built  up  one  plank  at  a  time  as  the  concrete 
work  progressed.  Column  forms  were  made  of  2-in.  planks  on  end, 
extending  from  floor  to  girder.  Three  sides  were  enclosed  and  one 
side  was  left  open  to  receive  the  concrete ;  this  side  was  closed 
up  as  the  concreting  advanced  in  height. 

The  beam  and  girder  forms  were  open  troughs  of  the  required 
dimensions,  made  of  2-in.  plank,  surfaced  on  inner  faces.  The  form 
of  centering  for  the  roof  slab  consisted  of  a  smooth,  tight  floor  of 
2-in.  planks,  extending  between  the  open  tops  of  column,  beam  and 
girder  forms  over  the  entire  area  between  enclosing  walls  of  the 
reservoir.  The  centering  and  the  beam  and  girder  forms  were 
supported  by  6  x  6-in.  posts  resting  upon  the  floor  below. 

The  regular  carpenter  gang  consisted  of  a  foreman  carpenter  at 
$5  per  day,  a  carpenter  at  $3.50  per  day,  and  two  helpers  at  $2.75 
per  day.  During  the  early  concrete  work  of  making  footings  and 
floor,  where  forms  were  not  required,  the  carpenter  force  was  em- 
ployed in  erecting  the  steel  skeleton  for  the  walls.  The  upright  bars 
were  placed  in  position  and  secured  by  temporary  wooden  stays  ex- 
tending from  the  upper  portion  of  bars  to  the  surface  of  ground 
outside  of  excavation.  These  stays  were  removed  after  concreting 
had  advanced  to  a  sufficient  height  to  hold  the  steel  securely  in 
place. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Work. — The  wages  paid  the  concrete  gang  which 
mixed  and  placed  all  the  concrete  and  the  carpenter  gang  which 
constructed  and  erected  the  forms  and  placed  the  reinforcement 
have  been  given  above.  The  costs  of  construction  materials  on  the 
site  were : 

Cement,     per     barrel ?   2.57 

Sand,    per    cu.    yd 1.80 

Stone,    per    cu.    yd 3.15 

Lumber,  per  M  ft.   B.   M 27.50 


<82  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

The    quantities    in    the    completed    concrete    structure    were    as 
follows : 

Cu.  yds. 

Total  volume  of  concrete  in  reservoir 704.71 

Total  volume  of  steel  reinforcement  in  reservoir.      5.57 

Total  volume  of  material  in  completed  structure.  710.28 
Volume    of    material    in    structure    exclusive    of 

roof    slab     648.35 

Volume  of  material  in  roof  slab 61.93 

Total     ' 710.28 

The  cost  of  the   structure  per  cubic  yard  of   concrete,   exclusive 
of  the  roof  slab,   was  as  follows : 

Item.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Crushed    stone    %   3.168 

Sand     842 

Cement     3.859 

Reinforcement     4.959 

Labor,    mixing  and   placing   concrete 1.721 

Forms,    labor   and   material 2.960 


Total     $17.509 

In  constructing  the  roof  slab   the  expanded  metal  reinforcement 
raised  the  unit  cost.     For  this  portion  of  the  work  the  costs  were : 
Item.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Expanded    metal    reinforcement $  5.241 

Other   items,    same    as   above 12.556 

Total      ?17.791 

Plastering  and  Waterproofing. — According  to  the  requirements  of 
the  specifications  the  floor  and  the  inside  surface  of  reservoir  walls 
were  covered  with  a  coating  of  cement  mortar  composed  of  one  part 
Portland  cement  and  one  part  sand.  The  wall  plastering  was  from 
%  in.  to  %-in.  thick;  it  was  applied  in  two  coats.  The  floor  finish 
was  laid  in  alternate  strips  about  1  in.  thick  and  3  ft.  wide.  After 
the  strips  first  laid  had  hardened  the  remaining  strips  were  laid, 
the  edges  being  grouted  to  insure  tight  joints. 

The  outside  of  walls  and  roof  was  covered  with  a  coating  of  tar 
which  was  heated  in  an  open  kettle  to  a  temperature  of  about  360° 
F.  and  then  applied  with  a  brush  or  mop. 

The  cost  of  wall  and  floor  plastering  was  44.4  cts.  per  square  yard, 
itemized  as  follows: 

Cement     '. 26.4  cts. 

Sand     2.6  cts. 

Labor      15.4   cts. 

Total     44.4   cts. 

The  cost  of  outside  waterproofiing  was  4  cts.  per  square  yard,  dis- 
tributed as  follows : 

Material 2.5  cts. 

Labor     1.5  cts. 

Total     4.0  cts. 

Backfilling. — The  entire  structure,  after  completion,  was  covered 
with  earth  to  a  depth  of  2  ft.  above  the  roof,  sloping  on  all  sides 
to  the  natural  surface  of  the  ground.  The  earth  composing  thH 
fill  was  handled  by  means  of  teams  and  scrapers ;  this  method 


WATER-WORKS.  783 

caused  the  material  to  be  compacted  firmly  in  place  and  at  the 
same  time  afforded  a  good  test  of  the  rigidity  and  strength  of  the 
roof. 

The  backfill  gang  consisted  of  four  teams  and  from  four  to  six 
laborers  in  addition  to  the  drivers.  Drag  scrapers  were  used  to 
move  the  material  from  the  spoil  banks  and  place  it  over  and 
around  the  reservoir.  Part  of  the  material  was  side  dumped  from 
runways  and  shoveled  to  place  between  the  walls  of  reservoir  and 
sides  of  excavation.  This  material  was  carefully  tamped  and 
compacted  as  the  filling  progressed.  The  wage  of  team  and  driver 
was  $5  per  day,  and  for  laborers  for  this  work,  $2.50  per  day  of  ten 
hours. 

The  amount  of  backfilling  was  2,039  cu.  yds.  and  its  cost  was  30 
cts.  per  cubic  yard,  distributed  as  follows : 

Loosening  and   loading  materials. . , 12  cts. 

Hauling    and    depositing 17  cts. 

Supervision,     tools,     etc 1  ct. 

Total     30  cts. 

Summary  of  Costs. — The  total  cost  of  the  completed  reservoir,  ex- 
clusive of  pipe  connections  with  water  mains,  was  $15,068.76.  The 
cost  of  the  various  items  was  distributed  as  follows : 

Main   structure,   648.35  cu.  yds.,  at  $17.509.  .$11,351.96 

Roof   slab,    61.93   cu.   yds.,   at    $17.91 1,101.79 

Ventilators,  doors,  stepping  irons,  etc 164.08 

Plastering,  1,517  sq.  yds.,  at  44.4  cts 673.08 

Waterproofing,  1,285  sq.  yds.,  at  4  cts 51.40 

Excavation,  2,275  cu.  yds.,  at  49  cts 1,114.75 

Back  fill,  2,039  cu.  yds.,  at  30  cts 611.70 


Total $15,068.76 

While  some  of  the  cost  items  are  apparently  high  when  com- 
pared with  the  cost  of  similar  work  in  other  places,  it  should  be 
remembered  that  the  isolated  locality  and  the  local  conditions  were 
unfavorable  for  low  cost.  Owing  to  the  isolated  location  of  the 
reservoir  with  respect  to  large  markets  and  also  to  local  sources  of 
supply  the  cost  of  material  and  labor  was  quite  high.  All  con- 
struction material,  except  some  of  the  stone  for  crushing,  had  to  be 
hauled  over  a  mountain  road  from  3  to  4  miles  to  the  top  of  the  hill 
selected  for  the  reservoir  site.  Labor  was  scarce  and  commanded 
a  wage  of  $2.50  per  day  for  ordinary  work;  the  laborers  mixing 
concrete  were  paid  $2.75  per  day.  Another  source  of  considerable 
expense  was  the  high  cost  of  lumber  and  carpenter  work  on  the 
forms.  On  account  of  the  thinness  of  the  walls  and  roof,  the  cost 
of  lumber  and  labor  required  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  was  consid- 
erable. A  part  of  the  lumber  was  used  the  second  time  in  forms, 
but  it  was  found  impracticable  to  delay  the  work  by  waiting,  for  the 
concrete  to  harden  before  beginning  the  new  portions  of  the  walls. 
This  lumber  was  sold  after  the  completion  of  the  work,  but  the  sal- 
vage was  inconsiderable,  amounting  to  less  than  10  per  cent  of  the 
original  cost. 

The  writer  kept  a  record  of  cost  of  the  various  items  of  material 
and  labor  entering  into  the  construction  of  tnis  reservoir.  This 


784 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


record  was  verified  by  comparison  with  the  vouchers  and  pay  rolls 
of  the  contractor  and  was  made  as  complete  and  accurate  as  pos- 
sible. From  these  data  the  above  statements  of  construction  cost 
have  been  compiled. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Reservoir,  Pomona,  Cal.*— Mr.  Charles  Kirby 
Fox  gives  the  following: 

The  concrete  reservoir  herein  described  was  erected  in  the  sum- 
mer of  1904  on  Point  Lookout,  Ganesha  Park,  Pomona,  Cal.  It  was 
designed  by  Mr.  Geo.  P.  Robinson,  City  Engineer,  and  Mr.  Albert 
Simmons  had  the  contract.  The  writer  was  .  in  direct  charge  of 
construction. 

The  reservoir  is  oval  in  form  (Fig.  26),  being  77.7  ft.  by  40.7  ft. 
over  all.  It  is  12  ft.  deep  and  the  floor  has  a  slight  slope  to  the 


4O7'  — 

Enq-Ccmfr 

Fig.    26. — Concrete   Reservoir. 

sluice  box.  Iron  ladders  are  placed  in  each  of  the  quarter  points. 
The  inlet  and  overflow  pipes  are  near  the  top  of  the  walls,  the  dis- 
charge pipe  is  12  ins.  above  the  bottom  of  the  reservoir  and  the 
sluice  pipe  is  set  in  a  bowl  3  ft.  in  diameter  and  4  ins.  deep.  It  is 
the  lowest  part  of  the  reservoir. 

The  walls  (Fig.  27)  are  12  ft.  high.  They  were  designed  to  be 
6  ins.  thick  at  the  top  and  15  ins.  thick  a,t  the  bottom  and  to  be 
connected  with  the  bottom  of  the  reservoir  with  a  12-in.  radius. 
The  bottom  is  4  ins.  thick.  Before  the  walls  were  started  it  was 
decided  to  add  a  6  x  30-in.  ring  to  the  outside  of  the  top,  making  the 

'Engineering-Contracting,  April   15,   1908. 


WATER-WORKS. 


785 


top   12   ins.   wide.     The  joint  connecting  the  walls  with  the  bottom 
was  put  in  about  12  ins.  from  the  inside  edge  of  the  radius. 

Around  the  sluices  and  inlet  and  outlet  pipes  a  larger  mass  of 
concrete  was  used.  The  finish  was  ^-in.  thick  and  was  water- 
proofed. 

The  contract  price  of  the  reservoir  was $1,625.00 

Extra  concrete  in  ring,    8.3  cu.   yds 60.90 

Extra    valve,    screws,    etc 16.00 

$1,701.90 

Include   valve   box  changed $      25.00 

Cost    of    reservoir 1,726.90 

Excavation. — The  greater  part  of  the  excavation  of  the  oval,  about 
77  x  40  ft.,  and  the  tunnel  was  done  by  the  city  by  force  account.  I 


EIrtcj.-Cc>nt-r: 
Fig.   27. — Concrete  Reservoir  Wall. 

have  no  records  of  the  costs  of  this  part  of  the  work.  The  con- 
tractor trimmed  down  the  sides  and  bottom  of  the  reservoir,  in  all 
about  5,000  sq.  ft.,  at  a  cost  of  $71.60,  or  l1/^  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Pipes,  Valves,  Etc. — The  pipes,  valves,  etc.,  as  provided  in  the 
specifications  cost  $455.52  and  the  extra  valve  sets  installed  cost 
$16.  The  laying  of  the  pipe  cost  $9.70.  The  tunnel  excavation  to 
get  down  to  grade  cost  $52.38,  making  a  total  of  $533.60.  This 
includes  5  6-in.  Ludlow  valves,  270  lin.  ft.  of  heavy  6-in.  cast-iron 
pipe  and  80  ft.  of  6-in.  vitrified  pipe,  all  installed. 

Cleaning  Up  — The  contractor  mixed  the  concrete  for  the  walls 
ou  the  floor  of  the  reservoir  and  to  clean  out  his  old  concrete  cost 
him  $22.25.  The  final  clean  up  cost  him  $7.0^,  making  a  total  cost 
for  cleaning'  up  of  $29,25. 


786  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Concrete. — The  concrete  was  specified  to  be  1  part  cement,  2  parts 
sand  and  4  parts  gravel  (pea  size  to  2-in.  ring).  As  put  in,  a 
cement  barrel  was  filled  and  emptied  six  times  with  the  bin  run 
of  sand  and  gravel  and  four  sacks  of  cement  (1  bbl.)  were  emptied 
on  top  of  it ;  it  was  then  turned  wet.  The  costs  per  cu.  yd.  were : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor     $1.09 

Cement,    1.08  bbl.,  at  $3,   delivered 3.23 

tnd  and  gravel,  at  $1 0.93 
ater    (had   to  be  pumped) 0.34 

Forms,     labor    and    lumber : 0.76 

Total     .  . $6.35 

The  wages  paid  labor  were  $1.75  and  $2  per  day,  foreman  mason 
$4  per  day.  Carpenters  were  paid  43  cts.  per  hour  and  lumber  cost 
$33  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  A  9 -hour  day  was  worked. 

Finish. — The  %-in.  finish  was  specified  to  be  1 :  1,  but  that  did 
not  work  well,  so  we  increased  the  amount  of  sand.  It  was  water- 
proofed. It  was  mixed  very  thoroughly  with  35  Ibs.  alum  at  6  cts. 
per  lb.,  and  then  the  water,  containing  35  Ibs.  good  potash  soap  per 
cubic  yard  of  mortar  was  added.  The  finish  cost : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Materials     $14.45 

Labor,    mixing    and    applying 11.90 

Total     $26.35 

On    the   finishing   there  were    two    masons   at    $4    plastering   and 
enough   laborers   to    keep    them    supplied    with    mortar.      The    com- 
pleted floor  cost  9   cts  per  sq.   ft. 
Summary  of  costs: 

Cement,   at    $3   per  bbl $    481.50 

Sand,    at    $1    per    cu.    yd... 113.30 

Soap  and  alum,  at  6  cts.  per  lb 21.00 

Water 43.00 

Timber 30.00 

Labor    and    superintendence 361.35 

Pipe   laying    (contract    price) 533.60 

Total      $1,583.75 

The  reservoir  has  now  been  in  use  3  %  years  and  has  given  excel- 
lent satisfaction.  Only  a  few  hair  cracks  have  appeared  on  the 
surface  and  none  of  the  plaster  has  scaled  off. 

Cost  of  Storage  Reservoir,  Hagerstown,  Md.* — In  1902-3  the 
water  supply  of  Hagerstown,  Md.,  was  improved  by  the  construc- 
tion of  a  storage  reservoir  to  impound  the  waters  of  the  two  streams 
known  as  Warner's  Hollow  Creek  and  Raven  Rock  Creek.  The 
works  were  designed  and  constructed  by  the  American  Pipe  Manu- 
facturing Co.,  of  Philadelphia,  Pa.,  Mr.  J.  W.  Ledoux,  M.  Am.  Soc. 
C.  E.,  Chief  Engineer. 

Earth  Dam  and  Accessories. — The  general  construction  of  the 
earth  dam  is  shown  by  the  section  of  Fig.  28.  Owing  to  scarcity  of 

* Engineering-Contracting,   Oct.    10,    1906. 


WATER-WORKS. 


787 


£1.905.0 


Wafer  Surface.  El.  901.0 


Section      along       Blow-off       Pipe. 
El.905.0     */&* 


„ -Puddle 
'    Wall 


"S/f " 'Discharge  Drain 

Section      alon9       Discharge       Main 


•Puddle 
Wa/l 


£1.905.0    "J&* 

El.901.0  - 


^/p"4(/xi//ary 

Section       along       Auxiliary       Main 
Fig.    28. — Sections  of  Earth  Dam. 


-Puddle 
Wall 


788  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

available  material  only  the  upstream  half  of  the  dam  and  the  puddle 
walls  were  made  of  selected  material ;  the  downstream  half  of 
the  dam  was  made  of  earth  and  loose  rock.  The  main  puddle  wall 
varied  from  5  to  10  ft.  in  width  and  from  6  to  20  ft.  in  depth,  and 
contained  1,602  cu.  yds.  of  material ;  the  secondary  puddle  wall  was 
narrower  and  shallower,  containing  only  712  cu.  yds.  of  material. 
Both  slopes  of  the  dam  are  riprapped  and  it  is  pierced  by  a  30-in. 
cast-iron  pipe  blow-off  and  two  12-in.  cast-iron  supply  mains.  There 
was  also  some  1,286  cu.  yds.  of  3^-ft.  thick  dry  rubble  retaining 
wall  built  in  connection  with  the  dam  work.  The  costs  of  these 
several  items  of  the  dam  work  are  given  from  figures  furnished  by 
Mr.  T«edoux,  as  follows : 

Daw.— There  were  93,200  cu.  yds.  of  embankment  built  at  a  total 
cost  of  $60,532,  or  $0.65  per  cu.  yd.  The  several  items  of  cost  were 
as  follows  : 

Items.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman    $0.0243 

Hauling     0.2694 

Labor     0.2252 

Sprinkling     0.0144 

Picking    stones     0.0192 

Trimming    slopes 0.0080 

Tools,    blacksmithing,    powder,    etc. 0.0479 

Superintendence    and    engineering 0.0354 

Protecting   for   winter 0.0056 

Total $0.6494 

Rip-rap. — The  embankment  slopes  were  rip-rapped  with  stones 
of  %  cu.  ft.  or  less,  placed  by  hand  to  fairly  uniform  thickness,  after 
which  broken  stone  of  3  or  4-in.  sizes  were  spread  on  top  and 
trimmed  to  an  even  slope.  Altogether  3,844  cu.  yds.  of  rip-rap  stone 
and  1,882  cu.  yds.  of  broken  stone  were  placed  at  a  cost  of 
$5,059.69,  or  $0.884  per  cu.  yd. 

Puddle  Walls. — The  two  puddle  walls  aggregated  2,314  cu.  yds. 
of  puddle,  the  main  wall  having  1,602  cu.  yds.  and  the  secondary 
wall  712  cu.  yds.  The  puddle  was  deposited  loose  and  then  flooded 
with  water  and  tramped  oy  men  with  rubber  boots.  When  the 
top  of  the  puddle  reached  a  tevel  about  3  ft.  from  the  natural  surface 
of  the  ground  the  amount  of  water  was  diminished  to  just  enough 
to  permit  the  clay  to  be  tamped  with  rammers  weighing  about  20 
Ibs.  The  cost  of  the  puddle  walls  was  as  follows: 

No.    1.  Per  cu.  yd. 

1,602    cu.    yds.    excavation $1.02 

Placing   puddle    0.60 

Tools,  etc 0.48 


Total     $2.10 

No.  2. 

712  cu.  yds.  excavation $0.98 

Placing    puddle     0.80 

Crushed   stone   in   puddle 0.26 

Pumping,    tools,    etc „.  .    0.40 

Total     ,  ..$2.44 


WATER-WORKS.  789 

Masonry  Walls. — -The  cost  of  these  was: 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Masonry  cut-off  walls,  52  cu.  yds $     262.34          $5.04 

Dry  retaining  wall,   1,286  cu.  yds $1,601.53          $1.245 

Gate  House. — The  gate  house  cost  $951.76,  made  up  of  the  fol- 
lowing items  : 

Concrete,    2y2    cu.    yds $   13.20  $5.28 

Rubble    masonry,    15    cu.    yds 93.41  6.23 

Broken   range  masonry,   24   cu.  yds 534.07  23.07 

Red    tile    roof,    complete 311.08           

Total     $951.76  

Blow-Off  Pipe. — The  30-in.  cast-iron  blow-off  pipe  through  the 
dam  cost  $1,761.79,  or  $5.76  per  lin.  ft.,  made  up  of  the  following 
items : 

Items.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Pipe $4.00 

Excavation     0.36 

Filling      0.23 

Freight,   hauling  and   laying 1.17 


Total     $5.76 

Spillway. — The  spillway  contained  1,224  cu.  yds.  of  1:3:5  con- 
crete masonry.  Its  total  cost  was  $9,820.43,  made  up  of  the  follow- 
ing items : 

Concrete     $6,457.72 

Top   lining  of   1-in.   yellow  pine 918.05 

Excavation      1,830.90 

Rip-rap  on  slopes  above  walls 78.44 

Timber,    crib    at    foot 535.32 


Total    $9,820.43 

The  concrete  work,   1,224    cu.   yds.,  cost   $5.25   per  cu.  yd.,   made 
up -as  follows: 

Item.  Per  cu  yd. 

Cement,     4.82     bags $1,795 

Sand     0.860 

Stone 1.081 

Labor 0.971 

Tools,    forms,    etc 0.541 

Total $5*248 

Raven  Rock  Creek  Intake. — To  bring  the  water  from  Raven  Rock 
Creek  to  the  main  storage  reservoir  a  masonry  intake  dam  was  con- 
structed on  that  stream,  and  from  this  dam  a  30-in.  terra  cotta  pipe 
line  was  constructed  to  the  storage  reservoir.  The  cost  of  the  intake 
dam  was  $3,223.89.  The  itemized  cost  of  the  masonry  work  was: 
Item.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Excavation,    145   cu.   yds $  0.92 

Rubble  masonry,    158    cu.   yds 12.45 

Concrete   coping,    14    cu.    yds 13.21 

The  30-in.  pipe  line  is  composed  of  extra  heavy  terra  cotta  pipe, 
with  deep  bells  corrugated  on  the  inside,  furnished  by  A.  N.  Pierson, 


790  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

New  York,  N.  T.     It  was  2,244  ft.  long  and  cost,  complete,  $8,932.05. 

The  itemized  cost  per  foot  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Perlin.    ft. 

Pipe $2.486 

Cement    for    joints 0.057 

Jute    for    joints 0.068 

Trench,     tools,     etc. . 1.370 

Total $3.981 

Grubbing  and  Clearing. — The  reservoir  area  of  15.1  acres  had  all 
trees  and  brush  cleared  off  and  all  stumps  grubbed  up.  The  trees 
were  generally  removed  by  blasting.  A  force  of  about  20  men  was 
worked,  their  wages  being  $1.50  per  day.  No  record  was  kept  of 
the  area  cleared  per  day,  but  the  cost  of  clearing  and  grubbing  \.g 
given  as  $107,13  per  acre.  The  costs  of  two  floodwood  racks  wer 
$30.74  and  $21.66;  both  were  constructed  as  follows:  Two  heavy 
logs  were  laid  horizontally  across  stream,  one  about  3  ft.  above  the 
bottom  of  the  stream  and  the  other  about  8  ft.  above  the  bottom  and 
parallel  to  the  first,  but  upstream,  so  as  to  make  a  slope  of  about  1 
on  1.  To  these  two  logs  were  spiked  6-in.  timbers  reaching  down  to 
the  bed  of  the  stream.  The  transverse  logs  were  supported  against 
the  roots  of  trees  and  all  the  timber  was  rough  stuff,  such  as  could 
be  obtained  on  the  site — chestnut,  oak  or  spruce.  While  the  work  was 
in  progress  water  was  supplied  by  means  of  1,776  ft.  of  rectangular 
trough,  composed  of  three  12-in.  posts  nailed  together  and  laid  at  a 
grade  of  1  per  cent.  Considerable  trestling  was  necessary.  This 
trough  cost  $303.93,  or  17.1  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

Cost  of  a  Wooden  Covering  for  Reservoir,  Quincy,  III.— Mr.  Don 
R.  Gwinn  gives  the  following: 

The  reservoir  was  415  x  317  ft.  at  top,  26  ft.  deep,  inside  slopes 
l1/^  to  1.  A  vegetable  growth  had  given  much  trouble,  so  the 
reservoir  was  roofed  over  in  1898  at  a  cost  of  4  cts.  per  sq.  ft,  the 
price  of  lumber  being  at  that  time  only  $15  per  M.  There  were 
260,000  ft.  B.  M.  used  (or  2  ft.  B.  M.  per  sq.  ft.),  and  38  kegs  of 
nails  at  $1.85  per  keg.  The  pedestal  piers  or  foundations  for  the 
posts  were  of  brick  ($7  per  M),  21  ins.  sq.  at  the  base,  16  ins.  at 
the  top,  18  ins.  high  and  capped  with  a  limestone  slab  12  x  12  x  6  ins. 
(43  cts.  per  cap).  A  %  x  3-in.  dowel  pin  was  let  into  each  cap  1% 
ins.  The  posts  were  6  x  6-in.  x  22  ft.,  spaced  14  ft.  in  one  "direction 
and  18  ft.  in  the  other.  They  were  capped  with  6  x  6-in.  caps,  or 
girders,  18  ft.  long.  On  these  caps  were  laid  2  x  6-in.  joists  or  string- 
ers 14  ft.  long  spaced  4  ft.  c.  to  c. ;  and  on  the  stringers  were  laid 
1-in.  roofing  boards  (1  x  10  in.  x  16  ft.)-.  These  boards  were  laid 
north  and  south  to  exclude  sunlight  from  the  cracks  as  much  as 
possible. 

Two  posts  and  a  cap  were  framed  and  fastened  together  on  the 
ground,  and  sway  braced  with  two  braces  of  2x6,  and  then  up- 
ended. Joists  were  then  shoved  out  from  the  completed  part  of  the 
roof,  and  laid  flat  upon  the  caps ;  two  joists  being  thus  laid  upon, 
'  and  nailed  to,  each  end  of  the  cap,  to  serve  as  walking  planks  for 
the  workmen.  The  joists  were  then  spaced  properly  by  means  of 


WATER-WORKS.  791 

gages,  and  then  braced  with  2  x  4-in.  "bridging."  White  pine  was 
used  throughout,  all  the  dimension  stuff  being  No.  1,  and  the  roof- 
ing boards  No.  2.  Of  the  total  surface  of  the  roof,  25%  is  trap  doors. 

In  the  section  on  Timberwork  will  be  found  further  data  on  the 
cost  of  wooden  coverings  for  reservoir.  See  the  index  under  "Tim- 
berwork, reservoir  roof." 

Cost  of  a  Reservoir  Embankment.— The  Tabeaud  Dam  in  Cali- 
fornia is  an  earth  embankment  100  ft.  high,  containing  370,000  cu. 
yds.  of  embankment.  Mr.  Burr  Bassell  is  authority  for  the  fol- 
lowing : 

The  dam  was  built  by  contract  in  1901,  the  contract  price  being 
40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  During  the  months  of  August,  September  and 
October  more  than  2,000  cu.  yds.  were  built  per  working  day 
(53,000  cu.  yds.  per  month).  Mr.  Bassell  states  that  the  maximum 
force  was  233  men  and  416  horses  and  mules.  Fresno  scrapers 
were  used  to  load  wagons  through  "traps."  There  were  4  horses 
on  each  fresno  and  4  horses  on  each  wagon.  Assuming  $1.50  per 
day  for  laborers  and  $1.00  per  day  for  horses,  we  have  a  daily  cost 
of  $716,  or  nearly  36  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  the  output  being  2,000  cu!  yds. 
per  day.  The  wagons,  tools,  etc.  (exclusive  of  horses)  were  worth 
about  $16,000.  Allowing  3%  per  month  for  interest,  depreciation 
and  repairs,  the  daily  plant  charge  would  be  about  $20,  or  1  ct.  per 
cu.  yd.  Allowing  5%  for  general  supervision  and  overhead  charges, 
we  have  nearly  2  cts.  more  per  cu.  yd.,  or  a  total  cost  of  39  cts. 
per  cu.  yd. 

The  average  haul  was  %  mile. 

The  earth  (a  clay  mixed  with  gravel)  was  spread  in  6-in.  layers, 
sprinkled  and  rolled.  To  spread  the  2,000  cu.  yds.  of  embankment 
daily,  there  were  3  road  graders  operated  by  6  horses  and  2  men 
on  each  grader.  There  were  2  rollers,  each  operated  by  6  horses 
and  one  driver.  There  were  2  harrows,  and,  while  Mr.  Bassell  does 
not  so  state,  presumably  4  horses  and  a  driver  to  each  harrow.  At 
$1.50  per  10  hr.  day  for  each  man  and  $1  for  each  horse,  we  have 
following  cost  : 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Cts. 

Spreading     1.5 

Sprinkling     0.8 

Harrowing     0.6 

Rolling     0.8 

Total 3.7 

Loading   and    hauling 32.3 

General    expense     (estimated)     2.0 

Plant    charge    (estimated)     1.0 

Total     39.0 

Test  pits  dug  in  this  dam  showed  a. weight  of  133  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft. 
of  compacted  earth. 

The  above  given  yardage  relates  to  the  yardage  in  the  embank- 
ment, not  in  the  barrow  pits. 

The  rates  of  wages  are  merely  assumed  for  illustration.  It  is 
probable  that  laborers  received  $2.  per  .day  at  that  time  and  place. 


792        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  Core  Wall.*— This  article  covers  the  construc- 
tion of  2,184  ft.  of  core  wall,  being  a  portion  of  a  wall  which  will 
ultimately  be  2%  miles  long.  This  wall  was  built  along  the  toe  on 
the  pool  sides  of  a  rock-fill  dam  in  a  trench  excavated  to  solid 
rock.  The  face  of  the  wall  has  a  batter  of  3y2  in  12  and  the  back 
conforms  to  the  face  of  the  side  of  the  trench  below  water  and  is 
practically  vertical  above  water,  being  2  ft.  wide  on  top.  Level 
with  the  top  a  6-in.  concrete  apron  extends  back  20  ft.  over  the  top 
of  the  rock-fill  dam.  The  wall  varies  in  height  from  10  to  21  ft.  It 
was  built  of  1  :  5  gravel  concrete  and  is  reinforced  as  follows :  A 
longitudinal  line  of  old  steel  bars  was  placed  in  the  center  of  the 
wall  6  ins.  below  the  top.  Over  this  horizontal  bar  were  hooked 
vertical  bars  spaced  5  ft.  apart.  This  reinforcement  was  used 
principally  to  anchor  down  any  pieces  of  the  wall  top  which  might 
break  away. 

Forms. — As  fast  as  the  dipper  dredge  opened  the  footing  trench 
to  rock,  2 -in.  holes  10  ft.  apart  were  drilled  into  the  ledge.  Uprights 
of  6x8  in.  timbers  having  2-in.  rods  5  ft.  long  bolted  to  the  bottoms 
were  erected  by  inserting  the  rods  in  the  drilled  holes  and  bracing 
the  tops  back  to  posts  set  into  the  rock-fill  dam.  The  uprights 
were  set  to  the  inclination  of  the  face  of  the  wall.  Waling  pieces, 
6x6  ins.  x  16  ft.  were  connected  several  end  to  end  by  bevel  joints, 
with  one  bolt  in  each  so  the  joint  would  be  flexible.  The  several 
lengths  of  waling  pieces  were  thus  connected  inside  the  uprights. 
A  vertical  plank  was  then  bolted  to  the  waling  near  a  joint,  and  by 
it  the  joint  was  pushed  down  under  water  3  ft.,  and  a  second  waling 
was  bolted  to  the  plank  at  the  surface  of  the  water.  Other  planks 
were  then  bolted  to  the  first  waling  at  the  joints  on  each  side  of  the 
joint  first  sunk,  and  these  joints  were  in  turn  pushed  down  3  ft., 
permitting  the  second  waling  to  be  bolted  to  the  planks.  In  this 
manner  one  waling  after  another  was  added  at  3-ft.  intervals  until 
the  first  waling  had  been  pushed  down  to  rock.  The  walings  were 
not  fastened  to  the  uprights,  as  the  up-thrust  of  the  water  pushing 
them  against  the  slant  of  the  uprights  held  them  fast. 

The  lagging  consisted  of  vertical  2  x  12-in.  planks,  set  close  in- 
side the  walings ;  these  planks  were  nailed  to  the  topmost  waling, 
but  were  not  fastened  to  the  lower  walings. 

The  forms  were  built  around  curves  without  alterations,  as  the 
one-bolt  waling  joints  gave  considerable  flexibility.  Ordinarily,  the 
wall  was  concreted  in  alternate  30  to  50-ft.  sections.  The  forms 
were  built  continuously  in  advance,  and  torn  down  behind  as  fast 
as  the  concrete  set.  At  the  ends  of  sections  of  wall,  transverse 
bulkheads  were  built  inside  the  form  and  bonding  recess  forms 
fastened  to  them.  To  remove  the  forms  the  braces  from  the  tops 
of  the  uprights  were  unbolted  and  the  whole  form  was  pushed 
away  from  the  wall  and  taken  apart.  As  the  forms  were  not 
nailed,  except  at  one  point,  as  noted  above,  the  lumber  was  but  lit- 
tle damaged,  and,  with  the  addition  of  a  small  amount  of  lagging, 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.    10,   1909. 


WATER-WORKS.  79? 

there  is  enough  lumber  remaining  from  the  form-work  for  the  first 
2,184  ft.  of  wall  to  build  the  remainder  of  the  wall.  The  form 
lumber  was  used  from  three  to  four  times  on  the  portion  of  the 
wall  that  is  now  completed. 

Concreting. — The  concrete  mixing  and  handling  plant  was  mount- 
ed on  an  18%  x  100  ft.  barge.  On  one  end  of  the  barge  was  a  *4 
cu.  yd.  Chicago  concrete  mixer  with  a  gravel  supply  bin  mounted 
overhead.  On  the  opposite  end  of  the  barge  a  stiff-leg  derrick, 
operated  by  a  bull  wheel,  was  erected.  This  derrick  handled  the 
gravel  from  stock  barges  moored  alongside  to  the  supply  bin  over 
the  mixer,  and  also  handled  the  concrete,  from  the  mixer  into  the 
forms.  A  wooden  bottom  dump  bucket  was  used  to  deposit  the 
concrete  under  water  and  did  the  work  successfully  up  to  a  depth 
of  17  ft. 

Wages  and  Cost. — The  gang  for  forms  consisted  of  2  carpenters 
and  from  2  to  6  helpers  and  a  drill  boat  crew  setting  uprights ;  and 
the  gang  for  concreting  of  14  men,  including  foreman,  derrickman. 
mixerman,  etc.  The  wages  paid  were  as  follows : 

Drillmen,   per  month    $    60 

Foreman,  per  month    75 

Overseer,   per  month 125 

Carpenters,    per   day    2.50 

Laborers,  per  day $1  to  $1.25 

All  men  were  subsisted  in  addition  to  regular  wages,  which  was 
considered  equivalent  to  50  cts.  per  day  per  man  additional.  The 
prices  of  materials  were  as  follows: 

Coal,    per   ton $  2.20 

Corrugated    bars     2.85 

Round   bars    1.80 

Cement,  per  bbl.,   f.  o.   b.  Moline 1.14 

Gravel,  per  cu.   yd.  on  barge,   towing  extra 0.65 

Lumber,    per   M.    ft,   B.    M 26.50 

The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Item.                                                        Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Preliminary    expense     $  9,074.30  $2.0441 

Supt.  and  office   1,798.30  0.4051 

Excavation     467.50  0.1053 


Totals     $11,340.10  $2.5545 

Concrete  work: 
Forms — 

Materials     $  2,575.30  $0.0351 

Labor    940.06  0.2117 

Drilling 168.10  0.0379 

Coal  for  drills    94.57  0.0213 


Totals     $   3,778.03  $0.8060 

Concrete  materials — 

Cement     $  7,059.48  $1.5901 

Cement  handling    169.11  0.0381 

Cement   testing    .,.  .         130.68  0.0294 

Gravel 2,847.85  0.6415 

Reinforcement    104.08  0.0235 

Towing     945.78  0.2131 

Towing,    coal    for    378.28  0.0852 

Totals     .$11,635.26  $2.6210 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Mixing  and  placing  concrete : 

Labor     $   2,054.60          $0.4628 

Coal    283.71  0.0639 


Totals     $  2,338.31  $0.5267 

Back   filling    $  203.64  $0.0459 

Subsistence     1,327.32  0.2991 

Plant  repairs 298.66  0.0673 

Totals     $  1,829.62          ?0.4123 

Grand  total    (4,339.1  cu.  yds.)  $30,721.32          $6.9205 

Regarding  these  items  it  needs  to  be  noted  that  the  $9,074.30  for 
preliminary  expenses  includes  a  large  number  of  miscellaneous 
items,  including  new  machinery,  erection  of  plant,  etc.,  charged 
out  In  full.  To  compare  the  work  with  a  contract  job  the  engi- 
neer suggests  taking  this  item  at  about  $5,000,  which  represents 
about  a  20  per  cent  depreciation  charge  on  all  plant  used.  It  should 
be  noted  also  that  all  form  lumber  is  charged  in  full  against  this 
?,178  ft.  of  wall,  yet,  as  stated  above,  it  is  enough  to  build  the  re- 
mainder of  the  wall  and  should  ultimately  be  charged  against  the 
total  yardage.  In  the  same  way  most  of  the  items  constituting  pre- 
liminary charges  must  be  distributed  over  a  large  yardage  in  addi- 
tion to  that  of  the  wall  already  built. 

The  wall  was  built  by  day  labor,  under  the  direction  of  J.  B. 
Bassett,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  IT.  S.  Assistant  Engineer,  Rock  Island, 
111.  We  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Bassett  for  the  data  from  which  this 
analysis  of  costs  has  been  prepared.  The  dam  was  a  portion  of  the 
Mississippi  improvement  -work  at  Moline,  111. 

Cost  of  Puddle. — Puddle  is  a  mixture  of  gravel  and  clay  which  is 
wet  and  rammed  or  rolled  into  place.  Many  engineers  use  the  clay 
as  they  would  a  mortar  to  fill  the  voids  in  the  gravel.  A  few  engi- 
neers use  the  gravel  merely  to  insure  the  crumbling  of  the  sides  and 
roof  of  any  incipient  hole  in  the  puddle  so  as  to  fill  it  up. 

Fanning  gives  the  following  proportions  measured  loose : 

Cu.  yd. 

Coarse   gravel    1.00 

Fine    gravel 0.35 

Sand     0.15 

Clay     0.20 

Total    loose* 1.70 

This  when  mixed,  he  says,  will  make  1.3  cu.  yds.,  and  when  thor- 
oughly rammed  1.25  cu.  yds. 
Another  mixture  given  is : 

Cu.  yd. 

Gravel J.OO 

Sand     0.35 

Clay 025 

Total " 1.60 

This   when    mixed   and    spread   makes    1.16    cu.    yds.,    and   when 

rammed  1.1  cu.  yd. 

When  clay  is  not  available,  very  fine  sand  and  a  little  loam  can 

be  used  to  fill  the  voids  in  gravel.     Where  puddle  is  used  tovcover 


WATER-WORKS.  796 

a  large  area,  like  the  bottom  of  a  reservoir,  the  gravel  is  first  spread 
in  a  layer  about  3  ins.  thick,  the  clay  is  spread  over  the  gravel,  and 
the  sand  over  the  clay  in  their  proper  proportions.  Then  an  ordi- 
nary harrow  is  dragged  by  a  team  back  and  forth  until  mixing  is 
complete.  Water  is  next  sprinkled  over  in  amount  sufficient  to 
cause  the  mass  to  knead  like  stiff  dough  under  a  2*6 -ton  rolling 
tamper  or  under  a  2 -ton  sectional  roller.  Such  a  puddle  is  as  heavy 
as  concrete  and  resists  abrasion  almost  as  well.  With  labor  at  $1.50 
and  teams  at  $3.50,  the  cost  is  about  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Spreading  by  hand    . 8  cts. 

Harrowing 5   cts. 

Sprinkling     2  cts. 

Rolling 5  cts. 

Total    20  cts. 

An  exacting  engineer,  however,  can  readily  double  this  cost,  bring- 
ing it  to  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  which  is  about  what  it  costs  to  spread, 
sprinkle  and  roll  a  cu.  yd.  of  macadam  road. 

Where  puddle  is  used  in  confined  places,  like  trenches,  it  must  be 
mixed  like  concrete  and  rammed  to  place,  the  cost  then  being  30  to 
50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  On  the  Erie  Canal,  in  1896,  with  wages  at  $1.50 
for  10  hrs.,  the  contract  prices  for  mixing  and  laying  puddle  ranged 
from  20  to  60  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  the  average  price  being  35  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.,  exclusive  of  the  materials. 

Cost  of  Sheeting  and  Bracing  a  Small  Circular  Reservoir. — Mr. 
George  A.  Rogers  gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  sheeting 
and  bracing  a  circular  pit  excavated  for  a  reservoir  at  Kinston, 
N.  C.,  in  1905: 

The  reservoir  is  60  ft.  inside  diam.,  20  ft.  deep,  and  holds  15  ft.  of 
water,  or  350,000  gals.  The  sides  and  bottom  are  lined  with  brick, 
of  which  200,000  were  required.  The  brick  side  walls  are  12  ins. 
thick  at  the  top  and  36  ins.  at  the  bottom.  The  bottom  lining  is  6 
ins.  thick,  being  three  layers  of  brick  laid  flatwise. 

The  first  5  ft.  were  excavated  with  drag  scrapers ;  below  that  the 
material  was  a  running  sand  which  was  loaded  by  hand  into  skips. 
The  sheeting  was  2x8  ins.  x  18  ft.,  plank  dressed  on  three  sides. 
It  was  held  by  three  rings  (70  ft.  diameter)  of  rangers  (8x8-in) 
encircling  the  pit ;  which  were  held  in  line  by  8  x  8-in.  posts,  4  ft. 
long,  spaced  5  ft.  apart  and  bolted  to  the  rangers.  The  rangers 
were  12  ft.  long,  mitered  at  the  ends  and  with  joints  bolted. 

The  cost  of  this  timber  work  was  as  follows: 

10.000   ft.   B.  M.,   at  $10 $100.00 

•  Iron     30.00 

6  days  carpenter,  at  $2.50 15.00 

12  days   helper,    at   $1.00 12.00 

Total    $157.00 

This  labor  cost  includes  framing  and  assembling  the  rings  and 
braces,  but  not  the  driving  of  the  sheeting.  There  were  about 
6,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  rangers  and  braces,  so  that  this  framing  and 
erecting  cost  $4.50  per  M. 


796  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

A  ditch  was  dug  all  around  the  inside  of  the  sheeting  to  lead  the 
ground  water  to  a  sump  whence  it  was  raised  by  a  plusometer  at  the 
rate  of  450  gals,  per  min. 

By  this  style  of  circular  ring  bracing,  not  only  was  very  little 
timber  required  (4  ft.  B.  M.  per  cu.  yd.  of  pit  enclosed  by  sheeting), 
but  the  pit  was  left  entirely  open. 

Cost  of  Dams  Per  Million  Feet  of  Water  Stored.— It  is  not  un- 
usual for  hydraulic  engineers  to  compare  the  cost  of  small  reser- 
voirs in  terms  of  the  cost  per  million  gallons  of  water  stored,  and,  in 
like  manner,  to  compare  large  reservoirs  or  dams  in  terms  of  the 
cost  per  million  cubic  feet  of  water  stored.  The  cost  of  small  arti- 
ficial reservoirs,  made  by  throwing  up  banks  of  earth  excavated 
from  the  interior,  can  be  compared  in  this  way  with  some  rough 
degree  of  accuracy,  but  a  little  consideration  shows  how  absurd  it 
is  thus  to  compare  large  reservoirs  made  by  building  a  dam  across 
a  natural  valley.  How  much  water  a  dam  will  impound  depends 
far  less  upon  the  size,  and  therefore  upon  the  cost,  of  the  dam 
than  upon  the  topography  of  the  valley  above  the  dam.  The  fol- 
lowing tabulation  brings  out  this  fact  very  clearly : 

Cost  per 

Height  Masonry  1,000,000  cu.  ft 

Dam.                                        ft.  cu.  yds.  Cost.              stored. 

New  Croton,   N.   Y 297  833,000  ?7,600,000          ?1,900 

Wachusett,     Mass 207  280,000  2,000.000               238 

Roosevelt,    Ariz 280  350,000  3,850,000                 63 

Shoshone,     Wyo 308  69,000  1,000,000                 50 

Pathfinder,     Wyo 210  53,000  1,000,000                 23 

Cross  References  on  Dams  and  Reservoirs.— The  following  sec- 
tions of  this  book  contain  data  on  dams :  Earth  Excavation  and 
Embankment,  Stone  Masonry,  Concrete  Construction.  Consul  the 
index  under  Dams  and  under  Reservoirs. 

Waterworks  Valuation  and  Plant  Depreciation— A  very  com' 
plete  discussion  of  this  subject  by  Leonard  Metcalf  is  given  in 
Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  16  and  23,  1908,  and  Jan.  6  and  13, 
1909.  Mr.  Metcalf  gives  also  an  excellent  compendium  of  legal  de- 
cisions and  a  very  full  bibliography  of  articles  bearing  upon  valu- 
ations. 

Figs.  29  and  30  give  the  depreciated  value  when  estimated  by 
the  sinking  fund  formula  of  depreciation,  for  a  discussion  of  which 
consult  Section  I,  of  this  book.  See  the  index  under  Depreciation. 

Table  XVI  gives  the  life  and  annual  contributions  to  the  sinking 
fund  to  cover  depreciation. 

"Going  Value"  of  Waterworks.— A  discussion  of  this  subject  by 
John  W.  Alvord,  with  data  and  illustrative  diagrams,  will  be  found 
in  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  4,  1909. 

A  discussion  of  the  subject  by  Chas.  B.  Burdick  is  also  given 
in  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  23,  1907. 

Life  of  Cast  Iron  Water  Pipe.— Regarding  the  life  of  cast  iron 
water  pipe,  Mr.  John  W.  Alvord  says: 


WATER-WORKS. 


797 


"It  is  generally  conceded  that  cast  iron  pipe  of  hard,  light-gray, 
close-grained  iron  of  even  texture,  properly  coated  with  good 
preservative's,  laid  in  ordinary  soils  and  conveying  water  of  average 
quality,  has  a  life  that  we  have  as  yet  no  reliable  data  to  deter- 
mine, because  a  sufficient  amount  of  it  has  not,  as  yet,  lived  its 
life,  and  we  can  only  approximate  what  a  fair  average  may  be.  The 
uncoated  pipe  first  laid  in  England  and  this  country  about  100 
years  ago  (1803)  are  every  now  and  then  taken  up  and  exam- 


TABLE  XVI. 


Annual  contribution  to  De- 
preciation Account  or  Sink- 
ing Fund  in  per  cent  of 
cost. 

General 

approximate 

results. 


75 

40 
50 
30 


At  5  %  annual  rate 
sinking  fund. 

Per  cent. 
0.4777-0.0383 
2.0952-0.8278 
0.8278-0.4777 
3.0243-0.4777 

0.4777-0.1322 


Per  cent. 


-   Va 
-1 


3.0243-0.8278 

3     - 

2.0952-0.4777 

2     - 

3.0243-1.5051 

3     -2 

4.6342-1.5051 

5     -2 

3.0243-1.5051 

3     -2 

0.8278-0.4777 

1 

0.8278-0.4777 

1     - 

3.0243-1.5051 

4     -2 

4.6342-2.0952 

5     -3 

6.2825-4.2270 

6     -4 

3.0243-1.5051 

4     -2 

tern)  .  . 

.  .  1  %  to 

Useful  life. 
Years.* 

Reservoirs    50-100 

Standpipes    25-  40 

Masonry    buildings    40-  50 

Wooden    buildings     20-50 

Cast-iron    pipe     of     large 

diameter    50- 

Cast-iron   pipe     of    small 

diameter    20- 

Steel    pipe    25- 

Wood-stave  pipe    20- 

Wrought-iron  service  pipe.  15-  30 

Meters     20-  30 

Hydrants     40-  50 

Gates     40-  50 

Pumping     and     auxiliary 

machinery     20-  30 

Steam   engines    15-  25 

Boilers    12-  16 

Electrical   machinery    20-  30 

Average  for  entire  plant    (gravity  system) 1%  to    V2% 

Average  for  entire  plant    (pumping  system) 2%  to  iya  % 

'Except  where  subject  to  heavy  deposit  of  silt. 

ined  with  the  result  that  while  always  found  to  be  filled  with  the 
result  of  oxidation  and  tuberculation  to  a  serious  degree  the  actual 
body  of  the  iron,  although  somewhat  brittle,  does  not  seem  to  have 
been  seriously  diminished  in  thickness." 

"The  coating  process  of  Dr.  Angus  Smith  was  first  introduced  into 
this  country  in  1858,  and  by  1869  the  method  of  coating  by  coal 
tar  varnish  was  generally  adopted,  with  great  resulting  benefit,  pre- 
serving the  life  and  carrying  capacity  of  the  cast  iron  pipe  in  a 
manner  and  to  an  extent  which,  as  has  been  before  said,  is  still  to 
be  determined  by  future  observations." 

Life  of  Pipe  Wrought  Iron  Pipe,  Lowell,  Mass.— In  the  Proceed- 
ings of  the  American  Water  Works  Association,  1894,  page  181  et 
seq.,  are  given  some  data  as  to  the  corrosion  of  iron  and  steel.  An 
instance  is  cited  of  a  wrought  iron  pipe,  y$  in.  thick,  laid  at  the 
Merrimack  Co.'s  Mills,  Lowell,  Mass.,  in  1845.  A  piece  was  cut 


798 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


8       g 


§       §       8 


WATEK  WORKS. 
S       8 


799 


g       8        8       38 

V  non«inuinoov  pan.1  Sai^ujg 


800  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

out  in  1887,  and  it  was  evident  that  the  pipe  was  good  for  another 
40  years.  The  outside  and  inside  of  the  pipe  had  originally  been 
coated  with  coal  tar.  The  conditions  of  soil  and  water  were  ex- 
ceptionally favorable. 

Life  of  Pipe  in  Salty  Soil. — In  the  Proceedings  of  the  American 
Waterworks  Association,  1899,  page  103,  Mr.  S.  Tomlinson  says  that 
a  32-in.  cast  iron  pipe,  laid  in  an  embankment  across  land  washed 
by  the  ocean  tides,  was  badly  corroded  in  10  years,  and  after  30 
years  is  unfit  for  further  use,  in  many  places  the  iron  Demg  con- 
verted to  oxide  y2  to  %  in.  in  thickness,  leaving  a  mere  shell  of 
solid  iron. 

In  the  Proceedings  of  the  Institution  of  Civil  Engineers  (Great 
Britain),  Vol.  143  (1901),  p.  259,  Mr.  William  Wark  says  that 
wrought  iron  service  pipes  lasted  only  7  years  at  Hay,  whereas  such 
pipes  were  still  in  good  condition  after  27  years'  service  at  Bath- 
hurst.  The  soil  at  Hay  is  of  a  light  sandy  nature,  containing  large 
quantities  of  salt.  The  soil  at  Bathhurst  is  of  a  rotten  granita 
nature.  Cast  iron  water  mains  at  Hay  show  no  signs  of  injury, 
but  wrought  iron  gas  mains  lasted  only  11  years. 

Life  of  Pipe,  St.  Jchn,  N.  B.— Mr.  Gilbert  Murdoch  gave,  in 
1892,  the  following  relative  to  the  life  of  cast  iron  pipe  at  St.  John, 
N.  B. : 

A  4-in  cast  iron  pipe,  33  yrs.  old,  buried  in  marsh  mud,  burst  un- 
der a  pressure  of  65  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  The  outside  of  the  pipe  had 
undergone  a  softening  at  the  break,  which  was  along  some  air  cells 
in  the  body  of  the  shell. 

A  6 -in  pipe,  52  yrs.  old,  in  soft,  slaty  rock  failed.  The  pipe  was 
as  easily  cut  as  plumbago. 

A  2 4-in.  pipe,  36  yrs.  old,  in  well  drained,  gravelly  brick-clay, 
failed. 

The  Life  of  Pipe  and  Appraisal  of  Syracuse  Waterworks. — Mr. 
Stephen  E.  Babcock  gives  the  following  relative  to  the  life  of  cast 
iron  pipe.  In  1891,  in  the  city  of  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  condemnation 
proceedings  were  undertaken  preliminary  to  the  purchase  of  the 
waterworks  owned  by  a  private  company.  The  engineering  experts 
for  the  water  company  dug  up  sections  of  pipe  and  tested  it  in  the 
presence  of  the  court.  Uncoated  cast  iron  pipe  that  had  been  laid 
40  years  was  found  to  be  apparently  as  perfect  as  when  first  laid; 
it  had  become  coated  neatly  and  uniformly  with  a  coating  not  ex- 
ceeding l/64th  of  an  inch  thick.  It  stood  a  pressure  of  700  Ibs. 
per  sq.  in.  The  water  is  unusually  hard.  Cement  lined  pipe  (with 
a  wrought  iron  core)  was  also  dug  up  and  tested,  sizes  being  4  to 
10-in.  It  stood  300  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  and  where  the  cement  was  re- 
moved the  iron  appeared  as  perfect  as  when  laid  in  1862. 

The  experts  for  the  city  claimed  that  practically  no  value  should 
be  assigned  to  existing  4  in.  and  6  in.  pipes,  as  they  were  too  small. 
In  rebutal  it  was  shown  that  the  mileage  of  pipes  of  these  sizes 
was  as  follows  in  different  cities: 


WATER-WORKS.  801 

Per  cent 

Syracuse,   N.   Y 62 

Rochester,   N.   Y 70 

Waltham,    Mass 81 

Fitchburgh,    Mass 76 

Erie,    Pa , 90 

Washington,    D.    C 85 

Schenectady,   N.   Y 87 

Cincinnati,    0 66 

Binghamton,   N.   Y 74 

Port  Huron,  Mich 75 

As  the  reservoir  had  been  built  many  years  beiore,  all  records 
of  the  amount  of  excavation,  etc.,  had  been  lost.  The  experts  for 
the  water  company  submitted  evidence  to  show  what  similar  reser- 
voirs had  cost  per  million  gallons  of  storage  capacity,  as  being  the 
only  rational  means  of  arriving  at  the  value  of  this  reservoir  whose 
capacity  was  known. 

Estimated    Depreciation    of   Water    Pipe,   Los   Angeles,    Calif In 

estimating  the  depreciation  of  water  pipes  in  Los  Angeles,  Calif., 
a  board  of  four  engineers  (Jas.  D.  Schuyler,  A.  L.  Adams,  A.  H. 
Koebig  and  J.  P.  Lippincott)  adopted  the  following  rates  of  annual 
depreciation,  for  purposes  of  appraisal  of  present  value: 

Cast  iron  pipe  in  good  soil , 1.25 

Cast  iron  pipe  in  poor  soil 2.00 

Sheet  iron  pipe  in  good  soil 4.00 

Sheet  iron  pipe  in  poor  soil 6.77 

Wrought  iron  pipe  in  good  soil ' 3.33 

Wrought  iron  pipe  in  poor  soil 5.71 

These  depreciations  were  applied  to  the  cost  of  the  pipe  in  place 
(including  pipe,  lead,  labor  of  laying,  removing  and  replacing  pave- 
ment, etc.)  Soils  ranging  from  salty  shales  and  alkaline  adobe 
(clay)  to  heavy  clay  were  classed  as  "poor,"  and  the  balance  as 
"good."  After  deducting  the  above  depreciation  from  the  first  cost, 
a  further  depreciation,  called  internal  depreciation  due  to  tubercu- 
lation,  was  calculated  on  those  depreciated  values  and  deduced 
therefrom.  The  annual  internal  depreciation  was  estimated  as  fol- 
lows : 

Per  cent. 
Per  year. 

Cast  iron  pipe,  4  in.  and  over 0.6 

Cast  iron  pipe,  3  in.  for  less  than  10-yrs.  of  age. ..2.0 

Cast  iron  pipe,  3  in.  for  over  10  yrs.  of  age 1.0 

Sheet   iron    and    steel    0.75 

Wrought  iron,  under  4  ins.,  for  less  than  10  yrs.  of 

age     .2.00 

Wrought  iron,  under  4  ins.,  for  over  10  yrs.  of  age.. 1.00 
Wrought  iron,   4  ins 150 


SECTION  VIII. 
SEWERS,   CONDUITS  AND   DRAINS. 

General  Considerations. — Trenches  for  sewers  are  usually  much 
deeper  than  trenches  for  water  pipes,  because  it  is  generally  desir- 
able to  have  a  sewer  deep  enough  to  drain  cellars  and  basements. 
In  cities  a  common  depth  of  trench  is  8  to  11  ft.  If  the  depth  is 
more  than  about  6  ft.,  even  in  narrow  trench  work,  men  will  be 
required  on  the  surface  to  shovel  the  earth  back  from  the  edge  of 
the  trench  after  it  has  been  cast  up.  in  such  cases  always  cast  the 
earth  onto  plank,  for  reasons  given  in  Section  2  on  Earthwork. 
When  the  depth  much  exceeds  8  ft.,  it  is  advisable  to  cast  the  earth 
out  of  the  trench  in  stages,  using  platforms  about  6  ft.  apart^-or 
less  if  the  earth  is  sloppy.  Bear  in  mind  that  where  the  trench  is 
a  wide  one,  there  is  much  handling  of  the  earth  after  it  reaches 
the  surface,  both,  in  stacking  it  up  in  pile  and  in  moving  it  back 
into  the  trench  ("backfilling")  after  the  sewer  has  been  laid.  In 
large  sewer  construction  there  is  more  excavation  than  backfill,  and 
the  excess  must  be  loaded  and  carted  away.  Each  case  must  be 
estimated  separately,  which  can  be  done  with  the  data  given  in 
Section  2  on  Earthwork,  and  with  the  data  in  this  section  and  in 
the  previous  section  on  Waterworks. 

Deep  trenching  is  beset  with  so  many  difficulties,  such  as  the 
handling  of  unexpected  bodies  of  water,  the  caving  of  banks  even 
when  well  sheeted,  and  the  like,  that  liberal  estimates  of  cost  should 
always  be  made.  Then  $7  to  $10  a  day  should  ordinarily  be  added 
for  rental  of  a  trench  machine,  for  even  where  owned  by  the  con- 
tractor a  liberal  allowance  must  be  made  for  wear  and  tear  and 
interest,  since  so  much  of  the  time  the  machine  is  ordinarily  idle. 
The  cost  of  the  sheeting  plank  and  bracing  must  be  added,  also  that 
of  pumping,  if  the  soil  is  wet.  In  many  localities  glacial  boulders 
are  likely  to  be  encountered,  greatly  delaying  work  and  adding  to 
the  cost. 

Accidents  to  men  are  frequent — so  much  so  in  -some  cities  that  ac- 
cident insurance  companies  absolutely  refuse  to  insure  a  sewer 
contractor's  men.  Aocident  insurance  is  seldom  less  than  1%  of  the 
pay  roll,  even  on  safe  work,  and  on  sewer  work  it  often  runs  up  to 
several  per  cent. 

Cost  of  Sheeting  at  Peoria,  III.— On  a  trench  13  ft.  wide  X  45  ft. 
deep,  at  Peoria,  111.,  sheeting  in  16-ft.  lengths  cost  as  follows  for 
labor : 

802 


CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  803 

2  men  on   top,    at   $2 $4 

2  men   setting   sheeting,   at   $2.50 5 

8  men   driving  sheeting,   at   $1.50 12 

8  men   pulling  sheeting,   at   $1.50 12 

2  men  moving  lumber  ahead,  at  $1.50 3 

Total   daily  wages  of  gang $36 

This  gang  sheeted  12  lin.  ft.  of  trench  per  day  at  a  cost  of  $3 
per  lin.  ft.,  all  work  being  by  hand  ;  this  is  equivalent  to  6%  cts. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  trench  for  each  foot  of  depth.  If  2-in.  sheet  plank 
were  used,  there  were  192  ft.  B.  M.  of  sheet  plank  per  lin.  ft.  of 
trench  and  probably  38  ft.  B.  M.  of  stringers  and  braces,  say  230 
ft.  B.  M.  per  lin.  ft.  From  which  we  see  that  driving  and  pulling 
sheeting,  including  bracing,  cost  for  labor  about  $13  per  M  (=1,000 
ft.  B.  M.)  at  the  rate  of  wages  above  given,  which  is  a  high  cost. 

The  cost  of  exactly  the  same  kind  of  work,  using  an  Adams' 
trench  machine  with  steam  power  for  driving  and  pulling  the  sheet- 
ing, was  as  follows: 

2  timber  men  on  top,  at  $2 $4.00 

2  men   setting,   at    $2.50 $5.00 

1  man    operating   driver 2.00 

2  helpers,    at    $1.50 3.00 

1  man    pulling 2.00 

2  helpers,  at  $1.50 3.00 

1  engineer     2.00 

1  man  moving  lumber  ahead 1.50 

Coal,  oil,   steam  hose  and  repairs 2.50 

Total     $25.00 

Twelve  lineal  feet  of  trench,  45  ft.  deep,  were  timbered  per  day 
at  this  cost  of  $25,  or  at  $2.08  per  lin.  ft.,  which  is  practically  %  the 
cost  by  hand  above  given,  and  in  addition  the  wear  of  the  sheet 
plank  was  less  than  with  hand  driving. 

The  following  cost  of  sheeting  is  for  hand  work,  trench  being 
12  ft.  wide  X  35  ft.  deep: 

2  timber  men  on  top,  at  $2 $4.00 

1  man   setting    2.50 

6  men  driving,   at  $1.50 9.00 

4  men  pulling,   at   $1.50 6.00 

1  man    moving    lumber 1.50 

Total     $23.00 

At  this  cost,  13  lin.  ft.  of  trench  were  sheeted  per  day,  or  at  the 
rate  of  $1.77  per  lin.  ft. 

Smaller  trenches,  8  ft.  to  16  ft.  deep  in  sand,  cost  from  10  to  25 
cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  labor  of  sheeting  with  2  x  7-in.  hemlock.  String- 
ers in  trenches  35  ft.  or  more  deep  were  8x8  ins.  yellow  pine,  with 
6  x  8-in.  white  pine  braces.  In  trenches  of  less  depth  6  x  6-in.  hem- 
lock stringers  and  braces  were  useu.  The  above  costs  do  not  in- 
clude wear  and  tear  on  timber.  Some  sewer  contractors  figure  on 
using  hemlock  sheeting  about  4  times,  with  hand-driving,  before  it 
is  worn  out. 


804  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Pumping  water  From  Trenches. — The  cost  of  pumping 
water  from  trenches  is  given  by  Mr.  Eliot  C.  Clarke  as  follows  for 
three  kinds  of  wet  trenches,  namely,  "slightly  wet,"  "quite  wet"  and 
"very  wet." 

In  a  "slightly  wet"  trench  one  hand  pump  was  used. 

In  a  "quite  wet"  trench  one  steam  pump  and  a  line  of  8-in.  pipe 
was  used,  sumps  or  wells  being  500  ft.  apart;  the  rent  of  this  plant 
is  rated  at  $3  a  day ;  the  engineman  $2.50  a  day ;  the  price  of  fuel 
is  not  given. 

In  a  "very  wet"  trench  two  steam  pumps  and  wells  every  250  ft 
were  used;  three  englnemen. 

The  cost  of  pumping  per  lineal  foot  of  trench  was  as  follows : 

Depth   of   trench,   ft 5  10  15  20  25 

Slightly  wet,  cost  per  ft $0.06       $0.07        $0.10       $0.12       $0.18 

Quite  wet,  cost  per  ft... 0.71          0.73          0.76          1.04          1.27 

Very  wet,  cost  per  ft 1.17          1.19          1.26          1.64          2.26 

Cost  of  Trenching  With  Trench  Excavators. — Mr.  Ernest  McCul- 
lough  gives  the  following  data  relating  to  work  done  by  the  "Chicago 
Trench  Excavator" — a  machine  made  by  the  Municipal  Engineering 
and  Contracting  Co. 

The  machine  consists  of  an  endless  chain  provided  with  cutters 
and  scrapers  which  deliver  the  earth  onto  a  traveling  belt,  the  ex- 
cavators and  conveyors  being  carried  by  a  four-wheeled  traction 
engine,  which  furnishes  the  power.  These  machines  are  rented  or 
sold  to  contractors. 

In  laying  7%  miles  of  pipe  sewers  at  Marshfield,  Wis.,  the  dally 
cost  of  operating  the  machine  and  laying  pipe  was  as  follows : 

Operator  of  trench  digger $  3.00 

Engineman  of  trench  digger 2.75 

Fireman   of  trench  digger 2.25 

Man  trimming  bottom  of  trench 2.25 

2  men   bracing   trench   with    plank 4.00 

2  pipe  layers,   at   $2.50 5.00 

2  men    furnishing    pipe    and    mortar 4.00 

2  men   tamping  earth   around  pipe 4.00 

1  man  shoveling  earth  down  to  the  tampers.  2.00 

2  teams  and  drivers  scraping  backfill 7.50 

4  men    holding    the    scrapers 8.00 

Total  labor  per  10-hr,  day $44.75 

About  %-ton  of  coal  was  used  daily. 

The  trench  was  27  ins.  wide  and  averaged  7  ft.  deep.  The  best 
day's  run  was  850  Hn.  ft.  of  trench,  or  500  cu.  yds.  in  10  hrs.,  in  dry 
clay  containing  no  stones.  On  another  day  nearly  500  ft.  were  run 
in  spite  of  many  stops  to  blast  out  boulders.  A  fair  average  was 
400  to  500  lin.  ft.,  or  300  cu.  yds.,  per  day.  Due  to  the  jarring  of 
the  ground  by  the  machine  it  is  necessary  to  brace  the  trench. 

(I  am  informed  by  Mr.  McCullough  that  records  of  650  cu.  yd& 
per  day  have  recently  been  made  with  this  machine.) 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  805 

These  trench  excavators  are  made  in  four  sizes  to  excavate  from 
14  ins.  to  60  ins.  in  width  and  up  to  20  ft.  in  depth. 

As  confirming  these  data  of  Mr.  McCullough's,  the  following 
records  given  by  Mr.  B.  Ewing  are  of  value :  In  the  summer  of 
1904,  many  miles  of  pipe  sewers  were  built  at  Wheaton,  111.,  by  con- 
tract. Two  Chicago  Excavators  were  used,  cutting  a  trench  2*&  ft. 
wide,  7  to  18  ft.  deep.  One  machine  would  excavate  750  lin.  ft.  of 
trench  7  ft.  deep  through  hard  clay  mixed  with  small  stones,  in  a 
10-hr,  day.  In  cutting  trenches  15  to  18  ft.,  a  machine  would 
average  150  to  200  lin.  ft.  per  day,  depending  upon  how  much 
bracing  was  necessary. 

See  page  651  for  data  on  the  cost  of  trenching  with  a  Buckeye 
Traction  Ditcher. 

Cost  of  Excavating  With  Trench  Machines. — A  trench  machine, 
as  the  term  is  here  used,  does  not  mean  an  earth  digger,  but  an 
earth  conveyor.  The  Carson  trench  machine  is  a  good  example  of 
the  type.  It  consists  essentially  of  a  single  rail  track  on  which 
a  trolley  travels,  being  hauled  back  and  forth  by  the  cables  of  a 
hoisting  engine.  The  trolley  carries  the  bucket  into  which  the  earth 
or  rock  has  been  loaded  by  hand.  The  single  rail  track  is  sup- 
ported at  intervals  by  a  light  trestle  made  of  bents  that  are  A- 
shaped. 

The  legs  of  the  A-bents  are  provided  with  wheels  at  the  bottom 
riding  on  a  track  straddling  the  trench,  and  the  whole  trestle  can 
be  moved  forward  in  5  to  10  mins.,  from  time  to  time,  as  the  work 
advances,  without  taking  the  trestle  apart,  unless  a  curve  has  to 
be  rounded.  These  A-bents  are  of  6  x  8-in.  spruce,  20  ft.  high  and 
have  a  spread  of  18  ft.  at  the  bottom.  The  trestle  is  288  ft.  long, 
and  buckets  of  1  cu.  yd.  each  are  handled.  The  crew  and  the  cost 
of  operation  are  the  same  as  for  a  cableway. 

Mr.  A.  W.  Byrne  states  that  in  completing  one  4,000-ft.  section 
of  the  Metropolitan  sewer  system,  at  Boston,  he  used  the  follow- 
ing force : 

1  engineman $  3.00 

1  lockman    2.00 

1  dumper    1.50 

8  shovelers,  at   ?1.75 14.00 

2  bracers,  at  $2.50 5.00 

2  tenders,  at  $2.00 4.00 

4  plank  drivers,  at  $2.00 8.00 

2  men  cutting  down  planks,  at  $2.00 4.08 

8  men  pulling  planks,   etc,,    at    $1.75 14.00 

Total $55.50 

The  force  working  in  a  trench  9  ft.  wide  x  20  to  30  ft.  deep  aver- 
aged 64  lin.  ft.  a  week  in  "boiling  sand,"  the  pressure  of  which 
would  break  6  x  8-in.  stringers  2y2  ft.  apart,  and  192  ft.  a  week 
in  gravel  and  coarse  sand,  which  is  equivalent  to  70  to  110  cu.  yds 
a  day  in  the  running  sand,  and  200  cu.  yds.  in  good  ground,  or  at 
a  cost  ranging  from  80  to  25  cts.  cu.  yd.  A  steam  pump  running 
at  a  cost  of  $10  a  day  was  also  required,  and  about  %-ton  of  coaJ 


806  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

was  used  by  the  trench  machine.  The  work  mentioned  was  done 
after  the  trench  machine  was  set  up,  and  the  gang  well  organized. 
Another  contractor  states  that  it  took  him  two  days  to  dismantle  a 
machine,  move  it  1,000  ft.  and  set  up  again. 

The  Adams  trench  machine  consists  of  a  series  of  wrought-iron  fl- 
shaped  bents,  the  lower  feet  of  the  fl  being  provided  with  wheels 
running  on  rails  laid  each  side  of  the  trench.  These  n  bents  car- 
ried two  rails,  on  each  side,  beneath  the  top  of  the  bent,  and  a  car 
ran  along  these  rails ;  this  car  is  pulled  back  and  forth  by  cables 
from  a  hoisting  engine  at  one  end  of  the  trench;  and  the  same 
engine  raises  buckets  up  to  the  car  where  they  are  gripped.  Work- 
ing in  sand  at  Peoria,  111.,  the  following  was  the  cost  in  a  trench 
13  ft.  wide  x  45  ft.  deep : 

r  rttiw  Per  day. 

18  men  loading  buckets,  at  $1.50 $27.00 

1  man  operating  bucket  car 2.00 

1  foreman 3.00 

1  engineman 2.50 

1  waterboy 50 

Coal,   oil,   etc 1.00 

Total  per  day $36.00 

This  force  excavated  284  buckets  of  1  1/9  cu.  yds.  each,  of  316 
cu.  yds.,  daily  at  a  cost  of  11.4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  as  the  average  of 
1  month. 

The  same  gang  operating  in  a  trench,  12  ft.  wide  x  33  ft.  deep, 
averaged  288  buckets  a  day,  at  a  cost  of  12.5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Most 
of  the  excavated  material  was  dumped  directly  from  the  buckets  as 
backfill  into  the  trench  where  the  sewer  was  completed. 

A  Moore  Hoister  and  Conveyor,  which  differed  only  in  having  the 
bucket  car  travel  on  top  of  the  bent,  instead  of  below,  required  one 
more  man  handling  the  buckets,  making  the  daily  force  account  $38. 
In  a  trench  12  ft.  wide  x  35  ft.  deep  the  Moore  machine  daily 
averaged  286  buckets  of  1  cu.  yd.  each,  at  a  cost  of  13.3  cts.  per 
cu.  yd. 

These  records  for  Adams  and  Moore  machines  show  unusually  low 
costs.  They  should  not  be  taken  as  averages,  but  rather  as  show- 
ing the  very  best  that  can  be  done  under  favorable  conditions.  Mr. 
A.  D.  Thompson  is  my  authority  for  these  cost  records.  The  cost 
of  sheeting  these  trenches  is  given  on  pages  435  and  436. 

Cost  of  Trench  Excavation  in  Massachusetts,  Using  a  Carson 
Machine.— Mr.  H.  H.  Carter  gives  the  following  account  of  work 
done  by  contract  in  Massachusetts  in  1884:  A  trench  2,100  ft. 
long,  9V2  ft.  deep  and  20  ft.  wide  was  dug  for  a  conduit  along  the 
shore  of  a  pond  and  about  30  ft.  away  from  the  water's  edge.  The 
water  in  the  pond  was  8  ft.  higher  than  the  bottom  of  the  trench, 
but  most  of  the  water  that  entered  the  trench  seeped  in  from  the 
side  farthest  away  from  the  pond.  The  water  was  handled  by  two 
Pulsometer  Steam  Pumps.  A  large  quantity  flowed  in  at  some 
places.  All  water  was  pumped  from  sumps  located  ahead  of  the 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  807 

laying  of  the  brick  conduit.  No  underdrains  were  left  under  the 
finished  conduit.  The  material  excavated  was  variable.  The 
greater  part  of  the  conduit  was  built  on  a  hard,  coarse  sand  and 
gravel  bottom ;  but  for  several  hundred  feet  quicksand  was  en- 
countered in  the  bottom.  A  Carson  trench  machine  was  used  for 
10  weeks.  The  total  excavation  was  15,100  cu.  yds.,  or  7.2  cu.  yds. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  trench.  The  backfill  amounted  to  only  1.5  cu.  yds. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  trench.  The  itemized  cost  was  as  follows  for  2,100 
ft.,  or  15,100  cu.  yds. : 

Total.        Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman,    66   days,   at  $4.00 $      264.001         $0.044 

Foreman,   159  days,  at  $2.50 397. 50J 

Engineman,    123   days,    at   $2.50 307.50  0.020 


Fireman,   147  days,   at   $1.75 257.25  0.016 

$3.00 282.001 

Pumpman,    56   days,   at   $1.75 98.00 J 


Pumpman,  94  days,  at  $3.00 282.001  0.026 


Laborer,   2,400  days,  at   $1.25 3,000.00  0.200 

Laborer,   2,200  days,  at  $1.50 3,300.00  0.220 

Bracer,  366  days,  at  $1.75 640.50  0.042 

Carpenter,   7  days,  at  $2.00 14.00  0.001 

Horse  and  cart,   88  days,  at  $4.00... 352.00  0.023 

Horse  and  cart,  10  days,  at  $3.15 31.50  0.002 

Scraper,    71   days,   at  $5.00 355.00  0.024 

Carson   machine,    10   weeks,   at   $45.00......  450.00  0.030 

Engines,    103   days,   at   $2.00 206.00  0.014 

Boiler,  129  days,  at  $1.00 129.00  0.009 

Pumps  (two),  199  days,  at  $0.80.., ..  159.20  0.011 

Derricks,   72  days,  at  $1.00 72.00  0.005 

Tools .-. 71.00  0.005 

Coal,  80  tons,  at  $6.00 480.00  0.032 

Sheeting,  loss  on,  at  $14  per  M 200.00  0.013 

Iron,  at  3  cts.  per  Ib 15.00  0.001 

Miscellaneous     26.00  0.002 


Total   $11,107.45  $0.740 

The  backfilling  and  embankment  cost  is  included  in  the  above  cost 
of  74  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  trench  excavation.  Properly  it  should  be 
separated,  as  follows: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Excavating  trench $3.20 

Bracing   trench,   labor 0.30 

Bracing    trench,    lumber 0.10 

Pumping    trench 0.45 

Backfilling    0.71 

Embankment    0.69 

Miscellaneous ; .    0.28 

Total,  per  lin.  ft $5.73 

Deducting  the  backfilling  and  embankment,  we  have  left  $4.33 
per  lin.  ft.,  or  60  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  trench.  The  backfilling  itself 
cost  18  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  backfilled. 

This  same  trench  work  was  extended  across  a  pond  that  had  been 
filled  with  an  embankment  of  gravel  and  sand  from  a  trestle.  The 
trench  was  excavated  in  the  center  of  this  embankment,  and  was  18 
ft.  wide,  with  sheet  piles  on  both  sides,  and  its  bottom  was  6  ft. 
below  the  level  of  the  pond.  The  water  was  handled  by  two  pul- 
someters  and  one  Andrews  pump.  The  trench  was  1,550  ft.  long, 


808  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

containing  8,070  cu.  yds.  and  took  125  days  to  excavate.     The  item- 
ized cost  was  as  follows: 

Total.        Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman,  35  days,  at  $3.50 %  122.50  $0.015 

Foreman,  150  days,  at  $2.50 375.00  0.047 

Engineman,    146    days,   at   $2.50 465.00  0.058 

Pumpman,  286  days,  at  $1.75 500.50  0.062 

Laborer,  400  days,  at  $1.65 680.00  0.085 

Laborer,  460  days,  at  $1.50 690.00  0.086 

Laborer,  2,500  days,  at  $1.25 3,125.00  0.383 

Bracer,  255  days,  at  $1.75 446.25  0.056 

Horse  and  cart,  12  days,  at  $3.15 37.80  0.004 

Engines,    125    days,   at   $2.00 250.00  0.031 

Boiler,  125  days,  at  $1.00 125.00  0.015 

Pulsometers,  223  days,  at  $0.80 178.40  0.022 

Pump   (Andrews),  67  days,  at  $2.00 134.00  0.017 

Derricks,  125  days,  at  $1.00 125.00  0.015 

Tools     57.00  0.007 

Coal,  52   tons,  at  $6.00 312.00  0.039 

Spruce,  49  M  left  in,  at  $14.00 686.00  0.086 

Miscellaneous   35.00  0.004 

Total  (1,550  lin.  ft.) $8,344.45  $1.032 

This  cost  of  $1.03  per  cu.  yd.  includes  some  but  not  all  of  the 
backfilling.  The  cost  per  lin.  ft.  was  distributed  as  follows: 

Per  lin.  ft 

Excavating $3.25 

Bracing,  labor 0.29 

Bracing,   lumber    0.45 

Pumping    0.72 

Backfilling  and  embankment 0.66 

Total    $5.37 

Deducting  the  backfilling  we  have  $4.71  per  lin.  ft,  which  is 
equivalent  to  90  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  trench.  The  backfilling  itself 
cost  19  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  backfilled.  The  contractor's  price  was  less 
than  half  .what  the  work  cost  him,  but  it  appears  evident  that  he 
did  not  manage  his  work  very  well. 

Cost  of  Excavating  With  a  Potter  Trench  Machine.— The  follow- 
ing data  were  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  April,  1906, 
and  January  28,  1908.  Fig.  1  shows  a  Potter  trench  machine,  made 
by  the  Potter  Mfg.  Co.,  Indianapolis,  Ind.  The  machine  consists 
of  a  track  supported  by  bents  that  span  the  trench.  On  this  track 
travels  a.  carriage  having  drums  for  hoisting  the  buckets  of  earth 
from  the  trench.  The  track  is  ordinarily  270  ft.  long,  the  hoisting 
engine  being  located  at  one  end.  Two  men  ride  on  the  carriage  to 
handle  the  buckets.  Buckets  loaded  by  hand  are  lifted  from  the 
trench  by  the  machine  and  carried  back  and  dumped  on  the  com- 
pleted sewer  for  backfill. 

Certain  sections  of  an  intercepting  sewer  were  built  by  day  labor 
in  Chicago,  during  1901-1903.  A  Potter  trench  machine  370  ft. 
long  was  used.  An  ordinary  double  drum  hoisting  engine  was 
placed  at  the  front  end  of  the  machine:  By  means  of  two  cables 
and"  a  series  of  drum  sheaves,  the  engine  hoisted  the  bucket  and 
moved  the  carrier  along  the  trackway  as  required.  The  entire  ma- 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


chine,  including  the  engine,  was  supported  on  track  on  each  side  of 
the  trench.  After  the  track  was  built,  5  mins.  was  ample  time  in 
which  to  move  the  whole  machine  48  ft.,  that  amount  of  trench 
being  worked  at  a  time.  The  Potter  trench  machine  was  used  to 
remove  the  clay  and  about  2  ft.  of  overlying  sand. 

In  the  excavation  six  %-yd.  buckets  were  used,  four  in  the  trench 
and  two  on  the  carrier.  Two  empty  buckets  were  placed  in  ad- 
joining sections  and  two  full  ones  removed  on  each  trip.  The 
trench  machine  crew  consisted  of  the  following :  One  hoisting 
engineman,  one  fireman,  and  two  carrier  men.  The  number  OL 
bottom  men  or  diggers  ranged  from  17  to  21,  depending  on  the 


Pipe      «Hr  Wff-:*~: 
r          'Yellow  Sand:- 


/7WJJ7/}Wy'/ys7yys/s/'/r> 

Very  fart  Blue  Clay 
Fig 


1.     Trench  Machine. 


kind  and  amount  of  excavation.  In  addition,  the  track  supporting 
the  machine  was  built  by  a  gang  of  timber  men,  whose  other  duties 
were  the  removal  of  braces,  and  miscellaneous  work. 

The  rates  of  wages  of  the  trench  machine  crew  were  as  follows: 

Rate.  Total. 

1  foreman    $4.00  $  4.00 

2  enginemen    4.80  9.60 

1  fireman    2.75  2.75 

2  carrier    men     3.75  7.50 

17  bottom    men    3.25  55.25 

Total  daily  labor  cost $78.10 

Note  that  the  wages  of  laborers  were  very  high. 

One  ton  of  coal,  costing  $2.90,  per  day  was  used;    adding  this  to 


810        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

the  total  labor  cost  and  we  get  $81.  About  190  cu.  yds.  were 
excavated  each  day,  so  the  cost,  per  cu.  yd.,  was  40.2  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.,  exclusive  of  plant  rental,  and  cost  of  laying  track. 

During  1906,  there  were  2,440  lin.  ft.  of  concrete  sewer  (5^  ft. 
diam. )  built  by  contract  for  the  city  of  South  Bend,  Ind. 

The  section  of  the  city  through  which  this  sewer  was  built  was 
flat  and  marshy.  The  material,  in  consequence  of  this,  was  loose 
black  soil  for  a  depth  of  about  4 .  ft.  Then  sand  and  gravel  were 
encountered,  and  for  the  last  4  or  5  ft.  of  the  trench  this  material 
was  water  soaked.  This  made  pumping  necessary  in  the  excava- 
tion work  and  also  during  the  progress  of  the  concrete  construction. 

The  trench  was  10%  ft.  wide,  and  18  ft.  was  the  average  depth. 
This  gave  7  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  per  lin.  ft.  of  trench.  Shoring 
of  the  sides  of  the  trench  was  necessary.  The  first  2  or  3  ft.  of  the 
trench  was  excavated  either  by  men  casting  the  material  from  the 
trench  or  was  plowed  and  moved  with  scrapers. 

After  this  much  excavation  was  done  a  Potter  trench  machine, 
manufactured  by  the  Potter  Manufacturing  Co.,  Indianapolis,  Ind., 
•vsas  installed  and  used  for  all  the  work  of  excavation  and  for 
handling  the  concrete. 

The  trench  machine  was  used  to  excavate  from  5  to  6  cu.  yds. 
per  lin.  ft.,  but,  as  no  separate  record  was  kept  of  the  first  excava- 
tion done,  the  entire  cost  of  the  excavation  is  figured  as  done  with 
the  machine. 

It  is  stated  that  the  carriage  that  handled  the  buckets  could  make 
a  round  trip  in  one  minute,  including  the  time  of  lowering  and 
hoisting  the  buckets.  The  following  data  were  furnished  by  "Mr. 
W.  A.  Morris,  Asst.  City  Engineer  of  South  Bend. 

On  the  work  described  it  was  the  custom  to  keep  about  200  ft.  of 
the  trench  open  at  one  time.  The  material  was  taken  from  in 
front  of  the  sewer  and  dumped  on  the  completed  portion.  The 
excavation  on  top  was  dry,  but  as  it  neared  the  bottom,  as  pre- 
viously stated,  water  was  encountered.  The  following  system  of 
drainage  was  used.  The  water  came  from  the  gravel  and  sand. 
A  sub-drain  pipe  was  laid  of  second  class  and  cull  pipe,  the  bot- 
tom of  this  being  laid  30  ins.  below  the  grade  of  the  invert  of  the 
sewer.  The  joints  were  loosely  caulked  with  tufts  of  sod  in  order 
to  prevent  the  fine  sand  from  entering  the  pipe.  Clean  gravel  of 
medium  size  covered  the  pipe.  This  permitted  water  to  enter  the 
pipe,  through  which  it  flowed  to  a  sump  at  the  lower  end  of  the 
new  work.  This  sump  was  18  ins.  below  the  grade  of  the  drain 
pipe,  and  the  water  was  pumped  from  the  sump  by  a  6-in.  rotary 
pump  over  a  dam  into  the  old  portion  of  the  work. 

This  drained  the  bottom  of  the  trench  so  that  the  concrete  was 
readily  laid,  and  by  keeping  the  pump  going  continually,  allowed 
the  concrete  to  set  without  being  injured  by  the  water  rising  in 
the  trench.  This  pumping  and  drainage  work  is  included  in  the 
cost  of  excavation  but  a  part  of  it  could  properly  have  been 
charged  against  the  concrete  work. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  811 

The  wages  paid  for  a  10-hr,  day  were  as  follows: 

Engineer  on  trench  machine $3.00 

Fireman    on    trench    machine 1.65 

Engineer  for  pumping 2.00 

Fireman     2.50 

Carpenter    2.50 

Laborers    1.85 

The  cost  of  the  various  work  per  lin.  ft.  of  trench  was  as 
follows : 

Pipe  for  sub-drain    $0.33 

Labor  laying  this  pipe 0.35 

Pumping    water     0.45 

Excavation   and   backfilling 2.80 

Setting  and  pulling  shoring 1.04 

Allowance  for  tools  and  gen.  ex 25 

Total  per  lin.  ft $5.22 

With  7  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  trench  this  makes  a  cost  per  cu. 
yd.  of  excavation  for  each  of  the  above  items  as  follows: 

Pipe  for  sub-drain . . . $0.047 

Labor  laying  this  pipe 0.050 

Pumping  water    0.065 

Excavation  and  backfilling 0.400 

Shoring 0.150 

Tools  and   general   expenses 0.035 

Total  per  cu.  yd $0.747 

The  drainage,  it  will  be  noticed,  cost  a  little  more  than  20  per 
cent  of  the  total.  The  cost  of  excavation  and  back  filling,  and  of 
shoring  and  filling  the  street  piles  for  a  trench  as  deep  as  this  is 
quite  reasonable. 

Cost  of  Excavating  With  Potter  Trenching  Machine  for  16-ft. 
Sewer.* — The  final  section  of  the  conduit  work  proper  for  the  Law- 
rence avenue  sewer  at  Chicago,  111.,  includes  the  construction  of 
1,160  lin.  ft.  of  5-ring,  16  ft.  diameter  brick  conduit  from  the  north 
branch  of  the  Chicago  river  to  the  section  completed  in  1901  oy 
Farley  &  Green.  The  sewer  will  empty  in  the  north  branch,  which 
is  being  dredged  to  a  width  of  90  ft.  •  ultimately  this  width  will  be 
increased  to  180  ft. 

The  excavation  was  done  by  the  open  cut  method,  the  width  of 
the  trench  being  21  ft.  and  the  average  depth  being  30.5  ft.  The 
materials  encountered  in  the  excavation  consist  of  a  top  layer  of 
black  soil,  then  come  about  15  ft.  of  soft  blue  clay,  6  to  8  ft.  of 
stiff  blue  clay,  1  ft.  of  sandy  loam  and  about  2  ft.  of  hard  blue 
clay.  This  latter  was  so  hard  in  places  that  its  removal  was 
facilitated  by  "shooting." 

The  first  16  to  18  ft.  of  excavatior  was  done  with  the  aid  of  skips 
and  a  derrick  of  the  Kearnes  type,  having  a  5  5 -ft.  boom  and 
equipped  with  a  7x10  double  drum  hoisting  engine.  The  derrick 
is  so  arranged  that  the  boom  can  swing  in  a  half  circle  on  either 
side  of  the  trench.  The  framework  carrying  the  turntables  span- 
ning the  trench  rests  on  shoe  timbers,  these  in  turn  resting  on 
rollers.  A  runway  is  built  ahead  of  these  rollers,  and  the  derrick 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  9,  1907. 


512  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

is  pulled  ahead  by  means  of  ropes  wound  round  the  nigger  head 
of  the  engine  and  single  and  double  blocks.  The  skips  are  of  1  cu. 
yd.  capacity,  were  filled  by  hand  shoveling,  lifted  by  the  derrick 
and  swung  to  one  side  of  the  trench,  the  spoil  being  used  for  filling 
low  places,  or  later  for  completing  the  backfilling.  As  the  excava- 
tion proceeds,  a  2-in.  plank  sheeting  is  placed  and  carried  down  to 
a  depth  of  about  14  ft,  8xlO-in.  timber  spaced  20  ft.  centers  being 
used  for  bracing. 

A  Potter  trenching  machine  followed  the  derrick  and  skips,  and 
was  used  in  carrying  down  the  excavation  to  the  required  depth. 
Six  %  cu.  yd.  capacity  buckets  are  used  with  this  machine,  there 
always  being  four  buckets  in  the  trench  being  filled,  while  the 
remainder  are  being  carried  back  on  the  carriage  and  dumped  on 
the  completed  brick  work.  The  hardest  part  of  the  excavation  was 
done  with  this  machine,  the  clay  being  sticky  and  tenacious  and 
coming  away  in  hard  lumps.  An  average  of  175  to  200  cu.  yds. 
was  excavated  each  day  with  this  machine. 

The  wages  per  8-hour  day  and  number  of  men  employed  in  ex- 
cavating with  the  Potter  trenching  machine  were  about  as  follows : 

Per  day.  Total. 

Engineer     $6.00  |  6.00 

Fireman    2.50  2.50 

1  man  on   carriage 2.50  2.50 

1  man   on   carriage 3.25  3.25 

20  bottom  men    2.75  55.00 

1  man  on  dump 2.75  2.75 

Foreman   3.50  3.50 

Total     $75.50 

One-half  ton  of  coal  was. consumed  each  day  by  the  machine, 
allowing  $2.50  for  this  and  assuming  that  the  rent  of  the  machine 
was  $125  per  month  ($4.80  per  day)  the  total  cost  per  8-hour  day 
would  be  $82.80.  On  the  basis  that  175  cu.  yds.  of  material  was 
excavated  each  day,  the  cost  would  be  about  47  cts.  per  cubic  yard. 
The  bricklayers  follow  the  trenching  machine,  six  masons  work- 
ing to  a  shift.  About  1,700  brick  were  used  per  foot  of  sewer,  the 
average  rate  of  progress  being  16  ft.  of  sewer  completed  per  day. 
This  means  that  one  bricklayer  puts  in  place  4,500  brick  per  day, 
at  a  cost  for  his  labor,  in  the  wages  at  $6  per  8  hours,  of  $1.33  per 
thousand  of  brick,  or  about  $2.65  per  cubic  yard  of  masonry.  This, 
of  course,  does  not  include  bricklayers'  helpers,  cost  of  materials 
or  centers. 

The  work,  which  was  completed  recently,  was  done  by  the 
American  Engineering  &  Construction  Co.  of  Chicago,  of  which 
Mr.  W.  A.  Shaw  is  president. 

Cost  of  Excavating  With  Trench  Machine.— In  Engineering  Con- 
tracting, April,  1906,  the  method  of  excavating  a  sewer  in  Chicago 
with  a  Potter  trench  machine  is  illustrated  and  described.  The 
machine  was  370  ft.  long,  and  was  moved  forward  48  ft.  at  a 
time,  only  5  minutes  being  required  to  make  a  move.  The  crew 
digging  and  operating  the  machine  was : 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  813 

Per  day, 

1  foreman     $  4.00 

2  enginemen  at   $4.80 ' 9.60 

1  fireman    2.75 

2  carrier  men  at  $3.75 7.50 

17  bottom  men  at  $3.25 55.25 


Total    labor $78.10 

1  ton  coal..  2.90 


Total,  190  cu.  yds.  at  40.2  cts $81.00 

Note  that  the  laborers  were  paid  very  high  wages.  They  were 
working  for  the  city. 

Cost  of  Trenching  by  Cableways.— A  cableway  consists  essentially 
of  a  main  cable  suspended  between  two  towers,  and  serving  as  a 
track  for  the  trolley  carrying  the  loaded  bucket,  which  is  pulled 
back  and  forth  by  small  cables  from  a  stationary  hoisting  engine. 
The  following  data  will  give  a  good  idea  of  what  can  be  done  with  a 
cableway. 

Parallel  with  a  railroad  track  a  trench  14  ft.  wide  by  18  ft.  deep 
was  dug  in  earth  slightly  more  compact  than  "average."  A  Lam- 
bert cableway  with  towers  400  ft.  apart  was  used,  and  it  delivered 
the  buckets  to  a  chute  that  discharged  into  railroad  cars  alongside. 
The  writer's  record  of  cost  was  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

30  men  loading  buckets,  at  $1.50 $45.00 

1  signalman      (signaling     engineman),      at 

$1.75     1.75 

1  man   hooking   buckets   to    cable's   trolley, 

at    $1.75    1.75 

1  man   dumping   buckets,    at    $1.75 1.75 

4  men    driving    sheet    plank    and    bracing, 

at    $1.50     » 6.00 

5  men  spreading  earth  in  cars  and  moving 
cars,  at  $1.50   7.50 

1  engineman 3.00 

1  fireman    1.75 

1  waterboy 1.00 

1  foreman     4.00 

Total     $73~io 

The  output  was  260  buckets  in  10  hrs.,  each  bucket  holding  1%  cu. 
yds.  of  loose  earth,  which  was  probably  not  much  more  than  1  cu. 
yd.  measured  in  cut.  Th'e  wages  and  coal  amounted  to  $76  a  day. 
Hence,  not  including  the  cost  of  timber  sheeting,  nor  the  hauling 
and  unloading  of  cars,  the  cost  of  excavation  was  about  30  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  There  was  no  backfilling,  as  the  trench  was  for  a  retaining 
wall.  When  the  bucket  was  traveling  360  ft.  from  pit  to  dump,  the 
following  time  was  required  for  each  round  trip : 

Seconds. 

Raising   bucket    15 

Moving  bucket  360  ft '. 35 

Dumping    bucket    25 

Returning    bucket    35 

Lowering  bucket    15 

Changing   buckets    15 

Total    .  .140 


814        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

Almost  5  sees,  could  be  saved  on  each  of  these  six  items  if  every- 
thing went  well,  but  with  the  ordinary  slight  delays  the  above  is 
a  fair  average  for  each  round  trip — tnat  is  2%  mins.  A  cable- 
way  may  be  used  to  advantage  in  pulling  sheet  planking,  and  one 
2  x  10-in.  plank  buried  16  ft.  in  the  earth  can  be  pulled  in  1  min., 
thus  making  the  cost  of  timber  removal  merely  nominal.  In  pull- 
ing the  plank  use  a  -piece  of  1  x  3-in.  iron  bent  into  a  U-shape  and 
with  a  ring  welded  to  one  leg  of  the  U.  It  clings  to  the  plank 
even  though  it  is  not  held  by  a  set  screw  or  the  like. 

To  move  one  of  these  cableways  takes  a  gang  of  15  men  three 
Says  if  they  are  "green"  at  the  work,  two  days  if  they  are  used  to 
it  The  anchorage  for  the  main  cable  is  made  by  digging  a  trench 
5  or  6  ft.  deep  and  16  ft,  long,  in  which  a  log  16  or  18  ins.  in  diam- 
eter and  15  ft.  long  is  laid,  and  the  cable  carried  around  its  center. 
A  short  narrow  trench  leads  off  from  the  main  trench  so  as  to  give 
a  clear  way  for  the  cable  to  pass  to  the  top  of  the  tower.  The 
main  trench  is  filled  with  stones  carefully  laid  over  the  log,  and  on 
top  of  the  ground  over  the  log  is  built  a  pile  of  stones  6  ft.  high  x 
12  x  12  ft.  To  move  all  this  rock  for  the  anchors,  to  move  the 
engine,  towers,  cables,  etc.,  and  set  up  again  will  seldom  cost  less 
than  $50,  and  frequently  costs  $75,  to  say  nothing  of  the  lost  time. 
If  this  cost  is  added  to  the  cost  of  excavating  the  earth  in  a  trench 
370  ft.  long,  it  will  amount  to  several  cents  per  cu.  yd.  Thus  if  the 
trench  is  only  6  ft.  wide  x  9  ft.  deep,  there  will  be  740  cu.  yds.  in 
370  ft.  of  trench,  and  if  it  costs  $74  to  move  the  cableway,  we  have 
10  cents  per  cu.  yd.  of  trenching  chargeable  to  the  cableway  mov- 
ing, besides  the  cost  of  excavation  and  backfill.  For  deeper  and 
wider  trenches  this  cost  of  moving,  being  distributed  over  a  greater 
yardage,  becomes  a  comparatively  small  item.  Each  case  must  be 
treated  as  a  separate  problem,  in  ascertaining  the  cost. 

The  following  data  have  been  obtained  from  The  Carson  Trench 
Machine  Co.,  of  Charlestown,  Boston,  Mass.,  makers  of  the  Carson- 
Lidgerwood  cableway  much  used  on  the  Rapid  Transit  Subway 
New  York  City: 

Two  A- shaped  bents  or  towers,  20  to  35  ft.  high,  and  200  to  300 
ft.  apart,  support  the  1%-in.  cable  along  which  the  bucket  travels. 
A  hoisting  engine  at  one  end  with  two  7  x  10-in.  cylinders  and 
capable  of  lifting  5,000  Ibs.,  raises  and  transports  the  buckets  at  a 
speed  of  440  ft.  a  minute,  or  5  miles  an  hour. 

Aside  from  the  men  required  to  fill  the  buckets,  the  force  re- 
quired consists  of  an  engineman,  a  fireman,  a  signalman,  and  a 
dumpman  ;  and  %  to  %-ton  of  coal  is  daily  consumed.  On  a  sewer 
in  Orange,  N.  J.,  44  buckets  (1  cu.  yd.)  were  handled  per  hour 
on  an  average,  60  being  the  maximum.  The  output  depends  upon 
the  number  of  men  digging,  and  the  character  of  the  material,  but 
250  cu.  yds.  a  day  may  be  taken  as  a  good  output. 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  815 

The  following  coots  are  given  in  letters  to  the  Carson  Trench 
Machine  Co. 

Mr.  Frank  P.  Davis,  C.  E.,  gives  the  following  for  a  sewer  in 
Washington,  D.  C. :  Width  of  trench,  18  f t. ;  depth  at  which  cable- 
way  began  work,  15  f  t. ;  distance  of  travel  of  1  cu.  yd.  bucket, 
150  f  t. ;  number  of  trips  per  hour,  35  ;  hours  per  day,  8  ;  material, 
cemented  gravel.  Cost : 

Engineman     $  2.00 

Fireman     1.25 

Signalman     1.00 

2    dumpers,    at    $1 2.00 

Coal,    oil    and    waste 1.50 

Interest    and    maintenance     (estimated)....      7.00 

$14V7? 
30  men  picking  and   shoveling 30.00 

Total   for   280   cu.  yds $44.75 

Cost  of  picking,  shoveling,  hoisting  15  ft.  and  conveying  150  ?t. 
to  wagons,  16  cts.  cu.  yd.  (Note  that  the  wages  were  very  low.) 
Bracing  and  sheeting  was  going  on  at  the  same  time ;  the  men  did 
not  enow  they  were  being  timed. 

James  Pilkington,  of  New  York,  says:  "I  have  excavated  and  re- 
filled 250  cu.  yds.  in  10  hours  at  an  expense  of  15  cts.  per  yard. 
For  rock  excavation  the  cableway  has  no  equal.  I  have  taken  the 
machine  down  and  moved  250  ft,  and  put  up,  and  was  in  working 
order  in  three  hours  and  fifty  minutes."  This  is  unusually  fast  and 
indicates  that  Mr.  Pilkington  did  not  raise  his  towers  by  "main 
force  and  awkwardness." 

Cost  of  Sewer  Trench  and  Back  Filling.— The  city  of  Holyoke, 
Mass.,  built  a  system  of  sewers  during  1908.  The  main  sewers  are 
39  ins.  and  54  ins.  These  are  built  of  concrete  blocks,  there  being 
1,233  lin.  ft.  of  them.  The  sewers  were  built  by  contract,  but  the 
excavation  and  backfilling  was  done  by  day  labor,  under  the  dir^c- 
tion  of  the  city  engineer. 

One  trench  was  dug  14  ft.  deep  and  about  4%  ft.  wide,  through 
sand  and  clay.  The  material  was  thrown  om  the  side  of  the  trench 
and  used  for  backfilling.  The  following  wages  were  paid  for  an 
8-hr,  day: 

Foreman     $3.50 

Laborers     2.00 

There  were  excavated  from  this  trench  2ys  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft. 
The  cost  per  cu.  yd.  was  $1.21,  giving  a  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  $2.82. 

The  second  trench  was  14  ft.  deep  and  about  6  ft.  wide,  the  ma- 
terial being  the  same,  mainly  sand  and  clay.  There  were  3.11  cu. 
yds.  of  excavation  per  lin.  ft.  The  cost  of  excavating  and  back- 
filling this  trench  was  $1.25  per  cu.  yd.,  making  a  cost  per  lin.  ft. 
of  $3.90.  All  the  excavation  and  backfilling  was  done  by  hand. 

These  high  costs  show  how  inefficient  is  the  day  laborer  when 
working  in  the  employ  of  a  city  instead  of  a  contractor. 


816  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Cost  of  Excavating  Trench  With  Orange  Peel  Bucket.— In  En- 
gineering-Contracting, April,  1906,  a  detailed  description  is  given 
of  the  plant  and  methods  used  in  building  a  large  sewer  in  Chicago 
by  city  forces.  For  part  of  the  work  a  1  cu.  yd.  orange  peel 
bucket  was  used.  A  traveling  derrick,  on  rollers,  was  used.  It 
was  designed  to  swing  in  a  full  circle.  The  crew  was : 

Per  day. 

1  engineman     $  4.80 

1  fireman    2.50 

1  signal     man 3.25 

1  powder  man 3.25 

2  laborers   at    $3.25 6.50 

Total  per  day $20.30 

Under  ordinary  conditions,  the  orange-peel  bucket  excavated 
about  450  cu.  yds.  a  day,  all  earth  being  dumped  on  a  spoil  bank 
at  one  side. 

On  the  assumption  that  450  cu.  yds.  were  excavated  per  day, 
the  labor  cost  was  4.5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  About  50  Ibs.  of  dynamite 
and  %  ton  of  coal  were  used  each  eight-hour  day.  The  cost  of  the 
dynamite  was  $7.50  and  the  coal  cost  $3  per  ton,  making  the 
total  cost  for  dynamite  and  coal  $9.75.  The  total  cost  per  day 
for  excavating  thus  was  $30.05  ;  and  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  was 
6.6  cts.,  exclusive  of  the  wear  and  tear  on  the  machine. 

In  this  excavation  the  swinging  derrick  with  the  orange-peel 
bucket  could  be  worked  to  better  advantage  than  a  steam  shovel, 
inasmuch  as  it  could  work  between  the  braces,  which  were  11  ft. 
centers.  The  bracing  was  placed  as  the  excavation  proceeded,  and 
when  the  trench  excavation  was  completed,  the  braces  were  all  in 
place.  By  the  use  of  the  derrick  the  excavated  material  could  be 
deposited  far  enough  from  the  trench  so  as  not  to  necessitate 
rehandling.  In  the  case  of  a  steam  shovel  it  would  have  been 
necessary  first  to  put  in  a  temporary  bracing,  and  a  permanent 
bracing  afterwards.  Also,  the  boom  of  a  steam  shovel  would  not 
be  long  enough  to  deposit  the  excavated  matter  the  necessary 
distance  from  the  trench. 

Cost  of  Sewer  Trenching  Using  a  Derrick.* — The  trenching  was 
done  for  a  trunk  sewer  constructed  at  Big  Rapids,  Mich.  The 
trench  was  4  ft.  wide  and  varied  from  14  ft.  2  ins.  to  17  ft.  3  ins. 
deep.  A  15-in.  pipe  sewer  was  laid  in  the  trench.  A  length  of 
1,000  ft.  of  sewer  was  constructed.  The  material  was  gravel  and 
boulders.  As  much  as  3  cords  of  stone  in  400  ft.  of  trench  were 
removed,  many  of  the  boulders  required  a  3,000-lb.  chain  fall  to 
handle  them.  In  addition  most  of  the  stone  lay  from  12  to  16  ft. 
deep,  which  made  it  very  difficult  to  handle  them  between  the 
braces.  The  gravel  was  treacherous  and  hard  to  hold,  requiring 
two  and  sometimes  three  sections  of  sheeting  and  three  and  four 
stringers  to  hold  it. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  8,  1909. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS,  817 

The  first  4  to  6  ft.  of  the  trench  was  excavated  by  means  of  a 
slush  scraper  fitted  with  inside  ears  and  bail  so  that  it  would  cut 
vertical  sides  without  the  use  of  shovel  or  pick.  A  team  and  driver 
at  $3.75  per  day  did  all  this  digging1  and  also  all  filling.  The  gang 
employed  and  the  wages  per  day  were  as  follows: 

Item.  Per  day. 

1  foreman   at    $2 $  2.00 

1  scraper  team  and  driver  at  $3.75 3.75 

1  man  holding  scraper  at  $1.50 1.50 

1  man  dumping  scraper  at  $1.50 1.50 

2  men  pulling  sheeting  and  carrying  it  ahead  at 
$1.50     3.00 

1  man  setting  top  section  of  sheeting  at  $1.50.  .  .  1.50 

1  man  tending  derrick  at  $1.50 1.50 

1  horse  and  driver  on  haul  line  at  $2.50 2.50 

4  men  filling  2  buckets  at  $1.50 6.00 

1  man  laying  pipe  at  $2 2.00 

1  pipelayer's  helper  at  $1.50 1.50 

Total     $26.75 

This  gang  completed  from  46  to  54  ft.  of  sewer  per  day;  this 
gives  a  labor  cost  of  58.2  cts.  to  49.5  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer. 

The  derrick  used  on  this  work  was  a  No.  1  Parker  derrick  made 
by  the  Parker  Hoist  &  Machine  Co.,  Chicago,  111.  Regarding  the 
service  of  this  derrick  the  contractor,  Mr.  D.  J.  Shafer,  Big  Rapids, 
Mich.,  says: 

"In  speaking  of  the  derrick  I  can  say  that  it  reduced  the  cost 
of  my  ditch  from  78  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  to  59  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  As  soon 
as  I  put  the  derrick  on  the  job  I  cut  my  crew  from  26  and  28  men 
down  to  16  men  and  dug  more  trench  with  much  more  ease  than  I 
did  with  the  28  men.  The  buckets  held  about  1/6  cu.  yd.  and 
with  common  work  and  4  men  filling  buckets,  1  man  dumping 
buckets,  1  man  on  the  machine,  with  1  man  and  horse,  would 
handle  61  to  68  buckets  of  dirt  every  hour  for  10  hours 
each  day.  In  regard  to  moving  the  derrick,  will  say  it  never 
took  us  over  7  mins.  to  pull  up  stakes,  move  ahead  16  to  32  ft.  and 
stake  down  and  ready  to  lift  dirt  from  the  ditch.  We  moved  the 
derrick  two  and  three  times  a  day." 

Sizes  and  Prices  of  Sewer  Pipe.— The  manufacturers  of  vitrified 
sewer  pipe  east  of  the  Illinois-Indiana  line  adopted,  December  19, 
1901,  the  standard  weights  and  list  prices  given  in  Tables  I,  II 
and  III.  The  western  manufacturers  use  weights  and  list  prices 
shown  in  Table  IV. 

On  the  Pacific  Coast  and  in  parts  of  the  Northwest  and  South- 
west some  strictly  local  lists  are  used  occasionally. 

The  standard  length  is  2  ft.  for  pipes  up  to  and  including  24-in. 
pipe.  The  standard  length  is  2%  ft.  for  27-in.  to  36-in.  pipe.  The 
size  of  the  pipe  is  designated  by  its  inside  diameter.  It  will  be 
noted  that  the  list  prices  vary  almost  exactly  with  the  weight  of 
the  pipe.  Up  to  18  diam.  the  Western  price  list  follows  closely  the 
formula  :  List  price  =  0.4d2  +  15. 


818 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


TABLE  I. — PRICES  AND  WEIGHTS  OF  STANDARD  SEWER  PIPE. 


Size,    inches.                         2  &  3.       4. 

5.            6. 

8.            9. 

Straight  pipe    per  foot  $0.16     $0.20 

$0.25      $0.30 

$0.50      $0.60 

Elbows  and   curves,    each..    0.50       0.65 

0.85        1.10 

2.00        2.40 

Ys  and   Ts,   inlets   smaller 

than    15    ins      each  0.72       0.90 

1.13       1.35 

2.25        2.76 

Traps     each    1.50       2.00 

2.50       3.50 

6.50       7.50 

Weight,  per  ft.,  Ibs  7            9 

12           15 

23           28 

Size,  inches.                           10.         12. 

15.          18. 

20.          21. 

Straight   pipe,    per   foot  $0.75     $1.00 
Elbows  and  curves,    each..    3.00       4.00 

$1.35     $1.70 
5.40        6.80 

$2.25     $2.50 
9.00     10.00 

Ys    or    Ts,     inlets    smaller 

than    15    ins      each  3.40       4.50 

6.10       7.65 

10.13      11.25 

Traps     each                                  9  00     15  00 

22  00        .... 

Weight    per  ft     Ibs    35           43 

60           85 

100         120 

Size,   inches.                            22.         24. 

27.          30. 

33.          36. 

Straight  pipe   per  foot   ...   $275     $325 

$4.25   •  $5.50 

$6.25      $7  00 

Elbows   and  curves,    each..  11.  00     13.00 

20.00     27.50 

30.00     32.50 

Ys    or     Ts,     inlets     smaller 

than   15  ins     each      .    .  .    12.38     14.63 

21.25      27.50 

31  25     35  00 

Weight,  per  ft.,  Ibs  130         140 

224        252 

310        350 

TABLE  II.  —  DIMENSIONS  OP 

SEWER  PIPE. 

Standard  Pipe. 

Size  of             Thick-               Depth  of 

Cement 

Weight 

Pipe.                 ness.                  Socket. 

Space. 

per  ft. 

in.                    in.                          in. 

in. 

Ibs. 

2                      7/16                      IMs 

14 

6 

3                       Ms                            1  % 

i^ 

7 

4                        %                             1  % 

&L 

9 

5                       %                            1% 

% 

12 

6                       %                            1% 

% 

15 

8                       %                            2 

% 

23 

9                       13/16                     2 

% 

28 

10                       %                            2V8 

&L 

33 

12                     1                                2% 

Mi 

45 

15                     1%                            2  ya 

% 

65 

18                    1%                            2% 

Mi 

75 

2\>                    1  %                            3 

M« 

95 

21                     iya                            3 

Mi 

110 

22                    1%                            3 

Mi 

125 

24                     1%                            3% 

Mi 

145 

Special  Deep  Socket 

Pipe. 

Size  of            Thick-              Depth  of 

Cement 

Weight 

Pipe.                ness.                 Socket. 

Space. 

per  ft. 

in.                    in.                          in. 

in. 

Ibs. 

4                      %                           2 

Ms 

10 

5                       %                            2  Mi 

% 

13 

6                %                    2y2 

% 

17 

8                       %                            2  % 

% 

25 

10                       %                            2% 

% 

35 

12                    1                                3 

% 

48 

15                    1%                            3 

% 

70 

18                    1%                            3% 

% 

80 

20                    1%                            8% 

% 

100 

24                    1%                            4 

% 

150 

SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  813 

TABLE  III.  —  DIMENSIONS  OF  DOUBLE  STRENGTH  SEWER  PIPE. 

Standard  Socket. 

Size  of             Thick-               Depth  of               Cement  Weight 

Pipe.                 ness.                  Socket.                  Space.  per  ft. 

in.                    in.                           in.                           in.  Ibs. 

15                    1%                           2%                         ya  80 

18                     1%                            2y2                          ya  100 

20  •      1%                            2%                          ya  125 

21  1%                            3                              ya  138 

22  1%                            3                              Va  155 
24                     2                                3%                          y2  200 
27                     2^4                            4                              %  260 
30                    21/2                            4                              %  300 
33                     2%                            5                            1%  340 
36                     2%      .                      5                            1%  380 

TABLE  IV.  —  WESTERN  PRICE  LIST  OF  STANDARD  VITRIFIED  PIPE. 


H 

~3  $0.15  |0.50  |0.60  ?1-70      $0.90 

4  .20  .60  .80  2.10        1.20 

5  .25  .75  1.00  2.50        1.50 

6  .30  1.00  1.20  2.90        1.80 

7  .35  1.25  1.40  3.50        2.10 

8  .45  1.65  1.80  4.50        2.70 

9  .50  1.75  2.00  5.00        3.00 
10  .60  2.10  2.40  6.00  •     3.60 
12  .75  2.75  3.00  8.50        4.50 
15  1.00  3.75  4.00  ........ 

18  1.50  4.75  6.00  ........ 

20  1.75  5.75  7.00  ........ 

21  2.00  6.75  8.00  ........ 

24  2.50  8.00  10.00  ........ 

27  3.25  16.25  16.25  ........ 

30  4.00  20.00  20.00 

33  5.00      25.00      25.00        ........ 

36  6.00      30.00      30.00        ____        ;.  .  . 

Sizes  3-in.  to  6-in.,  inclusive,  in  2-ft.  lengths. 

Sizes  8-in.  to  18-in.,   inclusive,  in  2%  -ft.   lengths. 

Sizes  27-in.  to  36-in.,  inclusive,  in  3-ft.  lengths. 

*Both   P   Traps   and   Running   Traps   are   made  with  or   without 
hand  holes. 

tDouble  Branches,  both  T  and  Y  above  12-in.  marde  only  to  order. 

Branches,    Increasers,    Decreasers,    Slants,    27    to    36-in.   are   3    ft. 
tong. 

Large    discounts    from    these    prices    are    given.       The    present 
(August,  1909)   discount  for  Eastern  Pennsylvania  is  as  follows: 

Standard   Pipe  —  Per  cent  off. 

3-in.    to    24-in.,    inc  .......................      79 

27-in.     and     30-in  .........................      71 

33-in.     and     36-in  .........................      66 

Double    Strength  — 

15-in  ...................................      74 

18-in  ...................................      73 

20-in.    to    24-in  ............................      72 

27-in.     and     30-in  ......  .  .........  •  .........      63 

33-in.     and     36-in  .........................      58 


820  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

No.   2  Pipe — 

3-in.    to    24-in.,    inc 81 

27-in.    and    30-in 76 

33-in.     and     36-in 71 

All  pipe  and  branches  in  2  y2  ft.  or  3  ft.  lengths  to  take  2  per  cent 
less  discount  than  above,  except  27  in.  and  over.  • 

Deep  and  Wide  Sockets  on  Standard  Pipe  4-in.  to  24-in.,  inclusive, 
2  per  cent  less  than  schedule  discount.  No  extra  charge  is  made 
for  Deep  and  Wide  Sockets  on  Double  Strength  Pipe  15-in.  to  24-in. 
inclusive.  Sizes  27-in.  to  36-in.,  inclusive,  are  made  only  in  Deep 
and  Wide  and  no  extra  charge  is  made  for  same. 

On  First  Quality  Pipe,  1  per  cent  less  discount  than  the  above 
for  allowing  breakage  and  inspection  at  railroad  point  of  delivery. 

Freight  allowed  on  car  lots  to  points  where  the  rate  on  Sewer 
Pipe  from  Akron,  Ohio,  is  more  than  14  cts.  and  does  not  exceed 
16  cts.  per  cwt. 

Terms:  30  days  or  2  per  cent  off  net  bills,  after  all  deductions 
have  been  made,  for  cash  in  1.5  days  from  date  of  shipment.  Break- 
age (if  any)  in  transit,  at  risk  of  purchaser.  (Patton  Clay  Mfg. 
Co.,  Patton,  Pa.) 

Discounts  from  Western  List,  St.  Louis,  delivery  (Evens  &  How- 
ard Fire  Brick  Co.,  St.  Louis),  August,  1909,  are:  . 

Standard  Pipe —  Per-cent. 

3-in    to       6-in 77  Ms 

8-in.     to    12-in 75 

15-in.    and    18-in 70 

20-in.    to    24-in 65 

27-in.    to    30-in 62^ 

33-in.    to    36-in 60 

Double  Strength — 

12-in 70 

15-in.    and    18-in 65 

20-in.    to    24-in 60 

27-in.    and    30-in 5714 

33-in.     to    36-in 55 

Cement  Required  for  Sewer  Pipe  Joints.— There  are  two  kinds 
of  sewer  pipe:  (1)  The  standard  pipe  with  shallow  joints;  and 
(2)  the  special  deep-socket  pipe  with  wide  and  deep  joints.  The 
dimensions  of  these  two  kinds  of  joints  are  given  in  Tables  II  and 
III.  Unless  otherwise  specified,  the  standard  pipe  with  shallow 
joints  is  used ;  but  rr>Qny  engineers  prefer  the  deep-socket  pipe,  and, 
specify  it. 

If  the  mortar  is  tilled  in  the  pipe  joint  and  cut  off  vertically, 
•flush  with  the  face  of  the  bell,  the  joint  is  called  a  "flush  joint."  If 
the  mortar  is  also  plastered  on  the  outside,  and  beveled  on  a  1  to  1 
slope  from  the  outer  edge  of  the  bell  to  the  body  of  the  entering 
pipe,  the  joint  is  called  an  "overfilled  joint"  or  a  "beveled  joint." 
The  amount  of  mortar  required  for  each  of  these  kinds  of  joints  is 
given  in  Tables  V  and  VI.  I  have  made  no  allowance  for  the  space 
in  the  joint  occupied  by  gasket  or  yarn.  For  discussion  of  the 
amount  of  cement  per  cubic  yard  of  mortar  see  page  538. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  821 

TABLE  V. — CEMENT  REQUIRED  TO  LAY  100  FT.  OF  STANDARD  SEWER 

PIPE. 

(2-ft.  Lengths.) 

Size  of  pipe,  ins. ...        4.         6.         8.       10.      12.      15.      18.      20.      24. 
Cu.  yds.  mortar  :* 

Flush     joints 009    .013    .014    .018    .025    .040    .050    .055    .066 

Overfilled  joints ..  .020  .036  .058  .072  .087  .116  .160  .260  .310 
Bbls.  cement  (1  to 

Flush^joSits .  .       .    .036    .052    .056    .072    .100    .160    .200    .220    .260 
Overfilled -joints.  .    .080    .144    .232    .288    .348    .464    .640     1.04    1.24 
Bbls.    cement    (1    to 

Flush^jofnts'.  .      .    .027    .039    .042    .054    .075    .120    .150    .165    .195 
Overfilled  joints..   .060    .108    .174    .216    .261    .348    .480    .780    .930 

TABLE  VI. — CEMENT  REQUIRED   TO   LAY   100   FT.   OF    SPECIAL  DEEP 

SOCKET  PIPE. 
(2-ft.  Lengths.) 

Size  of  pipe,  ins. ...  4.  6.  8.  10.  12.  15.  18.  20.  24. 
Cu.  yds.  mortar:* 

Flush    joints 035    .050    .060    .075    .090    .130    .145    .170    .260 

Overfilled  joints..  .065  .100  .140  .170  .200  .300  .340  .440  .600 
Bbls.  cement  (1  to 

1  mortar)  : 

Flush    joints 140    .200    .240    .300    .360    .520    .580    .680    1.04 

Overfilled  joints..  .260  .400  .560  .680  .800  1.20  1.36  1.76  2.40 
Bbls.  cement  (1  to 

2  mortar)  : 

Flush    joints 105    .150    .180    .225    .270    .390    .435    .510    .780 

Overfilled  joints..   .195    .300    .420    .510    .600    .900    1.02    1.32    1.80 

*The  number  of  barrels  of  cement  required  to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of 
mortar  is  given  on  page  538.  I  have  assumed  4  bbls.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
1  to  1  mortar,  and  3  bbls.  per  cu.  yd.  for  1  to  2  mortar. 

To  calculate  the  cost  of  cement  per  lineal  foot  of  pipe  line  mul- 
tiply the  fraction  of  a  barrel  of  cement  .(given  in  Tables  V  and  VI) 
by  the  prices  of  cement  in  dollars  per  barrel.  Thus,  if  cement  is  $2 
per  bbl.,  and  the  mortar  is  mixed  1  part  cement  to  1  part  sand,  and 
deep-socket  pipe  is  to  be  used  with  overfilled  joints,  we  find,  from 
Table  VI,  that  a  6-in.  pipe  requires  0.4  bbl.  cement,  multiplying 
this  0.4  by  2,  gives  0.8  ct.  per  lin.  ft.  as  the  cost  of  cement,  when 
cement  is  $2  per  bbl.  Under  these  same  conditions  the  cost  of 
cement  per  lin.  ft.,  for  different  sizes  of  pipe,  is  as  follows : 

Size   of  pipe,    ins 4         6         8      10      12      15      18      20      24 

Cement,   per   ft,    cts 0.5     0.8     1.1     1.4     1.6     2.4     2.7     3.5     4.8 

Cost  of  Hauling  Sewer  Pipe. — The  weight  of  sewer  pipe  is  given 
in  Table  I,  and  if  2  tons  (4,000  Ibs.)  are  hauled  per  wagon  load,  a 
wagon  will  carry  the  following  amounts  of  pipe  at  the  costs  given : 

Size  of  pipe,  ins 4  6  8  10  12  15  18  20  24 

Lin.  ft.  per  wagon..  444  260  174  114  92  66  46  40  28 
Cost  of  hauling,  cts. 

per  lin.  ft,  per  mile  0.10     0.15     0.25     0.40     0.5     0.7     1.0     1.1     1.6 

The  cost  of  hauling  is  based  upon  wages  of  $3.50  a  day  for  team 
and  driver,  and  16  miles  traveled  per  day.  It  is  assumed  that 
enough  men  are  provided  at  both  ends  of  the  haul  to  load  and 
unload  the  wagon  rapidly  enough  to  leave  the  team  time  to  cover 
its  16  miles,  or  that  extra  wagons  are  provided  for  each  team.  The 


822        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

cost  of  hauling  12-in.  pipe,  it  will  be  seen,  is  %-ct.  per  lin.  ft.  per 
mile.  This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  loading  and  unloading  the 
pipe,  which  is  practically  as  much  more  as  the  cost  of  hauling  it 
one  mile.  Thus  for  12-in.  pipe,  the  cost  of  loading  and  unloading  is 
%-ct.  per  lin.  ft.,  and  to  this  must  be  added  the  cost  of  hauling  at 
the  rate  of  %-ct.  per  lin.  ft.  per  mile  of  distance  from  the  freight 
yard  to  the  sewer.  In  other  words,  to  calculate  the  cost  of  loading 
and  hauling  pipe,  determine  the  actual  number  of  miles  from  the 
freight  yard  to  the  sewer  and  add  1  mile  (to  cover  the  cost  of  load- 
ing and  unloading),  then  multiply  by  the  cost  of  hauling  given  in 
the  table.  For  example,  if  the  actual  haul  is  1%  miles,  then,  by 
the  rule,  add  1  mile,  which  makes  2^  miles.  If  the  pipe  is  10-in. 
pipe,  the  table  gives  us  0.4  ct.  per  ft.  per  mile,  which  multiplied  by 
the  2%  miles  gives  1  ct.  per  ft. 

Cost  of  Laying  Sewer  Pipe. — This  will  depend  largely  upon 
whether  each  pipe  layer  is  provided  with  one  or  with  two  helpers 
to  mix  mortar  and  supply  materials.  As  will  be  seen  from  cases 
subsequently  given,  two  helpers  to  each  pipe  layer  do  not  ordinarily 
increase  the  output  sufficiently  to  justify  the  extra  cost. 

Pipe  laid  in  a  trench  dug  in  rock,  or  in  quicksand,  usually  costs 
twice  as  much  for  the  labor  of  laying  as  in  ordinary  earth.  When 
a  pipe  layer  receives  $2.25  and  his  helper  receives  $1.75  a  day,  the 
following  costs  per  lineal  foot  are  easily  attainable  under  good 
management,  and  where  no  rock  or  quicksand  are  encountered : 

Size    of   pipe,    ins 46        8     10       12     18       20     24        30     36 

Cts.    per   lin.   ft 1     1%   2       2y2      3       Sy2     4       4y2      5       6 

As  will  be  seen  from  records  given  later  on,  the  costs  of  pipe 
laying  are  frequently  two  or  three  times  the  above  figures,  but  any 
contractor  who  finds  his  costs  running  higher  than  the  above,  had 
better  investigate  his  management.  By  giving  the  men  a  bonus  for 
every  foot  laid  in  excess  of  a  given  number  of  feet  laid  each  day 
the  costs  of  pipe  laying  may  be  reduced  considerably  below  the 
above  given  figures.  Of  course  the  cost  of  trenching  and  backfilling 
is  not  included  in  the  above  costs. 

Diagram  Giving  Contract  Prices  of  Sewers. — The  diagram,  Fig.  2, 
is  one  that  I  have  prepared  from  data  given  by  Mr.  G.  M.  Warren, 
based  upon  contract  prices  for  about  60  miles  of  sewer  work  in 
Newton,  Mass.,  and  covering  a  period  of  four  years,  1891-1895. 
The  wages  of  common  laborers  were  $1.50  for  10  hrs. 

The  prices  for  trenching  include  excavating,  sheeting  and  back- 
filling in  earth ;  and  do  not  relate  to  work  in  rock  or  quicksand. 

The  price  of  1  ct.  per  inch  of  diameter  of  pipe  per  lin.  ft.  laid, 
includes  hauling  of  pipe,  labor  of  laying,  and  cement  for  joints. 

The  price  of  pipe  is  70%  off  the  list  price  given  in  Table  I,  plus 
20%  to  cover  the  cost  of  branches  which  are  placed  25  ft.  apart. 
For  example,  the  list  price  of  12-in.  pipe  is  $1.00  ;  and  with  70% 
discount  the  price  becomes  30  cts.  Now,  20%  of  30  cts.  is  6  cts., 
which  approximately  covers  the  extra  cost  of  branches  spaced  25  ft. 
apart,  so  that  the  total  cost  of  the  pipe  for  a  12-in.  pipe  line  is 
30  cts.  plus  6  cts.,  or  36  cts.  To  this  is  added  12  cts.  (1  ct.  for 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


c 

Trend 
Trench 

n 
tt 

Lay  if 
of  Dk 

Pipe  L 
Gos-h 

ontract 
for 
Pipe      Se 
res  for&'fv 

ig  Pipe,  err 
•xmeter  per 

rf  70%  off 
20%iv  co\ 
of  Branc/n 

Kn< 
wer 
?4"  » 

^;^ 
C 
/ 
/ 

^/ 
///7£ 

ZA5/- 

fer 
?s. 

:es 
s. 
t    4 

0.50, 
7.75 
.^ 
.25 
oer, 
a/  F 

Prlc 
/ 

oei 
to 

70 

e, 

w 

> 

'CL 

h 
/-. 

t 

'.y< 

t 

? 
1. 

i 
1 

y 

4.25 

y 

/ 

4.00 

I 

/ 

y 

375 

350 

y^- 

\ 

/ 

3.25  $ 

u. 
3.00 

2.75  g 

c 

/ 

/ 

s 

/ 

- 

^y 

/ 

X- 

/ 

^L 

-7 

^ 

J 

- 

/ 

= 

- 

•/- 

5 

^ 

'  / 

2.50  J 

2.25  | 

~Vj 

—  2 

—f 

y1- 

^-j 

^  — 

/- 

yt- 

t-f 

^xi 

^ 

£ 

-^ 

/- 

y 

f—i 

-V 

-^ 

IE 

/'^V 

J 

^~ 

J 

A 

/f 

2 

*- 

-/ 

1 

^ 

-7 

V- 

-7 

^ 

1.75  ^ 
1.50 
1.25 
1.00 
0.75 
0.50 

3. 

V 

?(^- 

-\>c 

-X 

—  ^ 

^ 

*-p 

^v 

> 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

/ 

_^  £_ 

—  ^ 

<*-^ 

-^ 

/—j 

^  

x^- 

^-t 

r 

£f 

sA 

[7, 

/ 

/ 

/ 

-^ 

**- 

-7 

*-? 

'  — 

^ 

/ 

K 

V 

^- 

^ 

^ 

5                 10                15              20              25 
Depth        in         Feet. 

Fig.  2.     Contract  Prices  of  Pipe  Sewen 

824  HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

each  12  ins.  of  diameter)  to  cover  the  price  af  "laying,"  making 
a  total  of  48  cts.,  exclusive  of  trenching.  The  first  8  ft.  in  depth 
of  trench  are  dug  at  a  price  of  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  next  6  ft. 
below  are  dug  at  a  price  of  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  the  price  for 
each  succeeding  6-ft.  lift  is  25  cts.  higher  per  cu.  yd.  than  the  pre- 
ceding lift.  This  is  based  upon  the  assumption  that  trench  machines 
are  not  used,  and  that  the  earth  is  raised  in  6-ft.  lifts. 

To  show  how  to  use  the  diagram,  an  example  will  serve.  Sup- 
pose it  is  desired  to  know  the  contract  price  for  a  12-in.  sewer  in 
a  trench  15  ft.  deep.  Start  at  the  bottom  of  the  diagram  on  the 
line  marked  15,  and  follow  the  line  up  until  it  meets  the  sloping 
line  marked  12".  Then  starting  from  this  intersection,  follow  the 
straight  line  across  the  page  to  the  right  until  the  side  of  the  dia- 
gram is  reached,  when  it  will  be  seen  that  the  intersection  is  just 
one  division  above  $1.50  ;  and,  as  each  division  is  equal  to  5  cts., 
the  price  is  $1.55  for  a  12-in.  pipe  in  a  15-ft.  trench.  This  price 
includes  contractor's  profits. 

Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers  at  Atlantic,  la  — In  Engineering-Contracting, 
May  15,  1907,  appeared  the  first  of  a  series  of  articles  on  the  cost 
of  pipe  sewers,  the  data  for  which  were  gathered  by  Mr.  M.  A.  Hall, 
the  engineer  in  charge  of  the  work.  Mr.  Hall  had  the  inspectors 
report  daily  the  organization  of  the  forces  working  under  the  vari- 
ous contractors,  and  the  amount  of  work  accomplished.  With  the 
exception  of  the  item  of  cement  used  in  filling  the  pipe  joints,  it  is 
believed  that  these  records  of  cost  are  very  reliable.  The  first  of 
this  series  of  articles  related  to  sewer  work  at  Atlantic,  Iowa.  The 
data,  as  originally  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  were  so 
voluminous  that  I  have  made  a  great  condensation,  but  I  believe 
that,  in  the  condensed  form  here  given,  the  costs  are  more  avail- 
able for  use,  and  that  nothing  of  great  importance  has  been  omitted. 

The  excavation  was,  for  the  most  part,  a  clay  not  difficult  to 
spade,  and  requiring  little  or  no  bracing  and  practically  no  pump- 
ing. The  "bottom  men"  shoveled  the  earth  out  of  the  trench  and 
the  "top  men"  shoveled  as  much  of  it  back  from  the  edge  as  was 
necessary.  The  backfilling  was  done,  for  the  most  part,  by  a  team 
and  drag  scraper,  and  there  was  no  ramming. 

Table  VII  gives  the  costs  at  Atlantic,  la.  To  the  labor  costs, 
Mr.  Hall  thinks  10%  should  be  added  for  overhead  charges  and  in- 
cidentals, to  cover  office  expenses,  hauling  tools,  moving  materials 
from  place  to .  place  so  as  to  use  up  odds  and  ends,  etc. 

The  contractor  was  his  own  foreman  and  handled  his  men  well. 
The  weather  was  good,  the  work  being  done  between  April  and 
October,  1904.  A  10-hr,  day  was  worked.  Natural  cement  (Louis- 
ville) was  used. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  excavation  for  the  20-in.  sewer  cost  less 
not  only  per  lin.  ft.  but  per  cu.  yd.  than  for  any  of  the  others.  This 
is  due  largely  to  the  fact  that  the  trench  was  shallow,  also  to  the 
fact  that  the  earth  was  a  heavy,  black  soil,  very  easily  spaded. 

On  a  short  job  of  15 -in.  sewer,  360  ft.  long,  where  the  trench  was 
24  ins.  wide  and  12.6  ft.  deep,  in  clay  that  was  good  spading,  the 
cost  was  as  follows  for  excavation : 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


825 


Per  lin.  ft. 

Bottom  men    $0.299 

Top   men    0.104 

Scaffold   men    0.045 

Bracing   men    0.005 


.  Total     $0.453 

This  is  equivalent  to  34.8  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
The  backfilling  cost  2.8  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  additional. 
The  costs  in  Table  VII  are  averages  of  several  jobs.     The  mini- 
mum costs  of  pipe  laying  on  the  best  of  these  jobs  were  as  follows 
per  lineal  foot: 

8-in.  10-in.          12-in.          15-in. 

Pipe  layers,  at  22%   cts $0.009          $0.006          $0.011          $0.015 

Helpers,   at  17  %    cts 


0.007 


0.007 


0.008 


0.009 


Total     $0.016          $0.013          $0.019          $0.024 

By  dividing  the  pipe  layers'  hourly  wage  (22%  cts.)  by  the  costs 
per  lineal  foot,  we  find  the  total  number  of  feet  laid  per  hour  per 
pipe  layer;  thus,  22  %-^  0.9  =  25  ft.  of  8-in.  pipe  laid  per  hr.  per 
pipe  layer,  or  250  ft.  per  10-hr,  day.  In  this  manner  the  following 
table  was  calculated : 

8-in.  pipe,  250  ft.  per  day  per  pipe  layer 
10-in.  pipe,  375  ft.  per  day  per  pipe  layer 
12-in.  pipe,  205  ft.  per  day  per  pipe  layer 
15-in.  pipe,  150  ft.  per  day  per  pipe  layer 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  10-in.  pipe  was  laid  with  abnormal  ra- 
pidity in  this  particular  case.  On  another  job,  10-in.  pipe  was  laid 
at  the  rate  of  250  ft.  per  day. 

TABLE  VII. — COST  OF   PIPE   SEWERS,  ATLANTIC,  IOWA. 
Wage  per  hr., 
cts. 

Pipe,    vitrified 

Hauling,     team    and 

driver     '30 

Hauling,    man    help- 
ing      17Y2 

Cement    and    sand.  .    .  . 

Pipe   layers    22% 

Pipe  layers'  helpers.    17% 
Trenching : 

Bottom   men    ....    17% 

Top    men    17% 

Scaffolding    men..    17% 

Bracing  men    ....    17% 
Backfilling : 

Men     shoveling...    17% 

Team    on    scraper.   30 

Man  hold,   scraper  17% 

Waterboy 10 

Foreman   30 


8-in. 
;0.135 

10-in. 
$0.200 

12-in. 

$0.250 

15-in. 
$0.330 

18-in. 
$0.450 

20-in. 
$0.550 

0.006 

0.003 

0.010 

0.006 

0.005 

0.023 

0.003 
0.006 
0.012 
0.010 

0.001 
0.006 
0.014 
0.014 

0.004 
0.005 
0.015 
0.010 

0.002 
0.010 
0.015 
0.010 

0.001 
0.015 
0.030 
0.021 

0.011 
0.010 
0.018 
0.015 

0.150 
0.013 

0.130 
0.027 
0.002 
0.002 

0.153 
0.014 
0.001 
0.002 

0.125 
0.023 
0.011 
0.001 

0.188 
0.059 
0.012 
0.012 

0.078 
0.004 

0.013 
0.013 
0.008 
0.005 
0.015 

0.010 
0.008 
0.005 
0.006 
0.022 

0.008 
0.010 
0.006 
0.005 
0.018 

0.010 
0.009 
0.005 
0.005 
0.022 

0.035 
0.017 
0.010 
0.011 
0.046 

0.029 
0.005 
0.003 
0.008 
0.022 

Grand  total    

Total    length    sewer,    ft. . . 

Depth  of  trench,  f  t. 

Width  of  trench,   ins 

Cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft 

Trenching,  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
Backfill,  cts.  per  cu.  yd. . 
Ft.  of  pipe  per  bbl.  cement 


$0.389  $0.450  $0.517  $0.584  $0.912  $0.776 

2,850  2,560  3,650  1,125  1,850  2,550 

10.0  8.2  9.3  9.2  9.6  5.4 

26  30  30  34  35  36 

0.82  0.77  0.87  0.95  1.06  0.6 

21.0  22.0  19.0  16.8  27.2  13.7 

4.0  3.2  2.8  2.7  6.2  6.1 

275  425  260  160  100  170 


826        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers  at  Centerville,  Iowa. —  In  Engineering-Con- 
tracting, June  12,  Aug.  21,  Sept.  18  and  Oct.  16,  1907,  voluminous 
tables  were  published  giving  the  cost  of  pipe  sewers  at  Centerville, 
Iowa,  the  data  for  which  were  gathered  by  Mr.  M.  A.  Hall.  The 
work  was  done  by  contract  on  161  different  jobs,  covering  more 
than  ten  miles  of  sewer.  The  average  cost  of  pipe  laying,  not  in- 
cluding trenching,  was  as  follows: 

8-in.  pipe,   5.0  cts.  per  lin.  ft.    (average  of  83  jobs). 

10-in.   pipe,   7.3   cts.   per  lin.   ft.    (average  of   27   jobs). 

12-in.  pipe,   7.5   cts.   per  lin.   ft.    (average  of   41   jobs). 

15-in.  pipe,  6.7  cts.  per  lin.   ft.    (average  of  10  jobs). 

Apparently  none  of  this  work  was  as  well  handled  as  that  at 
Atlantic,  Iowa,  the  data  for  which  have  been  previously  given. 
Average  costs  on  work  so  simple  as  pipe  laying,  and  where  no  plant 
Is  required,  often  indicate  nothing  but  poor  management  or  lazi- 
ness. For  this  reason  the  following  minimum  costs  of  work  done  at 
Centerville  are  of  more  value,  as  they  show  what  can  readily  be 
accomplished : 

8-in.  10-in.  12-in.  15-in. 

Pipe  layers,  at  30  cts $0.010         $0.017         $0.019         $0.016 

Helpers,   at  17y2    cts 0.012  0.018  0.011  0.020 

Total    $0.022          $0.035          $0.030          $0.036 

Even  these  minimum  costs  at  Centerville  are  greater  than  the 
average  costs  of  pipe  laying  given  above  for  the  work  at  Atlantic, 
Iowa.  At  Atlantic  the  contractor  usually  had  only  one  helper  to 
each  pipe  layer,  whereas  on  this  work  at  Centerville  there  were 
usually  two  helpers  to  each  pipe  layer.  The  wages  of  the  pipe 
layers  at  Centerville  were  nearly  40%  higher  than  at  Atlantic,  but 
the  helpers  received  the  same  wages  in  both  places. 

Based  upon  the  above  table  of  minimum  cost,  the  following  is  the 
number  of  lineal  feet  laid  per  10-hr,  day  by  a  pipe  layer: 

8-in.  pipe,  300  lin.  ft.  per  pipe  layer. 
10-in.  pipe,  177  lin.  ft.  per  pipe  layer. 
12-in.  pipe,  158  lin.  ft.  per  pipe  layer. 
15-in.  pipe,  188  lin.  ft.  per  pipe  layer. 

A  considerable  part  (15%)  of  the  work  done  at  Centerville  in- 
volved trenching  in  hardpan  and  hard  shale,  and  there  was  a  little 
quicksand  and  some  wet  weather  that  caused  the  banks  to  cave. 
All  these  increased  not  only  the  cost  of  excavating,  but  also  the 
cost  of  pipe  laying.  On  the  various  jobs  where  the  excavation  was 
entirely  in  shale  and  hardpan,  the  cost  of  laying  was  50%  more 
than  the  average  costs  above  given;  so  that  for  10  and  12-in.  pipe 
the  cost  of  pipe  laying  was  about  11  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

Where  quicksand,  or  a  trench  soaked  from  rain,  was  encoun- 
tered the  cost  of  pipe  laying  was  similarly  increased,  that  is  about 
50%  above  the  average  cost. 

The  trenching  averaged  a  cost  of  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  excava- 
tion and  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  backfilling,  except  in  shale  and  hard- 
pan,  where  the  cost  was  about  70  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  excavation. 
About  15%  of  the  excavation  was  shale  that  could  be  picked  and 
hardpan.  The  rest  was  mostly  clay  and  gumbo,  requiring  prac- 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  827 

tically  no  sheeting.  The  trenches  averaged  about  9  ft.  deep.  The 
width  of  the  trenches  was  the  same  as  at  Atlantic,  above  given. 
Wages  averaged  18  cts.  per  hr.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  trenching 
at  Centerville  cost  practically  twice  as  much  per  cubic  yard  as  at 
Atlantic.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  pipe  laying  also  cost  twice 
as  much,  it  would  seem  that  the  workmen  at  Centerville  were 
about  half  as  efficient  as  those  under  the  contractor  at  Atlantic. 

Foreman's  and  waterboy's  wages  are  not  included  in  the  above 
given  costs  for  labor  of  trenching  and  pipe  laying.  Foreman  re- 
ceived 35  cts.  per  hr.,  and  Waterboys  12%  cts.  per  hr.  Their  com- 
bined wages  amounted  to  about  10%  of  the  labor  cost  of  trenching, 
backfilling  and  pipe  laying.  This  shows  that  there  were  one  fore- 
man and  one  waterboy  to  25  workmen. 

Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers  at  Laurel,  Miss. —  In  Engineering-Contracting, 
July  24,  1907,  the  cost  of  3  miles  of  pipe  sewers  on  each  of  43  sec- 
tions was  given.  The  data  were  secured  by  Mr.  M.  A.  Hall  in  the 
manner  previously  described  under  the  paragraph  relating  to  sewer 
work  at  Atlantic,  Iowa. 

Negroes  were  employed  and  the  work  was  done  under  inefficient 
foremen,  except  on  6  of  the  sections.  The  working  day  was  10  to 
11  hrs.  long.  Common  laborers  received  $1.25  to  $1.50  a  day,  and 
foremen  received  $3  to  $4  per  day. 

The  excavation  was  mostly  clay,  and  the  average  cost  of  exca- 
vation was  30%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages  being  assumed  to  average 
12%  cts.  per  hr.  The  backfill  was  largely  done  by  hand,  although 
teams  and  scrapers  were  used  on  many  of  the  sections.  The  back- 
fill averaged  about  6  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  following  were  the  costs 
on  a  few  of  the  sections  that  showed  the  lowest  costs : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Excavation  of  trench  6.3  ft.  deep,  1.62  hrs.,  at  12%  cts 20.2 

Backfill  ditto,  0.3  hr.  man  at  12%  cts.  plus  0.06  hr.  team  and 

driver  at  30  cts 5.6 

Excav.  of  trench  7.6  ft.  deep,  1.80  hrs.,  at  12%  cts 22.5 

Backfill  ditto,  0.24  hr.  man,  at  12%   cts.,  plus  0.04  team  and 

driver,   at   30    cts 7.2 

Excav.  of  trench  7.7  ft.  deep,  2.07  hrs.,  at  12%  cts 26.0 

Backfill  ditto,  0.12  hr.  man,  at  12%  cts.,  plus  0.03  hr.  team, 

and  driver,  at  30   cts 2.4 

The  average  costs  of  pipe  laying  were  as  follows  per  lin.  ft, 
wages  being  assumed  to  be  20  cts.  for  pipe  layers  and  12%  cts.  for 
helpers : 

8-in.       10-in.      12-in.      18-in.      20-in. 

Pipe  layer,  at  20  cts $0.010     $0.012     $0.011     $0.015     $0.012 

Helper,    at    12%    cts 0.013       0.012       0.018       0.026       0.022 

Total  $0.023  $0.024  ?9~029  $(U)41  $0.034 

Number  of  sections 31  3  2  5  2 

There  were,   ordinarily,   two  helpers  to  each  pipe  layer. 

For  comparison  with  the  above  averages,  the  following  minimum 
costs  of  pipe  laying  on  certain  sections  are  given : 

8-in.        10-in.      12-in.      18-in.      20-in. 

Pipelayer,  at  20  cts $0.005     $0.010     $0.009     $0008     $0012 

Helper,  at  12%   cts 0.008       0.012       0.015       0.018       0.022 

Total     $0.013     $0.022     $0.024     $oTo26     $0034 


828  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

That  these  minimum  costs  vary  so  slightly  from  the  average  costs 
on  sections  other  than  for  the  8-in.  pipe  is  due  to  the  fact  that  there 
were  so  few  sections  where  sizes  larger  than  8-in.  were  laid. 

Estimated  Cost  of  Pipe  Sewers.  —  In  Engineering-Contractingt 
April  1,  1908,  the  Table  VII  A  was  published.  The  estimated 
costs  given  in  this  table  are  said  to  be  based  upon  the  actual  costs 
of  51  miles  of  sewers  built  in  five  cities  where  the  physical  condi- 
tions were  similar  to  those  at  Clinton,  Iowa,  as  compiled  by  Mr. 
Charles  P.  Chase,  city  engineer  of  Clinton.  The  table  gives  the 
estimated  cost  per  lin.  ft.,  not  including  the  cost  of  excavation,  nor 
foremanship  and  incidentals. 

I  have  omitted  the  item  of  "foreman"  from  the  above  table. 
Foreman's  salary  usually  amounts  to  5  to  10%  of  the  labor — not  5 
to  10%  of  the  labor  and  materials. 

I  have  also  omitted  an  item  of  "interest  and  incidentals,"  which 
Mr.  Chase  estimates  at  10%  of  the  total  cost  of  labor  and  materials. 
Interest  on  money  invested  is  a  very  small  item  where  the  con- 
tractor receives  monthly  payments,  and  a  percentage  for  "inci- 
dentals" should  apply  only  to  the  labor. 

Mr.  Chase  calls  the  total  of  the  above  items  a  "constant,"  and  to 
this  "constant"  he  adds  the  cost  of  trenching,  which  is  the 
"variable." 

There  is  an  error  in  the  item  of  laying  3  6 -in.  pipe,  as  will  be 
seen  by  comparison  with  the  corresponding  item  for  30-in.  pipe. 
The  item  of  "shipping  loss  and  haul"  appears  to  be  much  over- 
estimated ;  so  also  is  the  item  of  "lights  and  watchman." 

Cost  of  a  Pipe  Sewer  in  Quicksand. — The  following  data  were 
published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  June  3,  1908. 

Wildwood  is  a  new  summer  resort  town,  built  a  few  years  ago 
on  the  southern  end  of  an  island  called  Five  Mile  Beach,  on  the 
New  Jersey  coast.  Prior  to  the  building  of  the  town  the  site  was 
covered  at  high  tide  by  3  ft.  of  water.  The  soil  was  black  mud 
covered  with  thick  meadow  sod,  with,  here  and  there,  piles  of  sand 
which  were  shifted  by  the  tide.  The  first  work  done  was  to  build 
a  bulkhead  and  by  means  of  dredges  to  raise  the  land  above  the 
high  tide.  Then  the  building  of  the  town  and  resorts  began. 

To  serve  the  buildings,  a  system  of  terra  cotta  pipe  sewers  was 
built.  The  trench  for  the  entire  distance,  12  miles,  was  through 
quicksand,  from  which  water  bubbled,  and  known  locally  as  "boil- 
ing sand."  This  makes  both  expensive  and  difficult  work,  adding 
to  the  cost  of  laying  the  pipe,  as  it  is  difficult  to  keep  the  pipes  at 
the  proper  grade  and  in  good  alignment,  and  the  joints  are  hard  to 
caulk,  owing  to  the  water  in  the  ditch. 

The  greatest  cutting  was  6%  ft.  deep  and  the  entire  trench  was 
double  sheeted  throughout,  great  trouble  being  experienced  in  keep- 
ing the  trench  even  partially  dry.  Sumps  or  wells  could  not  be 
made,  as  the  pumps  pulled  out  so  much  sand  under  the  sheeting  as 
to  cause  either  the  ditch  to  fill  or  the  sheeting  to  cave  in. 

The  sheeting  was  put  down  to  a  depth  of  10  ft.  with  a  water 
jet  in  advance  of  the  excavation,  this  being  the  only  way  the  con- 
tractor  could  make  any  headway.  Owing  to  the  numerous  "salt 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


829 


r 


jj  0000000-^lft 

V  t~   W    r-j    iH   T-J    O    O    O    O 

J£        c<5do'do'dddd    'co 
pj         ooocooomoift    I    eo 

2**SiH^OtHO<000  ff^ 

«o        iHodo'ddodd    '   fri 
C        ooo«ooooooio    |o> 

fl  inrHi-HOrHOOOO  O 

N        THoddddddd    'c4 

^,**SSoOrHOOOO      I     ^J 

IM        ddddddddd    '^ 

Cq  OOr-JOOr-jOOOO  «<I 

.     "^        ddddddddd    I  H 
on 

n     S  **^  "J  °.  °.  °.  ^  °.  °.  °.  °.    I   °^ 

a 

£j       .5  OtDCOOlfiOt-OLOjCT 

"     J5  **  in  o  o  o_  o  o  o  o  o    |   t>- 
O 

O     in        eo  o  o  o_  o  o  o  o  o    I   in 

^        S^'^S^'^^-'-'OrHO      |«> 

M       i         e^o  oooo  ooo    |co 

n    2  **  ^  ^  ^  ?  ^  ®.  ®.  ?  ? 

jV  rHOOOOOoOO      | 

^    --    —    . .   —     _    ...  —      i     °* 

13      .  £3      .    ,/   irt 

J  ^ 

•2*     I   ^^ 

fl     rt  Tj       •     Z    O 

;•     3  •  8  S        •    +J    ° 

5:lll«  sl 

Ii!--§is:  - 

S-Sfi^ajg^0        rf 

f^lllllll    S 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


holes"  encountered,  through  which  the  line  at  time  ran,  it  was  nec- 
essary to  make  a  foundation  for  the  manholes  and  pipe.  This  was 
done  by  piling  spaced  7  ft.  apart  and  6  in.  c.  to  c.  On  the  piles 
4x4  yellow  pine,  8  ft.  long,  was  spiked,  and  to  this  was  spiked 
hemlock  planks  2x8 — 12  ft.  long.  The  pipe  was  laid  on  this  and 
the  hole  filled  with  sand  and  salt  hay. 

If  a  manhole  was  located  at  one  of  these  "salt  holes,"  4  piles,  10 
to  15  ft.  long  were  driven  4%  ft.  c.  to  c.  Four  railroad  ties  were 
then  spiked  together  with  two  pieces  of  batten,  and  the  whole  bolted 
securely  to  the  piles.  On  this  foundation  was  placed  a  box  5  ft. 
square  and  10  ins.  deep,  the  bottom  being  covered  with  tongue  and 
grooved  floor  boards,  and  in  some  cases  lined  with  canvas  and  the 
inside  covered  with  coal  tar  pitch.  The  concrete  was  placed  in  the 
box,  the  pipe  line  run  through,  and  the  brick  work  completed. 

As  a  general  rule,  water  was  struck  in  excavating  the  trench 
about  18  ins.  below  the  surface.  The  pipe  laid  was  8  and  12  in. 


"     O9  ¥ 

-    mrr— 

'/"* 

s 

/•* 

I 

\ 

Enq-Contr 


Fig.  3. —  (1)  Centrifugal  Pump;  (2)  Boiler;  (3) 
Piston  Pump;  (4)  Pipe  in  Trench;  (5)  Trench  Be- 
ing Excavated  ;  ( 6 )  Suction  Pipe  ;  ( 7 )  Discharge 
Pipe;  (8)  and  (9)  Steam  Pipes;  (10)  Pipe  to 
Water  Supply. 


terra  cotta,  hence  the  ditch  was  made  only  wide  enough  for  a  man 
to  work  in  it  easily,  this  width  being  2  ft.  for  a  ditch  6  to  7  ft.  in 
depth. 

The  method  of  excavating  was  as  follows:  By  using  the  piston 
pump  the  sheathing  was  put  down  for  a  distance  of  150  ft.  along 
the  trench,  and  a  closure  made  at  each  end.  Then  10  laborers  were 
put  in  the  trench  and  excavation  made  to  the  water  line,  when 
rangers  and  braces  were  set. 

The  piston  pump  was  then  started  pumping  water  into  this  "land 
coffer  dam."  A  centrifugal  pump  was  moved  into  position,  and 
the  discharge  pipe  placed  midway  in  the  last  section,  where  the 
.sewer  pipe  had  already  been  laid.  Thus  the  centrifugal  pump  ex- 
cavated the  material  from  the  forward  section  and  backfilled  the 
last  section  at  the  same  time.  See  Fig.  3. 

When  grade  was  reached,  the  foundation  piles  were  jetted  down 
and  the  cradle  constructed.  The  pipe  was  then  laid,  the  joints  being 
made  with  cement  and  tar.  The  next  section  was  then  done  in  the 
same  manner. 

The  sand  excavated  was  quite  coarse,  and  but  little  agitation  was 
necessary  with  shovels,  in  order  to  allow  the  pump  to  pick  up  the 
sand.  When  the  sand  is  fine  grained,  much  more  water  is  needed, 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  831 

and  likewise  the  sand  must  be  agitated  with  shovels.  With  ex- 
tremely fine  sand,  the  men  must  be  relieved  frequently,  as  the  work 
is  hard,  and,  as  the  pumps  take  up  a  much  smaller  percentage  of 
the  sand,  the  ditch  must  be  kept  with  a  larger  amount  of  water  in 
it,  and  the  men,  being  compelled  to  stand  in  the  water,  feel  the 
effect  of  it  quickly. 

At  times  when  the  contractor  got  as  deep  in  the  trench  as  the 
original  ground  surface,  he  encountered  a  considerable  number  of 
roots  that  had  to  be  cut  out,  but  this  was  seldom  necessary. 

Fig.  3  shows  the  layout  of  the  plant  to  do  the  work  in  the  manner 
described.  In  this  way  an  average  of  300  lin.  ft.  of  trench  was  dug 
and  pipe  laid  per  day,  while  another  contractor  doing  similar  work 
by  another  method  averaged  only  from  35  to  50  ft.  per  day. 

The  cost  of  driving  the  sheeting  and  pulling  it  for  the  300  lin.  ft. 
of  trench  done  per  day  was: 

Boss   timberman $  2.50 

Fireman   on  jet  pump 1.50 

One  man  setting  sheeting 2.00 

Two  helpers,   at   $1.50 3.00 

Three  men  pulling  sheeting,  at  $1.50 4.50 

One  man  carrying  sheeting 1.50 

Two  -men  bracing  trench,  at  $2.00 4.00 

One  man  pumping    1.75 

Coal    and   oil    1.00 

Total .$21.75 

This  gives  a  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  trench  of  7  cts.  for  driving  and 
pulling  sheeting,  and  as  there  was  6,080  lin  ft.  of  sheeting  driven 
and  pulled  a  day,  it  makes  a  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  sheeting  %-ct. 
With  2-in.  sheeting  used,  the  amount  of  timber  was  6,000  ft.  B.  M., 
which  cost  $26  per  M.  This  timber,  being  driven  with  a  water 
jet,  was  used  time  and  time  again.  The  sound  piles,  which  were 
from  10  to  15  ft.  long,  cost  25  cts.  apiece,  and  the  cost  of  driving 
them  was  1.5  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

The  cradle  for  the  pipe  was  built  by  two  men,  each  at  $2  per  day. 
They  built  200  lin.  ft.  per  day,  which  meant  a  cost  per  ft.  of  trench 
of  2  cts.  The  amount  of  lumber  in  200  ft.  of  cradle  was  866  ft. 
B.  M.,  which  meant  a  labor  cost  for  framing  of  about  $5  per  M. 
The  lumber  cost  $26  per  M. 

The  daily  cost  of  digging  the  trench  and  backfilling,  and  of  lay- 
ing the  pipe  was: 

Foreman,    10   hrs $  4.00 

Eight  men  digging,  at  $1.50 12.00 

Two  men  trimming,  at  $1.50 3.00 

One    engineman     3.00 

One  pumper    2.50 

Two  pipemen,  at   $2.00 4.00 

Coal,   at    $5.00   per   ton 1.25 

Rent  of  boiler 2.00 

Rent    of   pumps 2.50 

Rent  of  engine .      2.00 

Two  pipelayers,    at   $2.00 4.00 

Two  pipe  carriers,  at  $1.50 3.00 

One  man  on  mortar  and  jute 1.50 

Total ,.$44.75 


832        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

The  excavation  and  backfilling  done  by  the  pumper  can  be  listed 
as  follows: 

Cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  trench: 

Labor     $0.032 

Coal    0.004 

Plant  rental    0.022 

Total     $0.058 

Each  day  this  plant  excavated  about  200  cu.  yds.,  hence  the  cost 
per  cu.  yd.  was: 

Labor   4.  $0.047 

Coal     0.006 

Plant  rental 0.032 

Total    , $0.085 

This  is  a  very  low  cost  for  excavating  earth  from  a  trench  and 
backfilling  it. 

The  terra  cotta  pipe  cost  16  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  and  the  hauling  of  it 
cost  2  cts. 

The  total  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  pipe  laid  was  as  follows,  exclusive 
of  manholes: 

Foreman     $0.013 

Excavating  and  backfilling  by  hand 0.050 

Excavating  and  backfilling  by  pump : 

Labor     $0.032 

Coal    0.004 

Plant   rental    0.022     0.058 

Driving    sheeting    0.040 

Bracing   trench    0.013 

Pulling  and  carrying  sheeting 0.020 

Piles   in    place 0.105 

-  Cradle,  lumber  and  labor 0.132 

Pipe 0.160 

Hauling  pipe    0.020 

Laying  pipe 0.028 

Materials  for  joints 0.013 

Total     $o!65l 

This  cost  does  not  include  any  allowance  for  general  expense  nor 
for  the  materials  used  in  shoring  the  sides  of  the  trenches.     The 
sheeting  was  used  many  times,  as  driving  the  planks  with  a  water 
jet  did  not  injure  the  planks  or  break  them  up. 
The  cost  of  a  manhole  was  as  follows : 

Cover    and    frame $  9.00 

Bricklayer     200 

Bricks,  1,500,  at  $10  per  M 15  00 

Stone,   %   cu.  yd.,  at  $1.00 75 

Cement,    3   bags,   at   50  cts 150 

Pumping     1.12 

Labor,     excavating 3.18 

Sheeting,   etc.    2.17 

Total    $34.72 

The  cost  of  this  work  in  a  ground  difficult  to  excavate  is  exceed- 
ingly low,  and  can  be  attributed  to  the  methods  used  in  carrying 
on  the  work. 

Mr.  George  L.  Watson,  M.  Can.  Soc.  C.  E.,  was  chief  engineer  of 
the  Wild  wood  Sewer  Co.,  and  designed  the  entire  improvement  made, 
including  the  sewers.  He  afterwards  associated  himself  with  the 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  833 

contractor  for  the  sewers,  Mr.  Alexander  Murdock ;  and,  as  engi- 
neer in  charge,  decided  upon  and  put  into  operation  the  method 
used. 

Cost  of  Two  Pipe  Sewers  and  Manholes  at  Oskaloosa,  la.* — The 
following  cost  data  relate  to  the  construction  of  a  12 -in.  sanitary 
sewer  in  Sixth  avenue,  and  an  8-in.  sewer  in  South  Market  street, 
Oskaloosa,  la. 

The  -Sixth  avenue  sewer  consisted  of  1,004  lin.  ft.  of  12-in.  pipe 
(tile),  five  manholes  and  one  lamphole.  The  work  required  the  ex- 
cavation of  1,063.8  cu.  yds.  of  material,  the  average  depth  being 
11.4  ft.  and  the  maximum  depth  16  ft.  On  this  sewer  there  were 
about  250  ft.  of  trench  in  which  the  depth  was  from  13  to  15  ft. 
This  necessitated  handling  part  of  the  earth  three  times  before  it 
was  removed  from  the  trench,  which  added  considerably  to  the  cost 
of  excavation.  The  cost  of  the  1,004  lin.  ft.  of  12-in.  sewer  was  as 
follows  : 

Cost  of  12-in  Sewer. 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Labor :  Total.         Sewer. 

Trenching    ?    543.90          $0.541 

Sheeting    72.00  .072 

Laying   pipe    46.38  .046 

Backfilling   93.65  .093 

Miscellaneous     expense,     laying 

pavement,  hauling,  etc 45.00  .045 

Total,   labor    $  800.93  $0.797 

Materials : 

Lumber,  for   sheeting $  32.30  $0.032 

Cement  for  joints,  15  sacks.  . .  .  5.40  .005  • 

Sand  for  joints,   30  bu 1.80  .002 

Jute    calking,    50    Ibs 3.50  .003 

Pipe,   958  lin.  ft 249.08  .248 

Specials,  14,  at  $0.72 10.08  .010 

Total,   materials    $    302.16          $0.301 

One  lamp  hole,  13   ft.  deep 4.20  .004 

Five    manholes     274.82  .274 

Grand    total     $1,382.11         $1.377 

In  the  above  work  there  was  980  lin.  ft.  of  trenching,  the  cost 
per  lin.  ft.  being  $0.555.  The  cost  of  sheeting  the  980  lin.  ft.  of 
trench  was: 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Total.         Trench. 

Labor     $   72.00          $0.073 

Lumber   32.30  .033 

Total     $104.30         $0.106 

There  were  400  joints,  requiring  15  sacks  of  cement  and  30  bush- 
els of  sand,  the  cost  per' joint  being  $0.018.  The  calking  for  the 
400  joints  took  50  Ibs.  of  jute,  or  .125  Ib.  per  joint,  and  cost  $0.009 
per  joint. 

The  South  Market  street  sewer  consisted  of  816.8  lin.  ft.  of  8-in. 
tile,  two  manholes  and  one  lamphole.  There  were  365.9  cu.  yds. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   23,  1908. 


834        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

of  excavation,   the  average  depth  being  6.6   ft.,   and   the  maximum 
depth  10.6  ft.     The  cost  of  this  sewer  was  as  follows: 

Cost  of  8-in.  Sewer. 

Per  lin  ft. 

Total.  Sewer. 

Trenching    $113.40  $0.139 

Sheeting      trench      and      miscel- 
laneous           15.00  .018 

Laying    pipe    21.25  .026 

Backfilling     15.25  .019 

Cement  for  joints,   6  sacks 2.16  .002 

Sand   for  joints,    20   bu 1.20  .001 

Pipe,    780    lin.    ft 121.60  .149 

Specials,    18,    at    ?0.72 12.96  .016 

Total     $302.90          $0.369 

One  lamp  hole,  10  ft.  deep 4.30  .005 

Two  manholes 64.89  .081 


Grand  total    $372.09         $0.455 

There  was  805.6  lin.  ft.  of  trenching,  the  cost  per  lin.  ft.  being 
$0.14.  There  were  327  joints,  requiring  six  sacks  of  cement  and 
20  bushels  of  sand,  the  cost  per  joint  being  $0.011. 

In  the  above  work  the  cost  of  laying  tile  includes  taking  out  the 
last  spading  from  the  bottom  of  the  trench,  and  tamping  same  about 
tile  previously  laid.  Each  tile  was  laid  to  line  and  grade  from  a 
grade  cord  supported  over  trench,  the  supports  consisting  of  two 
upright  2x4  pieces,  and  cross  board,  spaced  25  ft.  apart.  Joints 
were  calked  and  cemented,  bevel  pattern,  with  1 :  1  Portland  cement 
mortar. 

The  backfilling  was  done  with  team  and  scraper  and  two  men. 
Earth  was  first  put  in  the  trench  to  within  about  1  ft.  of  the  top, 
and  the  trench  then  flooded  with  the  fire  hose.  The  balance  of  the 
earth  was  then  scraped  onto  the  trench.  This  has  proven  a  very 
satisfactory  method,  as  practically  all  of  the  earth  goes  back  into 
the  trench  in  a  short  time. 

The  soil  consists  of  from  1  to  3  ft.  of  black  loam  on  the  surface, 
under  which  is  tough  clay.  As  the  ground  this  summer  contained 
very  little  water,  only  skeleton  bracing  was  used. 

Prices  and  Wages. 

The  prices  of  materials  delivered  on  the  work  were  as  follows : 
Cast-iron  manhole  and  lamphole  covers,   $0.025  per  Ib. 
Wrought-iron  manhole  steps,  $0.24  each. 
No.   1  vitrified  paving  brick,    $11.00  per  M. 
Cement,   $0.36  per  sack. 
Sand,  $0.06  per  bu.,  100  Ibs.  per  bu. 
Jute  calking,  $0.07  per  Ib. 

8-in.  tile,  $0.156  per  lin.  ft. 
10-in.  tile,  $0.26  per  lin.  ft. 
Oak  lumber,  $38.50  per  M. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  835 

The  wages  paid  were  as  follows: 

Brick  masons,  $0.55  per  hour  for  8  hours. 

Tile  layer,  $2.50  per  day. 

Common  labor,   $0.20  per  hour  for  9  hours. 

Team  and  driver  for  backfilling,   $0.40  per  hour. 

Cost   of  Manholes. 

The  manholes  were  built  of  No.  1  vitrified  paving  brick  oh  a 
foundation  of  1 :  4.:  8  concrete  from  8  in.  to  1  ft.  thick  under  the 
walls.  Portland  cement  mortar  mixed  1 :  2  was  used  in  building 
walls,  all  joints  being  slushed  full.  The  walls  were  lo  in.  thick  at 
depths  greater  than  about  12  ft.  and  9  in.  thick  above  this  depth. 

Below  is  given  cost  of  two  manholes  of  different  depths: 

• 

Manhole  16.5  ft.  deep,  requiring  20.4  cu.  yds.  ex- 
cavation. 

Excavation : 
Labor,  at  $0.20  per  hour $  9.40 

Foundation : 

Labor,   at   $0.20  per  hour 2.40 

3  sacks  cement,  at  $0.36  per  sack 1.08 

0.4  cu.  yd.   sand,  at   $1.40  per  yd 0.56 

1  cu.  yd.  crushed  brick,  at  $2.30  per  cu.  yd..  2.30 

Superstructure  Manhole : 

2,400  brick,  at  $11.00  per  M 26.40 

16  sacks  cement,  at  $0.36  per  sack 5.76 

26  bu.    sand,    at   $0.06    per   bu 1.56 

1  C.  I.  cover,   307  Ibs.,  at  $0.025  per  Ib. ...  7.68 

1  dust  pan,  50  Ibs.,  at  $0.025  per  Ib 1.25 

8  steps,  at  $0.24  each 1.92 

2  pieces  split  tile  in  bottom 0.65 

Brick  mason,   10  hrs.,  at  $0.55  per  hr 5.50 

Hod  carriers,   at   $0.20   per  hr 6.00 

Total   cost   of   manhole $72.46 

Manhole  8.4  ft.   deep,  requiring  8.2  cu.  yds.   ex- 
cavation. 
Excavation : 

1  man  13  hrs.,  at  $0.20  per  hr $  2.60 

Foundation : 

Labor,    at    $0.20   per  hr 080 

2  sacks  cement,  at  $0.36  per  sack 0.72 

.25   cu.   yd.   sand,   at   $1.40  per  cu.   yd 0.35 

.5  cu.  yd.  crushed  brick,  at  $2.30  per  cu.  yd.  1.15 

Superstructure  Manhole : 

1,100  brick,  at  $11.00  per  M 12.10 

6  sacks    cement,    at    $0.36    per    sack 216 

10  bu.  sand,  at  $0.06  per  bu 0.60 

1  C.  I.  cover,   307  ft.,  at  $0.025  per  Ib 7.68 

1  dust  pan,  50  Ibs.,  at  $0.025  per  Ib 125 

3  steps,    at    $0.24    each 072 

2  pieces   split    tile    in    bottom 040 

Brick  mason,   8  hrs.,  at  $0.55  per  hr 4.40 

Hod  carriers,  at  $0.20  per  hr 1.60 

Total  cost   of   manhole $36.53 


836  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

All  of  the  above  work  was  done  this  summer  by  lay  labor  under 
the  supervision  of  Mr.  E.  F.  Bridges,  City  Engineer,  to  whom  we 
are  Indebted  for  the  information  from  which  this  article  was  pre- 
pared. 

Cost  of  Two  Pipe  Sewers.* — The  following  costs  relate  to '  two 
small  jobs  of  8-in.  pipe  sewer  constructed  during  1908  at  Frederic- 
ton)  N.  B.  The  work  was  done  by  day  labor  and  the  wages  paid 
were : 

Cents. 

Foreman,   per  hour 30 

Laborers,   per  hour 18 

Single  team,  per  hour , 27 

Double  team,  per  hour 50 

t 

A  9-hour  day  was  worked.  The  8-in.  terra  cotta  pipe  cost  22% 
cts.  per  foot,  and  Gillingham  cement  cost  $2.10  per  barrel  delivered 
on  the  work.  Lumber  for  studding  cost  $16.50  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M. 
The  manholes  were  elliptical  4  ft.  x  3  ft.  in  diameter  with  8-in. 
brick  walls  and  12-in.  tube. 

Waterloo  Road  Sewer. — This  job  comprised  495  ft.  of  8-in.  pipe 
sewer  with  2  manholes.  The  average  depth  of  trench  was  9.7  ft. 
It  cost  as  follows: 

Item.  Total.        Per  unit. 

5.98  cu.  yds.  brick  work $   83.10         $13.85 

533.5  cu.  yds.  excavation.  .  : 274.97  0.515 

Laying  8-in.  pipe   (495  lin.  ft.) 20.72  0.04 

The  cost  of  the  sewer,  including  sheeting,  which  is  lumped  with 
excavation  in  the  above  costs,  was  $0.93  per  lin.  ft.  The  trench 
had  to  be  close  sheeted  every  foot  of  its  length,  the  material  being 
sand  and  the  bottom  4  ft.  wide. 

Phoenix  Square  Sewer. — This  job  comprised  811  ft.  of  8-in.  pipe 
sewer,  with  3  manholes.     The  average  depth  of  trench  was  5.8  ft. 
in  sand  and  loam,  which  had  to  be  braced  about  every  4  to  6  ft. 
The  trench  was  dry.     The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 
Item.  Total.        Per  unit. 

4.32  cu.  yds.  brick  work $  54.00         $12.50 

522.5  cu.  yds.  excavation 195.30  0.374 

Pipe  laying  (811  ft.) 27.70  0.034 

The  total  cost  of  the  sewer  was  $425.15  or  $0.52  per  lin.  ft 
We  are  indebted  for  the  above  information  to  A.  K.  Grimmer,  city 
engineer,  Fredericton,  N.  B. 

Cost  of  8-In.  to  18-ln.  Sewers  at  Cardele,  Ga.— In  Engineering 
News,  March  30,  1893,  Mr.  Geo.  G.  Earl,  C.  E.,  gives  the  cost  of 
some  pipe  sewer  work  at  Cardele,  Ga.  Wages  were  80  cts.  to  $1  per 
day  for  labor  (presumably  riegroes)  and  the  foreman  received  $70 
a  month. 


^Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  25,  1909. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  837 

Depth  Cost  of  Cost  of 

of  cut  Length  labor,  foreman, 

Size  of  pipe.                   in  ft.  in  ft.  cts.  per  ft.  cts.  per  ft 

8    inches    5.9  1,185  14.1  1.0 

8    inches    7.0  3,090  22.8  1.9 

8    inches    8.0  900  33.8  1.9 

8    inches    11.2  487  35.2  5.8 

10    inches    7.0  225  26.7 

10    inches    7.1  298  35.5  1.6 

12    inches    5.4  1,044  27.0  1.1 

18    inches 6.7  963  33.5  1.7 

18   inches    10.6  867  79.2  4.0 

The  "Cost  of  Labor"  given  in  the  fourth  column  includes  trench- 
Ing,  pipe  laying  and  backfilling. 

In  building-  2.6  miles  of  sewer  (2  miles  of  which  were  8-in.)  and 
35  manholes,  the  total  cost  was: 

Labor     $3,867 

Masons    and    helpers 462 

Sundries     17 

Foreman   266 

Supervision     1,000 

Pipe     2,635 

Brick     252 

Cement     .  .  .  < 166 

Hauling     82 

Manhole  covers    289 

Tools   and    incidentals 561 

Total     $9,596 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  foreman's  wages  amounted  to  about  Q% 
of  the  total  wages  paid  to  laborers  and  masons. 

Cost  of  a  12-in.  Pipe  Sewer,  Menasha,  WIs.— In  1903,  some  pipe 
sewers  were  built  in  Menasha,  Wis.,  by  day  labor.  I  am  indebted 
to  Mr.  S.  S.  Little  for  the  following  data:  There  were  2,200  ft.  of 
trench,  about  half  of  which  was  for  12-in.  pipe  and  half  for  15-in. 
pipe.  The  depth  of  trench  ranged  from  7%  to  10  ft.,  averaging 
9  ft,  and  the  width  was  2  ft  The  material  was  solid  red  clay. 
Wages  paid  were  $1.75  per  10-hr,  day.  Some  team  work,  at  $3.50  a 
day,  was  used  in  scraping  in  the  backfill.  The  labor  of  trenching, 
laying  pipe,  and  backfilling  averaged  37  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  trench. 
If  the  pipe  laying  cost  4  cts.  per  ft.,  the  cost  of  trenching  and  back- 
filling was  33  cts.  per  ft.,  or  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  8- In.  Sewer  at  Ithaca,  N.  Y. — In  Engineering  News,  Aug. 
20,  1896,  Mr.  H.  N.  Ogden,  C.  E.,  gives  the  following  costs  of  trench- 
ing and  laying  8-in.  sewer  pipe  in  Ithaca,  N.  Y. :  The  column  of 
labor  cost  is  based  on  daily  wages  of  $1.35  for  laborers,  $1.50  for 
pipe  layers,  and  $2  for  foreman.  Mr.  Ogden  has  kindly  informed 
the  writer  that  the  working  day  was  10  hours  long.  Teams  were 
paid  $3.50,  masons  on  manholes,  $3.50,  and  masons'  helpers,  $1.50  ; 
8-in.  sewer  pipe  cost  12%  cts.  per  ft.  Natural  cement,  at  95  cts. 
per  bbl.,  laid  120  to  243  ft.  of  pipe  per  bbl.  (Doubtless  neat  cement 
mortar  was  used.)  The  work  was  by  contract,  and  not  all  under 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


shown  in  the  table. 


—  Cost  of  labor.  — 


in  ft.       rial,     work. 

Total. 

Per  ft. 

5.3 

4 

$126.50 

?0.11 

5.8 

5 

200.70 

.12 

-4  9 

1% 

49.50 

.12 

6.8 

318.90 

.23 

5.9 

7 

209.00 

.1*) 

6.7 

4 

108.25 

.18 

5.6 

4 

195.05 

.20 

6  8 

7 

347.00 

.26 

5.7 

11 

418.85 

.22 

54            10          11 

519.85 

.22 

5.0            u            9 

319.50 

.22 

5.3            v*            7 

373.47 

.28 

6.3            13          10 

468.25 

.33 

the  same  foreman;  hence  the  variation  in  cost 
Depth  of  No.  of 

Length 
Name  of  street.       laid. 

Wheat 1,134 

Corn   1,^04 

Washington 398 

Titus     1,391 

Plain    1,332 

Buffalo 597 

Fayette 984 

Centre 1,334 

Green   1,919 

Clinton    2,403 

Albany    1,431 

Geneva   1,323 

Cayuga    1,413 

i  Wet  clay ;   water  3  ft.  down,  bailed  out. 

a  Wet  clay ;   water  3  ft.  down,  bailed  out,  occasional  bracing. 

*  Loam  over  wet  clay ;  water  6  ft.  down ;  occasional  bracing. 
6 Wet   clay;     water    5    ft.    down;    diaphragm    pump;    occasional 
bracing. 

6  Clay  and  gravel ;  much  water  in  places ;  pump  ;  braced. 

7  Wet  clay ;  water  4  ft.  down  ;  occasional  bracing  and  pumping. 

8  Wet  clay ;  water  3  ft.  down  ;  1  diaphragm  ;  occasional  bracing. 

9  Half  clay,  half  gravel ;  half  close  sheeted  ;  underdrain  pumps. 

10  Wet  clay,  some  gravel  pockets  ;  1  pump  ;  some  bracing. 

11  Gravel  containing  water  at  5  ft.  ;  pump  ;  half  sheeted. 

12  Sheeting  and  pumping  entire  ;  water  at  5  ft. 

18  Loose  gravel ;  brick  pavement  removed ;   half  braced  and   hair 
sheeted. 

Cost  of  12-in.   Sewers   in  Toronto,   Canada.— A  large  number  of 

12-in.  pipe  sewers  were  built  by  day  labor  for  the  city  of  Toronto 
in  1891,  at  the  following  costs: 

.     Man-      Catch-  Conne( 
tions. 

15  $1.95 

240  1.27 
2.11 

15  2.20 

4  2.41 

29  1.33 

24  1.78 

13  0.96 

17  1.90 

18  1.28 
5 


Average 
depth. 

Soil. 

Length,     Man-      Catcl 
feet.         holes,     basin 

10' 

10" 

Quicksand 

1,041 

5 

6 

11' 

2" 

Clay 

4,427 

19 

21 

18' 

0" 

Blue<t  clay 

650 

3 

.  . 

12' 

1" 

180 

1 

11' 

6" 

" 

251 

8' 

1 

" 

800 

3 

'4 

9' 

9" 

•• 

483 

4 

2 

11' 

O/' 

Clay  loam 

430 

2 

2 

10' 

8" 

«« 

357 

3 

11' 

0" 

Hardpan 

320 

2 

*2 

11' 

3" 

Sand 

535 

3 

2 

Cost  per 
foot. 


11 


45 


39 


380 


1.50 
$1.51 


Av.   of  above'      9,474 

The  cost  per  ft.  includes  all  materials,  labor  and  inspection  of 
work.  It  also  includes  the  manholes  and  catch-basins,  and  the 
Y-connections.  The  12-in.  pipe  cost  22  cts.  per  ft.  ;  brick  was  $8.50 
per  M.  Laborers  were  paid  15  cts.  per  hr.,  and  a  few  special 
men  were  paid  18  cts.  per  hr. ;  bricklayers  were  paid  40  cts.  per  hr. 

Contract  Labor  Costs  at  Providence,  R.  I.— During  1906  there 
were  2.263  miles  of  regular  sewers  built  at  Providence,  R.  I.,  of 
which  1.751  miles  were  of  pipe  and  .512  miles  were  of  brick.  The 
average  depth  of  cut,  nature  of  excavation  and  contract  cost  of 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.               839 

labor  per  foot  on  the  different  sizes  of  sewers  built  during  1906  are 

given    in    the    annual    report    of    the    city  engineer    as    being    as 
follows : 

Average  depth     Average  cost 
Nature  of  Excavation.  of  cut,   ft.  per  ft. 

6-in.  pipe3 — Fine   sand,   dry    . . 10.50  $0.45 

6-in.  pipe1 — Fine    sand,    wet 10.50  .49 

6-in.  pipe1 — Sand  and  gravel,  dry 10.50  .41 

6-in.  pipe1 — Hard    pan,    wet 10.50  .60 

6-in.  pipe1 — Hard  pan  and  rock 10.50  .35 

8-in.  pipe2 — Fine  sand,  dry 8.00  .40 

8-in.  pipe2 — Fine  sand,  wet 8.00  .45 

8-in.  pipe2 — Sand  and  gravel,  dry 8.00  .40 

8-in.  pipe2 — Hard  pan,  wet 8.00  .45 

8-in.  sewer — Fine  sand,  dry 11.67  .30 

8-in.  sewer — Sand  and   gravel... 11.67  .70 

8-in.  sewer — Filling,  dry    11.67  .60 

12-in.  sewer — Fine    sand,    dry 12.00  .60 

12-in.  sewer — Fine  sand,  wet   12.00  .85 

12-in.  sewer — Sand  and   gravel,    dry 12.00  .62 

12-in.  sewer — Hard  pan,  wet   12.00  .60 

12-in.  sewer — Hard  pan  and  rock 12.00  .35 

15-in.  sewer — Sand  and  gravel,  dry 12.25  .75 

15-in.  sewer — Hard  pan,  wet   12'.25  1.00 

20-in.  brick  sewer — Hard    pan    and    rock, 

wet 12.67  2.00 

22-in.    brick    sewer — Hard    pan,    sand    and 

rock,  dry    12.83  .65 

24-in.  brick  sewer — Sand  and  gravel,  wet.  13.00  3.00 

30-in.  brick  sewer — Sand  and  gravel,  wet.  13.50  4.00 

36-in.  iron  pipe — Mud,  wet 14.00  6.50 

70-in.  brick  and  concrete — Sand  and  grav- 
el, wet 18.00  8.00 

70-in.  brick  and  concrete — Sand  and  grav- 
el, wet 8  30.00 

84-in.  brick  and  concrete — Mud,   wet    14.00  8.00 

8 4 -in.  brick  and  concrete — Sand  and  grav- 
el,  wet    20.00  20.00 


1  In  drains  to  curb  line.    2  In  basin  connections.    8  In  tunnel. 

The  average  labor  cost  of  building  each  manhole  was  $10.65,  each 
catch-basin  $11.07,  and  each  extra  inlet  $9.00. 

Brick  Sewer  Data. — Brick  sewers  are  either  "circular"  or  "egg- 
shape."  In  either  case  the  upper  part  of  the  sewer  is  called  the 
"arch,"  and  the  lower  part  is  called  the  "invert."  The  depth 
of  a  brick  sewer,  as  given  on  profiles,  is  the  depth  from  the  sur- 
face of  the  street  to  the  inside  of  the  bottom  of  the  sewer,  so  that 
the  thickness  of  the  sewer  invert  should  be  added  to  secure  the 
full  depth  of  the  trench.  The  thickness  of  a  brick  sewer  is  usu- 
ally expressed  in  Brings."  A  "one-ring"  sewer  is  made  one  brick 
thick ;  that  is,  4  ins.  thick  plus  the  cement  plaster  which  Is  usually 
%-in.  thick;  so  that  a  one-ring  sewer  is  4%  ins.  thick.  A  two-ring 
sewer  is  two  bricks,  or  9  ins.  thick,  A  three-ring  sewer  is  three 
bricks,  or  I3y2  ins.  thick. 

The  size  of  a  sewer  is  denoted  by  its  inside  diameter. 

Brick  sewers,  like  pipe  sewers,  are  usually  paid  for  by  the 
lineal  foot  of  sewer  including  trenching  ;  but  it  is  desirable  always 
;o  calculate  the  brickwork  in  cubic  yards.  Table  VIII  gives  the 


840  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

number  of  cubic  yards  of  brick  masonry  per  lineal  foot  of  circular 
sewer. 

For  intermediate  sizes  interpolate  between  the  values  given  in 
the  table. 

To  calculate  the  number  of  cubic  yards  per  lineal  foot  of  any 
circular  sewer,  proceed  as  follows:  Add  the  inside  diameter  in  feet 
to  the  thickness  of  the  sewer  in  feet;  this  gives  the  "average 
diameter."  Multiply  this  "average  diameter"  by  3  1/7,  or  3.14 ; 
then  multiply  the  quotient  by  the  thickness  of  the  sewer  in  feet 
and  divide  by  27. 

For  example,  a  5-ft.  sewer  has  walls  9  ins.  thick  (it  is  a  "two- 
ring"  sewer)  ;  and.  as  9  ins.  =  %  ft.,  we  have  by  the  rule: 
5  +  %  =  5%  as  the  "average  diameter"  ;  then  5%  X  3  1/7  X  %  -5-  27 
=  l/2  cu.  yd.  per  lin.  ft. 

Sewer  bricks  are  of  a  better  quality  than  common  building 
bricks,  and  usually  cost  $1  per  M  more  than  common  bricks. 
Ordinarily  about  500  bricks  are  required  per  cubic  yard,  but  the 
variation  may  be  15%  greater  or  less,  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
sizes  of  bricks  differ  in  different  localities.  About  2%  is  usually 
added  to  cover  the  wastage. 

Since  the  joints  are  V-shaped,  and  since  the  inside  of  the  sewer 
Is  usually  plastered,  more  mortar  is  required  than  in  plain  brick- 
work. About  0.35  to  0.4  cu.  yd.  of  mortar  is  required  per  cu.  yd. 
of  brick  masonry.  The  number  of  barrels  of  cement  required  to 
make  1  cu.  yd.  of  mortar  is  given  on  page  253. 

In  building  5-ft.  circular  sewers  at  Lawrence,  Mass.,  in  1886,  1 
part  natural  cement  to  1  %  parts  sand  was  used ;  and  it  required 
2%  bbls.  of  cement  per  thousand  bricks. 

At  Newton,  Mass.,  a  24  x  36-in.  egg-shaped  sewer  required  1.5 
bbls.  of  cement  per  cu.  yd.,  the  mortar  being  mixed  1:1%.  There 
were  509  bricks  per  cu.  yd.  of  sewer  masonry,  not  including  the 
waste;  and  520  bricks  including  waste. 

At  Los  Angeles,  two-ring  40-in.  circular  sewers  required  0.4  bbl. 
Portland  cement  per  lineal  foot  of  sewer,  which  is  equivalent  to  1.12 
bbls.  cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  brick  masonry.  The  mortar  was  1  part 
cement  to  2  parts  sand. 

Mr.  Desmond  Fitzgerald  gives  the  following  as  averages  of  cost 
of  brick  sewer  work  done  by  certain  contractors  at  Boston,  prior 
to  1894: 

Per  cu.  yd.— — 

Labor    $   2.89  $   3.40 

Brick   (560  to  580  per  cu.  yd.),  at  $9.50  per  M.         5.48  5.30 

Sand    0  30  0.40 

Natural  cement,  1.27  bbls.,  at  $1.13 1.35  1.50 

Centers    0.23  .20 

Miscellaneous    0.19  .20 

Total   per  cu.   yd $10.44  $11.00 

The  first  example  is  the  cost  of  a  well-handled  job  of  1,300 
cu.  yds.  of  brick  masonry.  The  second  example  is  the  average  of 
several  jobs.  Brick  cost  $9.50  per  M;  and  natural  cement  $1.13 
per  bbL  The  mortar  was  probably  mixed  1:1%,  that  is  1  part 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


841 


cement  to   1^    parts  sancL     Wages  of   bricklayers  were  probably 
50  cts.  per  hr.,  and  helpers  15  to  20  cts.  per  hr. 


TABLE  VIII. — BRICK  MASONUT  IN  CIRCULAR 
LINEAL  FT. 


SEWERS,  Cu.  YDS.  PEE 


Diameter. 
Ft.     Ins. 

One-Ring 
(4y2  ins.) 

Two-Ring 
(9  ins.) 

Three-Ring 
(13  ya  ins.) 

2         0 

0.103 

0.240 



2          3 

.114 

.261 

.*." 

2          6 

.125 

.280 

'.'. 

2          9 

.136 

.305 

3          0 

.147 

.327 

"| 

3          3 

.158 

.349 

]' 

° 

3          6 

.169 

.371 

3          9 

.180 

.393 

4          0 

.191 

.415 

* 

4          3 

.202 

.436 

4          6 

.213 

.458 

[ 

4          9 

.223 

.480 

5          0 

.234 

.501 

".802 

5          3 

.245 

.523 

.834 

§          C 

.256 

.545 

.867 

5          9 

.267 

.567 

.900 

6          0 

.278 

.589 

.933 

6          3 

.611 

.966 

6          6 

.633 

1.000 

€          9 

. 

.655 

1.031 

7          0 

.677 

1.063 

7          6 

f 

.720 

1.128 

8          0 

. 

.763 

1.193 

8          6 

t 

.807 

1.260 

9          0 

.851 

1.325 

9          6 

\ 

.895 

1.390 

10          0 

• 

.938 

1.456 

TABLE  IX.  —  BHICK 

MASONRY  IN 

EGG-SHAPED  SEWERS, 

Cu.  YDS.  PEH 

LINEAL  FT. 

Dimensions 

One-Ring 

Two-Ring 

Three-Ring 

Ins. 

(4%  ins.) 

(9  ins.) 

(13yains.) 

12x18 

0.071 

0.176 

14x21 

.081 

.194 

16x24 

.090 

.212 

18x27 

.099 

.231 

20x30 

.108 

.249 

| 

* 

22x3,3 

.117 

.267 

24x3^ 

.126 

.286 

26x39 

.136 

.304 

28x42 

.145 

.322 

30x45 

.154 

.341 

32x48 

.163 

.359 

34x51 

.172 

.374 

36x54 

.182 

.396 

38x57 

.191 

.414 

40x60 

.200 

.433 

0*.698 

42x63 

.451 

.725 

44  x  66 

\ 

.469 

.753 

46x69 

.488 

.781 

48x72 

\ 

.506 

.808 

60x75 

u 

.524 

.836 

52  x78 

i 

.543 

.863 

54x81 

t 

.561 

.891 

56x84 

f 
" 

.579 

.918 

58x87 

.598 

.946 

60x90 

• 

.616 

.973 

842  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Bricklayers  on  sewer  work  often  receive  abnormally  high  wages. 
In  some  cities  the  labor  unions  have  forced  up  the  price  to  $1  per 
hour.  In  such  cases  a  bricklayer  is  usually  required  to  lay  not 
less  than  3,000  or  4,000  bricks  a  day;  and  I  have  known  as  high 
a.»  5,000  bricks  to  be  laid  by  skilful  and  rapid  layers. 

The  dimensions  of  egg-shaped  sewers  are  given  in  terms  of  the 
inside  diameter  of  the  upper  arch,  and  the  inside  height  of  the 
sewer ;  thus  a  30  x  45-in.  sewer,  is  one  having  an  upper  arch  30  ins. 
inside  diameter  and  an  inside  height  of  45  ins.  The  Phillips  Metro- 
politan Standard  (English)  egg-shaped  sewer  has  an  inside  height 
which  is  1%  times  the  diameter  of  the  arch.  Calling  the  diameter 
of  the  arch  d,  the  other  dimensions  are: 

Radius   of   invert %  d 

Radius  of   side IVa  d 

Height    l^d 

Area    of    waterway 1.15  d* 

Perimeter 3.96  d 

The  first  dimension  given  in  the  first  column  of  Table  VIII  Is  d. 
The  table  gives  the  number  of  cubic  yards  of  masonry  per  lin.  ft. 
of  egg-shaped  sewer. 

Cost  of  Large  Brick  Sewers,  Denver,  Colo.— Mr.  W.  W.  Follett 
gives  the  following  data  on  brick  and  concrete  sewers  built  by  day 
labor  in  Denver,  Colo. :  Work  was  begun  August,  1894,  and  fin- 
ished June,  1895.  Work  was  carried  on  in  the  winter,  which 
added  somewhat  to  the  cost.  The  wages  paid  were  high  and  the 
hours  of  labor  short.  The  men  were  considered  to  be  efficient. 
The  following  were  the  number  of  day's  work  performed  and  the 
wages  per  8-hr,  day : 

726  days,  foremen,  at  $3.33%  to  $5. 

1,398  days,  stone  masons,  at  $3.60. 

1,491  days,  brick  masons,  at  $4.00. 
385  days,  watchmen,  blacksmiths,  and  timbermen,  at  $2.50. 

8,115  days,  labor,  at  $2.00. 

7,628  days,  labor,  at  $1.75. 
363  days,  Waterboys,  at  $1.00  to  $1.25. 

2,150  days,  team  with  driver,  at  $3.50. 
252  days,  enginemen  and  pumpers,  at  $3.00. 

See  Table  X. 

Note. — Sec.  1  was  built  in  filled  ground  containing  city  refuse. 
The  original  ground  was  about  level  with  the  invert,  and  had  been 
filled  with  2  to  5  ft.  of  refuse.  The  bottom  of  the  trench  was  2  to  4 
ft.  below  the  level  of  a  river  near  by,  so  that  there  was  much 
pumping.  The  backfill  was  largely  hauled  in  with  wagons,  as  the 
material  from  the  trench  was  not  a  suitable  backfill.  The  sewer 
had  a  concrete  base  8  ins.  thick  and  16  ft.  wide,  on  top  of  which 
was  a  stone  cradle.  The  invert  was  a  single  ring  of  brick,  and  the 
arch  was  three  rings. 

Sec.  3  was  nearly  all  in  good  ground,  but  there  was  water  all 
along  it.  The  cross-section  of  the  sewer  was  the  same  as  in  Sec.  1, 
except  with  less  diameter,  giving  about  80%  as  much  material. 

Sec.  6  contained. rock  for  its  full  length,  but  the  rock  was  very 
soft,  being  in  places  hardly  more  than  indurated  clay.  The  trench 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


t~oo  <• 

000  •  .OOOCOrHOO 

1-.CO  •  •  CO  T*  TJ«  rH  rH 

r-5  d  I  I  ci  d  o°  d  d 


O  rH     fcjZ 

S     >  o^ 

N         ~4>£ 


<y  000     -O     • 

«  o»    i-r-*i>:  :t>:  : 


OS        t»(M      •      .COOO-^rHrH 

o'     I-HO    I    laid  odd 


CO          |^| 

cs      m  9.  3 


g  c-as  I       ! 

60          co_ioin    ~ia    • 
®  oo     rHcgin    Iin    : 


to      MOO    •    'oocoocg   I  as 
d     rHo'    :    loio'do'd 


t-t- 

OOOTt*-^ 


t—     oo  oo    •    •  c<j  Is*  o  c^  ir>  j 

O>        OO      •      -COCOlOOrHJ 

d     <NO 


00        rH      •     •      '<MC<lt~lrtCO     |   rH 

00        ^      •     •      ;COC<|lf5rHrH 

d     rH    *    !    .oo'dddd     o 


CO  «IO  .(Mt^COrHCO 

CO  -CO  .  (M  Tf  rH  OO  t~ 

IM  -CO  .t-COOiCOrH 

rH  ;d  Iio'dddd 


I 


O        CO        t-  10  LO  M<  rH  CO  CO  O  00 


IrH     IcoO        rH 


in      eo  in  co  T-H  t- oo  cc  co  rH 
d      ddrH-jJindddd 


"?      5-M 


eo      rH  co  in  oo  co  N  in  Tt<  o 

t>-        OO  t-  Oi  rH  -^  OO  tr-  •*  O 

d      ddrHooeodddd 


^    r«H 


'W.M'M  >     > 


II 


. 


tf& 

itt 

•   £s° 

^H  H 


O 


2  «  d 

^£^ 


H44  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

averaged  11  ft.  deep,  and  was  timbered  all  along.     No  water  was 
encountered.     The  sewer  was  three-ring  brick. 

Sec.  7  was  similar  in  every  way  to  Sec.  6,  except  that  a  loose 
sand  overlaid  the  rock. 

Sec.  8  was  in  gravel  containing  much  water.  The  cut  averaged 
12ya  ft.  deep. 

Sec.  9  was  in  fine,  loose  sand,  heavily  charged  with  water.  The 
average  cut  was  14  ft.  deep. 

The  concrete  foundations  were  made  1:3:6  Portland  cement  and 
crushed,  unscreened  sandstone.  The  stone  was  estimated  on  a 
basis  of  2,500  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  Concrete  was  hand  mixed  and  de- 
livered in  wheelbarrows.  The  average  cost  of  1,545  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  was  as  follows: 

0.732  bbl.    cement     $2.543 

0.754  cu.  yd.  stone     1.409 

0.424  cu.  yd.  sand     0.148 

Water    0.007 

Labor    ($1.75   an    8-hr,    day) 0.703 

Total  per  cu.  yd $4.810 

The  stone  cradle  was  built  of  a  soft  sandstone  which  broke  out 
square  in  the  quarry  so  that  little  hammering  was  required  in  the 
trench.  It  was  bought  by  the  ton.  Louisville  (natural)  cement, 
weighing  265  Ibs.  per  bbl.,  was  used  in  a  1:2  mortar.  The  average 
cost  (not  including  engineering)  of  6,438  cu.  yds.  of  this  stone 
cradle  was  as  follows: 

1.297  cu.  yds.  of  rubble $1.975 

0.875  bbl.    natural    cement 1.261 

0.305  cu.  yd.   sand 0.130 

Water    0.005 

Labor    (masons,    $3.60 ;    laborers,    $2.00,    for 

8   hrs.) 1.284 

Total  per  cu.  yd $4.655 

The  invert  brick  ring  of  Sec.  3  was  laid  in  1 :  3  Portland  mortar, 
and  the  same  mortar  was  used  in  plastering.  On  Sees.  1,  3  and  5  a 
l:-2%  Louisville  mortar  was  used;  and  on  Sees.  6,  7,  8  and  9,  a 
1 :  3  Louisville  throughout. 

The  amount  of  cement  per  cubic  yard  of  brickwork,  by  sections, 
was  as  follows:  Sec.  10,  0.835  bbl. ;  Sec.  3,  1  bbl. ;  Sec.  5,  1.07  bbls. ; 
Sec.  6,  0.87  bbl. ;  Sec.  7,  0.937  bbl. ;  Sec.  8,  0.99  bbl. ;  Sec.  9, 
0.976  bbl.  Assuming  that  the  I:2y2  mortar  required  2%  bbls. 
cement  per  cu.  yd.  of  mortar,  it  would  require  0.4  cu.  yd.  of  mortar 
per  cu.  yd.  of  brick  masonry  when  it  took  1  bbl.  of  cement  per 
cu.  yd.  of  brick  masonry. 

The  number  of  brick  per  cubic  yard  ranged  from  431  on  Sec.  3 
to  450  on  Sec.  6.  The  average  cost  of  6,702  cu.  yds.  of  brick- 
work on  all  sections  was  as  follows,  per  cu.  yd. : 

439    brick    $4.584 

0.92  bbl.    cement    1.953 

0.41  cu.   yd.   sand 0.198 

Miscellaneous     0.229 

Labor 2.384 

Total  per  cu.  yd $9.348 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


845 


The  labor  cost  ranged  from  $2  per  cu.  yd.  on  Sees.  1  and  3  to 
12.95  on  Sec.  9. 

One  foreman  handled  18  bricklayers,  divided  into  three  gangs,  the 
total  number  of  his  force,  including  helpers  and  laborers,  being 
80  men. 

A  neat  form  of  steel  centering  was  designed  and  used  as  fol- 
lows: Light,  8-lb.,  dump-car  rails  were  bent  so  as  to  form  half- 
rings;  the  lower  half -ring  (or  semi-circle)  being  bent  with  the 


(Short-  Piece 
\  of  Rat/ boli-ect 
•fo  Lower  Rail 


View  of  Joint 
Looking  across 
the  Sewer  from 
its  Center. 


View  of  Joint 

Looking  along 

the  Side  of  the 

Sewer. 


Fig.   4.     Centers  for  Concrete  Sewer. 

head  of  the  rail  facing  out,  and  the  upper  half-ring  with  its  head 
facing  in,  as  shown  in  Fig.  4.  A  short  piece  of  rail  was  laid  with 
its  flange  against  the  flange  of  the  lower  half-ring  and  riveted. 
One  of  these  short  pieces  of  rail  was  thus  riveted  at  each  end  of 
the  lower  half-ring.  Thus  it  was  possible  to  butt  the  ends  of  the 
upper  half-ring  against  these  short  pieces  of  rail  riveted  to  the 
lower  half-ring,  and  connect  the-  two  with  fish-plates  and  boles.  In 
order  to  be  able  to  "strike"  (remove)  these  steel  centers,  a  be^el- 
joint  was  made,  as  shown  in  the  figure.  This  was  done  by  sawing 
one  end  of  the  upper  half-ring  across  on  a  bevel,  and  sawing  a 


846  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

similar  bevel  on  the  end  of  the  short  piece  of  rail  against  Which  it 
butted.  After  the  fish-plate  bolts  were  removed,  a  blow  of  a 
hammer  would  readily  knock  the  two  half-rings  apart  at  the  bevel- 
joint.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  2 -in.  lagging  was  laid  upon  ths 
flange  of  the  upper  half-ring,  no  lagging  being  used  on  the  lower 
half-ring,  as  the  invert  was  built  of  brick. 

To  hold  the  lagging  to  the  upper  half -ring,  it  was  found  best  to 
make  little  iron  clips,  three  of  which  were  fastened  to  the  under- 
side of  each  12-ft.  stick  of  lagging,  using  two  wood  screws  for 
each  clip.  The  end  of  the  clip  slipped  over  the  flange  of  the  steel 
rail,  but  was  not  screwed  or  bolted  to  the  rail,  so  that  each  stick  of 
lagging  was  quickly  removed  by  shoving  it  endwise.  These  steel 
centers  or  rings  were  placed  2  ft.  5  ins.  apart,  c.  to  c.,  so  that  40 
rings  sufficed  to  set  up  centers  for  96  ft.  of  sewer.  Two  men 
would  take  down,  clean  and  set  up  96  ft.  of  this  centering  in  a  day, 
making  the  cost  of  moving  centers  about  4  cts.  per  ft.  of  sewer. 
In  building  8,290  ft.  of  sewers,  three  sets  of  steel  centers  and  two 
sets  of  lagging  were  used,  costing  $775  for  materials  and  labor 
of  making,  or  9.3  cts.  per  ft.  of  sewer,  making  a  total  cost  of  a 
little  over  13  cts.  per  ft.  of  sewer  for  making  and  moving  lagging 
and  material.  There  were  only  three  sets  of  rings  because  there 
were  only  three  sizes  of  sewers,  70,  77  and  94-in. 

Cost  of  an  Egg  Shaped  Sewer,  Springfield,  Mass.*— The  Worces- 
ter St.  sewer,  for  which  cost  data  are  given  below,  was  built  at 
Springfield,  Mass.,  during  December,  1904,  and  January,  1905.  It 
consists  of  670  ft.  of  1  ft.  10  in.  by  2  ft.  9  in.,  egg-shaped  brick 
sewer  and  two  manholes.  The  sewer  was  laid  in  a  gravel  trench  at 
an  average  depth  of  9.8  ft.,  the  grade  being  6  in.  per  100  ft. 
The  loose  character  of  the  gravel  necessitated  tight  sheeting  of  the 
trench  all  of  the  way. 

The  invert  of  the  sewer  was  constructed  of  8-in.  brickwork,  but 
the  arch  was  of  a  single  ring  or  4-in.  brick,  plastered  outside  with 
1  in.  of  cement  mortar,  Portland  cement  being  used  throughout. 

At  the  time  the  work  was  done  there  was  about  2%  ft.  of  frost 
in  the  ground,  and  consequently  coke  fires  were  built  along  the 
line  of  excavation  in  advance  of  the  work.  These  fires  required 
about  $45  worth  of  wood  and  536  bushels  of  coke  at  11  cts.  per 
busheL 

The  excavation  was  done  by  pick  and  shovel,  and  the  trench 
was  backfilled  as  fast  as  the  mason  work  was  completed.  The 
work  was  done  by  the  city  by  day  labor. 

The  wages  paid  per  8-hour  day  were  as  follows: 

Foreman    $3.00 

Bracers 2.00 

Laborers 1.75 

Teams    4.50 

Masons     5.60 

Mason    tenders 2.40 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.   16,   1907. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  847 

The  cost  of  the  work  is  shown  in  the  following  .tabulation : 
Labor.  Per  lin  ft. 

Excavating   and   refilling $1.40 

Sheeting 23 

Masons     ,;. „ 36 

Tenders 20 

Total    labor . . . $2.19 

Material. 

Brick,   $9.20  per  M $  .79 

Cement,    at    $1.60 36 

Manhole  castings  and  steps 02 

Sheeting  lumber,  at  $22.50 05 

Wood 07 

Coke   (536  bu.) 09 

Profiles    and   centers 01 

Total   materials $1.39 

Grand    total $3.58 

The  labor  cost  of  constructing  the  brickwork  was  as  follows: 

Per  lin.  ft.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Masons,    42%    days $0.36  $2.14 

Tenders,    57  %    days 20  1.19 

Total     ..$0.56  $3.33 

On  the  work  there  were  usually  two  masons  and  three  tenders. 

Cost  of  a  7- Ft.  Brick  Sewer,  Gary,  Ind.* — In  trenching  for  a  7-ft. 
sewer  through  water  soaked  sand  at  Gary,  Ind.,  the  sand  is  being 
unwatered  by  driving  well  points  and  pumping.  The  method  has 
enabled  what  promised  to  be  a  difficult  task  to  be  accomplished 
with  comparative  ease.  Only  a  moderate  amount  of  sheeting  has 
been  necessary  and  practically  no  caving  has  resulted. 

The  sand  through  which  the  work  passes  is  very  fine,  such  a 
sand  as  forms  the  dunes  of  Michigan  and  other  states  bordering 
Lake  Michigan.  When  water  soaked  it  takes  a  slope  of  about  1 
on  15.  At  Gary  this  fine  sand  is  water  soaked  to  within  a  few  feet 
of  the  surface ;  in  places  water  covers  the  surface.  So  far  as 
excavation  work  goes  the  material  is  to  all  intents  and  'purposes 
a  quicksand. 

In  brief,  the  method  of  work  adopted  is  as  follows:  A  wide 
shallow  trench  is  excavated  by  a  drag,  scraper  bucket  excavator 
of  the  Page  &  Shnable  type  to  about  water  level,  say  to  a  depth 
of  6  to  8  ft.  Bleeding  is  then  begun.  A  4-in.  pipe  132  ft.  long  in 
six  22-ft.  sections  it  stretched  along  the  center  line  of  the  sewer. 
On  each  side  of  this  pipe  about  3  ft.  away  is  sunk  a  row  of  well 
points  2  ft.  apart.  These  well  points  are  3  ft.  long  and  are  attached 
to  13-ft.  pipes.  The' tops  of  the  driven  pipes  are  connected  by  hose 
to  the  4-in.  pipe  line  which  has  cross-valves  for  the  purposes.  A  pump 
connects  with  the  4-in.  pipe  line  and  also  with  a  4-in.  well  point 
sunk  vertically  underneath.  An  extension  of  the  4-in.  pipe  line 
with  strainer  end  also  takes  the  surface  water  from  a  sump. 

This  battery  of  well  points  lowers  the  water  so  that  a  further 
excavation  of  6  to  8  ft.  can  be  made  between  sheet  piling.  A  second 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  5,  1908. 


848 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


battery  of  well  points  is  then  sunk  at  this  new  level.  In  this 
battery,  however,  the  points  are  sunk  close  to  the  sheeting  and  each 
row  feeds  into  a  separate  2-in.  pipe  along  the  trench.  This 
battery  lowers  the  water  level  enough  to  permit  excavation  to 
•sub-grade,  which  is  some  6-ft.  below  the  bottom  of  the  sheeting. 
The  brick  sewer  is  then  built  in  the  usual  manner  and  the  back- 
filling done  by  means  of  a  derrick  and  Hayward  clam  shell  bucket. 

The  diagram  Fig.  4A  shows  the  general  plan  of  procedure 
described.  In  this  description  details  have  been  neglected  to 
prevent  confusion  ;  some  of  these  details,  however,  require 
description. 

Scraper  Bucket  Excavator  Work.  —  The  bucket  is  of  2  cu.  yds. 
capacity  and  is  operated  on  a  58-ft  boom  with  the  usual  cable  and 
chain  attachments.  The  sand  being  excavated  is  wet  ;  that  is,  the 
voids  are  filled  with  water.  The  amount  of  excavation  is  10  cu.  yds. 
per  running  foot  of  trench,  and  the  machine  makes  60  ft.  per  day. 
This  60  ft.  is  not  its  capacity,  but  is  the  distance  made  daily  by 


\,' ^' 

]T 


Fig,     4  A. 

all  the  work  and  the  excavator  is  worked  just  enough  to  keep 
pace.  The  depth  being  excavated  is  also  limited  by  water  level. 

The  machine  is  mounted  on  rollers  traveling  on  a  track  of 
timbers.  One  merit  of  the  machine  is  that  some  of  the  excavated 
material  can  be  dumped  straight  ahead  in  the  path  of  the  work  so 
that  it  builds  its  own  roadbed  over  the  swamps  in  front.  The 
machine  is  pulled  ahead  by  simply  lowering  the  bucket  and  letting 
it  get  a  good  bite  in  the  ground  ahead,  then  pulling  on  the  digging 
cable. 

The  excavator  is  taking  out  about  400  cu.  yds.  per  9-hour  day, 
with  a  gang  of  1  engineer,  1  fireman  and  4  laborers. 

First  Battery  of  WeU  Points. — Referring  to  Fig.  4A  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  first  battery  of  well  points  occupies  a  narrow  space  along 
the  center  of  the  trench ;  this  permits  the  sheeting  to  be  driven 
outside  of  the  well  points.  The  well  points  are  2  ins.  x  3  ft, 
and  they  are  attached  to  2-in.  x  13-ft.  pipes  with  ells  at  their  tops. 
A  4-ft.  length  of  wire  lined  hose  is  attached  to  each  ell.  These 
points  are  sunk  vertically  by  jetting.  Two  men  were  timed  in 
Jetting.  They  used  1-in.  jetting  pipes  with  about  100  Ibs.  water 
pressure  and  sunk  four  points  in  one  minute.  This  time  did  not 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  849 

include  making  connections.     In  addition  to  the  two  rows  of  2-in. 
points,  a  4-in.  point  is  sunk  directly  under  the  pump. 

The  well  points  are  connected  by  the  short  hose  lengths  to  a 
4-in.  horizontal  suction  pipe.  Six  22-ft.  sections  of  suction  pipe  are 
used  with  hanged  joints.  Each  section  has  11  cross-valves  with. 
double  bushings  for  the  hose  connections.  A  gate  valve  near  the 
end  of  each  section  permits  the  rear-sections  to  be  removed  and 
placed  ahead  as  fast  as  the  work  progresses.  An  extension  of  the 
4-in.  suction  pipe  forward  to  a  sump  in  the  excavation  being  made 
by  the  scraper  bucket  handles  the  surface  water. 

The  water  is  drawn  from  the  suction  pipe  by  an  Emerson  No.  3 
pump  with  5-in.  suction  and  4-in.  discharge.  The  pump  is  hung  to 
a  chain  fall  from  an  A-frame  mounted  on  rollers.  It  discharges 
into  a  tile  drain  alongside  the  trench ;  this  drain  leads  back  to  the 
completed  sewer  discharging  behind  a  temporary  dam  of  bags  of 
sand  inside  the  sewer.  Summarized,  the  first  battery  of  well  points 
is  composed  as  follows : 

1  No.   3  Emerson  pump. 

1  4-in.  well  point  sunk  below  pump. 

132  2-in.  well  points  sunk  in  two  rows. 

1  4-in.  suction  pipe  with  extension  to  surface  water  sump. 

Sheeting  Trench. — The  trench  is  sheeted  10  ft.  wide,  the  sheeting 
being  carried  along  so  as  to  embrace  about  one  section  (the 
rearmost)  of  the  first  battery  of  well  points.  The  sheeting  is 
2  x  8-in.  x  12-ft.  planks  and  is  driven  by  mauls.  Waling  pieces 
and  trench  braces  are  placed  as  the  excavation  proceeds.  This 
excavation  is  carried  down  about  6  ft.  by  shovelers  and  at  this 
level  the  second  battery  of  well  points  is  placed.  The  sheeting  is 
pulled  as  the  back  filling  proceeds. 

Second  Battery  of  Well  Points. — The  second  battery  of  well 
points  consists  of  two  rows  like  the  first,  but  the  rows  are  placed 
wide  apart  (close  inside  the  sheeting  on  both  sides)  and  each  has 
a  separate  suction  pipe.  The  suction  pipes  are  2  ins.  in  diameter 
and  the  well  points  are  1*4  ins.  in  diameter;  the  well  points  and 
pipes  are  16  ft.  long  and  when  sunk  they  penetrate  a  couple  feet 
or  so  below  sub-grade  and  6  ft.  below  the  bottom  of  the  sheeting. 
The  suction  points  are  made  in  sections  with  hose  connections  every 
two  feet  and  gate  valves  at  the  ends. 

Two  pumps  operate  the  second  battery  of  well  points ;  they  are 
of  the  same  size  and  make  as  that  for  the  first  battery  and  are 
suspended  similarly.  Each  pump  draws  water  from  both  rows  of 
well  points  and  also  from  a  4-in.  well  point  sunk  directly  under 
the  pump.  This  is  accomplished  by  means  of  a  four-way  connection 
in  the  suction  of  each  pump,  about  1  ft.  below  the  pump.  From 
this  connection  2-in.  pipes  branch  right  and  left  to  connections  with 
the  2-in.  suction  pipes  and  a  third  connection  is  made  with  the 
4-in.  well  point.  Operating  in  parallel  the  two  pumps  can,  by  means 
of  the  gate  valves,  concentrate  their  work  on  those  portions  of  the 
battery  of  well  points  where  especially  large  quantities  of  water 
are  encountered  or  can  pump  from  the  whole  system,  also  either 


Sat/  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

one  o>   (he  pumps  can  be  cut  out.     These  pumps  discharge  into  the 
same  tile  drain  as  the  first  pump. 

The  methods  of  advancing  the  second  battery  of  well  points  is 
substantially  the  same  as  for  the  first ;  that  is,  the  rear  sections  of 
Suction  pipe  and  well  points  are  detached  and  placed  in  front. 
Generally  the  forward  end  of  the  second  battery  is  kept  far  enough 
ahead  to  overlap  the  rear  section  of  the  first  battery. 

Excavation  and  Sewer  Construction. — The  deepening  of  the  trench 
at  the  rear  end  of  the  second  battery  of  well  points  is  done  by  hand. 
So  perfect  is  the  drainage  that  it  is  found  possible  to  excavate  some 
6  ft.  deeper  than  the  bottom  of  the  sheeting,  and  to  construct  the 
brick  sewer  in  the  trench  bottom  with  no  more  seepage  than  can 
be  handled  by  a  fourth  Emerson  pump,  which  takes  water  from  a 
sump  and  discharges  behind  the  temporary  sand  bag  dam  mentioned 
previously. 

Backfilling. — The  backfilling  is  done  from  the  spoil  bank.  As  fast 
as  the  sewer  is  completed,  shovelers  cover  it  with  a  layer  of  sand. 
The  remainder  of  the  backfilling  is  done  by  an  8%  x  10-in.  Lidger- 
wood  engine  and  derrick  operating  a  1  cu.  yd.  Hayward  clam 
shell.  This  machine  puts  in  about  500  cu.  yds.  of  backfill  in  9  hours 
at  a  labor  cost  of  about  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  figured  as  follows: 

1  engineman    at    $5 $   5.00 

1  fireman   at    $3 3.00 

3  laborers  at  $2 6.00 

Fuel  at  $3.60  per  ton 6.25 

Total  500  cu.  yds.  at  4  cts $20.25 

Sheeting  and  Bracing. — Two  rows  of  2  x  8-in.  x  12-ft.  sheeting 
60  ft.  long  are  driven,  braced  and  pulled  per  9-hour  day  with  the 
following  gang: 

4  men  setting  braces  at   $2.25 f $  9.00 

3  men  driving  sheeting  at  $2.50 7.50 

4  men  pulling  sheeting  at  $2.50 10.00 

1  carpenter  at  $3 3.00 

Total    $29.50 

This  gives  a  cost  of  24%  cts.  per  lineal  foot  of  12-ft.  sheeting 
driven,  braced  and  pulled,  not  including  materials  and  superintend- 
ence, etc. 

Pumping  and  Changing  Piping. — The  pumping  is  continuous  day 
and  night,  but  the  jetting  of  well  points  and  changing  of  piping  is 
confined  to  the  regular  shift  of  9  hours.  The  gang  worked  is  as 
follows : 

14  pipe  line  men  at  $2.25...  ..$31.50 

10  firemen    (two  shifts)   at  $3 3000 

2  foremen  at  $3 600 

6  laborers  at  $2 12*00 

Coal  for  24  hours  (estimated) 15.00 

Total    .$94.50 

This  gives  a  cost  of   $1.57   per  lin.   ft.   of  trench,   not  including 

superintendence,   interest,   depreciation,   etc. 

Trench    Excavation. — The    trench    excavation,    excluding    scraper 

bucket  works,   runs  about   300   cu.   yds.   per   day,    assuming   60   ft 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  851 

of  10.5  x  13  ft.  trench  per  9  hours.  This  work  is  done  by  85 
shovelers  at  $2  per  day,  and  costs  $170  -v-  300  cu.  yds.  =  56.6  cts. 
per  cu.  yd. 

Miscellaneous. — The  cost  of  clearing  the  right  of  way  amounts 
to  $4  per  day,  2  men  at  $2  being  employed.  There  are  3  water- 
boys  at  $1,  or  a  charge  of  $3  per  day  for  Waterboys. 

Summary. — Summarizing  we  have  the  following  costs  for  trench 
complete  and  ready  for  sewer  construction ; 

Per 

Per  day.  lin.  ft. 

Scraper  excavator  work   (400  cu.  yds.  )....$  22.25  $0.370 

Shovel  excavation    (300  cu.  yds.) 170.00  2.833 

Sheeting  and  bracing   (300  cu.  yds.) 29.50  0.491 

Pumping  and  pipe  system  (300  cu.  yds.)...      94.50  1.575 

Backfilling    (500   cu.    yds.) 20.25  0.337 

Miscellaneous    (300   cu.  yds.) 7.00  0.116 


Total  * $343.50     $5.722 

Figured  on  a  cubic  yard  basis  these  costs  may  be  arranged  as 
follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Scraper  work,  including  clearing  (400  cu.  yds.) .  .$0.055 
Trenching,  pumping  and  sheeting  (300  cu.  yds.)  0.980 
Backfilling  (500  cu.  yds.) 0.040 

Brick  Sewer  Construction. — About  60  ft.  of  sewer  are  completed 
per  9-hour  day.  The  labor  and  materials  cost  of  this  work  runs 
about  as  follows : 

Materials.  Per  day. 

30,000  brick  at  $6.50 $195.00 

30   bbls.   Portland  cement  at   $1.75 52.50 

30  bbls.  Utica  natural  cement  at  $1 30.00 


Total  materials $277.50 

Labor. 
5  men  mixing  mortar .  .$2  50     $  12.50 

5  men    carrying   cement   mortar 2.50  12.50 

3  men  lowering  cement  mortar 2.25  6.75 

6  brick  masons  (5,000  brick  each  daily)  10.00  60.00 
3  brick    tenders 3.75  11.25 

15  brick   handlers    (av.) 2^50.  37.50 

26  men  on   industrial   railway 2.00  5J.OO 

3  teamsters     2.50  7.50 

3  teams 9.00  27.00 

3  form    setters 3.25  9.75 

3  water    boys 1.00  3.00 

Total     labor $249.75 

Total  labor  and  materials 517.25 

Assuming  500  brick  per  cubic  yard  of  masonry,  these  figures  give 
a  cost  of : 

Per  cu  yd. 

Materials     $4.62 

Labor     3.99 

Total     $8.62 

About  2  bbls.  of  cement  were  required  per  1,000  brick  laid,  and 

the  cost  per  1,000  brick  laid  was  $17.24. 

The  cost  of  superintendence  on  the  work  runs  about  $50  per  day, 

and  repairs,   waste  and  depreciation  aggregate  about  $40  per  day. 


852  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

In  reviewing  these  figures  it  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  they  omit 
a  number  of  costs.  For  example,  the  cost  of  lumber  for  sheeting, 
runways,  etc.,  and  the  cost  of  lumber  and  construction  for  certers 
are  not  included.  Other  lacking  items  will  be  noted  by  those 
familiar  with  such  work.  Though  incomplete  as  noted  the  figures 
will,  we  believe,  prove  decidedly  interesting  in  connection  with  the 
novel  methods  of  work  adopted. 

[The  costs  are  given  in  greater  detail  in  the  following  paragraphs.] 

Cost  of  a  Brick  Sewer  in  Water-Soaked  Sand  at  Gary,  Ind.*— 
In  our  issue  of  Aug.  5,  1908,  we  described  in  some  detail  the  con- 
struction of  a  sewer  in  water  soaked  sand  at  Gary,  Ind.  The 
method  adopted  was  to  unwater  the  sand  by  bleeding — by  sinking 
well  points  in  the  sand  along  the  line  of  the  sewer  and  drawing 
out  the  water  with  pumps.  At  the  time  this  description  was  pub- 
lished the  construction  had  not  been  completed  nor  the  costs  fully 
analyzed,  so  that  the  costs  then  published  were  only  approximate. 
Since  then  the  cost  of  the  work  has  been  worked  out  in  considerable 
detail  by  City  Engineer  A.  P.  Melton  and  his  assistant,  Mr.  E.  M. 
Scheflow,  and  has  been  placed  at  our  disposal  by  Mr.  Melton. 

The  costs  were  compiled  by  keeping  a  force  and  time  account  of 
the  work.  The  inspector  kept  the  records  on  blanks  prepared  for 
the  purpose  and  checked  them  with  the  books  of  the  contractor's 
timekeeper.  While  some  items  of  cost  familiar  to  the  contractor 
were  not  thus  included,  yet  the  figures  given  may  be  considered 
very  close  approximations. 

The  work  comprised  4,258  ft.  of  brick  sewer,  ranging  from  7  ft. 
circular  section  to  6  ft.  4  in.  by  8  ft.  11  in.  oval  section,  all  with 
shells  consisting  of  2  y2  rings  of  brick.  The  soil  was  fine  sand  water 
soaked  below  a  level  about  22  ft.  above  subgrade ;  the  water- 
soaked  sand  ran  on  a  slope  of  about  1  on  15.  The  trench  ranged 
from  18  to  30  ft.  in  depth.  The  method  of  excavation  was  fully 
described  in  our  issue  of  Aug.  5.  Briefly  a  preliminary  wide  cut 
was  made  some  5  to  15  ft.  deep  with  machines,  then  well  points 
were  sunk  and  the  ground  drained,  after  which  excavation  pro- 
ceeded by  hand  between  sheeting.  The  masonry  work  and  back- 
filling followed.  The  cost  of  construction  was  divided  into  the 
following  items :  Machine  excavation,  sheeting,  pumping,  hauling 
materials,  sewer  building,  backfilling,  materials  and  organization. 

Machine  Excavation. — The  preliminary  wide  shallow  cut  only  was 
excavated  by  machine.  A  %  cu.  yd.  Hayward  orange  peel  bucket 
operated  by  a  25-hp.  engine  was  used  for  the  first  1,900  ft.  and 
took  out  21,250  cu.  yds.  at  the  following  cost: 

Item.  Total.       Per  cu  vd 

Engineer,    56    days,    at   $6 $    336.00          $0.0153' 

Fireman,  56  days,  at  $3.50...       196.00  00092 

Laborers,   255   days,   at  $1.75.       446.25  o!o210 

Coal,  56  shifts,  at  $5 280.00  00131 


Total     $1,258.25          $0.0586 

At  this  point  the  orange  peel  was  removed  to  the  rear  to  work 
on  backfilling  and  a  Page  &  Schnable  drag  scraper  excavator  was 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  7,  1908. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  853 

substituted.  This  machine  had  a  2  cu.  yd.  bucket  and  a  40-hp. 
engine ;  this  engine  was  found  to  be  too  weak  and  was  used  only 
until  a  larger  one  could  be  secured.  Another  objection  to  the 
first  arrangement  was  that  two  men  were  required  to  operate  the 
bucket,  one  at  the  hoist  and  one  at  the  swing  engine.  With  the 
machine  as  first  equipped  and  operated  15,300  cu.  yds.  of  material 
were  excavated  at  the  following  cost : 

Item.                                                 Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Engineer,  31  days,  at  $6 $186.00  $0.0122 

Fireman,   31   days,   at   $3.50 108.50  0.0071 

Engineer,   31   days,   at   $3 93.00  0.0060- 

Laborers,   118  days,  at  ?1.75...    206.50  0.0138 

Coal,  31  shifts,  at  $5 155.00  0.0101 

Total     $749.00          $0.0492 

The  40-hp.  engine  was  replaced  by  one  of  60  hp.,  so  arranged 
that  one  man  operated  both  hoist  and  swinging  engine.  With  the 
remodeled  outfit  11,000  cu.  yds.  of  material  were  excavated  at  the 
following  cost : 

Item.  Total.       Per  cu.  yd. 

Engineer,   21  days,   at   $6 $126.00         $0.0114 

Fireman,    21    days,    at    $3.50...      73.50  0.0067 

Laborers,   84  days,  at  $1.75 147.00  0.0133 

Coal,  21  shifts,  at  $5 105.00  0.0095 


Total     $451.50          $0.0409 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  change  of  the  engines  reduced  the  cost 
per  cubic  yard  by  the  amount  of  the  wages  of  one  engineer ;  the 
saving  was  0.83  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Summarizing  we  have  a  cost  of 
$2,488.75  for  excavating  47,550  cu.  yds.,  or  of  $0.0523  per  cu.  yd. 
For  the  4,258  ft.  of  sewer  the  cost  was  57.9  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

Hand  Excavation. — The  bottom  13  ft.  in  depth  of  the  trench  was 
excavated  by  hand  between  sheeting ;  the  width  of  the  excavation 
was  approximately  10  ft.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Item.                    .  Total.       Per  cu.  yd. 

Laborers,  6,441  days,  at  $2.  .$12,882.50          $0.5413 
Foreman,  84  days,  at  $3 522.00  0.0232 

Total    $13,434.00          $0.5645 

The  total  amount  of  hand  excavation  was  23,800  cu.  yds. 
Sheeting. — The  sheeting  consisted  of  vertical  2  x  8-in.  by  12-ft. 
planks  held  by  two  pairs  of  6  x  8-in.  waling  pieces  and  9-ft.  cross 
braces  spaced  8  ft.  apart.  In  cases  of  very  wet  trench  a  third 
row  of  waling  and  braces  was  put  in ;  occasionally,  also,  hori- 
zontal sheeting  was  used  in  the  bottom.  The  cost  of  driving  the 
sheeting  and  placing  the  bracing  and  also  of  pulling  it  was  as 
follows : 

Placing.  Total.       Per  lin.  ft. 

Laborers,  882  'days,  at  $2 $1,764          $0.4142 

Foreman,    80    days,    at    $3.50 280  0.0658 

Carpenters,   50   days,   at   $3 150  0.0351 

Total $2,194          $0.5151 

Pulling : 
Laborers,    242   days,  at   $2 $    484          $0.1136 

Grand    total    .  ..$2,678          $0.6287 


854  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Pumping. — The  item  of  pumping  comprises  all  the  work  of  sink- 
ing and  shifting  the  well  points  and  pipe  line  and  the  removal 
of  the  backwater  in  the  finished  part  of  the  sewer.  Three  Emerson 
pumps  took  water  from  the  well  points,  a  fourth  handled  the  back- 
water and  a  duplex  pump  furnished  water  for  boilers,  mixing 
mortar,  jetting,  etc.  The  cost  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Total.       Per  lin.  ft. 

Laborers,  542  days,  at  $1.75..$    948.50          $0.2227 

$2.50me.  .7!6.1!' !...    2,395.00  0.5625 

Total  for  pipe  work $3,343.50         $0.7852 

Coal,  100  days,  at  $15 $1,500.00          $0.3499 

Firemen,  855  days,  at  $3.50..   2,992.50  0.7025 

Total  for  pumping $4,492.50          $1.0524 

Grand  total    $7,836.00         $1.8376 

Pumping  costs  and  pipe  line  costs  have  been  separated,  since 
the  first  is  a  continuous  expense  which  does  not  vary  from  day  to 
day,  and  the  second  cost  is  operative  only  when  construction  is 
actually  going  on. 

Hauling  Brick  and  Other  Materials. — The  materials  were  hauled 
1,500  ft.  in  steel  dump  cars  running  on  portable  track ;  the  cars 
were  pushed  by  hand.  Coal,  lumber,  supplies,  etc.,  purchased  from 
local  dealers,  were  hauled  by  team.  The  cost  of  hauling  was  as 
follows : 

Item.  Total.       Per  lin.  ft. 

Laborers,  1,219  days,  at  $2 $2,438         $0.5725 

Foreman,  80  days,  at  $3.50 280  0.0657 

Teams    and    drivers,    180    days,    at 

$5.50 . 990  0.2322 

Total ?3/708         $0.8704 

Sewer  Construction. — The  construction  of  the  4,258  ft.  brick 
sewer  was  as  follows: 

Item.  Total.       Per  lin.  ft. 

Laborers,   1,506  days,  at  $2..$  3,012.00          $0.7073 
Carpenters,   50   days,  at  $3..         150.00  0.0351 

Form    setters,    225    days,    at 

$3.75    843.75  0.1981 

Bricklayers,  471  days,  at  $10     4,710.00  1.1061 

Scaffold    men,    236    days,    at 

$2.75     649.00  0.1524 

Brick    tenders,    236    days,    at 

$3.75 885.00  0.2076 

Mortar  mixers,    387    days,   at 

$2.25     860.75  0.2021 

Total $11,110.50         $2.6087 

As  noted  further  on,  the  cost  of  brick  and  cement  for  the  job 
was  $14,436.50,  or  $2.384  per  foot  of  sewer,  making  the  total  cost 
for  labor  and  materials  $4.993  per  lin.  ft.  Since  there  were  520 
bricks  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer,  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  the  brick- 
work was  approximately  the  same  as  the  cost  per  lineal  foot.  The 
bricklayers  averaged  4,710  bricks  per  man  per  9-hr.  day.  Two 
barrels  of  cement  were  used  per  1,000  bricks. 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


855 


Backfilling. — Enough  backfilling  was  done  by  hand  to  cover  the 
sewer  and  to  permit  the  sheeting  to  be  pulled ;    the  remainder  waa 
done    with    the    clam-shell    excavator    first    used    for    preliminary 
trenching.     The  cost  of  backfilling  by  hand  was  as  follows: 
Item.                                                      Total.     Per  lin.  ft. 
Laborers,   378  days,  at  $2 $756  $0:18 

The  cost  of  backfilling  by  machine  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.       Per  lin.  ft. iv?  ,< 

Laborers,   307   days,  at  $1.75. .  .$537.25          $0.1261 

Engineers,    93    days,    at    $6 558.00  0.1287 

Firemen,    93   days,   at   $3.50 325.50  0.0764 

Coal,  93  shifts,  at  $5 465.00  0.1092 

Total    $1,885.75          $0.4404 

Materials. — The   cost   of  the   materials  used   in   the  job  was  as 
follows : 

Item.  Total.       Per  lin.  ft. 

2,221,000  brick,  at  $5 $11,105.00  $2.6080 

Utica  cement,  6,663  sacks,  at 

20  cts 1,332.60  0.3106 

Universal        cement,        6,663 

sacks,  at  30  cts 1,998.90  0.4694 

30  M  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  $20        600.00  0.1409 

Total     $Ti,036.50          $3.5289 

Superintendence   and    General   Expenses. — The  costs    of   superin- 
tendence and  general  expenses  were  as  follows: 

Superintendence.                             Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Superintendent,  4  mos.,  at  $150..$    600  $0.1409 

Gen'l  foreman,  4  mos.,  at  $125..       500  0.1174 

Master  mechanic,  4  mos.,  at  $200      800  0.1855 

Timekeeper,   3   mos.,   at  $60 180  0.0422 

Team,    100   days,   at   $4 400  0.0927 

Total    $2,480         $0.5787 

General   expenses. 

Waterboys,    220   days,   at   $1.50..$  '330          $0.0775 
Clearing  right  of  way,  60  days  at 

$150 90  0.0211 

Total     $    420          $0.0986 

Summarizing    we    have    the    cost    per    lineal    foot    of    sewer    as 
follows : 

Item.  Per  lin  ft. 

Excavation  by  machine        $  0.58 

Excavation   by   hand 3.15 

Sheeting     0.63 

Hauling  brick  and   other   materials 0.87 

Pumping     1.84 

Laying    brick    sewer 2.61 

Backfilling    by    hand 0.18 

Backfilling    by    machine 0.44 

Materials     3.53 

Superintendence    and    general .  0.68 

Depreciation,  repairs,  setting  up  machines  1.50 

Making  3   railway   crossings    ($2,500) 0.58 

Total    $16~59 

The  work  was  begun  on  April  2   and  was  completed  on  Aug.    5, 


856  HANDBOOK   OF  COST   DATA. 

1908,  during  which  time  only  11  days  were  lost  by  the  brick- 
layers. 

Cost  of  a  66-in.  Brick  Sewer  at  Gary,  Ind.* — The  methods  and 
cost  of  constructing  a  brick  sewer  of  oval  section,  6  ft.  2  ins.  x  8  ft. 
11  ins.  in  size,  at  Gary,  Ind.,  were  published  in  our  issues  of  Aug. 
5  and  Oct."  7,  1908.  This  oval  section  changes  to  a  circular  section 
66  ins.  in  diameter  and  then  to  a  circular  section  60  ins.  in  diam- 
eter, which  continue  the  sewer  inland.  The  costs  of  the  circular  sec- 
tions, 4,062  ft.  long,  have  recently  been  compiled  from  inspectors' 
and  timekeepers'  reports  by  City  Engineer  A.  P.  Melton  and  As- 
sistant Engineer  E.  M.  Scheflow  and  are  given  us  for  publication. 

The  land  through  which  the  sewer  passes  consists  of  alternating 
ridges  and  marshes  differing  in  elevation  about  10  ft.  The  trench, 
therefore,  varied  in  depth  between  a  maximum  of  24  ft.  and  a 
minimum  of  14  ft.,  and  averaged  17  ft.  in  depth.  The  material 
trenched  was  a  fine  sand  saturated  with  water  to  a  height  of  13  to 
14  ft.  above  the  bottom  of  the  trench.  The  water-soaked  sand  was 
very  unstable,  taking  a  slope  of  about  1  on  15  when  unconfined. 

The  method  of  excavation  was  to  take  out  a  wide  cut  between 
natural  banks  to  about  waterline  level,  then  to  drive  sheeting  and 
excavate  between  it  to  subgrade.  To  permit  excavation  between 
sheeting  the  sand  was  freed  of  its  water  to  below  sub-grade  level 
by  sinking  batteries  of  well  points  and  pumping.  Full  details  of  the 
bleeding  plant  were  given  in  our  issue  of  Aug.  5,  1908.  The  wide 
surface  cut  was  made  with  a  drag  bucket  excavator,  with  two 
objects,  to  get  a  wide  working  space,  and  to  reduce  the  depth  of 
sheeting. 

Construction  was  begun  Aug.  1  and  finished  Oct.  1,  1908.  Labor- 
ers on  excavation  sheeting,  pumping,  etc.,  worked  a  10-hour  day; 
tenders,  cement  mixers  and  helpers  to  bricklayers  worked  a  9 -hour 
day ;  bricklayers  worked  an  8-hour  day ;  firemen  on  pumps  worked 
in  12-hour  shifts,  and  excavating  machine  crews  worked  a  9 -hour 
day.  The  costs  of  the  various  items  of  the  work  were  as  follows : 

Drag  Bucket  Excavator  Work. — The  preliminary  cut  was  about 
30  ft.  wide  and  from  4  to  10  ft.  deep;  there  were  33,350  cu.  yds. 
of  excavation  for  the  4,062  ft.  of  sewer  or  about  8.21  cu.  yds.  per 
lin.  ft.  The  excavator  worked  83.5  shifts  and  so  averaged  nearly 
400  cu.  yds.  per  shift  of  9  hours.  The  cost  of  operating  the  ex- 
cavator was  as  follows: 

.Item.  Per  9-hr,  shift. 

1  engineman,    at    $6 $   6.00 

1  fireman,     at     $3.50 3.50 

4  laborers,    at    $2 8.00 

Coal    (estimated)    5.00 

Oil,  repairs,   etc 2.00 

Total     $24~50 

This  gives  a  cost  of  6.1  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation  and  of  50.3 
cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.   27,  1909. 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  857 

Excavation  by  Hand. — The  excavation  between  sheeting,  approx- 
imately 8y2xlO  ft,  was  done  by  hand,  scaffolding  the  material  from 
3  to  5  times  and  an  average  of  4  times.  The  cost  of  the  work  was 
as  follows: 

Item.  Total. 

Foreman,  51   days,  at  $3.25 $    165.75 

Laborers,    2,184   days,   at   $2.25 4,914.00 

Total     $5,079.75 

This  gives  a  cost  of  39.4  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  of  $1.25  per  lin.  ft. 
of  sewer. 

Pumping. — The  pumping  plant  consisted  of  3  No.  3  Emerson 
pumpfa  drawing  from  the  well  points ;  1  No.  2  Emerson  pump  tak- 
ing water  from  the  pools  formed  behind  the  drag  bucket  ex- 
cavator ;  1  duplex  pump  for  boiler  feed,  jetting  points,  wetting  brick, 
etc.,  and  4  30-hp.  horizontal  boilers  mounted  on  wheels.  This  plant 
worked  continuously.  The  cost  of  operation  was  as  follows : 
Item.  Total. 

Laborers,   464   days,   at  $2 $    928.00 

Fireman,   439  .days,   at   $3.50 1,536.50 

Pipe  linemen,    1,238  days,   at   $2.50 3,094.00 

Foreman,   27  days,  at   $3.50 94.50 

Coal,   60   days,   at   $15    (estimated) 900.00 


Total     $6,553.00 

This  gives  a  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  sewer  of  $1.61  for  pumping. 
Charged  entirely  against  the  excavation  between  sheeting  which 
was  closely  12,893  cu.  yds.,  the  cost  of  pumping  per  cubic  yard  of 
excavation  was  50.8  cts. 

Sheeting. — The  sheeting  consisted  of  2x8  in.  x.  12  ft.  plank  driven 
close  on  each  side  of  the  trench.  This  sheeting  was  braced  apart 
by  two  6x8  in.  walling  pieces  set  3  ft.  apart  vertically  and  6x8  in. 
x  8%  ft.  cross-braces  spaced  8  ft.  apart  along  trench.  The  cost  for 
sinking,  bracing,  pulling  and  bringing  forward  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total. 

Labor,  placing  and  driving,   392   days,   at 

$2.25     $    882.00 

Labor,    pulling   and    bringing    ahead,    182 

days,     at     $2.25 409.50 

Foreman,    27    days,    at    $3.50 94.50 

Carpenter,    36   days,   at  $3 108.00 

Total     $1,494.00 

This  gives  a  cost  for  sheeting  of  36.8  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  trench 
and  of  11.6  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation  between  sheeting.  There 
were  about  73  ft.  B.  M.  of  sheeting  and  bracing  per  lineal  foot  of 
trench,  so  that  the  cost  per  M.  ft.  B.  M.  was  practically  $5  for 
labor  placing,  pulling,  etc. 

Laying  Brick  Sewer. — The  sewer  was  built  of  two  rings  of  brick. 
The  invert  was  built  in  24-ft.  sections.  Wooden  centers  with  lag- 
ging 16  ft.  long  were  used  in  laying  the  arch  and  2  men  knocked  the 


858  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

centers  down,  brought  them  forward  and  re-erected  them  as  fast  as 
6  bricklayers  could  work.     The  cost  of  laying  was  as  follows: 
Item  Total. 

Bricklayers,   223   days,  at  $10 $2,230.00 

Tenders,  112  days,  at  $3.75 420.00 

Scaffoldmen,    111    days,    at    $2.75 305.25 

Mortar  mixers,    225   days,   at   $2.50. 

Form  setters,   100  days,  at  $3.75. 

Laborers,    715   days,   at  $ 

Carpenter,    18   days,   at   $ 

Total     $5,376.75 

This  gives  a  cost  of  $1.32  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer  and  of  $5.28  per 
1,000  bricks  laid. 

Backfilling. — The  backfilling  to  a  height  of  2  ft.  above  the  brick- 
work was  done  by  hand,  and  for  the  remainder  of  the  height  by  a 
1-cu.  yd.  Hay  ward  clam  shell  excavator.  The  backfilling  by  hand 
called  for  277  days'  labor  at  $2  and  cost,  therefore,  $554  or  13.6  cts. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer.  The  cost  of  the  clam-shell  excavator  work  was 
as  follows: 

Item.  Per  shift. 

1  engineer,    at    $6 $   6.00 

1  fireman,    at    $3 3.00 

3  laborers,   at    $2 6.00 

Coal    (estimated)    5.00 

Oil,  repairs,  etc 2.00 

Total $22.00 

There  were  55  shifts  worked  giving  a  total  cost  of  $1,210.  In  ad- 
dition the  drag  bucket  excavator  was  worked  backfilling  for  18 
shifts  at  $24.50  making  a  total  of  $441.  Lumping  the  work  of  both 
machines,  the  cost  of  backfilling  was  40.6  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer 
and  6.8  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Materials. — The  cost  of  materials  was  as  follows : 

Item.  Total. 

1,018,000  brick,  at  $5  per  M $5,090.00 

3,054  bags  Utica  cement,  at  20  cts.: 610.80 

3,054  bags  Universal  cement,  at  35  cts...    1,065.90 
Lumber    (estimated) 600.00 


Total     $7,369.70 

This  is  a  cost  of  $1.81  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer. 

Hauling  Materials. — For  about  3,000  ft.  of  the  work  all  materials 
were  hauled  from  the  railway  siding  in  2  cu.  yd.  steel  dump  cars 
running  on  narrow  gage  track.  The  average  haul  was  1,700  ft.  For 
the  remainder  of  the  work  the  hauling  was  done  with  teams ;  brick 
were  hauled  by  subcontract  for  70  cts.  per  M.  Two  teams  were  also 
employed  throughout  the  work  to  haul  supplies  from  local  dealers 
and  to  haul  coal  to  the  excavators  when  they  were  beyond  reach  of 
the  contractors'  railway.  The  cost  of  hauling  was  as  follows : 
Item.  Total. 

Laborers,  767  days,  at  $2 .$1,534.00 

Foreman,   52  days,  at  $3.50 182.00 

Brick,  hauled  by  team  at  70  cts.  per  M. .       194.60 
Teams,   100  days,  at  $5.50 550.00 

Total $2,460.00 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  859 

The  cost  of  hauling  was  thus  60.7  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer. 

Superintendence  and  General  Expenses. — The  costs  under  these 
items  comprised  the  following: 

Item.  Total. 

Superintendent,    2   months,   at   $150 $    300.00 

General  foreman,    2   months,   at   $150 300.00 

Master  mechanic,   1  month,  at  $200 200.00 

Clearing    right    of    way 80.00 

Waterboys,    160   days,   at   $1.50 240.00 

Handy  teams,   52   days,  at  $3 156.00 

Total     $1,226.00 

This  gives  a  cost  of  30  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer. 
Summary. — Summarizing  the  costs  of  the  work  per  lineal  foot  of 
sewer  we  have: 

Item.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Drag    bucket    excavation .$0.503 

Hand   excavation    1.250 

Pumping 1.610 

Sheeting    0.368 

Laying    sewer    1.320 

Backfilling    by    hand 0.136 

Backfilling    by    machine 0.406 

Materials     .  . .  '. 1.810 

Hauling  materials    0.607 

Superintendence  and  general 0.300 

Depreciation    of    plant,    repairs,    etc.     (esti- 
mated)         1.500 

Total $9.810 

Cost  of  Rock  Excavation  for  Sewer  Trenches  in  St.  Louis. — The 
following  data  were  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  May  30, 
1906 :  The  excavation  of  sewer  trenches  in  South  Ben  ton  street, 
Sewer  District  No.  6,  St.  Louis,  was  mostly  in  solid  rock,  of  a  lime- 
stone formation  usual  to  the  vicinity.  The  work  was  done  by  con- 
tract, and  the  actual  cost  of  the  work  is  given  below. 

The  rock  is  a  limestone  lying  in  horizontal  ledges  or  strata,  1  ft. 
to  3  ft.  thick.  The  top  4  ft.  or  5  ft.  of  rock  is  more  or  less  rotten 
and  seamy,  easily  shot  and  sledged  to  pieces.  Below  this  top  rock 
it  is  hard  and  difficult  to  break  up. 

Dirt  seams  run  through  it  all,  at  times  causing  the  ledge  to  break 
out  back  under  the  sides  of  the  trench,  requiring  considerably  more 
excavation  than  is  estimated  and  paid  for  under  the  specifications. 
An  estimate  of  this  extra  excavation  is  about  20%  more  than  is 
paid  for.  The  specifications  stated  that  when  solid  rock  was  en- 
countered in  laying  pipe  sewers,  the  solid  rock  was  to  be  excavated 
6  ins.  below  the  flow  line  for  all  pipes  of  18  ins.  or  less  in  diameter, 
and  9  ins.  below  the  flow  line  for  pipes  of  greater  diameter  than 
18  ins.  The  trench  was  then  to  be  filled  with  sufficient  earth,  well 
rammed,  to  form  a  foundation  upon  which  the  pipe  should  be  laid. 
Payment  for  the  work  was  made  as  follows:  Class  "A,"  (Earth), 
Class  "B"  (Loose  Rock),  Class  "C"  (Solid  Rock),  and  quicksand 
excavation  for  pipe  sewers  was  paid  for  at  the  prices  bid  for  Class 
"A,"  Class  "B,"  Class  "C"  and  quicksand  excavation,  respectively, 
and  was  estimated  for  a  width  12  ins.  greater  than  the  inside  dl 


860  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

ameter  of  the  pipe,  for  all  pipe  18  in.  or  less  in  diameter  and  15 
in.  for  pipes  of  greater  inside  diameter  than  18  ins. 

To  quarry  the  top  rock,  the  drill  holes  were  staggered,  spaced 
about  4  ft.  apart  along  the  trench  and  about  6  ins.  from  the  sides 
of  the  required  width  of  trench.  See  Fig.  5.  In  the  lower  and  hard- 
er rock,  the  spacing  of  drill  roles  was  2%  ft.  but  similarly  stag- 
gered. If  any  rock  projected  too  far  out,  it  was  sledged  or  shot  off 
by  light  shots. 

To  break  up  a  ledge  or  strata,  the  drill  holes  in  the  top  rock  were 
driven  about  half  way  through  the  ledge  while  for  the  lower  rock 
they  were  driven  %  to  %  the  thickness  of  ledge.  Hand  drills,  1%- 
in.  bit,  were  used,  one  man  to  a  drill,  and  about  10  lin.  ft.  of  hole 
was  drilled  per  8  hours'  work.  The  shots  were  about  one  stick  of 
60%  dynamite  per  foot  in  depth  of  drill  hole. 

The  costs  given  here  do  not  include  insurance,  collection  of  spe- 
cial tax  bills,  tools,  and  office  expenses.  The  blacksmith  bill  was 
$355,  or  20  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  ;  the  powder  bill  $689.76,  for  about  4,300 
Ibs.  of  dynamite;  the  wages  of  foremen  were  $5.00,  quarrymen  $3.00, 


Fig.    5.      Spacing   of   Drill   Holes. 

and  a  few  laborers  $2.00  per  8-hour  day.  The  total  amount  of  rock 
paid  for  was  1,683  cu.  yds.  The  cost  of  dynamite  was,  therefore, 
$0.40  per  cu.  yd.,  and  amount  was  2*4  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  On  the  sup- 
position of  1-5  more  rock  actually  handled  than  allowed  in  the  esti- 
mates, the  dynamite  is  $0.34  per  cu.  yd.,  or  2  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  The 
average  amount  of  rock  for  an  8-hour  day  per  quarryman  was  0.96 
cu.  yd. 

The  following  tables  are  based  upon  measurements  and  quantities 
estimated  and  paid  for  under  the  specifications.  The  average  costs 
are  derived  from  this  estimate  and  the  expense  account  on  the 
whole  or  actual  excavation. 

370  lin.  ft,  21-In.  sewer;  average  depth  in  solid  rock,  14  ft.: 

Foreman,  67  days,  at  |5 |    335 

Quarryman,    700   days,    at   $3 2,100 

Laborer,    73   days,   at   $2 146 


Total,   600   cu.   yds.,   at   $4.30 $2,581 

287  lin.  ft,   18-in.   sewer;    average  depth  in  solid  rock,12  ft.: 

Foreman,    54    days,    at    $5 %    270 

Quarryman,    343   days,   at   $3 1,029 

Laborer,    53   days,   at   $2 106 

Total,    317    cu.    yds.,    at    $4.43..  . . $M05 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  861 

314  lin.  ft.,   18-in.  sewer;  average  depth  In  solid  rock,   13  ft: 

Foreman,    65    days,    at    $5 $    320 

Quarryman,    350    days,    at   $3 1,050 

Laborer,    80^1    days,    at    $2 161 

Total,    380    cu.    yds.,    at    $4.04 $17536 

222  lin.  ft,  15-in.  sewer;    average  depth  in  solid  rock,  11  ft: 

Foreman,    36    days,    at    $5 $180 

Quarryman,    215    days,   at   $3 645 

Laborer,    40    days,    at  .  $2 80 

Total,    206    cu.   yds.,    at   $4.39 $905 

251  lin.  ft,   15-in.  sewer;    average  depth  in  solid  rock,  8  ft: 

Foreman,   32  days,  at  $5 $160 

Quarryman,    129    days,    at    $3 387 

Laborer,  60  days,  at  $2 120 

Total,    180  cu.   yds.,   at   $3.70 $667 

The  average  cost  of  the  rock  excavation  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman    and    labor $4.20 

Dynamite     0.40 

Blacksmith     0.20 

Total     $4.80 

On  the  estimate  of  1-5  more  actually  excavated  than  allowed 
for  the  average  cost  of  rock  excavation  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman    and    labor $3.50 

Dynamite     0.34 

Blacksmith 0.16 



Total     (actual    excavation) $4.00 

The  cost  of  excavation  of  earth  and  loose  rock  was  $0.50  and 
$1.40  per  cu.  yd.,  respectively.  The  cost  of  backfilling  was  $0.15 
per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation. 

For  the  information  in  this  article  we  are  indebted  to  Mr. 
Curtis  Hill,  Civil  Engineer  of  the  Sewer  Department,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Cost  of  Pipe  and  Brick  Sewers,  St.  Louis. — Mr.  Curtis  Hill  gives 
the  following  data,  which  are  averages  of  work  done  by  contract 
during  three  years,  April,  1901,  to  April,  1904.  The  work  con- 
sisted in  building  40  miles  of  vitrified  pipe  sewers,  12  to  24  ins. 
diam.,  and  13  miles  of  egg-shaped  (18x27-in.  to  48x60-in.)  and 
circular  (60  to  108-in. )  sewers.  The  egg-shaped  sewers  were  9  ins. 
thick;  the  circular  sewers  were  13  ins.  thick.  The  excavation  was, 
for  the  most  part,  in  stiff  clay,  only  a  small  amount  of  quicksand 
occurring.  Trench  excavators  were  not  very  successful,  because  the 
"joint  clay"  caved  in  if  not  well  braced  as  fast  as  excavated.  The 
Chicago  Sewer  Excavator,  however,  made  the  best  records  made 
with  trench  excavators.  Potter  trench  machines  were  largely  used 
for  the  smaller  trenches,  and  cableways  for  the  larger  trenches. 
The  Potter  machine  consists  of  a  movable  trestle,  and  a  bucket  car 
that  rides  on  tracks  on  top  of  the  trestle  bents.  This  car  is  moved 
back  and  forth  by  a  stationary  hoisting  engine,  .which  also  hoists 
the  buckets.  The  legs  of  the  trestle  span  the  trench  and  are  pro- 
vided with  wheels  that  rest  on  rails. 


862        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

The  following  table  gives  the  actual  average  cost  to  the  con- 
tractors, including  foremen  and  superintendence,  but  not  including 
interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,  insurance  of  men,  and  office 
expenses. 

COST  OF  PIPE  AND  BRICK  SEWERS,  ST.  Louis. 

Earth  Excavation.  Brick  Masonry. 

3         ds  ^         o3^  oS  -P-O  v 

.    ~o  >>        e  3          .0  ft  &>>  ft 

-M  <0      ^&  d 

oi'o    a  ^-S       i**a 


*-  .  _  p 

gg  gS        3  g§  5*3  orf  oS 

x    15'*  ____        30  ........  1.18  $1.71  $6.13  $7.84 

circular!  .....        26  1.0        $0.36  1.00  1.87  6.13  8.00 

6'     circulart  .....        17  0.8          0.40  0.97  1.75  6.30  8.05 

5'     circular!  .....        16  0.8          0.40  0.95  1.80  6.30  8.10 

2'    x    3'$  ........        11  ........  0.80  2.40  6.10  8.50 


*  Method  of  excavation  was  steam   shovel  followed  by  a   cable- 
way.     The  lumber  bracing  cost  $3.60  per  running  foot  of  sewer, 
t  Potter  trench  machine  used. 
j  No  trench  machine  used. 

The  "cu.  yds.  per  laborer  per  hr."  means  the  number  of  cubic 
yards  excavated  and  loaded  into  buckets  by  each  laborer  actually 
engaged  in  digging.  The  average  of  all  the  work,  including  pipe 
sewers,  was  about  9  cu.  yds.  excavated  per  man  per  10-hr,  day. 

On  pipe  sewer  trenches,  where  no  machinery  was  used,  the  cost 
of  earth  excavating  was  as  follows: 

Size  of  pipe,  ins.         Depth  in  ft.       Cost  per  cu.  yd. 

24     15  $0.50 

21 16  0.50 

21     7  0.35 

18     8  0.35 

15     16  0.55 

It  cost  90  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  to  excavate  loose  rock  in  the  trenches 
35  and  16  ft.  deep;  and  $3.80  per  cu.  yd.  to  excavate  solid  rock. 

"Four  men,  the  bottomman  and  his  helper,  with  two  men  hand- 
ling and  lowering  the  pipe,  laid  21-in.  and  24-in.  pipe  at  the  rate 
of  sixteen  lineal  feet  per  hour,  at  a  cost  of  6  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  Three 
men  will  lay  the  same  amount  of  15 -in.  or  18-in.  pipe  in  the  same 
time.  Including  the  material  for  jointing,  the  cost  of  laying  pipe  is 
10  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

"A  good  sewer  brick  mason  will  lay  from  400  to  500  bricks  per 
hr.  There  is  one  case  where  four  masons,  working  on  a  6^-ft. 
brick  sewer,  each  averaged  600  bricks  per  hr.,  and  kept  it  up  for 
several  days,  but  this  is  far  above  the  average." 

The  average  contract  prices  for  the  three  years  (1901-4)  was  as 
follows : 

12-in.   pipe,  per  lineal   foot $  0.45 

15-ln.   pipe,  per  lineal  foot 0.55 

18-in.  pipe,   per  lineal  foot 0.80 

21-in.  pipe,   per  lineal  foot 1.00 

H-ln.  pipe,   per  lineal  foot 1.60 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  86b 

Pipe  junctions,   extra,   each 1.50 

Slants  for  brick  sewers,  each 0.65 

Earth  excavation,   per  cubic  yard 0.55 

Loose   rock   excavation,   per   cubic   yard 1.60 

Solid  rock  excavation,  per  cubic  yard 4.00 

Concrete,   per  cubic  yard 6.50 

Brick  masonry,   per  cubic  yard 9.40 

Vitrified    brick    masonry,    per    cubic    yard 12.20 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  excavation  was  paid  for  as  a  separate 
Item,  and  not  included  with  the  pipe  or  brick. 

Mr.  Hill  informs  me  that  on  a  recently  completed  brick  sewer, 
requiring  287  days  to  build,  two  Potter  machines  and  a  cable  way 
were  used.  There  were  49,918  cu.  yds.  of  Class  "A"  excavation 
(earth),  6,629  cu.  yds.  of  Class  "B"  (loose  rock),  and  33  cu.  yds. 
of  Class  "C"  (solid  rock).  There  were  2,303  lin.  ft.  of  9-ft.  sewer, 
3,240  lin.  ft.  of  8-ft.  sewer,  254  lin.  ft.  of  7 -ft  sewer,  1,607  lin.  ft. 
of  5% -ft.  sewer,  and  1,203  lin.  ft.  of  4  x  5 -ft.  sewer.  These  re- 
quired 8,177  cu.  yds.  of  hard  brick  masonry  and  723  cu.  yds.  of 
vitrified  brick  masonry.  The  excavation  ("A,"  "B"  and  "C")  cost 
68  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  of  which  11%  cts.  was  the  cost  of  the  trench 
machines.  The  total  cost  of  this  trench  excavation  (56,580  cu. 
yds.),  including  labor  of  bracing  and  backfilling,  was  as  follows: 

Foreman,   6,400   hours,   at  50  cts %   3,200.00 

Laborer,    87,000    hours,   at    22  y2    cts 19.575.00 

Bottom-man     (pipe    layer),    6,360    hours,    at 

30    cts 1,908.00 

Waterboy,  3,800  hours,  at  15  cts 570.00 

Team,    10,450    hours,    at   50    cts 5,225.00 

Watchman,    4,800    hours,    at    25    cts 1,200.00 

Machine,    4,400    hours,    at    $1.50 6,600.00 


Total,    56,580    cu.   yds.,   at    $0.68 .$38,278.00 

Most  of  the  trenches  require  bracing,  the  timber  for  which  costs 
2  cts.  to  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation,  which  is  not  included 
in  the  above.  Yello.w  pine  costs  $18  per  M. 

The  wages  of  foremen,  Waterboys  and  watchmen  are  all  charged 
against  excavation,  and  no  part  against  masonry. 

The  cost  of  laying  the  brick  masonry  was  as  follows: 

Masons,  9,400  hrs.,  at  75  cts...  .  .$   7,050.00 

Helpers,   1,400  hrs.,  at  25  cts 3,500.00 

Mortarmen,   10,750  hrs.,  at  27%   cts 2,956.25 

Total    for    8,900    cu.    yds.,    at    $1.52 $13,506.25 

The  masons  averaged  422  bricks  per  hr.,  or  3,376  bricks  per  8-hr, 
day. 

Cost  of  a  Brick  Sewer  at  St.  Louis,  Including  Tunneling  in  Earth 
and  in  Rock.— The  following  data  were  published  in  Engineering- 
Contracting,  July  10,  1907. 

The  13th  street  sewer  in  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  was  designed  to  give 
deep  drainage  in  a  down  town  district,  where  the  street  is  narrow, 
the  traffic  heavy,  and  the  ground  well  filled  with  pipes  and  con- 
duits. Owing  to  these  conditions,  the  plans  were  made  and  con- 
tract let  for  tunneling  the  entire  sewer.  The  sewer  is  brick,  30-in. 
x  4 2 -in.  diameter  and  1,458  ft.  in  length. 


864 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


Taking  a  mean  length  of  earth  and  rock,  there  were  630  ft.  of 
earth  and  828  ft.  of  solid  rock  tunnel.  Five  shafts  were  used  in 
the  earth  section  and  ten  in  the  rock. 

The  work  was  done  by  the  Myers  Construction  Co.  of  St.  Louis 
during  the  whiter  of  1906-1907,  in  190  days,  including  Sundays  and 
holidays. 

The  contract  included  the  excavation  of  1,156  cu.  yds.  of  earth 


COST  OF  A  WEEK'S  SEWER  WORK  ON  FOUR  JOBS. 
(Two  Brick  and  Two  Pipe  Sewers) 


Kind  of 
Trench  Mach. 

Potter 

Potter 

Carson 

None 

Foreman  .... 
Laborer  
Bottom  man. 
Water  boy... 
Team  .  . 

Wages 
per 
hour 
(0.50 
.221 
.30 
.15 
.50 
.25 
1.50 

Job  No.  1 

Job  No.  2 

Job  No.  3 

Job  No.  4 

Hrs. 
54 
1,089 
50 
54 
54 
63 
64 

Wages 
$27.00 
245.02 
15.00 
8.10 
27.00 
15.75 
81.00 

Hrs. 
54 
1,000 
47 
54 

Wages 
$27.00 
225.00 
14.10 
8.10 

Hrs. 
54 
640 
54 
54 

Wages 
$27.00 
144.00 
16.20 
8.10 

Hrs. 
9 
126 
9 
9 

Wages 
$4.50 
28.35 
2  70 
1.35 

Watchman.  . 
*  Machine..  .  . 

"54 

"SLOO' 

54 

54 

13.50 
81.00 

Total  for  excavation  . 
Total  cu.  yds.    " 
Cubic  yards  per  hour 
per  man  
Cost  per  cubic  yard  .  . 
Depth  of  trench,  ft.  . 

Kind  of  soil  
Size  of  sewer  

$418.87 
980 

0.9 

$0.43 
19* 

Sandy 

3x4  ft. 
300 

$355.20 
600 

0.6 
$0.60 
23 

Stiff  earth 
and  clay 

2*x3Ht. 
154 

$289.20 
407 

0.64 
$0.71 
18 
Stiff  earth, 
fire  clay  and 
30%  loose  rk. 
18-in.  pipe 
244 

$36.90 
120 

0.95 
$0.31 
Shallow 

Black  loam 

21-in.  pipe 
108 

Length  of  sewer,  ft  .  . 

Brick  Mason. 
Helper  
Mortarman  .  . 
Total  

$0.75 
.25 
.27* 

104 
104 
104 

I/S.OO 
26.00 
28.60 

68 
84 
84 

$51.00 
21.00 
23.10 

4Hii 
pipe 
stre 
laidp 
per  i 
ma 
pipe 
whos 
are; 
per 

I.  ft.  Of 

(double 
ngth) 
er  hour 
jottom 
n  (or 
layer), 
e  wages 
W  cents 
hour 

12  lin.  ft.  of 
pipe  per  houi 
per  bottom 
man. 
Trench 
shallow, 
no  scaffold- 
ing or 
bracing 

$132.60 

$95.10 

Cu.  yds.  brick 
Cu.  yds.  per  n 
Cost  of  labor 
masonry.  .  . 
450  brick  at  $S 
0.7  bbl.  cemen 
$1  50 

masonry  
lason,  per  hr.  . 
per  cubic  yard 

.25  i  M 

112 
1.08 

$1  20 
3.71 

1.05 
0.22 

61 
0.90 

$1.56 
3.71 

1.05 
0.22 

t  (1-3  mort.)  at 

0.2  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $1.10  .  .  . 
Total  per  cubic  yard  brick 
masonry  

$6.18 

$6.54 

*  A  trench  machine  is  rented  for  $125  per  month,  and  bums  15  bushels  of 
coal  per  9-hour  day.  When  the  rental  and  fuel  costs  are  added  to  the  wages  of 
engineman  and  fireman,  the  total  cost  is  $1.50  per  hour. 

and  880  cu.  yds.  of  rock,  and  the  construction  of  770  cu.  yds.  of 
brick  masonry.  The  work  was  paid  for  on  the  unit  basis  and  all 
work  done  was  measured  up  and  paid  for. 

The  earth  was  a  plastic  clay,  which  would  drop  out  in  the  arch 
following  the  shovel.  In  this  way  extra  work  over  the  arch  (over 
and  above  the  regular  9-in.  brick  work)  averaged  8  ins.  In  the 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  865 

rock  tunnel,  the  average  was  7  ins.  over  the  arch  and  6  ina  on 
the  lower  quarter  haunches  of  the  invert.  These  spaces  were  filled 
solid  with  brick  masonry. 

In  the  earth  section,  a  small  opening  was  driven  4  ft.  to  6  ft. 
in  length,  and  braced  with  a  crown  plank  and  short  upright  sup- 
ports. As  this  was  enlarged,  other  crown  planks  were  inserted,  re- 
placing the  shorter  supports  with  longer  ones.  The  masonry  was 
then  built  in  the  section,  removing  the  timber  supports  as  the 
masonry  progressed.  Material  for  the  next  section  was  passed 
through  the  finished  one. 

The  rock  was  a  stratified  limestone,  irregular  and  gnarly.  It 
varied  in  hardness,  in  some  places  to  a  flinty  appearance.  The 
blasting  was  done  in  batteries  of  three  shots,  the  first  in  the  upper, 
or  arch,  portion  of  the  heading.  When  this  broken  rock  had  been 
removed,  the  same  process  was  repeated  on  the  lower,  or  invert, 
section.  Holes  were  driven  to  a  depth  of  about  2  ft.  and  loaded 
with  from  %  to  1%  sticks  of  50  per  cent  dynamite,  the  size  of 
stick  depending  upon  the  indicated  hardness  and  position  of  the 
rock. 

The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Earth   excavation  :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman,   520   hrs.,   at  $0.50 10.225 

Bottommen,    1,320   hrs.,   at    $0.50 571 

Laborers,    7,500    hra.,    at    $0.30 1.946 

Carpenter,    830  hrs.,   at   $0.50 359 

Labor,    timbering,    620   hrs.,    at   $0.30 161 

Timber,   22  M  ft,  at  $20 „ 381 

Watchman,    520   hrs.,    at   .017%... 079 

Waste,    585    loads,    at   $1 506 

Total     '. $4.228 

The  earth  excavation  amounted  to  1,156  cu.  yds.  and  each  labor- 
er averaged  .154  cu.  yd.  per  hour. 

Rock    excavation :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman,    1,000    hrs.,   at   $0.50 $0.568 

Bottommen,    2,600   hrs.,   at   $0.50 1.477 

Laborers,    9,980   hrs.,   at    $0.30 3.402 

Engineer,    1,600    hrs.,   at   $0.50 909 

Blacksmith     070 

Watchman,    1,600    hrs.,    at    $0.17  % 318 

Dynamite,   4,000   Ibs.,   at   $0.15 682 

Caps    and    fuse 030 

Waste,   445   loads,    at    $1 500 

Total     $7.956 

The  rock  excavation  amounted  to  880  cu.  yds.  and  each  laborer 
averaged  .088  cu.  yd.  per  hour.  In  the  figures  given  above  for 
earth  excavation  and  rock  excavation,  by  the  item  "waste"  is  meant 
the  excavated  material  that  it  was  necessary  to  take  away ;  in  other 


866        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

words  the  surplus  excavation.  The  length  of  the  haul  was  about  2^ 
miles,  and,  where  the  contractor  hired  teams  for  the  purpose,  they 
were  paid  by  the  load  at  the  rate  of  $1  per  load.  The  figures  given 
for  "waste"  are  what  the  contractor  actually  hired  teams  to  re- 
move ;  but,  in  addition,  he  used  some  of  his  own  teams,  of  which  he 
kept  no  close  record. 

Brick  masonry :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Bricklayer,    1,180   hrs.,    at   $1 $1.532 

Helpers,     2,400    hrs.,     at     $0.30 935 

Watchman,    480   hrs.,   at   $0.17  y2 109 

Brick,   340   M,   at   $9 3.974 

Cement,    460    bbls.,    at    $1.80... 1.075 

Sand,    190  cu.  yds.,   at   $1 247 

Total     $7.872 

A  total  of  770  cu.  yds.  of  brick  work  were  constructed ;  of  this 
amount  73  cu.  yds.  were  constructed  of  vitrified  brick,  costing 
$12.00  per  M.  Allowing  for  the  extra  cost  of  this  vitrified  brick 
brings  the  total  cost  of  the  brick  masonry  per  cubic  yard  to  $7.99. 
The  vitrified  brick  masonry  alone  cost  $8.12  per  cu.  yd.  Each 
bricklayer  averaged  .652  cu.  yd.  per  hour. 

The  plant  used  in  the  work  and  its  cost  were  as  follows: 

Dynamo,  20  hp.,  and  electricity  for  4  months $800 

Compressor    250 

Receiver     25 

Air  drills   (Ingersoll-Rand,  N.  Y.),  3,  at  $110 330 

Pumps,  two  2-in.  at  $60,  and  one  1-in.  at  $30.,..  150 

Hand  windlasses    100 

Tools,    boots,    lights,    gasoline,    etc 200 

With  the  exception  of  the  last  two  items,  all  of  the  plant  was 
used  in  rock  excavation  alone.  The  earth  section  of  the  tunnel 
was  worked  from  the  outlet  and  there  was  little  pumping  required. 

In  the  costs  given  above  no  charge  has  been  made  for  plant, 
nor  do  the  costs  include  office  expenses  of  the  contractor  nor  in- 
surance of  the  men.  For  the  information  from  which  this  article 
was  prepared  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Curtis  Hill,  C.  E.,  of  St. 
.Louis,  Mo. 

Cost  of  Pipe  and  Brick  Sewers  and  Manholes  in  St.  Louis.— This 

sewer,  which  was  known  as  the  Tarn  Avenue  public  sewer,  was  con- 
structed in  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  and  consisted  of  262.5  ft.  of  24-in.  pipe 
sewer  and  154  ft.  of  2 2-in.  x  33-in.  brick  sewer  and  one  manhole. 

The  brick  portion  of  this  sewer  is  under  the  Missouri  Pacific 
Railroad  tracks  and  the  street  railway  tracks  on  the  adjoining 
street.  The  tracks  consist  of  five  railroad  and  two  street  car 
tracks.  The  work  here  was  done  in  open  cut,  the  railway  com- 
panies supporting  their  own  tracks.  The  difficulty  of  working 
through  and  under  these  tracks  somewhat  increased  the  cost  of  the 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


861 


brick  sewer.  Even  with  this,  the  cost  of  rock  excavation  is  low, 
since  the  rock  belonged  to  a  class  easily  handled,  being  horizontally 
stratified  limestone,  more  or  less  rotten  on  top,  while  the  rest 
shattered  well  when  blasted. 

The  drill  holes  were  vertical  (drilled  with  hand,  or  churn  drills), 
spaced  about  3  ft.  along  the  center  of  the  trench,  driven  about  2^ 
ft.  deep  and  loaded  with  1%  sticks,  about  1  Ib.)  of  40%  dynamite. 
The  driller  held  his  own  drill,  one  man  drilling,  1.  e.,  only  one  drill 
with  one  man  to  a  hole.  Limestone  was  ordinarily  found  in  one 
to  three  foot  strata,  and  the  drill  holes  were  driven  to  such  a  depth 
that  the  shot  would  tear  out  the  strata.  The  layers  of  stone  were 
of  a  depth  at  this  place  that  holes  about  1%  ft.  deep  loosened  up 
the  stone  to  the  layer  beneath.  The  top  4  or  5  ft.  (and  sometimes 
more)  of  the  rock  were  rotten,  and  all  that  was  necessary  in  the 
way  of  blasting  was  to  loosen  up  the  ledge,  then  sledge  and  pick 
it  out  The  shots  were  in  the  center  of  the  trench,  which  would 


Fig.  6.     Profile  of  Tarn  Avenue  Sewer. 


leave  the  -sides  of  the  trench  ragged,  but  the  same  rotten  rock  can 
be  sledged  and  dressed  off  to  required  width. 

The  trench  was  3%  ft.  wide.  The  width  of  rock  excavation  paid 
for  is  estimated  to  the  extreme  width  of  the  brick  work  down  to 
sub-grade.  The  railroad  ballast  is  included  in  the  earth  excava- 
tion. All  excavation  costs  include  the  labor  of  backfilling,  disposal 
of  surplus,  bracing,  etc.,  but  no  allowance  is  made  for'  lumber  for 
bracing,  nor  for  the  incidentals,  such  as  care  of  tools,  insurance, 
contractor's  office  expense,  etc.  No  machinery  was  used. 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


2Jf-In.  Pipe  Sewer. 
Earth  Excavation   (5^  ft.  cut;  150  cu.  yds.). 

Total.      Per  cu.  yd.  Per  lin.  ft 

Foreman,  27  hrs.,  at  $0.50 $13.50              $0.09  $0.05 

Labor,    153    hrs.,   at    $0.25 38.25 

Total     $51~75              $0.35  $0.20 

Pipe   and   Pipe  Laying    (262.5   lin.   ft). 

Total.  Per  lin.  ft 

Foreman,   10  hrs.,    at    $0.50 $  5.00  $0.02 

Labor,   120  hrs.,   at   $0.25 30.00  0.11 

Bottomman,   63   hrs.,   at   $0.30 18.90  0.07 

Cement,   1-150   bbl.,   at   $1.50 0.01 

Pipe,  per  ft . 

Total     $1.46 

Excavation  per  lin.  ft 0.20 

Grand  total  per  lin.  ft  pipe  sewer $1.66 

22-In.  x  33-In   Brick  Sewer. 

(154  lin.  ft.) 
Earth  Excavation    (9.2   ft    cut;    190   cu.   yds.). 

Total.      Per  cu.  yd.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Foreman,   53   hrs.,   at   $0.50 $  26.50              $0.14  $0.16 

Labor,    630   hrs.,    at    $0.25 162.50                0.85  1.05 

Total     $189.00              $0.99  $1.21 

Solid  Rock  Excavation  (7  ft.  cut;  135  cu.  yds.). 

Total.      Per  cu.  yd  Per  lin.  ft. 

Foreman,    100  hrs.,  at   $0.50 $  50.00              $0.37  $0.32 

'Drillers,  570  hrs.,  at  $0.30 ....    171.00                1.26  1.11 

Labor,    460   hrs.,    at    $0.25 115.00                0.85  0.75 

Dynamite,   70  Ibs.,  at  $0.15 10.50                0.08  0.07 

Total     $346.50              $2.56  $2.25 

Brick  Masonry   (41  cu.  yds.). 

Total.      Per  cu.  yd.  Per  lin.  ft 

Foreman,   54   hrs.,  at  $0.50 $  27.00              $0.66  $0.17 

tMason,   61   hrs.,   at    $1.00 61.00                1.49  039 

Helper,   61  hrs.,   at   $0.25 15.25                0.37  0.10 

Mortarma,n,   62  hrs.,   at   $0.30 18.60                045  012 

Brick,  18,200,  at  $8.50  per  M 155.55                 3.79  1.01 

Cement,  25  bbls.,  at   $1.50 37.50                091  024 

Sand,  12  cu.  yds.,  at  $1.00 12.00                0.29  0.08 

Total     $326.90              $7.96  $2.11 

Earth    excavation    - 121 

Rock  excavation    '....'.  2.25 

Total  cost  of  brick  sewer $5.57 

*  At  rate  of  %  cu.  yd.  per  hour  per  driller. 
t  At  rate  of  %  cu.  yd.  per  hour  per  mason. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  869 

Brick  Manhole. 
(4  cu.  yds.) 

Total.       Per  cu.  yd. 

Mason,   9  hrs.,  at  $1.00     $  9.00  $2.25 

Helper,   9  hrs.,  at   $0.25 2.25  0.56 

Mortarman,   9   hrs.   at  $0.30 2.70  0.67 

Brick,    1,800,   at  $8.50  per  M 15.30  3.82 

Cement,   2.5   bbls.,  at  $1.50 3.75  .94 

Sand,  1  cu.  yd.,  at  $1.00 1.00  .25 

Total     $34~00  |!U8 

Cast-iron   (head),  490  Ibs.,  at  $0.02% 12.25 

Wrought-iron  bands  and  steps,  102  Ibs.,  at  $0.04     4.08 

Total   cost   of   manhole $50.33 

The  information  given  above  was  furnished  by  Mr.  Curtis  Hill, 
Chief  Engineer  of  the  Sewer  Department  of  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  and 
published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  March,  1906. 

Cost  of  a  Brick  Sewer  at  Syracuse,  Built  by  Tunneling. — The  fol- 
lowing data  were  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  14, 
1906. 

The  so-called  tunnel  line  sewer  of  Syracuse,  N.  Y.,  was  construct- 
ed for  the  purpose  of  draining  some  600  acres  of  land.  The  area 
to  be  drained  lies  in  a  valley,  surrounded  entirely  by  a  ridge  of 
nills,  so  that  the  excavation  for  the  sewer  had  to  be  done  partly  by 
the  open  cut  method  and  partly  by  the  tunnel  method.  The  cost 
figures  that  follow  are  for  a  section  of  the  sewer  constructed  by 
the  latter  method.  The  sewer  has  a  total  length  of  4,717  ft.  and, 
starting  at  Grumbach  avenue  (see  Fig.  7),  the  first  section  of 
470  ft.  was  constructed  by  the  open  cut  method;  then  came  1,135 
ft.  of  tunnel,  495  ft.  of  open  cut,  670  ft.  of  tunnel,  1,240  ft.  of 
open  cut,  280  ft.  of  tunnel,  and  finally  431  ft.  of  open  cut.  The 
sewer  is  circular,  33  ins.  inside  diameter,  constructed  of  two  rings 
of  brick  laid  in  cement  mortar,  and  was  designed  to  flow  one- 
half  full.  As  originally  planned  it  was  proposed  to  have  cuts  under 
30  ft.  made  by  the  open  cut  method ;  the  contractor,  however, 
decided  to  build  the  sewer  for  the  distance  of  495  ft.  between  the 
two  longest  tunnels  in  tunnel  construction.  All  tunnel  openings  are 
permanent,  manholes  being  built  at  these  points,  and  also  at  places 
where  the  tunnel  line  intersects  streets,  a  distance  of  about  600  ft., 
apart. 

Open  Cut  Method. — Work  on  the  first  open  cut  section  of  the 
sewer  was  commenced  at  Grumbach  avenue  on  Dec.  2,  1905.  The 
cut  ran  from  13  ft.  at  Station  O  to  32  ft.  to  sub-grade  at  the  first 
section  of  the  tunnel  (Station  4  +  70).  The  first  6  ft.  of  the  cut 
was  cast  out  by  hand,  but  from  this  point  to  sub-grade  a  trench- 
ing machine  was  used  to  handle  the  material.  The  first  material 
encountered  was  7  ft.  of  loam  clay  and  gravel,  and  underlying  this 
was  a  stiff  red  clay  containing  stone  and  gravel,  varying  in  size 
from  pebbles  to  12-in.  boulders. 

The  trenching  machine  was  built  by  the  contractor.  It  consists 
of  a  bucket  car  mounted  on  wheels,  and  had  a  device  at  the  top  for 
use  in  hoisting  the  buckets.  The  latter  were  of  iron,  revolving  type, 


HAt 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


otn jsnoo  RBW  ,.Y  JC 
&•!«  adT     .fcfuai  lo  ac 

t   Sgbi-'t 
d    ^U'li; -.; 


SEWERS,  CONDUJTS  AND  DRAINS.  871 

%  cu.  yd.  capacity,  of  the  kind  ordinarily  used  on  trenching  ma- 
chines. The  car  ran  on  a  track  extending  over  the  trench,  spiked 
to  cross  ties  laid  on  the  ground,  the  rails  being  laid  so  that  th6 
car  cleared  the  line  of  sheeting.  A  double  drum  stationary  engine 
in  an  engine  house,  mounted  on  wheels,  was  used  to  operate  the 
car  and  the  hoisting  apparatus.  One  drum  of  the  engine 
was  attached  to  the  cable  for  moving  the  car ;  the  other  drum 
operates  the  cable  for  raising  and  lowering  the  buckets.  The  cable 
runs  from  the  engine  house  to  an  A  frame,  and  a  working  distance 
of  200  ft.  can  be  made  advantageously. 

The  operator,  standing  on  the  car  in  view  of  the  trench  and 
buckets,  gave  the  signals  to  the  engineer  to  raise  or  lower  the 
buckets  or  to  move  the  car  forward  or  backward  on  the  track. 
Buckets  were  distributed  along  the  trench  and  when  filled  the  op- 
erator dropped  an  empty  one,  picked  up  a  filled  bucket  and  carried 
it  backward,  dumping  the  material  over  the  completed  sewer.  In 
this  way  the  completed  sewer  was  backfilled  as  rapidly  as  the  work 
was  finished.  When  it  was  necessary  to  move  the  machine  ahead, 
rails  were  laid  and  the  engine  house  moved  forward  under  its  own 
power,  carrying  the  A  frame  along  with  it. 

By  Jan;  4,  404  ft.  of  the  first  470  ft.  of  open  cut  sewer  had  been 
completed,  the  remaining  distance  being  left  open  to  allow  the  engi- 
neers distance  for  a  backsight  .to  project  the  line  into  the  tunneL 
This  section  was  afterwards  built  to  within  a  few  feet  of  the  tun- 
nel opening,  only  enough  room  being  allowed  in  which  to  raise  and 
lower  the  buckets. 

The  sewer  constructed  in  the  open  cut  excavation  was  circular, 
33  ins.  in  diameter,  the  invert  being  of  second  quality  paving  brick 
and  the  arch  of  ordinary  sewer  brick.  The  brickwork  was  laid  on 
a  cradle  of  1-in.  hemlock  nailed  to  2-in.  square  forms,  the  cradle 
being  backed  with  concrete  for  3  ins.  underneath  and  6  ins.  at  the 
spring  line.  The  space  below  the  spring  line  was  also  filled  with 
concrete. 

Tunnel  Method  — Work  on  the  tunnel  section  was  first  com- 
menced at  the  western  end  (Station  4  +  70).  It  was  planned 
originally,  however,  to  start  the  shaft  at  Oak  street  and  the  shaft 
at  De  Witt  street  about  the  same  time  that  the  open  cut  excava- 
tio'n  was  commenced,  and  in  this  way  start  the  tunnel  excavation 
simultaneously  in  four  headings.  Later  on  the  work  was  carried 
on  in  four  headings. 

The  dimensions  of  the  tunnel  excavation  were  7  ft.  9  ins.  x  6  ft. 
10  ins.,  and  the  materials  encountered  were  a  clay  rock  and  in 
some  instances  slate  rock.  In  the  first  section  small  pockets  of  clay 
and  sand  were  encountered,  which  necessitated  very  close  side 
sheeting.  All  of  the  drilling  was  done  by  hand,  four  holes,  spaced 
about  a  foot  from  the  side,  being  drilled  in  the  face.  The  two 
upper  holes  were  drilled  about  18  ins.  from  the  roof,  the  lower  ones 
being  from  18  ins.  to  2  ft.  from  the  floor.  At  first  each  hole  was 
loaded  with  one  stick  of  40%  dynamite,  and  all  four  holes  blown  at 
once.  This  threw  down  the  whole  face  and  was  very  effective. 
It  was  found,  however,  that  the  charge  was  too  heavy  for  the  tim- 


872 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


bering  to  stand  safely,  and  accordingly  the  two  upper  holes  were 
loaded  with  iy2  sticks  of  dynamite  and  fired.  After  the  muck  had 
been  cleared  away  the  two  lower  noles  were  loaded  with  the  same 
sized  charge  and  fired.  The  result  proved  satisfactory.  The  holes 
were  drilled  from  2  ft.  to  2%  ft.,  and  the  face  thrown  out  by  the 
blast  had  a  depth  of  18  ins.  to  2  ft.  Before  a  blast  was  fired  a  plat- 
form was  laid  at  the  foot  of  the  face,  and  the  material  or  muck  was 
blasted,  out  upon  it.  In  this  way  the  material  was  more  easily 
handled. 

The  method  of  timbering  the  tunnel  is  shown  in  Fig.  8.  All  tim- 
ber used  in  the  tunnel  was  beech,  which  on  account  of  its  toughness 
did  not  splinter  or  brush.  The  timber  consisted  of  6-in.  x  6-in. 
frames,  spaced  about  5  ft.  centers.  The  cap  and  sill  were  5%  ft. 
long  and  uprights  were  6V2  ft.  long,  with  corners  temporarily 
strapped  with  angle  iron,  which  was  withdrawn  after  overhead 


:Space  for  driving  overhead  Sheeting 


Sewer  in  a  Tunnel. 


and  sidebridging  had  advanced  two  frames.  On  top  of  the  frames 
at  each  corner  were  blocks,  on  which  was  placed  2 -in.  plank,  leav- 
ing a  space  for  driving  overhead  sheeting.  On  account  of  this 
overhead  sheeting  causing  a  pressure  on  the  plank  placed  on  the 
blocks,  the  edge  of  the  plank  was  beveled  and  the  overhead  sheeting 
pointed  to  allow  it  to  enter  the  space. 

The  excavated  matter  was  removed  in  buckets,  similar  to  those 
described  under  open  cut  work.  These  buckets  were  placed  on  a 
platform  car  which  ran  on  a  2 -ft.  gage  track  carried  along  as  the 
tunnel  progressed.  The  car  was  pushed  to  the  mouth  of  the  tun- 
nel by  one  of  the  men,  where  it  was  raised  by  trenching  machine 
previously  described,  and  conveyed  to  the  dumping  ground.  The 
excess  of  material  was  used  in  filling  low  land  near  the  tunnel 
opening,  the  haul  consequently  being  very  short.  The  platform 
car  was  also  used  in  carrying  lumber  and  other  materials  into  the 
tunnel,  and  in  carrying  out  boulders,  etc. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  873 

The  foul  air  caused  by  the  dynamite  fumes,  also  from  working 
so  far  in  the  tunnel  without  ventilation,  was  overcome  by  pump- 
ing fresh  air  into  the  tunnel  through  a  9-in.  galvanized  pipe  by 
means  of  a  rotary  steam  fan.  In  this  manner  the  air  was  kept 
very  pure,  and  within  a  short  time  after  a  blast  was  fired  the 
fumes  had  passed  away  and  the  workmen  were  able  to  return  to 
the  breast  of  the  heading  to  clear  away  the  muck. 

Some  water  was  encountered,  and  this  was  pumped  from  the 
tunnel  at  the  low  points,  as  Station  4  +  70  and  shaft  at  Oak  street, 
by  means  of  a  steam  siphon  into  the  completed  sewer.  At  the 
DeWitt  street  shaft  the  water  was  pumped  out  by  a  pulsometer, 
and  in  this  way  the  tunnel  was  kept  comparatively  dry.  In  the 
section  of  the  tunnel  from  Oak  street  to  DeWitt  street  a  very  hard 
clay  rock,  bearing  gypsum,  was  encountered,  which  proved  not 
only  hard  to  drill,  but  could  not  be  blasted  out  satisfactorily.  In 
addition  water  ran  continually  from  the  breast  of  the  heading  and 
also  from  the  sides  of  the  tunnel,  making  constant  pumping  neces- 
sary. The  drillers  were  obliged  to  wear  rubber  suits.  The  rate 
of  progress  was  about  one-half  as  great  as  in  the  section  from 
4  +  70  to  Oak  street. 

Cost  Data  on  Tunnel  Sewer  Construction. — Cost  data  on  the  con- 
struction of  a  greater  portion  of  the  first  section  of  the  sewer 
built  by  the  tunnel  rfiethod  are  given  below.  These  costs  are  for 
a  total  length  of  sewer  of  1,047  ft,  that  is,  for  the  sewer  starting 
at  Station  4  +  70  to  within  about  100  ft.  of  DeWitt  street  (see 
Fig.  7).  In  these  data  the  cost  of  drilling  per  foot  of  hole  could 
not  well  be  separated  from  picking  and  shoveling  into  buckets, 
as  some  men  worked  on  both.  The  drilling  was  all  done  by  hand, 
and  after  a  shot  was  fired  the  drillers  shoveled  the  muck  and 
trimmed  up  with  picks.  Water  was,  in  general,  taken  care  of  with 
a  steam  siphon  at  one  shaft  and  pulsometer  at  other.  Hand  bail- 
ing was  occasionally  resorted  to. 

From  Jan.  15  to  Feb.  22,  in  35  days  of  actual  work,  173  lin.  ft. 
of  tunnel  was  excavated,  or  an  average  of  4.94  ft.  per  day  of  ten 
hours.  The  allowed  excavation  was  45.18  cu.  ft.  per  lineal  foot  of 
tunnel ;  consequently  an  average  of  8.26  cu.  yds.  was  excavated 
each  day.  The  material  was  hard  red  clay,  which  worked  well. 
The  work  was  done  by  one  gang  working  ten  hours  per  day.  The 
labor  cost  per  day  was  as  follows  : 

Per  day. 

6  men    in    tunnel    $2.00 

1   sheeter     3.00 

1  foreman 2.50 

1   engineer 1.75 

4  men  on  top 1.75 

1  waterboy     1.00 

Total     $27.25  $5.50 

From  Feb.  22  to  March  23,  three  shifts  of  eight  hours  each  per 
day  were  worked  by  the  men  in  the  tunnel.  The  actual  number  of 
days  worked  was  30,  and  in  this  time  115  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  was 
excavated,  an  average  of  3.83  lin.  ft.  per  24  hours,  or  1.28  lin.  ft 


874        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

per  8-hr,  shift.  The  material  was  clay  rock  with  from  12  ins.  to 
20  ins.  of  gypsum  in  the  bottom.  This  material  was  very  hard 
and  progress  was  consequently  slow.  The  labor  cost  per  day  was 
as  follows: 

Per  shift.        Per  day.      Per  lin.  ft. 
6  men    In    tunnel $2.00  $36.00  $9.40 

1  sheeter     3.00  6.00  1.57 

2  men   on   top 1.75  7.00 

1  engineer     1.75  3.50  0.91 

1  waterboy     1.00  2.00  0.52 

Total     $54.50  $14.22 

The    6    men    in    the    tunnel    worked    an    8-hr,    shift ;     all    others 
worked  12  hours. 

From  March  23  to  April  4,  two  headings  were  worked,  the  men 
In  the  tunnel  working  in  three  shifts  of  eight  hours  each.  The 
actual  number  of  days  worked  was  13,  and  in  this  time  the  tunnel 
was  advanced  216  ft.,  or  8.31  ft.  per  heading  per  24  hours.  At 
the  shaft  heading  at  Oak  street  the  material  was  a  soft;  clay  rock 
which  worked  easily.  In  the  west  heading  the  gypsum  continued 
until  March  14,  when  it  disappeared  entirely. 
The  labor  cost  per  day  was  as  follows : 

Total 
Per  shift.         pSr  day.       Per  lin.  ft. 

12  men  in 'tunnel $2.00  $72.00  $4.33 

2   sheeters    2.00  12.00  0.72 

6  men    on    top    1.75  21.00  1.26 

2  engineers     1.75  7.00  0.48 

1  team     4.00  8.00  0.48 

1  tag    line    boy 1.25  2.50  0.15 

Total     .''..V'Jl.k'1       $122.50  $T36 

The  materials  used  in  the  work  from  Jan.   15  to  April   4,  when 
the  first  section  of  the  tunnel  was  completed,  were  as  follows: 

Rate.  Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

2,255  Ibs.     dynamite $0.14  $315.70  $0.63 

32   tons    coal     3.50  112.00  .         .22 

110  gals,    olive    oil .45  49.50  .10 

50  gals,    engine  oil    ......     .34%  17.25  .03 

860  electrical     exploders...      .03ya  30.10  .06 

55,000  ft.   B.   M.   lumber 16.00  880.00  1.74 

Total     ... $1,404.55  $2.78 

The  total  cost  of  the   tunnel  work  from  Jan.   15  to  April   4,   a 
total  progress  of  504  ft.  having  been  made,  was  as  follows: 

Per  day.  Total. 

Labor,   35   days ...      $  27.25  $    953.75 

Labor,    30   days 54,50  1,635.00 

Labor,   13   days 122.50  1,592.50 

Total $4,081.25 

Blacksmith,  156   hrs.,  at  25   cts 3900 

Materials     1,405.55 

Repairs     10000 


Grand  total,    504   ft,   at  $11.16 $5,624.80 

Part  of  blacksmith  work,  sharpening  picks,  etc.,  was  done  by  one 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  875 

of  the  men  on  top  and  is  not  separated  from  cost  of  labor  of  men 
on  top.  Men  on  top  also  made  wedges  and  assisted  the  sheeter 
in  cutting  frames,  etc.  One  man  on  top  acted  as  conductor  on  the 
bucket  car. 

The  above  costs  include  not  only  the  excavation,  but  also  the 
sheeting  of  the  tunnel,  and  in  addition  a  small  amount  of  concrete 
work.  The  cost  of  sheeting  the  tunnel  was  approximately  as 
follows : 

Total.       Per  lin.  ft. 

Labor     $    546  $1.08 

Timber     88C  1.74 

Total $1,426  $2.82 

The  labor  cost  on  concrete  amounted  to  about  $.110  ;  deducting 
this  and  the  cost  of  sheeting  from  the  total  cost  ($5,624.80),  we 
have  $4,088.80  as  the  cost  of  excavating  the  tunnel.  The  average 
cost  per  lineal  foot  of  excavation  would  then  be  $8.11.  At  the 
allowed  excavation,  45.18  cu.  ft.  per  lineal  foot,  the  average  cost 
of  excavation  per  cubic  yard  for  the  504  ft.  was  $4.87.  The  labor 
referred  to  in  the  foregoing  tables  as  "men  on  top"  included  man 
tending  dump,  conductor  on  bucket  car,  cutting  wedges  and  all 
incidental  work. 

Brickwork  in  First  Section  of  Tunnel. — The  sewer  construction 
in  the  tunnel  is  the  same  as  in  the  open  cut,  or  33-in.  circular, 
2-ring  brick,  laid  on  a  cradle.  The  allowed  thickness  was  9  ins.,  or 
8.25  cu.  ft.  per  foot  of  sewer.  All  space  below  the  spring  line 
is  filled  with  second-class  natural  cement,  mixed  in  a  1:3:7  pro- 
portion. From  the  spring  line  of  the  sewer  to  the  roof  tunnel  the 
space  is  backfilled  with  carefully  rammed  earth.  The  brickwork 
was  carried  4  ft.  from  the  opening  of  the  tunnel,  making  500  ft. 
of  completed  sewer  for  the -first  section. 

The  brickwork,  backfilling,  etc.,  for  the  500  ft.  of  sewer  were 
completed  in  18  days  of  12  hours  each,  the  cost  being  as  follows: 

Rate.  Total.        Per  lin.  ft. 

1  mason     $4.50  $4.50  $0.16 

1  mason     3.00  3.00  .11 

5  men     2.00  10.00  .36 

Total     $17.50  $0.64 

The  materials  used  were  as  follows: 

Rate.  Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

75,000  brick     $7.50  $    562.50              $1.12 

115  bbls.     cement 1.20  138.00                  .27 

105  cu.    yds.    gravel 1.25  131.25                  .26 

Total     $    831.75  $1.66 

18  days  labor,  at   $17.50 315.00  .64 


Grand   total    $1,146.75  $2.30 

The  above  work  included  153  cu.  yds.  of  brickwork,   110  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  and    3.10   cu.   yds.   of  backfilling.      The  latter  was  done' 
by  the  men  who  assisted  the  bricklayers,  each  5-ft.   section  taking 
four  men  about   1%   hours.     The  labor  cost  of  the  backfilling  was 
40.     The  labor  on  concrete  consisted  of  about  550  hours'   work 


876        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

at  20  cts.  per  hour,  or  $110.  Deducting  these  amounts  from  th« 
total  of  $1,146.75,  we  get  $923.35  as  the  cost  of  the  brickwork  for 
the  first  section  of  sewer. 

On  this  basis  the  cost  per  lineal  foot  was  $1.85,  and  the  cost  per 
cubic  yard  of  brickwork  was  $6.03. 

The  cost  of  the  forms  or  cradles  used  in  construction  of  brick- 
work could  not  be  separated  from  lumber  cost.  The  cost  was  very 
slight. 

Shaft  at  Oak  Street  — The  dimensions  of  the  shaft  at  Oak  street 
were  10  ft.  x  16  ft.  on  top;  the  bottom  measured  9  ft.  x  15  ft. 
The  shaft  was  sunk  to  a  depth  of  58  ft.  The  materials  encountered 
followed  very  closely  those  shown  by  the  test  borings  as  shown 
in  Fig.  7.  The  shaft  was  divided  into  three  compartments,  the 
middle  compartment,  used  for  hoisting  buckets,  being  6  ft.  in  clear 
and  the  end  compartments  being  3^  ft.  in  clear.  One  end  com- 
partment was  used  for  a  ladderway,  the  other  end  compartment 
being  used  for  a  pumpway.  Beech  timber  was  used  and  sets  or 
frames  were  all  6-in.  x  8-in.  timber ;  the  sidewalls  were  16  ft. 
long,  braces  6%  ft.  long.  The  lagging  was  2-in.  beech.  All  of  the 
drilling  on  shafts  and  tunnel  was  done  by  hand. 

A  machine  was  used  at  this  shaft  for  hoisting  and  disposing  of 
excavated  matter  from  the  tunnel.  It  consisted  of  a  platform  car, 
13  ft.  long  by  8  ft.  wide,  mounted  on  standard  gage  steel  trucks. 
Buckets  were  hoisted  through  a  hole  4  ft.  10  ins.  by  6  ft.  in  the 
platform.  Over  this  hole  was  an  iron  angle  frame,  at  the  top  of 
which  was  the  hoisting  device  for  raising  and  lowering  the  buckets. 
The  mechanism  is  similar  to  that  of  the  trenching  machine,  pre- 
viously described.  A  4-cylinder,  4-cycle  gasoline  engine  of  30  hp. 
furnished  the  power  to  operate  the  hoisting  apparatus  and  to  move 
the  car.  The  engine  acts  through  a  two-way  friction  clutch  ;  one 
way  throws  in  a  single  drum  and  operates  the  cable  which  hoists 
or  lowers  the  buckets ;  the  other  way  throws  gears  connected  to  a 
sprocket  on  the  car  wheel,  causing  the  car  to  move  forward  or 
backward,  the  direction  being  controlled  by  a  marine  reversing 
device.  The  bucket  operator  stands  between  the  bucket  opening 
and  one  end  of  the  car.  The  engine  and  drum  are  at  the  other 
end  of  the  car  and  the  engineer  is  stationed  near  the  opening, 
where  he  can  operate  levers  and  at  the  same  time  have  a  clear  view 
of  the  shaft  below.  The  machine  was  designed  and  built  by  the 
contractor  for  the  work. 

In  sinking  the  shaft,  red  clay  was  encountered  to  within  15  ft. 
of  the  bottom,  when  some  boulders  were  reached,  and  in  the 
bottom  was  3  ft.  of  clay  rock.  The  shaft  was  sunk  in  14  days  of 
10  hours  each,  the  cost  being  as  follows: 

Labor. 

Rate.  Total.  Per  lin  ft. 

7  men    in    shaft    ...$2.00  $14.00  $3.38 

4  men   on  top    1.75  7.00  1.69 

2  teams     4.00  8.00  1.93 

1  engineer     1.75  1.75  .42 

1  tag    line    boy 1.25        .         1.25  .30 

Total $32.00  $7.72 


SEU'ERS.  COXDL'ITS  AXD  DR.UXS. 


Rat*.  Total.  Berlin,  ft. 

150    Ibs.    dynamite $0.14  f*5,0«             |0.€0 

100    electrical   exploder* 3.S*  3.50                 t-» 

4  tons  coal  3*0  _14^                 :* 

Total     $51.50 


30   lurs..   blacksmith  ..........  *0.ii 

14    days,    labor.  .............  31.00 

19.300  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  ......  14.00 

Total.    58   ft.,   at   114.07  ......  SSltSO  *14.07 

The  manhole  in  the  Oak  street  shaft  was  5  ft.  malilt  m»matig 
with  a  1-ft.  wall  of  brickwork  to  within  SO  ft.  of  the  surface,  where 
it  was  reduced  to  a  9-in.  wall,  and  5  ft.  from  the  surface  was 
drawn  in  from  5  ft.  diameter  to  2  ft.  to  allow  for  an  iron  cover. 
Around  the  sewer  the  size  of  the  manhole  and  as  far  up  aa  the 
springiine  was  solid  brickwork  to  insure  a  solid  foundation  for  the 

DMMttMla 

First-class  Portland  cement  concrete  was  used  as  backfilling 
around  the  manhole  for  the  full  dimensions  of  the  shaft  from  the 
springiine  of  the  sewer  to  the  top  of  the  normal  tunnel  excavation  ; 
from  this  point  to  the  surface  the  backfilling  in  the  shaft  was  earth. 
The  Umbering  hi  both  shaft  and  tunnel  was  allowed  to 
in  place  permanently. 

The    cost,    including    labor    on    brickwork. 
masons  and  all  incidental  work,  was  as  follows: 

I*  tor. 


1  mason     .............................  $4.50  $  4.50 

1  mason     .............................  &tO  S,00 

5  men    ...............................   1  $.7$ 

Per  day  of  ten  hours  ...................  $:<:.> 

R-i-.f  Total. 

5    men    ...............................  $l,n  *>  :^ 


4  t/5  days 

S.75 


Total    labor 


, 
brick     .........................  $  7.5% 

TO  iron    st*ps    .....................  OS 

,00 


1    irx^n  iwer    .....................    10, 

24  bbls.   cement    ..................     1,TO 

19  cxi.     yds.    gravel  ................     l.M  2J.7S 

Total    material     ........................  .£.40 


878 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


The  measured  work  complete  was  37  cu.  yds.  brickwork,  10  cu. 
yds.  concrete,  65  cu.  yds.  backfilling. 

Shaft  at  De  Witt  Street. — The  dimensions  of  the  shaft  at  De  Witt 

street  were  9  ft.  by  15  ft.  The  shaft  was  sunk  to  a  depth  of  ?6Va 
ft.,  through  red  clay  mixed  with  a  few  boulders,  and  4  ft.  of  clay 
rock  at  the  bottom.  The  shaft  was  sunk  in  seven  days  of  ten  hours 
each,  the  cost  being  as  follows: 

Labor. 

Rate.            Total.  Per  lin.  f. 

6  men  in   shaft $2.00             $12.00  $2.31 

2  men    on     top 1.75                  3.50  .67 

1  foreman     2.00  2.00 

$17.50  $3.36 

7  days     $17.50            $122!50  $3.36 

Engineer,    5    days 1.75                  8.75  .24 

Sheeter,    5    days 3.00                15.00  .41 

21    hours,    blacksmith 25                  5.25  .14 

Total     $151.50  $4.15 

' 
Material. 

110  Ibs.    dynamite $0.12              $13.20  $0.36 

50  electric    exploders 3.50                  1.75  .04 

2  tons   coal    3.50                  7.00  .20 

10,500  ft.   B.  M.   lumber 16.00              168.00  4.60 



$189.95  $5.20 

Summary. 

Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Labor     . .'. . '.  \~f  ff.  .-1 '.'»». . ".^,  .V,,. $151.50  $4.15 

Material                                                              .    189.95  5.20 


Total,     36%     ft.,    at    $9.35 $341.45 


$9.35 


Cost  Data  on  Second  Section  of  Tunnel. — The  second  section  of 
the  tunnel,  from  Oak  street  to  De  Witt  street,  543  ft.,  was  driven 
in  139  days'  labor  of  24  hours  each.  The  average  progress  was 
about  3.9  ft.  per  day,  or  1.3  ft.  per  shift  of  eight  hours. 

The  material  from  entrance  (Station  9 -f  88)  to  Station  10-+  12 
was  clay  rock,  which  broke  up  easily,  but  from  this  point  to  Sta- 
tion 15  the  material  was  a  hard  clay  rock  bearing  gypsum,  much 
of  which  was  of  a  flinty  nature  and  very  difficult  to  handle.  An- 
other disagreeable  feature  of  this  section  was  the  large  amount  of 
water  encountered,  which  was  continuous  from  Station  10  +  50  to 
Station  15.  Men  were  obliged  to  wear  rubber  suits  and  pumping 
and  bailing  were  constantly  necessary. 

The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Labor. 

Per  shift.  Per  day.  Per  lin.  ft. 

4  men    in    tunnel $2.00  $24.00             $6.15 

1  sheeter     3.00  6.00                1.54 

3  men    on    top 1.75  10.50                2.69 

1    engineer     1.75  3.50                   .90 

Total     $44.00  $11.28 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


879 


Labor  (Continued). 

139  days     144.00        $6.116.00  |11.28 

77  days  extra  men  bailing..      2.00             154.00  .28 

62  days    blacksmith 1.75              108.50  .20 

62  days  waterboy    1.00               62.00  .11 

Grand  total  for  labor 16,440.50  $11.87 

Materials. 

Rate.  Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

400  Ibs.  dynamite   $  0.14  $  56.00  $0.10 

945  Ibs.    dynamite    12.00  113.40  .21 

842  exploders 3.50  29.50  .05 

280  gals,    olive   oil 45  126.00  .23 

51  gals,   engine  oil   (bbl.)..        .34ya  17.60  .03 

35  tons  coal 3.50  122.50  .22 

$466.00  $0.84 

37,400  ft.  B.  M.  lumber $16.00  $598.40  $1.10 

Summary. 

Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Labor     $6,440.50  $11.87 

Material 466.00  .84 

Lumber     598.40  1.10 

Total,  543  ft.  of  tunnel  at  $13.82.  .$7,504.90  $I3~81 

A  •  in  the  case  of  the  first  sectioa  the  above  figures  include  the 
cost  of  sheeting  and  a  small  amount  of  concrete. 

The  cost  of  the  material  for  the  sheeting  was  $598.40,  and  the 
laboi-  cost  was  approximately  as  follows: 

695  hours,   at   25   cts $173.75 

1^00  hours,  at   17%    cts 243.25 

Total     $417.00 

Total.        Per  lin.  ft 

Lumber     $    598.40  $1.10 

Labor 417.00  .77 

Total     $1,015.40  $1.87 

The  cost  of  the  labor  on  concrete  was  approximately  $149.50 ; 
deducting  this  sum  and  the  cost  of  sheeting  from  the  total  of 
$7,504.90,  and  we  get  $6,340  as  the  cost  of  excavating  the  second 
section  of  the  sewer.  As  the  second  section  of  the  tunnel  was  543 
ft.  long,  the  actual  average  cost  per  lineal  foot  was  $11.67  ;  the 
average  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  excavation  was  $7.00. 

Cost  of  Third  Section  of  Tunnel. 

Section  3  of  the  tunnel,  from  Station  15  +  45.50  to  21  +  50,  or 
605  ft,  was  driven  in  95  days  of  24  hours  each,  or  6.36  ft.  per  24 
hours.  Work  on  Section  3  began  on  Aug.  22,  with  gang  working 
east.  On  Oct.  8,  another  shaft  was  opened  and  gang  started  west 
from  shaft  No.  3.  The  two  headings  met  on  Nov.  2.  The  .laborers 
in  tunnel,  and  sheeters,  worked  in  8-hr,  shifts,  and  engineers  and 
men  on  top  were  on  duty  12  hours.  The  material  was  clay  rock, 
not  hard,  and  therefore  easily  handled.  In  this  section  the  engi- 


880 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


neer  attended  to  blacksmithing,   so   there  was  no  charge  against 
this  item. 

Labor  Cost. 

Rate.             Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

855  days,  labor  in  tunnel $2.00        $1,710.00  $2.84 

285  days,  sheeters  in  tunnel....  3.00             855.00  1.41 

190  days,   engineers 2.00              380.00  .63 

285  days,    labor    on    top 1.75  495.75 

Total     13,440.75  $5.70 

From  allowed  excavation,  the  cost  is  $3.41  per  cu.  yd. 

Material. 

21  tons  coal,   at  $3.25   ton $  68.25  $0.11 

1,665  Ibs.  dynamite,  at  $11.50  cwt 191.48  .31 

762   caps,    at    $3.50 26.67  .04 

190  gals,  olive  oil,  at  $0.38 72.20  .11 V2 

20  gals,   engine  oil,   at  $0.48 9.60  .01Va 

3      mos.    telephone,    at    $2.00 6.00  .01 

38,682  ft.   B.   M.    lumber,   at   $14.00  M...    441.54  .73 

Total    $815.74  $1.33 

From   allowed   excavation,    cost    is    $0.80   per   cu.   yd. 

Labor $3,440.75*  $5.70 

Material     815.74  1.33 

Total    $4,256.49  $7.03 

Setting   Cradle  find  Placing   Concrete. 
Labor. 

Rate.             Total.  Per  lin.  ft. 

96  days,    labor   in   tunnel $2.00            $192.00  $0.31 

24  days,    engineer     2.00                48.00  .08 

48  days,    labor    on    top 1.75                84.00  .14 

$324.00  $0.53 
Material. 

240  cu.  yds.   gravel ...$1.10           $264.00  $0.43 

204  bbls.   cement 98              200.90  .33 

2,828  ft.    B.     M.     lumber     for 

cradles     20.00                56.56  .09 

$~521.46  $0.85 

Grand    total    $845.66  $1.37 

Brickwork  and  Backfilling  Over  Sewer. 
Labor. 

Rate.              Total.  Per  lin.  ft 

22  days,   mason   in   tunnel.  .  .$3.50            $  77.00  $0.12 

22  days,   mason   in   tunnel...    3.00                66.00  .11 

132  days,    labor   in   tunnel 2.00              264.00  .43 

24  days,  engineer  on  top....   2.00               48.00  .08 

72  days,  labor  on  top 1.75             126.00  .21 


Material 

92,000  brick     $7.50 

110yds.    sand     1.10 

180  bbls.    cement     98 


Total     

Grand   total 


$581.00 

$690.00 
121.00 
176.40 

$987.40 
$1,568.40 


$0.95 

$1.12 
.20 
.29 


$258 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  881 

The  labor  on  top  under  "setting  cradles  and  placing  concrete" 
was  for  lowering  cradles,  mixing  concrete  and  lowering  same. 

The  labor  on  top  under  "brickwork"  was  for  lowering  brick  and 
mixing  and  lowering  mortar.  ' 

The  work  is  being  done  by  contract  under  the  direction  of 
Henry  B.  Brewster,  Assistant  City  Engineer,  to  whom  we  are  in- 
debted for  the  above  information. 

Cost  of  a  Sewer  Tunnel  at  Chicago,  Using  a  Hydraulic  Shield. — 
The  following  data  were  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb. 
6,  1907.. 

The  Lawrence  avenue  conduit  of  the  new  intercepting  sewer  sys- 
tem of  Chicago,  111.,  is  tunnel  work  through  clay.  The  completed 
conduit  will  be  16  ft.  inside  diameter,  lined  with  162  ins.  of  brick- 
work in  four  rings,  backed  by  a  ring  of  solid  timbering  8  ins.  thick. 
The  bore  being  made  by  the  shields  is,  thus,  20  ft  in  diameter, 
From  Lake  Michigan  to  the  Chicago  River  the  conduit  is  8,220  ft. 
long  and  there  is,  in  addition,  an  intake  tunnel  for  flushing  water 
extending  out  under  the  lake.  This  article  refers  only  to  the  land 
portion  of  the  conduit,  which  is  being  built  by  M.  H.  McGovern, 
Contractor,  at  a  contract  price  of  $79.50  per  lineal  foot. 

The  conduit  is  being  constructed  by  driving  two  shields  in  oppo- 
site directions  from  a  central  shaft,  about  the  top  of  which  are 
located  the  contractor's  power  house,  shops,  sawmill,  storage  yards 
and  the  spoil  bank.  The  shield  work  is  unusual  in  the  fact  that  a 
close  lining  of  timber  segments  is  used  to  keep  the  clay  in  place 
and  to  take  the  thrust  of  the  jacks  used  to  advance  the  shields. 
This  timbering  is  described  fully  in  a  succeeding  paragraph,  but 
it  is  important  to  note  here  that  it  serves  its  purpose  admirably, 
being  neither  crushed  nor  distorted  by  the  pressure  of  the  jacks. 

Shield  Construction  and  Operation. — Fig.  9  is  a  diagram  longi- 
tudinal section  of  the  shield  and  tunnel  lining  and  Fig.  10  is  an  en- 
larged detail  of  the  cutting  edge  of  the  shield.  The  structural 
features  and  the  principal  dimensions  of  the  shields  are  given 
clearly  by  these  illustrations.  Each  shield  is  operated  by  24 
hydraulic  jacks  of  60  tons  capacity  and  good  for  6,000  Ibs.  pres- 
sure. These  jacks  are  of  the  Watson-Stillman  type  with  8-in. 
barrels  and  5.75-in.  plungers.  They  are  operated  with  3,500  Ibs. 
per  sq.  in.  working  pressure  and  2,000  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  release  pres- 
sure. Each  shield  weighs  about  8  tons  and  cost  $8,000. 

Excavation. — The  tunnel  is  through  clay  which  holds  a  nearly 
vertical  working  face  and  becomes  quite  hard  in  places.  This  clay 
is  excavated  principally  by  means  of  draw  knives  of  the  form  illus- 
trated by  the  sketches  in  Fig.  11  and  the  photographic  view,  Fig. 
12.  The  knives  are  operated  like  a  draw  shave  for  working  wood. 
When  the  clay  is  soft,  two  men  operate  the  knife,  one  grasping 
each  handle,  but,  when  the  clay  is  hard,  a  third  man  is  employed, 
who  also  takes  hold  and  bears  down.  A  strip  of  clay  nearly  5  ft. 
long  is  shaved  off  with  each  stroke  of  the  knife  and  is  passed  to  a 


882        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

third  man,   who  rolls  it  up  and  casts  it  over  his  shoulder   to  the 
muckers  behind. 

The  draw  knives,  made  by  the  contractor's  blacksmith,  are 
7/32  x  1%-in.  spring  steel  self-annealed  in  air.  Two  forms  of  knife 
are  used,  one  for  soft  and  one  for  hard  clay;  the  difference  in 
form  is  in  the  angle  which  the  cutting  edge  makes  with  the 
handle  this  angle  being  45°  for  soft  clay  and  20°  for  hard  clay. 
The  blades  wear  down  to  a  width  of  about  %-in.  and  then  break 
at  the  center.  Other  details  and  dimensions  are  given  by  the 
sketches,  Fig.  11. 

Work   is   carried  on   continuously  in    8-hr,    shifts,    the   usual   ar- 
rangement being  to  operate  three  shifts  of  miners  in  one  drift  and 


Fig.  9. — Tunnel  Shield. 

two  shifts  of  miners  and  one  shift  of  masons  in  the  other  drift,  the 
masons'  shift  working  the  two  drifts  alternately.  Each  shift  of 
miners  is  made  up  as  follows : 

Per  shift. 

1  foreman,    at    $5 $     5.00 

14  miners,    at    $3.75 52.50 

12  muckers,     at    $3.25 39.00 

2  valvemen,   at    $3.50 7.00 

4  timbermen,    at    $3.50 14.00 

2  switchmen,    at    $2 4.00 

3  drivers,    at     $2.25 6.75 

Totals     $128.25  $384.75 

This  crew  is  divided  between  the  two  drifts  and  has  averaged 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


883 


7  lin.  ft.  of  excavation  per  shift  in  each  drift,  or  14  ft.  per  shift  in 
both  drifts.  The  bore  being  20  ft.  in  diameter,  there  are  11.63 
cu.  yds.  of  excavation  per  lineal  foot  of  tunnel.  Therefore, 
14X11.63  =  163  cu.  yds.  of  material  are  taken  out  every  8  hours  at 
a  labor  cost  for  mining,  mucking,  timbering  and  haulage  in  tunnel 
of  $128.25,  or  79  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Timbering. — The  timbering  consists  of  a  solid  lining  8  ins.  thick 
composed  of  rings  of  4-ft.  segments  laid  close.  This  timbering  is 
placed  by  the  mining  gangs  inside  the  tail  of  the  shield,  and  as  fast 
as  the  shield  advances.  The  segments  are  prepared  in  the  con- 
tractor's  sawmill  by  a  separate  gang  working  one  8-hr,  shift  per 
day.  Since  about  495  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  is  required  for  timbering 
each  lineal  foot  of  tunnel,  the  millwork  is  an  important  detail. 

The  timber  used  for  the  lining  is  rough  hemlock,  costing  $18  per 
M.  ft.  B.  M.  It  is  delivered  to  the  work  in  6  x  8-in.  pieces  about 
12  ft.  long  and  is  then  sawed  into  segments  4  ft.  long,  6  ins.  wide 
and  8  ins.  deep ;  each  segment  has  its  ends  cut  to  true  radial  planes 
and  its  back  to  a  true  circular  arc.  The  machines  for  this  work 
are  installed  in  a  building  at  the  contractor's  plant,  and  consist  of 


Wet>  of Casting 

1v  fit  against 

Channe/s-. 


Fig.    10. — Cutting  Edge  of  Shield. 


a  circular  saw,  a  band  saw,  a  band  saw  sharpener  and  minor  tools. 
The  circular  saw  is  fitted  with  a  table  which  swings  with  just  the 
proper  angle  with  respect  to  the  saw  to  give  the  ends  of  the  seg- 
ments the  correct  bevel.  The  band  saw  cuts  the  back  of  the  seg- 
ment to  the  true  circular  arc  and  is  fitted  with  a  table  which  swings 
on  the  proper  curve  to  effect  this.  In  operation  the  6  x  8-in.  pieces 
are  brought  to  the  rear  of  the  building  and  slid  endwise  through  a 
window  directly  onto  the  table  of  the  cutting-off  saw. 

The  sawyer  first  takes  off  a  crop  end  to  get  the  proper  bevel ; 
he  then  turns  the  stick  half-way  over,  shoves  it  along  the  table 
until  the  end  comes  against  the  stop  and  cuts  it  off.  The  stick  is 
then  turned  again,  pushed  ahead  against  the  stop  and  cut  off. 
These  operations  are  repeated  for  the  third  segment.  As  the  seg- 
ments are  sawed  off  they  are  piled  up  by  the  side  of  the  band  saw. 
The  band  sawyer  takes  the  pieces,  one  at  a  time,  adjusts  them  on 
the  swinging  table  and  cuts  their  backs  to  the  desired  arcs,  and 
they  are  ready  to  go  to  the  work.  Each  sawyer  has  one  helper, 
and  there  are  two  other  laborers  to  bring  the  sticks  to  the  mill 


884 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


and  pass  them  to  the  cutting-off  saw.     The  sawmill  force  works  one 
8-hr,  shift  per  day,  and  is  organized  as  follows  : 

Per  shift. 
1  fireman,  at  $5 $   5.00 

1  engineer,   at   $5 5.00 

2  sawyers,   at  $3.50 7.00 

4  laborers,    at    $3.00    J.2'^ 

Total $29.00 

Thi3  sawmill  gang  turns  out  all  the  segments  necessary  to  keep 
the  work  going  in  both  drifts.  The  average  advance  of  each  drift 
is  21  ft.  per  day,  and  there  being  495  ft.  B.  M.  of  timber  per  lineal 
foot  of  lining,  this  gang  turns  out  495X42  =  20,790  ft.  B.  M.  of 
finished  segments  at  a  labor  cost  for  sawing  of  $29,  or  about  $1.40 
per  thousand  feet. 

Lining. — The    16-in.   brick   lining   inside  the   timbering   is   placed 


Fig.    11. — Draw  Knife. 

by  a  separate  mason  gang.     It  amounts  to  3.42   cu.  yds.  of  brick- 
work per  lineal  foot.     The  mason  gang  is  organized  as  follows : 

Per  shift. 

7  masons,   at   $9 %   63.00 

17  helpers,    at    $2.75 46.75 

10  laborers,   at  $2.50 25.00 

2  drivers,    at    $2.25 4.50 


Total    $139.25 

The  mason  gang  lays  20  lin.  ft.  or  68.4  cu.  yds.  of  lining  per 
shift  at  a  cost  for  labor  and  haulage  in  tunnel  of  $2.04  per  cu.  yd., 
or  $6.96  per  lineal  foot. 

Haulage. — The  muck  is  hauled  from  the  working  faces  to  the 
shaft  in  tunnel  and  from  the  shaft  top  to  the  spoil  bank  on  sur- 
face in  cars  drawn  by  mules.  The  same  cars  are  taken  back  load- 
ed with  brick,  lining  segments  or  other  materials,  so  that  they  run 
loaded  both  ways.  In  the  tunnel  the  hauling  is  done  by  the  mining 
and  the  mason  gangs,  but  a  separate  lift  gang  handles  the  cars  on 
the  elevator,  and  still  another  gang  hauls  them  from  the  shaft  top 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


885 


to  the  spoil  bank.  This  spoil  bank  is  located  about  a  hundred 
yards  from  the  shaft  top,  since  the  clay  is  being  saved  for  sale,  it 
being  of  a  kind  particularly  suited  for  certain  burnt  clay  products. 
The  lift  gang  works  three  8-hr,  shifts  per  day,  and  is  organized 
as  follows: 

Per  shift.         Per  24  hrs. 

2  cagemen,     at    $3 $6.00  $18.00 

4  laborers,    at    $2.50 10.00  30.00 


Total     $16.00 


$48.00 


The    dump    gang   works    three    8-hr,    shift   and    is   organized    as 
follows : 

Per  shift. 
1  hoisting  engineer,   at   $5 $  5.00 

1  fireman,     at     $4 4.00 

16  laborers,    at    $2.75 44.00 

2  drivers,   at    $2.25 4.50 

Totals    $57.50  $172.50 

From  these  figures  we  can  make  an  approximation  of  the  cost  of 
hoisting  and  dumping.     Considering  the  cost  of  hoisting  first,  it  is 


Fig.    12. — Draw   Knife. 

to  b'e  noted  that  this  is  divided  between  the  work  of  hoisting  tha 
muck  and  of  lowering  the  brick,  timber  and  mortar  materials.  We 
will,  therefore,  estimate  the  total  cost  of  hoisting  per  day,  and 
prorate  this  sum  between  the  two.  Assuming  that  one-half  the  fire- 
man's wages  and  one-fourth  the  coal  consumption  are  chargeable 
to  hoisting,  we  have  the  following  figures : 

Per  day. 
2  cagemen,    at    $3    per    shift $18.00 

4  laborers,  at  $2.50  per  shift 30.00 

1  hoisting    engineer,    at    $5    per    shift 15.00 

%    fireman,  at  $3.50   per   shift 5.25 

5  tons    coal,    at    $3    per    ton 15.00 

Total $83.25 

Taking    the    quantities   given    elsewhere    in    the   article   we   can 


886  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

figure  the  weight  of  muck  hoisted  and  the  weight  of  materials  low- 
ered per  lineal  foot  of  tunnel  as  follows: 

11.63  cu.  yds.  muck,  at  3,000  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd... 17. 45  tons. 
As  42  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  are  excavated  each  24  hours,   the  weight 
of   muck   hoisted   during  that   time   is   733   tons.      Turning   now   to 
the  materials  lowered,  we  have  : 

Tons. 

0.91  cu.  yds  sand,  at  2,700  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd 1.23 

41.2  cu.  ft.  timber,  at  35  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft 0.72 

1,650  bricks,  at  4%   Ibs.  per  brick 3.71 

Total    weight    of    materials 5.66 

This  total  multiplied  by  42  ft.  gives  238  tons  of  materials  low- 
ered every  24  hours.  The  total  tonnage  of  material  handled  is, 
therefore,  971  tons  at  a  cost  of  8.57  cts.  per  ton,  of  which  about 
one- third,  or  2.8.  cts.,  are  chargeable  to  lowering  materials  and 
two-thirds,  or  5.68  cts.,  are  chargeable  to  hoisting  muck.  The  total 
yardage  of  muck  hoisted  every  24  hours  is  11.63  X  42  =  489  cu.  yds. 
The  estimated  cost  of  operating  the  hoist  for  24  hours  being  $83.35, 
we  have  ($83.25-4-489)  %  =  ll1^  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  as  the  cost  on 
the  above  assumptions  of  hoisting  the  muck. 

The  cost  of  dumping  per  24  hours  as  given  above  is  $172.50,  and 
a  part  of  this  is  chargeable  to  loading  materials  and  hauling  them 
to  the  shaft  head.  It  is  probably  fair  to  assume  that  at  least  two- 
thirds  of  the  total  cost  is  chargeable  to  hauling  and  dumping  muck. 
As  489  cu.  yds.  of  muck  are  hauled  and  dumped  each  24  hours,  we 
have  ($172.50-^-489)  %  =  23.4  cts.  as  the  cost  per  cu.  yd.  on  the 
above  assumptions. 

Plant. — The  contractor's  plant  is  housed  in  wooden  buildings 
grouped  around  the  head  of  the  shaft  and  comprises  the  following 
machinery:  Power  plant:  two  100  h.p.  boilers,  one  dynamo  and 
dynamo  engine,  20  h.p. ;  one  lift ;  one  emery  wheel ;  one  100  h.p. 
air  compressor;  one  positive  blower  and  10  h.p.  blower  engine; 
two  50  h.p.  hydraulic  pressure  pumps,  and  one  40  h.p.  cage  hoisting 
engine.  Sawmill :  one  80  h.p.  boiler,  one  50  h.p.  engine,  and  the 
saws,  etc.,  previously  itemized.  On  the  dump:  one  15  h.p.  hoisting 
engine  boiler.  The  estimated  first  cost  of  this  plant  is  $30,000. 
About  20  tons  of  coal  per  day  (24  hrs.)  at  a  cost  of  $3  per  ton  are 
required  to  operate  it.  The  plant  gang  works  three  8-hour  shifts 
and  each  shift  is  made  up  of: 

Per  shift.       Per  24  hrs. 

hydraulic  pump  engineer,  at  $5. .$5. 90  $15.00 

hoisting   engineer,    at   $5 5.00  15.00 

fireman,    at    $3.50 3.50  10.50 

machinist,    at    $4 4.00  12.00 

machinist's    helper,     at    $2.75...  2.75  8.25 

electrician,    at    $4 4.00  12.00 

blacksmith,     at    $4.. 4.00  12.00 

blacksmith's    helper,    at    $2.50...  2.50  7.50 

carpenter,    at    $5 5.00  15.00 

trackman,    at    $3.50 3.50  10.50 

barnman,    at    $3.50 3.50  10.50 

2  laborers,    at    $2.50 5.00  15.00 

Totals    $47.75  $143.25 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  887 

Office  Force. — The  office  force  consists  of  seven  men  and  its  work 
is  divided  into  two  12-hour  shifts.  It  is  made  up  of: 

Per  month. 

1  general  manager,   at   $400 $133.00 

2  superintendents,    at    $150 300.00 

2  timekeepers,   at   $75 150.00 

1  receiving  clerk,  at   $75 75.00 

1  bookkeeper,    at    $75 75.00 

Total     $733.00 

The  general  manager  has  charge  of  several  jobs  and  about  one- 
third  of  his  time  is  chargeable  to  the  work  being  described.  Di- 
viding the  total  wages  by  30,  we  get  $24.33  as  the  labor  cost  of 
the  office  force  per  day. 

Summary  of  Costs. — The  daily  cost  of  labor,  summarized  from 
the  above  figures,  is  as  follows: 

Office    force    $  24.33 

Dump    gang    .    172.50 

Lift    gang     48.00 

Mason    gang    13>H£ 

Sawmill    gang    29.00 

Drift   gang 384.75 

Plant    gang    143.25 

Lock    tender     9.00 

Total $950.08 

The  cost  of  lumber  as  given  above  is  $18  per  M  ft.  B.  M.,  and 
the  cost  of  coal  is  $3  per  ton.  Estimating  the  cost  of  brick  at  $9 
per  thousand,  of  cement  at  $1.50  per  barrel  and  sand  at  $1  per 
cu.  yd.,  we  get  the  following  as  the  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  the 
conduit  exclusive  of  interest  and  depreciation  on  plant : 

Per  lln.  ft. 

495  ft.   B.  M.   of  timber,  at  $18 $   8.91 

0.48  ton   coal,    at    $3 1.44 

1,650  bricks,  at   $9  per  M 14.85 

3.38  barrels   cement,   at  $1.50 5.07 

0.91  cu.    yd.    sand,   at    $1 0.91 

Labor,    $950.08   per   day 22.62 

Total    $53.60 

This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  sinking  the  shaft,  nor  does  it 
include  plant  interest,  depreciation  and  repairs. 

Cost  of  a  13/2-ft-  Sewer  Tunnel  at  Cleveland,  Using  a  Hydraulic 
Shield.*— The  method  of  building  large  sewers  by  tunneling  is  be- 
coming increasingly  popular,  not  only  because  it  is  usually  cheaper 
than  open  cut  work  in  soft  ground,  but  because  there  is  no  obstruc- 
tion of  streets  and  no  settlement  of  buildings  adjacent  to  the 
sewer.  Unfortunately,  however,  the  use  of  a  hydraulic  shield  is 
little  understood  by  most  contractors,  and  less  is  known  about  the 
actual  cost  of  such  work.  We  believe  the  following  data  are  the 
first  itemized  costs  of  shield  work  that  have  appeared  in  the  tech- 
nical press ;  and,  while  a  few  of  the  items  are  probably  not  abso- 
lutely correct',  the  data  are  reliable  in  the  main,  and  serve  to  give 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  July   25,    1906. 


888        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

a  very  close  estimate  of  the  cost  of  similar  work.     Before  giving 
the  figures  of  cost,  a  word  as  to  the  conditions: 

Most  of  the  main  intercepting  sewer  of  Cleveland,  Ohio,  was 
built  in  open  cut,  the  top  width  of  trench  being  20  ft.  and  the  depth 
averaging  40  ft.  Two  sets  of  Wakefield  sheet  piling  were  re- 
quired, the  upper  set  being  28  ft.  long.  The  sheet  piling  was  well 
driven,  but  in  passing  certain  brick  buildings,  enough  quicksand 
leaked  under  the  sheeting  to  cause  a  settlement  of  the  buildings, 
and  resulting  cracking  of  the  walls.  The  trench  was  through  dry 
sand,  wet  sand,  quicksand,  and  clay  and  sand  mixed.  As  a  result 
of  the  damage  to  one  building  it  was  decided  to  build  the  remainder 
of  the  sewer  by  the  tunnel  method.  The  contract  price  for  the 
13%-ft.  sewer  in  open  cut  (40  ft.  deep)  had  been  $71  per  lin.  ft. 
The  contractor  agreed  reluctantly  to  undertake  the  building  of  the 
sewer  by  the  tunnel  method  for  $60  per  lin.  ft.,  and,  as  we  shall 
see,  made  a  good  profit  at  this  price.  The  tunnel  work  proceeded 
day  and  night  at  a  rate  of  250  ft.  a  month,  as  compared  with  135 
ft.  per  month  when  the  open  cut  method  was  used.  One  advantage 
of  the  tunnel  work  is  that  it  can  be  carried  on  continuously,  day 
and  night,  and  there  is  no  interruption  on  account  of  bad  weather. 
Moreover,  it  requires  fewer  laborers  than  the  open  cut  method, 
under  the  conditions  above  stated. 

The  secret  of  the  modern  success  in  driving  tunnels  through 
quicksand  and  other  soft  materials  lies  in  the  use  of  the  hydraulic 
shield.  A  shield  is  a  section  of  steel  tube,  open  at  both  ends.  The 
forward  end  is  provided  with  cutting  edges,  and,  in  very  soft 
materials,  it  is  -provided  with  trap  doors  through  which  the  mate- 
rial is  excavated.  The  shield  is  shoved  forward  about  2  ft.  at  a 
time,  by  means  of  hydraulic  jacks ;  and  the  tunnel  lining  is  built 
up  inside  the  rear  part  of  the  shield,  ready  for  the  next  shove.  In 
this  particular  case  a  brick  lining  was  used,  and  the  hydraulic 
jacks  bore  against  blocks  of  wood  laid  on  this  lining  when  shoving 
the  shield  ahead.  Where  the  ground  is  so  porous  that  the  water 
flows  in  faster  than  it  can  be  pumped  out,  the  tunnel  is  kept  full 
of  compressed  air.  The  pressure  of  the  air  depends  entirely  upon 
the  pressure  of  the  outside  water  at  the  face  of  the  shield.  In 
this  particular  work  an  air  pressure  of  5  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  was 
ordinarily  sufficient,  although  in  a  few  soft  spots  a  pressure  of  9 
Ibs.  was  used.  With  such  low  pressures  as  these  there  is  no  danger 
that  the  men  will  get  the  "bends."  And  there  is  no  danger  of 
"blowouts"  at  the  face  of  the  shield  where  the  air  pressure  is  light, 
and  the  covering  of  earth  over  the  shield  has  a  fair  thickness.  In 
a  word,  this  sort  of  sewer  tunneling  by  the  shield  method  is  not 
at  all  hazardous;  and,  it  Is  surprising,  indeed,  to  note  how  few 
contractors  have  had  the  courage  to  try  it.  Perhaps  the  stories  of 
the  difficulties  encountered  in  driving  tunnels  under  rivers  (which 
is  a  wholly  different  matter)  have  served  to  frighten  contractors 
and  engineers  generally. 

Regarding  keeping  the  shield  to  line  and  grade,  no  difficulty  need 
be  experienced  in  sewer  work  of  this  character.  By  making  a 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


889 


mark  in  the  earth  at  the  face  of  the  shield,  it  is  easy  to  see  whether 
the  shield  is  moving  in  a  straight  line  or  not.  If  the  shield  is 
moving  off  to  one  side,  simply  relax  the  pressure  on  the  hydraulic 
jacks  of  the  opposite  side,  and  the  shield  is  easily  brought  to  line. 
In  similar  manner  it  is  kept  to  grade.  The  jacks  are  so  connected 
by  piping  that  any  one  of  them  can  be  cut  out.  All  that  is  needed 
is  careful  watching,  and  the  shield  can  be  easily  kept  to  line.  A 
cut  showing  the  general  dimensions  of  the  shield  is  given  herewith 
(Fig.  13). 

We  now  come  to  the  details  of  the  work. 

The  sewer  is   13%    ft.   in  diameter  and  was   built  of  four  rings 

< 4'0*~-  ->< 7'ff" 


Fig.  13.— Tunnel  Shield. 

of  No.  1  shale  brick  laid  in  Portland  cement  mortar.  The  masonry, 
from  a  point  2  ft.  below  the  spring  line  to  a  point  4  ft.  from  the 
crown  of  arch,  was  laid  in  Flemish  bond,  keyed  in  with  row-lock 
masonry. 

The  air  lock  consisted  of  a  section  of  the  sewer  included  between 
two  brick  bulkheads,  2  ft.  thick  and  24  ft.  apart.  A  wooden  door 
made  of  4 -in  tongued  and  grooved  timber  was  placed  in  each  bulk- 
head. When  closed  the  doors  press  against  rubber  gaskets  to  pre- 
vent leakage.  The  lock  was  supplied  with  large  valves  so  that  it 
could  be  filled  or  emptied  in  about  one  minute.  The  ordinary  air 
pressure  was  about  5  Ibs.,  and  it  was  found  that  this  was  sufficient 


890  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

to  keep  the  tunnel  dry  and  to  give  a  good  supply  of  fresh  air  to 
the  workmen.  When  soft  spots  occurred  in  the  excavation  tilt- 
pressure  was  run  up  to  about  9  Ibs.  A  higher  pressure  than  this 
might  have  caused  a  "blowout"  as  the  hard  material  in  the  roof 
of  the  tunnel  was  not  particularly  thick. 

The  shield,  a  section  through  the  center  of  which  is  shown  in 
Fig.  13,  was  constructed  of  %-in.  steel,  and  had  a  total  weight  of 
about  16  tons.  The  shield  was  4  ft.  long  and  16^  ft.  in  diameter. 
The  upper  half  was  provided  with  a  follower,  7  ft.  long,  made  of 
%-in.  steel,  bolted  to  the  shield.  When  the  roof  was  of  hard 
material  the  "follower"  was  pulled  off  the  brickwork  about  2%  ft. 
The  shield  was  pushed  forward  by  12  hydraulic  jacks,  Sins,  in 
diameter  and  26  ins.  long.  The  water  is  conveyed  to  the  jacks 
by  a  pipe  line  containing  a  swinging  joint  in  the  shape  of  an  in- 
verted "V"  with  the  joint  at  the  apex,  which  allowed  the  shield 
to  be  shoved  ahead  and  pulled  the  pipe  with  it.  The  average  pres- 
sure used  in  shoving  the  shield  was  about  700  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  but 
the  pump  could  develop  a  pressure  of  6,000  Ibs. 

The  material  excavated  was  principally  a  hard,  dry  quicksand,  at 
times  mixed  with  clay.  All  material  was  handled  in  cars  of  a 
1  cu.  yd.  capacity,  the  cars  being  pushed  in  and  out  by  the  laborers. 

The  method  of  excavation  was  as  follows:  The  miners  exca- 
vated about  2  ft.  in  advance  of  the  shield,  the  pressure  was  then 
applied  and  the  shield  shoved  ahead  into  the  part  just  excavated. 
At  the  beginning  of  each  day's  work  the  heads  of  the  jacks  stood 
about  1  ft.  from  the  brickwork.  Large  wooden  blocks  were  then 
placed  against  the  two  outer  rings  of  the  brickwork  and  other 
blocks  were  placed  between  these  and  the  heads  of  the  jacks.  The 
pressure  transmitted  to  the  brickwork  did  not  damage  it.  After 
the  first  shove  of  2  ft.,  the  jacks  were  forced  back  and  more  block- 
ing placed  between  them  and  the  other  blocks. 

The  sewer  for  part  of  the  time,  at  least,  was  constructed  at 
the  rate  of  9  ft.  a  day  or  about  250  ft.  a  month.  An  additional 
foot  a  day  could  easily  have  been  made  but  the  contractor  did  not 
care  to  take  too  great  chances  by  pulling  the  shield  follower  off 
the  brickwork  any  further. 

Two  brick  layers  laid  up  the  9  ft.  of  sewer  in  about  8  hours, 
each  man  laying  about  5,000  bricks.  The  mortar  was  mixed  in 
the  tunnel  at  the  face  of  the  work.  In  each  lineal  foot  of  sewer 
there  were  8  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  and  2.62  cu.  yds.  of  masonry, 
or  about  1,100  bricks  per  lineal  foot. 

The  work  was  divided  into  four  shifts,  the  wages  and  number 
of  the  men  in  each  shift  being  as  follows:  the  superintendent's 
were  the  contractor's  sons,  their  wages  being  estimated  at  $5  per 
day: 

1  Head   Miner   at    $4.00... .  .$  4.00 

3  Miners    at     $3.50 .  1050 

2  Muckers    at    $2.50 5.00 

1   Double  Team  at  f 5.00 5.00 


Total     - $   24.50 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  891 

Second  Tunnel  Gang,  7  A.  M.  to  3  p.  M.  : 
Same  number  as  first  gang $   24.50 

Total   for   tunnel    gangs $  49.00 

Brick  Shift,  3  p.  M    to  10  p.  M.  : 

2  Bricklayers   at    $8.00 $   16.00 

4  Tenders    at    $1.75 7.00 

2  Car   Pushers  at   $1.75 3.50 


Total     $  26.50 

Top  Gang,   7  A.   M.   to  5:30  p.   M.  : 

4  Laborers    at    $1.50 $  6.00 

Day  Shift,  7  A.  M.  to  7  p.  M.  : 

1  Superintendent    at    $5.00 $  5.00 

1  Engineer    at    $3.25 3.25 

1  Fireman   at   $1.75 1.75 

1  Carpenter    at    $2.00 2.00 

4  Car  Pushers  at    $1.75 7.00 

1  Car  Dumper  at  $1.75 1.75 

Total $^20.75 

Night  Shift,  7  p.  M.  to  7  A.  M.  : 

1   Superintendent   at    $5.00 $  5.00 

1  Engineer    at    $3.25 3.25 

1  Fireman   at   $1.75 1.^5 

4  Car  Pushers  at  $1.75 7.00 

1  Car   Dumper  at   $1.75 1.75 

Total $   18.75 

Total  labor  for  24  hours $121.00 

The  two  tunnel  gangs  worked  8  hours  each,  and  the  total  wages 
paid  them  were  $49  for  16  hours,  during  which  time  they  excavated 
9  lin.  ft,  or  72.  cu.  yds.  Hence  their  labor  cost  $5.44  per  lin.  ft, 
or  68  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  two  top  gangs  worked  12  hours  each,  and  their  total  wages 
were  $39.50.  In  addition  to  this  there  was  the  fuel  for  a  60-hp. 
boiler,  which  could  not  have  exceeded  4  tons  in  24  hours,  and, 
doubtless,  was  much  less.  Assuming  4  tons  at  $3,  we  have  $12 
to  be  added  to  the  $39.50,  making  $51.50,  or  $2.15  per  hour. 
In  the  16  hours  of  excavating  work,  the  cost  of  the  top  labor  and 
fuel  would  be  16  x  $2.15  =  $34.40,  which  is  equivalent  to  $3.82 
per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  or  48  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  total  cost  of 
excavation  was,  therefore,  $0.68  plus  $0.48,  or  $1.16  per  cu.  yd., 
exclusive  of  interest  and  depreciation  of  plant. 

The  brick  mason  gang  worked  7  hours,  and  the  total  wages 
were  $26.50.  Since  2.62  cu.  yds.  of  brick  masonry  were  laid 
per  lin.  ft.,  there  were  23.6  cu.  yds.  laid  each  shift,  the  advance 
being  9  lin.  ft  Hence  the  cost  of  labor  was  $1.12  per  cu.  yd., 
of  $3  per  M,  or  $2.95  per  lin.  ft.  But  this  does  not  include  the 
wages  and  fuel  charged  to  the  surface  gang,  which  is  $2.15  per 
hour,  or  $17.20  for  8  hours.  Distributing  this  $17.20  over  the 
23.6  cu.  yds.  of  brick  masonry  we  have  73  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
of  masonry,  or  $1.91  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel.  The  total  labor  cost 


892  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

of  brick  masonry  is,  therefore,  $1.12  Plus  0.73,  or  $1.85  per  cu.  yd. 
We    are    now    able    to    approximate    the    cost    of    the    tunnel    per 

lineal  foot. 

Per 
lin.  ft. 

8  cu    yds.  excav.,  underground  labor,  at  $0.68 $  5.44 

8  cu.  yds.  excav.,  surface  labor,  at  ?0.48 .  . 3.82 

2  62  cu    yds.  brickwork,  underground  labor,  at   $1.12 2.95 

2-62  cu.  yds.  brickwork,  surface  labor,  at  $0.73 1.91 

1,100  bricks  at  $9  per  M 9.90 

2.1  bbls.  cement  (1 :3  mortar)   at  $1.70 3.57 

Plan't,y50  per  cent  of  first  cost,' distributed  over  1,625  lin.  ft.  .      5.00 

35  ft.  B.  M.  floor  of  tunnel  at  3  cts 1.05 

Shafts  or  manholes 1-00 

Total     $35.64 

The  plant  is  estimated  to  have  cost  about  $16,000,  including 
$3,000  for  track  rails,  pipe,  wire  and  lamps;  and  we  have  assumed 
that  half  of  this  $16,000,  or  $8,000  should  be  charged  to  the  1,600 
lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  which  is  $5  per  lin.  ft. 

The  tunnel  was  temporarily  floored  with  plank,  and  upon  this 
the  tracks  were  laid.  We  have  estimated  that  this  flooring  need 
not  have  exceeded  35  ft.  B.  M.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel. 

No  data  are  available  for  accurately  estimating  the  cost  of 
shafts,  but  it  is  safe  to  assume  $1,600  for  the  1,600  ft.  of  tunnel 
as  the  cost  of  shafts. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  above  costs  are  based  upon  a 
progress  of  9  lin.  ft.  per  2 4 -hour  day.  Very  bad  material  might 
reduce  progress  to  6  ft.  per  day,  correspondingly  increasing  the 
cost  of  labor. 

The  contractor's  plant  on  this  tunnel  work  was  as  follows: 

2  boilers,  60  hp.,  return  flue,  only  one  in  use  at  a  time. 

1  Duplex  feed  pump,  4-in.  steam  cylinder,  3-in.  water  cylinder, 
5-in.  stroke,  made  by  Laidlaw  &  Dunn,  Cincinnati,  O. 

1  straight  line  air  compressor,  class  "A,"  16-in.  steam  cylinder, 
16  ^4 -in.  air  cylinder,  18-in.  stroke,  made  by  Ingersoll-Rand  Co., 
New  York  City. 

1  vertical  high  speed  engine  (20  hp.)  for  dynamo,  cyl.  8  x  10  ins. 

1  dynamo  with  rheostat,  capacity  250  incandescent  lights,  110 
volts,  55  amperes. 

1  Norton  voltmeter  and  switches. 

1  high  pressure  hydraulic  pump,  10-in.  steam  cylinder,  1-in. 
water  cylinder,  12-in.  stroke,  made  by  the  National  Pump  Co., 
Chicago. 

1  hoisting  engine,  double  cylinder,  8  x  10  ins.,  with  one  drum 
(22  x  22  ins.),  sink  motion  reverse,  made  by  J.  S.  Mundy,  Newark, 
N.  J. 

1  pump  shaft,  steam  cyl.,  5%  x  4  ins.,  made  by  Knowles  Steam 
Pump  Co.,  114  Liberty  St.,  New  York. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  893 

1  elevator  cage  and  guides. 

12  hydraulic  jacks  (5  x  26  ins.),  with  valves,  for  shield. 

1  shield,  weight  32,000  Ibs. 

In  conclusion  it  should  be  said  that  this  work  was  done  without 
the  slightest  settlement  of  adjacent  buildings,  although  a  3-story 
brick  building  was  with  a  few  feet  of  the  line  of  the  sewer. 

The  contractor  was  Mr.  John  Wagner,  of  Cleveland,  O.  Mr.  J. 
M.  Estep  was  Assistant  Engineer  Intercepting  Sewers,  and  to  him 
we  are  indebted  for  the  data  upon  which  the  above  given  costs  are 


Cost  of  Sewer  In  Tunnel,  Cleveland,  O.* — The  tunnel  construction 
is  a  portion  of  the  contract  for  the  Lakeside  Ave.  intercepting 
sewer,  between  E.  40th  and  Marquette  streets  in  Cleveland,  Ohio, 
Mr.  Thomas  W.  Nicholson,  contractor.  For  some  of  the  intercepting 
sewer,  brick,  with  internal  diameter  of  13  ft.  6  ins.,  approximate 
depth  to  bottom  of  sewer  40  ft.,  the  price  per  lineal  foot  in  open  cut 
was  $88.  In  spite  of  all  the  care  taken  by  the  contractors  to  brace 
the  trench  it  broke  away  from  them  in  places  until  at  some  spots 
the  sinking  of  the  street  extended  to  the  curb  lines.  Much  trouble 
was  experienced  with  settlement  of  buildings  with  the  drawbacks 
incidental  to  such  happenings.  The  contractors  were  in  so  much 
trouble  that  they  were  permitted  to  tunnel  and  no  more  trouble  was 
experienced  with  buildings  settling  and  there  was  an  immediate 
reduction  in  the  cost  of  the  work. 

The  sewer  now  being  put  in  by  Mr.  Nicholson  was  let  to  him  for 
$33  per  lineal  foot  when  using  three  rings  of  brick  with  wood 
backing,  his  price  for  four  rings  of  brick  without  the  wood  backing 
being  $36.  There  were  a  number  of  other  bidders  who  all  bid 
higher  for  the  wood  backing  form  of  construction,  than  for  the  four 
rings  of  brick,  internal  diameter  of  the  sewer  12  ft.  The  work  is 
now  in  progress.  It  may  be  interesting  to  note  that  on  Aug.  4, 
1908,  a  contract  was  let  for  another  section  3,430  ft.  long,  to  John 
Wagner,  the  internal  diameter  being  12  ft.  3  ins.  at  a  price  of  $32. 7S 
with  wood  backing  and  $33.73  for  all  brick.  The  cost  to  the  city 
is  thus  less  than  half  by  tunnelling  compared  with  the  open  cut 
work  and  the  dangers  supposed  to  be  guarded  against  by  open  cut 
work  are  really  less  with  the  tunnel.  On  his  present  contract  for 
the  12-ft.  sewer  Mr.  Nicholson  is  said  to  be  meeting  with  no  trouble 
by  reason  of  settlement  of  buildings. 

To  get  rid  of  water  and  prevent  settlement  by  a  too  rapid  un- 
watering  of  the  ground,  the  tunnel  is  constructed  under  air  pressure 
of  about  7  Ibs.  to  the  sq.  in.  Men  work  in  this  pressure  for  a 
whole  shift,  the  work  being  continuous  in  8-hour  shifts.  A  shield 
is  used  and  an  attempt  is  made  to  complete  a  12-ft.  length  in  each 
shift.  The  table  given  shows  the  progress  made  during  August  and 
September,  up  to  the  time  the  tunnel  was  visited. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  6,  1909. 


894        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

The  material  being  a  fine  joint  clay  is  shaved  by  knives.  These 
knives  are.  made  like  a  carpenter's  draw  knife,  or  shave  knife,  with 
the  blade  bent  to  a  half  circle.  Small  ones  can  be  used  by  one 
man  but  in  this  tunnel  the  air  makes  the  clay  dense  and  several 
men  pull  on  the  knives,  thus  being  enabled  to  take  off  long  slices. 
When  2  ft.  of  excavation  are  gained  the  shield  is  driven  ahead, 
and  the  wood  lining  put  in.  This  wood  lining  consists  of  blocks 
of  wood  about  2  ft.  long,  8  ins.  wide  and  6  ins.  thick.  On  one 
side  a  curved  piece  is  cut  so  the  face  of  the  block  is  cut  to  a 
radius  of  7  ft.  1  in.  The  piece  removed  is  nailed  on  the  back  and 
thus  the  block  is  8  ins.  wide  and  6  ins.  thick  but  front  and  back 
both  curved  to  a  radius.  The  excavation  is  3  8  ins.  larger  than 
the  interior  diameter  of  the  sewer  and  the  wooden  blocks  are  used 
to  line  the  entire  excavation,  making  a  wooden  ring  with  the 
inside  face  13  ins.  larger  than  the  sewer.  The  jacks  of  the 
shield  press  against  this  wood  lining  and  the  pieces  being  cut  to  fit, 
any  pressure  exerted  on  the  side  of  the  excavation  will  simply  force 
the  ends  of  the  blocks  together  and  no  other  bracing  is  required. 
This  leaves  the  space  clear  for  the  brick  masons. 

The  masons  lay  three  rings  of  brick  on'  the  wooden  ring  for 
one-half  the  height.  Great  care  is  taken  to  insure  grade  and  as  the 
excavation,  if  anything,  is  usually  slightly  in  excess,  the  extra 
space  is  filled  with  cement  mortar.  The  inside  diameter  of  the 
sewer  is  therefore  true.  When  the  sewer  is  completed  on  either  side 
to  the  middle,  braces  are  spiked  to  the  ends  of  the  ties  of  the  material 
track  and  leaning  against  the  sides  of  the  sewer.  Upon  the  upper 
ends  of  these  braces  are  placed  heavy  timbers  carefully  leveled  and 
resting  upon  these  timbers  are  placed  semi-circular  steel  centers 
made  from  4  in.  channels,  with  feet  riveted  to  them  to  enable  them 
to  be  maintained  in  a  vertical  position.  These  centers  are  placed 
4  ft.  apart  and  the  total  length  of  brickwork  put  in  on  a  shift  is 
generally  12  ft.,  requiring  three  centers.  The  space  between  the 
brickwork  and  the  centers  is  sufficient  to  permit  the  placing  of  2  in. 
lagging  on  the  centers. 

Against  the  lagging  the  masons  lay  the  brick  horizontally  on 
the  sides,  presenting  the  narrow  edge  to  the  inside  of  the  sewer. 
The  three  rings  are  thus  laid  and  if  any  spaces  exist  between  the 
brick  and  the  wooden  lining  it  is  easy  to  slush  them  in.  At  the 
top,  arrangements  are  made  to  place  lagging  for  3  ft.  across, 
instead  of  lengthwise,  and  thus  1  ft.  at  a  time  can  be  built  and 
cavities  taken  care  of.  Brick  and  mortar  are  carried  in  by  cars 
drawn  by  a  mule  on  ordinary  industrial  track.  Double  lines  of 
track  are  laid  with  frequent  switches  and  cross  overs.  All  the 
excavated  material  is  taken  out  on  these  tracks  and  the  brick 
and  other  materials  brought  in.  There  is  one  shaft  from  which 
work  is  carried  in  two  headings  but  only  one  heading  was  being 
worked  at  the  time  of  the  visit.  The  equipment  at  the  shaft  head 

consists  of  a  hoisting  engine  and  air  compressor  and  in  the  tunnel 

is   a  pump   to   force   out  the  water   when   it   becomes   troublesome. 

The  air  lock  is  at  the  foot  of  the  shaft  and  about  25  ft.  long.     The 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  895 

tunnel  was  in  about  2,000  ft.  when  visited  and  under  air  the  whole 
length. 

A  usual  working  force  consists  of  11  men,  according  to  the  city 
sewer  inspector,  divided  about  as  follows : 

Miners     6 

Men    placing    blocks 2 

Muckers    2 

Mule     driver 1 

Total     11 

This  exact  division  is  not  adhered  to  as  all  the  men  help  the 
miners  except  when  blocks  are  to  be  placed,  when  some  of  the 
laborers  are  detailed  for  that  work.  There  are  generally  two 
masons  with  four  or  more  helpers. 

The  men  are  paid  by  the  shift  and  the  inspector  did  not  know 
what  they  were  paid  but  from  conversation  with  the  men  he  gath- 
ered that  the  rates  of  pay  are  about  as  follows : 

Per  hours. 

Masons     $1.00 

Helpers    0.25 

Miners .    0.30 

Laborers    . 0.25 

The  following  table  is  copied  from  the  inspectors  daily  reports 
and  collected  for  each  week  from  tables  prepared  in  the  office  of 
the  city  engineer.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  laborers'  hours  are 
lumped,  regardless  of  the  work  performed,  no  distinction  being  made 
between  miners,  muckers  and  helpers. 

Engineers  from  the  sewer  department  go  into  the  sewer  daily 
to  keep  up  the  line  and  grade  points.  For  grade,  nails  are  driven 
in  each  side  at  a  definite  height  at  intervals,  and  strings  are 
stretched  from  nail  to  nail  across  the  sewer  when  the  men  want 
to  check  their  grade  at  any  time.  Upon  the  strings  pieces  of 
paper  are  hung  and  sights  are  taken  across  two  or  more  strings. 
In  this  way  it  is  easy  to  keep  it  almost  exactly  on  the  grade  with 
the  work.  Owing  to  soft  places  encountered  from  time  to  time 
in  the  material,  it  is  more  difficult  seemingly  to  preserve  the  line 
than  the  grade.  The  alignment,  however,  seemed  excellent  and  the 
work  was  creditable  to  the  contractor  and  the  men  in  charge  for 
the  city. 

Feet 

Week        . — Hours • —       of  sewer 

ending.   Foreman.   Engineer.   Masons.   Helpers.   Laborers,   completed. 
Sept.  18.    .    96  96  112  560  1,647 


Sept.  11 
Sept.  4.. 
Aug.  28. 
Aug.  21. 
Aug.  14. 
Aug.  7 .  . 


.  84  84  80  400  1,210  51 

.  84  84  24  80  406  18 

.168  168  154  800  2,470  97 

.168  168  160  800  2,398  111 

.168  168  160  800  2,910  101 

.168  168  192  960  2,904  124 


Total  ..936      9.36      882     4,400    13,945      571 
The  cost  was  as  given  in  Table  XT. 


896        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

TABLE  XI. — LABOR  COSTS  PER  FOOT  OP  SEWER. 

Total 

Week  labor  cost 

ending.    Foreman.    Engineer.   Masons.    Helpers.    Laborers,     per  foot. 
Sept.    18.      $0.68          $0.56  $1.62          $2.03  $6.56          $11.45 


Sept.  11. 

Sept.  4 .  . 

Aug.  28. 

Aug.  21, 

Aug.  14, 

Aug.  7 . 


0.82  0.66  1.57  1.96  6.52  11.53 

2.33  1.87  1.33  1.11  6.20  12.84 

0.87  0.69  1.59  2.06  7.00  12.21 

0.76  0.61  1.44  1.80  6.59  11.20 

0.83  0.67  1.58  1.98  7.92  12.98 

0.68  0.54  1.55  1.93  5.71  10.41 


The  wages  are  assumed  to  be  correct  as  given  by  the  inspector. 
The  wages  for  laborers  are  assumed  at  an  average  of  27%  cts.  per 
hour;  foreman  assumed  50  cts.  per  hour;  engineer  assumed  at  40 
cts.  per  hour.  This  analysis  is  made  upon  the  foregoing  data 
solely  and  has  not  been  checked  with  information  from  the  con- 
tractor. 

The  foregoing  labor  cost  takes  the  wood,  brick,  mortar,  etc., 
down  into  the  tunnel ;  puts  them  in  place  and  the  excavated  material 
is  brought  to  the  surface  to  be  hauled  away.  This  hauling  must 
add  $2  per  foot  to  the  cost  unless  some  arrangements  are  made 
to  dispose  of  the  material  at  a  profit. 

Each  foot  of  excavation  contains  6.7  cu.  yds.  In  each  foot 
there  are  800  brick  and  276  ft.  B.  M.  of  lining  blocks.  The 
mechanical  equipment  consists  of  a  shield,  a  hoisting  engine,  air 
compressor  and  two  pump's ;  one  in  each  heading  and  of  tracks  for 
cars,  cars,  mules,  piping,  etc.,  and  locks.  For  this  equipment  and 
operation  a  charge  of  $1.25  per  foot  should  be  reasonable  as  it  will 
not  be  worn  out  on  this  one  job. 

The  following  estimate  should  be  about  right  for  similar  work : 

Plant,  fuel,  etc .$  1.25 

800  brick  at  $15  per  M 12.00 

Mortar   128 

Wood  lining,  276  ft.  B.  M.  at  $35 9.63 

Hauling  away  material 2.00 


Cost  per  foot  exclusive  of  labor $26.16 

The  labor  costs  vary  as  shown  from  $10.41  to  $12.98  per  foot, 
which  brings  the  cost  per  foot  from  $36.57  to  $39.14,  the  contract 
price  being  $33. 

When  both  headings  are  going  the  cost  for  foreman  and  engineer 
will  of  course  be  divided  but  this  will  cut  off  less  than  $1  per  foot. 
If  the  excavated  material  is  sold  the  price  cannot  more  than  pay 
the  cost  of  hauling.  Assuming  everything  favorable  that  can  be 
assumed,  it  looks  as  if  the  contract  is  not  going  to  be  very 
remunerative. 

The  men  lumped  together  as  laborers  handle  all  the  material 
into  and  out  of  the  tunnel,  do  the  mining,  cleaning  up,  assisting 
brick  masons,  helpers,  etc.,  so  the  actual  excavation  cost  is  less 
than  $1  per  cu.  yd.  The  cost  of  masons  and  helpers  is  about  $2.80 
per  1,000  brick.  No  fault  can  be  found  with  these  items. 

Labor  Cost  of  a   Large   Brick   Sewer   in   Chicago.*— In   1901  the 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  30,   1906. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  897 

City  of  Chicago  began  the  construction  of  the  south  arm  of  its 
intercepting  sewer  system,  comprising  Section  G,  which  extended 
from  39th  street  to  51st  street,  and  Sections  G  3  and  H,  which 
extended  from  51st  street  to  73d  street.  The  work  was  done  by 
day  labor  under  the  supervision  of  the  city's  engineers.  Descrip- 
tions of  the  methods  and  cost  of  driving  sheet  piling  and  of  the 
excavation  for  these  sewers  were  given  in  the  March  and  April 
issues  of  this  magazine. 

The  specifications  for  the  brickwork  on  Section  G  called  for 
five  rings  of  hard  burned  sewer  brick,  laid  in  natural  cement 
mortar,  composed  of  one  part  cement  and  one  part  sand.  From 
39th  street  to  44th  place,  the  sewer  was  16  ft.  in  internal  diameter, 
and  from  44th  place  to  51st  street,  it  had  an  internal  diameter  of 
15%  ft.  Bricklaying  on  Section  G  was  commenced  in  the  early 
part  of  June,  1901,  and  was  completed  about  March  1,  1903,  no 
work  being  done  during  the  winter  of  1901-2.  On  account  of  the 
necessity  of  getting  through  the  freight  yards  of  the  Illinois  Central 
Ry.  at  51st  street,  bricklaying  was  carried  on  during  the  winter  of 
1902-3  when  the  weather  would  permit.  At  no  time  was  brick  laid 
when  the  temperature  was  lower  than  15  degrees  above  zero.  The 
best  quality  of  torpedo  sand,  thoroughly  heated  was  used  in  the 
mortar.  This  section  of  the  conduit  was  about  300  ft.  long. 

The  brick  were  unloaded  from  the  cars  and  placed  in  piles  about 
16  ft.  from  the  side  of  the  trench.  From  these  piles  the  bricks 
were  loaded  and  wheeled  to  the  side  of  the  trench,  and  were  then 
delivered  to  the  bricklayers  by  means  of  tossers  working  on  the 
bank  and  on  scaffolds  on  the  braces.  All  cement  mortar  was 
mixed  by  hand  and  lowered  in  galvanized  iron  pails  by  means  of 
ropes,  from  scaffolds  on  the  top  set  of  braces. 

During  the  season  of  1901,  eight  bricklayers  were  employed,  and 
an  average  of  about  22  ft.  of  conduit  was  built  per  day.  This  was 
equivalent  to  about  40.5  cu.  yds.  of  brickwork  per  day,  or  5  cu. 
yds.  per  mason.  The  second  year,  13  bricklayers  were  used,  and 
they  averaged  about  35  ft.  of  conduit  per  day.  It  should  be  re- 
marked that  while  13  bricklayers  were  carried  on  the  roll  at  this 
time,  the  gang  usually  consisted  of  12  men.  The  gang  for  handling 
brick,  mixing  cement,  etc.,  consisted  of  from  70  to  75  men  for  12 
Bricklayers. 

On  the  construction  of  that  portion  of  the  intercepting  sewer 
lying  between  51st  street  and  73d  street,  the  first  brick  was  laid 
Dec.  8,  1901.  But  144  ft.  were  finished  that  year  owing  to  the 
cold  weather.  Construction  was  resumed  about  March  15,  1902, 
and  continued  until  Jan.  2,  1903,  when  it  was  stopped  for  the 
winter.  The  work  was  resumed  April  10.  1903,  and  was  completed 
July  10.  The  masonry  consisted  of  five  concentric  rings  of  brick 
laid  in  natural  cement  mortar,  composed  of  one  part  cement  and 
one  part  sand.  From  51st  street  to  56th  street  the  sewer  was  to 
have  an  internal  diameter  of  14*4  ft.;  from  56th  street  to  63d 
street  the  diameter  was  13 Ms  ft.;  from  63d  street  to  70th  street, 


898        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

13  %  ft.,  and  from  70th  street  to  73d  street,  12V2  ft-  The  excavated 
sections  were  48  ft.  long,  and  consequently  12  bricklayers  were 
employed  most  of  the  time.  The  work  was  so  arranged  that  as 
soon  as  the  invert  was  finished,  work  was  begun  on  the  arch.  The 
arch  work  was  usually  kept  at  least  one  day  behind  the  invert  in 
order  to  give  plenty  of  room  for  setting  up  centers,  removal  of 
timbers,  and  at  the  same  time  keep  the  mason  gang  busy,  if  there 
should  be  any  delay  in  excavating  the  bottom  or  from  other  causes. 

Brick  were  delivered  in  cars  on  the  street  by  the  Municipal  nar- 
row gage  railway,  no  hand  wheeling  being  necessary.  When 
dumping  space  was  available,  sufficient  brick  for  half  the  invert 
were  usually  on  the  bank  before  the  masons  began  to  work.  The 
brick  were  passed  from  hand  to  hand  to  the  masons. 

As  in  the  construction  of  Section  G,  the  cement  was  mixed  by 
hand,  the  mixing  being  done  as  close  to  the  workers  as  possible, 
but  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  trench  from  the  brick  pile.  The 
mortar  was  lowered  by  hand,  one  man  supplying  three  masons,  that 
number  being  allotted  to  each  12-ft.  section.  The  division  was 
made  on  account  of  the  Potter  trench  machine  bents,  which  were  so 
low  that  a  man  could  not  pass  under  them  while  on  the  cement 
platform.  The  cement  platform  was  laid  on  the  cross  timbers  which 
supported  the  trench  machine.  The  platform  was  about  1  ft.  above 
the  street  surface,  thus  making  a  lowering  distance  of  from  22  ft. 
to  28  ft.  when  mortar  was  delivered  for  the  invert.  A  departure 
was  made  from  the  usual  custom  of  having  the  mason  tender 
dump  the  mortar,  in  that  one  man  in  the  bottom  was  assigned  to 
do  this  work.  This  proved  a  decided  advantage  as  the  mortar 
boxes  were  always  kept  filled.  It  might  be  well  to  note  here  that 
while  a  mason  tender  could  have  handled  the  mortar  for  a  part  of 
the  time,  yet  even  a  delay  of  a  few  minutes  for  one  mason  at 
frequent  intervals,  amounts  to  considerable  at  the  end  of  the  day. 
Every  contractor  knows  that  a  slight  excuse  for  slow  work  will 
make  a  considerable  difference  in  the  amount  of  finished  product. 

When  12  masons  were  working  the  mason  gang  consisted  of  from 
58  to  65  men.  The  gang  included  masons,  tenders,  brick  tossers 
and  cement  handlers.  With  this  force,  from  38  to  44  ft.  of  com- 
oleted  sewer  were  built  daily. 

The  mason  gang  was  as  follows: 

Rate.  Per  Day. 

1  Foreman     $10.00  $   10.00 

12  Masons    9.00  108.00 

11  Bottom    tenders 3.25  35.75 

7  Bank    men 3.50  24.50 

7  First    scaffold    men 2.50  17.50 

7  Second    scaffold    men 2.50  17.50 

7  Third    scaffold    men 2.75  19.25 

6  Cement    mixers 2.75  16.50 

5  Cement   carriers 2.75  13  75 

5  Cement    lowerers 2.75  13.75 

2  Wheelers     2.50  500 

5  Sand    men 2.50  12.50 

3  Laborers    2.50  750 


Total    per    day $301.50 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  899 

As  an  average  of  38  ft.  of  sewer  was  built  each  day,  the  labor 
cost  per  foot  is  about  $7.93.  Assuming  that. the  inside  diameter  of 
the  sewer  was  13 %  (some  sections  were  14*4  ft,  13*4  ft.  and  12% 
ft.)  the  labor  cost  for  the  brick  masonry  amounted  to  $2.48 
per  cu.  yd. 

It  will  be  noticed  in  the  above  tabulation  that  the  rates  of  wages 
in  many  cases  were  excessive.  All  that  it  is  necessary  to  say  in 
regard  to  this  is  that  the  work  was  done  by  the  city. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  and  Brick  Sewer.— Mr.  William  G.  Taylor, 
City  Engineer  of  Medford,  Mass.,  gives  the  following  data  of  work 
done  in  1902,  by  day  labor,  for  the  city.  Figure  14  is  a  cross- 
section  of  the  sewer,  which  has  a  concrete  invert  and  sides  and  a 
brick  arch.  The  concrete  was  1:3:6  gravel.  The  forms  for  the 
invert  were  made  collapsible  and  in  10-ft.  lengths.  The  two  halves 


Portland  Cemerrt  Carter, 
?t?r  3  •sand 


Fig.  14.  —  Concrete  and  Brick  Sewer. 

were  held  together  by  iron  dogs  or  clamps.  The  morning  following 
the  placing  01  the  concrete  the  dogs  were  removed  and  turnbuckle 
hooks  were  put  in  their  places,  so  that  by  tightening  the  turn- 
buckle  the  forms  were  carefully  separated  from  the  concrete.  The 
concrete  was  theen  allowed  to  stand  24  hrs.,  when  the  arch  centers 
were  set  in  place.  These  centers  were  made  of  %  x  1%-in.  lagging 
on  2-in.  plank  ribs  2  ft.  apart,  and  stringers  on  each  side.  Wooden 
wedges  on  the  forward  end  of  each  section  supported  the  rear  end 
of  the  adjoining  section.  The  forward  end  of  each  section  was  sup- 
ported by  a  screw  jack  placed  under  a  rib  2  ft.  from  the  front  end. 
To  remove  the  centers,  the  rear  end  of  a  small  truck  was  pushed 
under  the  section  about  18  ins.  ;  an  adjustable  roller  was  fastened 
by  a  thumb  screw  to  the  forward  rib  of  the  center  ;  the  screw  jack 
was  lowered  allowing  the  roller  to  drop  on  a  run  board  on  top  of 
the  truck  ;  the  truck  was  then  pulled  back  by  a  tail  rope  until 


900        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

the  adjustable  roller  ran  off  the  end  of  the  truck;  whereupon  the 
truck  was  pulled  forward,  drawing  the  center  off  the  supporting 
wedges  of  the  rear  section.  In  this  manner  not  the  least  injury 
was  done  to  the  fresh  concrete. 

Each  lineal  foot  of  sewer  required  1  *4  cu.  yds.  of  excavation ; 
4  cu.  ft.  of  concrete,  and  1  cu.  ft.  of  brick  arch.  The  sewer  was 
1,610  ft.  long  and  was  built  by  day  labor,  wages  being  $2  for  8  hrs. 
The  material  excavated  was  gravel  and  clay. 

Excavation  and  backfill:  Percu.yd.     Perlin.ft. 

l?accaivnagtion' labor' 25  cts" per  h"  ". ; :  :'oSS       '8:Jli 

Backfilfing'Y.Y.Y.Y.Y.Y:.:. 0.168  0.210 

Waterboy  0.017  u.uzi 

Kerosene     .Y.Y.'.Y.Y 0.009 

Lumber •  0-035 

Total    ?0.594  $0.742 

Concrete  masonry:                                           Percu.yd.  Perlin.ft. 

PortSnf  cement,  at  $2.15  per  bbl $2.292  $0.34? 

Labor  mixing  and  placing 3.017  0.45 

Cost    of    forms 0.187  0.028 

Labor    screening    gravel* 0.471 

Cartine                                0.592  0.088 

Miscellaneous' '.'.'...". 0.146  0.021 

Total     $6.705  $1.002 

Brick  masonry :  Per  cu.  yd.     Per  lin.  ft. 

492   brick,   at   $8.50  per  M $  4.182  $0.153 

1%  bbls.  cement,t  at  $2.25  per  bbl 3.026  0.111 

Forms     0.408  0.015 

Labor,   mason 1.343  0.049 

Labor,    helpers 2.091  0.077 

Carting     0.680  0.025 

Incidentals   0.340  0.012 

Total $12.070  $0.442 

*The  gravel  and  sand  were  obtained  from  the  excavation. 
|This  includes  cement  used  in  plastering  the  arch. 

The  cost  of  this  30-in.  sewer  was,  therefore,  $1.44  per  lin.  ft., 
exclusive  of  the  excavation  which  cost  74  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  The  cost 
of  brickwork  in  manholes  was  $15.34  per  cu.  yd.  It  should  be 
noted  that  wages  were  high  ($2  per  8  hrs.)  and  that  the  work  was 
done  by  day  labor,  thus  making  the  cost  higher  than  it  would  be  to 
a  contractor. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  Sewer.* — The  work  consisted  of  a  sewer  1,360 
ft.  long  and  30  ins.  inside  diameter,  with  a  4 -in.  shell,  constructed 
during  November  and  December,  1908,  with  the  thermometer 
ranging  15  degrees  above  zero  to  above  freezing  point.  The  neces- 
sity of  using  frost  preventives  added  about  2%  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  to 
the  cost  of  the  work.  The  following  is  a  description  of  the  sewer 
and  its  construction.  The  location  of  the  work  was  at  Fond  du 
Lac,  Wis. 

About  four  years  ago  the  city  dug  an  open  drain  along  a  high- 
way upon  the  outskirts  of  the  city  for  carrying  storm  water  into 


'Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.   27,   1909. 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  901 

De  Neveu  creek.  On  account  of  the  ditch  washing  Into  the  road  ft 
was  decided  to  place  a  pipe  in  this  trench  and  backfill  over  it.  The 
contract  was  awarded  to  Burett  &  Dooley  for  a  monolithic  con- 
crete sewer. 

It  contained  about  1/9  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  per  lineal  foot.  In 
addition  there  were  17  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  two  abutments 
or  portals  at  the  ends  of  the  sewer. 

The  itemized  total  cost  of  the  sewer  was  as  follows: 

Perlinft. 
Items.  Total.  Cts. 

Labor    ...$635.50  46.72 

Tools    24.59  1.81 

Sandy  gravel 208.40  15.32 

Lumber     14.04  1.03 

Water    11.35  0.83 

Frost    preventives    34.38  2.53 

Cement    370.19  27.22 

Steel   forms    204.35  15.02 

Engineering     132.00  9.71 

Totals     '. $1,634.80  $1.20 

In  this  statement  the  labor  item  is  for  unskilled  laborers  at  $2 
per  day,  working  from  3  to  14  men  a  day  for  29  days  and  2  fore- 
men at  $3  each  for  31  days.  The  cost  items  for  tools,  lumber  and 
frost  preventives  are  the  differences  between  their  purchase  prices 
and  what  they  brought  when  afterwards  sold.  The  sandy  gravel 
was  purchased  delivered  from  three  different  pits  at  $1.50  per  load 
of  about  1.75  cu.  yds.,  with  some  at  10  cts.  extra  per  load;  it 
cost,  therefore,  about  89  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  gravel  was  mixed 
to  obtain  the  greatest  density  of  aggregates,  and  5  parts  of  gravel 
were  mixed  with  1  part  cement  to  make  the  concrete.  The  cement 
cost  $1.70  per  barrel  delivered  in  sacks,  less  the  rebate  on  sacks 
returned.  Water  cost  for  hauling  only  35  cts.  per  load.  The  lum- 
ber was  used  for  abutment  forms  and  for  establishing  grades.  The 
frost  preventives  consisted  of  horse  stable  manure,  marsh  hay,  and 
a  thin  layer  of  flax  straw  sewed  between  two  sheets  of  rosin  paper 
and  also  fuel  for  heating  the  concrete  materials.  The  steel  forms 
were  rented  and  the  cost  includes  drayage  to  and  from  the  job  and 
a  small  sum  for  oil  to  grease  them.  The  charge  for  engineering 
covers  the  entire  expense  to  the  city  and  township  for  plans,  speci- 
fications, advertising,  inspection  of  sewer  during  construction,  etc. 

Separating  the  abutments  containing  17  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  the 
cost  was  as  follows: 

Items.  Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor    $25.50  $  1.50 

Tools     00.59  0.035 

Gravel     ' 15.00  0.882 

Cement    32.01  1.882 

Lumber     40.04  0.237 

Water    00.60  0.035 

Frost    preventives    1.88  0.110 

Centers     0.75  0.045 

Engineering,    etc 5.00  0.295 

Totals     ,  .  .~$I573~7  $5.021 


902  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Some  of  these  items  are  actual  amounts  and  others  are  close  ap- 
proximations. The  costs  for  the  sewer  proper  arrived  at  in  the 
same  manner  were  as  follows : 

Per  Per. 

Items —                                            Total.  Lin.  Ft.  Cu.  Yd. 

Labor    or    concrete... $253.00     $0.187  $1.683 

Labor     excavation 357.00       0.263  2.367 

Tools     .               24.00        0.017  0.153 

Gravel    : 193.40       0.142  1.278 

Lumber     10.00       0.007  0.063 

Water     10.70       0.008  0.072 

Frost     preventives 32.50        0.024  0.216 

Cement     338.18       0.249  2.241 

Center    molds 203.60       0.149  1.341 

Engineering 127.00       0.093  0.837 

Totals    $1,549.43     $1.139   $10.251 

In  the  above  table  the  amount  for  the  concrete  labor  includes 
the  labor  cost  for  heating  the  materials,  mixing  and  depositing  the 
same  in  position  complete,  also  for  the  small  expense  of  operating 
the  steel  forms.  The  rest  of  the  labor  expense  was  for  excavating 
the  trench  an  average  depth  of  3  ft.  and  for  back  filling.  This  was 
done,  as  noted  previously,  in  an  old  ditch,  the  bottom  of  which 
was  red  clay  soil,  requiring  but  a  slight  expense  for  trench  bracing. 
No  water  ran  in  the  trench  except  on  a  couple  of  days  it  rained 
when  the  water  ran  out  soon  through  the  molds  into  the  sewer. 

Flax  straw,  bound  in  paper,  already  put  up,  was  tried  as  a  cover 
to  the  fresh  concrete  pipe,  to  keep  frost  away  while  the  cement 
was  setting,  but  the  vapor  from  the  concrete  softened  the  paper 
cover  so  that  it  could  not  be  handled  and  the  article  had  to  be 
discarded.  The  horse  stable  bedding  of  straw  proved  to  be  efficient 
for  keeping  frost  out  of  the  green  concrete,  it  generating  a  certain 
amount  of  heat  and  allowed  the  moisture  to  pass  through  it  from 
the  heated  concrete.  Due  to  the  chemical  changes  going  on  in  this 
cover,  too  strong  an  article  should  not  be  laid  next  to  fresh  con- 
crete, as  in  some  places  on  the  pipe  it  was  observed  that  the 
cement  did  not  set  well  for  a  depth  of  1/16  to  %  in.  A  thin  layer 
of  marsh  hay  was  placed  between  the  manure  and  the  concrete  on 
the  balance  of  the  work  and  the  condition  did  not  appear  again. 

In  the  steel  forms  lighted  oil  heaters  were  placed  at  short  inter- 
vals to  keep  up  summer  conditions  while  the  cement  made  its 
initial  set 

The  style  of  the  centers  used  was  the  full  circle  form  so  that 
the  crown  and  invert  of  the  pipe  were  built  in  one  operation.  The 
materials  were  mixed  on  a  flat  No.  12  gage  steel  sheet,  size  60  x  156 
ins.  Concrete  was  put  in  the  bottom  of  the  trench  first,  which  was 
dug  somewhat  rounding,  and  graded  4  ins.  thick.  Strips  of  No.  26 
gage  sheet  steel  12  ins.  wide  by  8  ft.  long,  previously  rolled  to  the 
arc  of  30-in.  circle,  was  next  laid;  one  piece  lengthwise  on  this 
bed,  then  one  5-ft.  section  of  steel  forms  was  placed  upon*  the  strip, 
or  track.  The  form  was  expanded  to  size  by  turning  the  hand 
wheel,  the  correct  diameter  being  obtained  by  fitting  a  wire  hoop 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  903 

grage  around  the  near  end  of  the  center  and  expanding  the  center 
against  the  gage.  Another  batch  of  concrete  now  ready  was 
positioned  around  the  form,  an  operator  at  the  front  end  of  the 
form  having  a  steel  blade,  5  ins.  wide  by  10  ins,  long,  affixed  to 
a  long  handle,  tamped  the  concrete  firmly  to  place  under  the  two 
bottom  quarters  of  the  form  so  that  the  possibility  of  voids  or 
pockets  forming  In  the  bottom  of  the  concrete  pipe  to  be  refinished 
later  was  eliminated,  the  concrete  being  positioned  on  top  of  the 


Fig.    15. — Centers  for  Concrete   Sewer. 

form  nearly  out  to  the  end.     Another  form  being  set,   the  process 
described  was  repeated,, 

The  object  of  using  a  light  steel  track,  or  slide,  under  the  forms, 
was  so  that  the  molds  could  be  drawn  out  easily  the  next  morning 
one  at  a.  time,  and.  to  prevent  scraping  out  partially  set 
concrete  from  the  bottom  of  the  sewer,  the  steel  track  being  laid 
with  lapped  ends  so  that  the  forms  could  slide  over  the  joints 
and  not  disturb  the  track.  The  track  was,  of  course,  taken  each 


904  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

morning  from  the  sewer  after  the  centers  were  withdrawn  and  used 
repeatedly. 

Collapsing  of  the  centers  was  accomplished  by  merely  giving  the 
hand  wheel  a  few  turns  to  the  left,  when  the  mold  was  pulled  out 
of  the  sewer  with  a  rope  and  taken  ahead  in  the  trench  for  re- 
setting when  needed.  No  bracing  of  the  forms  was  required  to 
keep  them  in  alignment.  The  top  of  the  concrete  pipe  was  shaped 
with  a  wood  hand  float,  the  concrete  for  this  purpose  not  being 
made  wet  enough  to  make  it  sloppy. 

The  adjustable  steel  centers  as  used  on  this  job  were  handled  on 
the  desirable  unit  plan ;  however,  all  the  forms  may  be  set  before 
placing  concrete  about  them,  or  in  any  other  way  that  may  appeal 
to  a  contractor  as  most  advantageous.  Two  Y-connections  were 
made  to  this  sewer  by  placing  the  small  ends  of  clay  pipes  against 
the  steel  forms  as  the  concrete  was  being  positioned.  The  next 
morning  when  the  steel  forms  had  been  removed  the  first  connec- 
tion had  some  concrete  to  be  broken  out  of  the  end  and  refinished, 
while  the  one  made  later  was  found  perfect.  Gas  engine  oil  thinned 
with  kerosene  and  applied  with  a  brush  to  the  surface  of  the  molds 
prevented  the  adhesion  of  concrete  to  the  forms.  The  temperature 
varied  during  construction  when  concrete  was  made  from  15° 
above  zero  to  above  the  freezing  point.  The  thermometer  one 
morning  registered  12°  below  zero,  but  by  10  o'clock  it  showed  15° 
above  when  concreting  was  started.  One  foreman  with  a  crew  of 
six  men  often  put  in  70  ft.  of  sewer  in  less  than  5  hours'  time. 

The  style  of  mold  used  on  this  job  is  patened  by  J.  E.  Dooley, 
and  is  manufactured  by  the  Adjustable  Steel  Centering  Co.  of  Pond 
du  Lac,  Wis.  We  are  indebted  to  the  contractors,  Burett  &  Dooley, 
for  fhe  information  from  which  this  article  has  been  prepared. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer  at  Cleveland,  O. — Mr.  Wal- 
ter C.  Parmley,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  gives  the  following  data:  There 
were  3^j  miles  of  reinforced  concrete  sewer.  13^  ft.  diameter,  of 
section  shown  in  Fig.  16,  and  12  ins.  thick  at  the  crown.  The 
contract  price  was  $62  per  lin.  ft,  including  excavation,  and  the 
excavation  averaged  20  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  The  bid  for  a  brick 
sewer  was  $75  per  lin.  ft. 

It  will  be  noted  that  there  are  two  rows  of  "anchor  bars"  buried 
in  the  side  walls.  The  invert  and  side  walls  were  first  built,  up  as 
high  as  the  top  of  the  brick  lining,  then  the  arch  centers  were 
placed,  and  the  steel  skeleton  was  bolted  to  the  anchor  bars.  The 
ribs  of  this  steel  skeleton  were  spaced  15  ins.  centers,  and  there 
were  8  rows  of  horizontal  or  longitudinal  bars  of  l%x%-in.  steel 
bolted  to  the  ribs.  The  metal  was  all  bent  to  shape  in  the  shop, 
so  that  there  was  no  field  work  except  to  place  and  bolt  the  metal 
together.  There  were  93  Ibs.  of  steel  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer,  of  which 
56  Ibs.  made  the  skeleton  in  the  arch,  and  37  Ibs.  of  anchor  bars. 
This  design  of  steel  skeleton  was  patented  by  Mr.  Parmley. 

The  lagging  of  the  arch  centers  was  covered  with  building  paper 
water-proofed  with  paraffine.  Then  Portland  cement  mortar  2  to  3 
Ins.  thick  was  plastered  on  the  paper,  so  as  to  form  the  interior 


S,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


905 


finish  of  the  arch.  Then  the  concrete  for  the  arch  was  placed 
and  rammed,  being  12  ins.  thick  at  the  crown  and  15  ins.  thick  at 
the  spring  line.  No  outside  forms  were  used  on  the  arch.  The  arch 
concrete  was  1:3:7%.  When  the  paper  lining  was  pulled  off  a 
smooth  surface  was  left.  The  invert  concrete  was  made  with 
natural  cement. 

Mr.  Parmley  had  an  inspector  keep  a  record  of  progress  for  sev- 
eral days  on  the  work,  when  the  men  did  not  know  they  were  being 


Fig.  16. — Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer. 

timed.     He  informs  me  that  an  8-hour  shift  was  worked.     The  labor 
cost  of  building  13% -ft.  concrete  steel  sewer  was  as  follows: 
Labor  placing  anchor  bars  (1,500  Ibs.)  : 

1  man     1  day,    at    $3.50 $3.50 

1  day,    at    $1.75, 


1  man 

1  man  %   day,    at    $1.60, 


1.75 
,    0.80 

,$~<UJ5 


Placing  1,500   Ibs.   steel,   at  0.4   cts 

Labor  on  concrete  invert  and  side  walls : 

5  men  mixing  and  wheeling,   at  $1.75 $  8.75 

1  man  tamping    1.75 

1  man  carrying   concrete    1.75 

%   man  lowering  concrete,  at  $2.25 1.50 

Labor,   13  cu.  yds.  concrete,  at  $1.06 $13.75 


90(1  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Labor  on  shale  brick  lining    (2   rings)  : 

2  masons,    at    $5.60 $11.20 

1  man  mixing  mortar -.25 

3  men  wheeling  sand,  filling  buckets  and  dumping  at  $1.75. .      5.25 
ys  man  lowering  materials,  at  $2.25 0.75 

Labor,  6.38  cu.  yds.  brick  work,  at  $3.05 $19.45 

Labor  on  concrete  arch: 

1  man  putting  mortar  lining  on  centers,  3  days,  at  $1.75..$  5.25 

2  men  mixing  mortar,  screening  and  wheeling  sand,  3  days, 

at    $1.75     10.50 

8  men  on  mixing  board,  3  days,  at  $1.75 42.00 

1  man  tamping,  3  days,  at  $1.75 5.25 

Labor,   72  cu.  yds.,   at  $0.87 $63.00 

Labor  placing  centers  and  steel  skeleton  : 

1  man,  3  days,  at  $3.50 $10.50 

2  men,  3  days,  at  $1.75 10.50 

Labor,  40  lin.  ft,  at  52  y2  cts.  per  ft $21.00 

There  were  56  Ibs.  of  steel  skeleton  per  lin.  ft,  and  about  %  the 
time  of  this  last  gang  of  3  men  was  spent  in  placing  the  metal, 
%  being  spent  in  moving  and  placing  the  centers ;  so  the  labor  cost 
0.3  cts.  per  Ib.  of  steel  (not  including  shop  work)  and  the  labor 
moving  centers  cost  35  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer.  The  backfilling 
was  begun  6  to  12  hrs.  after  the  arch  was  built,  but  the  centers 
were  left  in  place  14  days. 

On  another  section  of  this  sewer  a  six-day  observation  showed 
the  labor  cost  (hand  work,  no  machine  mixers)  was  81  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  of  concrete  in  the  invert  and  side  walls,  and  70  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
on  the  concrete  in  the  arch  ;  36  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  placing  centers, 
and  18  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  placing  the  steel  skeleton  ;  0.32  cts.  per 
Ib.  for  placing  the  anchor  rods.  A  gang  of  2  brick  masons  and  6 
laborers  laid  11.2  cu.  yds.  of  the  double-ring  brick  lining  per  day, 
at  a  cost  of  $2  per  cu.  yd.  All  wages  were  as  above  given.  It 
will  be  seen  that  this  longer  observation  gave  much  lower  costs 
than  above  tabulated,  and  Mr.  Parmley  regards  it  as  being  nearer 
a  fair  average. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer,  Wilmington,  Del.— Mr.  T. 
Chalkley  Hatton,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  gives  the  following  data :  Fig. 
17  shows  a  profile  of  Price's  Run  Sewer,  Wilmington,  Del.,  built  in 
1903,  by  day  labor  for  the  city,  the  working  day  being  8  hrs.  long. 
Fig.  18  shows  cross- sections  at  different  points.  The  notable  fea- 
ture is  the  boldness  in  the  design  of  such  thin  concrete  shells  for 
sewers  of  such  large  diameters.  The  cross-sections  of  sewers  in 
trenches  deep  enough  to  cover  the  arch  are  marked  "deep  cutting"  ; 
the  sections  where  the  arch  projects  above  the  ground  surface  are 
marked  "light  cutting."  The  section  through  the  marsh  was  700  ft. 
long,  the  cutting  being  8  ft.  deep,  and  at  high  tide  the  marsh  was 
flooded  1  to  4  ft.  The  material  was  a  soft  mud  that  would  pull 
a  tight  rubber  boot  from  a  workman's  foot.  The  cost  of  this  marsh 
excavation  including  cofferdams,  underdraining,  pumping,  etc., 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


901 


was  $4.60  per  cu.  yd.  For  1,100  ft.  the  9  %  -ft.  sewer  Was  through 
a  cut  22  to  34  ft.  deep,  the  material  being  clay  underlaid  by  gran- 
ite. A  Carson-Lidgerwood  cableway  was  used.  Although  the 
crown  of  the  arch  was  but  8  ins.  thick,  it  withstood  the  shock  of 
dumping  1  cu.  yd.  buckets  of  earth  and  rock  from  heights  of  3  to 
10  f t.  ;  and  the  weight  of  25  ft.  of  loose  filling  caused  no  cracks 
in  the  concrete. 

Concrete  was  placed  in  4-in.  layers  (the  depth  of  the  lagging) 
and  well  rammed,  since  it  was  found  that  "wet"  concrete  left  small 
honeycombed  spaces  on  the  inner  surface.  Concrete  for  the  invert 
was  1:2:6,  the  stone  being  1%-in.  and  smaller,  and  the  sand 
being  crusher  dust.  The  arch  was  1:2:5. 

The  reinforcing  metal  used  in  the  9% -ft.  sewer  was  No.  6  ex- 
panded metal,  6 -in.  mesh,  in  sheets  8x5%  ft.,  supplied  by  Merritt 
&  Co.,  of  Philadelphia.  A  single  layer  was  placed  around^  the 


Rock. 


Coarse  Sand  ' 


Fig.  17.  —  Profile  of  Sewer. 


sewer,  2  ins.  from  the  inner  surface,  its  position  being  carefully 
maintained  by  the  men  ramming,  and  with  but  little  difficulty  as 
the  sheets  were  first  bent  to  the  radius  of  the  circle.  Each  sheet 
was  lapped  one  mesh  (6  ins.)  over  its  neighbor  at  both  ends  and 
sides,  and  no  sheets  were  wired  except  the  top  ones,  which  were 
liable  to  displacement  by  men  walking  over  them. 

The  metal  used  on  the  rest  of  the  work  was  a  wire-woven  fabric 
furnished  by  the  Wight-Easton-Townsend  Co.,  of  New  York.  This 
fabric  comes  in  rolls  5l/2  ft.  wide  and  100  ft.  to  the  roll.  The  wire 
is  No.  8,  with  a  6  x  4-in.  mesh.  This  fabric  was  placed  by  first 
cutting  the  sheets  to  the  required  length  to  surround  the  sewer 
entirely,  embedding  it  in  the  concrete  as  fast  as  concrete  was 
placed,  in  jthe  same  manner  as  was  done  with  the  expanded  metal, 
except  over  the  center  where,  on  account  of  its  pliability,  the  fabric 
was  held  the  proper  distance  from  the  lagging  by  a  number  of  2-in. 
blocks,  which  were  removed  as  the  concrete  was  placed.  The 
wire  cloth,  being  all  in  one  sheet,  can  be  placed  a  little  more  ex- 
pedltiously  than  expanded  metal,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 
t 


Secfion   in  Deep  Cutting. 


Section  through   MgirsK.- 

Fig.  18.— Cross  Sections  of  Concrete  Sewer. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  909 

expanded  metal  holds  its  position  better  in  the  concrete,  since  it  is 
more  rigid. 

I  quote  now  from  Mr.  Hatton's  letter  to  me:  "The  major  portion 
of  concrete  was  mixed  by  machine  at  a  cost  of  66  cents  per  yard, 
including  wheeling  to  place,  coal  and  running  of  mixing  machine, 
wages  being  $1.50  per  day  of  8  hrs.  Stone  was  delivered  alongside 
of  machine  and  all  material  had  to  be  wheeled  in  barrows  upon  the 
platform,  and  after  mixing  to  the  sewer.  Placing  and  ramming 
concrete  around  the  forms  cost  39  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  additional. 
Setting  forms  in  invert  cost  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  invert ;  setting 
centers,  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  arch.  Cost  of  setting  forms  and  cen- 
ters includes  placing  steel  metal.  Each  lineal  foot  of  9*4 -ft 
sewer  contained  1  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  although  the  section  only 
calls  for  0.94  cu.  yd.  The  excess  was  usually  wasted  by  falling 
over  sides  of  forms  or  being  made  too  thick  at  crown. 

"This  yard  of  1:2:5  concrete  cost  in  place  as  follows  (record 
taken  as  an  average  of  several  days'  run)  : 

Cement,    1.31   bbls.,   at   $1.30 $1.703 

Stone,   0.84   cu.  yds.,   at  $1.21 1.016 

Stone  dust,  0.42  cu.  yds.,  at  $1.21 0.508 

Labor,   at   18%    cts.  per  hour 0.987 

Labor  setting  forms  and  setting  metal 0.045 

Cost    of    forms     (distributed    over    1,800    ft.    of 

sewer) 0.082 

40  sq.  ft.  expanded  metal,  at  4*4  cts 1.700 

Labor  plastering   invert 0.070 

Cost  per  lin.  ft,  or  per  cu.  yd $6.111 

"The  forms  for  the  invert  were  made  of  2-in.  rough  hemlock 
boards  cut  out  4  ins.  less  diameter  than  the  diameter  of  the  sewer, 
except  for  18  ins.  at  the  bottom  of  the  form  which  coincided  with 
the  inside  form  of  sewer.  The  bottom  of  the  sewers  was  laid  to 
the  bottom  of  this  form  before  it  was  set.  Then  the  lagging,  con- 
sisting of  2  x  6-in.  x  16  ft.  hemlock  planed,  was  placed  against  each 
side  of  the  form,  one  at  a  time,  and  the  concrete  brought  to  the  line 
of  this  top  in  6-in.  layers  until  the  whole  invert  was  finished. 
These  forms  were  set  in  16  ft.  sections,  five  to  each  section. 

"The  centers  consisted  of  seven  ribs  of  2-in.  hemlock  upon  which 
was  nailed  1^-in.  lagging,  2  ins.  wide,  tongued  and  grooved,  and 
were  16  ft.  long,  non-collapsible,  but  had  one  wing  on  each  side, 
9  ins.  wide,  which  could  be  wedged  out  to  fit  any  inaccuracies  in  the 
invert.  We  used  four  of  these  centers  setting  two  at  each  opera- 
tion and  worked  from  two  ends.  We  left  the  centers  in  for  18 
hours  before  drawing. 

The  cost  of  the  concrete  on  the  smaller  sewers  was  the  same  as 
are  the  larger  sewers,  but  the  steel  metal  cost  less,  as  it  was  wire 
woven  metal  that  cost  2%  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  It  was  much  easier 
handled  and  cut  to  no  waste  as  it  came  in  long  rolls  and  was  very 
pliable. 

"After  training  our  men,  which  occupied  about  .one  week  or  10 
days,  we  had  no  difficulty  in  getting  the  concrete  well  placed  around 
the  metal,  preserving  the  proper  location  of  the  latter,  which,  how- 


910 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


ever,  bore  constant  watching,  as  a  careless  workman  would  often 
take  the  temporary  supporting  blocks  and  allow  the  metal  to  rest 
against  the  wooden  center,  in  which  case  the  metal  would  show 
through  the  surface  inside  of  the  sewer.  The  metal  was  kept  2  ins. 
away  from  the  inside  forms  and  the  arch.  To  keep  it  at  this  loca- 
tion we  had  several  2-in.  wooden  blocks  cut  which  were  slipped 
under  the  wire  or  expanded  metal  and  as  soon  as  some  concrete 
was  pushed  under  the  wire  at  this  point  the  block  was  removed. 

"After  the  forms  were  removed  the  invert  needed  plastering,  but 
the  arch  was  practically  like  a  smoothly  plastered  wall  except 
where  it  joined  the  invert,  where  it  frequently  showed  the  result 
of  too  much  hurry  in  depositing  the  first  loads  of  concrete  on  the 
arch.  We  remedied  this  by  requiring  less  concrete  to  be  deposited 


rf' file  Drain 

i 
Fig.    19. — Reinforced    Concrete   Sewer. 

at  the  start,  thus  giving  the  rammers  time  to  place  the  material 
properly. 

"An  interesting  result  was  obtained  in  the  smoothness  of  the  in- 
side surface  by  using  a  mixture  of  different  sized  stones.  When 
%-in.  stones  or  smaller  were  used  in  the  arch,  the  inside  was 
honeycombed;  but,  where  1  to  1%-in.  stones  (nothing  smaller) 
were  used,  the  inside  was  perfectly  smooth,  and  the  same  was  t-ue 
of  the  invert,  showing  that  the  use  of  larger  stones  is  an  advan- 
tage and  secures  more  monolithic  work.  When  the  run  of  the 
crusher  from  1%  to  %-in.  stones  was  used  the  work  was  not  at  all 
satisfactory. 

"The  difference  in  cost  of  mixing  by  ha'nd  and  machine  is  prac- 
tically nothing  on  this  kind  of  work,  as  the  moving  of  the  ma- 
chine to  keep  pace  with  the  progress  of  the  work  equals  the  extra 
cost  of  mixing  by  hand  when  the  mixing  can  be  done  close  to  the 
point  where  the  cement  is  being  placed." 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  911 

The  total  cost  of  the  sewers,  including  excavation,  etc.,  was : 

Cost  per  lin.  ft. 

914 -ft.  sewer    through    marsh $32.00 

9  %  -ft.  sewer  in  cut  averaging  24%   ft 24.00 

6% -ft.  sewer  in  cut  averaging  12   ft 10.00 

5 -ft.  sewer  in  cut  averaging  11%   ft *. . . .          6.70 

Cost    of    a.   Reinforced    Concrete    Sewer,    Kalamazoo,    Mich.— Mr. 

Geo.  S,  Pierson  gives  the  following  data : 

A  reinforced  concrete  sewer  1,080  ft.  long  at  Kalamazoo,  Mich., 
was  begun  Nov.  3,  1902,  and  finished  Jan.  10,  1903.  The  work 
was  done  by  day  labor  for  the  city.  Much  of  the  work  was  done  at 
a  temperature  of  12°  to  25°.  The  sewer  arch  has  a  span  of  9  ft. 
10  ins.,  and  the  sewer  is  6  ft.  high  from  invert  to  crown.  The  arch 
is  8  ins.  thick  at  the  crown,  and  the  invert  is  6  ins.  thick,  Fig.  19. 
The  concrete  was  reinforced  with  woven-wire  fabric  of  No.  11  steel 
wires.  The  concrete  was  1  cement  to  6  gravel  and  sand,  but  this 
proportion  was  not  strictly  adhered  to.  The  centers  were  built  in 
sections  12%  ft.  long,  and  there  were  6  arch  sections  and  12  invert 
sections.  The  ribs  for  the  arch  centers  were  of  2-in.  pine,  and 
were  2  ft.  apart.  The  sheeting  was  1-in.  dressed  white  pine.  The 
average  gang  was  10  men  mixing  and  wheeling  concrete,  5  men 
placing  and  ramming,  and  4%  men  moving  and  setting  up  forms. 
This  gang  averaged  18.6  lin.  ft.  of  sewer  per  day,  the  best  day's 
work  being  28  lin.  ft.  There  were  0.95  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per  lin. 
ft.  of  sewer.  Wages  were  $1.75  a  day.  The  cost  per  lineal  foot 
was  as  follows,  including  superintendence: 

Per  lin.  ft.    Per  cu.  yd. 

1.18   bbls.   cement    ...$2.44  $2.56 

Sand   and  gravel 0.42  0.44 

Labor  mixing  and  wheeling   (10  men) 0.98  1.03 

Labor  placing  and  ramming    (5   men)....    0.47  0.50 

Labor  moving  and  setting  forms  (4%  men)    0.43  0.45 

Cost  of  forms  and  templates 0.30  0.32 

Metal  fabric  (175  lin.  ft.  No.  11  wire) 0.39  0.41 

Finishing     0.09  0.10 

Tools,    general    expenses   and    superintend- 
ence        0.43  0.45 

Total    $5.95  $6.26 

The  cost  of  excavation  and  backfilling  is  not  included 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  moving  and  setting  the  forms 

was  unnecessarily  high.     Compare  this  cost  of  45  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

with  the  5  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  at  Wilmington,  Del.,  in  the  next  case 

cited. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer  at  South  Bend,  Ind.*— In 
building  2,464  ft.  of  66-in.  circular  reinforced  concrete  sewer  at 
South  Bend,  Ind.,  in  1906,  the  method  of  construction  illustrated  In 
Figs.  20,  21  and  22  was  employed.  The  sewer  has  a  9-in.  shell  but- 
tressed on  the  sides,  and  is  reinforced  every  12  ins.  by  a  3/16  x  1-In. 
peripheral  bar  in  the  sides  and  roof  and  3  ins.  in  from  the  soffit 


' Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   22,   1906. 


012 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


Each  bar  is  composed  of  three  pieces,  two  side  pieces  from  15  ins. 
below  to  6  ins.  above  springing  lines  and  a  connecting  roof  bar  at- 
tached to  the  side  bars  by  cotter  pins.  Two  grades  of  concrete 
were  used,  a  1:3:6  bank  gravel  concrete  for  the  invert  and  a 
1:2:4  bank  gravel  concrete  for  the  arch.  The  invert  was  given  a 
%-in.  plaster  coat  of  1 :  1  mortar  as  high  as  the  springing  lines. 

Forma  and  Concreting. — In  constructing  the  sewer  the  trench  was 
excavated  so  as  to  give  a  clearance  of  1  ft.  on  each  side  and  wan 


T*  Temp/ef 
Fig.  20. — Concrete  Sewer  Construction. 


i  fSide  Pieces  of 

j  Reinforcement  Bcrna/£~ 


'Brace 

Fig.   21. — Concrete   Sewer  Construction. 

sheeted,  as  shown  by  Fig.  20.  The  sewer  was  built  in  12  ft.  sections 
as  follows:  The  bottom  of  the  trench  was  shaped  as  nearly  as 
possible  to  the  grade  and  shape  of  the  base  of  the  sewer.  Four 
braces  to  each  12 -ft.  section  were  then  nailed  across  the  trench  be- 
tween the  lowest  rangers  on  the  trench  sheeting.  A  partial  form 
consisting  of  a  vertical  row  of  lagging  was  set  on  each  of  the  out- 
side lines  of  the  sewer  barrel  as  shown  by  Fig.  20.  Each  section 
of  this  lagging  was  held  by  stakes  driven  into  the  trench  bottom 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


913 


and  nailed  at  their  tops  to  the  cross  braces,  as  shown  by  Fig.  21. 
A  template  for  the  invert  was  then  suspended  from  the  cross  braces 
by  pieces  nailed  to  the  four  ribs  of  the  template  and  to  the  cross 
braces,  as  shown  by  Fig.  20.  The  concrete  was  now  placed  and 
carried  to  the  top  of  the  template,  which  was  then  removed.  The 
side  pieces  of  the  reinforcing  bars  were  then  set  and  fastened,  as 
shown  by  Fig.  21.  The  side  forms  extending  up  to  the  springing 
lines  were  then  placed.  They  were  held  in  position  by  braces 
nailed  to  their  ribs  at  the  tops  and  by  other  braces  fitting  into 
notches  in  the  ends  of  their  ribs  at  the  bottom.  The  concrete  was 
then  carried  up  to  the  springing  lines ;  the  arch  centers  in  two 
pieces  were  placed  ;  the  arch  bar  of  the  reinforcement  was  placed, 
and  the  extrados  forms  erected  up  to  the  45°  lines,  all  as  shown  by 
Fig.  22.  The  placing  of  the  arch  concrete  completed  the  sewer 
barrel.  The  outside  forms  and  bracing  were  removed  about  24 


Fig.   22. — Concrete  Sewer  Construction. 

hours  after  the  completion  of  the  arch,  and  backfilling  the  trench 
was  begun  immediately,  but  the  inside  forms  were  left  in  place  for 
two  weeks ;  they  were  then  removed  by  the  simple  process  of 
knocking  out  the  notched  braces.  By  building  several  lengths  of 
invert  first  and  following  in  succession  by  the  side  wall  construction 
and  then  by  the  arch  construction,  the  form  erection  and  the  con- 
creting proceeded  without  interruption  by  each  other.  It  was  also 
found  that,  by  making  bends  in  the  form  of  polygons  with  10-ft. 
sides  instead  of  in  the  form  of  curves,  there  was  a  material  saving 
in  expensive  form  work.  To  overcome  the  friction  of  the  angles 
in  such  bends,  an  additional  fall  was  provided  at  these  places.  All 
concrete  was  made  in  a  Smith  mixer  mounted  on  trucks  so  that  it 
could  be  moved  along  the  bank  of  the  trench  and  discharging  into 
a  trough  leading  to  the  work. 

Labor  Force  and  Cost. — With  a  gang  of   12   men,  from  24   to   36 
ft.   of  sewer  were  built  per  10-hour  day,  working  only  part  of  the 


914  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

time  on  actual  concreting.     The  disposition  of  the  force  mixing  and 
laying  concrete  and  the  wages  were  as  follows : 

Per  day. 
Six  wheelers,  at  18.5  cts.  per  hour $11.10 

gne  mixer,  at  22.5  cts.  per  hour 2.25 
ne  dumper,   at  18.5   cts.  per  hour 1.85 

Four   placers,    at   22.5    cts.   per    hour 9.00 

Total    $24.20 

There  were  0.594  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per  lineal  foot  of  sewer, 
and  its  cost  is  given  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Gravel $0.774 

Sand     0.36 

Cement    1.50 

Steel   reinforcement    0.84 

Labor,  mixing  and  placing  concrete 1.094 

Moving   forms,    templates,    etc 0.757 

Forms,    templates,    etc 0.589 

Finishing,    plastering,    etc 0.639 

Tools  and  general    expenses 0.841 

Total     $7.395 

The  work  was  done  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  A.  H.  Hammond, 
M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  City  Engineer,  South  Bend,  Ind.,  to  whom  we 
are  indebted  for  the  information  given. 

Cost  of  a  Large  Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer  at  St.  Louis,  Mo.*— 
An  unusual  piece  of  sewer  work  is  being  carried-  out  by  the  city  of 
St.  Louis.  Harlem  Creek,  which  drains  a  large  area  of  the  city 
and  which  has  been  made  the  outlet  of  district  sewers  until  it  has 
become  a  menace  to  health,  is  being  replaced  by  a  large  reinforced 
concrete  intercepting  sewer.  Ultimately  the  sewer  will  be  several 
miles  long,  but  at  present  only  2,200  lin.  ft.  of  the  lower  end  are 
under  construction  and  about  as  much  more  is  planned  for  early 
contract.  The  sewer  under  construction  comprises  162  ft.  of  29-ft. 
section,  and  1,340  ft.  of  27-ft.  section  ;  the  162  ft.  of  29-ft.  section 
have  been  completed  and  the  following  is  an  account  of  the  methods 
of  construction  adopted  by  the  contractors,  the  Hoffman-Hogan 
Construction  Co.,  of  St.  Louis,  Mo.,  with  a  statement  of  the  cost 
of  the  work. 

The  interior  dimensions  of  the  sewer  are  29  x  18.62  ft,  giving  an 
area  of  opening  of  411  sq.  ft.  The  grade  of  the  sewer  is  0.0025 
per  cent,  which  gives  a  velocity  running  full  of  18.9  ft.  per  second 
and  a  capacity  of  7,489  cu.  ft.  per- second.  The  estimated  run-off, 
calculated  by  McMath's  formula,  is  100  cu.  ft.  per  second  less. 
The  area  drained  is  about  6,000  acres  and  the  maximum  rainfall 
assumed  is  2.75  ins.  per  hour. 

The  cross-section  of  the  sewer  is  given  by  Fig.  23,  which  also 
shows  the  arrangement  of  the  reinforcing  bars.  Johnson  corru- 
gated bars,  old  style,  are  used  for  reinforcement.  The  sections 
of  the  various  reinforcing  bars  are:  Longitudinal  bars,  0.18  sq.  in.  -. 
invert  bars,  0.7  sq.  in.  ;  and  arch  bars,  0.7  sq.  in.  The  spacing  of 


'Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.    20,    1907. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


915 


the  bars  and  the  arrangement  of  the  splices  are  indicated  on  the 
drawings  of  Fig.  23.  All  splices  have  a  lap  of  36  ins.  Some  gravel 
concrete  has  been  used  in  the  invert,  but  most  of  the  concrete  has 
been  crushed  limestone  and  Mississippi  River  channel  sand.  The 
proportions  were  1:3:6  in  the  invert  and  1:2:5  in  the  arch.  The 
arch  was  computed  by  Prof.  Greene's  method.  The  ultimat/3 
strength  of  concrete  in  compression  was  taken  as  2,000  Ibs.  per  sq. 

" 


Bars      in      Extraolos.  ( 

Fig.    23. — Reinforced   Concrete   Sewer. 

in.  and  the  working  strength  at  500  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  The  elastic 
limit  of  the  reinforcing  bars  was  taken  at  50,000  Ibs. 

The  trenching  was  done  by  wheel  scrapers  to  the  amount  of 
waste.  Then  a  cableway  was  erected  spanning  the  entire  length  of 
the  section  and  the  remainder  of  the  material  taken  out.  The  last 
4  or  5  ft.  in  depth  were  in  limestone  and  the  excavated  rock  was 
taken  by  cableway  to  dump  carts  which  took  it  to  the  crusher  and 
returned  with  crushed  rock  to  be  used  for  concrete.  This  rock 
foundation  was  taken  advantage  of  to  reduce  the  amount  of  invert 
concrete. 

In  constructing  the  sewer  proper  the  invert  was  first  concreted  to 
template.  The  arch  forms  were  then  placed  and  the  roof  arch  con- 


916  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

creted.     Both  templates  and  arch  forms  were  constructed  of  wood. 
The  arch   forms  were  moved  ahead   on  iron   rails  and  jacked   into 
place.      The   ribs   were   2  x  10-in.    pieces  and  were   spaced   4    ft.   on 
centers  ;   the  lagging  was  2  -in.   tongue  and  grooved  stuff  and  was 
smeared  with  crude  oil.     The  reinforcing  bars  were  bent  to  proper 
radius  by   means   of  a  wagon   tire   bender  and  were  held  in  place 
by   templates.      The   concrete  was   all   mixed   by   two   Chicago   Im- 
proved Cube  mixers  operated  by  electric  power. 

The  cost  records  of  constructing  the   section  of  29-ft.   sewer   so 
far  built  are  not  susceptible  of  complete  analysis,  but  the  follow- 
ing figures  can  be  given.     The  prices  of  materials  were  as  follows  : 
Cement,    per    barrel  .............  .............  $   1.80 

Sand,    per    cubic    yard  ........................      0.75 

Broken  stone,  per  cubic  yard  ..................      1.00 

Reinforcing    bars,    per    pound  ..................      0.02 

Vitrified  brick,  per   1,000  ......................    12.00 

The  wages  paid  different  classes  of  labor  were  : 

Per  hour. 
Firemen     ...................................  $0.50 

Laborers    ...................................  0.175 

Laborers    ...................................  0.20 

Laborers    ...................................  0.25 

Laborers    ...................................  0.28 

Laborers    ...................................  0.3025 

Bricklayers    .....  .  ...........................  0.66% 

Helpers     ....................................  0.25 

Carpenters    .................................  0.55 

Engineers     ..................................  0.50 

Timekeepers     ...............................  0.25 

Watchmen     ......................  •  ...........  0  175 

Hostlers     ...................................  0.175 

Teams    .....................................  0.60 

Taking  up  the  several  items  of  work  in  order,  the  excavation 
amounted  to  21,400  cu.  yds.,  of  which  1,400  cu.  yds.  were  rock  ex- 
cavation. The  cost  of  excavation  was  as  follows  : 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 
Earth,  excavation    .................  $7,640  $038 

Earth,    bracing    ....................    2  000  0.10 

Rock,   excavation    ..................    1,400  1  00 

Rock,  dynamite,  tools,   etc  ...........       560  0.40 

The  cost  of  crushing  the  excavated  rock  and  returning  it  to  the 
mixer  was  $1  per  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  of  the  concrete  work  was  as  follows  : 

Per  cu.  vd. 
1.30  bbl.   cement,   at  $1.80  ____  $2*34 

0.44  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  75   cts  .........  0*33 

1   cu.  yd.   broken   stone,   at   $1  ..................    1.00 

Total    concrete   materials  ...................  $3.57 

There  were  1,600  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  placed  at  a  cost  of  for: 

Total.          Per  cu.  yd. 
*1,180  $0.7375 


2,000  1  25 

Moving  forms    .....  .  .............      '40o  o!25 


Total   for   forms  and   labor.  ...  $3,580  $2.2375 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


917 


For  reinforcing  the  concrete  86,600  Ibs.  of  steel,  or  about  55  Ibs. 
per  cu.  yd.,  were  used.  The  cost  of  placing  and  bending  this  steel 
was  as  follows: 

Total.  Per  Ib. 

Placing    $172  0.20  ct. 

Bending    52  0.06  ct. 

We  can  now  summarize  the  cost  of  the  concrete  work  proper  of 
this  sewer  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement,  sand  and  stone $3.67 

55  Ibs.  steel,  at  2  cts 1.10 

Forms,   labor  and   materials 1.25 

Mixing  and  placing  concrete  labor 0.74 

Placing  steel,  at   0.20  ct.  per  Ib 0.11 

Bending   steel,   at    0.06    ct.    per   Ib 0.03 

Moving   forms    0.25 


Total  labor  ana  materials 


$7.15 


P/,,/. >* &i<- ff     v 

Fig.    24. — Reinforced   Concrete   Sewer. 

To  get  the  total  cost  of  the  sewer  proper  we  must  add  the  cost  of 
the  vitrified  brick  invert  paving.  There  were  71  cu.  yds.  of  this 
paving  and  its  cost  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.6     bbls.   cement,   at  $1.80 $1.08 

0.25  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  75  cts 0.19 

450  bricks,   at  $12   per  M '. . .    5.40 

Labor  laying,  71  cu.  yds.,  at  $180.33 2.54 

Total     $9.21 

None  of  the  preceding  figures  include  the  plant  charges.  The 
plant  cost  $12,000,  and  the  cost  of  running  it  during  the  work  de- 
scribed was  $2,000.  This  plant  will,  of  course,  serve  for  the  whole 
work  under  contract. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Sewer.— Mr.  Wm.  G.  Taylor  is 
authority  for  the  following  data. 

The  sewer  had  the  section  shown  by  Fig.  24  ;    it  was  constructed 


918        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

of  1:7%  concrete  mixed  to  a  mushy  consistency  using  the  forms 
shown  by  the  illustration.  The  reinforcement  was  of  twisted  steel 
rods  for  parts  of  the  work  and  of  expanded  metals  for  parts. 
When  rod  reinforcement  was  used  it  was  bent  on  the  bank  and 
erected  in  cage  form  in  the  trench.  The  invert  section  was  built 
as  the  first  operation  and  the  forms  erected  on  it.  The  first  cost 
of  the  forms  shown  was  $1.80  per  lin.  ft.  of  sewer  and  the  cost 
of  maintenance  was  about  12  cts.  per  lin.  ft,  including  depreciation 
and  fixed  charges.  Petroline  was  used  to  grease  the  forms  and  was 
found  superior  to  soft  soap  or  to  both  light  and  dark  mineral  oils 
which  were  also  tried.  The  concrete  was  deposited  in  level  layers 
6  ins.  thick.  The  normal  cost  per  lineal  foot  and  per  cubic  yard  of 
the  sewer  was  as  follows : 

Materials :  Per  lin.  ft.     Per  cu.  yd. 

Reinforcement   (17%  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.) $0.43  $1.16 

•Cement  (0.482  bbl.  per  lin.  ft.),  at  $1-53..   0.74  2.00 

Sand   (0.17  cu.  yd.  per  lin.  ft),  at  $0.50..    0.09  0.24 

Stone   (0.435  cu.  yd.  per  lin.  ft),  at  $1.10 
per   ton    0-47 

Total     $~I73  $4.67 

Labor : 

Making    and    placing    reinforcement $0.14  $0.38 

Operation    of    forms 0.16  0.43 

Mixing  concrete    0.30  0.81 

Placing   concrete    0.27  0.73 

Screeding   and   finishing   invert 0.08  0.22 

Finishing  interior  surface T 0.01  0.03 

Sprinkling  and  wetting. 0.02  0.06 

Total $T98  $2.66 

General  charges: 

Interior  forms,   cons,  and  maint $0.12  $0.32 

Exterior  forms,  cons,  and  maint 0.05  0.14 

Coating  oil  for  forms 0.01  0.03 

Cement,  storage,  handling  and  cartage....    0.08  0.22 

Total     $.26  $0.71 

Grand    total $2.97  $8.04 

In  reference  to  these  figures  it  should  be  noted  that,  as  several 
contractors  did  the  work,  these  are  the  composite  costs.  They  in- 
clude a  foreman  at  50  cts.,  a  sub-foreman  at  35  cts.,  common  labor 
at  17%  cts.,  and  teams  at  50  cts.  per  hour.  No  administration  ex- 
penses or  contractor's  profit  are  included. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Sewers,  Richmond,  Ind.— From  a  long  and  in- 
structive ar.ticle  by  Mr.  Fred  R.  Charles,  in  Engineering-Contracting, 
Dec.  29,  1909,  the  following  is  an  abstract: 

Concrete  Pipes. — Fifty-two-inch  was  the  largest  size  used  in 
concrete  pipe.  This  was  made  according  to  the  "Sheets"  system,  in 
which  expanded  metal  is  used  for  reinforcement;  thickness  of  shell 
is  1 1/12  ins.  per  foot  diameter;  24  ins.  pipe  made  in  2%  ft.,  and 
larger  sizes  in  3-ft  lengths.  Pipe  is  made  in  a  mold  consisting  of 
an  outer  steel  casing  and  an  inner  collapsible  shell.  The  pipe 
rests  on  the  end  upon  a  pallet,  and  each  end  is  formed  by  a  shaping 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  919 

ring,  so  that  it  is  notched  or  rabbeted  through  half  the  thickness 
of  the  shell,  on  the  outside  for  one-half  the  circumference,  and 
on  the  inside  for  the  other  half  circumference.  The  pipes  are  laid 
so  as  to  form  a  groove  at  the  joint,  coming  on  the  interior  for  the 
lower  half  and  on  the  exterior  of  the  upper  half,  whereby  the 
mortar  is  always  plastered  downward  in  cementing  the  joint. 
For  handling  and  placing  in  the  trench  a  tripod  or  beam  derrick 
Is  needed  with  a  block  and  tackle  or  chain  hoist,  as  tne  weight  is 
considerable.'  Our  average  cost  to  lay  these  pipes,  including  plas- 
tering the  joints,  was  for  42-in.,  $0.083;  30-in.,  $0.06  ;  24-in.,  $0.053 
per  lin.  ft. 

Monolithic  Concrete. — Another  sewer,  54  ins.  in  diameter,  was 
built  in  horse-shoe  shape,  semi-circular  arch,  vertical  sides  and 
bottom  slightly  V  shaped.  It  was  in  an  open  ditch  or  water  course, 
so  nearly  all  except  the  flow  line  was  above  ground,  and  outside 
forms  were  necessary,  in  the  absence  of  the  trench  walls,  to  hold 
the  concrete.  First  the  bottom  was  laid  as  in  sidewalks,  and  the 
vertical  sides  run  up  to  the  spring  line  with  ordinary  plank  inner 
and  outer  forms,  the  expanded  metal  reinforcement  having  been 
bent  and  placed  as  before,  with  plenty  of  lap  at  the  spring  line.  The 
arch  was  put  on  with  a  semi-circular  "Blaw"  form.  On  all  these 
monolithic  jobs  the  average  labor  hours  per  linear  foot  for  the 
different  operations  of  constructing  the  sewer,  using  "Blaw"  forms 
and  expanded  metal  reinforcement,  is  given  in  the  following  table. 
Knowing  the  wages  paid  labor  per  hour  and  the  price  of  materials, 
this  will  be  some  guide  to  the  cost  in  other  places: 

Labor  hours 
per  lin.  ft. 

Placing   flow  line 0.48 

Setting  invert  forms 0.50 

Concreting  invert 0.44 

Setting  arch  forms 0.33 

Concreting  arch 0.25 

For  the  lower  half  of  the  sewer  the  concrete  should  be  very  wet, 
so  that  it  will  flow  freely  around  and  under  the  forms ;  for  the 
arch  not  so  much  water  must  be  used ;  only  enough  to  show  quite 
perceptibly  when  concrete  is  tamped,  as  the  concrete  must  have 
sufficient  consistency  to  retain  its  position  and  not  run  off  the 
arch;  for  the  flow  line  the  proper  consistency  is  between  the  two. 
At  first,  house  connections  were  provided  for  by  building  in  ordinary 
vitrified  slants  or  thimbles,  but  the  flanges  of  these  were^  frequently 
broken  by  falling  rock  and  otherwise,  so  a  change  was*  made  and 
an  opening  left  in  the  concrete  shell  by  means  of  a  special  form  or 
core,  devised  by  Mr.  D.  B.  Davis,  inspector  on  the  work.  This 
comprised  two  circular  blocks  of  hard  wood,  nailed  together ;  one 
8  ins.  in  diameter  and  2  ins.  thick,  the  other  6  ins.  in  diametar  and 
3  ins.  thick.  Inserted  in  the  concrete  this  left  a  good  flange  to 
receive  the  end  of  the  6-in.  house  connection  pipe,  and  was  ex- 
tremely inexpensive,  two  of  these  blocks  lasting  for  the  whole  sea- 
eon.  The  average  cost  of  this  work  was  as  follows: 


P20  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

For  54-in.  sewer,   5-in.  shell,   rib  metal   10  ft. : 

Per  lin.  ft 

Cement,  0.347  bbl.  at  $1.25 $0.434 

Gravel  at  $0.80 0.260 

Rib  metal 0.30 

Forms   (cost  of) 0.125 

Labor,  20  cts.  per  hour 0.23 

Total    cost,    exclusive    of   machine   and    super- 
intendence   $1.349 

For  48-in.  sewer,  5-in.  shell,  rib  metal  9  ft.: 

Cement,  0.29  bbl.  at  $1.25.  . . $0.362 

Gravel  at  $0.80 0.170 

Rib    metal 0.25 

Forms    0.115 

Labor,  20  cts.  per  hour 0.186 

Total    ?1.083 

For  42-in.  sewer,  4-in.  shell,  rib  metal  8  ft.: 

Cement,  0.20  bbl.  at  $1.25 $0.25 

Gravel  at  $0.80 0.118 

Rib  metal 0.24 

Forms    0.115 

Labor  at  20  cts.  per  hour 0.188 

Total    cost,    exclusive    of   machine   and    super- 
intendence   $0.911 

Forms  were  made  by  the  Adjustable  Steel  Centering  Co.,  6  ft. 
long,  and  6  sections  were  used,  which  make  35  ft.  of  sewer,  allow- 
ing for  the  necessary  lap.  These  forms  are  especially  well  adapted 
to  large  sewer  work,  owing  to  the  accessibility  of  all  the  parts, 
which  renders  them  easy  and  inexpensive  to  handle.  They  are 
made  of  sheet  steel  with  steel  ribs  on  the  inside  at  each  end. 
These  ribs  are  collapsed  by  especially  made  "collapsers"  ;  forms 
then  set  in  place. 

Cost  of  Making  Blocks  for  a  Concrete  Sewer.— At  Coldwater, 
Mich.,  in  1901,  there  was  built  a  concrete  sewer  with  a  monolithic 
invert  and  an  arch  of  concrete  blocks.  Riggs  &  Sheridan,  of  To- 
ledo, O.,  designed  the  sewer,  and  H.  V.  Gifford,  of  Bradner,  O., 
was  in  charge  of  construction. 

The  sewer  was  circular,  having  an  inner  diameter  of  42  ins.,  the 
thickness  of  the  invert  and  the  arch  alike  was  8  ins.  The  con- 
crete was  1  of  Portland  cement  to  6  of  gravel.  There  were  11  con- 
crete blocks  in  the  ring  of  the  arch,  each  block  being  24  ins.  long, 
8  ins.  thick,  8  ins.  wide  on  the  outside  of  the  arch  and  5  %  ins.  wide 
on  the  inside  of  the  arch.  A  block  weighed  90  Ibs.  which  was  too 
heavy  for  rapid  laying;  blocks  18  ins.  long  would  have  been  better. 
Some  8,500  blocks  were  made.  Molds  were  of  2-in.  lumber,  lined 
with  tin,  for  after  a  little  use  it  was  found  the  concrete  would  stick 
to  the  wood  when  the  mold  was  removed.  The  four  sides  of  the 
mold  formed  the  extrados,  the  intrados,  and  the  two  ends  of  the 
block ;  the  other  two  sides  being  left  open.  When  put  together 
the  mold  was  laid  upon  a  1-in.  board,  12  x  30  ins.,  reinforced  by 
vleats  across  the  bottom.  The  sides  of  the  molds  were  held  to- 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  921 

gether  with  screws  or  wedge  clamps.  When  the  blocks  had  set, 
the  sides  of  the  molds  were  removed,  and  the  blocks  were  left  on 
the  12  x  30-in.  boards  for  3  days,  then  piled  up,  being  watered 
several  times  each  day  for  a  week. 

A  gang  of  14  men  made  the  blocks;  2  screening  gravel  through 
1-in.  mesh  screen  ;  4  mixing  concrete  ;  4  molders ;  3  shifting  and 
watering  blocks ;  and  1  foreman.  With  a  little  practice  each 
molder  could  turn  out  175  blocks  a  day ;  and  since  each  block 
measured  %  cu.  ft.,  the  output  of  the  14  men  was  19^  cu.  yds.  a 
day.  Mr.  Gifford  informs  me  that  the  wages  were  $1.50  a  day  for 
all  the  men,  except  the  foreman.  The  daily  wages  of  the  14 
men  were  $22,  so  that  the  labor  of  making  the  blocks  was  $1.10 
per  cu.  yd. 

Each  batch  of  concrete,  containing  %  bbl.  of  Portland  cement 
costing  $1.35  per  bbl.,  made  18  blocks.  (JL  bbl.  per  cu.  yd.)  Since 
the  gravel  cost  nothing,  except  the  labor  of  screening  it,  the  total 
cost  of  each  block  was  11  to  12  cts.,  which  includes  0.85  cent  for 
use  of  molds  and  mold  boards,  which  were  an  entire  loss.  At  12  cts. 
per  block  the  cost  was  $4.32  per  cu.  yd. 

The  contract  price  was  $3  per  lin.  ft.  of  this  sewer,  as  against 
a  bid  of  $3.40  per  ft.  for  a  brick  sewer. 

When  the  trenching  had  reached  to  the  level  of  the  top  of  the 
invert,  two  rows  of  stakes  were  -riven  in  the  bottom,  stakes  being 
6  ft.  apart  in  each  row,  and  rows  being  a  distance  apart  %-in. 
greater  than  the  outer  diameter  of  the  sewer.  Those  stakes  were 
driven  to  such  a  grade  that  the  top  of  a  2  x  4-in.  cap  or  "runner" 
set  edgewise  on  top  of  them  was  at  the  proper  grade  of  the  top 
of  the  invert.  The  excavation  for  the  invert  was  then  begun  and 
finished  to  the  proper  curve  by  the  aid  of  a  templet  drawn  along 
the  2  x  4-in.  runners.  In  gravel  it  was  impossible  to  hold  the  true 
curve  of  the  invert  bottom.  Concrete  was  then  placed  for  the 
invert.  To  hold  up  the  sides  of  the  invert  concrete,  a  board  served 
as  a  support  for  the  insides,  but  regular  forms  were  more  satis- 
factory in  every  respect  except  that  they  were  in  the  way  of  the 
workmen.  A  form  was  tried,  its  length  being  6  ft.  It  was  built 
like  the  center  for  an  arch,  except  that  the  sheeting  was  omitted 
on  the  lower  part  of  the  invert.  It  was  suspended  from  cross-pieces 
resting  on  the  "runners."  After  the  concrete  had  been  rounded  in 
place,  the  form  was  removed  and  the  invert  trued  up.  This  form 
worked  well  in  soil  that  could  be  excavated  a  number  of  feet 
ahead,  so  that  the  forms  could  be  drawn  ahead  instead  of  having  to 
be  lifted  out ;  but  in  soil,  where  the  concreting  must  immediately 
follow  the  excavation  for  the  invert,  the  form  is  in  the  way.  The 
invert  was  trued  up  by  drawing  along  the  runners  a  semicircular 
templet  having  .a  radius  of  21%  ins.  Then  a  %-in.  coat  of  1 :  2 
mortar  was  roughly  troweled  on  the  green  concrete.  Another  tem- 
plet having  a  2 1-in.  radius  was  then  drawn  along  the  runners  to 
finish  the  invert. 

When  the  plaster  had  hardened,  two  courses  of  concrete  blocks 
were  laid  on  each  shoulder  of  the  invert,  using  a  7  :  2  :  %  mortar, 


922"  HANDBOOK   OF  'COST   DATA. 

the  !/4  part  being  lime  paste.  The  lime  made  the  mortar  more 
plastic  and  easier  to  trowel.  Then  the  form  for  the  arch  was 
placed,  and  as  each  8-ft  section  of  the  arch  was  built,  a  grout  of 
1 :  1  mortar  was  poured  over  the  top  to  fill  the  joints.  Earth  was 
thrown  on  each  shoulder  and  tamped,  and  the  center  moved  ahead. 
Common  laborers  were  used  for  all  the  invert  work,  except  the 
plastering,  which  was  done  by  masons  who  were  paid  30  cts.  per  hr. 
Masons  were  also  used  to  lay  the  concrete  blocks  in  the  arch.  Mr. 
Gifford  states  that  two  masons  would  lay  at  the  rate  of  100  lin.  ft. 
of  arch  per  day,  if  enough  invert  were  prepared  in  advance.  As 
there  were  11  blocks  in  the  ring  of  the  arch,  this  rate  would  be 
equivalent  to  7%  cu.  yds.  of  arch  laid  per  mason  per  day. 

Cost  of  'Concrete  Sewer  Blocks.— The  cost  of  molding  several 
thousand  concrete  blocks  to  be  used  in  sewer  construction  at 
Halifax,  N.  S.,  is  given  in  the  "Canadian  Engineer,"  from  which 
we  rearrange  and  further  analyze  the  figures  as  follows  : 

The  work  involved  the  mixing  and  molding  of  356.35  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  in  1,341  batches  of  7.17  cu.  ft.  each.  The  cost  of 
the  molded  blocks  was  as  follows: 

Total.  Per  cu.  ft. 

5,050  hrs.  labor,  at  16  to  24  cts $    838.76  $0.087 

1,733  bushels  cement,  at  80  cts 1,386.40  0.144 

2,850  bushels   sand,   at  6   cts 171.00  0.017 

2,684  bushels  gravel,   at  6   cts., 141.04  0.014 

5,364  bushels  stone,   at   7   cts 375.48  0.038 

Paper    26.82  0.0028 

Soap     17.85  0.0018 

Coal    48.95  0.0050 


Total $3,006.30  $0.3096 

The  cost  of  the  blocks  complete  was  thus  31  cts.  per  cu.  ft.  or 
$8.37  per  cu.  yd.  This  cost  includes  cleaning  molds,  moving  and 
storing  blocks  and  all  expenses  incident  to  the  cost  of  manufacture 
except  the  cost  of  the  water  used. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Block  Manholes. — Mr.  Hugh  C.  Baker,  Jr., 
gives  the  following: 

The  cost  of  making  concrete  block  manholes  at  Rye,  N.  Y.,  was 
as  follows  per  manhole : 

30  blocks  for  walls,  2.5  cu.  yd.  of  1 :  2  :  5  concrete $21.00 

6  blocks  for  cover,   Viz  cu.  yd.  reinforced  concrete.  .  .      4.27 

T-beams  for  cover  in  place 5.40 

Supervision,  freight  and  hauling,   5.6  tons  concrete..      9.38 

3  hrs.  labor  placing  cover,  at  15  cts 0.45 

20  hrs.  labor  placing  walls,  at  15  cts 3.00 

Total  per  manhole,   exclusive  of  iron  cover $43.50 

Each  manhole  was  5  ft.  deep  inside,  8-in.  walls,  5  ft.  in  diameter. 
All  concrete  was  hand-mixed,  very  wet,  %-in.  stone  being  used.  A 
set  of  30  wooden  molds  for  the  wall  blocks  was  made.  These 
molds  cost  from  $3.50  to  $12  each;  some  being  made  of  hard  wood 
lined  with  zinc.  In  making  the  blocks  4  men  averaged  15  wall 
blocks  a  day  .of  about  2V2  cu.  ft.  each,  which  is  equivalent  to  0.84 
cu.  yd.  per  man  per  day.  The  concrete  was  allowed  to  set  3  to  12 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


923 


hrs.  before  removing  the  molds ;  24  to  36  hrs.  before  taking  the 
blocks  outside  to  dry,  and  7  days  before  shipping  the  blocks.  About 
1,000  blocks  were  made  and  only  9  lost  by  breaking. 

For  comparison  it  is  well  to  give  the  cost  of  brick  manholes,  as 
follows  : 

1,450    brick,    at    $8.25    per   M '.$11.96 

Mason     6.00 

46  hrs.  labor,  at  15  cts 6.90 

4  bbls.    cement,    at    $1.25 5.00 

Sand 75 

Supervision,   etc 2.50 

Concrete  top  blocks    (%   cu.  yd.)   and  I-beams 11.40 

Total     $44.51 

This  brick  manhole  had  a  flat  concrete  top. 


Br/ttr  lO.WperM 
Cement  2.00 1  bbl. 
Sand 


Eng.-Confr: 


Fig.  25. — Diagram  for  Estimating  Quantities  in  and  Costs  of  Man- 
holes. 

Estimating  the  Cost  of  Manholes  from  a  Diagram. — This  dia- 
gram and  the  description  of  its  use  were  given  by  Mr.  John  Wilson, 
in  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  8,  1908. 

Herewith  is  given  a  diagram  (Fig.  25)  for  estimating  the  quanti- 
ties of  materials  in  manholes ;  and,  at  given  prices  of  materials  and 
labor,  the  cost  of  the  manhole  can  likewise  be  ascertained.  The 
diagram  shown  is  for  a  4-ft.  manhole. 

Having  the  depth  of  the  manhole  given,  the  number  of  brick,  the 
amount  of  sand,  cement,  mortar,  the  cost  of  labor,  and  total  cost  of 
manhole  complete,  plus  15  per  cent  profit,  may  be  taken  from  the 
diagram. 

Thus  for  a  15-ft.  manhole,  follow  the  vertical  15-ft.  line  to  inter- 


924 


HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 


section  with  brick  curve,  thence  horizontally  to  left  read  2,600. 
From  the  intersections  of  the  last  horizontal  line  with  the  sand, 
mortar  and  cement  curves,  respectively,  read  vertically  above  1.88 
cu.  yds.  of  sand,  2.22  cu.  yds.  of  mortar  and  4.6  barrels  of 
cement.  To  ascertain  the  cost,  follow  the  vertical  15-ft.  line  from 
bottom  to  intersection  with  the  cost  curves,  and  read  horizontally 
to  right,  cost  plus  15  per  cent,  $64,  of  which  the  cost  of  labor  alone 
is  $12.50,  as  shown  by  the  labor  curve. 

The  curves  allow  for  a  double  layer  of  brick  in  the  bottom  and 
the  outside  of  the  manhole  to  be  well  plastered.  It  is  an  easy 
matter  to  draw  similar  curves  to  meet  local  conditions  and  thus 
secure  a  very  ready  method  of  making  estimates. 

A  Device  for  Building  Circular  Manholes.*— We  illustrate  here- 
with a  device  (Fig.  26)  for  use  in  building  circular  manholes  hav- 
ing a  concrete  bottom  and  brick  walls.  The  device  was  designed 


Fig.   26.— Device  Used  in  Building  a  Manhole. 

. 

by  Mr.  Elmer  E.  Barnard,  Assistant  City  Engineer  of  Lynchburg, 
Va.,  and  has  been  in  use  in  the  sewer  department  of  that  city  for 
about  a  year. 

While  the  device  was  put  in  service  with  the  primary  object  of 
getting  a  better  class  of  work,  yet  both  this  has  been  obtained  and 
the  cost  of  the  work  has  also  been  decreased  quite  a  good  deal. 

Mr.  Barnard  informs  us  that,  using  the  device,  they  have  built 
two  10-ft.  manholes  in  2^4  days,  two  men  at  $1.40  per  day  each, 
and  one  man  at  $2.00  being  employed. 

Hence  the  labor   cost  of  each  manhole  was : 

2%   days,    at    $1.40 ..$3.15 

1%  day,  at  $2.00 2.25 

Total $540 

"Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   19,   1906. 


SPM'ERS,  COX DU ITS  AND  DRAINS. 


925 


It  has  been  found  that  on  a  system  where  a  large  number  of 
manholes  are  to  be  installed,  they  can  be  built  in  much  less  time 
than  the  figures  given  above,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  concrete 
bottoms  can  be  put  in  before  the  bricklayers  have  gotten  up  to  the 

work. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  Manhole. — The  following  figures  of  the  cost 
of  constructing  a  concrete  manhole  are  rearranged  from  the  "Cana- 
dian Engineer."  The  construction  of  the  manhole  is  clearly  shown 
by  the  accompanying  sketch  (Fig.  27).  About  the  only  point  that 
need  be  noted  is  that  the  form  lumber  was  so  cut  up  that  it  could 
not  be  used  again  and  its  total  cost  is  therefore  charged  against  the 


Fig.   27. — Concrete  Manhole. 

work.     The  costs  were  as  follows,  there  being  4.08  cu.  yds.  of  con- 
crete in  the  manhole: 

Materials :  Total.         Per  cu.  yd. 

300  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  $30 $  9.00  $  2.21 

5  bbls.   cement,   at   $2.25 11.00  2.69 

4  cu.  yds.  sand  and  gravel,  at$l.      4.00  0.98 

Total   materials    $24.00  $~5~88 

Labor : 
Forms,  70  hrs.,  at  32%  cts $22.75  $  5.57 

Mixing  and  placing  concrete: 
13  hrs.,  at  22%  cts $  2.92  $  0.71 

Total   labor    $25.67  $  6.28 

Total    labor    and    materials. ..  .$49.67  $12.16 

Cost  of  Brick  Manholes.— The  walls  of  brick  manholes  are  gen- 
erally 8  ins.  thick  up  to  12  ft.  in  depth,  and  12  ins.  thick  below. 
The  cross-section  of  manholes  is  usually  elliptical,  3  f t.  x  4  %  ft.,  up 
to  the  neck  of  the  manhole  which  is  circular  and  narrows  down  to 
about  24  ins.  in  diameter.  The  cast-iron  ring  and  cast-iron  cover 
weigh  from  375  Ibs.  to  650  Ibs.,  the  lighter  weight  being  used  in 
village  streets.  A  common  weight  for  use  in  cities  is  475  Ibs.  These 
"manhole  heads"  are  carried  in  stock  by  manufacturers  of  sewer 


926  HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

pipe,    and    are    listed    in    their    catalogues.      The    following    is    th« 
actual  cost  of  a  manhole  built  by  day  labor  for  a  Western  city: 

2,000  brick,  at  $6 $12.00 

475-lb.   ring  and  cover,   at  2   cts 9.50 

2%  bbls.  Louisville  cement,  at  75  cts 2.00 

1  cu.  yd.   sand    1.50 

24  hrs.  bricklayer,  at  55   cts 13.20 

24  hrs.  helper,  at  18%   cts 4.50 

Total    $42.70 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  mason  averaged  less  than  700  bricks  per 
8-hr,  day,  which  indicates  that  he  realized  that  he  was  working  for 
a  city  and  not  for  an  individual.  However,  small  jobs  like  manhole 
work  are  apt  not  to  be  handled  with  rapidity.  Consult,  for  com- 
parison, other  data.  See  "Manhole"  and  "Vault"  in  the  index. 

Cost  of  a  Brick  Manhole,  Flush  Tank  and  Laying  Pipe  Sewer.*— 
The  following  data  relate  to  the  construction  of  a  brick  manhole, 
a  brick  flush  tank,  and  the  laying  of  a  section  of  sanitary  sewer  at 
Columbus,  Mass.  The  work  was  constructed  by  day  labor. 

Brick  Manhole. — The  manhole  was  4  ft.  in  diameter  and  6^5  ft. 
deep ;  it  was  of  the  "churn  pattern."  Its  cost  was  as  follows : 

1,000  hard   brick,   at    $6.50 $  6.50 

7  sacks  Portland  cement,  at  50c 3.50 

1  cu.  yd.  sand,  delivered  0.85 

Ring  and  cover,  395  Ibs.,  at  $2.40  per  100  Ibs 9.48 

3    step    irons 0.30 

Hauling  iron    0.20 

Digging    hole — in    brick    clay 2.25 

Filling    t.75 

Mason,   8  hours,  at   55   cts 4.40 

Helper,  8  hours,  at  12  ya  cts 1.00 

Total  actual   cost $29.23 

Engineers'  estimate  of  cost $30.00 

Brick  Flush  Tank. — The  flush  tank  was  4  ft.  in  diameter  by  & 
ft.  deep.  Its  cost  was  as  follows: 

650   brick,    at    $6.50 $  4.22 

9  sacks  Portland  cement,  at  50  cts 4.50 

1  load  sand 50 

1  load  gravel    60 

Ring  and  cover,  395  Ibs.,  at  $2.40  per  100  Ibs 9.48 

5-in.    automatic    syphon 22.10 

Freight    65 

Drayage    45 

Drain  pipe    50 

Digging    and    filling     (sand) 1.50 

Mason,   9  hours,   at  55   cts 4.95 

Helper,  9  hours,  at  12  y2   cts 1.13 

Total  actual   cost $50.58 

Engineer's   estimate   of   cost 60.00 

Laying  Sewer. — The  sewer  was  1,613  ft.  long,  of  8-in.  terra  cotta 
pipe.  The  sewer  pipe  was  furnished  by  the  city,  delivered  on  the 
job,  so  that  the  following  is  the  cost  of  laying  only. 

Four  manholes  and  one  flush  tank  were  also  constructed,  but 
these  were  paid  for  separately  and  their  cost  is  not  included  in  the 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  June  9,  1909. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


927 


figures  below.  The  average  depth  of  the  trench  was  6%  ft.  The 
work  was  completed  in  14  days  of  10  hours  each.  The  cost  was 
as  follows : 

Total.      Per  lin  ft. 
Labor,   1,639^   hours,  opening  trench,  laying 

and  backfilling  with  shovels,  at  10  cts.  per 

hour     $163.95         $0.1016 

Wiping  joints    (acting  foreman),    143   hours, 

at    15    cts 21.45  .0133 

Superintendence,   14  days,  at  $5 70.00  .0434 

Cement,  12  sacks,  at  50  cts. 6.00  .0037 

Sand,  3  loads,  at  50  cts 1.50  .0010 


Total     $262.90 


$0.163 


We  are  indebted  to  Charles  Lyon  Wood,  C.  E.,  Columbus,  Mass., 
for  the  above  information. 

Cost  of  Making  Cement  Pipe.— Mr.  Arthur  S.  Bent  gives  the  fol- 
lowing data:  In  1892  four  miles  of  28-in.  cement  pipe  were  laid 
for  an  irrigation  system  in  Riverside  county,  California.  The  mor- 
tar was  mixed  by  hand  in  boxes  holding  %  cu.  yd.,  and  was  hoed 
oyer  3  times  dry  and  3  times  wet.  It  was  then  tamped  (17-lb. 
tampers)  by  hand  into  sheet  iron  molds. 

The  pipe  was  28  ins.  in  diameter,  2%  ins.  thick  and  in  2-ft. 
lengths.  The  mixture  used  was  1  part  Portland  cement  and  3*£ 
parts  pit  gravel  and  sand.  During  the  best  week's  work,  a  gang 
of  25  men  made  1  mile  of  pipe,  or  35  ft.  per  man  per  day,  or  1% 
cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per  man  per  day.  But  the  average  week's 
work  was  V2  mile  of  pipe  made  by  a  gang  of  25  men,  or  17  lin.  ft., 
or  0.9  cu.  yd.  per  man  per  day.  The  laborers  received  $2  and  up- 
ward per  day. 

This  pipe  line,  after  seven  years  of  use,  showed  no  appreciable 
loss  of  water  in  its  4  miles  of  length. 

The  Miracle  Pressed  Stone  Co.,  of  Minneapolis,  Minn.,  manufac- 
ture molds  for  making  cement  tile  and  cement  sewer  pipe  with 
bell  ends.  Their  catalogue  contains  the  data  given  in  the  follow- 
ing table : 

COST  OF  CEMENT  PIPE,  IN   2-pr.   LENGTHS. 

(Mortar,    1 :  3  mixture ;  sand,   75  cts.  per  cu.  yd. ;   cement,   $2  per 
bbl. ;    labor,  $2  per  day.) 

Pipe,  2  ft.  long. — — 

Tot.  cost  Total 


Kind  of          Thick-  Cu.  ft. 

Cost      Cost  of  Cost  of 

2-ft. 

cost 

24" 

pipe.               ness,  of  sand,  of  sand,  cement,  labor. 
Bell-End.          2"         2.75     $0.075     $0.460     $0.15 

pipe,     per  ft. 
$0.685     $0.34 

24" 
20" 

Straight  .  . 
Bell-End. 

2"         2.25 
1%"     1.95 

.063 
.056 

.370 
.325 

.12 
.13 

.553 
.511 

.28 
.26 

20" 

Straight.  . 

1%"     1.67 

.045 

.266 

.09 

.401 

.20 

18" 

Bell-End. 

1%"     1.84 

.055 

.230 

.13 

.445 

.22 

18" 

Straight.  . 

1%"     1.50 

.045 

.190 

.10 

.335 

.17 

15" 

Bell-End. 

1%"     1.40 

.039 

.235 

.11 

.384 

.19 

15" 
12" 

Straight.  . 
Bell-End. 

1%"     1.17 
1%"     1.10 

.033 
.030 

.195 
.180 

.08 
.10 

.308 
.316 

.15 
.1C 

12" 

Straight.  . 

1%"       .88 

.026 

.145 

.07 

.240 

.12 

10" 

Bell-End. 

1%"       .83 

.025 

.105 

.10 

.230 

.12 

10" 

Straight.  . 

!%<'       .68 

.020 

.850 

.07 

.175 

.09 

928 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Cost  of  Cement  Pipe  Sewer  and  Manholes  at  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. — 
The  following  records  Of  the  methods  and  cost  of  constructing  a 
24-in.  egg-shaped  cement  pipe  sewer  in  Butler  street,  Brooklyn, 
N.  Y.,  were  furnished  by  Mr.  J.  J.  B.  LaMarsh  and  published  in 
Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  3,  1906.  A  plan  and  profile  of  the 
sewer  are  shown  in  Fig.  28.,  which  gives  all  lengths.  The  work 
Included  trenching,  pipe-laying  and  backfilling,  manhole  construc- 
tion and  catch  basin  construction. 

The  trench  had  an  average  depth  of  12  ft.  and  was  opened  3  ft. 
wide  throughout.  For  the  first  2  ft.  the  soil  was  loam  and  for 
the  remainder  of  the  depth  it  was  gravel  and  sand.  Picks  were 
used.  The  timbering  consisted  of  I^xl2-in.  vertical  sheeting 
held  by  2  x  10-in  x  16-ft.  rangers  and  4-in.  diameter  bars  3  ft.  long. 


Fig.   28. — Plan  and  Profile  of  Sewer. 

The  sheeting  was  easily  placed,  as  the  bank  stood  until  dried  by  the 
sun.  On  the  18-in.  pipe  curve  into  Rogers  avenue  the  sheeting 
was  left  in  place,  but  all  the  other  timbering  was  removed. 

The  pipe  was  laid  on  a  foundation  plank  I%xl2  ins.  It  was 
cement  pipe  manufactured  by  the  Wilson  &  Baillie  Mfg.  Co.,  and 
was  of  the  general  form  shown  by  Fig.  29.  It  came  in  3-ft.  lengths, 
weighing  for  the  24-in.  size  500  Ibs.  each.  It  was  laid  with  a  three- 
leg  derrick,  using  a  goose-neck  to  lower.  Four  men  handled  the 
pipe  to  the  derrick  and  lowered  it  and  two  men  in  the  bottom  of 
the  trench  placed  it.  There  was  no  separate  pipe  gang,  the  work 
being  done  by  men  taken  from  the  trenching  gang  and  in  stretches 
of  from  3  to  20  lengths,  as  the  progress  of  work  necessitated.  In 
all  933  ft.  of  24-in.  pipe  were  actually  laid,  although  the  contractor 
got  paid  for  964  ft. ;  the  difference  of  31  ft.  was  taken  up  in  the 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


929 


3  x  5-ft.  manholes.  Besides  the  24-in.  pipe  main,  there  were 
36  ft.  of  18-in.  pipe,  33  ft.  of  12-in.  pipe,  10  manholes  and  3  sewer 
basins. 

Turning   now    to    the    cost   of   this   work   we    have   the   following 
figures : 

Amounts  and  Cost  of  Materials  Used. 

18,500  brick,    at    $8.75    , ' ?    1?1.875 

27  barrels  of  cement,   at  $1.35 

10  manhole  heads  and  covers,  at  $11.00 

5,500  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  $18.50. 


3  sets  granite  stones  for  basins,  at  $35, 
3  sets  blue   stones   for   basins,   at   $5.. 


.450 
110.000 
46.750 
105.000 
15.000 

3  pans  and  hoods,  at  $9.50 28.500 

933  ft.   24-in  pipe,  at  $1.43 1,334.190 

36  ft.   18-in.  pipe,  at  $0.85 30.600 

96  ft.  12-in.  pipe,  at  $0.40. 38.400 

Total  cost  of  materials $1,906.765 


Fig    29. — Cement  Pipe  for  Sewer. 


Owing  to  the  method  of  doing  the  work  the  labor  costs  can  be 
only  partially  classified.  The  trenching,  sheeting,  pipe-laying  and 
backfilling  were  all  done  by  the  same  gang,  the  men  changing 
from  one  item  to  another,  as  occasion  demanded.  As  a  rule,  the 
whole  gang  was  worked  on  backfilling  from  4  :30  to  6  p.  m.  each 
day ;  there  was  no  ramming. 

Of  the   5,500    ft.   B.   M.    of   lumber,    the   contractor  got  paid   for 


930  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

3,250  ft.  B.  M.,  leaving  2,250  ft.  B.  M.  lost  from  use.  In  this  con- 
nection it  should  be  noted  that  about  40  loads  of  sand  from  the  ex- 
cavation were  sold  by  the  contractor  at  25  cts.  a  load,  or  a  total 
of  $10. 

The  team  work  was  mostly  hauling  brick  and  lumber ;  the  outfit 
was  owned  by  the  contractor  and  with  driver  was  estimated  to  cost 
$3.50  per  day.  The  labor  thus  is  itemized  as  follows: 

Trenching,  Pipe-laying,  Timbering  and  Backfilling. 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Total.  Cts. 

One  foreman,   34  days,  at  $3.50 $119.000  11.90 

One  boy,  317  days,  at  75  cts 23.775  2.37 

One  bracer,   34  days,  at  $2.40 81.600  8.16 

Labor,  A,   172.5  days,  at  $1.70 £93.250  29.82 

Labor,  B,  192.9  days,  at  $1.60 308.640  30.8*i 

Team  and  driver,  12  days,  at  $3.50 42.000  4.20 


Total    $868.265  86.82 

These  figures  per  foot  are  based  on  1,002  ft.  of  sewer,  namely, 
933  ft.  24-in.,  36  ft.  18-in.,  and  33  ft.  12-in.  sewer.  They  include 
labor,  excavating  and  backfilling,  manholes  and  basins,  but  not  the 
mason's  labor.  With  a  trench  3  ft.  wide  and  12  ft.  deep,  there  were 
1.33  cu.  yds.  of  trench  excavation  per  lin.  ft. ;  hence  the  excavation 
cost  65  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  labor  for  ten  manholes  and  three  basins  was  as  follows : 

Mason,   12.4  days,  at  $7 $   86.80 

Mason's  helper,   12.4  days,  at  $2.10 26.04 


Total    $112.84 

The  actual  cost  of  one  sewer  basin  was  as  follows: 

Sewer  Basin. 
Materials : 

1  set  granite $35.00 

1  set  bluestone    5.00 

1  hood    and    pans 9.50 

2,100  brick,  at  $8.50 17.85 

3  barrels  cement,  at  $1.35 4.05 

21  ft.  12-in.  pipe,  at  40  cts 8.40 

Total  materials   $79.80 

Labor : 
5  men,  1  day,  excavating  and  backfilling,  at  $1.70. . .  .$   8.50 

1  mason,  1  day,  at  $7 7.00 

1  helper,  1  day,  at  $2.10 2.10 

Total  labor $17.60 

Grand  total $97.40 

The  manholes  were  3x4  ft.  of  brick  masonry.     The  actual  cost  of 
one  manhole  was  as  follows : 

Manhole. 

1  head  and  cover $11.00 

1,600   brick,  at   $8.50 „ 13.60 

1%   barrels  cement,  at  $1.35 2.03 

1  day  mason,  at  $7 7.00 

1  day  helper,  at  $2.10 2.10 

Total     $35*73 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  933 

From  the  preceding  figures  the  total  cost  of  the  work  may  be 
summarized  as  follows: 

Materials    $1,906.765 

Labor     981.105 

Total $2,887.870 

Deduct   sand    10.000 

Total $2,877.870 

In  this  total  there  is  no  wear  on  tools,  interest  on  money  invested, 
oil  for  10  lanterns,  or  payment  on  bond  included.  There  was  no 
insurance  on  men. 

Cost  of  Constructing  Cement  Pipe  in  Place.* — The  method  of 
making  cement  pipe  in  place,  which  will  be  briefly  described  in  this 
article,  is  an  invention  of  Mr.  Ernest  L.  Ransome. 

A  short  stretch  of  8-in.  pipe  was  built  at  the  rate  of  1  lin.  ft. 
'  per  minute  by  six  men  and  a  foreman.  The  men  were  working 
with  great  energy,  and  the  records  show  that  they  actually  aver- 
aged about  half  this  rate,  their  average  being  300  lin.  ft.  per 
10 -hr.  day. 

As  shown  in  Fig.  30,  three  men  work  in  the  trench,  one  of.  the 
men  packing  the  cement  mortar  in  the  mold,  one  continuously 
pulling  the  mold  ahead  by  means  of  the  lever  and  the  third  filling 
around  the  green  pipe  with  earth.  The  other  three  men  mix 
mortar  and  deliver  it  into  the  trench. 

Before  giving  the  cost  of  this  pipe,  a  word  as  to  the  method  of 
construction : 

The  mold,  Fig.  31,  is  made  of  sheet  steel  with  an  inner  core  10  ft. 
long.  The  front  end  of  this  core  is  surrounded  by  a  short  steel 
shell  that  serves  as  the  outer  form  for  the  cement  pipe.  The  mortar 
for  the  pipe  is  packed  in  between  the  inner  core  and  this  outer 
shell  by  a  man  who  uses  a  small  wooden  rammer  for  the  purpose  as 
shown  in  Fig.  30.  The  man  standing  in  the  foreground  keeps  mov- 
ing the  mold  forward  slowly  by  means  of  the  lever  grasped  in  the 
right  hand.  This  lever  is  provided  with  a  dog  that  works  in  a 
ratchet  and  thus  rotates  a  small  drum  upon  which  a  wire  rope  is 
wound.  The  wire  rope  is  anchored  into  a  deadman  in  the  trench 
ahead.  As  the  mold  is  thus  moved  forward  it  leaves  behind  it  the 
cement  pipe  which  is  still  green.  The  cement  mortar,  however,  is 
mixed  with  a  small  amount  of  water  so  that  it  possesses  sufficient 
cohesion  to  hold  together  when  unsupported  by  the  core.  To  pro- 
tect the  pipe  until  it  hardens,  it  has  been  found  advisable  to  pack  a 
little  earth  around  its  sides  and  over  the  top ;  this  is  done  by  the 
third  man  in  the  trench,  and  he  does  this  backfilling  upon  the  part 
of  the  pipe  that  is  still  supported  by  the  core. 

In  verbally  describing  this  feature  of  the  construction  two  ques- 
tions have  invariably  been  asked : 

1.  Doesn't  the  pipe  cave  in  occasionally,  especially  when  it   is 
of  large  diameter? 

2.  How  are  branches  put  in? 

-Engineering-Contracting,  March,  1906. 


932  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Fig.    30. — Ransome  Cement  Pipe   Mold  in  Trench. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  933 

Answering  the  first  question,  Mr.  Ransome  says  that  caving  does 
not  occur  except  when  some  heavy  object  falls  upon  the  pipe  before 
the  cement  has  hardened.  The  pipe  does  not  break  down  of  its  own 
weight  even  when  made  three  feet  in  diameter. 

To  put  in  a  branch  a  hole  is  cut  in  the  side  of  the  "green"  pipe 
before  the  core  has  been  pulled  ahead.  A  branch  of  the  proper 
pattern  is  shoved  up  tightly  against  the  pipe  and  the  collar  of  the 
branch  is  plastered  with  cement  mortar,  producing  a  strong  water- 
tight joint. 

The  following  was  the  itemized  cost  of  an  8-in.  cement  pipe,  built 
as  before  described,  at  Despatch,  N.  Y. : 

6  men,  at  $1.70  per  day,  10  hours. $10.20 

1  foreman    2.00 

3  bbls.    cement,    at    $1.25 3.75 

3.3  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  85  cts 2.80 

Water     15 

Total  for  300  lin.  ft..,  ..$19.90 


Fig.  31.  —  Ransome  Cement  Pipe  Mold. 

This  is  equivalent  to  6.63  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pipe.  It  should  be 
added  that  the  shell  of  this  particular  8-in.  cement  pipe  was  made 
unusually  heavy,  being  1%  ins.  thick. 

On  another  stretch  of  12-in.  pipe  the  cost  was  as  follows  : 

Per  day. 
7  men,    at    $1.70  .............................  $11.90 

1  foreman    ........................  .  .........      2.20 

13  bbls.  cement,  at  $1.33  ......................    17.30 

12  cu.  yds.  fine  gravel,  at  88  cts  ................      9.60 

Total  for  400  ft.   of  pipe  ..................  $41.00 

This  is  equivalent  to  10%   cts.  per  ft'.     In  none  of  these  cases  is 


the  cost  of  digging  the  trench  included  in  the  labor  item,  for  that 
cost  is  common  to  all  kinds  of  pipe  sewers.  However,  due  to  the 
fact  that  there  are  no  bells  on  the  cement  pipe  and  no  joints  to  be 
made,  the  trench  can  be  dug  about  6  ins.  narrower  than  where  vitri- 
fied pipe  is  used,  thus  effecting  considerable  saving  in  the  cost  of 
excavation. 

It  was  noted  that  in  building  the  8-in.  pipe  the  men  in  the  trench 
were  capable  of  putting  in  pipes  at  the  rate  of  1  lin.  ft.  per  minute, 
which  was  just  about  twice  what  they  averaged  for  the  whole  job. 


934  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

The  speed  depends  very  largely  upon  the  man  who  is  packing  the 
mortar  into  the  mold,  and  as  this  is  hard  work,  it  would  be  ad- 
visable to  let  him  change  places  frequently  with  the  man  who  works 
the  lever  that  pulls  the  mold  ahead.  By  having  two  strong  and 
willing  men  in  these  positions,  it  is  believed  that  500  lin.  ft.  of  8-in. 
pipe  could  be  built  in  10  hours,  day  in  and  day  out. 

The  molds  for  making  this  pipe  are  made  by  the  Ransome  Inter- 
national Conduit  Co.,  11  Broadway,  New  York  City. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  a  Large  Brick  Sewer. — Mr.  Frederick  L.  Ford 
gives  the  following,  relating  to  work  done  in  Hartford,  Conn.,  in 
1905. 

The  Franklin  avenue  sewer  cleaned  consists  of  9,269  lin.  ft.  of 
circular  brick  sewer,  5,128  ft.  of  which  is  6  ft.  inside  diameter; 
2,225  ft.  4  ft.,  and  1,916  ft.  3  ft.  inside  diameter.  This  sewer  was 
built  in  1872-73,  at  a  cost  of  about  $150,000,  and  drains  a  district 
containing  about  1,167  acres.  It  has  never  been  thoroughly  cleaned 
since  it  was  built.  The  sewers  which  discharge  into  this  trunk 
sewer  vary  from  8  ins.  to  3  ft.  in  diameter,  and  have  grades  rang- 
ing from  0.5  to  6.0  ft.  per  hundred.  The  6-ft.  Franklin  avenue  sewer 
has  a  grade  of  2  ft.  per  1,000,.  and  the  4  and  3-ft.  sections  a  grade 
of  3  ft.  per  1,000. 

The  first  work  done  was  a  thorough  inspection  of  the  sewer  to 
determine  the  location  and  amount  of  the  deposits.  In  the  6-ft. 
sewer  this  was  an  easy  task  with  lanterns,  and  the  material  was 
found  only  in  patches  on  the  bottom,  averaging  from  6  ins.  to  a 
foot  deep  and  from  50  to  150  ft.  in  length,  located  usually  just  below 
where  some  large  tributary  sewer  entered  the  Franklin  avenue 
sewer. 

It  was  impossible  to  make  a  thorough  advance  inspection  of  either 
the  4  or  3-ft.  sections  of  the  sewer,  as  the  manholes  were,  as 
originally  built,  sometimes  1,000  ft.  apart,  and  the  ventilation  so  bad 
that  we  found  it  suffocating  and  too  dangerous  to  enter  either  for 
any  great  distance  from  any  manhole. 

The  deposits  in  the  3-ft.  sewer  were  found,  upon  opening  the 
sewer,  to  average  about  1  ft.  in  depth  and  the  ordinary  sewage, 
about  6  to  8  ins.,  was  running  on  top  of  it,  so  there  was  little 
available  working  space  left. 

The  cleaning  was  done  by  a  contractor  on  a  percentage  basis 
(15%).  The  laborers  received  $2  a  day,  and  their  foreman  received 
$15  per  week. 

Before  commencing  the  cleaning,  manholes  were  built  where  nec- 
essary, so  that  they  are  now  not  more  than  300  ft.  apart,  and  often 
less  on  the  smaller  sizes. 

In  cleaning,  the  force  was  organized  in  small  gangs,  which  could 
work  to  advantage  ;  two  starting  at  a  manhole  and  working  in  op- 
posite directions  until  they  met  the  men  coming  in  the  opposite 
direction. 

In  the  6  and  4-ft.  sections,  wheelbarrows  were  used  to  convey  the 
material  to  the  nearest  manhole,  where  it  was  hauled  up  and  re- 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS. 


935 


moved  in  carts,  each  holding  1  cu.  yd.     In  the  3-ft.  sewer  the  men 
used  pails  to  remove  the  deposit. 

The  result  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Diara.  sewer.                      Length.  Loads.  Cost. 

6-ft 5,128ft.  107          $    387.55 

4ft 2,225ft.  61  243.80 

3-ft.    1,916ft.  107  466.38 


Total    9,269  ft. 


275          $1,097.73 


The  average  cost  per  load  (cubic  yard)  on  9,269  ft.  of  sewer  was 
$3.99,  and  the  average  cost  per  lineal  foot  was  $0.118. 

Size  of  sewer,  ft 6  4  3 


Cost  per  load $3.62 

Cost  per  foot 0.075 


$3.99 
0.109 


$4.36 
0.243 


The  6-ft.  sewer  was  cleaned  in  7  days.  The  total  time  on  this 
work,  including  foreman  and  team,  was  1,592  hours.  This  is 
equivalent  to  22.7  men  working  10  hours  a  day  for  7  days. 

The  4 -ft.  sewer  was  cleaned  in  4  days.  The  total  time  was  1,000 
hours,  equal  to  25  men  employed  10  hours  a  day  for  4  days. 

The  3-ft.  sewer  was  cleaned  in  13  days.  The  time  occupied  was 
2,019  hours,  or  an  average  of  15.3  men,  working  10  hours  a  day 
for  13  days. 

The  average  distance  cleaned  by  each  man  per  day  on  the  6-ft. 
sewer  was  32  ft. ;  on  the  4-ft.  sewer,  33  ft.,  and  on  the  3-r't. 
sewer,  9  ft. 

The  total  cost  of  the  work,  including  manholes  built,  was 
$1,395.47,  of  which  15%  was  paid  to  Mr.  Charles  H.  Slocomb,  who 
furnished  the  labor  and  materials  and  superintended  the  work. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Sewers  and  Catchbasins. — The  following  tabu- 
lation shows  the  amount  expended  per  mile  per  year  for  the  past 
21  years  by  the  Bureau  of  Sewers  of  Chicago,  111.,  in  cleaning 
sewers  and  catch  basins: 

Miles  of  sewer 
to  maintain. 
1887    ...  474 


1888  492 

1889  712 

1890  785 

1891  888 

1892  992 

1893  1,145 

1894  1,211 

1895  1,248 

1896  1,306 

1897  1,345 

1898  1,388 

1899  1,424 

1900  1,453 

1901 1,475 

1902  1,501 

1903  1,529 

1904  1,583 

1905  1,615 

1906  .  .*. 1,633 

1907  1,673 


Cost  of 
cleaning. 
$   50,264.65 
52,423.41 
61,503.01 
107,878.34 
123,620.44 
142,720.52 
132,633.51 
154,225.45 
134,424.44 
96,901.65 
91,414.89 
92,961.88 
72,439.07 
80,985.64 
94,369.87 
99,372.58 
118,303.41 
124,260.26 
127,003.97 
150,942.10 
204,329.37 


Cost  per  mile 
per  year. 
$106.04 
106.55 


137.42 

139.21 

143.87 

115.84 

127.35 

107.71 

74.20 

67.96 

66.98 

50.92 

55.73 

63.98 

66.20 

77.37 

79.50 

78.64 

92.43 

122.13 


936  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  work  is  done  by  regular  employes  of  the  Bureau  of  Sewers, 
common  laborers  during  1907  receiving  $2.50  and  up  per  8-hr.  day. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Sewers  and  Catchbasins. — The  following  table 
shows  the  cost  of  sewers  cleaned  in  the  city  of  Chicago  during  the 
year  1907: 

Method.  Feet  cleaned.  Total.         Per  ft.,  cts. 

Flushing   2,485,900  $29,060  1.17 

Iron   scraper    488,700  32,161  6.58 

Wood  scraper   6,200  204  3.29 

A  total  of  24,974  catchbasins  were  cleaned  at  a  cost  of  $96,522, 
the  average  cost  per  basin  being  $3.86.  The  work  is  done  by  day 
labor  by  the  Bureau  of  Sewers,  common  labor  being  paid  $2.50  per 
day  of  8  hours. 

Cost  of  Sewage  Purification  at  Providence,  R.  I.— The  cost  of 
treatment  per  million  gallons  of  sewage  during  1906  at  Providence, 
R.  I.,  was  as  follows:  Chemical  precipitation,  $3.50;  sludge  dis- 
posal, $3.10.  The  population  served  by  sewers  in  1906  was  about 
182,000,  according  to  the  annual  report  of  Otis  F.  Clapp,  City  Engi- 
neer. The  sewerage  system  included  205.89  miles  of  combined 
sewers  and  9.94  miles  of  storm  sewers.  The  sewage  was  com- 
posed of  manufacturing,  wool  washings,  jewelers'  dyeing  and  bleach- 
ing wastes,  with  domestic  sewage,  and  the  strength  of  average  sew- 
age (parts  per  100,000)  was:  Albuminoid  ammonia,  total  0.729; 
soluble,  0.370;  suspended,  0.359;  chlorine,  45.58.  Other  data  from 
Mr.  Clapp' s  report  were  as  follows:  Daily  flow  of  sewage  in  mil- 
lion gallons:  Maximum,  Dec.  31,  43.5;  minimum,  Aug.  19,  10.3; 
average  for  the  year,  20.36.  Average  daily  flow  of  sewage  treated: 
19,550,000  gals.  Pounds  of  lime  used  per  million  gallons  of  sew- 
age (treated):  637.75.  Other  chemical  used:  Copperas,  72.1  Ibs. 
per  million  gallons.  Cubic  contents  of  settling  basin  up  to  water 
surface,  when  in  use,  in  million  gallons:  11.13.  Per  cent  organic 
matter  removed  from  sewage  in  terms  of  albuminoid  ammonia . 
Total,  43.35  ;  suspended,  85.07.  Disposition  of  effluent :  Discharged 
into  Providence  River  off  the  end  of  Field's  Point  under  36  ft.  of 
water.  Volume  of  sludge  produced  in  gallons  per  million  gallons 
of  sewage  treated:  4,444.4.  Per  cent  of  solids  in  wet  sludge:  7.43. 
Method  of  sludge  disposal :  Pressed  and  cake  hauled  by  steam  train 
to  dump.  Sludge  pressing:  Average  number  of  gallons  pumped 
per  day,  86,893.  Per  cent  of  solids  in  wet  sludge:  7.43.  Pounds  of 
lime  added  per  thousand  gallons  of  sludge:  23.07. 

Sludge  Disposal — Description  of  machinery  used :  Sludge  pumped 
by  Shone  ejectors  (two,  500  gals.)  to  storage  reservoirs;  thence  by 
gravity  to  forcing  receivers  (four,  8  ft.  dia.  x  12  ft.  long)  ;  thence 
forced  under  60  to  80  Ibs.  pressure  per  square  inch  up  into  the 
presses.  The  ejectors  and  forcing  receivers  are  run  by  air  pres- 
sure generated  by  one  150  and  one  50-hp.  air  compressors  actuated 
by  electric  motors;  18  filter  presses  are  used,  each  with  from  43 
to  54  plates,  with  6-in.  center  holes,  forming  cakes  36  Ins.  square 
and  from  1%  in.  to  %  in.  thick,  between  filter  cloths  which  sur- 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  937 

round  the  plates.  Hours  of  operation  of  presses  daily:  6.83.  For 
light,  heat  and  power,  $7.69  per  day.  Tons  of  sludge  cake  pro- 
duced daily:  97.16.  Per  cent  of  solids  in  pressed  cake:  27.7  Tons 
of  solids  in  sludge  cake  produced  daily:  26.97.  Cost  of  operation 
per  ton  of  solids:  $2.24.  The  quantities  per  day  in  above  table  are 
calculated  on  basis  of  365  days'  work. 

Cost  of  Sewage  Disposal,  6  Cities. — In  Engineering-Contracting, 
Oct.  6,  1907,  appeared  a  five-page  article  compiled  from  a  report 
prepared  by  Mr.  A.  C.  Gregory.  It  contains  many  valuable  data 
relating  to  six  cities,  of  which  the  following  is  a  very  brief 
abstract. 

Chemical  Precipitation,  Providence,  R.  I. — Providence  has  the 
distinction  of  being  the  one  large  city  in  this  country  which  treats 
all  (except  in  time  of  heavy  storm)  of  its  sewage  by  chemical 
precipitation,  the  object,  of  course,  being  clarification.  This  is  all 
that  is  considered  necessary,  inasmuch  as  the  clarified  effluent  is 
discharged  into  the  Providence  River  and  speedily  carried  into  Long 
Island  Sound,  where  the  dilution  is  amply  sufficient  to  take  care  of 
what  organic  matter  remains  in  the  effluent. 

The  disposal  works  consist  of  a  pumping  plant,  chemical  house, 
precipitation  tanks  and  sludge  compressing  house  with  sludge  well 
and  tanks  and  a  chemical  laboratory. 

A  pound  of  lime  used  as  a  precipitant  produces  10  Ibs.  of  sludge 
(Dunbar,  1908)  and  that  the  amount  of  sludge  amounts  to  about 
three  times  that  produced  by  sedimentation  or  septic  tank  action. 

Population  in  1907,  208,000. 

Population  served  by  sewers,  about  185,000. 

Length  of  sewerage  system:  Combined,  209.8  miles;  storm,  10.11 
miles. 

Character  of  sewage :  Manufacturing,  wool  washings,  jewelers, 
dyeing  and  bleaching  waste,  with  domestic  sewage. 

Daily  flow  of  sewage,  in  gallons:  Maximum,  40,462,000;  mini- 
mum, 9,424,000  ;  average  for  year,  19,329,000. 

Pounds  of  lime  used  per  million  gallons  of  sewage  treated, 
653.54. 

Other  chemicals  used:  Copperas,  83.05  pounds  per  million 
gallons. 

Volume  of  sludge  produced  in  gallons  per  million  gallons  of  sew- 
age treated,  4,504. 

Per  cent  of  solids  in  wet  sludge,  7.85. 

Average  number  of  gallons  of  sludge  pumped  per  day,  83,660. 

Hours  of  operation  of  sludge  presses  per  day,  671. 

Tons  of  sludge  cake  produced  daily,   96.84. 

Tons  of  solids  in  sludge  cake  produced  daily,  28.2. 

Cost  of  treatment  per  million  gallons  of  sewage :  Chemical  pre- 
cipitation, $3.54  ;  sludge  disposal,  $3.07 ;  total,  $6.61  per  million 
gallons. 


938  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Annual  cost  of  maintenance  about  22.4  cts.  per  capita. 

Per  cent  of  organic  matter  removed  from  sewage  in  terms  of 
albuminoid  ammonia,  44.74,  and  of  suspended  matter,  83.92. 

In  the  analysis  of  sewage  the  amount  of  albuminoid  ammonia 
found  is  a  valuable  index  of  the  amount  of  organic  matter  present. 

Chemical  Precipitation,  Worcester,  Mass. — The  Worcester  dis- 
posal plant  consists  of  a  chemical  house  for  storing  and  mixing 
the  lime  precipitant,  and  also  containing  sludge  presses,  a  chemical 
laboratory,  16  precipitation  tanks  and  61  acres  of  filter  beds. 

The  sludge  is  finally  deposited  at  a  distance  of  about  a  mile 
from  the  works.  During  the  year  ending  with  Nov.  30,  1908, 
15,930,000  gals,  of  semi-liquid  sludge  were  pumped  from  the  pre- 
cipitation tanks.  After  as  much  as  possible  of  the  liquid  had  been 
drawn  off  the  remaining  12,074,000  gals,  were  pressed  into  sludge 
cake,  amounting  to  12,987  tons.  Of  this  about  10,000  cu.  yds.  were 
taken  as  fertilizer  by  farmers. 

The  above  figures,  together  with  those  that  follow,  are  taken 
from  or  based  upon  the  report  of  the  city  engineer  for  1908: 

Average  daily  quantity  of  sewage  treated  (precipitation),  11,- 
240,000  gals. 

Length  of  time  sewage  remains  in  tanks,  4  to  8  hours. 

Volume  of  sludge  per  million  gallons  of  sewage,  3,872  gals. 

Cost  of  tanks,  $265,628.75. 

Cost  of  maintenance  for  year,  including  disposal  of  sludge, 
135,671.15. 

Kind  and  quantity  of  chemicals  used  per  1,000,000  gals.,  871  Ibs. 
Of  lime. 

Cost  of  chemical  precipitation  per  1,000,000  gals.,  $4-82  ;•  sludge 
pressing,  $3.85  ;  total,  $8.67. 

Annual  cost  of  maintenance  per  capita,  about  26.5  cts. 

In  terms  of  albuminoid  ammonia  chemical  precipitation  removes 
37.3%  of  the  total  organic  matter  and  75.3%  of  the  suspended 
organic  matter. 

Intermittent  Sand  Filtration,  Worcester. — There  are  in  use  about 
'61  acres  of  sand  filters,  divided  generally  in  units  of  one  acre  and 
having  a  depth  of  from  4  to  6  ft.  A  large  part  of  this  area  .is  a 
natural  sand  bed,  by  reason  of  which  fact  a  considerable  saving 
was  effected.  At  the  bottom  of  the  beds  are  laid  parallel  lines  of 
drain  pipes  at  intervals  of  about  50  ft.  These  collect  the  effluent 
and  carry  it  to  an  intercepting  pipe,  whereby  it  is  conveyed  to  the 
main  effluent  channel  and  finally  reaches  the  Blackstone  River. 

Date  of  construction  of  works,  1899-1908. 

Cost  of  beds,  $263,340.93. 

Total  filtering  area,  61  acres. 

Average  area  of  beds,  0.98  acre. 

Average  daily  quantity  of  sewage  treated,  4,022,000  gals. 

Average  daily  quantity  treated  per  acre,  79,000  gals. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  939 


Annual  cost  of  maintenance  per  capita,  about  10%  cts. 

Sewage  flows  on  one  bed,  two  to  six  hours. 

Beds  used,  one  to  four  times  weekly. 

Cubic  yards  material  removed  from  surface  of  beds,  23,804. 

Cost  of  removing  same,  $8,500. 

Total  cost  of  maintenance  for  year,  $13,555.37. 

Cost  of  maintenance  per  million  gallons  of  sewage  treated,  $9.21. 

The  net  cost  of  maintenance  per  capita  for  both  sand  filtration 
and  chemical  precipitation  is  slightly  less  than  37  cts. 

Intermittent  Sand  Filtration,  Brockton,  Mass.  —  There  are  37  filter 
beds  of  an  acre  each.  The  use  of  water  meters  has  brought  water 
consumption  down  to  35  gals,  per  capita. 

The  sewage  runs  by  gravity  to  a  sump  (pit)  passing  through 
screens  before  entering  the  sump,  and  from  which  it  is  pumped  to 
the  disposal  beds  about  three  and  one-quarter  miles  away.  About 
110  Ibs.  of  refuse  per  1,000,000  gals,  is  screened  out  before  the 
pumping.  No  pumping  is  done  at  night,  the  sewage  being  allowed 
to  collect  during  that  time,  and  is  pumped  away  on  the  following 
day.  A  considerable  amount  of  sediment  is  deposited  in  the  sump. 
This  is  stirred  up,  pumped  to  the  disposal  plant,  and  applied  to  beds, 
of  which  there  are  five,  especially  used  for  that  purpose,  an  aver- 
age of  about  136,000  gals,  of  sludge  sewage  being  thus  treated  each 
day.  The  average  amount  of  sewage  treated  per  day  at  Brockton 
amounts  to  about  1,208,000  gals.  The  minimum  seems  to  be  about 
1,079,000  gals.,  and  the  maximum  about  1,433,000  gals.  This  would 
indicate  a  rate  of  about  45,000  gals,  per  acre  per  aay. 

The  population  of  Brockton  is  estimated  at  55,000. 

The  above  figures  are  for  1908.  In  reaching  the  bed  from  the 
pumping  station  the  sewage  travels  3.3  miles  and  is  raised  42  ft. 

The  Brockton  plant  has  been  placed  in  a  spot  naturally  lending 
itself  to  economical  construction.  For  the  most  part  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  beds  consisted  in  removing  the  upper  soil  so  as  to  leave 
exposed  the  sand  and  gravel  underneath.  Under  drains  were  put 
in  only  where  the  sand  at  a  depth  of  5  or  6  ft.  was  too  fine  to 
allow  the  sewage  to  percolate  freely  through  it.  Where  such  a  con- 
dition existed  drains  with  open  joints  were  placed  about  40  ft. 
apart.  Banks  were  also  raised  and  the  necessary  dosing  arrange- 
ments made. 

The  disposal  plant,  up  to  Jan.  1,  1909,  has  cost  $337,488.64. 

Seven  new  beds,  constructed  in  1907  and.  1908,  were  completed 
at  a  cost  of  $23,239.06,  or  at  about  $3,320  per  bed. 

The  expense  for  maintenance  of  the  beds  during  1908  amounted 
to  $6,169.04,  or  about  $12.53  per  million  gallons  filtered,  or  11.2  cts. 
per  capita. 

Intermittent  Sand  Fltration,  Saratoga,  N.  Y.  —  Saratoga  has  a 
population  of  12,000  to  60,000,  according  to  the  season  of  the  year. 

The  filter  beds  handle  100,000  gals,  per  acre  per  day.  The  plant 
cost  $200,000,  including  $65,000  for  metering  water  supply  and  for 


940        HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

drains  desijjned  to  separate  the  storm  water.     Some  of  the  items  of 

cost  were: 

Pumping    plant $11,000 

Force    main 24,500 

Septic  tanks 15,500 

Filter  beds 48,000 

Total    $99,000 

The  operation  of  the  pumps  costs  $700  per  year. 
The  cost  of  maintenance  of  beds  for  1907,   according  to  figures 
secured  on  the  ground,  was  $1,833.47,  and  for  1908,  $1,153.07. 

Mr.  Barbour  states  that  the  total  cost  of  maintenance  per  year 
amounts  to  about  $3,000.  Assuming  the  normal  population  at 
12,000,  a  rate  of  25  cts.  per  capita  per  year  is  indicated. 

Septic  Tanks  and  Contact  Beds,  Ballston  Spa,  N.  Y. — Ballston 
Spa  has  a  population  of  about  6,000,  although  being  somewhat  of  a 
summer  resort,  the  population  varies.  The  plant  was  designed  to 
deal  with  an  estimated  flow  of  1,000,000  gals,  per  twenty-four  hours. 
No  figures  are  in  our  possession  as  to  expense  of  maintenance. 
The  management,  at  the  time  of  our  visit,  appeared  to  be  in  the 
hands  of  one  man,  who  not  only  looked  after  the  electrically  driven 
pumps  but  the  disposal  works  as  well.  Probably  one  man  is  all 
that  is  necessary  for  such  a  plant  except  in  extraordinary  occa- 
sions. The  following  is  the  cost  of  the  plant  as  it  appears  in  the 
accepted  bid: 

Septic  tanks,  beds,  etc $39,456 

Receiving  tanks,  pumping  outfit 15,254 

Pump     house 3,072 

Two   gate    houses , 1,118 

Force  main  ($1.68  per  foot) 4,536 

Sewer  extension  ($1.41  per  foot) 1,551 

Crushed  stone  ($0.90  per  cubic  yard) 18,000 

total $82,987 

Estimated  Cost  of  Sewage  Filtering. — Profs.  C.  E.  A.  Winslow  and 
E.  B.  Phelps  read  a  paper  before  the  Boston  Society  of  Civil  Engi- 
neers, In  1907,  wherein  the  following  estimates  were  given  of  the 
probable  cost  of  a  50-acre  trickling  or  percolating  sewage  filter 
were  given.  It  was  estimated  that  2,000,000  gals,  per  acre  would 
percolate  daily  through  a  bed  of  broken  stone  8  ft.  thick.  It  was 
estimated  that  such  filter  could  be  built  for  $1,800,000,  or  $36,000 
per  acre,  including  all  necessary  land  (Thompson's  Island),  grading, 
etc.  The  cost  of  treating  the  sewage  was  estimated  thus  per  mUlion 
gallons : 

Capital  charges $3.50 

Operation,  including  extra  pumping 2.00 

Chloride  of  lime 1.50 

Total    $7.00 

It  is  not  stated  what  the  land  was  estimated  to  cost. 
Cost  of  Sewage  Filters,  Pawtucket,  R.  I. — Mr.  George  A.  Carpen- 
ter  gives  the   following  relative  to  a  sewage  filter  at   Pawtucket, 
R.  I. 


SEWERS.  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  941 

The  filter  serves  7  miles  of  sewers,  combined  system,  draining 
960  acres,  with  a  population  of  9,500.  These  7  miles  of  sewers 
deliver  58,000  gals,  per  day,  as  the  average  for  the  year  (1895), 
more  than  half  of  this  being  ground  water  which  enters  the  sewers, 
notwithstanding  underdrains  beneath  of  some  sections  of  the  sewers. 
There  are  13  filter  beds  having  a  total  filtering  area  of  2.36  acres; 
four  of  these  beds  (0.51  acres)  being  sludge  beds,  and  receive  the 
sewage  from  the  bottom  foot  of  the  settling  tanks.  The  two 
settling  tanks  are  each  30  x  100  ft.,  4  ft.  deep.  Sewage  is  held 
24  hrs.  in  these  tanks,  and  then  delivered  through  8-in.  pipes  to  the 
filter  beds  in  doses  of  100,000  gals,  to  the  acre.  The  underdrains  are 
4-in.  tiles,  buried  5  ft.  deep  in  the  natural  sand  that  forms  the  filter 
beds.  The  cost  of  this  plant  was  $12,000,  or  about  $5,000  per  acre 
of  filter  bed.  One  man  operates  the  plant. 

Cost  of  Sewaae  Filters,  Waterloo,  Ont.— Mr.  Herbert  J.  Bowman 
gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  sewage  filter  beds  built 
in  1895  for  Waterloo,  Ontario.  The  work  was  done  by  contract. 
Six  filter  beds  were  built,  each  averaging  132  x  200  ft,  or  26,400 
sq.  ft.,  or  a  total  of  3.65  acres,  with  an  available  filtering  area  of 
3  acres.  The  land  is  of  sand  and  gravel,  requiring  little  leveling 
up.  The  beds  are  underdrained  by  3-in.  tiles,  laid  10  ft.  apart  in  a 
tile  gutter  composed  of  5 -in.  half-tile,  with  joint  covers  of  quarter- 
tile.  The  contract  cost  of  10,545  ft.  of  3-in.  tile  in  place  (for  4 
of  the  beds)  was  as  follows: 

Materials,  10,545  ft.  at  2.5  cts $    264 

Laying  10,545  ft.  at  3.5  cts.. 369 

1,856  cu.  yds.  gravel  backfill  at  20  cts 371 

Removing  surplus  earth 129 

Total,  10,545  ft.  at  10.75  cts $1,133 

The  trenches  were  dug  4  ft.  deep,  and  backfilled  with  gravel 
which  cost  20  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  delivered.  The  3.5  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 
for  "laying"  included  digging  the  trench  and  backfilling,  *at  which 
price  the  contractor  barely  paid  his  men,  and  had  no  profit. 

The  entire  cost  of  the  6  beds,  with  3  acres  of  filtering  area,  was : 

3,050    cu.    yds.    excavation   for   embankments   at 

12   cts $    366 

1,500  cu.  yds.  gravel  for  leveling  up  beds  at  20  cts.      300 

15,800  lin.  ft.  3-in.  drain  at  10%  cts 1,699 

Sewer  carriers  (18-in.) 300 


Total    $2,665 

This  is  equivalent  to  only  $900  per  acre.  The  low  cost  is  due  to 
favorable  conditions  and  to  very  low  contract  prices.  The  excava- 
tion for  embankments  was  done  with  drag  scrapers.  The  3.6  acres 
of  land  cost  $100  an  acre  in  addition  to  the  above  cost. 

Cost  of  a  Sewage  Filter  and  Septic  Tank  With  Costs  of  Opera- 
tion.*— Mr.  F.  A.  Barbour  gives  the  following  relative  to  a  sewage 
filter  and  septic  tank  plant  at  Saratoga  Springs,  N.  Y.,  built  in 
1903. 


^Engineering-Contracting,  July  14,   1909. 


942  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

The  sewage  is  lifted  15  ft.  by  three  electrically  driven  centrifugal 
pumps  (6-in.),  and  carried  8,800  ft.  through  a  16-in.  cast-iron  main, 
and  then  passed  in  succession  through  covered  septic  tanks,  an 
aerator,  an  automatic  dosing  tank  and  intermittent  sand  filters. 
The  volume  ranges  from  1,250,000  gals,  to  2,500,000  gals,  per  day, 
the  latter  during  the  summer.  The  regular  population  is  about 
12,500,  which  increases  to  50,000  during  the  summer. 

The  pumps  and  motors  have  an  average  combined  efficiency  of 
35%.  They  cost  $5,400.  The  pump,  well  and  building  cost  $4,000. 
The  pumps  work  only  during  the  day.  The  4  septic  tanks  are  of 
concrete  with  a  concrete  vaulted  roof,  each  being  52x91  ft.  in 
area.  The  total  capacity  of  the  4  tanks  is  1,000,000  gals.,  the 
sewage  being  8  ft.  deep. 

The  aerator  and  dosing  tank  hold  26,000  gals. 

There  are  20  filter  beds  of  about  1  acre  each.  About  2%  to  3  ft. 
of  topsoil  was  excavated  (and  built  into  embankments)  exposing 
the  natural  sand  bed. 

The  cost  of  the  plant  was  as  follows  (exclusive  of  a  $40,000  storm 
water  built  to  reduce  the  amount  of  sewage  treated)  : 

Pumping  plant  and  accessories $11,000 

Force  main   (16-in.)    8,800  ft 25,000 

Septic  tanks,   1,000,000  gals 15,000 

Filter  beds,  20  acres 48,000 


Total    $99,000 

The  cost  of  pumping  and  operating  the  purification  works  is 
$3,000  a  year,  of  which  $720  is  for  the  electric  power,  and  $600 
covers  all  services  at  the  screen  and  pumps.  At  the  filter  beds, 
$1,680  a  year  is  spent,  of  which  66%  is  for  work  not  relating  to  the 
maintenance  of  the  surface  of  the  filter  bed,  being  trimming  em- 
bankments, weeding  drives,  etc. 

In  midsummer  12  filter  beds  are  used  daily,  the  gates  being 
changed  twice ;  during  the  remainder  of  the  year  8  beds  are  used 
daily,  the  gates  being  shifted  once.  The  average  daily  amount  of 
sewage  per  bed  in  use  is  about  140,000  gals.,  applied  in  four  doses. 
All  the  filter  beds  are  kept  in  commission  and  the  beds  are  used 
alternately,  so  that  the  average  daily  rate  for  the  field  is  60,000  gals. 
per  acre.  Mr.  Barbour  believes  that  double  this  rate  could  be 
maintained  with  equally  good  results. 

Assuming  a  cost  of  $3,000  per  year  for  operation  and  $5,000  per 
year  (5%  of  $100,000)  for  capital  charges,  we  have  a  total  of  $8,000 
per  year,  to  which  may  be  added,  say,  $1,000  for  repairs  and  depre- 
ciation of  pumping  plant,  making  a  grand  total  of  $9,000,  or  less 
than  $30  a  day  for  treating  1,2000,000  gals.,  or  about  $25  per 
million  gals. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Sewers  and  Catch  Basins.*— Mr.  Allen  Aldrich 
gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  cleaning  173  miles  of 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  11,  1909. 


SEWERS,  CONDUITS  AND  DRAINS.  943 

sewers  at  Providence,  R.  I.,  during  1898.  There  were  in  use  4,026 
catch  basins  (231/4  per  mile),  each  of  which  was  cleaned,  on  an 
average,  3%  times  during  the  year.  The  14,522  cleanings  yielded 
10,600  cu.  yds.  of  deposit,  or  about  0.7  cu.  yd.  per  cleaning.  A  gang 
of  2  laborers  and  2  one-horse  carts  with  drivers  averaged  20  cu. 
yds.  per  day,  cleaned  out  and  hauled  away.  Assuming  men's 
wages  to  be  $2  each  and  a  horse  to  be  $1,  the  daily  wage  of  this 
gang  would  be  $10,  and  the  cost  would  be  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of 
sludge,  or  35  cts.  per  catch  basin  per  cleaning.  The  labor  cost  for 
the  year  would  then  be  about  $300  per  mile  of  sewer,  since  600 
cu.  yds.  were  removed  per  mile. 

In  addition  to  this,  about  10.4  miles  of  sewers  were  flushed  out 
with  a  fire  hose  during  the  year,  yielding  831  cu.  yds.  more. 

In  cleaning  the  catch  basins  a  man  descends  into  the  basin  and 
first  bails  out  the  water  into  the  sewer,  until  nothing  but  sludge  is 
left ;  and  the  -sludge  is  removed  with  buckets  raised  by  a  "wheel 
derrick"  (a  tripod  with  a  drum  operated  by  the  wheels  on  which 
the  derrick  is  transported)  and  dumped  into  the  cart.  Steel  carts 
holding  1  cu.  yd.  are  used. 

Mr.  T.  Chalkley  Hatton  describes  a  more  economic  method  of 
cleaning  catch  basins,  which  involves  a  special  design  of  catch 
basin,  so  that  the  sludge  accumulates  in  a  "catch  bucket."  This 
galvanized  catch  bucket  is  3  ft.  high  and  2%  ft.  diam.  at  the  top. 
A  cast-iron  hood  is  placed  over  the  outlet  to  the  sewer,  for  trap- 
ping the  sewer  gases.  This  hood  is  removed  before  raising  the 
catch  bucket.  Riveted  to  the  top  of  the  bucket  is  an  angle  iron 
that  rests  on  a  ledge  in  the  catch  basin,  the  joint  being  merely  dirt 
proof  and  not  water  proof.  The  bucket  is  raised  with  a  "wheel 
derrick"  (a  trip  on  wheels),  by  means  of  a  friction  pulley.  The 
legs  of  the  derrick  are  of  gas  pipe. 

A  brick  catch  basin  (8  ft.  8  ins.  deep)  on  a  6 -in.  concrete  founda- 
tion, with  a  bucket,  hood,  and  connections  complete,  costs  $40.  Each 
connecting  inlet  costs  about  $35.  The  "wheel  derrick"  costs  $35. 
Two  men,  with  a  horse  and  cart,  can  clean  20  catch  basins  a  day, 
at  a  cost  of  25  cts.  per  catch  basin. 

Cost  of  Flushing  Sewers.* — Mr.  Andrew  Rosewater  gives  the  fol- 
lowing relative  to  the  cost  of  flushing  sewers  by  automatic  flush 
tanks  and  by  hand.  The  costs  are  estimated,  but  said  to  be  based 
upon  actual  performance. 

In  1893  Mr.  Rosewater  designed  flush  tanks  that  averaged  400 
gals,  capacity  each  and  discharged  at  the  rate  of  11  gals,  per  sec- 
ond, developing  effective  scour  in  an  8-in.  sewer  for  a  distance 
of  2,000  ft.  below  the  tank.  To  avoid  sedimentation  in  the  pipe 
that  serves  the  flush  tank,  Mr.  Rosewater  states  that  the  velocity 
of  flow  should  not  be  less  than  2  ft.  per  sec.,  and  this  is  attained 
In  a  %-in.  pipe  discharging  445  gals,  in  24  hrs.  A  larger  pipe 
causes  decreased  velocity  and  sedimentation  where  unfiltered  water 


* Engineering-Contracting,  July  28,    1909. 


944  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

is  used.  He  estimates  the  cost  of  maintenance  and  operation  of 
each  flush  tank  as  follows  per  annum,  provided  the  flush  tank  is 
properly  designed : 

Interest  on  $100  tank  at  5  per  cent %  5.00 

Water,  182,000  gals,  at  $15  per  million 2.73 

Labor  of  attendance  ($2,000  -i-  300  tanks) 6.67 

Total  per  tank  per  year $14.40 

Two  men  with  a  horse  and  wagon  (costing  $2,000  per  year)  are 
estimated  to  be  able  to  take  care  of  300  flush  tanks  and  maintain 
them  in  repair. 

In  100  miles  of  sewers  in  Omaha,  Mr.  Rosewater  found  that  the 
existing  flush  tanks  were  using  1,800,000  gals,  daily,  which  was 
three  times  the  amount  needed  if  the  flow  had  been  properly  ad- 
justed. 

If  flushing  is  done  by  hand  labor,  there  are  three  methods  avail- 
able :  ( 1 )  Water  carts ;  ( 2 )  direct  portable  base  m  connections  to 
hydrants;  and  (3)  connection  with  pipe  mains  and  hand  valves. 

Flushing  with  water  carts  requires  two  men,  at  $1.50  each,  and 
two  horses,  at  $0.75  each,  to  handle  25  tanks  per  day,  or  18  cts. 
per  tank  per  day,  or  $65.70  per  tank  per  year,  to  which  must  be 
added  $2.73  for  the  water,  making  a  total  of  $68.43. 

Flushing  with  portable  base  requires  2  men  and  a  horse,  who 
handle  30  tanks  daily,  at  a  cost  of  $49.25  per  year  per  tank,  to 
which  must  be  added  $2.73  for  water,  making  a  total  of  $49.25. 

Flushing  with  pipe  connection  and  hand  valves  requires  the  con- 
struction of  a  manhole,  which,  with  connections,  etc.,  will  cost  $100. 
One  man  with  a  horse  and  wagon  can  handle  40  tanks  daily,  at  a 
cost  of  $22.50  per  tank  per  year.  To  this  must  be  added  $5  for 
interest  and  $2.73  for  water,  making  a  total  of  $30.25. 

Cost  of  Vitrified  Conduits  and  of  Tile  Drains,  Cross- References.— 
Data  on  these  subjects  will  be  found  in  Section  XV,  Miscellaneous 
Cost  Data, 


SECTION  IX. 
PILING,  TRESTLING  AND  TIMBERWORK. 

Definitions.— Consult  the  index  for  words  "not  found  in  the  fol- 
lowing alphabetical  list 

Adz. — A  carpenter's  chipping  tool,  like  a  small  hoe  with  a  handle. 

Angle  Block. — A  block  of  cast  iron  or  wood,  having  a  triangular 
cross-section,  against  which  the  braces  and  counters  of  a  Howe 
bridge  truss  abut. 

Apron. — A  covering  at  the  foot  of  a  spillway,  to  protect  the 
ground  from  scour. 

Balk. — A  large  stick  of  timber. 

Batter  Piles. — Piles  driven  inclined,  as  distinguished  from  plumb 
piles. 

Bent. — One  of  the  transverse  frames  of  a  trestle  which  supports 
the  "deck"  or  floor  system.  It  consists  of  a  sill,  a  cap,  posts  (verti- 
cal and  batter),  and  sway  braces.  A  pile  bent  consists  of  the 
piles,  cap  and  sway  braces. 

Bit. — The  part  of  an  auger  that  does  the  boring. 

Block  and  Tackle. — A  pulley  block  and  rope. 

Board  Measure. — The  unit  of  timber  measure  is  the  board  foot 
(ft.  B.  M.),  which  is  1  ft.  square  and  1  in.  thick,  or  1/12  cu.  ft.  A 
thousand  feet  board  measure  (1,000  ft.  B.  M.)  is  often  designated 
by  the  letter  M. 

Box  Culvert. — A  culvert  having  a  water  way  of  rectangular  cross- 
section. 

'Brace. — A  diagonal  compression  member  of  a  truss,  also  any  stick 
used  to  resist  compression,  like  the  horizontal  timbers  running  from 
one  side  of  a  trench  to  another.  Sway  braces  are  the  diagonal 
braces  of  a  trestle  bent.  Lateral  (or  wind)  braces  are  the  diagonal 
braces  between  the  lower,  or  the  upper,  chords  of  a  Howe  truss 
bridge. 

The  frame  that  holds  a  bit  or  auger  is  called  a  brace. 

Brad  Spike. — A  railway  spike. 

Brash. — Brittle. 

Bridging. — The  small  diagonal  braces  between  two  joists  or 
stringers  of  a  floor  system,  which  prevent  the  joists  from  turning 
over  on  their  sides,  or  from  buckling  laterally. 

Brush  Hook. — A  curved  blade,  mounted  on  a  wooden  handle,  used 
for  cutting  brush. 

Burnettizing. — Impregnating  the  pores  of  wood  with  a  solution  of 
zinc  chloride  under  pressure. 

945 


946  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Burr. — The  nut  of  a  bolt. 

Calk. — To  fill  joints  with  oakum,  or  the  like,  to  prevent  leakage. 

Cant. — To  tip  or  lean. 

Cant  Hook. — A  tool  for  handling  timber.  It  is  like  a  peavey,  except 
that  the  pole  or  handle  is  not  pointed. 

Cap. — A  timber  across  the  tops  of  posts  or  piles,  and  usually 
flriftbolted  thereto. 

Centers. — The  falsework  that  supports  an  arch  during  construc- 
tion, or,  more  strictly,  the  arch  ribs  of  this  falsework. 

Check. — A  crack  in  timber  due  to  shrinkage  from  seasoning. 

Clear  Inspection. — A  class  of  timber  conforming  to  some  such 
specification  as  follows  (N.  T.  Lumber  Assoc.)  : 

"Scantling  and  plank  shall  be  free  of  sap,  large  knots  or  other 
defects.  Dimension  sizes  shall  be  free  from  sap,  large  or  unsound 
knots,  shakes  through  or  round." 

Clearing. — The  removal  of  all  trees  and  brush  above  the  ground 
level.  The  removal  of  the  roots  below  the  ground  level  is  grubbing. 

Close  Piles. — Sheet  piles. 

Corbel. — A  projecting  beam  acting  as  a  cantilever  supporting  an- 
other beam. 

Cord. — A  cord  of  wood  measures  4x4x8  ft.,  or  128  cu.  ft. 

Corduroy. — A  road  made  of  round  or  split  logs  laid  side  by  side 
upon  marshy  ground. 

Creosoting. — Impregnating  the  pores  of  timber  with  hot  creosote 
(dead  oil  of  coal  tar)  under  pressure. 

Crib. — A  log  cabin  structure  built  of  timbers  whose  ends  are 
notched  and  drift  bolted  together. 

Dap. — A  notch  cut  into  the  side  of  a  stick  of  timber. 

Deck. — The  wooden  floor  system  of  a  railway  bridge,  consisting 
of  the  stringers,  cross-ties  and  guard  rails. 

Deciduous. — Subject  to  shedding  leaves  in  the  fall  and  winter, 
as  distinguished  from  evergreen. 

Docking. — A  retaining  wall  of  piles  sheeted  with  plank,  and 
capped  with  a  "dock  stick"  bolted  thereto. 

Dolly. — A  roller  upon  which  is  mounted  a  small  truck  for  carry- 
ing timber. 

Dimension  lumber.— Sticks  measuring  Gx6  ins.  and  larger. 

Dosey. — Sap   rotted. 

Dovetail. — A  timber  joint  made  by  cutting  the  end  of  a  stick 
so  that  it  is  narrower  a  few  inches  back  of  the  end,  and  is  let 
into  a  cross  timber  notched  to  fit  it. 

Dowel. — A  short  iron  pin  inserted  into  bored  holes  in  two  faces 
of  sticks  that  meet.  Usually  a  dowel  is  used  to  hold  the  foot  of  a 
trestle  post  from  displacement  from  the  sill  on  which  it  rests. 

Dressed. — Planed. 

Drift  bolt. — A  bar  of  round  iron  (%  to  1  in.)  used  like  a  large 
nail  (without  a  head)  to  fasten  timbers  together.  An  auger  hole, 
1/16  to  %  in.  smaller  than  the  drift  bolt,  is  first  bored  and  the  bolt 
Is  driven  in  the  hole. 


PILING,  TRESTL1NG,  TIMBERWORK.  947 

Drop  Timbers. — Timbers  dropped  into  place  to  close  an  opening  in 
a  dam. 

Dry  rot. — Rotting  of  timber  not  exposed  to  rain.  The  moisture 
is  supplied  by  the  sap  of  the  timber.  Dry  rot  often  occurs  when 
green  timber  is  painted,  the  paint  preventing  the  evaporation  of 
the  sap. 

Dubb. — To  cut  the  end  of  a  stick  to  a  bevel  around  the  edge. 
It  is  usually  good  practice  to  dubb  the  end  of  a  pile  preparatory 
to  ringing  it. 

Falsework. — The  temporary  frame  work  or  staging  built  to 
support  a  bridge  or  other  structure  during  its  erection. 

Fascine. — A  bundle  of  brush  or  small  branches  wired  or  tied 
together. 

Flume. — A  trough  for  carrying  water. 

Follower. — A  short  length  of  pile  placed  on  top  of  the  pile  that 
is  being  driven,  to  protect  it  from  the  blows  of  the  hammer,  or  to 
force  it  down  below  the  bottom  of  the  leaders  as  when  driving 
under  water. 

Forms. — The  mold  in  which  concrete  is  cast. 

Frame. — To  shape  the  members  of  a  timber  structure.  Some- 
times the  term  is  used  to  include  the  erection  and  fastening  to- 
gether of  the  members. 

Frap. — To  bind  together  with  a  rope. 

Gib  or  Gib  Plate. — A  large  flat  plate  of  wrought  iron  or  steel, 
used  like  a  washer  between  the  timber  and  the  nut  heads  of  rods 
in  a  Howe  truss. 

Gin  or  Gin  Pole. — A  mast  with  a  pulley  at  the  top,  guyed  with 
three  or  four  ropes,  and  used  to  raise  heavy  timbers,  etc. 

Gins. — See  Leads. 

Grillage. — Timbers  laid  criss  cross,  bolted  together  and  fastened 
by  drift  bolts  to  the  heads  of  foundation  piles. 

Grub. — To  remove  the  roots  of  trees  and  brush. 

Jetting  Piles. — To  sink  piles  by  means  of  a  water  jet. 

Joist. — A  beam   or   stringer   that   supports  flooring. 

Kerf. — The  narrow  slot  made  in  sawing  timber. 

Kiln  Dried. — Dried  artificially  in  a  kiln. 

Knot. — The  American  Society  for  Testing  Materials  adopted 
(1906)  the  following  definitions:  (1)  A  sound  knot  is  one  which 
is  solid  across  its  face  and  which  is  as  hard  as  the  wood  surround- 
ing it ;  it  may  be  either  red  or  black,  and  is  so  fixed  by  growth  or 
position  that  it  will  retain  its  place  in  the  piece.  (2)  A  loose  knot 
is  one  not  firmly  held  in  place  by  growth  or  position.  (3)  A  pith 
knot  is  a  sound  knot  with  a  pith  hole  not  more  than  *4  in.  In 
diameter  in  the  center.  (4)  An  encased  knot  is  one  which  is  sur- 
rounded wholly  or  in  part  by  bark  or  pitch.  Where  the  encasement 
is  less  than  ys  of  an  inch  in  width  on  both  sides,  not  exceeding  one- 
half  the  circumference  of  the  knot,  it  shall  be  considered  a  sound 
knot.  (5)  A  rotten  knot  is  one  not  as  hard  as  the  wood  it  is  in. 

(6)  A    pin    knot    is   a    sound    knot   not   over    %    in.    in    diameter. 

(7)  A  standard  knot  is  a  sound  knot  not  over  1%  in.  in  diameter. 


948  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

(8)  A  large  knot  is  a  sound  knot,  more  than  ll/2  in.  in  diameter. 

(9)  A  round  knot  is  one  which  is  oval  or  circular  in  form.    (10)    A 
spike   knot   is   one   sawn   in   a  lengthwise   direction ;    the   mean   or 
average  diameter  shall  be  considered  in  measuring  these  knots. 

Lagging. — The  plank  sheeting  placed  upon  the  frames  of  arch 
centers. 

Lag  Screw. — A  thick  screw  with  a  square  bolt  head. 

Leads  or  Leaders. — The  vertical  guides  that  guide  a  pile  driver 
hammer  during  its  rise  and  fall.  Also  called  gins,  ways,  etc. 

Lug  Hook. — A  timber  grapple,  much  like  ice  tongs  hung  from  the 
center  of  a  wooden  handle ;  used  for  carrying  timber,  one  man  at 
each  end  of  the  handle. 

Mattock. — A  grubbing  tool  with  one  cutting  edge  shaped  like  an 
adz  (or  hoe),  and  the  other  edge  like  an  ax  or  pick. 

Mattress. — A  brush  mattress  consists  either  of  fascines  bound 
together,  or  of  strands  of  brush  woven  together,  ballasted  with 
stone  and  sunk  in  a  river  bed  to  prevent  scour. 

Merchantable  Timber. — According  to  specifications  of  the  South- 
ern Lumber  and  Timber  Asso. :  "Scantling  shall  show  three  corners 
heart  free  from  injurious  shakes  or  unsound  knots.  Plank  nine 
inches  and  under  wide,'  shall  show  one  heart  free  and  two-thirds 
heart  on  opposite  side ;  over  nine  inches  wide  shall  show  two-thirds 
heart  on  both  sides,  all  free  from  round  or  through  shakes,  large  or 
unsound  knots.  Dimension  sizes:  All  square  lumber  shall  show 
two-thirds  heart  on  two  sides  and  not  less  than  half  heart  on  two 
other  sides.  Other  sizes  shall  show  two-thirds  heart  on  faces  and 
show  heart  two-thirds  of  the  length  on  edges  excepting  where  width 
exceeds  thickness  by  three  inches  or  over,  and  then  it  shall  show 
heart  on  the  edges  for  half  its  length.  All  stock  to  be  well  and 
truly  manufactured  full  to  size  and  saw  butted." 

Miter. — The  joint  between  two  beveled  edges,  the  bevel  usually 
being  45  degrees. 

Mortise. — A  hollow  cut  made  in  the  side  of  a  timber  to  receive  the 
tenon  or  tongue  on  the  end  of  another  timber. 

Mud  Sills. — Short  pieces  of  timber  (often  cedar)  laid  beneath  the 
sill  of  a  trestle  bent  to  keep  it  from  contact  with  the  ground. 

Needle  Beam. — Floor  beam  of  a  Howe  truss,  through  the  ends 
of  which  pass  the  vertical  rods. 

Nippers. — The  scissor-like  tongs  that  clutch  the  hammer  of  a  free- 
fall  pile  driver. 

Overhang  Driver. — See  Pile  Driver. 

Packing  Piece. — A  piece  of  wood  or  metal  placed  between  two 
timbers  to  prevent  their  coming  in  contact. 

Peavey. — A  pointed  pole  with  a  pivoted  hook  near  the  pointed 
end,  used  for  handling  timbers.  See  Cant  Hook. 

Pile. — A  stick  driven  into  the  earth.  Foundation  piles  are  driven 
to  support  a  bridge,  building  or  other  structure.  Sheet  piles  are 
sawed  timber  piles  driven  touching  one  another,  so  as  to  form  a 
tight  diaphragm.  Wakefield  piles  are  sheet  piles  made  by  bolting 


PILING,  TRESTL1NG,  TIMBERIVORK.  949 

or  spiking  three  planks  together,  so  as  to  form  a  tongue  and  groove. 
When  driven,  this  gives  a  triple  lap  sheet  piling. 

Pile  Driver. — A  free-fall  pile  driver  has  a  hammer  held  by  nippers 
which,  when  tripped,  allow  the  hammer  to  fall  freely.  A  friction 
clutch  driver  has  its  hammer  always  attached  to  the  hoisting  rope, 
which  is  operated  by  the  drum  with  a  friction  clutch.  A  steam 
hammer  is  raised  by  steam  acting  directly  upon  a  piston  attached 
to  the  hammer.  An  overhang  driver  is  one  mounted  in  a  frame 
whose  leads  project  8  to  20  ft.  beyond  the  base  of  support. 

Pinch  Bar. — A  steel  bar  with  a  chisel- shaped  end. 

Pitch  Pocket. — The  American  Society  for  Testing  Materials  gives 
the  following  specification :  Pitch  pockets  are  openings  between  the 
grain  or  the  wood  containing  more  or  less  pitch  or  bark.  These 
shall  be  classified  as  small,  standard  and  large  pitch  pockets,  (a)  A 
small  pitch  pocket  is  one  not  over  %  of  an  inch  wide.  (b)  A 
standard  pitch  pocket  is  one  not  over  %  of  an  inch  wide,  or  3  ins. 
in  length,  (c)  A  large  pitch  pocket  is  one  over  %  of  an  inch  wide, 
or  over  3  ins.  in  length.  A  pitch  break  is  a  well-defined  accumu- 
lation of  pitch  at  one  point  in  the  piece. 

Plank. — In  the  lumber  trade,  the  term  plank  is  applied  to  pieces 
iy2  to  5  ins.  thick  x  7  ins.  wide,  or  wider. 

Posts. — The  upright  members  in  a  trestle  bent. 

Put  Logs. — Horizontal  stringers  supporting  a  building  scaffolding, 
the  ends  being  inserted  in  put-log  holes  left  in  the  masonry. 

Rangers. — The  longitudinal  timbers  used  in  bracing  a  trench ;  the 
"braces"  being  the  cross  timbers  between  the  rangers. 

Revetment. — A  river  bank  protection. 

Ring. — An  iron  band  around  the  head  of  a  pile  to  protect  it  from 
splitting  or  brooming. 

Scantling. — A  timber  of  small  cross-section.  Also  the  cross-sec- 
tion dimensions,  as  a  "scantling"  of  4x10  ins. 

Scarf  Joint. — A  joint  made  by  overlapping  and  bolting  or  locking 
together  the  ends  of  two  pieces  of  timber  that  are  halved,  notched 
or  cut  away,  so  that  they  will  fit  each  other  and  form  a  lengthened 
stick  of  the  same  size  at  the  scarf  joint  as  elsewhere. 

Scissors. — See  Nippers. 

Seasoned. — Air  dried. 

Sheet  Piles.— See  Piles. 

Shoe. — An  iron  point  over  the  lower  end  of  a  wooden  pile. 

Sill. — The  horizontal  timber  of  a  trestle  bent  on  which  the  posts 
rest. 

Sheeting  or  Sheathing. — Plank  or  boards  forming  a  wall,  or  a 
diaphragm. 

Skeleton  Bracing. — Trench  bracing  consisting  only  of  rangers  and 
cross  braces,  without  any  plank  sheeting. 

Stay  Lathed. — Temporarily  fastened  with  small  cleats  or  braces. 

Stringer. — A  longitudinal  joist  in  a  floor  system. 

Studs. — The  vertical  pieces  of  timber  (in  a  building)  to  which 
sheeting  is  fastened. 


950  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Stumpage. — The  amount  paid  a  land  owner  for  standing  timber. 

Tenon. — A  projecting  tongue  cut  on  the  end  of  a  stick  of  timber. 
See  Mortise. 

Tongs. — See  Nippers. 

Treated. — Preserved  by  impregnation  with  creosote,  zinc  chloride, 
or  the  like. 

Trestle. — A  bridge  consisting  of  bents  supporting  a  floor  system. 
A  frame  trestle  consists  entirely  of  sawed  timber.  A  pole  trestle 
is  made  largely  of  round  poles,  none  of  which,  however,  are  used  as 
piles.  A  pile  trestle  has  bents  composed  of  piles.  See  Bent. 

Wakefield.— See  Pile. 

Wale. — A  longitudinal  timber  bolted  to  a  row  of  piles ;  but  not  on 
top  of  the  piles,  such  a  timber  being  a  cap. 

Water  Jet. — See  Jetting. 

Ways. — See  Leads.  Also  the  inclined  timbers  down  which  any 
structure  is  launched  into  the  water. 

Importance  of  Timberwork. — Although  timber  will  be  used  to  a 
less  and  less  extent  for  permanent  engineering  structures,  it  will 
long  have  a  wide  field  of  usefulness  for  falsework,  forms,  centers, 
temporary  trestles,  etc.  In  foundations  that  are  always  under 
water,  timber  will  doubtless  never  cease  to  be  used  to  a  considerable 
extent.  In  supporting  the  roofs  of  mining  excavations  timber  may 
never  cease  to  be  used.  Trestle  bridges  for  railways  are  still  built 
extensively  in  the  West,  and  even  in  the  East.  In  brief,  there  is 
and  long  will  be  an  enormous  amount  of  timber  used  annually  in 
engineering  construction.  It  is  a  serious  mistake,  therefore,  to  re- 
gard a  knowledge  of  timberwork  as  being  comparatively  non-essen- 
tial to  the  engineer  of  the  future. 

Measurement  of  Timberwork.— Timber  is  sold  by  the  1,000  ft. 
B.  M.  (thousand  feet  board  measure).  A  common  abbreviation  for 
1,000  ft.  B.  M.  is  the  letter  M.  One  foot  board  measure  is  12  ins. 
square  and  1  in.  thick,  w,hich  is  one-twelfth  cubic  foot.  To  esti- 
mate the  number  of  feet  board  measure  in  a  sawed  stick,  multiply 
the  end  dimensions  (in  inches)  together  and  divide  by  twelve,  then 
multiply  this  quotient  by  the  length  of  the  stick  (in  feet).  For 
example,  in  a  10xl2-in.  stick,  16  ft.  long,  there  are: 

10  X  12 

X  16  =  160  ft.  B.  M. 

12 

Timberwork  is  paid  for  at  a  specified  price  per  M  for  the  timber 
measured  in  the  work.  The  contractor  must  be  cautious  to  make 
allowance  for  wastage  in  framing  the  timber.  Scarf  joints,  for  ex- 
example,  may  cause  a  wastage  of  6%.  If  bridge  flooring  planks  are 
laid  diagonally  for  a  16-ft.  roadway,  there  Is  a  wastage  of  about 
5%  when  the  ends  are  sawed  off  on  line  with  the  outer  stringers. 

Timber  is  usually  sold  in  lengths  containing  an  even  number  of 
feet,  as  10,  12,  14,  16  ft.  In  examining  plans,  the  contractor  should 
be  careful  to  note  whether  the  dimensions  are  such  as  to  require  the 
use  of  even  lengths  or  not,  for  a  careless  engineer  or  architect  may 
BO  design  a  structure  as  to  cause  a  large  wastage  of  timber. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  951 

In  measuring  dressed  lumber,  remember  that  the  thickness  used 
in  calculating  the  number  of  board  feet  is  not  the  actual  thickness 
of  the  dressed  board,  but  the  thickness  of  the  original  stock  from 
which  the  dressed  board  was  made.  So  also  the  width  of  a  tongue 
and  grooved  board  is  not  its  actual  face  width,  as  laid,  but  it  is 
the  width  of  the  original  board. 

Cubic  Contents  and  Weight  of  Piles  and  Poles.—  Table  I  gives  the 
cubic  feet  contents  of  a  tapering  pole.  Thus  a  pole  8  ins.  diam. 
at  the  small  end  and  16  ins.  at  the  large  end,  contains  0.81  cu.  ft. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  pole  (see  Table  I).  Hence  if  the  pole  is  30  ft.  long, 
it  contains  30  X  0.81  =  24.3  cu.  ft.  of  timber. 

The  weight  of  timber  per  cubic  foot  is  given  below. 

In  estimating  the  amount  of  lumber  that  can  be  sawed  from  a 
log,  the  following  rule  is  used: 

From  the  least  diameter  in  inches  subtract  4,  divide  by  16,  multi- 
ply by  the  length  in  feet,  and  the  quotient  is  the  number  of  feet 
board  measure. 

Expressed  as  a  formula,  we  have 

d  —  4 


(d  —  4x 
I 
16     ) 


Weight  of  Timber. — The  cost  of  hauling  timber  must  frequently 
be  estimated.  Timber  is  bought  by  the  M,  and  it  is  well  to  remem- 
ber that  an  M  contains  83%  cu.  ft.,  which  at  a  specific  gravity  of  1 
(the  same  as  water)  would  be  5,200  Ibs.,  or  2.6  tons  per  M.  How- 
ever, only  very  dense,  green  oaks,  and  similar  dense  timber,  ever 
have  a  specific  gravity  equal  to  1. 

Table  II  gives  the  weight  of  timber  for  different  specific  gravities. 

The  following  is  the  specific  gravity  of  some  of  the  common  kinds 
of  timber: 

Kiln 

Green.  Dried. 

Yellow    pine    (Southern) 0.90  0.60 

Norway   pine    (Northern) 0.50 

Douglas   fir    0.65  .... 

White  pine   0.40 

White  oak 1.00  0.70 

Hemlock    0.60  0.50 

Cedar     0.35 

See  Frye's  "Civil  Engineer's  Pocketbook"  for  the  most  complete 
data  on  weights  of  wood. 

TABLE  II. — WEIGHT  OF  TIMBER  PER  Cu.  FT.  AND  PER  M  FT.  B.  M. 

Specific  Weight  per                         Weight  per  1,000 

gravity.  cu.  ft.,  Ibs.  ft.  B.  M.,  Ibs. 

1.0  62.40  5,200 

0.9  56.16  4,680 

0.8  49.92  4,160 

0.7  43.68  3,640 

0.6  37.44  3  120 

0.5  31.20  2,600 

0.4  24.96  2,080 

0.3  18.72  1,560 


952  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


sis 

'Q'X'  oo  oo  oj  o>  o  o  ,-H  1-1  cq  IN  eo  eo  •*  •*  10  10  «o  «o  t-  t-  oo  oo  as  «  o 

MN  T-(  tH  ,H  iH  7-1  rH  iH  r-l  TH  T-l  r-l  r-l  iH  r-l  r-l  iH  rH  rH  rH  rH  (M 


•  COOlCOt-rHlrtOMOOiMt-rHSOT-l 
•OiOlOOi-lrHrH(N<MfOeOTfTt<U3 


•  OiiM^oeot-rHioai^ooeot-Nt- 

•  OOOiO5OOOi-HrHrHNNeceOTj<Tf 


•(MiaaxMtoo-^ooiMCDO-faKwooeo 

•OOOOOOCiOiOOOrHrHNCCKNeOeO-* 


PL,          vjjoj 

g  3s 


s  e<>  if)  os  T-I  «c  o  eo  t-  TH  rf  oo  oo  t- 1-1  «e  o  10 


o 


•eocoo5*ciiflO5e<Kr>OMt-rHioaio5ooe<KOi-i 
.«o«e?ot-t-t-ooooo5O5asoo©rHrH<M<Meo 


•  t-oe«3«>CT><M«oa>e<s<oo-*<ooe<i<£>0"'*'ooeot- 

•IfttCHOCCHOt-t-t-OOOOOiOiOiOOrHrHrHiKlN 


.     .     •     .  <M  •«*<  c-  O  CO  <£>  Ol  CO  «O  O  CO  t-  rH  ^f  OO  c<l  «O  rH  IO  Oi  M< 
IK       ...     .  ITS  10  Lf5  «0  «0  <£>  CD  t- t- 00  00  00  Oi  05  Oi  O  O  T-I  rH  rH  (M 

•fl _:_:_;_:_;_: 


§  s 

O        <O        r£       •     •     .t-Oi!MiflOOrH^<t-Occt-0^t-rHlOCieOt-rH(X>0 


..;       •t-OiC<|Tt<C-O( 

oo  G     •  eo  c<o  ^<  -^t  •«*!  i«  i 


t-  1-  oo  oo  oo  as  oi  o  o  o  I 


\ 

N0^  coiflt-oc<iiot-OM«DCT)eqirtoO(Mioaic<icDOTt<ooe<i«30 


t-a  co  tc  e«5  eo  ^  rt<  TIH  TJ<  to  in  10  us  «s  «o  co  t- 1- 1-  oo  oo  ai  os  as  o  o 


5  r-(  CO  U5  00  O  CO  U5  OO  rH  T*  t-  O  CO  «O  O  M  t-  O  -*<  OO  (M  to  O  Tf 
eof°  WSO1<UJlOUS<O«O«>t-t-t-OOOOOOOJO>O  O 


OO  rH  CO  «O  OS  <N  in  OO  T-4  r}<  t-  rH  •*  OO  r-4  IO  O5  CO  t-  i-4 

co  rf  TJ<  Ti-      in  us  in  ?o  «o  «o  t- 1- 1-  oo  oo  oo  a>  os  o 


Sgl      ^^^^^^^^^^!^^ 

MH          00  00  01  05  O  O  rH  iH  CO  M  05  05  •*  -<J<  US  IO  <£>  <£>  t-  t~  OO  OO  <35  O5  O 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  953 

Cost  of  Manufacturing  Lumber. — A  contractor  will  often  find  it 
profitable  to  cut  and  saw  lumber.  A  20-hp.  portable  engine  will  run 
a  small  sawmill,  and  with  a  crew  of  5  men  the  output  will  be  about 
8,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  3-in.  plank  per  day.  If  the  wages  of  the  5  men 
are  $10  a  day,  and  the  rental  of  the  engine  and  saw  is  $10  more 
per  day,  the  cost  of  sawing  is  about  $2.50  per  M.  The  price  of  the 
timber  as  it  stands  before  cutting,  is  called  the  stumpage  price,  and 
this  ranges  from  $1  to  $5  per  M.  The  cost  of  cutting  and  skidding 
hemlock  fogs,  I  have  found  to  be  about  $1  per  M,  half  of  which 
is  for  cutting  and  the  other  half  for  skidding,  wages  being  $1.50  a 
day.  The  total  cost  of  sawed  plank  in  one  case  was  as  follows : 

PerM. 

Stumpage $1.50 

Cutting     0.40 

Skidding    0.60 

Sawing     2.50 

Total   per    M $5.00 

I  have  been  told  by  a  lumberman  in  Washington  that  his  "log- 
ging" cost  him  $5  per  M,  wages  of  laborers  oeing  $3  per  day.  This 
seems  like  a  high  cost.  It  includes  cutting  the  trees  and  dragging 
the  logs  to  an  incline  up  which  they  are  hauled  by  a  hoisting  engine 
to  a  chute,  down  which  they  are  slid  by  gravity  to  tidewater. 

Cost  of  Sawing  and  Planing  Lumber.*— In  connection  with  the 
operation  and  care  of  the  Muscle  Shoals  Canal,  TJ.  S.  Government 
Tennessee  River  Improvement,  a  small  sawmill  was  used  for 
sawing  and  planing  lumber.  This  lumber  was  largely  used  in  build- 
ing and  repairing  boats  and  was  usually  sawed  and  planed  just  as 
needed.  Consequently  the  mill  was  run  very  spasmodically,  some- 
times being  in  operation  all  day,  and  again  only  an  hour  or  so. 
The  men  operating  the  mill  were  used  on  other  work  when  not  em- 
i  ployed  in  the  mill.  The  sawyer  was  paid  $50  per  month  and  helpers 
from  $1.20  to  $1.50  per  day  of  8  hrs. 

During  the  year  1904-5  a  total  of  77,591  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  were 
sawed  at  an  average  cost  of  $2.11  per  M,  and  56,121  ft.  B.  M.  were 
planed  at  an  average  of  $1.38  per  M. 

The  lumber  ranged  in  size  from  8  ft.  to  45  ft.  long  and  from 
j  1-in.  boards  to  sticks  20-in.  x  20-in.  in  cross-section. 

The  planer,  which  would  take  a  stick  as  large  as  6x24  ins.,  was 
worked  by  the  same  operations  as  the  sawmill. 

The  mill  was  run  by  a  55-hp.  Victor  turbine  and  had  a  60-in. 
|  circular  saw. 

Price  of  Yellow  Pine  for  Fourteen  Years.f— The  "American  Lum- 
berman," Aug.  22,  1908,  gives  a  very  complete  table  of  prices  of 
Southern  yellow  pine  lumber  of  different  classes,  from  which  we 
have  selected  the  prices  of  two  classes  only.  These  prices  apply  to 
lumber  delivered  at  points  that  are  reached  by  a  23-ct.  rate  (per 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  29,  1906. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  2,   1908. 


954  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

100  Ibs.)   from  the  mills,  and  include  the   23-ct.  freight  rate.     The 
prices  are  as  follows : 

No.  1  Timbers 

Dimension  4"  x  10"  to 

Year.                                  2"  x  10"  — 16'.  12"  x  12"  — 16'. 

1894    $12.50  $16.25 

1895    12.25  16.25 

1896 .        11.00  15.50 

1897  12.50  16.00 

1898  13.50  17.00 

1899  13.50  17.75 

1900  14.50  19.25 

1901  15.50  20.00 

1902  16.00  20.50 

1903  16.00  20.50 

1904  16.00  21.00 

1905  17.50  23.25 

1906  21.00  28.00 

1907  22.25  28.25 

1908  17.75  25.25 

Life  of  Trestle  and  Bridge  Timbers.* — A  committee  of  the  Ameri- 
can Railway  Bridge  and  Building  Association  reported  in  1908  thai 
the  following  is  the  average  life : 

Caps  of  Trestles:  Years. 

Long  leaf  pine   (av.  of  12  rys.) 10 

Douglas  fir  (av.  of  8  rys.) 10 

White  or  burr  oak  (av.  of  2  rys.) 11 

Stringers: 

Long  leaf  pine  (av.  of  13  rys.) 10 

Douglas  fir   (av.  of  10  rys.) 11 

White   oak    (av.    of    1    ry.) 10 

White  pine  with  iron  cover   (1  ry.) 14 

Ties: 

Long  leaf  pine   (av.  of  10  rys.) 9 

Douglas  fir   (av.  of  4  yrs.) 12 

White  oak  (av.  of  4  rys. ) 10 

Piles: 

White  or  burr  oak    (av.   of   10   rys.) 10 

White  cedar   (av.  of  6  rys.) 17 

Red   cedar    (av.    of   2    rys.) 12 

Treated  pine  (av.  of  2  rys.) 14 

In  1899  a  committee  of  the  same  association  made  a  similar  re- 
port, of  which  the  following  is  an   abstract.     It  is  not  so  reliable 
as  the  report  above  given. 
The  life  of  piles  is  as  follows: 

'        Years. — 

In  water.  On  land. 

Cedar,   white    (Wis.) 20+ 

Cedar   (Wis.)    28  16  to  20 

Chestnut    (New   England) 15  to  20  12  to  18 

Cypress    (111.)    7 

Oak    (New  Eng. )    9  to  20  8  to  14 

Oak,    white     (Middle    States) 8  to  30  8  to  12 

Pine,  yellow    (Miss. ) 10  10 

Pine,   Norway    (Wis.) 7  6 

Spruce    (New    Eng.) 4  to  10  4  to    8 

Spruce,    red     (Colo.) 10  to  15  7  to  10 

Tamarack   (New  Eng.) 18  10  to  12 

Tamarack    (Wis. )     8 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   25,   1908. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  955 

The  life  of  unprotected  bridge  timber,  whether  in  stringers, 
bents,  or  trusses,  is  as  follows : 

Years. 

Pine,  yellow  long  leaf   (New  Eng.) 12  to  20 

Pine,  yellow  long  leaf   (Miss.) 8 

Pine,  yellow  long  leaf   (111.) 8  to  14 

Pine,  yellow  long  leaf    (Colo. ) 10 

Pine,  white    (New  Eng.) 10  to  18 

Pine,    white    (111.) 10  to  14 

Pine,    white    (Minn. ) 10 

Pine,    Colorado    8  to  15 

Pine,   Norway    ( Wis. ) 8  to  10 

Spruce    ( New   Eng. ) 5  to  10     . 

Douglas    fir    (Wyo.) 10  to  16 

Douglas  fir    ( Colo. ) 1 8  to  20 

Oak,    white    ( Ohio) 7  to    8 

Oak,    white    (111.) 14  to  18 

Cypress,    red    (Ala. ) '. 12 

Even  a  casual  study  of  these  figures  shows  that  many  of  them 
are  merely  rough  guesses.  For  example,  why  should  white  oak 
timber  in  Illinois  last  twice  as  long  as  in  Ohio.  The  reports  for 
these  two  states  are  from  different  superintendents,  which  accounts 
for  the  discrepancy. 

The  life  of  timber  truss  bridges  protected  from  the  weather  was 
reported  to  be  20  to  50  years,  several  superintendents  saying  in- 
definitely. 

Consult  the  section  on  Railways  for  life  of  timber,  particularly 
ties. 

Life  of  Treated  and  Untreated  Fence  Posts. — A  committee  of  the 
Am.  Ry.  Engrg.  and  Mn.  of  Way  Assoc.  reported  in  1907  that  the* 
average  life  of  fence  posts  is  as  follows: 

Chestnut  and  oak 9  years 

Locust     10  years 

Catalpa     12  years 

Cedar     15  years 

Bois  d'Arc    Everlasting 

Mr.  B.  E.  Buffum  made  some  experiments  in  Wyoming  with  80 
pitch-pine  fence  posts,  by  treating  them  in  three  different  ways. 
The  posts  were  placed  in  1891  and  in  1907  the  following  conclusions 
were  reached.  The  best  treatment  consisted  in  dipping  the  lower 
2%  ft.  of  post  in  California  (?)  crude  asphaltic  oil  and  then  burn- 
ing off  the  outside  oil.  This  drives  the  hot  oil  into  the  post  and 
chars  the  outside.  After  16  years  these  posts  seemed  good  for  a  life 
of  fully  30  years,  as  they  were  as  sound  as  the  day  they  were 
placed. 

Of  15  untreated  posts  the  life  was  estimated  as  follows: 

Estimated  life, 

Number.  years. 

4  12 

2  14 
4  16 

3  17 
1  18 

1  20+ 

15  Average,  15 


956  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

A  treatment  of  the  lower  2%  ft.  of  the  post  with  tar  was  less 
effective  than  with  crude  oil,  and  it  seemed  to  make  little  differ- 
ence whether  the  tar  was  burned  off  or  not.  Of  ten  posts  thus 
treated  8  appeared  to  be  good  for  a  life  of  20  years  or  more. 

Posts  simply  well  charred  seemed  good-  for  a  life  of  about  20 
years. 

For  cost  of  fences  see  the  sections  on  Railways  and  on  Miscel- 
laneous Costs. 

Life  of  Creosoted  Ties.— In  1880-2,  some  150,000  ties  were  creo- 
soted  with  10  Ibs.  of  oil  per  cu.  ft.  and  put  in  the  tracks  of  the 
Houston  and  Texas  Central  Ry.  In  1907,  there  were  still  11,300  in 
service,  and  Mr.  O.  Chanute  estimated  that  the  average  life  had  been 
19.35  years. 

Cost  of  Treating  Timber,  Cross  References. — The  steadily  advanc- 
ing price  of  timber  has  lead  to  "treating"  timber  with  preserva- 
tives, such  as  creosote  and  zinc  chloride. 

Cedar  may  be  regarded  as  a  timber  containing  a  natural  pre- 
servative— the  oil  of  cedar,  which  is  too  often  "killed"  by  kiln 
drying  to  reduce  the  weight  before  shipment 

In  addition  to  the  data  in  the  following  paces,  consult  that  part 
of  the  section  on  Railways  relating  to  tie  preservation.  See  the 
index  under  "Timber,  Preserving." 

Process  Treatment  of  Timber  and  Approximate  Costs.* — Mr.  G.  B. 
Shipley  is  author  of  the  following: 

*  The  evolution  of  timber  preserving  processes  in  this  country  with- 
in the  last  ten  years  has  developed  many  new  methods  of  treating 
ties,  piling,  timber,  poles,  crossarms,  mine  timbers,  etc.,  and  a  great 
many  antiseptics  or  compounds  are  being  proposed,  but  the  subject 
is  of  such  vital  importance  that  the  leading  organizations  are  back- 
ward about  experimenting.  Consequently  the  processes  actually  em- 
ployed may  be  subdivided  into  only  two  methods  and  these  are  the 
full  cell  and  partial  cell  treatments.  The  full  cell  treatment  consists 
of  impregnating  the  wood  fibres  and  filling  the  cells  with  the  anti- 
septic, whereas  the  partial  cell  treatment  consists  of  impregnating 
the  wood  fibers  only.  These  two  methods  are  sometimes  confused 
with  processes  or  the  manner  in  which  the  treatment  is  performed. 

The  treatment  of  wood  depends  upon  where  the  wood  will  be 
used,  the  climatic  conditions,  the  permissible  cost  of  treatment  and 
the  wood  structure.  If  first-class  wood  is  to  be  used  for  such  work 
as  docks  around  salt  water,  telegraph  poles,  building  foundations 
or  for  railroad  ties,  where  there  is  no  mechanical  wear,  the  full 
cell  method  is  best,  but  if  the  wood  is  soft  and  not  protected  from 
mechanical  wear,  then  the  partial  cell  method  will  be  satisfactory 
for  the  reason  that  with  the  latter  method  the  chemical  life  will 
be  equivalent  to  the  mechanical  life. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  19,  1910. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  957 

The  important  processes  that  are  in  use  in  this  country  and 
which  may  be  classed  under  the  full  cell  method  are  the  burnettiz- 
ing,  Wellhouse,  full  cell  creosote  and  card  processes,  and  those  which 
may  be  classed  under  partial  cell  method  are  the  Reuping,  Lowry 
and  absorption  processes.  These  processes,  with  the  exception  of 
the  absorption  process,  are  manipulated  by  mechanical  contrivances, 
such  as  pressure  pumps,  vacuum  pumps  and  air  compressors  and  can 
be  controlled  to  suit  the  wood  structure,  while  with  the  absorption 
process  the  treatment  is  governed  by  temperature  and  atmospheric 
pressure,  therefore  is  limited  to  certain  woods. 

Burnettlzing  Process. — This  is  often  referred  to  as  the  zinc  chlo- 
ride process  and  consists  of  impregnating  the  wood  fibers  with  a 
solution  containing  %  Ib.  of  dry  zinc  chloride  per  cubic  foot  of  wood 
and  is  operated  as  follows :  The  wood  is  first  air  seasoned  in  the 
open,  or  steamed  in  retorts  to  expel  the  moisture,  then  a  vacuum  is 
produced  and  maintained  until  the  solution  is  introduced  and  the 
wood  is  completely  submerged,  the  pressure  is  then  increased  to 
about  100  Ibs.  or  125  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  by  pumping  in  additional  solu- 
tion until  the  required  penetration  and  impregnation  is  obtained, 
when  the  solution  is  drained  from  the  retort.  The  approximate 
time  required  for  the  process  is : 

Hrs.         Mins. 

Steaming   to    20    Ibs.    pressure 0  30 

Steaming,  20  Ibs.  to  35  Ibs.  pressure 3  30 

Blowing   off    steam 0  15 

Vacuum     0  45 

Solution  to  about  100  Ibs.  pressure 0  45 

Solution  maintained  to  100  Ibs.  pressure 1  15 

Forcing   back   solution 0  15 

Total   cycle    7  15 

If  the  steaming  time  Is  reduced  2  hrs.,  then  the  total  cycle  is  5  hrs. 
15  mins. 

Wellhouse  Process. — This  is  often  referred  to  as  the  zinc  tannin 
process.  It  consists  of  impregnating  the  wood  fibers  with  a  hot 
solution  containing  about  %  Ib.  of  dry  zinc  chloride  plus  %%  of 
glue  or  gelatine  per  cubic  foot  of  wood,  then  following  by  injecting 
a  second  solution  containing  %%  of  tannic  acid.  The  purpose  of 
the  tannin  is  to  solidify  the  first  injection  to  prevent  leaching. 

The  wood  is  first  air  seasoned  in  the  open  or  steamed  in  retorts  to 
expel  the  moisture,  then  a  vacuum  is  produced  and  maintained  until 
the  solution  is  introduced  and  the  wood  is  completely  submerged, 
the  pressure  is  .then  increased  to  about  100  to  125  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 
by  pumping  in  additional  solution  until  the  required  penetration  and 
impregnation  are  obtained,  when  the  solution  is  drained  from  the  re- 
tort and  the  second  movement  takes  place  by  filling  the  retort  with 
a  solution  containing  tannic  acid  and  increasing  the  pressure  by 
pumping  in  additional  solution  at  about  100  or  125  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 
until  the  required  penetration  is  obtained,  when  the  solution  is 
drained  from  the  retort.  The  approximate  time  required  is: 


958  HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

Maximum    Time, 

Hrs.  Mins. 

Steaming  to  20  Ibs.  pressure 0  30 

Steaming,  20  to  35  Ibs.  pressure 30 

Blowing  off  steam 15 

Vacuum    0  45 

Solution  and  glue  to  100  Ibs.  pressure 0  45 

Solution    and     glue     maintained    at     100     Ibs. 

pressure     1 

Forcing  back   solution  and  glue 0  15 

Tannin  introduced  to  100  Ibs.  pressure 0  20 

Tannin  maintained  at   100   Ibs.   pressure 0  50 

Forcing  back  tannin 0  15 

Total  cycle    8  40 

If  steaming  time  is  reduced  2  hrs.,  then  the  total  cycle  equals 
6  hrs.  40  mins. 

Absorption  Process. — This  Is  often  referred  to  as  the  non-pressure 
process  consists  of  submerging  the  wood  in  a  boiling  preserva- 
tive at  a  temperature  of  from  180°  to  230°  F.,  then  following  with 
a  cold  preservative  as  follows:  The  wood  is  first  air  seasoned  in 
the  open  to  reduce  the  moisture,  then  placed  in  either  an  open  or 
closed  receptacle  where  it  is  submerged  in  a  hot  preservative 
which  expels  the  air  and  additional  moisture ;  the  receptacle  is  then 
drained  and  the  wood  submerged  in  a  cold  preservative.  The  first 
movement  opens  the  pores  or  cells  of  the  wood  forming  a  vacuum 
within,  while  the  second  movement  causes  absorption  due  to  the 
difference  in  temperature  and  atmospheric  pressure.  This  process 
can  be  used  in  either  open  tanks  or  closed  retorts.  For  treating  the 
butts  of  poles,  fence  posts,  piling  and  small  quantities  of  ties  the 
open  tank  is  satisfactory,  but  for  treating  large  quantities  of  ma- 
terial the  closed  retort  is  recommended  where  thorough  impreg- 
nation is  desired.  The  time  of  treatment  is  as  follows : 
Green  Timber. 

Boiling  in  hot  preservative  from  8  to  10  hrs. 

Bath  in  cold  preservative  from   8  to  16  hrs. 

Total  time  of  treatment,  16  to  26  hrs. 
Seasoned   Timber. 

Boiling  in  hot  preservative  from   3   to  6  hrs. 

Bath  of  cold  preservative  from  4  to  8  hrs. 

Total  time  of  treatment,  7  to  14  hrs. 

With  this  process  it  is  possible  to  impregnate  a  limited  class  of 
woods  with  about  6  to  12  Ibs.  of  concrete  oil  per  cubic  foot. 

Full  Cell  Creosote  Process. — This  consists  of  impregnating  the 
wood  fibers  and  cells  of  ties  with  6  to  12  Ibs.  of  creosote  oil  per 
cubic  foot  and  timber  and  piling  with  10  Ibs.  to  20  Ibs.  of  creosote  oil 
per  cubic  foot,  as  follows :  The  wood  is  first  seasoned  in  the  open  or 
steamed  in  the  retorts  (generally  both)  to  reduce  the  moisture  and 
expel  the  sap ;  then  a  vacuum  is  produced  and  maintained  until 
the  creosote  oil  is  introduced  and  wood  is  completely  submerged. 
The  pressure  is  then  increased  to  about  100  to  125  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 
and  maintained  until  the  desired  penetration  and  impregnation  is 
secured,  when  the  creosote  oil  is  drained  from  the  tanks.  In  some 
cases  a  vacuum  is  produced  and  maintained  at  the  finish  to  drain 
the  surplus  oil  from  the  exterior  of  wood  to  nrevent  loss  by  drippag*; 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  959 

after  the  wood  has  been  removed  from  retorts.     The  approximate 

time  required  is: 

10-lb.  Treatment. 
Hrs.         Mins. 

Steaming  to   20   Ibs.   pressure 0  30 

Steaming,  20  to  35  Ibs.  pressure 

Blowing    off   steam 0  15 

Vacuum     ' 0 

Creosote  to   100   Ibs.    pressure 1 

Forcing   back    solution 0 

Vacuum    

Total  cycle 7  15 

If  the  steaming  time  is  reduced  2  hrs.,  then  the  total  cycle  equals 
5  hrs.  15  mins. 

Rueping  Process. — This  is  often  referred  to  as  a  partial  cell 
treatment  and  it  is  used  principally  in  connection  with  creosote 
oil.  It  consists  of  forcing  compressed  air  into  the  pores  or  cells 
of  wood  and  at  a  higher  pressure  creosote  oil  without  relieving  the 
air  pressure  and  upon  relieving  the  combined  pressure  the  air 
expands  and  forces  out  the  surplus  oil,  leaving  wood  fibres  im- 
pregnated. The  wood  is  first  air  seasoned  in  the  open  or 
steamed  in  the  retorts  (sometimes  both)  to  reduce  the  moisture; 
with  compressed  air  and  by  air  equalizing  reservoirs  or  pumps 
the  retorts  are  filled  with  oil  without  releasing  the  air  pressure. 
The  oil  pressure  is  thus  started  at  from  80  to  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 
and  gradually  increased  to  about  100  to  150  Ibs.  per  sq.  in., 
having  the  effect  of  compressing  the  air  in  the  cells  to  a  smaller 
volume  and  permitting  about  10  to  12  Ibs.  of  creosote  per  cubic  foot 
to  enter.  The  pressure  is  then  released  and  the  oil  drained  from 
the  retorts ;  then  a  vacuum  is  produced,  which  causes  the  air  within 
the  cells  to  expand  and  forces  the  surplus  oil  out  of  the  wood, 
leaving  the  wood  fibres  impregnated  with  from  4  to  6  Ibs.  of 
creosote  per  cubic  foot.  This  process  is  best  adapted  for  treat- 
ment of  ties.  The  approximate  time  required  using  equalizing 
cylinders  is: 

Hrs.         Mins. 

Air  to   80  Ibs.   pressure 0  30 

Transferring  oil    0  20 

Creosote  to   150   Ibs.   pressure ; 1  30 

Maintaining  150   Ibs.   pressure 0  15 

Forcing  back  oil 0  20 

Vacuum 1  0 

Maintaining    vacuum    0  15 

Draining  > «  10 

Total   cycle    4  20 

This  time  is  based  on  thoroughly  air  seasoned  ties. 
Lowry  Process. — This  is  often  referred  to  as  a  partial  cell  treat- 
ment and  it  is  used  in  connection  with  creosote  oil.  It  consists  of 
forcing  creosote  oil  into  the  wood  cells  and  then  drawing  out  by 
vacuum  the  surplus  oil,  leaving  only  the  wood  fibres  impregnated. 
The  wood  is  first  air  seasoned  in  the  open,  then  placed  in  retorts 
and  submerged  in  creosote.  The  pressure  is  then  applied  by 


960  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

forcing  in  additional  creosote  of  10  to  12  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  at  about 
180  Ibs.  pressure  so  as  to  saturate  the  pores  and  cells,  after  which 
the  retort  is  drained  and  a  quick  vacuum  is  produced  and  main- 
tained from  1%  to  2  hrs.,  leaving  the  wood  fibres  impregnated  with 
from  4  to  6  Ibs.  of  creosote  per  cubic  foot.  This  process  is  used 
principally  in  the  treatment  of  ties.  The  approximate  time  re- 
quired is: 

Ties  thoroughly   seasoned:  Hrs.         Mins. 

Creosote  to  180  Ibs.  pressure 2  00 

Draining    oil   from   retort 0  10 

Vacuum 2  00 

Draining     0  10 

Total  cycles  about 4  20 

Card  Process. — This  process  consists  of  impregnating  the  wood 
cells  with  an  emulsion  consisting  of  zinc  chloride  and  creosote 
oil,  as  follows:  The  wood  is  first  air  seasoned  in  the  open  or 
steamed  in  the  retorts  (generally  both)  to  reduce  the  moisture  and 
expel  the  sap.  Then  a  vacuum  is  produced  and  maintained  for  1 
hr.,  when  the  retort  is  filled  with  the  hot  emulsion  consisting  of  ya 
Ib.  of  dry  zinc  and  from  1%  to  4  Ibs.  of  creosote  per  cubic  foot. 
The  pressure  is  then  applied  by  forcing  in  additional  emulsion  at 
about  100  to  150  Ibs.  pressure  per  square  inch,  after  which  the 
retort  is  drained  and  a  vacuum  produced  and  maintained  for  about 
30  min.  to  draw  the  surplus  emulsion  from  the  exterior  of  the 
wood  to  prevent  loss  by  drippage  when  wood  is  removed  from 
retort. 

It  is  necessary  to  keep  the  emulsion  constantly  agitated  to 
prevent  a  separation  of  the  zinc  and  creosote  and  to  accomplish 
this  a  centrifugal  pump  draws  the  emulsion  from  top  of  retorts 
and  discharges  into  the  bottom  of  the  perforated  pipe. 

This  process  is  used  principally  in  the  treatment  of  ties.  The 
approximate  time  required  is: 

Hrs.         Mins. 

Steaming  to  20  Ibs.  pressure 0  30 

Steaming,   20  to  35  Ibs.  pressure 3  30 

Blowing    off    steam 0  10 

Vacuum    1  00 

Emulsion  to  120  Ibs.  pressure 1  00 

Maintaining  120  Ibs.  pressure 1  30 

Forcing  back  oil 0  15 

Vacuum    0  20 

Draining     0  10 

Total  cycle   about 8  25 

If  the  steaming  time  is  reduced  2  hrs.,  then  the  cycle  equals  6 
hrs.  25  mins.  If  ties  are  thoroughly  seasoned  this  time  can  be 
reduced  to  4  hrs.  25  mins. 

Cost  of  Treatment. — The  prevailing  rates  for  treating  material 
with  these  processes  depend  upon  locality,  structure  of  wood,  con- 
dition of  wood  ;  that  is,  whether  it  has  been  air  seasoned  or  requires 
steaming,  residual  impregnation  and  quality  to  be  treated  ;  however, 
it  is  safe  to  assume  that  the  following  is  an  average  rate  when 
taking  creosote  at  $0.07  per  gal.  and  zinc  chloride  at  $0.04  per  Ib. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  961 

Per  Per 

7  x  9 -in.  x  8-ft     1,000  ft. 

Process.  tie.  B.  M. 

Burnettizing  y2  Ib.  zinc  chloride  per  cu.  ft. $0.17  $4.10 

Wellhouse,    etc 0.23  5.50 

Card 0.26  6.10 

Rueping    0.32  7.60 

Lowry     0.32  7.60 

Absorption     0.33  7.80 

Full    cell    0.47  11.15 

Cost  of  Creosoting  and  Life  of  Creosoted  Timber. — Mr.  O.  T.  Dunn 
gives  the  following  data:  Creosoting  costs  $15  to  $20  per  M. 
Assuming  that  two  6-ft.  cylinders  100  ft.  long  are  used,  the  capacity 
of  each  cylinder  is  16,800  ft.  B.  M.  The  total  plant  will  cost,  say, 
$80,000.  If  the  timbers  are  to  be  impregnated  with  20  Ibs.  of 
creosote  per  cu.  ft.,  it  will  take  about  36  hrs.  for  a  run,  and  the 
annual  capacity  of  the  plant  will  be  nearly  7,000  M.  If  the  interest 
and  depreciation  of  the  plant  is  assumed  at  10%  we  have  $8,000  -~ 
7,000  =  $1.14  per  M.  chargeable  to  this  item.  The  labor  will  cost 
about  $3.75  per  M.  If  the  oil  costs  8  cts.  per  gal.,  and  20  Ibs. 
be  used  per  cu.  ft,  the  cost  of  oil  is  $15.33  per  M.  This  makes 
a  total  of  $20.22  per  M.  If  16  Ibs.  of  oil  per  cu.  ft  are  used,  the 
cost  of  oil  is  $10.26  per  M.,  thus  reducing  the  total  cost  by  $5. 
If  the  plant  is  not  worked  to  its  full  capacity,  the  interest  charge 
per  M.  becomes  greater. 

Treated  with  20  Ibs.  of  oil  per  cu.  ft.,  piles  in  the  bridge  of  the 
L.  &  N.  R.  R.,  over  the  mouths  of  the  Pascagoula  river,  have 
been  in  the  structure  28  years,  and  will  be  good  for  many  years  to 
come.  These  piles  are  subject  to  attacks  of  the  teredo,  where 
uncreosoted  piles  1%  ft.  in  diameter  have  been  cut  off  by  the 
teredo  in  a  single  year. 

Beech  ties  impregnated  with  12  Ibs.  of  oil  per  cu.  ft.  have  lasted 
30  years  on  the  Eastern  Railway  of  France. 

Mr.  Dunn  underestimates  the  "plant  charges,"  for  while  10%  for 
interest  and  depreciation,  may  be  ample,  it  does  not  provide  for 
current  repairs.  No  data  are  available  to  determine  what  repairs 
will  amount  to,  but  I  should  put  the  item  at  less  than  another 
10%  of  the  first  cost  of  the  plant,  excluding  land  and  buildings. 

Cost  of  Creosoting  Ties.— Mr.  W.  H.  Knowlton  gives  the  follow- 
ing relative  to  a  tie  creosoting  plant  at  Shirley,  Ind.  Ties  are 
first  seasoned  8  to  12  mos.,  then  loaded  on  "buggies,"  55  ties  per 
buggy,  running  on  30-in.  gage  track  made  of  52  Ib.  rails.,  and 
hauled  in  trains  of  15  buggies  by  an  electric  motor.  There  are 
200  buggies.  Two  retorts,  7  ft.  diam.  X  130  ft.  long,  receive  these 
trains  of  ties,  hence  each  retort  holds  800  ties.  The  boilers  are 
rated  at  200  hp.  The  following  force  is  required  to  work  one 
shift : 

1  man    at    the    boilers. 

1  headman  in  retort  house. 

3  assistants. 

15   laborers  to  handle  ties. 

1  machinist. 


962  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

When  working  at  full  capacity,  two  shifts  are  run.  The' laborers 
receive  %  ct.  for  each  tie  handled. 

Each  tie  receives  about  2%  gals,  of  oil,  costing  6  cts.  per  gal. 
(in  1906),  and  having  a  specific  gravity  of  1.02  to  1.07,  averaging 
1.05%.  A  chemist  analyzes  all  oil.  The  charge  for  tie  treating  is 
30  cts.  per  tie,  including  loading  and  unloading  ties.  This  plant 
cost  about  $75,000.  Working  only  one  shift  per  day,  and  allowing 

5  hrs.   for  treatment  of  ties,    the  two  retorts  would  handle   3,200 
ties  per  day,   or  about   900,000   per  year.     Mr.   Kn  owl  ton  does  not 
give  the  output  but   states  that  ties  are  left  in  the  retort   3%   to 

6  hrs. 

Cost  of  a  Zinc  Chloride  Treating  Plant.— A  zinc  chloride  tie  treat- 
ing plant  was  built  in  1902  at  Carbondale,  111.,  for  the  Ayer  & 
Lord  Tie  Co.  It  has  8  cylinders  or  retorts,  6  ft.  diam  X  125  ft. 
long,  and  the  plant  capacity  is  2,000,000  ties  per  year,  or  250,000 
per  retort.  Each  cylinder  holds  14  iron  cars,  each  with  30  to  40 
ties,  or  about  500  ties.  The  buildings  are  of  brick.  The  main 
building  is  115  X  123  ft,  the  retort  room  being  90  X  123  ft.  The' 
boiler  house  contains  six  tubular  boilers  6  X  18  ft.  The  total  cost 
of  the  plant  is  said  to  have  been  $175,000,  exclusive  of  yards  and 
tracks.  This  is  equivalent  to  about  $22,000  per  retort,  including 
buildings,  etc.,  or  about  90  cts.  is  invested  in  the  plant  per  tie 
treated  annually.  See  the  section  on  Railways  for  other  data  on 
zinc  chloride  plant  costs. 

Ties  Treated  With  Crude  Asphaltic  Oil.— On  the  A.  T.  &  S.   F. 

Ry.  some  seasoned  pine  ties  were  impregnated  (in  1902)  with 
California  crude  oil  under  a  pressure  of  150  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  Each 
tie  took  up  4  to  8  gals,  of  oil  containing  77%%  of  asphaltum. 
After  5  years  of  service  they  were  in  first  class  condition,  although 
untreated  ties  in  the  same  locality  (Southeastern  Texas)  lasted 
only  2  to  4  years  on  account  of  the  heat  and  moisture. 

General  Data  on  the  Cost  of  Framing  and  Erecting  Timber. — A 
study  of  the  data  given  in  the  subsequent  pages  of  this  section  and 
in  the  sections  on  Buildings  and  on  Railways  will  show  that  it 
seldom  needs  cost  more  than  $10  per  M.  to  frame  and  erect  almost 
any  kind  of  a  timber  structure.  In  fact  $10  per  M.  is  generally 
used  by  many  contractors  as  a  basis  for  a  rough  estimate  of  the 
labor  cost  of  any  timber  work.  Nevertheless,  it  should  not  be 
hastily  assumed  that  labor  on  timberwork  does  not  vary  con- 
siderably in  cost,  depending  on  the  character  of  the  work.  While 
it  will  rarely  exceed  $10  per  M.  under  good  management,  it  may 
often  be  done  for  as  little  as  $1,  and  I  have,  in  fact,  had  men 
lay  plank  roads  for  50  cts.  per  M.  These  very  low  costs  are 
obviously  obtained  only  where  there  is  no  framing,  measuring, 
or  sawing,  but  simply  handling  and  spiking  the  timber.  Even  in 
such  simple  cases,  a  little  poor  management  may  run  the  cost  up 
to  $2  or  $3  per  M. 

I  have  made  no  mention  of  the  rate  of  wages,  for  the  cost  per 
M.  has  been  almost  independent  of  rates  of  carpenters'  wages. 
This  seems  incredible,  but  I  find  it  to  have  been  so,  as  a  general 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  963 

rule.  Railway  companies  in  America  have  long  paid  about  $2.50 
per  10  hr.  day  to  carpenters  in  shops  and  on  bridge  and  building 
work.  Contractors  doing  similar  work  often  pay  carpenters  $3.00 
to  even  $3.50  per  8  hr.  day,  and  get  the  work  done  at  less  cost 
per  M.  than  do  the  railway  companies.  The  reason  is  not  far  to 
seek.  By  a  process  of  natural  selection  the  hard  working,  ambitious 
carpenters  are  soon  found  where  higher  wages  prevail,  and  their 
hard  work  justifies  the  higher  wage.  It  is  the  old  story.  Of 
course,  it  is  also  a  fact  that  the  average  contractor  is  a  much 
better  manager  than  the  average  railway  superintendent.  That  is 
why  the  one  is  a  contractor  and  the  other  is  a  superintendent. 
This  is  not  true  of  all  individuals,  but  it  is  true  of  the  classes  taken 
as  classes.  The  workman  is  usually  worthy  of  his  hire. 

It  does  not  follow,  however,  that  labor  unions  may  not  force  up 
wages  without  likewise  forcing  up  the  output  of  the  workmen. 
This  unfortunate  condition — unfortunate,  because  it  is  against 
the  best  ultimate  interests  of  the  workmen  themselves — exists  in 
many  cities. 

Nor  does  it  follow  that  it  is  not  good  economics  to  use  common 
laborers  as  much  as  possible  in  heavy  timber  work.  The  usual 
mistake  in  management  of  timberwork  is  to  let  high  priced  car- 
penters do  loading,  carrying,  cross-cut  sawing,  etc.,  which  can  be 
done  just  as  well  by  common  laborers. 

Cost  of  Loading  and  Hauling  Timber. — One  man,  assisted  by  the 
driver  of  a  team,  will  load  1  M.  of  2-in.  plank  onto  a  wagon  in 
about  16  mins.  These  same  two  men  will  unload  in  12  mins.  With 
wages  at  15  cts.  per  hr.  per  man,  the  cost  of  loading  is  8  cts.  per 
M.,  and  unloading  is  6  cts.  per  M.  On  short  hauls,  where  the  team 
is  idle  during  the  loading  and  unloading,  it  is  necessary  to  add  7 
cts.  more  per  M.  for  lost  team  time,  if  the  two  horses  are  worth 
15  cts.  per  hr.  This  makes  a  total  of  21  cts.  per  M.  for  loading 
and  unloading  a  wagon,  including  lost  team  time.  Green  timber 
weighs  from  3  Ibs.  to  5  Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M.,  depending  upon  the 
kind.  Assuming  4  Ibs.,  as  an  average  illustration,  we  see  that  1  M. 
weighs  2  tons,  which  is  a  good  load  for  hard  earth  roads  in  first- 
class  condition.  If  the  wages  of  a  team  and  driver  are  30  cts. 
per  hr.,  and  the  load  is  1  M.,  and  the  speed  going  and  coming  is 
2%  miles  per  hr.,  the  cost  of  hauling  is  nearly  25  cts.  per  M. 
t>er  mile  measured  one  way  from  loading  point  to  unloading  point. 
On  muddy  earth  roads,  1  ton,  or  y2  M.  is  often  a  good  load ;  then 
the  cost  of  hauling  is  nearly  50  cts.  per  M.  per  mile.  I  have  known 
earth  roads  to  be  so  bad  that  hauling  cost  75  cts.  per  M.  per  mile. 
Consult  the  index  under  "Hauling"  for  further  data. 

The  cost  of  unloading  timber  from  wagons  can  be  entirely 
eliminated  by  having  a  roller  3  ft.  long  (or  two  18  ins.  long)  at 
the  rear  end  of  the  wagon  box,  and  by  tilting  the  wagon  box 
up  so  that  its  front  end  is,  say,  2  ft.  higher  than  the  rear  end. 
The  roller  is  provided  with  a  ratchet  wheel  and  a  dog.  Where 
the  dog  is  tripped  the  timber  rolls  out  of  the  wagon  by  gravity, 
if  long  sticks  are  on  the  wagon.  If  sticks  are  short,  other  rollers 


964  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

must  be  placed  in  the  bottom  of  the  wagon  box.  All  rollers  are 
mounted  in  bearings,  of  course. 

Sawing,  Boring  and  Adzing.— In  heavy  timberwork  the  cost  of 
framing  consists  mainly  in  sawing,  boring  and  adzing  the  sticks. 
Where  a  large  number  of  sticks  are  to  be  sawed  to  the  same 
length  it  generally  pays  to  install  a  small  power  saw ;  but  on 
jobs  of  moderate  size  the  customary  practice  is  to  frame  the 
timbers  with  a  cross-cut  saw  operated  by  two  men.  Using  a  sharp 
saw  and  working  rapidly  two  men  can  cross-cut  a  12  X  12-in.  oak 
stick  in  3  mins.,  but  it  is  generally  safer  to  allow  5  mins.  to 
cover  delays. 

When  a  timber  is  to  be  notched,  or  scarfed,  a  cross-cut  saw  is 
used  to  cut  to  the  bottom  of  the  scarf,  then  a  hatchet  or  adz  is 
used  to  cut  away  the  wood  roughly,  and  an  adz  is  used  to  dress 
the  face.  I  have  seen  poor  foremen  permit  workmen  to  use 
chisels  instead  of  adzes,  thus  "making  the  job  last." 

A  "dap"  is  a  shallow  notch  cut  in  a  stick. 

Mortise  and  tenon  joints  are  no  longer  used  by  those  who  know 
how  to  design  economic  and  durable  timber  structures.  Dowel 
pins  and  drift-bolts  have  largely  replaced  the  old  mortise  and 
tenon. 

In  boring  holes  for  bolts,  there  are  three  methods  commonly  used : 
( 1 )  Boring  by  hand  with  ship  augers  ;  ( 2 )  boring  vertical  or  in- 
clined holes  of  moderate  depth  with  hand-power  boring  machines  ; 
and  (3)  boring  with  augers  operated  by  compressed  air. 

A  man  with  a  ship  auger  will  bore  a  1%-in.  hole  in  oak,  12  ins. 
deep  in  5  mins,  or  at  the  rate  of  120  ft.  in  10  hrs. 

Using  a  geared  boring  machine,  a  man  will  bore  a  1-in.  hole 
12  ins.  deep  in  2  mins.,  by  hand,  or  at  the  rate  of  300  ft.  in  10  hrs. 

With  a  pneumatic  auger  a  man  will  bore  a  1-in.  hole  3^  ft. 
deep,  in  yellow  pine  chord  members  of  a  trestle,  in  5  mins.  of 
actual  boring  time,  but  2  mins.  more  must  be  added  for  cleaning 
the  shavings  out  of  the  hole,  and  moving  to  the  next  hole,  making 
7  mins.  in  all  for  3y2  ft.,  or  2  mins.  per  ft.,  or  at  the  rate  of  300 
ft.  in  10  hrs. 

This  is  the  most  economic  method  of  boring  where  much  work  is 
to  be  done.  For  cost  of  operating  pneumatic  machines,  see  index 
under  Pneumatic  Machines. 

Mr.  W.  E.  Smith  states  that  in  building  an  ore  dock  three 
pneumatic  boring  machines  were  used.  The  air  was  supplied  by 
two  9-in.  Westinghouse  locomotive  air  pumps,  through  1,200  ft.  of 
iy2-in.  pipe  in  one  direction  of  the  dock  and  through  1,000  ft.  of 
1^-in.  pipe  in  another  direction  to  the  framing,  yard.  For  air 
receivers  there  were  one  locomotive  air  reservoir  on  the  dock  and 
one  in  the  framing  yard.  The  air  pumps  had  to  work  so  fast  to 
supply  air  that  a  stream  of  water  had  to  be  kept  running  over 
their  valves  to  keep  them  cool.  It  would  require  a  20  hp.  boiler  to 
supply  steam  for  one  of  the  air  pumps  working  at  such  a  speed. 
While  these  air  pumps  use  a  good  deal  of  steam,  they  are  very 
convenient,  for  they  are  light,  easily  moved  and  can  be  bolted  up 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TltyBERWORK.  965 

anywhere  to  a  wall  or  post.  The  pneumatic  borers  were  run  with 
a  pressure  of  60  to  90  Ibs.,  and  gave  great  satisfaction. 

In  the  following  paragraphs  will  be  found  a  statement  that  in 
boring  by  hand,  each  man  averaged  80  ft.  of  hole  per  day  bored 
through  trestle  stringers,  presumably  %  or  1-in.  holes,  averaging 
less  than  8  ins.  deep. 

For  cost  of  boring  deep  holes  lengthwise  in  oak  piles,  see  the 
index  under  "Timber  Boring." 

In  boring  %-in.  holes  with  a  ship  auger  through  12-in.  Douglas 
fir,  a  man  will  ordinarily  take  3  mins.,  which  is  at  the  rate  of 
200  ft.  in  10  hrs. 

Transporting  Timber  Short  Distances. — Never  allow  carpenters 
to  handle  any  considerable  amount  of  timber.  Provide  common 
laborers  for  loading,  carrying,  etc.  Rarely  should  men  carry 
timbers  on  their  shoulders  or  with  lug  hooks.  Instead,  lay  run 
plank  over  which  the  timber  can  be  pushed  on  a  dolly,  which  is  a 
little  roller  provided  with  a  frame  on  which  the  timber  is  balanced. 
Often  two  dollies  are  used,  one  at  each  end  of  the  timber.  Even 


W/y 


Fig.  1.— Dolly  with  Handle. 

if  the   timber  is  light  boards,   do  not  permit  carrying,  but  require 
the  boards  to  be  stacked  up  on  dollies. 

I  have  found  it  advantageous  to  provide  each  dolly  with  a 
handle,  as  shown  in  Fig.  1.  Then  one  man  walks  ahead  pulling  thft 
front  dolly  by  its  handle,  while  another  man  follows  at  the  rear 
pushing  the  handle  of  the  rear  dolly.  The  men  walk  tandem  along 
the  run  plank  until  the  place  of  delivery  is  reached ;  then,  if  it 
is  a  wooden  bridge  floor,  they  swing  the  rear  end  of  the  stick, 
around  (still  on  the  dolly)  and  dump  the  plank  right  where  it  is 
needed  by  the  carpenters.  In  loading  such  plank  onto  dollies,  each 
man  uses  a  lug  hook.  A  4  X  12  in.  X  20  ft.  plank  weighed  250  Ibs. 
Two  men  loaded,  hauled,  a  distance  of  60  ft.,  and  delivered  one 
plank  every  1%  mins.,  or  at  the  rate  of  more  than  30  M.  per  10  hr. 
day,  or  about  45  "tons  of  lumber  were  loaded  and  transported  60  ft. 
by  two  men.  A  heavier  load  could  readily  have  been  handled  on 
the  dollies,  but  one  plank  at  a  time  was  more  economic,  since  the 
carpenters  were  thus  relieved  of  all  work  except  spiking.  In  that 
connection  I  may  add  that  each  plank  was  pinched  up  tight  against 
the  last  plank  in  the  floor  by  a  man  using  a  peavey.  Another  man 
started  each  spike  with  an  ordinary  hammer,  and  two  men  drove  the 
spikes  with  spike  mauls. 


966  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Formulas  for  Quantity  of  Materials  in  Trestles. — I  have  deduced 
the  following  formulas  from  bills  of  materials  of  standard  trestles 
on  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry. 

High  frame  trestles  are  built  in  stories  25  ft.  high.  The  follow- 
ing formulas  give  the  amount  of  timber  in  a  single-track  frame 
trestle  of  any  given  height  up  to  125  ft. 

(1)  M  =  L  (220  +  6.ff)  for  trestles  up  to  25  ft.  high. 

(2)  M  =  L  (240  +  8tf)   for  trestles  25  to  50  ft.  high. 

(3)  M  =  L  (240  +  9#)  for  trestles  50  to  75  ft.  high. 

(4)  M  =  L  (240  +  10S")  for  trestles  75  to  125  ft.  high. 
M  —  total  ft.  B.  M. 

L  =  length  of  trestle  in  feet. 

JET  =  height  from  ground  to  4  ft.  below  base  of  rail. 
There  are  164  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  timber  deck  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge, 
but  the  above  formulas  include  this  deck  timber. 

There  are  70  Iba.  of  wrought  iron  and  30  Ibs.  of  cast  iron  per 
1,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  deck  and  half  that  amount  per  M.  of  bents. 
Hence 

(5)  W  =  L   (20  +  0.4H)   for  trestles  up  to  75  ft.  high. 

W  =  weight  of  iron  in  pounds,  70%  of  which  is  wrought  and 

30%  cast  iron. 

For  closely  approximate  estimates  determine  the  profile  area 
of  an  opening  that  is  to  be  trestled,  calculating  the  area  (A)  from 
the  ground  up  to  a  line  4  ft.  below  the  rail.  Divide  this  area 
(A)  by  the  length  (L)  of  the  trestle,  and  the  quotient  is  the 
average  height  (H).  If  it  is  desired  to  estimate  quantities  by 
profile  area  (A)  direct,  simply  substitute  for  H  in  the  above 

A 
equations  its  value  — . 

L 
Equation   (1)   then  becomes 

(6)  M  =  220  L  +  6A. 

This  has  the  same  general  form  as  my  "formula  for  the  weight 
of  steel  in  viaducts,  which  is  given  in  the  section  on  Bridges. 

For  pile  trestles,  four  piles  per  bent  (bents  16  ft.  c  to  c)  and 
assumed  penetration  and  cut  off  of  pile  amounting  to  20  ft.,  we  have 
H+  20 

(7)  P  = XL. 

(8)  M  =  185  L  for  heights  up  to  15  ft. 

(9)  M  =  200  L  for  heights  of  15  to  25  ft. 
(10)    W  =  16  L. 

P  =  number  of  lin.  ft.  of  piles. 

H  =  height  of  trestle  in  feet  from  ground  to  4  ft.  below  rail. 

L  —  length  of  trestle  in  feet. 

M  =  ft.  B.  M. 

W  =  weight  of  iron  in  pounds,    40%  of  which  is  wrought, 

30%  cast,  and  30%  galvanized. 

The  above  formulas  (1)  to  (4)  for  frame  trestles  are  sufficiently 
accurate  for  all  but  very  short  trestles,  but  they  give  an  excess 
of  timber  equivalent  to  the  amount  in  one  bent. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  %' 

The  formulas  for  pile  trestles,  however,  provides  for  one  bent 
fewer  than  is  usually  driven,  for  it  is  customary  to  drive  an  extra 
bent  at  each  end  to  act  as  a  bulkhead,  and  about  10  planks 
(4  X  12  ins.  X  12  ft.)  are  placed  as  a  sheeting  back  of  each  of 
these  pile  bulkheads,  to  hold  back  the  earth  fill.  Hence  one  bent 
of  4  piles  and  about  500  ft.  B.  M.  of  bulkhead  timber  should  be 
added  to  the  quantities  given  by  equations  (7)  and  (8)  for  pile 
trestles,  to  be  exact. 

In  the  section  on  Bridges,  it  will  be  found  that  the  average 
height  of  trestles  on  the  Great  Northern  and  on  the  Northern 
Pacific  Rys.  in  Washington  was  a  little  less  than  20  ft.  In  which 
case  H  =  16,  and  eq.  (1)  gives  us 

M  =  (220  +  96)  =  316  ft.  B.  M.  per  lin.  ft. 

W  =   (20  +  6.4)   ^  26.4  Ibs.  iron. 

Hence  at  $30  per  M.  for  timber  in  place  and  4  cts.  per  Ib.  for 
iron  in  place,  the  cost  is  $10.55  per  lin.  ft.  of  trestle. 

The  following  is  the  bill  of  lumber  in  a  Northern  Pacific  pile 
trestle  per  16  ft.  length. 

Ft.  B.  M. 

6  stringers,     9  x  18-in.  x  16-ft 1,296 

3  packing   blocks,    4  x  18-in.  x  6-ft 108 

1  spacing  block,    4  x  6-in.  x  6-ft 12   . 

14  cross    ties,     8  x  8-in.  x  12-ft 896 

2  guard  rails,  5  x  8-in.  x  16-ft 107 

1  cap,     12  x  16-in.  x  14-ft 224 

2  lateral  braces,    6  x  8-in.  x  18-ft 144 

1  cleat,     2  x  8-in.  x  10-ft 14 

2  sway   braces,    3  x  10-in.  x  20-f t 100 

Total     2,901 

This  is  practically  the  constant  for  heights  (H)  up  to  15  ft,  and 
is  equivalent  to  185  ft.  B.  M.  per  lin.  ft.  But  above  that  height  is 
customary  to  put  a  horizontal  brace  midway  between  the  cap  and 
the  ground,  and  use  four  diagonal  sway  braces  instead  of  two. 

Methods  and  Cost  of  Building  a  Railway  Trestle. — A  trestle  on 
the  Indiana,  Illinois  &  Iowa  R.  R.,  near  Streator,  111.,  was  destroyed 
by  a  tornado  in  July,  1903.  The  right-of-way  was  quickly  cleared 
by  a  large  gang  of  trackmen  and  a  new  trestle  built,  using  about 
half  of  the  old  timber,  all  of  which  had  to  be  framed  over  again  as 
the  bents  were  made  of  different  heights.  The  new  trestle  was 
854  ft.  long,  consisting  of  60  bents  spaced  14  ft.  center  to  center. 
Of  these  bents  43  were  double-deck  bents,  the  upper  bents  being 
20%  ft.  high,  and  the  lower  bents  averaging  21  ft.  The  remaining 
bents  were  single-deck.  The  force  averaged  70  bridgemen  (car- 
penters), and  190  trackmen  (laborers),  and  a  few  teams.  This 
force  cleared  away  the  wreckage,  and  built  the  new  trestle  com- 
plete in  7  days,  not  including  1%  days  spent  in  getting  men  to 
the  site  of  the  work.  There  were  351,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  new 
trestle,  including  ties,  and  the  cost  of  clearing  the  site  and  building 
the  trestle  was  $11.85  per  M.  for  labor  of  bridgemen,  trackmen  and 
a  few  teams.  The  wages  were  probably  about  $1.50  per  10-hr,  day 
for  trackmen,  and  $2.50  for  bridgemen.  The  new  timber  cost  $27 
per  M. 


968  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  mortise  and  tenon  is  "a  back  number"  on  railway  trestle 
work,  so  the  principal  tools  used  were  the  two-man  cross-cut  saw, 
the  adz,  and  the  ship  auger.  The  sills  were  dapped  %-in.,  and 
the  ends  of  the  posts  were  framed  to  11%  ins.  square,  ensuring  a 
perfect  joint. 

The  posts  were  sawed  off  square,  dapped  into  the  cap  and  drift- 
bolted,  toenailed  to  the  sill  with  eight  %-in.  X  10-in.  boatspikes  in 
each  post. 

A  peg  was  driven  and  numbered  to  mark  the  center  of  each  bent, 
and  small  stakes  were  set  on  each  side  to  mark  the  location  of  the 
plumb  legs  and  batter  posts.  The  ground  was  then  dug  to  a  level 
surface  around  each  of  the  four  pegs,  but  no  particular  care  was 
taken  to  dig  the  ground  to  the  same  level  at  all  four  pegs.  Dif- 
ferences in  level  were  made  up  by  using  blocks  for  cribbing  under 
the  sills.  These  blocks  were  leveled  on  top  by  digging  earth  out 
from  under  them  where  necessary,  which  did  away  with  adzing  or 
shimming  the  sill.  The  blocks  under  each  bent  consisted  of  eight 
pieces  4  ft.  long,  two  blocks  under  each  post,  giving  a  ground  bear- 
ing of  about  45  sq.  ft.  per  bent. 

When  a  foundation  of  blocking  and  the  lower  sill  were  in  place, 
the  posts  and  cap  for  a  bent  were  dragged  by  teams  to  the  site  of 
the  bent  and  rolled  over  into  position  just  ahead  of  the  foundation. 
The'  sill  was  rolled  over  on  its  side ;  the  plumb  posts  were  butted 
against  the  dapped  places  and  toenailed,  being  centered  from  the 
grading  pegs.  The  batter  posts  were  laid  near  their  proper  places 
(but  not  toenailed),  and  the  cap  was  drift  bolted  to  all  four  posts, 
holes  having  already  been  bored  in  the  cap.  The  cap  and  sill  were 
held  tight  to  the  plumb  post  with  chains  and  with  "right  and  left 
screw-pulling  jacks."  Then  the  batter  posts  were  crowded  in  at 
the  bottom  and  toenailed  to  the  sill.  The  bent  being  assembled, 
one  sash  brace  and  two  sway  braces  were  spiked  across  the  upper 
face  of  the  bent  as  it  lay  blocked  up  a  few  feet  above  the  ground. 
Four  %-in.  X  8-in.  boat  spikes  were  used  at  each  intersection. 
The  bent  was  then  ready  to  be  raised.  A  set  of  double  tackle  blocks 
was  made  fast  at  each  end  of  the  cap  and  anchored  to  the  cap  of 
the  preceding  bent  which  had  already  been  erected  and  securely 
braced.  The  pulling  ropes  ran  through  snatch  blocks  fastened  to 
the  sill  of  this  preceding  bent,  and  a  team  was  hitched  to  each 
of  the  two  pulling  ropes.  The  team  up-ended  the  bent  easily. 
A  subbing  rope  around  the  cap,  and  anchored  to  any  convenient 
anchorage,  prevented  the  bent  from  going  too  far  and  tipping  over. 
And  two  temporary  struts  from  the  sill  of  the  preceding  bent  to  the 
sill  of  the  bent  that  was  being  raised,  prevented  the  bent  from 
sliding  while  being  raised.  When  erected,  the  bent  was  pinched 
over  so  as  to  be  centered  on  the  alinement  stake ;  then  plumbed  and 
tied  to  the  preceding  bent  with  sash  braces  and  sway  braces.  The 
bents  were  plumbed  by  eye,  or  by  lining  the  posts  up  with  a  plumb 
line  string  held  at  arm's  length.  It  was  necessary  to  plumb  the 
bent  from  both  sides.  A  small  gang  followed  the  erectors,  putting 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  969 

on  the  remaining  sash  braces,  sway  braces,  tower  braces  and 
A-braces. 

Teams  were  used  for  hoisting  the  framed  timbers  for  the  top 
series  of  bents,  from  the  ground  to  the  top  of  the  lower  series  of 
bents,  where  they  were  assembled  and  erected  practically  as  above 
described.  To  hoist  the  timbers  for  the  top  series  of  bents,  a  gin- 
pole  was  erected.  The  gin-pole  was  40  ft.  high,  and  consisted  of  two 
3  X  12-in.  pieces,  28  ft.  long,  with  another  piece  spiked  between 
them  so  as  to  give  a  total  length  of  40  ft.  This  gin-pole  was 
securely  chained  to  one  of  the  lower  bents.  At  first  a  series 
of  snatch  blocks  was  used  in  hoisting  the  timbers,  but  this  proved 
too  severe  on  the  teams  and  double  blocks  were  used  to  multiply  the 
power. 

The  8  X  i6-in.  .stringers  were  run  out  on  the  trestle  on  dollies 
pushed  along  run  planks.  They  required  but  little  framing.  The 
ends  were  cut  off  so  that  the  joint  came  over  the  middle  of  the  cap, 
and  the  end  of  any  stringer  more  than  15%  ins.  deep  was  adzed 
off  to  that  size,  to  give  an  even  bearing  for  the  ties.  The  stringers 
were  then  turned  over  flatwise,  and  piled  three  deep  (breaking 
joint)  and  bored.  Then  they  were  lifted  apart  and  2-in.  cast  iron 
packing  washers  slipped  in  between,  and  the  bolts  were  entered  and 
tightened.  Sections  of  stringers  200  to  300  ft.  long  were  bolted 
together,  and  then  turned  over  into  position.  To  turn  a  section 
over,  a  stout  lever,  10  ft.  long,  was  chained  to  one  end  of  the 
section.  A  set  of  double  blocks  and  tackle  fastened  to  the  end  of 
this  lever  quickly  turned  the  section  over. 

In  boring  the  holes  through  the  stringers  each  man  averaged 
80  ft.  of  holes  bored  per  day,  that  is  40  holes  2  ft.  long. 

The  ties  were  hoisted  from  the  ground  by  teams,  using  gin-poles. 

The  foregoing  description  has  been  prepared  from  data  given  by 
Mr.  W.  R.  Sanborn. 

Cost  of  a  Timber  Viaduct. — Mr.  S.  D.  Mason  gives  the  following 
data  relating  to  a  high  timber  viaduct  on  the  N.  P.  R.  R.  in  the 
Rocky  Mts.,  near  Missoula.  The  viaduct  contained  970  M.  of  Nor- 
way pine,  75%  of  which  was  sawed  by  contract  and  the  rest  hewed. 
The  saw  mill  was  put  up  near  the  work  and  all  the  timber  was 
framed  at  the  mill.  The  viaduct  was  866  ft.  long,  and  227  ft. 
high  for  a  distance  of  about  150  ft.  at  the  center.  It  consisted  of 
8  timber  towers  supporting  7  Howe  truss  spans  of  50  ft.  each.  On 
each  side  of  these  were  M  bents  supporting  straining  beams  of  30 
ft.  span  each.  The  timbers  were  erected  by  2  to  4  gangs  of  16 
men  each,  a  stick  at  a  time.  The  heaviest  stick  weighed  1,700  Ibs. 
Both  hors«?  and  steam  power  were  used  for  hoisting.  The  chords 
of  the  Howe  trusses  consisted  of  two  6  X  12's  and  one  8  X  12. 
They  were  placed  and  the  diagonal  braces  put  in,  beginning  at  the 
center,  the  chords  being  temporarily  held  by  struts  and  guy  Jines. 
It  was  found  impracticable  to  raise  the  trusses  bodily.  Fir  angle 
blocks  were  used,  but  their  subsequent  shrinkage  led  finally  to 
the  building  of  new  Howe  trusses.  Work  was  begun  Jan.  1,  1882, 
and  completed  in  171  days.  Laborers  and  carpenters  received 


970  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

exceedingly  high  wages,  $6  to  $7.50  a  day,  which  accounts  for  the 
high  cost  of  $37  per  M.  for  framing  and  erecting.  At  ordinary 
wages  the  labor  would  have  cost  about  $12  per  M.  The  erecting 
gangs  struck  for  $10  a  day  when  within  30  ft.  of  the  top,  and 
their  wages  were  raised,  but  it  is  not  stated  how  much.  The  fol- 
lowing was  the  cost  of  the  viaduct: 

869  M.,  at  $27 .$23,463 

101  M.,  at  $16 1,616 

87,120  Ibs.  wrought  iron,  at  5%  cts 5,010 

29,940  Ibs.  cast  iron,  at  3%  cts 973 

117,060  Ibs.  hauled  80  miles,  at  2%  cts 3,220 

Wages  of  carpenters  and  laborers 36,336 

Salaries  of  engineers 3,137 

Traveling,  office  and  sundry  expenses 1,007 

Supplies  for   men 2,860 

Blocks,   ropes,  chains  and  wrenches 1,300 

40  horses,  90  days,  at  $1 3,600 

Hay  and  oats  for  same 2,700 

Rent  of  land  and  land  damages 400 

Total,  at  $88.27  per  M $85,622 

Cost  of  Building  a  Pile  and  Timber  Approach  to  a  Bridge.— Mr.  B. 
L.  Crosby  gives  the  following  cost  data  on  the  building  of  a  timber 
trestle  approach,  2,960  ft.  long,  to  a  double  track  bridge  across  the 
Missouri  River,  in  1893.  The  trestle  was  built  by  company  men. 
In  the  trestle  there  were  1,438  M  of  yellow  pine,  35,220  ft.  of  piles, 
and  97,552  Ibs.  of  iron  (70  Ibs.  per  M  of  timber).  The  cost  of  un- 
loading, handling  and  driving  piles,  including  all  material  and  labor 
(except  the  cost  of  the  piles  themselves)  was  13.7  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 
The  cost  of  unloading,  framing  and  erecting  timber,  was  $7.42  per  M. 

Cost  of  Building  a  Trestle  and  a  Howe  Truss  Bridge  Umder 
Traffic. — An  old  railway  trestle  was  rebuilt  under  a  traffic  averaging 
one  train  per  hour.  The  trestle  was  300  ft.  long  and  50  ft.  high  at 
the  center.  The  labor  of  rebuilding  this  trestle  cost  $9.90  per  M, 
including  taking  down  and  piling  up  the  old  trestle  timbers.  There 
were  5  men  and  a  working  foreman  in  the  gang;  2  men  at  $2  a  day 
each,  3  men  at  $1.75,  and  1  foreman  at  $60  a  month. 

This  same  gang  built  a  Howe  truss  railway  bridge  under  traffic 
at  a  cost  ot  $28  per  M  for  labor.  The  cost  of  framing  and  placing 
30  M  of  oak  ties  and  guard  rails  on  three  bridges  was  $12  per  M, 
which  was  a  very  high  cost.  For  comparative  data  see  the  section 
on  Bridges. 

Cost  of  Wagon  Road  Trestles.— My  records  show  the  following 
costs  of  building  a  dozen  or  more  trestles  in  the  state  of  Washington. 
The  trestles  were  for  highway  use,  and  had  a  3-in.  plank  floor,  16  ft. 
wide,  resting  on  7  lines  of  4  x  14-in.  stringers.  Bents  were  spaced 
20  ft.  apart,  three  10  x  10-in.  posts  to  a  bent  dapped  into  and  dow- 
eled to  caps  and  sills.  Sills  were  of  hewed  cedar  10  x  15  ins.  Caps 
were  10  x  12  ins.  x  18  ft.  Sway  braces  were  of  3  x  6-in.  stuff  spiked 
to  the  posts  and  sill.  The  supports  for  the  hand  rail  consisted  of 
4x4-in.  posts,  4y2  ft.  long,  spaced  10  ft.  apart  and  bolted  to  the 
outer  stringers  which  in  turn  were  drift  bolted  to  the  caps.  The 
top  or  hand  rail  was  of  3  x  4-in.  stuff,  and  the  hub  rail  was  2x8  ins. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  971 

There  was  no  mortise  and  tenon  work,  and  the  framing  was  of  the 
simplest  type.  The  bents  were  framed  flat  on  the  ground  and  up- 
ended to  place  by  using  blocks  and  tackle  operated  by  hand  power. 
The  flooring  and  stringers  were  conveyed  to  place  by  dollies.  The 
work  was  done  by  subcontractors  with  few  carpenters,  and  in  all 
cases  was  handled  with  excellent  judgment  and  with  rapidity. 

To  frame  and  erect  a  trestle  60  ft.  long,  consisting  of  two  bents 
and  two  bank  sills,  required  4  men  only  1  %  days.  This  trestle 
contained  7  M,  of  which  5  M  were  in  the  floor  system  (floor  and 
stringers).  Three  of  the  gang  were  laborers,  at  $1.50,  and  one  was 
a  carpenter,  at  $2.50,  making  the  daily  wages  $7  for  the  gang,  so 
that  the  cost  of  building  this  trestle  was  only  $1.50  per  M.  This 
cost  was  distributed  as  follows:  $4  per  M  for  framing  and  erect- 
ing the  bents  and  the  hand  railing;  50  cts.  per  M  for  laying  the 
stringers  and  the  floor  plank.  This  laying  of  stringers  and  plank, 
where  there  is  nothing  to  do  but  to  deliver  them  on  dollies,  toenail 
the  stringers  to  the  caps,  and  spike  the  floor  plank  to  the  stringers, 
can  be  done  very  cheaply  by  common  laborers  skilled  enough  to 
drive  nails. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  notch  the  stringers  in  order  to  secure  align- 
ment of  the  tops  of  the  stringers  for  the  plank  'floor,  because  in 
such  timberwork  perfection  of  alignment  causes  a  needless  waste 
of  labor. 

A  gang  of  3  laborers,  on  another  trestle,  laid  a  floor  system  con- 
taining 15  M  of  plank  and  stringers  in  ll/2  days,  at  a  cost  of  50  cts. 
per  M. 

On  another  trestle  260  ft.  long,  it  took  4  men  3  days  to  lay  23  M 
of  stringers  and  plank  in  the  floor  system,  at  a  cost  of  nearly  $1  per 
M.  These  men  were  much  slower. 

On  another  piece  of  road  work,  where  we  used  round  timber  for 
the  posts  and  sills,  a  gang  of  9  men  and  a  team  cut  and  delivered 
all  the  necessary  timber  from  the. forest,  erected  and  sway  braced 
the  bents  of  three  trestles,  having  a  total  length  of  440  ft.  in  12 
days.  There  were  7  framed  bents,  12  pile  bents  (36  piles  20  ft.  long, 
driven  5  ft.),  and  6  mud  sills  in  these  3  trestles.  The  piles  were 
driven  with  a  small  horsepower  pile  driver.  Seven  of  these  men 
were  laborers,  two  were  carpenters  and  bosses.  The  timber  in  the 
bents  was  not  accurately  measured  to  determine  the  number  of 
board  feet,  but  the  approximate  cost,  including  the  piles,  was  less 
than  $16  per  M  for  the  bents.  The  cost  of  the  sawed  timber  floor 
system  was,  of  course,  much  less.  I  consider  this  an  excellent  rec- 
ord, and  one  not  to  be  equalled  except  under  the  best  foremanship 
and  with  willing,  intelligent  laborers. 

Cost  of  Trestles,  Cross  References. — For  further  data  on  trestles 
see  particularly  the  section  on  Railways.  Consult  the  index  under 
"Timber,  Trestles." 

Estimated  Prices  of  Howe  Truss  Bridges.— The  following  were 
detailed  estimates  of  cost  at  standard  contract  prices  for  building 
Howe  truss  single-track  bridges  in  Washington  (in  1906),  according 


972  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

to    standard   plans   of    the   Northern    Pacific    Ry.      All    lengths   are 
lengths  over  all. 

40  FT.  PONT  TRUSS  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 

15  M.  timber  at  $16  +  $2  frt.  -  $18 $  270 

3,500  Ibs.  wrt.  iron  at  3  cts.  deliv 105 

3,200  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2  V2  cts 80 

Total  materials,   $11.44  per  lin.  ft $  455 

Labor  and  Falsework. 

Labor  to  frame  and  erect  15  M.  at  $15 $  225 

12  piles  (falsework)   delivered  at  $3 36 

12  piles  (falsework)   driven  at  $2 24 

4  M.  timber   (falsework)   second  hand,  at  $6 24 

4     M.     timber     (falsework)     erected    and    taken 

down,   $10 40 

Miscellaneous  expense 50 

Total  labor  and  falsework,  $10  per  lin.  ft $  400 

Abutments. 

2    pile  abutments  at   $250 $  500 

100  cu.  yds.  riprap  at  $1.50 150 

Total  abutments,   $16.25  per  lin.  ft $  650 

Grand  total  at  $37.50  per  lin.  ft 1,505 

60  FT.  PONY  TRUSS  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 

24  M.   at   $18 $  432 

7,200  Ibs.  wrt.  iron  at  3  cts 216 

6,800  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2  y2  cts 170 


Total  materials,  $13.60  per  lin.  ft $  818 

Labor  and  Falsework. 

Labor  and  frame  and  erect  24  M.  at  $15 $  360 

Falsework,  materials  and  labor 200 


Total  labor  and  falsework,  $9.20  per  lin.  ft...$  560 

Abutments. 

2  pile  abutments,   at  $250 $  500 

100  cu.  yds.  riprap  at  $1.50 150 


Total  abutments,    $10.80   per  lin.   ft $  650 

Grand  total,  $37.60  per  lin.  ft 2,028 

70  FT.  PONT  TRUSS  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 

29   M.  at   $18 $  522 

10,300  Ibs.  wrt.  iron  at  3  cts 309 

12,000  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2%  cts .' .  .  300 


Total  materials,   $16.16  per  lin.  ft $1,131 

Labor  and  Falsework. 

Labor  to  frame  and  erect  29  M.  at  $15 $    435 

Falsework,  materials  and  labor.  .  .  225 


Total  labor  and  falsework,  $9.33  per  lin.  ft $  660 

Abutments. 

2  abutments  at  $250 $  500 

100  cu.  yds.  riprap  at  $1.50 150 


Total  abutments,   $9.30   per  lin.  ft $    65G 

Grand  total,  $34.50  per  lin.  ft 2,416 


.   PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  973 

100  FT.  THROUGH  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 

51  M.   at   $18 %    918 

21,600  Ibs.  wrt.   iron  at  3  cts 648 

20,000  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2%  cts 500 


Total  materials,   $20.66  per  lin.  ft  ............  $2,066 

Labor  and  Falsework. 
100  lin.  ft.  erected  at  $8  ......................  $    800 

A  butments. 
2  abutments  at  $300  ..........................  $    600 

300  cu.  yds.   riprap  at  $1.50  ...................       450 

Total  abutments,   $10.50   per  lin.  ft  ...........  $1,050 

Grand  total,  $39.16  per  lin.  ft  ................    3,916 

120  FT.  THROUGH  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 
63  M.   at   $18  .............................  -....$1,184 

28,500  Ibs.  wrt.  iron  at  3  cts  ...................       855 

25,400  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2  y%  cts  ..................       635 


Total  materials,   $22.30  per  lin.   ft  ............  $2,674 

Labor  and  Falsework. 
120  lin.  ft.  erected  at  $9  ......................  $1,080 

Abutments. 
2  abutments  at  $300  .....................  •.  ____  $    600 

300  cu.  yds.  at  $1.50  .............  .............       450 


Total   abutments,   $8.38  per  lin.   ft $1,050 

Grand  total,  $40  per  lin.  ft 4,804 

130  FT.  THROUGH  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 

72  M.   at   $18 $1,296 

34,000  Ibs.  wrt.  iron  at  3  cts 1,020 

29,000  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2  %  cts 725 


Total  materials,  $23.40  per  lin.  ft $3,041 

Labor  and  Falsework. 
130  lin.  ft.  erected  at  $10 $1,300 

Abutments. 

2  abutments  at  $300 $    600 

300  cu.  yds.   riprap  at  $1.50 450 


Total   abutments,   $8.10  per  lin.  ft $1,050 

Grand  total,  $41.50  per  lin.  ft 5,390 

150  FT.  THROUGH  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 

89   M.  at   $18 $1,502 

45,000  Ibs.  wrt.  iron  at  3  cts 1,350 

40,000  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2%  cts 1,000 


Total  materials,   $26.30  per  lin.  ft $3,852 

Labor  and  Falsework. 
150  lin.  ft.  erected  at  $12 $1,800 

Abutments. 

2  abutments  at  $350 $    700 

300  cu.  yds.  riprap  at  $1.50 450 

Total  abutments,  $7.70  per  lin.  ft. $1,150 

Grand  total,   $47.30  per  lin.  ft 7,102 

The  standard  pile  abutment  contains  14  piles  for  spans  under  8ft 


974  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ft.,  16  piles  for  80  to  130-ft  spans,  and  20  piles  for  130  to  160-ft. 
spans.  Obviously  the  cost  of  piles  will  vary  with  the  length.  It  is 
customary  to  assume  a  20-ft.  penetration.  In  addition  to  the  piles 
there  were  2,500  to  4,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  timber  per  abutment,  and  160 
Ibs.  of  iron  per  M  of  this  timber. 

It  will  he  noticed  that  the  cost  of  Howe  truss  bridges  on  pile  abut- 
ments does  not  vary  greatly  per  lin.  ft.  of  span,  the  principal  rea- 
son being  that  the  abutments  constitute  so  large  a  part  of  the  cost. 

See  the  section  on  Bridges  and  on  Railways. 

Cost  of  160-ft.  Span  Howe  Truss  Bridges  and  Cribs.— In  1894  I 
designed,  and  built  by  contract,  two  highway  bridges  over  different 
points  on  the  Noaksack  River,  Washington.  Each  bridge  had  a  16-ft. 
roadway,  a  clear  span  of  160  ft.,  and  a  depth  of  truss  of  30  ft.  at 
the  center.  The  bridge  was  designed  to  carry  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft. 
of  roadway.  The  trusses  were  a  modified  type  of  Howe  truss,  having 
upper  chords  that  were  not  horizontal  but  sloped  up  from  both  end 
posts  to  an  apex  at  the  center,  like  a  roof  truss.  This  design  very 
materially  reduced  the  amount  of  iron,  which  was  an  important 
factor.  Each  chord  was  made  of  three  parallel  timbers,  each  6x14 
ins.,  bolted  together.  Panels  were  20  ft.  long.  The  floor  was  of 
3-in.  cedar  plank,  for  lightness  and  durability.  The  rest  of  the  tim- 
ber was  Washington  fir.  The  bridges  rested  on  pile  abutments, 
which  were  protected  by  log  cribs  filled  with  field-stones.  Each 
bridge  contained  40  M  of  timber,  of  which  23  M  were  in  the  trusses 
and  braces,  and  17  M  in  the  floor  system. 

No  piles  were  driven  for  falsework,  although  the  river  was  4  te  6 
ft.  deep  and  swift ;  but  two-post  bents  were  put  up  just  back  of 
each  panel  point.  Bents  were  made  of  round  timber,  and  erected 
by  first  dropping  into  the  water  pairs  of  long-legged  saw  horses  on 
each  side  of  the  proposed  falsework,  and  laying  run  planks  on  the 
horses  for  men  to  walk  on.  A  falsework  can  thus  be  built  with 
great  rapidity  and  cheaply,  and  in  spite  of  the  weight  coming  upon 
the  posts  of  each  bent  the  settlement  in  the  gravel  bottom  was  very 
slight,  and  easily  taken  up  by  wedges  under  the  lower  chords.  There 
is  always  danger,  however,  that  a  sudden  flood  will  undermine  the 
falsework,  and  this  happened  at  one  of  the  bridges,  causing  it  to  fall 
during  construction. 

No  upper  falsework,  except  a  light  staging  at  each  end  post  and 
at  the  center,  is  needed  with  this  type  of  truss,  provided  long  sticks 
of  timber  can  be  secured;  for  with  chord  sticks  62  ft.  long  (in  a 
bridge  of  this  size)  it  is  possible  to  lift,  first  one  end,  then  the  other, 
of  the  upper  chord  sticks  and  support  them  upon  the  light  staging 
at  each  end,  until  the  diagonal  struts  are  placed. 

The  trusses  must  be  first  framed  and  bolted  together,  flatwise 
on  the  ground,  then  unbolted  and  erected  piece  by  piece.  The  tim- 
bers were  pushed  out  onto  the  falsework  on  dollies,  and  lifted 
with  block  and  tackle,  using  a  gin-pole  where  necessary ;  all  this 
handling  being  by  hand  without  a  hoisting  engine.  Although  the 
following  record  of  low  cost  will  be  hard  te  equal,  it  serves  to 
show  what  can  be  done  with  efficient  labor  under  a  good  bridge 
foreman. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  975 

COST  OF  160-FT.  SPAN  BRIDGE. 
Materials. 

40  M.  timber,  at  $7  on  cars .  .$    280.00 

40  M.  timber  hauled  3  miles,  at  $2.50 100.00 

3,970  Ibs.  iron  rods;  662  Ibs.  bolts;  769  Ibs.  gib 
plates;   326  Ibs.  drift  bolts;  total  5,727  Ibs., 

at  3!/4   cts 186.10 

14  cast  iron  angle  blocks,  1,316  Ibs.,  at  2%  cts.         36.20 

613  cast  iron  washers,  613  Ibs.,  at  2y2  cts 15.30 

Lag  screws,  nails,  etc 9.90 

Freight   on   iron 14.50 


Total  bridge  materials  delivered $  642.00 

30  abutment  piles,  30  ft.  long,  at  5  cts.  per  ft.  45.00 

Labor. 

Framing  trusses,  6  carpenters  7  days,  at  $2.50.  .  $  105.00 
Getting  out  timber  for  falsework  and  building 

driver    40.00 

Driving  30  piles,  6  men  and  2  teams,  9  days..  150.00 

Building  two  log  cribs 75.00 

Erecting  lower  falsework,  8  men,  3  days 48.00 

Erecting  bridge,  4  carpenters  and  6  laborers,  7 

days     .  .  .  . 133.00 

Laying  floor  and  handrails,  4  carpenters  and  4 

laborers,  1  day 16.00 

Loading,    hauling  and   placing    70    cu.    yds.   of 

field-stones  in  cribs   (  %-mile  haul) 70.00 

Total $  637.00 

Foreman,  at  $4  per  day. '. 160.00 


Grand  total  labor  on  bridge  and  abutments.. $  797.00 

Summary 

Bridge  materials   delivered $  642.00 

Piles    delivered . .  45.00 

Labor    637.00 

Foremanship    160.00 

Tools,    ropes,    etc.    (one-half   charged   to   each 

bridge)    100.00 

Total  cost  of  one  bridge  and  abutments $1,584.00 

This  is  less  than  $10  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge. 

Deducting  the  cost  of  material  and  labor  on  the  two  pile  abut- 
ments and  their  cribs,  we  have  left,  $1,200  as  the  cost  of  one  bridge 
alone. 

If  we  analyze  the  labor  we  find  that  the  wages  of  the  foreman 
amounted  to  20%  of  the  total  labor  expenditure.  This  is  a  high 
percentage,  but  one  often  exceeded  on  small  works  of  this  char- 
acter where  delays  due  to  bad  weather  or  lack  of  materials,  add  up 
very  rapidly  when  the  foreman  is  paid  by  the  month  for  handling  a 
small  gang  of  men. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  carpenter  work  of  framing  the  23  M 
(exclusive  of  the  floor)  cost  $4.50  per  M,  to  which  should  be  added 
about  $1.00  per  M  for  foreman.  Erecting  the  bridge  (exclusive  of 
17  M  of  floor)  cost  $133  after  the  falsework  was  built,  or  nearly  $6 
per  M  (4  erectors  being  carpenters,  at  $2.50,  and  6  laborers,  at 
$1.50),  to  which  should  be  added  $1.50  for  foreman.  This  makes  a 
total  of  $10.50  per  M  for  framing  and  erecting  the  23  M  in  the 
bridge  trusses,  to  which  must  be  added  $2.50  per  M  for  foreman, 
and  $2  more  per  M  for  erecting  falsework,  if  we  distribute  the 


976 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 


labor  cost  of  erecting  the  falsework  over  the  23  M.  The  falsework 
cost  must  be  estimated  for  every  bridge  separately.  In  this  case  it 
was  unusually  cheap. 

The  cost  of  placing  the  17  M  of  flooring  on  the  bridge  was  less 
than  $1  per  M,  for  there  was  practically  no  sawing,  adzing  or  boring 
to  be  done — simply  running  the  timber  out  to  place  on  dollies,  and 
spiking  it.  This  seems  an  exceedingly  low  cost,  but  similar  records 
will  be  found  on  other  pages.  Perhaps  no  better  example  will  be 
found  in  this  book  to  show  the  necessity  of  separating  plain  timber 
work  from  framed  timberwork  in  analyzing  timberwork  costs. 

The  cost  of  the  pile  driving  was  high  per  pile  not  only  because  the 
driving  was  very  hard,  but  because  of  the  small  number  of  piles 
in  each  abutment,  and  because  of  the  cost  of  moving  across  the 


Fig.  2. — Log  Culvert. 

river  and  erecting  staging  for  the  driver  to  rest  upon  at  each  abut- 
ment. 

The  cribs  around  the  piles  were  made  of  hewn  timber  taken  from 
the  forest  near  by.  .Each  crib  averaged  6  ft.  high,  10  ft.  wide,  and 
30  ft.  long,  containing  about  6  M  of  timber.  The  cost  of  cutting  this 
timber,  hewing  and  erecting  it,  was  $6  per  M,  wages  of  men  being 
$2.50  a  day.  To  this  about  $1.50  per  M.  should  be  added  for  fore- 
man. 

A  third  crib,  built  for  another  bridge  abutment,  was  10  ft.  high, 
12  ft.  wide,  and  3*5  ft.  long,  containing  about  12  M  of  hewed  timber. 
It  took  5  men  4  days,  at  $2.50,  to  cut  the  timber  for  and  build  this 
crib,  which  is  equivalent  to  about  $4  per  M  and  to  this  $1  per  M 
should  be  added  for  foreman. 

For  actual  cost  of  Howe  truss  railway  bridges,  see  the  section  on 
Bridges. 

Cost  of  Log  Culverts. — In  building  roads  and  railways  through 
timbered  country,  it  is  generally  good  practice  to  build  most  of  the 
culverts  of  logs.  Log  culverts  are  frequently  floored  with  logs 
for  the  full  length  of  the  culvert,  but  they  may  be  built  with  log  sills 
spaced  4  ft.  c.  to  c.,  and  projecting  1  ft.  beyond  the  walls,  as  indi- 
cated by  the  dotted  lines  in  Fig.  2. 

The  ends  of  a  log  culvert  are  stepped  up,  as  in  Fig.  3,  I  =  L  —  2  D. 
Hence  the  "average  length"  is  L  —  D. 

To  estimate  the  lin.  ft.  of  logs  in  a  paved  culvert  like  that  in  Fig. 
it,  add  2  ft.  to  the  inside  horizontal  dimension  to  get  the  length  of 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK. 


977 


logs  in  pavement  and  in  cover,  which  is  6  ft.  in  this  case.  Then 
double  this  length  and  add  double  the  inside  height;  the  sum  will 
be  the  total  lineal  feet  of  12-in.  logs  per  lin.  ft.  of  "average  length" 
of  culvert.  In  a  2  x  4  culvert  (Fig.  2),  this  gives  (2  X  6)  +  (2  X  2) 
rr  16  lin.  ft.  of  logs. 

There  are  0.3  Ib.  of  %-in.  drift  bolts  required  per  lin.  ft.  of  logs 
(or  25 'Ibs.  per  M  when  squared  timbers  are  used). 

The  bidding  price  is  usually  about  12  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  logs  in 
place,  plus  3  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  hewing  two  sides,  exclusive  of  the 
price  for  the  iron.  On  the  Great  Northern  Railway  (517  miles)  in 


Fig.  3. — Log  Culvert. 

Washington,  the  average  size  log  culvert  was  3  x  3%  x  43  ft.,  or  750 
lin.  ft.  of  logs  per  culvert,  and  I  estimated  the  average  contract 
price  in  place  to  be: 

Per.  lin.  ft.  logs. 

Logs    in   place... ". $0.12 

Hewing  1%  sides  at  1%  cts.  per  side 0.02. 

0.33  Ibs.  iron  drift  bolts  at  3  cts 0.01 

Excavating  0.04  cu.  yds.  at   25  cts 0.01 

Total    $0.16 

See  the  sections  on  Railways  and  on  Bridges. 

Materials  Required  for  Timber  Box  Culverts.— Culverts  made  of 
sawed  timber  are  usually  designed  much  lighter  than  log  culverts.  A 
3x4-ft.  opening  will  have  wall  pieces  8  ins.  thick  (8x12),  cover 
8  ins.  thick  (8x12),  subsills  4  ins.  thick  (4x12)  spaced  4  ft., 
c.  to  c.,  and  floor  2  ins.  thick  (2x12),  making  a  total  of  90  ft. 
B.  M.  per  lin.  ft,  and  requiring  25  Ibs.  of  drift  bolts  per  M. 

Cost  of  a  Wooden  Reservoir  Roof  on  Iron  Posts.— A  reservoir  at 
Pasadena,  Cal.,  was  roofed  over  in  1899,  at  a  remarkably  low  cost. 
I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  T.  D.  Allin  for  the  following  data:  The 
extreme  dimensions  of  the  reservoir  were  330  x  540  ft.,  and  166,000 
sq.  ft.  were  roofed.  The  roof  was  supported  by  551  iron  posts  made 
of  2-in.  water  pipe,  capped  at  the  bottom  and  set  in  cement.  On 
the  top  of  each  of  these  posts  a  wooden  corbel,  6x6  ins.  x  2  Ms  ft., 
was  fastened  by  boring  a  hole  4  ins.  deep  in  the  corbel  and  driving 
the  pipe  into  the  hole.  Each  post,  about  20  ft.  long,  was  up-ended 
by  hand,  after  the  corbel  had  been  driven  on,  plumbed  and  tempo- 


978  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

rarily  stay-lathed.  Posts  were  spaced  15%  and  18  ft.  apart.  OH  the 
posts  were  laid  floor  beams  made  of  two  2  x  10-in.  plank,  overlapped 
at  the  ends  and  spiked  together,  forming  a  continuous  beam 
4x10  ins.  A  gang  of  7  men,  using  movable  scaffolding  for  plac- 
ing and  spiking  these  floor  beams,  averaged  1,500  ft.  of  floor 
beams  per  day.  On  these  beams  were  laid  2  x  8-in.  stringers, 
16  ft.  long.  The  stringers  were  overlapped  4  ins.  and  spiked,  and 
were  spaced  6  ft.  centers.  On  the  stringers  were  laid  1  x  12-in.  planks, 
forming  the  roof.  These  planks  were  cut  to  12-ft.,  18-ft.  and  24-ft. 
lengths,  the  planks  being  laid  in  forms  so  as  to  facilitate  accurate 
cutting  without  individual  measurement  of  each  plank.  Similar 
forms  were  used  for  cutting  the  planks  used  in  the  floor-beams.  The 
stringers  did  not  require  accurate  cutting.  All  the  timber  was  rough, 
merchantable  Oregon  pine.  The  cost  of  this  roof,  covering  166,000 
sq.  ft.,  was  as  follows: 

260  M.   Oregon  pine,  at  $18.70 $4,862 

9,373  ft.  of  2-in.  pipe 987 

Nails  and  spikes 203 

Millwork  on  551  corbels '.  . .         27 

Cement  for  footings '. 6 

Engineering 151 

Labor,  including  superintendence 1,004 

Total,  166,000  sq.  ft.,  at  4.36  cts $7,240 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  was  about  $4  per  M.  Mr. 
Allin  informs  me  that  about  75%  of  the  work  was  done  by  laborers 
and  25%  by  carpenters.  The  laborers  received  $1.75  for  9  hrs.,  and 
the  carpenters,  $2.50  for  9  hrs.  The  work  was  done  during  hard 
times  and  quite  a  number  of  the  laborers  were  really  carpenters. 
Carpenters  were  used  on  the  erection  work  and  on  work  around  the 
sides  of  the  structure  where  neatness  was  required. 

More  recently  Mr.  Allin  has  completed  covering  three  more  reser- 
voirs in  a  similar  manner,  the  only  change  in  design  being  the  spac- 
ing of  joists  4  ft.  apart  instead  of  6  ft.  He  believes  that  the  extra 
expense  is  justified  because  there  is  less  warping  of  the  boards. 
Wages  are  now  (1905)  $4  per  8  hrs.  for  carpenters,  and  $2  for 
laborers,  and  prices  of  materials  are  higher,  so  that  it  costs  6  cts. 
per  sq.  ft.  to  cover  a  reservoir. 

For  other  data  on  reservoir  roofs  see  the  section  on  Waterworks. 

Cost  of  a  Crib  Dam. — Mr.  J.  W.  Woermann  gives  the  following 
cost  data  for  two  crib  dams  across  the  north  and  the  south  chan- 
nels of  Rock  River,  at  the  head  of  Carr's  Island,  near  Milan,  111., 
built  in  1894.  The  north  dam  is  598  ft.  long;  the  south  dam,  764  ft 
long.  The  two  dams  are  connected  by  a  levee  1,000  ft.  long.  The 
dams  are  on  a  rock  foundation,  and  designed  to  withstand  a  head  of 
4  %  ft.  The  dam  is  a  crib  of  6  x  8-in.  pine  timbers,  with  a  rock 
filling.  The  main  part  of  the  dam  is  13y2  ft.  wide,  with  an  apron 
6^  ft.  wide,  making  a  total  base  of  20  ft.  A  filling  of  clay  and 
quarry  refuse  is  placed  against  the  cribwork  on  the  up-stream  side. 
The  main  dam  and  the  apron  are  covered  with  4-In.  oak  plank,  and 
the  up-stream  face  of  the  dam  with  two  rows  of  2-in.  pine  sheet- 
piling.  From  the  crest  of  the  dam  to  the  apron  the  fall  is  3  ft. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  979 

An  area  below  the  north  abutment  was  stripped  for  a  quarry 
(June,  1894),  and  the  800  cu.  yds.  of  stripping,  together  with  300 
cu.  yds.  of  riprap,  were  used  t  for  cofferdams  for  the  north  dam. 
The  cofferdams  were  made  as  follows:  Cribs,  16  ft.  square,  were 
built  in  line,  spaced  14  ft.  apart.  The  cribs  were  built  in  shallow 
water  by  boring  holes  in  the  ends  of  each  timber  and  dropping  the 
timbers  over  long  upright  bolts  at  each  corner  of  the  crib.  The 
top  of  these  cribs  was  sheeted  with  4-in.  oak  plank  and  weighted 
down  with  bags  of  sand.  Timbers,  6  x  8-in.,  the  ends  of  which  were 
supported  by  adjacent  cribs,  were  then  shoved  down  into  the  water. 
This  furnished  a  cofferdam  130  ft.  long,  and  riprap  and  quarry  strip- 
ping dumped  against  the  face  of  the  dam  could  not  be  washed  away. 
The  4-in.  oak  plank  was  then  removed  and  used  in  the  permanent 
work.  Subsequently  the  riprap,  which  was  placed  on  the  down- 
stream side  of  the  cribs,  was  removed  and  used  in  the  dam.  The 
quarry  stripping  was  placed  on  the  up-stream  side  of  the  cribs.  The 
areas  enclosed  by  cofferdams  were  50  to  200  ft.  long,  and  were  kept 
dry  with  hand  pumps.  The  water  in  the  river  was  so  shallow  that 
wagons  were  used  to  deliver  all  the  materials  used  in  both  coffer- 
dams and  main  dams. 

The  carpenter  work  on  the  south  dam  was  begun  Aug.  7  and  fin- 
ished Aug.  22,  working  8  hrs.  a  day,  including  Sundays.  For  this 
dam  about  75%  of  the  rock  was  quarried  from  the  river  bed  without 
requiring  explosives.  During  the  construction  of  the  coffer-dam  for 
the  south  dam  the  force  was  14  teams  and  50  laborers  (for  a  few 
rush  days  there  were  130  laborers),  and  they  were  engaged  from 
July  24  to  Aug.  4.  During  the  erection  of  the  cribwork  for  the 
main  dam  (16  days)  the  force  was  16  carpenters  and  50  laborers, 
about  one-third  of  the  laborers  assisting  the  carpenters  in  carrying 
timbers,  boring,  driving  bolts  and  spikes.  The  number  of  teams 
was  the  same  throughout  the  work. 

The  total  amount  of  timber  in  both  dams  was  330,190  ft.  B.  M., 
distributed  thus: 

Feet  B.  M.- 

North  dam.  South  dam. 

Longitudinal    timbers    (pine)  .  . 47,230  73,550 

Transverse  timbers    (pine) 28,350  46,950 

Sheet  piling  timbers   (pine) 7,950  14,610 

Plank  in  coding  (oak) 33,540  42,840 

Plank  in  apron    (oak) 15,870  19,300 

Total    ;    132,940          197,250 

The  cost  of  the  labor  of  putting  this  timber  into  the  dams  was 
$5.80  per  M. 

The  rock  filling  in  the  north  dam  is  1,240  cu.  yds. ;  in  the  south 
flam,  2,350  cu.  yds.  The  iron  used  was: 

North  dam.  South  dam. 

Anchor   bolts,    Ibs 1,010  320 

Drift  bolts,   Ibs 6,050  9,610 

Boat    spikes,    Ibs 4,750  6,050 

Wire  nails,    Ibs 300  400 

Total,    Ibs 12,110  16,380 


980  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  labor  on  the  two  dams  was: 

North  dam.  South  dam. 

Hauling  materials : $    284 

Building    coffer-dams $    730  1,055 

Preparing    foundation 493 

Carpenter  work  on  dams. 949  965 

Quarrying    rock,     tilling     cribs    and 

grading  above  dams 1,966  1,971 

Engineering,    watching    and    miscel- 
laneous           362  402 


Total    14,500  $5,495 

This  makes  the  total  cost  of  labor  $9,995  on  the  two  dams.     The 
total  cost  was  as  follows: 

Labor     $  9,995 

Rent  of  land 217 

111  M.  oak : 2,919 

218   M,  pine 3,087 

28,490  Ibs.   iron 805 

Explosives     151 


Total $17,174 

Cost  of  Timber  Cribs  for  Dams,  Etc.*— Maj.  Graham  D.  Fitch 
gives  the  following: 

Timber  cribs  were  built  in  connection  with  the  building  of  the 
lock  described  on  page  989. 

The  work  was  done  on  the  Upper  White  River,  Arkansas,  by  Gov- 
ernment forces,  common  laborers  receiving  $1.50  per  8-hr.  day. 

Guide  Cribs. — At  the  head  and  foot  of  each  lock  wall  permanent 
guard  or  guide  cribs  were  placed.  The  upper  river  crib  is  a  solid 
crib,  containing  the  line  of  the  river  wall.  It  is  150  ft.  long  and 
8  ft.  wide  on  top.  The  inside  face  is  vertical  from  the  top  to  1  ft. 
below  the  upper  miter  sill,  below  which  it  is  stepped,  as  is  the  outer 
face,  so  that  the  width  of  the  base  30  ft.  below  the  top  is  20  ft. 
The  lower  part  of  the  crib  work  connects  with  the  lock  wall,  but 
above  a  level  2  ft.  below  the  upper  miter  sill  there  is  a  gap  10  ft. 
wide  between  the  crib  and  the  lock  wall  for  the  passage  of  drift. 
The  top  of  the  crib  is  level  with  the  coping. 

The  lower  river  crib  is  150  ft.  long  and  is  similar  to  the  upper 
crib  except  that  there  is  no  gap  between  the  crib  and  the  lock  walls, 
and  that  the  top  of  the  crib  is  not  level  with  the  coping  throughout, 
that  portion  farthest  down  stream  being  5  ft.  below  the  coping  in 
elevation. 

The  land  cribs  are  in  line  with  the  lock  walls,  the  upper  one  being 
66  ft.  long  and  the  lower  one  20  ft.  The  cribs  were  built  of 
10  x  10-in.  timbers,  framed  and  drift  bolted  together,  pine  being  used 
below  pool  level  and  oak  above.  The  cribs  are  filled  with  one-man 
stone,  large  selected  stones  being  set  on  edge  with  their  flat  faces 
against  the  side  openings,  the  top  being  covered  with  large,  well- 
shaped  stones  set  level  with  the  timbers. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908,  p.  283, 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK. 


981 


The  cost  of  the  upper  land  crib  was  as  follows : 

Per  M.  ft. 
Material.  Unit  cost.     Total,     in  crib. 

Lumber,  pine,  30  M.  ft.  B.  M $18.20          $     546      $80.20 

Riprap,  602  cu.  yds 74  445        14.83 

Iron,    2,350    Ibs..' 0026  63          2.10 

Total  materials $1,054     $35.13 

Labor. 

Excavating  45  cu.  yds $   1.89  $      85  $   2.83 

Insp.  of  timber,   30  M.  ft 39  12  .40 

Riprap,  602  cu.  yds 008  5  .16 

Building  and  filling,  30  M.  ft 15.42  463  15.43 

Backfill,  180  cu.  yds 525  95  3.16 

Total    labor $    660     $21.98 

Grand  total  (30  M.  ft.) $1,713     $57.10 

The  labor  items  in  the  above  work  that  can  be  further  summarized 
are  as  follows: 

Labor  time  Work  done  per 
Work  done.  in  days.        man  per  day. 

Excavating,   45  cu.  yds 46  7/8         .957  cu.  yd. 

Building  and  filling,   30   M.  ft 259  6/8          .115  M.  ft. 

Backfilling,  180  cu.  yds 444/8         .404  cu.  yd. 

The  cost  of  the  lower  land  crib  was  as  follows : 

Per  M.  ft. 
Material.  Unit  cost.       Total.       in  crib. 

Lumber,  pine,  9.3  M.  ft $18.15  $169          $18.15 

Riprap,   145  cu.  yds 74  107  11.51 

Iron,   413    Ibs 026  11  1.12 

Total    materials $287         $30.78 

Excavation  labor. 

Earth  92,  rock  15,  107  cu.  yds $   3.26  $242  $26.02 

Building  and  filling,  9.3  M.  ft 275  29.65 

Insp.  of  timber,  4  M.  ft 39  2  .21 

Inspection  of  riprap,  65  cu.  yds. .        .008  ...  .... 

Total    labor $519  $55.88 

Grand  total   (9.3  M.  ft.)                                   $806  $86.66 
The  following  is  the  cost  of  the  lower  river  crib : 

Per  M.  ft. 

Material.                                              Unit  cost.       Total.  in  crib. 

Lumber,  oak,  14.8  M.  ft.  B.  M....  $16.82          $    249  $   5.39 

Lumber,  pine,  31.3  M.  ft.  B.  M..  .  .    14.97               469  10.16 

Riprap,  1,014   cu.  yds 74               714  15.46 

Iron  and  spikes,  5,420  Ibs 132  2.86 

Fuel    21  .45 

Total   cost  materials $1,585  $34.33 

Labor. 

Excavating,  980  cu.  yds $   0.039  $       39  $   0.84 

Framing  and  placing  timbers,  46.2 

M.    ft 15.60               721  15.60 

Filling  with  riprap,  1,014  cu.  yds.       .447             455  9.85 

Inspection  of  lumber,   8  M.  ft.....        .39                    3  .06 

Inspection  of  riprap,  90  cu.  yds...        .008                   .72  .02 

Total  labor $1,219        $26.37 

Grand   total    (46.2    M.    ft.) $2,804        $60.69 


982 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


The  cost  of  the  upper  river  crib  was  as  follows: 


Material.  Unit  cost. 

Lumber,  oak,  15.6  M.  ft.  B.  M.... $20.12 

Lumber,  pine,  32  M.  ft.  B.  M 14.90 

Iron  and  spikes,  1,620  Ibs 028 

Riprap,  1,315  cu.  yds 74 


Total   cost  materials. 

Labor. 
Excavation 


Total. 

$     314 

477 

46 

973 


Per  M.  ft. 

in  crib. 

$   6.60 

10.02 

.93 

20.47 


$1,810        $38.02 


Framing  and  placing  timbers,  47.6 

M.   ft $10.32- 

Filling  with  riprap,  1,135  cu.  yds.       .31 


50 


491 
410 


Total  labor 

Grand  total    (47.< 


M.   ft.).... 


$     951 
$2,761 


$19.98 
$58.00 


The  average  costs  of  crib  materials  may  be  summarized  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Average  cost  of  riprap,  delivered $     .74 

Average  cost  to  place 436 

Average  cost  in  place 1.176 

Per  M.  ft. 

Average  cost  of  crib  timber,  delivered $13.82 

Average  cost  to  place  timber 9.29 

Average  cost  of  crib  timber  in  place „ 23.11 

The  above  costs  include  field  supervision  and  subsistence,  but  do 
not  include  freight  on  timber,  which  is  about  $1  per  M  ft. 

Crib  Dam. — Dam  No.  1  was  a  timber  crib  structure  placed  normal 
to  the  axis  of  the  river  and  resting  against  the  buttress  of  the 
upper  river  lock  gate,  so  as  to  have  the  whole  length  of  the  lock 
chamber  in  the  lower  pool.  The  dam  was  324  ft.  long.  For  the  210 
ft.  next  to  the  lock  it  is  founded  on  rock,  the  remainder  of  it  resting 
on  gravel.  The  width  at  the  foundation  is  48  ft,  and  the  height 
above  the  foundation  varies  between  a  maximum  at  one  place  of  27 
ft.  (on  rock)  and  a  minimum  of  19  ft.  next  to  the  old  abutment. 
The  cribs  are  of  yellow  pine  except  the  slope  timbers  and  the  face 
stringers,  which  are  of  white  oak.  All  timbers  are  10  x  10-in.  scant- 
ling and  are  drift  bolted  together  at  their  intersections.  The  up- 
stream face  of  the  dam  is  vertical  to  within  2  ft.  of  the  top,  whence, 
to  prevent  catching  drift,  it  slopes,  to  the  crest  (a  12  by  12-in. 
comb  stick),  having  a  slope  of  1  on  4.  The  down-stream  face  sloped 
from  the  crest  for  8  ft.  with  a  slope  of  1  on  4  and  was  stepped, 
having  two  steps  each  8  ft.  wide  and  an  apron  16  ft.  wide,  the  three 
vertical  intervals  being  four  courses  of  40  ins.  each.  The  upper 
slope  was  laid  closely  so  as  to  be  water  tight ;  the  timbers  on  the 
down-stream  side  of  the  crest  were  spaced  1  in.  apart.  A  short 
section  of  the  dam  about  9  ft.  in  length  was  in  1900  built  inside 
the  lock  cofferdam  up  to  the  level  of  the  apron.  No  further  work  on 
this  dam  was  done  until  August,  1902,  when  work  was  recommenced 
by  excavating  with  a  dipper  dredge.  The  dam  was  built  in  three 
separate  sections,  which  were  partially  completed  a  short  distance 
up-stream,  the  bottoms  being  built  to  suit  careful  soundings  pre- 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  ys3 

viously  taken,  and  then  towed  to  position  and  the  building  con- 
tinued. Only  every  other  pen  was  filled  with  stone  until  the  last 
section  was  in  place  and  weighted.  Triple-lap  sheet  piles,  9  by  12 
ins.,  were  driven  to  rock  on  the  upper  side  of  the  dam  for  110  ft. 
out  from  the  abutment  where  the  dam  rested  on  gravel ;  the  remain- 
ing portion  of  the  dam,  which  is  on  rock,  was  merely  sheeted  with 
double-lap  1*4 -in.  plank.  The  lower  side  of  the  dam  for  120  ft. 
from  the  abutment  was  also  sheet  piled  for  the  purpose  of  holding  the 
gravel.  The  dam  was  backfilled  to  within  4  ft.  of  the  eave  for 
about  20  ft.  up-stream,  partly  with  gumbo  and  partly  with  gravel. 
Below  that  portion  of  the  dam  on  gravel  a  brush  mattress  covered 
with  2  ft.  of  stone  was  laid. 

The  cost  of  this  dam  was  af  follows : 

EXCAVATION. 
Materials. 
Fuel    and    oil $  96 

Labor. 
181  2/8    days 367 


Total    $463 

FRAMING  AND  PLACING  TIMBERS. 

Materials.                                             Unit  cost.  Total.  Per  M.  ft. 

Oak,   132.8   M.   ft.   B.   M $19.81      $2,632  $   5.07 

Pine,   387.3  M.   ft.   B.   M 13.71        5,320  10.23 

Iron,    25,297    Ibs 025         655  1.25 

Hauling  lumber,  147.4  M.  ft.  B.  M...      1.18           173  .33 

Fuel,  oil,  etc 173  .33 

Boat    spikes,    12    kegs 8.65           104  .20 

Miscellaneous 12  .02 

Total  cost  of  material,  520.2  M.  ft. 

B.    M $17.43      $9,069  $17.43 

Labor. 

Frame  and  place,  520.2  M.  ft,  B.  M.  .$   8.84   $   4,599  $   8.84 


Grand   total    $13,668     $26.27 

The  labor  time  in  days  for  framing  and  placing  the  520.2  M.  ft. 
B.  M.  was  2,392%,  and  the  average  amount  framed  and  placed  per 
man  per  day  was  217  ft. 

DRIVING   SHEET   PILES. 

Per  M.  ft. 
Materials.  Unit  cost.  Total.    Piling. 

Oak,    25.2    M.    ft $19.81      $     501      $19.81 

Boat  spikes,   2  kegs 8.50  17  .67 


Total  materials,  25.2  M.  ft $20.48     $    518     $20.48 

Labor. 
Driving,   25.2  M.   ft $22.54      $    570      $22.54 


Grand    total. $1,088     $43.02 

The  total  labor  time  for  driving  the  25.2  M  ft.  of  sheet  piles  was 
315%  days,  the  work  done  per  man  per  day  being  80  ft.  B.  M. 
driven. 


984  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

FILLING  (7,984  Cu.  YDS.) 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Materials.                                              Unit  cost.  Total.  Filling. 

Riprap,   7,984   cu.  yds $0.74  $5,908  $0.74 

Coal   (hauling),  47.1  tons 50  23  .003 

Labor. 

Filling,  7,984  cu.  yds 425  3,508  .428 

Grand    total $9,439     $1.18 

The  total  labor  time  for  filling  was  1,999  days,  the  average  work 
done  per  man  per  day  being  4  cu.  yds.  of  filling. 

PUDDLING  (8,640  Cu.  YDS.). 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Material.                                                Unit  cost.  Total.  Puddling. 

Fuel  and  oil $    148  $0.017 

Riprap,  60  cu.  yds $0.74               44  .005 

Labor. 

Digging  and  placing  8,640  cu.  yds 277     $2,395  .277 

Grand    total $2,587     $0.299 

REPUDDLING   (1904). 

Labor,  4,550  cu.  yds $0.336     $1,529     $0.336 

Cost  both  years,  13,190  cu.  yds 4,116  .      .312 

Total.       Per  lin.  ft. 

Dam,  324  lin.  ft $28,774          $88.81 

Per  cu  yd. 
Dam,  filling  7,984  cu.  yds $3.60 

SUMMARY  OF  DAM  No.  1. 

Total.  Unit  cost. 

Excavation     $      463  

Framing  and  placing  timber,  520.2  M.  ft.  .    13,668  $26.27 

Sheet  piles,  25.2  M.  ft 1,088  43.02 

Filling,    7,984    cu.   yds 9,439  1.18 

Puddling,  8,640  cu.  yds 2,587  .299 

Repuddling  (1904),  4,550  cu.  yds 1,529  .336 

Protecting    apron    and    end    of    dam    after 

flanking  of  abutment   (1903) 1,212  

Changing  shape   of  old  dam  from   step   to 

slope   (324  lin.  ft.) 6,177  19.06 

The  cost  of  Dam  No.  2  is  given  in  equal  detail  in  Engineering-Con- 
tracting, but  it  will  suffice  here  to  say  that  each  man  framed  and 
placed  250  ft.  B.  M.  per  day,  at  a  cost  of  $7.62  per  M,  there  being 
600  M  all  told. 

Foundation  Crib. — The  crib  was  T  shaped  in  plan,  following  the 
general  outline  of  the  dam  abutment.  The  length  of  the  river  face 
was  136  ft.,  its  width  was  12  ft.  at  the  up-stream  end  and  16  ft. 
at  the  down-stream  end,  and  24  ft.  near  the  middle  for  a  distance 
of  37  ft,  beginning  46  ft.  from  the  up-stream  end.  The  portion 
of  the  crib  underlying  the  stem  of  the  abutment  was  20  ft.  wide 
and  60  ft.  long  from  face  to  end  ;  it  entered  the  bank  36  ft.  The 
crib,  which  was  constructed  of  10  by  10-in.  squared  timbers,  was 
built  afloat  and  with  interior  pens  varying  in  size  from  5  to  10  ft.  to 
10  by  12  ft.  After  having  been  settled  in  place  it  was  filled  with 
"one  man"  stone  up  to  2  ft  below  extreme  low  water  (6  ft.  below 
water  level  at  the  time),  the  filling  averaging  11  ft.  in  depth.  Be- 
fore this  filling  began,  however,  the  distributing  boxes  for  the  grout 
were  placed.  These  consisted  of  open-ended  square  boxes  (8  by  8 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  985 

ins.  inside)  of  2-in.  plank  perforated  with  1%-in.  holes  spaced  zigzag 
1  ft.  apart  down  the  sides.  They  were  long  enough  to  reach  just 
above  a  loosely  laid  floor  on  the  top  timbers  and  were  set  about  10 
ft.  apart  throughout  the  crib.  The  cost  of  these  boxes  is  given 
under  grouting.  After  the  grout  boxes  had  been  placed  and  the 
crib  filled  with  rubble  9-in.  triple-lap  sheet  piling  was  driven  with 
a  steam  hammer  along  the  outside  of  the  crib  from  a  point  opposite 
the  downstream  edge  of  the  apron  to  the  up-stream  end  of  the  crib, 
and  thence  around  the  end  and  along  the  up-stream  face  of  the  stem. 
The  other  faces  of  the  crib  were  sheeted  with  double-lap  1-in.  plank 
driven  by  hand  mauls.  The  sheet  piling  was  also  for  the  purpose 
of  preventing  leakage  under  the  abutments,  otherwise  the  double 
sheeting  of  1-in.  plank  would  have  answered  throughout.  The 
sheet  piling  and  plank  sheeting  were  well  spiked  to  the  top  timbers 
of  the  crib.  Gravel  and  earth  were  then  deposited  around  the  crib 
up  to  the  water  level  for  a  double  purpose :  First,  to  prevent  the 
grout  from  forcing  its  way  through  the  sheeting,  and  second  to 
serve  as  a  cofferdam  when  the  time  came  to  pump  out  the  crib. 
The  cost  of  this  foundation  crib  was  as  follows : 

FOUNDATION  CRIB. 

Per  M.  ft. 

Material.                                                                          Total,  of  crib. 

Lumber,  pine,  65.3  M.  ft.  B.  M.  at  $11.36 $    742  $11.36 

Lumber,  hauled,  50.3  M.  ft.  B.  M.  at  $1.25 63  .96 

Iron,  5,123  Ibs.,  at  $0.023 119  1.82 

Miscellaneous  materials 100  1.53 

Total  cost  of  materials $1,024     $15.67 

Labor. 
Framing  and  placing,   65.3  ft,  981  2/8  days.. $1,859     $28.47 

Grand  total $2,834     $44.14 

The  average  work  done  per  man  per  day  was  66.6  ft.   B.  M.  of 
timber  framed  and  placed. 

SHEET  PILES  AND  SHEETING. 

Per  M.  ft. 

Materials.                                                                   Total,  in  place. 

Lumber,  oak,  18.8  M.  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $15.79.  .  .  .$    299  $10.40 

Lumber,  pine,  9.9  M.  ft.  B.  M.  at  $13.99 139  4.82 

Lumber,  hauled,  9.9  M.  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $1.25 12  .86 

Spikes,  800  Ibs.,  at  $0.031 25  .42 

Total  cost  of  materials $    475     $16.50 

Labor. 
Driving,  28.7  M.  ft.,   334  days     $    730     $25.43 

Grand  total $1,205     $41.93 

FILLING  WITH  RIPRAP. 

Material.                                                                   Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 
Riprap,  876  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.74 $    648     $0.74 

Labor. 

Filling  and  placing,  118  days. $    235     $     .27 

Inspection  of  riprap,  10  days 18  .02 

Grand  total,  876  cu.  yds.  riprap $    901     $   1.03 


986  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  average  work  done  per  man  per  day  was  6.84  cu.  yds.  of  rip* 
rap  placed. 

Cost  of  a  Coffer-dam  and  Aqueduct.— In  1840,  on  the  Erie  Canal, 
when  skilled  laborers  were  paid  $1  per  day  of  11  hrs.  worked  (and 
stonecutters  received  $2.25  a  day — carpenters'  wages  not  stated), 
a  cofferdam  (built  by  contract)  containing  157,500  ft.  B.  M.  of 
timber  and  plank  was  built  with  830  days  of  skilled  labor  and  a  few 
carpenters.  This  is  equivalent  to  190  ft.  B.  M.  per  man  per  day. 
If  wages  had  been  $2  per  day,  this  would  have  meant  a  cost  of 
$10.50  per  M. 

In  building  (by  contract)  an  aqueduct  trunk  or  flume,  supported 
by  masonry  arches,  the  timber  gang  consisted  of  2  carpenters  to 
every  1  skilled  laborer.  There  were  put  in  892,400  ft.  B.  M.  of 
timber,  of  which  260,300  ft.  B.  M.  were  framed.  This  required  3,153 
days  of  carpenters  and  laborers.  The  average  day's  work  for  each 
man  was: 

Ft.  B.  M. 

Framing   648 

Putting  in  the  work 324 

If  wages  had  averaged  $2.60  per  day  (2  carpenters  to  1  laborer) 
this  would  have  meant  a  cost  of  $4  per  M  for  framing  and  $8  per  M 
for  putting  in  the  work,  or  a  total  of  $12. 

Cost  of  Four  Caissons.— Mr.  B.  L.  Crosby  gives  the  following  on 
the  construction  of  four  piers  for  a  double-track  bridge  across  the 
Missouri  River,  for  the  St.  Louis  extension  of  the  St.  L.,  K.  &  N.  W. 
R.  R.  The  foundation  work  was  done  by  company  labor.  The 
masonry  piers  were  founded  on  pneumatic  caissons,  each  30x70  ft. 
outside  measure,  excepting  one  which  was  24  x  60  ft.  The  caissons 
were  16  ft.  high,  including  the  iron  cutting  edge,  and  surmounted 
with  a  timber  cribwork.  This  cribwork  was  24  ft,  45  ft.,  58  ft.  and 
64  ft.  high,  respectively,  on  the  four  piers.  All  the  caissons,  except 
one,  were  built  on  launching  ways  on  the  north  side  of  the  river, 
just  above  the  bridge  line.  These  launching  ways  were  con- 
structed by  driving  piles,  which  were  capped  by  12  x  12-in.  timbers 
running  up  and  down  stream,  and  then  the  12  x  12-in.  way  timbers 
were  drift-bolted  to  the  caps.  The  ways  had  a  slope  of  3  ins. 
to  the  foot  toward  the  river,  and  extended  far  enough  out  to  allow 
the  caisson  to  float  before  being  clear  of  the  timbers.  Piles  were 
cut  off  under  water  with  a  circular  saw,  and  the  drift-bolts,  which 
had  been  started  into  the  caps  before  they  were  sunk,  were  driven 
by  a  ramrod  working  through  a  gas-pipe  over  the  drift-bolt.  To 
remove  a  sand-bar  at  the  site  of  one  of  the  piers,  a  steamboat  was 
anchored  to  piles  over  the  pier  site,  and  by  the  revolution  of  its 
paddle  wheels  washed  out  a  hole  7  to  10  ft.  deep.  Barges  were  placed 
each  side  of  the  caisson,  and  heavy  timbers  bolted  across  the  caisson, 
and  extending  out  over  the  barges.  The  caisson  was  towed  to  its 
site,  and  when  it  struck  a  sand-bar,  air  was  pumped  into  the  caisson 
to  raise  it  so  as  to  clear  the  bar.  In  sinking  the  caisson  a  Morrison 
sand-pump  and  a  Morrison  clay-hoist  were  used.  The  greatest  depth 
reached  below  low  water  was  101  ft.,  and  laborers  in  the  caisson 
received  $3.50  a  day  of  2  or  3  hrs.  (working  1-hr,  shifts)  at  this 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  987 

great  depth.  The  pneumatic  plant  used  in  sinking  consisted  of  two 
No.  4  Clayton  duplex  compressors,  having  steam  and  air  cylinders, 
each  14-in.,  with  a  15-in.  stroke;  a  Worthington  duplex  pump, 
18%  x  10%  x  10  ins.,  and  a  small  dynamo  and  engine.  This  plant 
was  set  up  on  the  steamboat  whose  boilers  furnished  the  power. 
There  was  also  a  duplicate  plant,  which  was  used  part  of  the  time, 
supported  on  a  pile  platform.  There  were  several  hoisting  engines, 
a  pile  driver  boat  provided  with  a  derrick  for  handling  timbers  in 
building  up  the  cribwork  on  the  caissons.  The  concrete  used  to  fill 
the  cribwork  was  1:2:4  Louisville  cement,  and  1:3:6  Portland 
cement. 

In  these  four  caissons  and  cribs  there  were  1,609  M  of  yellow  pine. 
The  cost  of  framing  and  building  the  caissons  was  $21.93  per  M. 
This  includes  cost  of  launching  ways,  and  of  material  and  labor 
of  all  kinds;  except  the  cost  of  the  timber  itself.  It  also  includes 
all  handling  and  towing.  Carpenters  were  paid  $2.50  and  laborers 
?1.75  per  day. 

There  were  placed  in  these  caissons  13,285  cu.  yds.  of  concrete 
'  fcquiring  16,035  bbls.  of  Louisville  cement  and  4,759  bbls.  of  Port- 


6  ft  fang 
4- Frames,  ?fh  C.toC. 

Fig.   4. — A  Small   Scow. 

fend  cement.  The  cost  of  this  concrete  (broken  stone  was  used) 
was  $5.36  per  cu.  yd. 

The  average  cost  of  caisson  and  concrete  filling,,  including  cutting 
edges,  shafting,  etc.,  was  34.2  cts.  per  cu.  ft. ;  the  average  cost  of 
sinking  9.17  cts.  per  cu.  ft,  this  average  being  materially  increased 
due  to  some  rock  excavation  on  one  pier  where  the  average  cost  of 
caisson  sinking  was  12.33  cts.  per  cu.  ft.  The  average  cost  of  cais- 
sons was  $178  per  ft.  sunk,  ranging  from  $116  per' ft.  on  one  to 
$259  per  ft.  on  the  one  where  rock  was  encountered.  Work  on  the 
first  caisson  was  begun  July  30,  1892,  and  it  was  launched  Aug.  20. 
It  reached  bed  rock  Jan.  2,  1893,  at  a  depth  of  89  ft.  below  low 
water.  The  first  engine  passed  over  the  completed  bridge  Dec.  27, 
1893. 

For  much  more  detailed  costs  of  caisson  work  see  data  in  the 
section  on  Bridges. 

Cost  of  Two  Small  Scows. — For  use  in  river  work,  two  small 
scows  were  built  as  shown  in  Fig.  4.  Each  scow  was  2  ft.  deep,  6  ft. 
wide,  and  32  ft.  long.  It  consisted  of  four  parallel  frames  made  by 
spiking  2  x  6-in.  hemlock  to  form  rough  trusses.  These  frames  were 
2  ft.  apart,  and  to  them  rough  hemlock  sheeting  plank  was  spiked, 


988  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

making  deck  bottom,  sides  and  ends  of  a  closed  box.  All  the  joints, 
except  the  deck,  were  calked  with  oakum  and  tarred.  Thus  very 
cheap  and  watertight  scows  were  made.  They  were  strong  enough 
to  be  used  for  a  floating  pile  driver,  'by  bolting  the  two  scows  side 
by  side ;  but  they  were  not  quite  large  enough  for  this  purpose 
and  the  leaders  of  the  pile  driver  had  to  held  with  guy  ropes,  which 
was  a  great  nuisance.  Nevertheless,  this  rough  and  light  construc- 
tion proved  good  enough  in  every  other  respect  for  river  work  where 
no  logs  or  other  heavy  objects  could  batter  the  scows.  The  cost 
of  these  two  scows  was  as  follows : 

3  M.  rough  hemlock,  at  $11 $33.00 

15  Ibs.  oakum,  and  necessary  pitch. .-. 1.50 

1  keg  nails 2.00 

12  days'  labor,  at  $2 24.00 

Total  for  two   scows $60.50 

This  is  equivalent  to  $30  each  for  the  scows.  One  carpenter,  at 
$2.50,  assisted  by  one  laborer,  at  $1.50,  did  the  work,  which  cost  $8 
per  M.  During  the  winter  the  scows  were  hauled  out  of  the  water, 
and  next  spring  re-calked  with  8  Ibs.  of  oakum,  requiring  the  labor 
of  one  man  for  14  hrs.  Each  scow  was  readily  loaded  on  a  wagon 
for  transportation. 

Cost  of  a  Semi-Circular  Flume.— Mr.  William  H.  Hall  is  authority 
for  the  following  relating  to  the  work  on  the  Santa  Ana  Canal  of 
the  Bear  Valley  Irrigation  Co.,  in  San  Bernardino  County,  California, 
in  1894.  Wooden  stave  pipe  and  a  semi-circula*-  stave  flume,  in- 
vented by  Mr.  Hall,  were  largely  used,  and  cost  data  are  given. 
The  flume  is  5%  ft.  in  diameter,  semi-circular,  made  of  dressed  red- 
wood staves  1  %  ins.  thick  held  by  binding  rods  or  hoops  ( 2  f t.  8  ins. 
apart)  passing  through  4  x  4-in.  wooden  cross-yokes.  The  flume 
rests  on  sills  or  bolster*  (10  ft.  apart)  cut  to  fit  its  curved  bottom, 
and  these  sills  are  supported  on  concrete  blocks  or  on  wooden  trestles 
according  to  the  locality.  A  gang  of  10  laborers  and  5  carpenters 
and  a  foreman  built  the  flume.  Not  a  nail  was  used  in  its  con- 
struction, wages  were  high,  being  $2  a  day  for  laborers,  $3  a  day 
for  carpenters,  and  $4  a  day  for  team  and  driver.  The  cost  of  erect- 
ing the  flume,  exclusive  of  trestle  work,  was  $5.75  per  M,  but  this 
does  not  include  shop  work,  delivery  and  calking.  The  cost  of 
delivering  the  lumber  in  wagons  was  $2.50  per  M  and  subdelivering 
it  on  dollies  was  $2.50  per  M  more,  as  the  work  was  in  a  rough 
country;  hauling  costing  37%  cts.  per  ton  mile  by  contract.  The 
cost  of  making  the  sills,  and  yokes,  and  dipping  all  the  lumber  in 
coal  tar,  and  calking  after  erection,  came  to  $3.25  per  M,  including 
all  timber  in  the  flume,  exclusive  of  trestles.  Hence  the  total  labor 
cost,  including  delivery  and  subdelivery,  was  $14  per  M.  The  lum- 
ber was  bought  for  $28  per  M. 

The  cost  of  framing  and  erecting  timber  trestles  to  support  this 
flume  was  $13  per  M,  the  rough  pine  itself  costing  $19  per  M;  the 
cost  of  delivering  was  presumably  $5  per  M.  The  work  was  half 
over  before  the  men  became  trained  to  their  work,  and  at  no  time 
were  they  very  active  or  efficient. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  989 

The  total  amount  of  dressed  redwood  for  the  flume  staves  was  312 
M,  which  required  214,000  Ibs.  of  wrought  and  cast  iron  for  bands, 
bolts,  etc.,  or  about  700  Ibs.  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  This  iron  cost  5% 
cts.  per  Ib.  At  these  high  prices  the  cost  of  the  finished  flume  was 
about  $5  per  lin.  ft,  of  which  $2.50  was  for  the  flume  alone  and 
$2.50  for  the  trestle  supporting  it. 

Cost  of  a  Wood  Flume,  Klamath  Irrigation  Project.* — The  flume  is 
4,303  ft.  long,  and  has  an  inside  width  of  11  ft.  and  inside  height 
of  5 1/2  ft. ;  it  rests  on  concrete  piers  with  rubble-stone  foundations, 
and  is  built  of  red  fir  lumber.  Of  Class  1  lumber,  for  the  frame- 
work of  the  flume,  442,000  ft.  B.  M.  were  purchased  at  $15.50  per 
thousand,  delivered.  Measurement  after  construction,  however, 
showed  only  438,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  place,  and  thus  indicated  a  waste 
of  4,000  ft.  B.  M.,  or  a  little  less  than  1%.  Of  Class  2  lumber,  for 
lining  the  flume,  60,000  ft.  B.  M.  were  purchased  at  $30.50  per  thou- 
sand, delivered,  and  227,000  ft.  B.  M.  at  $19  per  thousand,  making 
a  total  purchase  of  287,000  ft.  B.  M.  Measurement  after  construc- 
tion showed  284,200  ft.  B.  M.  in  place,  thus  indicating  a  waste  of 
2,800  ft.  B.  M.,  or  about  1%. 

The  concrete  piers  and  stone  foundations  were  built  by  force 
account.  The  piers,  1,091  in  number,  are  18  ins.  high,  24  ins.  square 
at  the  base,  and  12  ins.  square  at  the  top,  and  rest  on  rubble  founda- 
tions 3  ft.  square. 

The  total  costs  on  which  the  tabulated  unit  costs  are  based  are 
$21,000  for  the  flume  proper  and  $6,995.88  for  the  foundations;  in 
addition,  however,  there  were  costs,  not  distributed  in  the  unit 
costs,  of  $174.96  for  a  spillway  and  $347.54  for  miscellaneous  ex- 
penditures, making  a  total  cost  for  the  whole  structure  of  $28,518.38, 
or  $6.64  per  lin.  ft.  of  flume. 

—Per  M  ft.  B.  M.—  Flume 

Labor:                                       Class  1.  Class  2.  per  lin  ft. 

Superintendence    $   0.46  $  1.02  $0.11 

Carpenter    work     5.97  4.83  .93 

Distributing  timbers 63  .63  .11 

Miscellaneous     21  .17  .03 

Material: 

Lumber    delivered 15.64  21.60  3.02 

Bolts  and  washers 36  ......  .04 

Nails  and   spikes 94  .94  .16 

Engineering  and  inspection..      2.91  2.91  .50 

Totals  for  flume  proper.  .  .$27.12              $32.10  $4.90 

Piers  and  foundations 1.62 

$6.52 

Cost  of  Lock  Gates.f— Maj.  Graham  D.  Fitch  gives  the  following: 
The  gates  for  the  lock  described  on  page  570  are  of  the  standard 
form,  namely,  mitering  gates  of  the  girder  type  with  straight  back 
and  front.  They  are  horizontally  framed  and  without  quoin  or 
miter  posts,  the  main  timbers  extending  from  edge  to  edge  of  the 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  26,  1909. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,   1908,  p.   281. 


990  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

gate  and  the  ends,  which  are  built  up  solid  with  filling  blocks,  being 
shaped  to  fit  the  hollow  quoin  and  miter,  respectively,  thus  avoiding 
the  weakness  of  beams  jointed  into  vertical  heel  and  toe  posts.  The 
rise  was  taken  as  1/6  of  the  span,  which  is  equivalent  to  a  miter 
angle  of  18  degrees  26  minutes. 

The  gates  are  of  white  oak,  20  ins.  thick  throughout,  each  arm 
consisting  of  a  built-up  beam  composed  of  two  10  by  10-in.  timbers 
bolted  together  with  1-in.  bolts  and  extending  in  one  length  from 
toe  to  heel.  The  tops  of  the  gates  are  flush  with  the  tops  of  the 
lock  walls,  so  that  the  lock  can  be  used  until  the  walls  are  sub- 
merged. The  lower  gates,  which  are  29  ft.  5  ins.  in  height,  are  built 
solid  for  10  ft.  from  the  bottom.  For  the  upper  gates  these  figures 
become  15  ft.  5  ins.  and  20  ins.,  respectively.  By  making  the  lower 
portion  of  a  gate  solid,  the  gate  may  be  made  thinner,  thus  reduc- 
ing under  pressure.  The  upper  portions  of  the  gates  are  paneled ; 
the  arms  are  all  made  of  the  same  scantling  as  below,  but  are 
spaced  inversely  as  the  maximum  loads ;  the  arms  are  separated  by 
five  blocks  (including  the  two  at  the  heel  and  toe),  and  the  inter- 
vals are  closed  with  a  sheathing  of  2-in.  oak  plank  made  watertight 
by  calking.  The  beams  are  held  together  by  seven  pairs  of  long 
1%-in.  bolts  running  vertically  through  the  center  lines  of  the  main 
timbers  as  well  as  through  the  filling  blocks  in  the  upper  part  of  the 
gate.  The  weight  of  the  gate  is  taken  up  by  two  diagonal  tie  straps 
of  3%  by  %-in.  wrought-iron  eyebars  provided  with  turnbuckles ; 
one  end  of  each  eyebar  passes  over  a  pin  in  the  journal  strap  and 
the  other  over  a  similar  pin  held  in  place  near  the  lower  end  of  the 
toe  by  a  stirrup  strap  and  a  nose  strap.  The  bottom  beam  is  fitted 
at  the  quoin  with  a  cast-iron  heel  piece  which  rests  on  a  forged 
steel  pivot  shrunk  into  a  cast-jron  pivot  plate  having  sufficient 
bearing.  This  bedplate  is  bolted  to  the  concrete.  The  top  gudgeon 
is  a  3-in.  steel  pin  supported  at  both  ends  by  journal  castings,  be- 
tween which  the  collar  works.  In  order  that  the  leaf  may,  in  open- 
ing and  closing,  swing  clear  of  the  quoin  without  friction,  the  rota- 
tion axis  of  the  pivot  and  gudgeon  is  on  the  up-stream  side  of  the 
center  of  figure  of  the  hollow  quoin  when  the  leaf  is  closed,  the 
eccentricity  being  1%  ins.  The  up-stream  half  of  the  toe  is 
rounded  off  so  that  the  surface  of  contact  when  the  gates  are  mitered 
shall  fall  upon  the  down-stream  timbers  of  the  built-up  beams. 
Thus  the  compression  due  to  the  end  reactions  is  thrown  on  the 
down-stream  timbers  where  it  will  relieve  the  tension  from  the 
direct  loading,  and  is  removed  entirely  from  the  up-stream  timbers 
to  avoid  increasing  the  compression  from  the  direct  loading. 

The  anchorage  for  the  gates  consists  of  four "  wrought-iron  bars 
with  cast-iron  washers  or  anchor  plates  embedded  in  the  concrete 
and  connected  in  pairs  at  their  exposed  ends  to  two  heavy  castings. 
The  anchorage  connections  fit  in  a  recess  below  the  coping  and  are 
covered  with  a  cast-iron  plate. 

The  method  of  building  and  placing  the  lock,  gates  was  as 
follows : 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  991 

A  small  hand-power  derrick  was  erected  on  a  level  spot  so  as  to 
command  the  ways,  which  were  built  of  heavy  timbers  laid  perfectly 
level  about  2^  ft.  from  the  ground  and  close  enough  together  to 
support  without  deflection  the  weight  of  an  entire  gate.  On  each 
side  of  the  derrick  were  placed  two  sets  of  ways,  between  which 
ran  a  track  for  carrying  the  timbers.  The  gate  timbers  were  de- 
livered as  needed  to  the  derrick  and  placed  on  the  ways,  the  built- 
up  beams  framed  and  bolted,  and  the  heel  and  toe  worked  to  pat- 
tern. The  arms  and  blocks  were  then  juxtaposed  in  position  so  as  to 
get  the  alignment  of  the  long  bolts  and  then  separated  for  the  holes 
to  be  bored.  This  was  a  tedious  procedure,  as  no  matter  how  care- 
fully the  measurements  for  the  holes  were  made  it  was  found  im- 
possible to  bore  all  of  them  in  the  different  pieces  so  as  to  avoid 
slight  errors  of  alignment ;  hence  burning  the  holes  out  with  long 
rods  of  hot  iron  had  to  be  resorted  to.  The  gate  was  then  assem- 
bled, the  bolts  inserted  and  tightened,  the  irons  fitted  on,  the  heel 
and  toe  worked  to  pattern,  and  each  arm  and  block  numbered  to 
avoid  any  displacement  later.  The  gates  were  then  taken  apart  and 
transported  to  the  lock  pit  to  be  erected  piece  by  piece,  for  which 
a  land  derrick  was  used.  As  each  beam  was  put  into  position  its 
top  was  given  a  heavy  coat  of  white  lead,  and  the  position  of  its  bolt 
holes  tested  by  thrusting  down  an  iron  rod.  After  the  gate  had  been 
thus  built  up  to  the  required  height,  the  long  perpendicular  bolts 
were  raised  by  the  derrick  and  put  into  place,  the  various  irons 
fitted,  the  anchor  bars  and  tie  straps  tightened,  and  the  gate  swung. 
The  gates  were  then  given  two  coats  of  red  lead. 

The  gates  are  operated  by  hand  power.  The  maneuvering  gear 
consists  of  a  spar,  to  each  end  of  which  is  fastened  one  end  of  a 
chain ;  the  bight  of  this  chain  is  led  through  a  chain  guide  consist- 
ing of  two  sheaves  to  a  chain  capstan  worked  by  a  crank.  The 
gate  is  opened  or  closed  according  as  the  chain  is  pulled  in  one 
direction  or  the  other. 

As  wooden  lock  gates  subject  to  varying  lifts,  unless  made  too 
heavy  at  low  water,  are  too  buoyant  at  high  water,  it  is  necessary 
at  the  approach  of  floods  to  ballast  them,  which  was  done  by  filling 
the  panels  with  large  stones. 

The  miter  sills,  which  provide  an  elastic  cushion  for  the  bottom 
of  the  gates,  consist  of  12  by  12-in.  timbers  well  bolted  to  the 
miter  wall,  as  they  may  sometimes  be  subjected  to  a  lifting  pressure 
from  the  gates,  and  when  once  started  the  upward  water  pressure  is 
of  course  added.  The  miter  sills  are  2  ins.  higher  than  the  miter 
walls  so  as  to  act  as  a  guard  for  the  masonry.  The  miter  sills  are 
1  ft.  below  normal  4  ft.  depth,  so  as  to  permit  the  pool  level  to  be 
reduced  without  affecting  navigation.  The  sills,  like  the  gates,  are 
of  white  oak  and  were  set  when  the  concrete  was  placed  in  the  miter 
walls.  The  gates  do  not,  when  shut,  extend  over  the  sill,  as  is  some- 
times the  case,  for  a  difficult  joint  then  becomes  necessary.  In 
this  instance  the  gates  lap  the  sill  by  5  ins.,  the  under  pressure 
being  counterbalanced  by  the  weight  of  the  gates. 


992  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  the  gates  and  sills  was  as  follows : 

Material:                                                      Unit  cost  Total. 

Lumber,  oak,  35.7  M  ft.  B.  M $41.37  $1,477 

Iron,    wrought,    342    Ibs 05  17 

Iron,    wrought,    16,243    Ibs 06  975 

Iron,  wrought  common,   153   Ibs 023  4 

Iron,  cast,   600   Ibs 046  28 

Iron,  cast,  5,354  Ibs 045  241 

Steel,    615   Ibs , 065  40 

Journal  castings  and  patterns 22 

Total  materials   $2,803 

Labor: 

Inspection  of  lumber,  33.9  M  ft $   0.3897  $      13 

Hauling   miscellaneous   material 15 

Framing,    35.7   M  ft 43.28  1,545 

Setting   gates,    4 76.54  306 

Care,  repair  and  adjusting  since  1901,  4 887 

Total   cost  of  labor $2,766 

Grand    total $5,569 

The  total  labor  time  in  days  for  framing  was  684  4/8  and  the  work 
done  per  man  per  day  was  52.1  ft.  ;  the  total  labor  time  for  setting 
the  four  gates  was  149%  days. 

Cost  of  a  Railway  Box  Car.— Mr.  E.  C.  Spalding  is  authority  for 
the  following  data  on  small  box  cars  built  in  1883.     The  car  was 
probably  designed   to  carry   about  30,000   Ibs.,   for   its  own  weight 
must  have  been  about  23,000  Ibs. 
Material  in  Body: 

4,000  ft.  B.  M.,  at   $20 $   80.00 

700  Ibs.  wrought  iron,  at  $0.05 35.00 

600  Ibs.  cast  iron,  at  $0.03 18.00 

Nails     5.20 

46    Ibs.   draw-springs,   at  $0,09 4.14 

Tin  for  roof   12.60 

Paint    3.30 

Total   material   in   body $158.24 

Labor  on  Body: 

20  days  carpenter,  at  $2.25 ...: $  45.00 

2  days  tinner  on  roof,  at  $2.00 4.00 

1%  days  painter,  at  $2.00 3.00 

Total    labor    on    body $52.00 

Material  in  Trucks: 

4,200  Ibs.  wheels  ;    1,400  Ibs.  axles $160.00 

64  Ibs.   brasses,   at  $0.22 14.08 

184  Ibs.    springs,   at    $0.09 16.56 

490  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $20 9.80 

1,000  Ibs.   wrought  iron,  at  $0.05 50.00 

1,300  Ibs.   cast  iron,   $0.03 39.00 

Paint    0.80 


Total  materials  in  trucks $290.24 

Labor  on  Trucks: 

<£   days  carpenter,  at  $2.25 $     5.63 

4   day  painter,  at  $2.00 0.50 


Total     $     6.13 

Grand   total    $506.61 


,  TIMBERWORK.  993 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  the  labor  on  the  box  of  the  car 
was  $45  for  4,000  ft.  B.  M.,  or  $11.25  per  M.  The  labor  cost,  on  the 
490  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  trucks  was  practically  the  same  rate. 

By  reference  to  data  in  the  section  on  Buildings,  it  will  be  found 
that  the  labor  costs  of  frame  buildings  is  about  the  same  as  above 
given  for  this  box  car. 

Cost  of  Making  Bodies  for  Dump  Cars — Some  bodies  for  bottom- 
dumping  cars  were  made  to  be  mounted  on  ordinary  hand-car  trucks, 
and  were  used  in  filling  a  trestle.  The  car  bodies  were  made  hop- 
per shape,  the  sides  being  4  ft.  apart ;  the  ends  were  6  y2  ft.  apart 
it  the  top  and  sloping  toward  the  center  until  they  were  4  ft.  apart 
it  the  bottom.  The  height  of  the  body  was  20  ins.,  thus  giving  a 
struck-measure  capacity  of  33  cu.  ft.  Two  doors,  forming  the  bot- 
tom of  the  car,  were  hinged  to  the  two  ends  of  the  car  body  with 
three  14-in.  strap  hinges  to  each  door.  These  doors  were  each  18  ins. 
wide  and  4  ft.  long,  and  were  closed  by  means  of  hoisting  chains 
(*4 -in.  iron)  passing  around  a  2% -in.  gas  pipe  winch  which 
spanned  the  car  from  side  to  side.  This  2% -in.  gas  pipe  was 
stiffened  by  a  2% -in.  pipe  slipped  inside.  It  required  150  ft.  B.  M. 
of  plank  to  make  each  car,  and  a  carpenter  (25  cts.  per  hr.)  with  a 
helper  (15  cts.  per  hr.)  averaged  one  car  in  7  hrs.,  which  is  at 
the  rate  of  $10  per  M. 

Cost  of  Making  Tool  Boxes.— A  carpenter  made  two  tool  boxes 
of  1-in.  matched  pine  boards  in  10  hrs.  Each  box  contained  130  ft. 
B.  M.,  so  that  the  labor  cost  was  a  little  less  than  $10  per  M,  wages 
being  25  cts.  per  hr. 

Cost  of  Plank  Roads.— Very  often  the  contractor  would  be  en- 
abled to  haul  much  larger  loads  in  wagons  if  he  were  to  build  plank 
roads  up  certain  short  steep  ascents,  or  up  out  of  the  pit.  The 
planks  need  not  be  spiked  to  the  stringers.  Plank  for  such  roads 
should  be  8  ft.  long  and  3  ins.  thick.  Contrary  to  general  opinion 
cedar  makes  an  excellent  plank  road,  for  its  surface  soon  becomes 
a  thin  mat  of  wood  fibers  and  dirt  that  protect  the  body  of  the 
plank.  Either  three  lines  of  4  x  6-in.  or  two  lines  of  3  x  12-in. 
cedar  stringers  should  be  bedded  in  the  ground  and  the  plank  laid 
upon  them  without  spiking. 

In  the  State  of  Washington  I  found  the  cost  of  building  the  very 
best  of  these  plank  roads  to  be  as  follows:  Three  skilled  laborers 
bedding  three  lines  of  4  x  6-in.  stringers  in  clay,  laying  and  spiking 
3-in.  plank,  averaged  15,000  ft.  B.  M.  per  10-hr,  day.  At  $2.50  per 
day  per  man,  the  cost  would  be  0.50  per  M.  In  sand  these  men 
averaged  18,000  ft.  B.  M.  per  day.  They  were  hustling,  as  they  re- 
ceived 50  cts.  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  for  laying  this  road,  plank  being 
delivered  alongside. 

Over  such  a  road  a  team  can  pull  as  much  as  on  the  very  best 
asphalt  pavement.  The  "trick"  about  building  a  good  plank  road  is 
to  bed  the  stringers,  not  leaving  them  on  top  of  the  ground.  The 
road  then  is  firm  and  great  loads  can  be  hauled  over  it,  so  long  as 
it  is  kept  in  good  condition. 

Since  in  temporary  roads  the  spiking  may  be  omitted,  and  as  a 


994  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

matter  of  fact  it  should  be  omitted  even  on  permanent  roads,  we  see 
that  the  plank  may  be  used  over  and  over  again  for  different  jobs ; 
but  if  the  road  is  worth  laying  at  all  it  is  worth  laying  well  in  the 
first  place. 

Plank  road  work  lends  itself  admirably  to  payment  by  the  piece 
rate  or  by  the  bonus  system. 

Piles.— Piles  are  sold  by  lumber  dealers  at  5  to  15  cents  per  lin.  ft. 
of  pile  for  all  ordinary  lengths,  but  very  long  piles  bring  high  prices 
per  lin.  ft.  Specifications  usually  provide  a  contract  price  per  lin. 
ft.  for  "piles  delivered"  on  the  work  ready  to  drive ;  and  another 
price  per  lin.  ft.  for  "piles  driven."  The  length  of  the  "pile  driven" 
is  the  full  length  of  the  pile  left  in  the  work  after  cutting  off  the 
broomed  head,  although  occasionally  it  is  specified  to  be  the  length 
of  the  pile  underground.  Hence  care  should  be  taken  to  make  clear 
what  is  meant  by  the  expressed  "per  foot  of  pile  driven." 

The  actual  cost  of  driving  a  pile  should  be  recorded  in  dollars  and 
cents  per  pile,  as  well  as  in  cents  per  lin.  ft.  of  pile  driven ;  for 
costs  vary  less  per  pile  than  per  lin.  ft.  This  is  evident  when  we 
consider  that  where  the  driving  is  easy  a  very  long  pile  is  driven  in 
no  longer  time  than  is  required  for  a  short  pile  where  driving  is 
hard. 

I  prefer  to  specify  payment  for  "piles  delivered"  by  the  lineal 
foot,  and  for  "piles  driven,"  by  the  pile. 

Pile  Drivers — There  are  three  types  of  pile  drivers:  (1)  Free  fall; 
( 2 )  friction-clutch  ;  and  ( 3 )  steam-hammer.  In  the  free-fall  driver, 
the  hammer  is  detached  from  the  hoisting  rope  and  allowed  to  fall 
freely  upon  the  pile.  In  the  friction-clutch  driver,  the  hammer  re- 
mains always  attached  to  the  hoisting  rope,  and,  by  means  of  a 
friction  clutch  on  the  hoisting  engine,  the  drum  is  thrown  into  gear 
or  out  of  gear  at  will.  When  the  clutch  is  thrown  out  of  gear,  the 
hammer  falls,  dragging  the  hoisting  rope  after  it.  The  Nasmyth 
steam-hammer  is  raised  by  steam  acting  direct  upon  a  piston  at- 
tached to  the  hammer.  The  hammer  is  raised  about  3%  ft.,  and 
allowed  to  fall  by  gravity. 

A  steam-hammer  strikes  about  60  blows  per  minute.  A  friction- 
clutch  hammer  strikes  about  18  blows  per  minute  when  the  ham- 
mer falls  12  ft. ;  and  25  blows  per  minute  when  the  hammer  falls 
only  5  ft.  A  free-fall  hammer  strikes  about  7  blows  per  minute 
when  the  fall  is  20  ft.  and  a  hoisting  engine  is  used. 

The  free-fall  hammer  is  much  used  where  horses  do  the  hoisting 
instead  of  an  engine.  In  either  case  a  lug  on  top  of  the  hammer  is 
gripped  by  a  pair  of  "tongs,"  which  are  tripped  at  the  desired 
height,  allowing  the  hammer  to  fall.  The  "tongs"  descend  slowly 
by  gravity  helped  perhaps  by  the  man,  who  has  tripped  them,  and 
they  automatically  grip  the  hammer  again.  The  "tongs"  are  also 
called  "scissors"  or  "nippers." 

The  two  upright  timbers  that  guide  the  hammer  are  called  "leads," 
or  "leaders,"  or  "gins,"  or  "ways."  A  common  weight  of  ham- 
mer for  a  free-fall  or  a  friction-clutch  machine  is  2,000  to  3,000  Ibs. 

An  "overhang  driver"  is  a  driver  provided  with  leads  that  project 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  995 

8  to  20  ft.  beyond  the  base  of  support  of  the  driver.  The  horizontal 
beams  that  support  the  leads  of  an  overhang  driver  are  trussed ; 
and  the  weight  of  .the  engine  on  the  rear  of  the  trussed  beams 
counterbalances  the  weight  of  the  leads  and  the  hammer  on  the 
front.  A  cheap  driver  of  this  type  can  readily  be  made  for  driving 
the  bents  of  a  pile  trestle  across  a  river,  or  other  body  of  water, 
where  a  scow  is  not  available  for  mounting  the  driver  upon.  The 
author  has  built  such  a  driver  with  a  20-ft.  overhang  for  driving 
falsework  pile  bents  across  a  river. 

A  "railway  pile  driver"  is  a  heavy  driver  of  the  "overhang"  type, 
mounted  on  a  railway  flat  car.  Sometimes  these  drivers  are  made 
self-propelling;  but  frequently  a  locomotive  is  used  in  handling  the 
driver.  The  leads  are  so  made  that  they  can  be  lowered  when  pass- 
ing under  overhead  bridges,  etc.  In  working  with  an  overhang 
driver,  there  is  always  considerable  delay,  for  as  soon  as  the  3  or 
4  piles  for  a  bent  have  been  driven,  they  must  be  sawed  off  and 
capped  with  a  12  x  12 -in.  stick  drift-bolted  to  the  piles,  before  the 
beams  or  stringers  can  be  laid  to  support  the  driver  when  it  moves 
forward. 

A  "scow  driver"  will  drive  more  piles  per  day  than  a  "railway 
^driver,"  because  this  delay  in  sawing  off  and  capping  each  bent 
does  not  occur.  Moreover,  the  piles  are  floated  alongside  the  driver 
ready  for  instant  use.  The  scow  itself  is  quickly  shifted  by  means 
of  ropes  from  suitable  anchorages  to  the  winch-heads  of  the  engine. 

Excepting  on  railway  work,  land  drivers  (as  distinguished  from 
scow  drivers)  are  seldom  mounted  on  wheels  running  on  a  track ; 
but  are  usually  supported  on  rollers  running  on  plank  or  timber 
runways  laid  down  in  advance  of  the  driver.  If  the  ground  is  very 
irregular,  it  must  be  either  graded,  or  the  timber  runways  for  the 
driver  must  be  supported  by  cribbing  or  blocking  so  as  to  give 
a  level  runway  for  the  driver.  The  building  of  such  a  runway  often 
retards  the  work  of  land-driving. 

Excepting  where  the  driving  is  exceedingly  hard,  the  hammer  is 
actually  at  work  but  a  small  fraction  of  the  day  at  best.  The 
contractor  should,  therefore,  exercise  his  wits  to  reduce  the  last 
time. 

There  are  no  very  reliable  data  as  to  the  relative  effectiveness  of 
the  blows  of  steam-hammer  drivers  and  friction-clutch  drivers,  but 
the  following  data  by  Mr.  N.  E.  Weydert  may  prove  of  value : 

In  driving  piles  in  Chicago,  piles  54  ft.  long  were  driven  52  ft,  of 
which  27  ft.  were  in  soft  clay,  and  25  ft.  in  tough  clay.  Each  pile 
averaged  13  ins.  in  diameter.  Using  a  Nasmyth  steam  hammer, 
striking  54  blows  per  minute,  with  a  weight  of  4,500  Ibs.  falling  3% 
ft.,  it  required  48  to  64  blows  to  drive  the  last  foot  when  a  follower 
20  ft.  long  was  used  on  top  of  the  pile;  but,  without  a  follower,  it 
is  estimated  it  would  have  taken  only  24  to  32  blows  to  drive  the 
last  foot.  After  a  pile  had  stood  24  hrs.  it  required  300  to  600  blows 
of  the  hammer  on  the  follower  to  drive  it  1  ft. 

In  the  same  soil,  using  a  3,000-lb.  drop  hammer  falling  30  ft., 
and  striking  a  follower  20  ft.  long,  it  required  16  blows  to  drive  the 


996  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

last  foot;    but  with  the  same  hammer  falling  15  ft.,  it  required  32 
to  36  blows  on  the  follower  to  drive  the  pile  the  last  foot. 

The  piles  were  tested  with  a  load  of  50  tons  each  for  two  weeks 
and  showed  no  settlement. 

The  Steam  Hammer  vs.  the  Drop  Hammer.— Some  50  years  ago, 
when  the  Nasmyth  steam  hammer  came  into  prominence  as  a  pile 
driver,  it  was  predicted  by  engineers  who  had  seen  it  that  the  days 
of  the  rope  hoisted  hammer  were  numbered.  Nor  is  it  uncommon  to 
read  similar  predictions  even  to  this  day.  That  the  steam  hammer 
weighing  two  tons  and  striking  60  blows  a  minute  is  a  very  effective 
machine  no  one  can  deny,  but  what  appears  to  have  been  overlooked 
by  many  engineers  is  the  fact  that  in  nearly  all  driving  of  piles  on 
land,  a  very  small  fraction  of  the  working  day  of  a  pile-driving  gang 
is  spent  in  actual  driving.  This  is  particularly  the  case  in  building 
pile  trestles  with  a  railroad  pile  driver. 

Records  that  I  have  kept  show  very  clearly  how  little  time  is 
ordinarily  spent  in  pile  driving  on  trestle  work,  using  the  ordinary 
railroad  pile  driver  with  a  friction-clutch  engine.  Each  trestle  bent 
consisted  of  four  piles  driven  about  10  ft.  into  firm,  dry  earth,  and 
bents  were  15  ft.  c.  to  c.  It  took  about  20  blows  of  a  2,800-lb.  ham- 
mer falling  about  18  ft.  to  drive  each  pile,  and,  once  the  pile  was  in 
the  leaders,  these  20  blows  were  delivered  in  from  1  to  2  minutes, 
depending  upon  minor  delays  in  keeping  the  pile  plumb.  The  piles 
were  not  ringed.  Hence  we  may  say  that  in  so  far  as  the  actual 
time  of  driving  four  piles  was  concerned,  only  8  minutes  were  thus 
consumed  per  bent  at  the  most.  About  4  or  5  minutes  were  re- 
quired to  get  each  pile  into  the  leaders,  thus  consuming  some  20 
minutes  per  bent. 

Tabulating  the  time  consumed  in  performing  each  detail  we  have: 

Minutes. 

(1)  Getting  4  piles  into  leaders 20 

(2)  Driving   4    piles 8 

(3)  Straightening   and   bracing    the   piles 27 

(4)  Leveling  and  nailing  guide  strips  for  sawing  off .  .      10 

(5)  Sawing  off   4   piles 12 

(6)  Putting  on  cap  and  drift  bolting  it 13 

(7)  Pulling  3  stringers  forward  from  last  bent 11 

(8)  Putting  in  2  more  stringers  that  overhang 20 

(9)  Putting  in  1  tie  and  spiking  rail 4 

Total  time  on  one  bent 125 

Item  (4)  was  unnecessarily  long,  due  to  the  hair-splitting  methods 
of  the  Y-level  man,  who  was  giving  the  cut-off.  Even  after  the 
cleats  to  guide  the  saws  were  nailed  on,  he  had  them  lowered  %-in. 

Items  (3)  and  (5)  may  frequently  be  reduced  very  materially, 
and  always  would  be  on  contract  work,  but  on  work  done  for  a 
railroad  company,  as  this  was,  the  end  of  the  10-hr,  day  will  find 
only  4  to  6  bents  built  under  the  conditions  here  given.  If,  how- 
ever, we  assume  a  bent  of  four  piles  built  in  100  minutes,  we  see 
that  only  8  minutes  of  that  time  will  be  consumed  in  actuaJ  driving. 
In  other  words,  only  three-quarters  of  an  hour  out  of  the  10  hrs.  is 
spent  in  hammering  the  pile.  This  will  doubtless  be  surprising  to 
many  engineers,  and  particularly  to  those  who  have  been  impressed 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  997 

by  the  speed  of  the  Nasmyth  steam  hammers.  Under  a  hustling, 
wide-awake  contractor,  the  writer  has  seen  10  bents  driven  and 
completed  in  a  day  with  a  friction-clutch  driver ;  but  even  under 
such  conditions  the  hammer  was  actually  at  work  driving  less  than 
two  hours. 

It  seems  quite  clear  from  the  foregoing  discussion,  that  main- 
tenance-of-way  engineers  should  look  not  to  improvements  in  the 
form  of  hammer  mechanism,  but  rather  to  improvements  in  the 
mechanism  and  methods  of  handling  the  piles,  caps,  stringers,  etc. 
Very  much  can  be  accomplished  in  this  respect  by  having  a  well- 
organized  force  with  a  clear-headed  foreman  at  its  head.  In  the 
example  just  cited  the  item  of  straightening  piles  was  exceedingly 
expensive  in  time,  in  that  it  consumed  nearly  half  an  hour.  This 
was  largely  due  to  the  fact  that  the  foreman  did  not  appreciate  the 
importance  of  sawing  the  pile  heads  square.  He  simply  put  the  piles 
into  the  leaders  with  the  heads  rough  sawed  as  they  came  from  the 
forest.  In  one  case  the  pile  had  a  large  prong  of  splintered  wood 
projecting  above  the  partly  sawed  head.  Haste  never  makes  more 
waste  than  in  neglecting  to  square  the  pile  heads,  and  guide  the  pile 
properly  while  driving  it. 

In  this  particular  instance,  since  the  driving  was  across  dry  land, 
the  foreman  should  have  secured  a  team  with  which  to  "snake" 
piles  and  timbers  up  alongside  of  or  directly  in  front  of  the  driver. 
Then  the  pile  rope  or  "runner"  could  have  been  quickly  hooked  on 
to  a  chain  already  fastened  around  the  pile  or  timber  to  be  moved, 
with  a  saving  of  50%  in  the  time  spent  in  getting  material  to  place. 
It  does  not  pay  to  make  a  team  out  of  a  pile  driver  and  a  gang  of 
men. 

Instead  of  spending  13  minutes  getting  a  cap  to  place  and  drift- 
bolting  it,  not  more  than  6  or  7  minutes  need  have  been  so  con- 
sumed. Two  men  can  cross-cut  a  pile  in  4  or  5  minutes,  hence  with 
eight  men  on  four  saws,  item  (5)  can  be  reduced  at  least  one-half. 
Running  around  looking  for  saws,  mauls,  drift  bolts,  etc.,  is  one  of 
the  greatest  causes  of  delay.  For  this  reason  there  should  be  a  man 
whose  duty  it  is  to  bring  tools  and  put  them  away  immediately  after 
they  have  served  their  purpose.  The  two  leader  men  on  the  driver 
might  well  attend  to -the  tools. 

We  see,  by  this  method  of  timing,  why  the  Nasmyth  steam  ham- 
;  mer  has  failed  to  displace  the  friction-clutch  hammer  on  trestle 
i  work,  and  we  see  that  if  any  improvement  is  desirable  in  driver 
design  it  is  not  in  the  hammer  mechanism,  but  rather  in  the  means 
!  of  mechanically  handling  the  timbers.  Finally  we  see  that  organ- 
<  ization  of  the  force  is  quite  as  essential  as  improvement  in  mechan- 
jism,  while  it  possesses  the  decided  advantage  of  costing  nothing 
I  except  what  may  be  paid  for  a  better  quality  of  brain  work. 

From  this  discussion  it  should  not  be  inferred  that  the  steam 
I  hammer  has  no  field  of  usefulness,  for  it  has.  Its  field,  however, 
i  is  in  scow  or  land  driving,  where  a  great  number  of  foundation  piles 
ijare  to  be  driven  close  together,  and  especially  where  a  great  num- 
ijber  of  blows  must  be  struck  to  secure  the  desired  pile  penetration. 


998  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Making  Piles.— Two  men  can  cut  down  and  trim  17  oak 
piles  per  day,  each  pile  being  20  ft.  long.  Where  the  men  are  paid 
$1.75  per  10  hrs.,  the  labor  cost  of  making  the  piles  is  practically 
1  ct.  per  lin  ft.  To  this  must  be  added  the  cost  of  hauling  and 
freight  to  the  place  where  the  piles  are  to  be  driven. 

For  weight  of  piles,  see  the  fore  part  of  this  section. 

Life  of  Pile  Driver  Rope.— Mr.  George  J.  Bishop  kept  some  rec- 
ords of  pile  driving  on  the  C.,  R.  I.  &  P.  Ry.  in  1897,  to  determine 
the  life  of  manilla  rope.  The  drum  of  the  friction  pile  driver  engine 
was  14  ins.  diam.,  also  the  sheave  at  the  top  of  the  leads,  and  the 
sheave  at  the  front  of  the  pile  driver  was  20  ins.  The  hammer 
weighed  3,000  Ibs.  The  rope  was  of  three  different  makes,  all  1^ 
ins.  diam.  Common  manilla  3-ply  rope  made  the  best  showing.  The 
length  of  rope  was  125  ft.  and  its  weight  ranged  from  74  to  95  Ibs., 
averaging  85  Ibs.,  or  nearly  0.7  Ib.  per  ft.  The  price  of  the  rope 
was  6^  cts.  per  Ib.  or  $5.53  per  average  rope.  Ten  ropes  were 
used  up  in  driving  1,335  piles  to  an  average  penetration  of  20  ft. 
Hence  each  rope  averaged  133  piles,  or  a  cost  of  4  cts.  per  pile  for 
rope.  However,  5  of  the  ropes  averaged  only  101  piles  each,  and 
5  averaged  166  piles  each. 

Cost  of  Driving  Piles  With  a  Horse  Driver.— This  work  con- 
sisted in  driving  219  piles,  2  ft.  centers,  to  form  the  protecting 
toe  of  a  slope-wall.  The  hammer  weighed  2,000  Ibs.,  and  was  raised 
with  block  and  tackle  by  horses.  Two  teams  were  used  alternately. 
As  soon  as  the  hammer  was  tripped,  two  men  pulled  back  the  ham- 
mer rope  hand  over  hand,  and  hooked  it  on  to  the  second  team  while 
the  other  team  was  returning.  In  this  way  the  blows  were  deliv- 
ered almost  twice  as  rapidly  as  when  one  team  only  is  used.  The 
driver  was  supported  on  wooden  rollers  sheathed  with  iron  and  pro- 
vided with  sockets  into  which  bars  could  be  inserted  for  turning  the 
rollers.  The  rollers  rested  on  planks  laid  on  the  ground  which  was 
comparatively  level  and  required  no  staying  or  grading  to  secure  a 
level  runway  for  the  driver.  Pine  piles,  15  ft.  long,  were  driven 
in  a  stiff  clay  to  a  depth  of  13  ft. 

The  average  number  of  piles  driven  per  10-hr,   day  was  21,  but 
the  best  day's  record  was  30.     The  cost  was  as  follows  per  day: 
5  laborers,  at  $1.50 $   7.50 

1  foreman,    who    worked .* 2.50 

2  teams  and  drivers,  at  $3.00 6.00 

Rent   of    driver 2.00 

Total,  for  21  piles,  at  85  cts $18.00 

The  piles  cost  10  cts.  per  ft.  delivered  ;  and  the  contract  price 
was  24  cts.  per  ft.  delivered  and  driven. 

On  another  contract  under  my  direction,  where  piles  were  spaced 
10  ft.  centers  and  driven  12  ft.  into  gravel  along  the  sloping  bank 
of  a  river,  it  was  necessary  to  do  more  or  less  grading  and  block- 
ing up  to  secure  a  level  runway  for  the  pile  driver.  Four  men  and  a 
pair  of  horses  averaged  only  6  piles  per  10-hr,  day,  making  the  cost 
about  $1.50  per  pile  for  the  labor  of  driving.  This  gang  was  too 
small,  and  worked  deliberately. 


PILING,  TRESTL1NG,  TIMBERWORK.  999 

Cost  of  Driving  Foundation  Piles  for  a  Building. — On  this  work, 
which  consisted  in  driving  long  piles  for  the  foundation  of  a  building 
in  Jersey  City,  a  pile  driver  mounted  on  rollers  was  used.  The  lead- 
ers were  60  ft.  long,  and  provided  with  two  head  sheaves,  one  for 
the  hammer  rope  and  one  for  the  rope  used  in  hauling  and  raising 
the  piles.  The  hammer  weighed  2,100  Ibs.  ;  and  the  engine  was  a 
double-drum  friction-clutch.  The  piles  were  of  spruce  50  ft.  long, 
and  were  driven  their  full  length  in  soft  clay.  For  the  first  10  ft. 
the  piles  were  driven  without  ringing.  When  the  pile  head 
reached  the  bottom  of  the  leaders,  a  short  wooden  follower  was  used 
for  the  last  10  to  25  blows.  The  pile  ring  was  then  pulled  off  the 
pile  by  a  short  iron  peavy  lifted  by  the  pile  rope.  The  piles  were 
stacked  up  in  the  street  about  100  ft.  away  from  the  driver,  and 
were  "snaked  over,"  when  wanted ;  the  pile  rope  being  used  for  the 
purpose.  For  the  first  few  blows  the  hammer  had  a  fall  of  only 
5  ft.,  and  about  25  blows  per  min.  were  delivered.  But  after  that 
the  fall  of  the  hammer  was  12  ft.,  and  about  18  blows  per  min.  were 
delivered.  It  required  about  110  blows  to  drive  a  pile  its  full  50  ft. 
The  time  required  to  drive  one  pile  was  as  follows : 

Minutes. 

Hooking   on   dragging  pile   to   driver 5 

Hoisting  pile  and  getting  it  in  place 

Hammering  pile   6 

Putting  ring  on  pile . 1 

Placing  follower  on  pile % 

Removing   follower    from    pile 1 

Removing   ring  from   pile % 

Shifting  pile  driver  2  ft 1 

Total  time  per  pile 17 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  hammer  was  actually  engaged  in  ham- 
mering not  much  more  than  one-third  of  the  total  time.  When 
everything  was  working  smoothly  35  piles  were  driven  in  10  hrs., 
but  the  output  frequently  fell  below  30  piles  in  a  day,  due  to  sundry 
slight  delays  and  accidents. 

The  cost  of  operating  the  driver  was  as  follows: 

1  engineman $   3.00 

1  man  up  the  ladder 1.50 

4  men  handling  and  guiding  pile 6.00 

1  man    sharpening  piles 1.50 

1  foreman  handling  pile  rope,  etc 4.00 

1/3  ton  coal,  at  $6 2.00 

Total  per  dav  for  labor  and  fuel $18.00 

Rent    of    pile    driver 3.00 

Total,  at  60  to  70  cts.  per  pile $21.00 

This  does  not  include  cost  of  delivering  and  removing  the  pile 
driver. 

The  Construction  and  Cost  of  a  Small  Pile  Driver.*— Frequently 
a  pile  trestle  must  be  built,  and  the  number  of  piles  to  be  driven  may 
not  warrant  buying,  or  even  hiring,  a  pile  driver  of  ordinary  size. 


'Engineering-Contracting,  January,  1906. 


1000 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


In  such  cases  a  small  driver  may  be  built  at  a  nominal  cost,  and  it 
will  do  very  effective  work  where  the  piles  are  to  be  driven  to  a 
moderate  depth.  Such  a  driver  (Fig.  5)  was  built  by  the  managing 
editor  of  this  journal  some  years  ago,  and  a  description  of  it  will 
be  given. 

The  "leads,"  or  "gins,"  that  guided  the  hammer  were  made  of  4-in. 
x  6-in.  sticks,  30  ft.  long.  The  hammer  was  of  cast  iron  and 
weighed  only  1,200  Ibs.  The  rope  that  raised  the  hammer  was  1-in. 
manilla.  One  end  of  this  hammer  rope  was  fastened  to  the  "nip- 
pers" that  clutched  the  lugs  on  the  hammer.  The  other  end  of  the 


H io'o" H 

Side     Elevation.  • 


ZO'O"- 

Front        Elevation. 


Fig.  5. — Small  Pile  Driver. 

rope  passed  through  a  pulley  and  around  a  wooden  drum  12  ins. 
in  diameter.  At  one  end  of  this  wooden  drum  was  fastened  a 
wooden  "bull  wheel,"  60  ins.  in  diameter.  Another  rope  was  wound 
around  this  "bull  wheel,"  and  a  horse  was  hitched  to  the  rope.  The 
horse  easily  raised  the  hammer  to  the  top  of  the  "leads,"  where  the 
"nippers"  were  automatically  tripped,  allowing  the  hammer  to  fall. 
The  reader  will  note  that  only  one  pulley  block  was  used.  The  use 
of  a  drum  and  "bull  wheel"  made  it  unnecessary  to  get  any  more 
blocks,  and  thus  reduced  the  first  cost ;  but,  what  is  even  more  im- 
portant, a  "bull  wheel"  and  drum  does  not  consume  the  power  of  the 
horse  in  friction  to  any  such  degree  as  is  the  case  where  pulley 
blocks  are  used. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1001 

The"  bill  of  lumber  for  the  driver  is  as  follows : 

Piece,    in.     in.    ft.  Ft.  B.  M. 

2—  4x    6x30  (leads)      / 120 

1 —  6x6x4  (cross-piece)      12 

2—  6x    6x16    (base)     96 

2 — 2x    4x32  (ladder)     43 

2 —  2x    4x    2  (ladder  rungs)    24 

2 —  4x    4  x  26  (sway  braces)    64 

1—  2  x    4  x  20  (long    front    sill) 13 

1 —  2x    4x14  (short    rear    sill) 3 

1— 12x12  x    4  (drum)     * 48 

30 —  Ixl2x    6  (bull    wheel)      180 

Total 603 

About  24  bolts,  %  x  8  ins.,  were  used,  and  a  few  pounds  of  nails. 
The  wooden  drum  and  "bull  wheel"  required  more  time  to  make  than 
all  the  rest  of  the  driver.  The  drum  was  shaped  out  of  a  12-in.  x 
12-in.  stick,  but  was  left  square  where  the  "bull  wheel"  was  to  be 
fastened  on.  At  each  end  of  the  wooden  drum,  a  wooden  axle,  4 
ins.  in  diameter  and  6  ins.  long,  was  cut  out ;  and  these  axles  were 
fitted  to  wooden  bearing  blocks,  and  were  well  daubed  with  axle 
grease.  The  wooden  "bull  wheel"  was  made  of  five  layers  of  1  in. 
by  12  in.  planks  spiked  together;  one  layer  running  one  way,  the 
next  layer  in  the  opposite  direction.  First,  three  of  these  layers 
were  spiked  together,  and  a  5-ft.  circle  was  marked  on  them.  Then 
with  a  key-hole  saw  the  5-ft.  wheel  was  cut  out.  On  each  side  of 
this  wheel  was  spiked  another  layer  of  plank  and  sawed  to  a  circle 
5  ft.  8  ins.  diameter.  These  two  layers  formed  the  rims  of  the 
"bull  wheel"  and  kept  the  "bull  rope"  from  slipping  off. 

Two  carpenters  and  two  laborers  built  this  driver  in  two  days,  at 
a  cost^of  $18  for  labor.  The  total  cast  was: 

700  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $20 $   14.00 

Bolts   and   nails 2.00 

Labor 18.00 

1,200-lb.   pile  hammer 50.00 

1  pair  nippers    5.00 

1   snatch  block    3.00 

240  ft.   of    1-in.   rope 10.00 

Total     $102.00 

The  driver  weighed  1*4  tons,  exclusive  of  the  hammer,  and  was 
easily  loaded  on  a  wagon. 

The  cost  of  driving  piles  with  it  is  given  in  the  following  para- 
graph. 

Cost  of  Driving  Piles  for  Wagon  Road  Trestles. — It  was  neces- 
sary to  drive  piles  for  a  number  of  wagon  road  trestles  across 
ravines,  which  were  often  separated  by  several  miles.  A  light  pile 
driver  that  could  readily  be  moved  from  place  to  place  was  built, 
as  described  on  page  1000. 

Piles  were  driven  in  bents  of  three  piles  each,  bents  20  ft.  apart. 
In  fairly  hard  ground  the  piles  were  driven  only  5  or  6  ft.  deep. 
Due  to  the  irregularity  of  the  ground,  in  nearly  all  cases  it  was 
necessary  to  build  a  light  scaffolding  on  which  to  run  the  driver 
across  each  creek.  This  scaffolding  was  made  of  sticks  cut  from 


1002  HANDBOOK   OP   COST   DATA. 

the  forest  alongside,  and  cost  nothing  except  for  labor,  which  is 
included  in  the  cost  of  $1  given  below.  The  young  contractor  would 
be  apt  to  overlook  this  item  of  scaffolding,  but  it  should  always  be 
remembered  that  a  driver  of  this  kind  must  have  a  level  runway 
on  which  to  work,  and,  if  the  ground  is  irregular,  it  must  either  be 
graded  or  scaffolding  put  up.  Usually  scaffolding  is  cheaper  than 
grading. 

The  crew  consisted  of  4  men  and  1  horse.  It  would  take  them 
about  2  days  to  move  the  driver  4  miles  over  poor  roads,  and  erect 
a  staging  upon  which  to  drive  a  seven-bent  trestle.  Then  they  would 
average  10  piles  driven  per  10-hr,  day.  The  cost  of  actual  driving 
was  about  $1  per  pile,  wages  being  $10  a  day  for  the  crew ;  to 
which  must  be  added  another  $1  per  pile  for  lost  time  moving 
driver  from  one  trestle  to  the  next  and  building  staging.  This  was 
the  average  cost  on  six  trestles,  84  piles  being  driven. 

Cedar  piles  were  largely  used  for  this  work,  as  the  driving  was 
light,  and  as  the  durability  of  cedar  is  greater  than  other  woods. 
After  driving  the  piles,  2  men  would  saw  off  the  heads  of  18  piles 
in  3  hrs.,  at  6  cts.  per  pile.  These  piles  averaged  20  ft.  in  length, 
and  with  axmen  at  $2  a  day  each,  they  were  cut  down  and  trimmed 
for  25  cts.  a  pile,  and  hauled  3  miles  over  rough  roads  for  50  cts. 
more  per  pile. 

I  found  it  economic  to  sublet  the  pile  driving  to  a  reliable  car- 
penter who  would  work  with  his  gang  of  three  men,  and  earn  good 
wages  for  himself  and  crew  if  paid  $2  for  driving  each  pile,  includ- 
ing all  moving  and  building  of  staging.  The  work  just  described 
was  done  in  this  way.  Work  handled  thus  generally  insures  activ- 
ity on  the  part  of  small  gangs  of  men  and  reduces  the  charges  for 
superintendence  to  a  very  small  percentage. 

Cost  of  Driving  Piles  for  Trestle  Renewals.*— Mr.  G.  H.  Herrold  is 
author  of  the  following  work  done  on  the  Chicago  Great  Western 
Ry.  in  Minnesota. 

I  have  compiled  the  following  statement  [the  complete  tabulation 
of  eaqh  day's  work  is  given  in  Engineering-Contracting,  but  not 
reprinted  here]  from  daily  reports  of  the  performance  of  pile  driver 
working  on  pile  bridge  renewals  during  the  1905  season,  to  show 
the  number  of  piles  driven  each  day  and  the  labor  cost  per  pile,  the 
total  labor  cost  per  day,  the  delays  and  the  average  labor  cost  per 
pile  for  the  season's  work. 

I  have  done  this  to  show  the  great  variation  in  the  cost  per  pile, 
comparing  one  day's  work  with  another,  and  yet  the  relative  low 
average  cost  of  the  total  work  done,  jand,  to  determine  a  basis  for 
estimating  more  closely  the  cost  of  pile  renewals. 

A  3,000  Ib.  drop  hammer  was  used ;  25  bridges  were  opened,  the 
work  on  each  bridge  varying  from  complete  renewal  to  one  bent 
renewal.  Driver  was  supplied  with  piling  by  making  shipments,  by 
bridges,  as  far  as  possible,  and  one  car  load  of  assorted  lengths,  as 
extras,  was  kept  in  work  train. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.    23,    1906. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1003 

Three  hundred  and  ninety-one  piles  were  driven  in  32  10-hr,  work- 
ing days,  or  an  average  of  12.2  piles  per  day,  the  maximum  cost  per 
pile  for  any  day  was  $10.57,  and  the  minimum  cost  was  $1.28.  The 
cost  per  pile  for  the  season  was  $2.88.  The  piles  varied  in  lengths 
from  20  ft.  to  40  ft.,  and  were  driven  9  to  21  ft.  in  the  ground. 
The  average  daily  expense  was  as  follows : 

Per  day. 

Pile  driver  crew,  wages $21.00 

Work  train,  wages 14.50 

Total,   12.2  piles,  at  $2.88 $35.50 

In  the  32  days'  work,  80  hrs.  were  lost  by  delays  due  to.  traffic, 
etc.,  or  about  25%  of  the  working  time. 

The  character  of  the  driving  varied  from  shell  rock  (requiring 
cast  shoes)  quick  sand,  and  indurated  clay  to  perfect  material. 

The  train  crew  consisted  of  engineer,  fireman,  conductor,  and 
brakemen. 

The  pile  driver  crew  consisted  of  a  foreman,  engineer,  fireman 
and  eight  men. 

The  men  were  cared  for  in  boarding  cars  which  were  self-sup- 
porting. 

The  following  is  a  type  of  the  daily  performance  report : 

David,  Sept.  26,  1905. 
Division  Engineer. 

Drove  16  piles  Br.  A188  and  transferred  piling  in  KC&MB  690 
to  a  local  flat.  Worked  10  men,  expense  $21.48.  Delayed  2  hrs., 
40  mins.,  as  follows:  40  min.  by  No.  274  ;  50  min.  running  for  water; 
30  min.  by  No.  203  ;  40  min.  by  No.  204.  Will  finish  A188  to-mor- 
row, want  orders. 

Pile  Driver  Foreman. 

Cost  of  Driving  Piles  for  a  Trestle,  N.  P.  Ry.— Mr.  E.  H.  Beckler 
gives  the  following  data  on  driving  piles  for  a  railway  trestle  and 
three  truss  bridges  on  the  N.  P.  Ry.,  at  Duluth,  Minn.,  by  contract 
in  1884.  The  work  was  all  done  in  the  winter,  and  about  2,340  piles 
were  driven,  of  which  460  were  in  foundations.  The  trestle  was 
5,000  ft.  long.  A  pile  driver,  having  leaders  65  ft.  long,  and  a  2,600- 
Ib.  hammer,  was  used.  The  piles  were  of  Norway  and  white  pine, 
the  average  length  being  51  ft.  From  50  to  150  blows  were  struck 
on  each  pile.  With  a  20-ft.  fall  the  hammer  struck  7  blows  per 
min.  The  penetration  was  10  to  42  ft.  The  average  cut-off  was  5  ft. 
for  the  trestle  piles.  The  pile  driven  engine  was  mounted  on  the 
driver  platform  to  give  stability  and  for  ease  of  moving.  A  900-lb. 
follower  was  used  in  driving  some  of  the  piles,  but  it  was  found  to 
reduce  the  penetration  of  each  blow  about  20%,  and  it  did  not  save 
the  heads  of  the  piles  from  more  or  less  shattering. 

Some  piles  were  driven  butt  down,  but  it  added  25%  to  the  cos! 
m  driving ;  and  it  was  believed  that  the  small  end,  being  exposed 
would  decay  faster  than  the  butt  end.  Moreover,  the  area  of  the 


1004  HANDBOOK   OP   COST   DATA. 

small  end  was  so  small  that  the  pile  would  not  stand  hoary  driving 
without  shattering. 

The  cost  of  operating  one  pile  driver  was  about  $38  a  day  and 
from  Dec.  11  to  Mar.  5  the  record  of  its  work  was  as  follows: 

Per  pile. 

202  piles  (32  ft.  long),  19.2  pites  per  day $2.25 

134  piles  (44  ft.  long),  23.3  piles  per  day 1.65 

364  piles   (60  ft.  long),  25.1  piles  per  day 1.50 

379  piles  (66  ft.  long),  19.2  piles  per  day 1.95 

73  piles   (65  ft.  long),  22.5  piles  per  day 1.85 

These  costs  represent  the  cost  to  the  contractor. 

As  niany  as  30  piles  a  day  for  4  consecutive  days  were  driven. 
The  average  cost  of  driving  these  1,152  piles,  it  will  be  seen,  was 
nearly  $1.75  per  pile. 

The  driving  was  done  after  the  ice  had  formed  in  the  bay,  and 
the  pile  driver  was  supported  by  the  ice  during  driving. 

The  soil  was  7  ft.  of  clay  under  which  was  sand.  Before  the  work 
was  begun,  test  piles  were  driven  from  a  scow  along  the  line  of 
the  trestle  300  ft.  apart.  This  enabled  the  engineers  to  make  out 
an  accurate  bill  of  pile  timber  for  the  work. 

It  was  found  that  Norway  pine  piles  stood  the  driving  in  cold 
weather  (as  low  as  — 15°  F.)  much  better  than  white  pine;  for, 
when  wood  freezes,  it  is  brittle. 

The  test  piles  were  nearly  all  broken  off  several  feet  below  the 
ground  level,  by  the  side  thrust  of  the  ice  that  formed  to  'a  thickness 
of  4  ft.  after  the  piles  were  driven.  Three  test  piles  were  pulled  up 
by  the  ice,  although  they  had  been  driven  40  ft.  into  mud.  The 
combined  strength  of  four  piles  in  a  bent  was  required  to  resist  the 
lateral  thrust  of  ice  pushed  by  the  wind.  The  ice  was  unable 
to  lift  the  piles  once  the  trestle  was  finished. 

Cost  of  Pile  Driving,  O.  &  St.  L.  Ry. — Mr.  A.  E.  Buchannan  gives 
the  following  data  of  work  done,  Oct.  22  to  Dec.  17,  1S89,  on  the 
Omaha  &  St.  Louis  Ry.,  by  company  labor.  There  were  46  days 
worked,  the  actual  working  time  being  6  hrs.  52  mins.  per  day. 
The  railway  driver  drove  1,267  piles  in  these  316  hrs.  of  which  time 
14  hrs.  were  lost  in  lowering  the  leads  344  times,  or  2%  rnins.  each 
time.  The  average  time  to  drive  a  pile,  it  will  be  seen,  was  15  mins. 
The  average  depth  driven  was  14  ft.  The  work  was  on  41  different 
trestles,  each  averaging  101  ft.  long.  Wages  were  $2.40  for  engine- 
men,  $2.00  for  fireman,  and  $1.50  to  $1.75  for  laborers.  The  cost  of 
the  46  days'  work  was: 

Wages    $1,684 

Fuel,    etc 262 

Total,  1,267  piles,  at  $1.54 $1,946 

The  poorest  day's  work  was  11  piles ;  the  best,  44  piles  ;  the  aver- 
age, 28  piles. 

Cost  of  Pile  Driving,  C.  &  E.  I.  Ry.— Mr.  A.  S.  Markley  gives  the 
following  data  relative  to  the  cost  of  driving  436  piles  on  16  jobs, 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1005 

averaging  27  piles  on  each  job.  The  work  was  done  in  1902  for 
the  C.  &  E.  I.  Ry.,  using  a  self-propelling  railway  pile  driver  made 
by  the  Industrial  Works,  Bay  City,  Mich.  No  locomotive  was  re- 
quired as  the  driver  could  run  at  a  speed  of  10  miles  an  hour  and 
pull  5  cars  on  a  level  road.  The  leads  were  47  ft.  long;  the  ham- 
mer, 2,900  Ibs. ;  the  hoisting  rope,  2-in. ;  and  the  engine  30-hp., 
double  cylinder.  The  leads  could  be  raised  in  2  mins.  The  engine- 
man  received  $2.50  a  day;  the  fireman,  $1.50;  the  rest  of  the  men 
were  laborers,  except  the  foreman.  The  average  cost  of  driving 
each  pile  was  75  cts.  ;  and  each  pile  averaged  24  ft.  long,  although 
the  range  was  from  14  to  42  ft. 

The  Record  for  Rapid  Driving  on  the  O.  &  M.  R.  R.— As  illus- 
trating what  can  be  done  under  favorable  conditions  where  men  are 
rushing  their  work,  a  record  given  by  Mr.  L.  C.  Fitch,  Engineer  of 
Maintenance-of-Way,  Ohio  &  Miss.  R.  R.,  is  interesting.  A  pile 
driver  crew  drove  28  piles  (7  bents  of  4  piles  each)  in  3  hrs.,  at  a 
cost  of  30  cts.  per  pile.  The  piles  averaged  21  ft.  long  and  were 
driven  15  ft.  into  the  ground. 

Cost  of  a  Pile  Trestle,  Sheet  Piles,  Etc — Mr.  Henry  H.  Carter 
gives  the  following  costs  of  building  a  trestle  across  a  pond  in  Mass- 
achusetts, The  work  was  done  by  contract,  occupying  five  months, 
beginning  November,  1883,  and  ending  April  9,  1884.  The  piles 
were  driven  in  bents  of  8  piles  to  the  bent,  bents  4  ft.  apart,  and 
capped  with  10  x  10's  35  ft.  long,  notched  down  (dapped)  2  ins.  on 
each  pile.  On  the  caps  were  laid  four  lines  of  8  x  10-in.  stringers, 
and  on  these  were  laid  the  ties  for  a  double  track  road  for  con- 
tractor's dump  cars.  This  trestle  was  filled  with  gravel,  and  after- 
ward all  but  the  two  outer  piles  in  each  bent  were  cut  off  7  ft.  below 
water  and  used  as  a  foundation  for  a  masonry  conduit.  The  aver- 
age length  of  the  3,750  piles  driven  was  37  ft.,  about  25%  of  the 
piles  being  over  45  ft.  long.  With  the  hammer  falling  about  12  ft., 
318  of  the  piles  penetrated  less  than  1  in.  under  the  last  blow  (very 
hard  driving)  ;  950  piles  penetrated  1.3  to  2.7  ins.  under  the  last 
blow  (hard  driving)  ;  2,016  piles  penetrated  3  to  4  ins.  under  the 
last  blow  (medium  driving)  ;  and  141  piles  penetrated  over  4  ins. 
under  the  last  blow  (easy  driving).  In  general  the  piles  were 
driven  through  several  feet  of  very  soft  mud  and  12  ft.  into  the 
hard  bottom.  The  piles  were  driven  by  two  floating  pile  drivers  sup- 
ported on  a  raft  made  of  timbers  and  empty  oil  barrels.  The  cost 
of  the  work  was  as  follows: 
Making  Pile  Driver: 

Foreman,  7  days,  at  $3.25 $  22.75 

Engineman,  7  days,  at  $3.25 22.75 

Laborers,    15    days,   at   $1.75 26.25 

Carpenter,  14  days,  at  $2.25 31.50 

Carpenter,  18  days,  at  $2.00 36.00 

Gins    124.00 

Floats    : :....    314.95 


Total  making  driver $578.20 

The  cost  of  building  this  driver  if  distributed  over  the  3,638  piles 


1006  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DJTA. 

driven,  amounts  to  nearly  16  cts.  per  pile.     The  other  costs  were 

as  follows: 

Loading  and  Transporting  Piles: 

Foreman,    96%    days,    at    $2.00 $  192.50 

Laborers,   449  days,  at  $1.75 785.75 

Horse,    104%    days,   at   $1.50... 157.12 

Sleds 3.50      - 

Total   loading,    etc , $1,138.87 

Pile  Driving: 

Foreman,   82  days,  at  $3.25 266.50 

Foreman,  118%   days,  at  $3.00 355.50 

Foreman,  95  days,  at  $2.50 237.50 

Engineman,  87  days,  at  $3.25 287.75 

Engineman,   103 V2   days,   at  $2.50 258.75 

Topman,  166  days,  at  $2.00 332.00 

Topman,   17   days,  at  $1.75 29.75 

Deckhand,  116%  days,  at  $2.25 262.12 

Deckhand,   255%    days,   at  $2.00 510.50 

Deckhand,  280  days,  at  $1.75 490.00 

Laborer,  20  days,  at  $1.00 20.00 

Carpenter,  177  days,  at  $2.25 398.25 

Carpenter,  172  days,  at  $2.00 344.00 

Freight  on  pile  drivers 75.00 

Coal,  35  tons,  at  $6.40 224.00 

Use  of  plant,  180  days,  at  $1.50 270.00 

11  M  spruce  braces,  at  $14 154.00 

872  Ibs.  spikes  in  braces,  at  3  cts 26.16 

Tools 120.00 


Total    driving     $4,661.98 

Piles: 
3,638  spruce  piles  (av.  37  ft.  each),  at  $2.26.  .$8,221.88 


Grand  total    (excl.   driver) $14,022.53 

The  loading  and  transporting  of  the  3,638  piles  cost  $0.32  per 
pile.  The  driving  cost  $1.30  per  pile,  the  average  number  of  piles 
driven  being  20  per  day.  The  cost  of  each  pile  averaged  $2.26.  The 
total  cost  of  each  pile  driven  was  $4.04,  including  cost  of  making 
scow,  interest  on  driver,  labor,  fuel  and  cost  of  pile.  The  use  of 
plant  at  $1.50  a  day  is  too  low  an  estimate  under  ordinary  con- 
ditions. 

The  cost  of  the  materials  and  labor  for  caps,  stringers  and  ties 
(there  were  no  sway  braces)   was  as  follows: 
Transporting  Timber: 

Foreman,  19  days,  at  $2.00 $      38.00 

Laborer,   89  days,  at  $1.75 155.75 

Laborer,  4  days,  at  $1.50 6.00 

Horse,   20  days,  at  $1.50 30.00 

Sled    1.50 


Total    transporting    timber $  231.25 

Labor  on  Caps  and  Stringers: 

Foreman,  16  days,  at  $3.25 $  52.00 

Foreman,  20  days,  at  $2.50 50.00 

Carpenter,   60  days,   at  $2.25 135.00 

Carpenter,  58  days,  at  $2.00 116.00 

Total  labor  on  caps,  etc $  353.00 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1007 

Caps  and  Stringers: 

159  M   spruce,   at  $16.10 $2,559.90 

12  M  spruce  bolsters,  at  $13.50 162.00 

3.6  M  spruce  plank,  at  $14.00 50.40 

10,490  Ibs.  bolts,  at  2%   cts 283.23 

3,830  Ibs.  bolts,  at  3  cts 114.90 

88   Ibs.   spikes,  at   3  cts 2.64 

Building  derricks   5.00 

Tools     28.50 


Total  labor  and  mtls.  for  caps  and  stringers. $3, 5 5 9. 5 7 

The  cost  of  transporting  timbers  to  the  trestle  ($231.25)  applies 
not  only  to  the  175  M  of  caps  and  stringers,  but  also  to  24  M  of  ties 
and  27  M  of  sheet  piling  and  wales,  making  the  cost  of  transport- 
ing practically  $1  per  M.  The  other  labor  involved  in  placing  the 
caps  and  stringers  ($353)  after  delivery,  is  equivalent  to  $2  per  M, 
making  a  total  of  $3  per  M  for  the  labor  on  the  caps  and  stringers. 
The  cost  of  placing  the  ties  was  as  follows  : 
Placing  Ties: 

Laborer,  4%  days,  at  $1.00 $     4.50 

Laborer,  6  days,  at  $1.50 9.00 

Laborer,  51  %  days,  at  $2.00 103.50 

Total   placing   ties    $117.00 

Ties: 

24.1 8  M  spruce  ties,  at  $14 $338.52 

540  Ibs.  spikes,  at  3  cts 16.20 

Total  labor  and  mtls $471.72 

Prom   this   it  appears  that   the   cost   of  placing  ties  was  nearly 
$5  per  M  (or  21.3  cts.  per  tie)  to  which  must  be  added  $1  per  M  for 
loading    and    transporting. 
The  cost  of  sheet  piling  was  as  follows- 
Sheet  Piling: 

25.5   M  sheet  piling,   at  $18.60 $474.30 

1.2  M  spruce  wales,  at  $16.00 19.20 

205  Ibs.  spikes,  at  3  cts 6.15 

Interest  on  pile  driver,   16  days,  at  $1.40 22.40 

3  tons  coal,  at   $6.40 '. 19.20 

Foreman,    16    days,    at   $3.25 52.00 

Engineman,  16  days,  at  $3.25 52.00 

Topman,    16   days,   at   $2.00 32.00 

Deckhand,   16  days,  at  $2.00 32.00 

Deckhand,  40%   days,  at  $1.75 71.31 

Carpenter,  32  days,  at  $2.00 64.00 

Total  sheet  piling $844.56 

The  cost  of  driving  the  25.5  M  and  placing  the  1.2  M  was  nearly 
$13  per  M.  This  sheet  piling  was  4-in.  tongued  and  grooved,  driven 
for  two  culverts. 

The  cost  of  sawing,  dapping  (notched  2  ins.)  and  fitting  280  caps 
for  280  pile  bents  of  6  piles  to  the  bent  was  as  follows:  Cost  to  saw 
off  piles,  and  fit  caps,  $2.95  per  cap,  or  $2  per  M  (for  each  cap 
was  10x10  ins.  x  18  ft.).  The  piles  were  sawed  off  at  the  bottom 
of  a  wet  trench,  and  it  cost  90  cts.  per  bent  to  saw  away  the  earth. 
Carpenters  received  $2.50,  laborers  $1.25,  and  foreman  $3.50  a  day 
The  gang  consisted  of  1  foreman,  3  laborers  and  4  carpenters. 


1008  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

These  caps  were  covered  with  a  platform  of  4-in.  spruce  plank 
run  lengthwise  of  the  trench,  laid  to  break  joint,  and  spiked  to  the 
caps  with  8-in.  cut  spikes.  This  platform  was  laid  with  a  force 
of  1  foreman,  at  $3.50 ;  8  laborers,  at  $1.50,  and  1  carpenter,  at 
$2.50.  The  cost  of  laying  900  M  was  $7.40  per  M.  The  contrac- 
tor doing  this  work  failed. 

Cost  of  a  Pile  Docking. — This  work  consisted  in  driving  a  row 
of  oak  piles,  25  ft.  long  and  5  ft.  centers,  to  an  average  depth  of 
10  ft.  into  gravel.  The  piles  were  sheeted  on  the  rear  with  3-in. 
oak  plank  laid  horizontally  and  breaking  joints.  A  waling  piece, 
of  10  x  12-in.  oak,  was  bolted  along  the  front  face  of  this  docking, 
and  anchored  back  to  stone  deadmen.  The  anchor  rods  were  1%- 
in.,  spaced  10  ft.  apart.  Back  of  this  docking  an  earth  fill  was 
placed,  but  the  following  costs  relate  only  to  the  timber  work. 
A  pile  driver,  mounted  on  rollers,  and  operated  by  a  friction-clutch 
engine,  was  used.  The  daily  cost  of  operation  was  as  follows : 

7  men,  at  $1.50   $10.50 

1  foreman     3.00 

1  pair    of   horses    1.50 

Rent  of  driver  and  engine 3.00 

%  ton  coal,  at  $4 1.00 

Total,  10  piles  driven,  at  $1.90 $19.00 

The  piles  were  of  oak  and  two  of  the  men  peeled  and  pointed 
them  and  square-sawed  the  heads.  The  horses  were  used  to  drag 
the  piles  up  to  the  driver.  There  was  some  grading  and  scaffolding 
work  necessary  to  provide  a  level  runway  for  the  driver.  The 
foreman  was  not  a  good  manager,  and  the  cost  was  much  higher 
than  it  should  have  been.  On  one  day  when  the  work  was  pushed 
and  when  conditions  were  favorable,  25  piles  were  driven. 

The  labor  cost  of  placing  the  sheet  planking  and  wale  piece  was 
$4.50  per  M,  about  80%  of  the  timber  being  the  3-in.  planking. 
This  work  was  done  by  common  laborers  working  in  pairs,  at  $1.50 
each  per  10-hr,  day.  The  piles  were  not  always  plumb  and  seldom 
spaced  exactly,  so  that  a  measuring  pole  had  to  be  used  to  fit 
each  plank,  and  every  plank  had  to  be  sawed  separately  by  the 
men.  Had  the  engineer  so  designed  the  work  that  the  planks  could 
have  been  set  on  end,  like  sheet  piling,  all  this  fitting  and  sawing 
of  individual  planks  could  have  been  avoided,  with  consequent  re- 
duction in  the  cost.  Moreover  there  would  have  been  less  wast- 
age of  plank.  Such  a  design  would  have  necessitated  two  more 
small-sized  wale  pieces,  but  it  would  have  made  easy  the  removal 
of  any  single  plank  at  any  time  for  repairs  due  to  rotting.  In  bor- 
ing the  oak  wale  pieces  and  piles  with  a  1%-in.  ship  auger,  a  man 
would  bore  12  ins.  in  5  mins.  It  took  5  mins.  for  two  men  to  cut 
off  a  10  x  12-in.  oak  stick  using  a  crosscut  saw. 

It  may  be  well  to  note  that  the  plans  called  for  the  driving  of 
3  x  8-in.  oak  sheet  piling  to  a  depth  of  5  ft.  by  hand,  using  wooden 
mauls.  It  was  found  impossible  to  drive  these  planks  more  than 
2  ft.  into  the  gravel  without  battering  the  heads  to  pieces. 


PILING,  TRESTL1NG,  TIMBERWORK.  1009 

Data  on  Driving  Plumb  and  Batter  Piles,  New  York  Docks. — Mr. 
Charles  W.  Raymond  gives  the  following  data  on  the  driving  of 
piles  for  docks,  Hudson  River,  New  York  City,  prior  to  1880:  Piles 
were  driven  with  a  scow  pile  driver,  the  scow  being  3x20x42  ft., 
provided  with  leaders  50  ft.  long.  The  engine  was  a  10-hp.  friction- 
clutch  hoisting  engine,  with  double  cylinders,  6x12  ins.  The  boiler 
was  15  hp.  upright.  A  crew  of  8  men  worked  8  hrs.  per  day  for 
the  city,  and  drove  10  to  15  piles  per  day.  The  piles  aver- 
.aged  about  65  ft.  long,  and  were  driven  55  to  60  ft.  below 
mean  low  water,  penetrating  about  10  ft.  of  gravel  and  cobbles 
(6-in.  and  less)  that  were  filled  in  over  the  dredged  area  before 
driving.  Then  the  piles  penetrated  about  25  ft.  of  river  muck, 
making  a  total  penetration  of  35  ft.  There  was  no  difficulty  in 
driving  through  the  cobbles  and  gravel. without  brooming  the  piles. 
All  piles  were  sharpened,  and  their  heads  were  squared.  To  indi- 
cate the  kind  of  driving,  two  records  of  50  piles  show  that  230 
blows  of  the  hammer  were  required  to  secure  a  penetration  of  38 
ft,  or  180  blows  to  secure  a  penetration  of  33  ft.  The  last  foot 
of  penetration  required  13  to  14  blows  of  a  3,000-lb.  hammer  falling 
8  ft.  (not  freely,  but  with  the  hammer  rope). 

A  special  driver,  with  leaders  inclined  1  to  6,  was  used  to  drive 
batter  piles,  and  the  average  number  of  piles  driven  per  day  was 
about  half  as  many  as  in  driving  plumb  piles,  or  5  to  7  piles  per  8- 
hr.  day.  The  number  of  blows  per  batter  pile  was  somewhat  great- 
er than  per  plumb  pile,  but  by  no  means  enough  greater  to  account 
for  the  slower  driving,  which  was  probably  due  to  difficulty  in 
getting  the  batter  pile  properly  started. 

Data  on  Driving  Piles  for  Docks,  New  York. — Mr.  Eugene  Len- 
tilhon  states  that  in  1896  the  following  comparative  records  were 
made  with  a  drop  hammer  and  a  Vulcan  steam  hammer :  The  driv- 
ing was  for  a  dock  on  the  Hudson  River,  New  York  City,  and  was 
very  hard  driving,  the  material  being  10  ft.  of  cobbles  underlaid  by 
sand  and  gravel.  The  piles  were  spaced  3  ft.  apart,  and  driven 
from  scows.  The  drop-hammer,  friction-clutch  machine  had  a  crew 
of  10  men.  It  required  175  blows  of  a  3,300-lb.  hammer  falling  10 
ft.  to  drive  a  pile;  and  15  blows  were  struck  per  minute,  hence  the 
actual  time  of  hammering  a  pile  was  about  12  mins.  The  piles 
were  55  to  60  ft.  long  and  penetrated  21  to  28  ft.  The  crew 
averaged  12  piles  per  10-hr,  day. 

As  compared  with  this  crew  of  8  men,  using  a  Vulcan  steam 
hammer,  averaged  18  piles  per  10  hrs.  The  machine  weighed  8,400 
Ibs.,  and  the  striking  piston  weighed  4,000  Ibs.  and  had  a  drop  of 
3%  ft.  It  struck  60  blows  per  minute,  and  some  piles  required  as 
many  as  1,200  blows.  Mr.  Lentilhon  does  not  make  it  clear  why 
the  steam  hammer  was  more  effective  than  the  drop  hammer.  It 
is  probable,  however,  that  there  were  fewer  delays  in  straightening 
up  the  pile  during  driving  when  a  steam  hammer  was  used.  He 
states  that  there  were' two  objections  to  the  steam  hammer,  one  of 
which  was  the  frequent  loss  of  the  "cap"  or  "saucepan,"  or  "hood," 
by  dropping  into  the  water,  and  the  rapidity  with  which  the  "cap" 


1010 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


was  worn  out.  Only  38  piles  were  driven  with  each  cap  before  it 
was  worn  out.  The  second  objection  was  the  impracticability  of 
driving  crooked  piles. 

Cost  of  Pulling  Piles,  Drivinq  Piles  and  Timberwork.*— In  1899 
the  city  of  New  York  let  a  contract  for  making  alterations  to  the 
temporary  bridge  over  the  Bronx  River  near  Westchester  avenue, 
Bronx  Borough.  The  contract  price  was  $950.  The  work  con- 
sisted of  the  tearing  out  of  the  old  pivot  pier,  cutting  off  one  span 
of  the  west  trestle  approach  and  adding  one  span  to  the  east  side. 
Fig.  6  shows  the  extent  of  the  work. 

The  old  pivot  pier  was  constructed  of  piles  driven  to  rock  through 
four  or  five  feet  of  hard  material,  probably  disintegrated  rock. 
The  piles  were  sway  braced,  were  capped  by  12  in.  x  12  in.  timber 


53'J"- 


s///////// 

Otf  Work : 


West  Approach 


Fig.  6. 

and  had  a  6  in.  deck  on  top  of  the  caps.  A  fender  rack  about  90 
ft.  long  was  also  removed.  This  rack  consisted  of  piles,  8  ft.  center 
and  timber,  3  in.  x  12  in.,  bolted  to  the  piles. 

The  contractor's  plant  consisted  of  a  pile  driver  and  scow  and 
a  land  driver  operated  from  the  scow.  According  to  the  terms  of 
the  contract  all  timber  in  good  condition  could  be  used  over  again. 
Work  was  begun  June  14,  and  the  weather  was  favorable  for  good 
work. 

The  first  work  done  was  the  tearing  out  of  the  old  pile  pivot 
pier  and  the  fender  rack.  In  this  work  the  scow  pile  driver  was 
used  in  pulling  the  piles,  about  45  piles  being  removed  in  this  man- 
ner. Such  of  these  piles  as  were  in  good  condition  were  used  in  the 
new  work.  In  addition  one  span  of  pile  trestle  was  cut  off  in  the 
west  trestle  approach,  the  timber  being  sawed  off  close  to  the 
ground.  A  total  of  about  10  M  ft.  B.  M.  was  removed,  the  labor 
cost  being  as  follows : 


^Engineering -Contracting,  June  13,   1906. 


PILING,  TRESTL1NG,  TIMBERWORK.  1011 

Hours.  Rate,  cts.  Total. 

Foreman    . 48              45  $21.60 

Engineman    24              35  8.40 

Dock    builders    96               27%  26.40 

Watchman    30              15  4.50 

Total  10  M  ft.  at  $6.09 $60.90 

It  was  necessary  to  excavate  a  small  amount  of  mud  in  order  to 
allow  the  pile  driver  to  float  in  sufficiently  near  the  pivot  pier,  and 
also  to  allow  the  placing  of  the  sway  bracing  as  low  as  possible 
The  depth  of  the  cutting  was  3  ft.  and  about  30  cu.  yds.  of  material 
was  removed.  The  labor  cost  wa«  as  follows : 

Hours.     Rate,  cts          Total. 

Foreman 4  45  $1.80 

Engineman    2  35  .70 

Oock  builders 8  27  %  2.20 

Watchman     2  15  .30 

Total,  30  cu.  yds.  at  16.6  cts $5.00 

In  driving  the  piles  the  scow  pile  driver  and  the  land  driver  were 
used,  the  latter,  however,  was  used  only  in  driving  the  piles  in  the 
bank  bents,  8  piles  being  so  driven.  In  all  83  piles  were  driven. 
The  piles  were  of  spruce,  about  25  ft.  long,  and  were  rather  slen- 
der. They  were  driven  through  about  5  ft.  of  disintegrated  rock, 
above  which  was  soft  mud,  to  solid  rock.  It  took  from  20  to  25 
blows  of  the  hammer  to  drive  each  pile.  The  hammer  was  raised 
by  a  friction  hoist,  and  fell  with  hoist  cable  attached. 

The  labor  cost  of  driving  the  piles  is  shown  in  the  accompany- 
ing table. 

LABOR  COST   OF  DRIVING  THE  PILES. 

Cost 

Hours.  Rate,  cts.  Total.  per  pile. 

Foreman    82              45  $   36.90  $0.44 

Engineman    41               35  14.35  .17 

Dock  builders    171     .          27%  47.03  .57 

Watchman    40               15  6.00  .07 

Total    $104.28  $1.25 

LABOR  COST  OF  FRAMING  AND  PLACING  TIMBER. 

Cost  per  M.  ft. 

Hours.   Rate,  cts.          Total.  B.   M. 

Foreman     166              45              $74.70  $5.06 

Engineman     88              35                   34.80  2.36 

Dock  builders    365              27%    •        100.38  6.78 

Watchman    .                             ..128              15                   19.20  1.30 


Total    .  $229.08  $15.50 

Tn  framing  and  placing-  timber  about  14,800  ft.  B.  M.  of  yellow 
pine  lumber  was  used.  Some  of  this  was  new  and  some  was  taken 
from  the  old  work.  The  piles  were  cut  off  and  capped,  and  the 
stringers  and  floor  in  the  approaches  and  the  deck  of  the  pivot 
pier  were  placed.  A  railing  was  built  on  the  approaches  and  the 
sway  braces  and  fender  rack  were  bolted  into  position.  Little  fram- 
ing was  done.  The  labor  cost  of  this  work  is  shown  in  the  accom- 
panying table. 


1012  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  total  cost  of  the  work  is  shown  below : 
Labor: 

Tearing  out  old  work $  60.90 

Excavation    5.00 

Driving  piles 104.28 

Framing  and   placing   timber 229.08 

Total  labor   $399.26 

Materials: 

53  piles  at  $2    $106.00 

Timber,  3.6  M  ft.  B.  M.  at  $30 108.00 

Bolts,   spikes,   etc.,   900  Ibs.  at  5   cts 45.00 

Total *. $259.00 

Operating  Expenses: 

Towing $  30.00, 

Coal  for  pile  driver,   2 »/,  tons  at  $4 10.00 

Repairs  to  plant 10.00 

Total    operating    expenses , $  50.00 

Total  cost   $679.00 

As  stated   previously  the   contract  price  was   $950. 

Work  of  this  character  is  generally  expensive  because  of  the 
small  gang  of  dock  builders  employed.  The  engineman's  wages 
and  plant  expense,  therefore,  form  a  large  percentage  of  the  total 
cost. 

Cost  of  Driving  and  Sawing  Off  Piles. — Mr.  Eugene  Lentilhon 
gives  the  following  relative  to  a  pile  foundation  for  a  concrete 
sewer,  built  by  the  New  York  City  Dock  Dept.  The  piles  were 
driven  by  a  scow  driver  with  a  3,400-lb.  hammer,  which  worked  65 
days.  Wages  were  $2.30  for  laborers,  $3.50  for  engineman,  and 
$3.00  for  dock-builders,  per  10  hrs.  The  average  was  8  piles 
driven  per  day,  at  a  cost  of  $3.90  for  labor  of  driving.  The  piles 
were  sawed  off  1  ft.  below  mean  low  water.  The  dock  builders 
fastened  small  battens  on  opposite  sides  of  a  pile  to  guide  the  saw, 
and  frequently  two  men  during  a  good  low  tide  sawed  off  3  piles. 
The  cost  of  sawing  off  was  $1.28  per  pile. 

Data  on  Driving  With  a  Steam  Hammer  and  Sawing  Off  Piles.— 
Mr.  Sanford  E.  Thomson  gives  the  following  data  on  driving  and 
sawing  off  piles  for  the  Cambridge  Bridge,  at  Boston,  in  1901.  A 
Warrington  steam  hammer,  made  by  the  Vulcan  Iron  Works,  of 
Chicago,  was  used  by  the  contractors.  It  weighed  9,800  Ibs.,  and 
the  striking  part  weighed  5,000  Ibs.  With  90  to  100  Ibs.  of  steam, 
the  hammer  would  strike  60  to  70  blows  per  minute,  falling  by 
gravity.  The  top  of  the  leaders  of  the  scow  driver  was  75  ft.  above 
the  water  surface.  After  a  pile  was  well  down,  an  oak  follower, 
14  ins.  square  and  30  ft.  long,  was  placed  on  the  pile  to  complete 
the  driving,  so  that  the  pile  head  was  left  18  ft.  below  the  water 
surface.  The  average  10-hrs.  work  of  a  driver  was  100  piles,  but  on 
one  day  as  many  as  212  piles  were  driven  in  9  hrs.  The  piles 
were  40  ft.  long  and  driven  in  hard  clay. 

The  piles  were  cut  off  15  to  34  ft.  below  low  water  by  a  rotary 


PILING-,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERW.ORK.  1013 

saw  mounted  on  another  scow.  A  40-hp.  engine  i-unning  at  150 
revolutions  per  minute  was  geared  up  to  the  saw  shaft  so  as  to 
drive  the  saw  at  about  450  revolutions  per  minute.  A  42-in.  saw 
was  mounted  at  the  lower  end  of  a  hollow  vertical  shaft  4  ins.  in 
diameter  and  60  ft.  long.  This  shaft  was  supported  by  three  pil- 
low-block bearings  which  were  bolted  to  a  spud  14  ins.  square  and 
60  ft.  long ;  so  that  when  the  spud  was  raised  or  lowered  the  saw 
shaft  moved  with  it.  The  pulley  on  the  saw  shaft  was  arranged 
to  slide  on  a  spline  or  key,  so  that  the  shaft  could  be  raised  with- 
out raising  the  pulley.  The  belt  from  the  pulley  ran  to  another 
pulley  mounted  on  a  short  vertical  jack-shaft,  provided  with  a 
bevel  gear  wheel  meshing  with  another  bevel  gear  wheel  on  a 
horizontal  shaft  driven  by  the  engine.  This  horizontal  shaft  was 
geared  to  the  engine  with  a  link  belt.  This  machine  sawed  off  600 
to  800  piles  per  10-hr,  day.  The  spruce  piles  were  10  ins.  diameter. 
Cost  of  Driving  Piles  for  a  Swing  Bridge. — A  steel  highway  swing 
bridge,  240  ft.  long,  and  16 -ft.  roadway,  was  to  be  supported  on  a 
pier  in  the  center  of  the  river.  The  piles  were  Washington  fir, 
driven  to  an  average  depth  of  20  ft.  in  grrvel.  The  penetration 
under  the  last  blow  of  a  2,400-lb.  hammer,  falling  freely  27  ft., 
was  3  to  4  ins.  A  scow  pile  driver  was  used,  and  the  force  to 
operate  it  was  as  follows : 

Per  day. 
1  engineman    $   3.00 

1  man  tripping  hammer    1.75 

2  men  guiding  pile 3.50 

2  men   making  ready  the   next  pile 3.50 

%  foreman   2.50 

%  ton  coal,  at  $9 3.00 


Total    per    10    hrs $15.25 

Rent  of  driver  .  6.00 


Total     $21.25 

This  force  averaged  26  piles  per  10-hr,  day.  The  foreman  super- 
vised another  gang  of  men,  so  that  half  his  wages  were  charged  to 
this  work.  The  piles  were  neither  peeled  nor  sharpened,  for  I 
found  no  economy  in  so  doing.  There  were  42  piles  in  the  pier, 
and  twice  as  many  more  in  the  pier  protection  bents  upstream  and 
downstream,  which  also  served  as  falsework  upon  which  to  build 
the  bridge.  The  piles  in  these  bents  were  sawed  off,  capped  and 
sheeted  with  plank.  Two  men  with  a  cross-cut  saw  would  saw  off 
30  of  the  piles  in  the  bents  in  10  hrs.,  at  about  12  cts.  per  pile.  The 
cost  of  sawing  off  the  piles  below  water  for  the  pier  is  given  in  the 
next  paragraph. 

Cost  of  Sawing  Off  42  Piles  Under  Water.— It  was  necessary  to 
cut  off  42  piles,  4  ft.  below  extreme  low  water  for  the  pier  work 
just  described.  A  gravel  bar  occupied  the  site  of  the  pier,  and,  al- 
though the  water  was  about  4  ft.  deep  over  the  bar  at  the  time  of 
pile  driving,  it  was  necessary  to  dredge  this  bar  at  least  4  ft.  deeper. 
A  hole  4  ft.  deep,  and  27  ft.  square  on  a  side,  was  dredged  with  an 
ordinary  drag  scraper  equipped  with  long  handles  and  hauled  by 
the  pile-driver  engine.  The  men  operating  the  scraper  walked  on 


1014  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

a  raft.  It  took  S1^  days  of  the  pile  driver  crew  above  given,  to  do 
this  dredging,  at  $21  per  day,  or  $74.  The  42  piles  were  driven 
in  this  hole,  after  driving  4  piles  above  the  hole  and  sheeting  them 
with  plank  to  act  as  a  temporary  sheer  dam  to  prevent  the  river 
current  (3  miles  per  hr. )  from  filling  in  the  hole  with  gravel  dur- 
ing pile  driving.  The  42  piles  were  cut  off  about  8  ft.  under  water 
with  a  circular  saw  mounted  on  a  shaft  driven  by  the  pile-driver 
engine.  A  saw,  shaft,  pulleys  and  belt  were  bought  for  this  pur- 
pose and  rigged  up  by  the  pile-driver  crew.  It  took  them  3  days  to 
rig  the  saw  and  cut  off  the  42  piles.  The  hole  had  not  been 
dredged  deep  enough  and  the  gravel  that  had  washed  in  dulled  the 
teeth  of  the  saw  requiring  frequent  raising  to  resharpen  it.  More- 
over, the  engine  did  not  have  sufficient  power  to  drive  the  saw  at 
high  speed,  and  the  piles  were  as  much  chewed  off  as  sawed  off. 
All  these,  however,  are  conditions  apt  to  be  met  in  similar  work 
on  small  jobs.  The  3  days'  sawing  cost  $64,  or  $1.50  per  pile. 

Data  on  Sawing  Off  Burlington  Bridge  Pier  Piles. — Mr.  C.  Hudson 
gives  the  following  description  of  the  method  used  in  sawing  off 
several  hundred  piles  for  the  Burlington  Bridge  pier,  in  1868: 

The  piles  when  driven,  were  sawed  off  by  machinery.  On  each 
side  of  the  pier,  and  a  few  feet  away  from  it,  a  row  of  piles,  per- 
haps 6  or  8  ft.  apart,  was  driven.  These  were  capped,  and  upon 
the  cap  was  placed  a  traveler  12  ft.  wide,  arranged  to  be  moved 
from  end  to  end  of  the  pier  on  these  caps.  Upon  this  traveler  was 
another  and  smaller  one,  arranged  to  run  upon  it  and  across  the 
pier.  This  last  traveler  carried  a  vertical  shaft  in  a  properly  braced 
frame.  This  shaft  carried  at  its  lower  end  a  circular  saw  about 
36  ins.  in  diameter.  The  shaft  could  be  raised  or  lowered  as  re- 
quired, and  was  driven  by  means  of  a  beveled  gear  from  a  hori- 
zontal shaft  on  the  little  traveler,  A  long  belt  extended  the  whole 
length  of  the  large  traveler,  around  a  pulley  on  this  horizontal 
shaft,  and  another  guide  pulley,  so  arranged  that  the  shaft  was 
turned  regardless  of  the  position  of  the  little  traveler.  An  engine 
on  a  boat  alongside  the  pier  was  the  motive  power. 

The  little  traveler  was  fed  across  the  pier  by  means  of  a  set 
of  small  blocks  on  each  side,  and  a  line  which  ran  around  a  wheel 
shaft  like  a  ship's  steering  wheel.  By  this  means  the  traveler  could 
be  moved  either  way,  and  could  thus  cut  off  a  row  of  piles  running 
one  way,  and  then,  by  feeding  back  cut  the  next  row,  the  large 
traveler  having  been  moved  back  to  reach  it.  In  this  way  12  or  15 
piles  were  cut  off  per  hour.  The  efficiency  of  the  saw  under  water 
is,  of  course,  very  much  less  than  in  the  air. 

Cost  of  Pulling  and  Driving  Piles  for  a  Guard  Pier. — The  pile  pro- 
tection, or  guard  pier,  of  an  old  draw  bridge,  across  a  tributary  of 
the  Hudson  River,  was  removed  and  new  piles  were  driven.  I  sub- 
let the  work,  and  the  following  are  the  actual  costs  to  the  sub- 
contractor : 

The  number  of  piles  pulled  was  200,  and  the  time  required  was 
10  days.  A  scow  pile  driver  was  used,  the  engine  being  a  friction- 
clutch  machine,  and  the  hammer  weighing  2,200  Ibs.  To  pull  the 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1015 

piles,  a  pair  of  heavy  triple-sheave  blocks  were  used.  The  pulling 
was  easy,  the  piles  being  only  10  to  15  ft.  in  rather  soft  ground. 
The  daily  (10-hr.)  cost  of  operating  the  scow  was  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

1  captain  of  driver $   2.50 

1  engineman     2.00 

3   men,    at    $1.80 5.40 

Va    ton   coal,   at    $3 1.00 

Rent  of  driver 5.00 


Total,    20  piles  pulled,   at   80   cts $15.90 

This  same  crew  then  drove  200  new  piles  in  20  days,  or  10  piles 
per  day,  at  a  cost  of  $1.60  per  pile.  The  piles  were  driven  15  to 
20  ft.,  and  were  30  to  35  ft.  long  after  cutting  off.  The  slowness 
of  the  driving  was  largely  due  to  delays  caused  by  navigation  at 
high  tide,  the  channel  being  so  narrow  that  the  driver  had  to 
drop  down  with  the  tide  to  make  way  for  boats  to  pass,  and  then 
pull  back  against  the  tide.  On  some  days  the  driver  was  inter- 
rupted in  this  way  as  many  as  8  times. 

After  the  piles  were  driven  and  cut  off,  a  6  x  12-in.  wale  piece  was 
bolted  on  each  side  of  the  piles,  entirely  around  the  guard  pier, 
the  wale  piece  being  1  ft.  below  the  top  of  the  piles.  Another 
(but  single)  wale  piece  was  bolted  to  the  piles,  on  the  outside,  at 
low  water.  To  these  wale  pieces,  3  x  12-in.  sheeting  planks  were 
spiked  upright;  and  two  more  lines  of  6  x  12-in.  walings  were 
bolted  through  the  sheeting  and  inside  wale  pieces,  to  hold  the 
sheeting  in  place.  The  1-in.  bolts  were  countersunk.  The  timber 
for  the  wale  pieces  was  yellow  pine  in  16-ft.  lengths,  and  had  to 
be  scarfed  with  a  12-in.  ship  lap  on  each  end,  and  drift  bolted  twice. 
This  scarfing  was  expensive  work,  beside  causing  a  6%  loss  of  tim- 
ber at  the  scarfs.  If  longer  lengths  than  16  ft.  had  been  used, 
the  cost  of  labor  and  the  waste  of  timber  would  have  been  less. 
Beside  the  wale  pieces  and  sheeting,  there  were  6  x  12-in.-  timbers 
bolted  on  each  side  of  every  fifth  bent  of  piles ;  and  the  center 
piles  of  the  bent  were  capped,  lengthwise  of  the  guard  pier,  with  a 
12  x  12-in.  cap.  There  were  nearly  30,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  yellow  pine 
timber  all  told,  which  cost  $23  per  M  delivered. 

For  this  timberwork  the  same  crew  was  used  as  for  pile  pulling 
and  driving,  except  that  one  more  timberman,  at  $1.80,  was  em- 
ployed, making  the  daily  cost  $17.70.  The  crew  averaged  only 
1,300  ft.  B.  M.  per  day,  at  a  cost  of  nearly  $14  per  M  for  framing 
and  placing  all  the  timber.  They  were  slow  workers,  and  there 
were  delays  due  to  navigation. 

Cost  of  Drawing  Foundation  Piles  and  Sheet  Piles.— The  following 
is  a  very  brief  abstract  of  a  long  illustrated  article  in  Engineering- 
Contracting,  May  8,  1907,  by  Mr.  Charles  M.  Ripley,  on  the  anchor- 
age of  the  Manhattan  Bridge. 

Sheet  Piling  and  Excavation. — The  first  work  done  was  the  exca- 
vation of  the  foundation  pit  and  the  driving  of  the  foundation 
piles.  This  work  was  done  by  the  J.  &  F.  Kelley  Co.,  as  sub- 
contractors. Sheet  piling  12  ins.  thick  and  from  20  to  30  ins. 
wide  was  driven  all  around  the  anchorage  and  so  as  to  give  about 


1016  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

4  ft.  clearance  on  the  sides  and  at  the  front  and  to  be  close  against 
the  footing  masonry  at  the  rear.  It  was  driven  by  a  Vulcan  steam 
hammer.  There  were  about  860  ft.  of  sheeting  around  the  pit;  the 
depth  of  the  sheeting  being  about  25  ft.  we  have  then  some  258  M 
ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  in  the  sheeting  proper  not  counting  in  waling 
or  bracing. 

Exact  figures  of  this  work  are  not  available  for  publication,  but 
the  sheet  piling  gang  working  with  one  driver  usually  consisted  of 
one  foreman  at  $4  per  day,  one  engineer  at  $4  per  day  and  five  or 
six  dock  builders  receiving  $2.50  per  day  on  land  and  $3.50  per  day 
on  water.  An  8-hr,  day  was  worked  and  about  twelve  sheet  piles 
were  driven  per  machine  per  day.  Assuming  an  average  depth  of 
sheeting  of  25  ft.  we  have  300  lin.  ft.  of  piling  driven  per  day,  or 
about  3,600  ft.  B.  M.,  at  a  labor  cost  of: 

PerM. 
Total.     Per  ft.          B.  M. 

1  foreman  at   $4 $4.00          l%c         $1.60 

1  engineer  at  $4 4.00         l%c  1.60 

6  dock  builders  at  $2.50 15.00          5c  6.00 

Total    .$23.00        7%c         $9.20 

The  amount  of  excavation  inside  the  cofferdam  was  approximately 
45,000  cu.  yds.  Taking  the  amount  of  sheeting  given  above  as  258,- 
000  ft.  B.  M.,  we  have  174  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  for  every  1,000  ft. 
B.  M.  of  sheet  piling,  or  5.75  ft.  B.  M.  of  piling  per  cubic  yard  of 
excavation. 

Foundation  Piling. — The  foundation  piles  were  driven  by  a  plant 
of  four  3,500-lb.  drop  hammer  drivers  with  4 5 -ft.  leads.  These  ma- 
chines were  mounted  on  skids  and  rollers  in  two  horizontal 
directions  and  traveled  across  the  work,  driving  a  strip  of  piling  as 
they  progressed.  In  addition  to  the  drop  hammer  drivers  there 
were  two  steam  hammer  drivers  similarly  mounted,  one  a  5-ton 
and  one  a  4-ton  Vulcan  hammer.  Every  sixth  row  of  piles  across 
the  foundation  pit  was  driven  by  light  drop  machines  and  was 
then  capped  with  a  12  x  20-in.  timber.  Two  of  these  parallel  tim- 
bers formed  the  track  for  the  drivers.  Five  rows  of  piles  were 
driven  from  each  track. 

In  a  few  cases  a  water  jet  was  used  to  assist  in  the  driving. 
Altogether  4,430  piles  were  driven.  The  piles  were  an  average  of 
25  to  30  ft.  long,  14  ins.  in  diameter  at  the  banded  end  and  9  ins. 
in  diameter  at  the  point.  The  piles  were  driven  to  a  refusal  of  a 
quarter  of  an  inch  and  the  work  was  so  arranged  that  16  piles  were 
driven  by  each  machine  per  8-hr.  day. 

The  gang  on  each  machine  worked  an  8-hr,  day  and  was  organ- 
ized as  follows : 

1  foreman   at    $4 $  4.00 

1  engineer  at  $4 400 

6  laborers   at    $2.50 15.00 


Total  labor $23.00 

With  each  machine  driving  16  piles  the  labor  cost  of  driving  per 
25   to   30-ft.   pile  was   $1.43    per   pile.      It  was  found   in   this  work 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  T1MBERWORK.  1017 

that  the  steam  hammer  drivers  were  about  2%   times  as  rapid  as 
the  drop  hammer  drivers. 

Cost  of  Pulling  Piles.— In  1898  I  had  a  contract  for  pulling  piles 
from  the  bed  of  a  river.  Several  hundred  piles  were  pulled  with 
a  tripod  machine,  with  gear  wheels  and  triple  blocks  that  multi- 
plied the  power  270  times,  as  shown  on  page  1047.  A  rope  passed 
from  the  drum  of  the  machine  to  a  4-hp.  hoisting  engine,  which 
was  thus  able  to  pull  piles  driven  27  ft.  into  the  ground.  It  cost 
$100  to  make  two  of  these  machines  and  about  $300  more  for  blocks 
and  tackle  and  repairs. 

The  crew  for  each  puller  was  3  laborers,  1  boss  and  1  engineman, 
so  that  the  cost  of  wages  and  ^4  ton  of  coal  was  $10  per  day. 
About  700  piles  were  pulled  with  two  machines,  the  average  depth 
of  pile  being  12  ft.,  although  many  were  25  ft.  The  average  day's 
work  per  machine  was  15  piles  making  the  cost  of  labor  and  fuel 
about  70  cts.  per  pile.  The  men  worked  in  water  up  to  their  knees 
and  were  provided  with  rubber  boots  costing  $100,  which,  with 
the  $400  paid  for  machines  and  repairs,  made  $500,  or  about  70  cts. 
more  per  pile,  or  a  total  of  $1.40  per  pile. 

Chains  that  were  wrapped  around  the  piles  in  pulling  were  made 
of  li/i-in.  iron,  with  a  breaking  strength  of  about  100,000  Ibs.  The 
strain  was  so  great  in  pulling  the  longest  piles  that  the  chains 
were  frequently  broken. 

Cost  of  Blasting  Piles. — Several  hundred  piles  were  removed  by 
blasting,  in  addition  to  the  700  that  were  pulled  as  above  de- 
scribed. The  piles  had  been  cut  off  at  the  water's  surface  many 
years  before,  and  our  contract  required  the  removal  of  the  piles 
at  least  4  ft.  below  the  surface  of  the  low  water,  which  was 
equivalent  to  about  2  ft.  below  the  bed  of  the  river.  Long  ship 
augers  were  used  to  bore  holes  1%  ins.  in  diameter  and  41/£  ft. 
deep,  down  the  core  each  pile.  Each  laborer  averaged  7  such  holes 
bored  per  10  hrs.  in  white  oak  piles,  or  30  ft.  per  day.  The  cost 
per  pile  for  boring  and  blasting  was: 

Labor  boring,  15  cts.  per  hr $0.21 

1    Ib.    of   70%    dynamite 0.20 

V2   lb.  of  40%   dynamite 0.08 

5  ft.  of  fuse 0.03 

1   cap    0.01 

Total  per  pile $0.53 

Each  pile  was  loaded  with  two  sticks  of  70%  dynamite  and  one 
stick  of  40%.  This  charge  would  cut  off  the  largest  pile  and  hurl  the 
butt  75  ft.  in  the  air.  Occasionally  a  very  tough  pile  would  be 
splintered,  and  had  to  be  pulled.  This  added  cost  of  pulling  aver- 
aged 10  cts.  more  per  pile,  which  might  have  been  avoided  by 
making  all  three  sticks  70%  dynamite. 

Cost  of  Driving  and  Pulling  Test  Piles.*— A  pile  was  driven  every 
50  ft.  across  the  Hackensack  River,  N.  J.t  to  test  the  nature  of  the 
bottom.  Three  90-ft.  piles  were  used,  and  were  pulled  after  driving. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  July  18,   1906. 


1018  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  the  work  includes  the  cost  of  pulling  as  well  as  driving. 
A  scow  driver  was  used,  and  the  work  was  done  at  cost  plus  10% 
for  superintendence.  The  total  number  of  feet  penetrated  by  the 
piles  was  634,  or  about  57%  ft.  as  an  average  of  the  11  piles,  8  of 
which  were  driven  to  rock.  The  material  penetrated  was  mud,  sand 
and  clay. 

The  work  occupied  4%  days,  of  which  1*4  days  were  spent  in 
transporting  the  driver  to  the  site  of  the  work  and  removing  it  from 
the  work  after  completion.  The  cost  was  as  follows : 

Foreman,  4  y>  days  at  $4 $   18.00 

Machine  men,  45  days  at  $3 135.00 

Watchman,    4    nights    at    $3 12.00 

Total $165.00 

Add  10  per  cent  for  profit 16.50 

Total $181.50 

This  is  at  the  rate  of  30  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  penetration  for  driving 
and  pulling,  but  it  does  not  include  the  cost  of  coal.  Coal  was 
probably  less  than  %  ton  per  day,  or  say  $10  for  the  whole  job,  or 
less  than  2  cts.  per  foot. 

The  cost  of  materials  was  as  follows : 

3  piles,  90  ft.  long,  at  $25.... $75.00 

2  spruce  piles,  52  ft.  long,  for  use  as  followers,  at  $4 8.00 

4  pile    bands,    at    $2.50 ' 10.00 

Total    $03.00 

Add  10  per  cent  for  profit 9.30 

Total     $102.30 

This  is  equivalent  to  about  16  cts.  per  lin.  foot  of  pile  penetra- 
tion. The  total  cost  was  therefore : 

Per  ft.  Per 

Penetration.  Pile. 

Labor     $0.30  $16.50 

Coal     .02  0.90 

Materials     ..'.'.,                          .16  9.30 


Total $0.48  $26.70 

It  will  be  noticed  that  there  were  10  men  and  1  foreman  on  the 
driver,  which  is  an  unusually  large  number ;  and  it  will  also 
be  noted  that  the  wages  paid  the  "machine  men"  were  very 
liberal. 

Since  only  3^4  days  were  actually  spent  in  driving,  the  average 
day's  work  was  3  piles  driven  and  pulled.  If  an  ordinary  scow 
driver  crew  of  6  men  at  $2,  and  1  man  at  $4,  had  been  employed, 
the  daily  wages  would  have  been  $16.  To  which  add  $2  for  coal 
and  $6  for  rental  of  plant,  making  a  total  of  $24  per  day  for  driv- 
ing and  pulling  3  test  piles,  or  $8  per  pile.  Even  $8  per  pile 
would  be  a  high  cost  for  such  work,  when  done  by  contract,  if  the 
cost  of  moving  the  driver  to  and  from  the  site  of  the  work  is  not 
included. 

In  view  of  the  valuable  information  gained  at  small  expense  by 
driving  test  piles,  it  ic  surprising  that  engineers  do  not  oftener  test 


PILING,  TRESTLIXG,  TIMBERWORK.  1019 

the  bottom  of  rivers  in  this  way  before  drawing  plans  and  speci- 
fications for  bridge  foundations,  trestles,  etc.  When  a  contract  has 
been  awarded  for  foundations,  the  first  thing  that  the  contractor 
wants  to  do  is  to  order  his  piles.  The  engineer  usually  refuses  to 
furnish  a  bill  of  materials  until  enough  piles  have  been  driven  to 
determine  the  character  of  the  bottom.  This  delays  the  whole  work, 
and  adds  materially  to  the  contractor's  expense.  Moreover,  it  usu- 
ally results  in  a  change  of  specified  lengths  of  piles,  and  a  corre- 
sponding change  in  the  ultimate  cost  of  the  job.  The  time  to  drive 
test  piles  is  before  the  award  of  a  contract,  not  afterward. 

Cost  of  Driving  Piles  for  a  Shore  Protection.*— Mr.  Daniel  J. 
Hauer  gives  the  following: 

The  work  was  done  by  contract  The  piles  were  for  the  founda- 
tion of  a  reinforced  concrete  shore  protection,  consisting  of  a 
pilaster  spaced  on  12-ft.  centers  and  a  curtain  wall  6  ins.  thick  cast 
between  the  pilasters.  Two  piles  were  driven  for  each  pilaster,  thus 
making  a  space  of  12  ft.  between  each  set  of  piles.  The  two  piles 
Were  18  ins.  center  to  center.  This  spacing  is  somewhat  unusual, 
as  foundation  piles  are  seldom  driven  on  more  than  6-ft.  centers, 
which  means  more  piles  to  drive  with  less  moving.  There  was 
nothing  difficult  in  the  driving,  and  no  great  obstacles  to  over- 
come. The  work  was  along  the  shore  of  a  tidewater  bay,  and 
except  in  a  few  places  out  of  reach  of  the  water.  Only  once  for 
an  hour  or  so  was  the  work  stopped  by  high  tide.  Nearly  half  of 
the  work  was  through  marshes,  the  rest  of  the  driving  being  in 
stiff  clay.  But  little  cribbing  had  to  be  done,  the  runways  being 
placed  on  blocks  on  the  ground.  Where  any  grading  had  to  be 
done  to  allow  the  machine  to  be  rolled  ahead,  it  was  done  by  other 
forces,  and  has  not  been  included  in  the  costs  given. 

The  piles  were  not  sawed  off,  but  were  driven  by  a  follow  head  to 
the  proper  depth,  which  was  0.6  ft.  below  mean  low  water,  the 
foundation  pit  having  just  been  excavated.  This  was  made  possible 
by  the  fact  that  the  piles  were  not  capped,  but  the  heads  of  the 
piles  were  imbedded  in  the  concrete.  The  piles  were  delivered  within 
easy  reach  of  the  machine  by  teams,  this  being  done  by  another 
contractor. 

The  lengths  driven  varied  from  10  to  30  ft.,  less  than  5%  being 
the  last  named  length,  while  many  were  only  15  to  20  ft.  long, 
more  than  half  being  but  10  ft.  The  average  length  was  12%  ft. 
The  pile  driver  had  leads  33  ft.  high,  which  were  bolted  to  a  bed 
frame  of  12  x  12-in.  timbers,  5  ft.  wide  and  24  ft.  long,  upon  the 
other  end  of  which  sat  the  10-hp.  hoisting  engine,  it  being  a  single 
cylinder  double  drum  engine  with  two  winch  heads.  One  drum 
operated  the  hammer  fall. and  the  other  the  pile  hoisting  line.  The 
top  of  the  machine  was  guyed  by  two  lines  run  to  anchors  a  hun- 
dred feet  or  more  away  on  either  side,  and  run  through  a  block 
on  the  head,  the  other  end  of  the  line  being  fastened  to  a  davit 
on  the  bed  frame ;  this  allowed  of  the  guys  being  easily  slackened 

*  Engineering-Contracting,   July  27,   1906. 


1020  HANDBOOK    OF    COST    DATA. 

or  tightened.  The  bed  frame  rested  on  two  steel  rollers  with  holes 
in  the  end  to  take  bars  in  order  to  roll  the  machine.  The  hammer 
weighed  2,000  Ibs. 

The  machine  was  old  and  in  a  dilapidated  condition.  The  fittings 
around  the  boiler  and  engine  leaked  both  steam  and  water;  the 
leads  were  badly  racked ;  towards  the  end  of  the  job  the  hammer 
frequently  jumped  out  of  them.  The  rollers,  too,  were  old  ones, 
and,  besides  being  cracked,  one  had  a  flat  side  on  it,  so  as  to  pre- 
vent it  rolling  easily.  All  these  things  materially  delayed  the  work 
at  times  and  added  much  to  the  expense  of  operating  the  driver. 
The  condition  of  the  boiler  and  the  indifferent  engineers  who  ran  it, 
coupled  with  the  fact  that  most  of  the  work  was  done  in  the  winter 
season,  made  the  consumption  of  coal  and  water  large. 

The  cost  of  such  a  plant  new  at  the  present  time,  including  ma- 
chine ropes,  small  tools,  blocks  and  anchors,  would  not  be  over 
$1,200.  Thus,  if  a  plant  rental  of  $5  per  day  was  charged  against 
the  job,  with  work  for  the  outfit  for  100  to  120  days  in  the  year, 
the  entire  cost  of  the  plant  would  be  cleared  in  two  seasons.  This 
charge  seems  to  the  writer  to  be  ample,  but  it  is  customary  to  hire 
such  a  plant  for  $10  per  day  for  short  jobs. 

The  work  will  be  divided  into  two  parts,  as  this  division  will  allow 
of  a  comparison  of  costs,  driving  the  piles  under  two  different  fore- 
men, also  under  different  weather  conditions ;  the  first  being  done 
in  excellent  weather  in  the  autumn,  the  second  during  the  winter 
months.  The  rates  of  wages  were  also  different  for  the  men.  The 
foreman  and  engineer  were  paid  weekly  and  were  not  allowed  over- 
time, as  they  lost  no  time.  The  work  was  seldom  stopped  even 
during  stormy  weather,  their  daily  wage,  prorated  from  the  weekly 
rate,  is  used.  In  example  No.  1  the  wages  paid  were  as  follows: 

Foreman $2.50 

Engine  runner    2.00 

Pile  driver  men    2.25 

Laborer    1.50 

In  example  No.  2  the  daily  wages  were : 

Foreman    $2.50 

Engine  runner    2.00 

Pile  driver  men 2.00 

Laborers    1.50 

Cart  and  driver    3.00 

Example  L — These  piles  were  driven  during  good  autumn  weather. 
The  foreman  was  competent  and  attended  to  his  work.  The  ma- 
chine was  brought  to  the  site  of  the  wall  on  a  scow,  which  was 
beached,  and  the  engine,  leads  and  so  forth  skidded  off  and  the  parts 
of  the  machine  assembled.  This,  with  the  building  of  a  camp,  con- 
sumed three  days,  and  the  labor  items  are  included  in  the  cost  of 
the  pile  driving.  This  foreman  drove  473  piles,  their  average 
length  being  15  ft.  The  engine  used  325  Ibs.  of  coal  **fih  day  of 
10  hrs.,  the  coal  costing  on  board  of  the  scows  $3.50  per  ton.  Both 
water  and  coal  were  brought  to  the  work  on  scows,  a  tow  costing 


PILING,  TRESTL1NG,  TIMBERWORK.  1021 

$15  per  trip,  the  tug  bringing  a  load  and  returning  with  the  empties. 
A  laborer  carried  the  coal  and  water  ashore  from  the  scow  in  a 
row  boat  and  delivered  it  at  the  engine.  One  man  was  kept  at  this 
continually,  and  he  is  listed  in  the  cost  under  coal  and  water  la- 
borer. The  monthly  rental  of  two  small  scows  at  $50  per  month 
is  given  under  "scows  and  tugs."  In  listing  the  cost  each  item 
was  kept  separate  and  is  as  follows,  per  pile  driven : 

Per  pile. 

Foreman    $0.151 

Engineer 0.121 

Pile  driver  men 0.830 

Labor    preparing    piles 0.106 

Coal  and  water  laborer 0.090 

Scows  and  tugs 0.272 

Watchman     0.052 


Total  labor   $1.622 

Coal,    325  Ibs.  daily    0.055 

Plant    (int.   and   deprec.) 0.320 

Total $1.997 

The  piles  were  squared  on  the  end  and  prepared  to  be  put  in 
the  leads  by  one  man,  who  had  no  trouble  in  keeping  this  work 
ahead  of  the  driving.  One  man  attended  to  the  water  and  coal, 
while  seven  men  placed  the  piles  in  the  leads,  guided  it  down,  placed 
the  runways  and  assisted  in  moving  the  driver  ahead.  To  accom- 
plish this  an  anchor  was  placed  in  the  ground  ahead  to  act  as  a 
dead  man,  and  with  a  line  run  from  it  to  the  winch  head  on  the 
engine,  the  machine  was  pulled  ahead  on  the  rollers,  the  crew  as- 
sisting with  bars. 

For  the  entire  job  an  average  of  17  piles  were  driven  each  day, 
but  as  three  days  were  consumed  in  starting,  and  three  addi- 
tional days  were  used  in  moving  the  machine  as  explained  later,  the 
average  number  of  piles  driven  for  each  day  of  driving  was  21. 
The  average  length  of  the  pile  was  15  ft.  They  were  delivered 
in  longer  lengths  and  sawed  into  two  pieces  of  the  desired  length. 

After  working  a  number  of  days  the  pile  driving  work  was 
stopped  on  account  of  the  necessary  excavation  not  having  been 
made,  and  it  was  decided  to  move  the  machine  back  to  the  start- 
ing point  and  drive  piles  in  the  opposite  direction  in  order  to  build 
more  of  the  shore  protection.  The  machine  was  turned  around 
and  moved  in  the  manner  as  described  above  for  a  distance  of  1,300 
ft.  Although  the  contractor  was  paid  full  account  for  this,  yet  the 
cost  has  been  included  in  the  figures  given  above.  The  time  con- 
sumed in  moving  was  three  days,  and  the  cost  for  labor,  plant,  coal, 
etc.,  was  as  follows: 

Labor   $65.25 

Plant    rental     15.00 

Coal     1.70 

$8l795 

This  makes  a  cost  per  pile  of  17.3  cts.  for  moving. 

During  the  course  of  the  job  it  was  necessary  to  move  the  water 


1022  HANDBOOK    OF    COST    DATA. 

and  coal  scows  along  the  shore,  so  the  water  and  coal  tender  could 
reach  them  quickly  to  get  his  supplies.  The  cost  of  this  work 
is  given  under  pile  driver  men,  and  was  not  separated  from  the 
other  work. 

The  foreman,  as  stated,  was  a  competent  and  Intelligent  one, 
and  handled  his  men  with  some  thought.  He  endeavored  to  keep 
up  his  runways  and  make  the  work  light  for  his  men,  realizing 
that  more  work  was  accomplished  in  this  manner. 

In  addition  to  the  cost  per  pile,  a  record  was  kept  of  the  cost 
per  lineal  foot  of  pile  driven,  which  was : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Foreman     $0.010 

Engineer     0.009 

Pile   driver    men 0.057 

Preparing  piles    0.007 

Coal   and   water   laborer 0.006 

Scows  and   tugs 0.020 

Watchman     0.003 

Total    labor    $0.112 

Coal,    325    Ibs.    daily 0.004 

Plant    (int.   and  deprec.) 0.022 

Total     $o".138 

Example  II. — After  the  winter  weather  had  set  in,  the  neces- 
sary excavation  having  been  made,  the  work  was  resumed.  A  new 
foreman  was  put  in  charge  of  the  job.  After  moving  the  machine 
from  where  it  was  last  used  to  the  new  site,  the  driving  com- 
menced. This  move  was  also  paid  for  by  the  railroad  company. 
The  distance  was  2,500  ft.  The  driver  was  rolled  100  ft.  onto  an 
embankment,  where  an  ox  team  could  be  brought  to  it,  was 
knocked  d>wn  and  hauled  by  the  yoke  of  oxen  hitched  to  a  timber 
cart.  The  bed  frame  and  engine  making  one  load,  the  leads 
another,  and  the  hammer,  ropes  and  small  tools  making  a  third 
load.  The  machine  was  then  set  up  for  work.  The  time  consumed 
was  five  days,  a  day  and  a  half  of  which  time  the  ox  team  worked. 
Fifty  dollars  were  paid  for  their  services.  The  total  cost  of  moving1 
was : 

Labor     $   74.75 

Plant   rental    25.00 

Coal 4.37 

Ox  team    50.00 

$154.12 

This  cost  is  also  included  in  the  cost  of  driving  as  given  below. 
The  average  length  of  the  piles  driven  was  11  ft.  For  the  actual 
number  of  days  of  driving  the  average  number  driven  per  day  was 
15,  while  for  the  whole  time  the  average  number  was  IS.  Scows 
were  not  used  for  coal  and  water,  but  the  water  was  hauled  from  a 
well  about  half  a  mile  distant,  and  the  coal  from  another  job  a  mile 
and  a  half  away.  A  one-horse  cart  was  used  for  this  purpose,  a 
laborer  serving  the  engine  from  the  supplies  so  hauled.  The  cost 
per  pile  was : 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  T1MBERIVORK.  10'JM 

Per  pile. 

Foreman $0.194 

Engineer     0.150 

Pile    driver   men 0.864 

Labor    preparing    piles 0.182 

Coal   and  water  laborer 0.110 

Carts     0.110 

Watchman     0.013 

Total    labor    .  ..$1.813 

Coal,   500  Ibs.   daily $0.070 

Plant   (int.  and  deprec.) 0.380 

Total     $2~263 

The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  pile  driven  was  as  follows : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Foreman     $0.014 

Engineer     0.013 

Pile    driver   men 0.078 

Labor   preparing   piles 0.016 

Coal   and  water   laborer 0.010 

Carts     0.027 

Watchman 0.005 

Total  labor  $0.163 

Coal,  500  Ibs.  daily 0.005 

Plant  (int.  and  deprec.) 0.035 



Total     $0.203 

A  comparison  of  the  costs  of  these  two  examples  of  similar  work 
is  extremely  interesting.  The  weather  was  favorable  in  the  first 
case,  but  the  rate  of  wages  for  pile  driver  men  were  higher  and 
the  average  length  of  pile  was  longer,  yet  every  item  of  cost  was 
larger  in  the  second  example.  The  size  of  the  crew  was  the  same, 
but  instead  of  one  man  preparing  the  piles  two  men  did  this  work, 
which  about  doubled  the  cost ;  but  this  extra  man  made  one  less 
man  working  with  the  machine ;  yet  that  cost  is  increased.  This 
and  the  other  labor  costs  being  enlarged  is  due  to  less  work  being 
done  each  day.  The  larger  consumption  of  coal  was  due  to  the 
weather  being  colder  and  to  bad  firing,  as  will  be  noted  later. 
Taking  into  consideration  the  wages  the  increased  cost  of  Example 
II  over  I  should  have  been  little,  if  any. 

The  foreman  in  the  last  work  was  incompetent,  yet  a  shrewd  fel- 
low. A  representative  of  the  contracting  firm  only  visited  him  a 
few  times  a  week,  and  then  rarely  stayed  with  him  more  than  an 
hour.  The  foreman  took  advantage  of  this,  and  by  "grand  stand 
plays"  stood  well  with  the  firm,  yet  shamefully  neglected  his  work ; 
in  fact,  he  and  his  crew  "soldiered." 

A  record  was  kept  of  the  time  used  in  doing  the  various  kinds 
of  work  each  day,  and  in  order  to  illustrate  how  it  is  possible  for 
a  foreman  to  rob  his  employer  this  record  is  reproduced  for  sev- 
eral days: 

December  27. — Moving  runways  ahead  and  placing  them,  2  hrs. ; 
rolling  machine,  3  hrs.  and  25  mins.  ;  boiler  foaming,  so  it  would 
not  steam,  30  mins. ;  driving  piles,  4  hrs.  and  10  mins.  Total  time 
worked,  10  hrs.  and  5  mins.  Crew:  Foreman,  engineer,  10  men, 


1024  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

cart  and  driver,  2  men  preparing  piles,  1  man  coal  and  water. 
Foreman  and  2  men  went  away  at  8:10  to  see  that  some  timber  was 
not  afloat;  came  back  at  9:45.  (This  was  not  necessary.) 

January  8. — Moving  runways  and  placing  them,  50  mins. ;  rolling 
machine,  1  hr.  and  35  mins. ;  driving  piles,  1  hr.  and  45  mins.  ; 
boiler  foaming,  so  it  would  not  steam,  30  mins.  ;  out  of  steam 
through  negligence  of  engineer,  20  mins.  ;  5  hrs.  consumed  in  fixing 
machine,  such  as  tightening  bolts  and  rods,  adjusting  lines,  most  of 
which  was  unnecessary ;  1  hr.  should  have  adjusted  everything 
that  needed  it.  Total  time  worked,  10  hrs.  Crew:  Foreman,  engi- 
neer, 11  men,  cart  and  driver,  1  man  coal  and  water,  2  men  pre- 
paring piles. 

January  15. — Waiting  for  steam  from  7  o'clock  until  10  :35,  3  hrs. 
and  35  mins.,  during  which  time  runways  were  placed;  rolling  ma- 
chine, 1  hr.  and  15  mins.  ;  waiting  for  steam  in  afternoon,  30  mins.  ; 
making  a  follower,  1  hr.  (the  writer  has  frequently  made  one  in 
10  mins.).  Total  time  worked,  9  hrs.  and  30  mins.  (30  mins.  stolen 
by  whole  crew).  Foreman  away  from  work,  1  hr.  Crew:  Fore- 
man, engineer,  8  men,  cart  and  driver,  1  man  on  water,  2  men  pre- 
paring piles  for  2  hrs. 

These  are  records  picked  at  random,  and  no  comment  is  needed 
regarding  them,  save  that  if  accurate  cost  data  are  kept  on  work 
such  rascality  and  incompetency  could  not  occur.  Another  feature 
that  added  to  the  cost  of  Example  II  was  that  the  foreman,  instead 
of  heading  his  machine  in  the  direction  in  which  he  was  moving, 
had  the  back  end  first,  which  prevented  him  from  using  an  anchor 
and  the  winch  head  of  his  engine  in  moving  the  driver,  as  the  other 
foreman  did.  Because  he  was  used  to  moving  a  machine  backward, 
owing  to  the  fact  that  with  such  a  driver  the  piles  are  frequently 
left  standing  above  the  surface  of  the  ground,  he  could  not  see  that 
when  the  piles  were  driven  below  the  surface  it  was  an  advan- 
tage in  moving  ahead  to  have  his  machine  with  the  leads  in  that 
direction.  Even  when  he  was  advised  to  prod  his  machine  properly 
he  ignored  the  advice,  and  before  finishing  the  job  he  had  to  turn 
the  machine,  as  the  last  piles  were  driven  so  close  to  a  high  bank 
there  was  not  room  enough  to  take  the  driver  between  the  piles 
and  the  bank.  This  turning  cost  $14.70  for  the  labor,  as  it  con- 
sumed 6  hrs.  of  time. 

The  following  shows  how  the  time  of  the  crew  was  spent  for  a 
week,  the  cost  of  each  item  of  work  being  given.  The  week  was 
picked  at  random  and  is  in  many  ways  representative.  The  total 
cost  of  labor  was  $148.97,  divided  as  follows: 

Fixing   runways    $   12.04 

Rolling  machine    18.96 

Preparing  piles    22.00 

Serving  coal  and   water 8.25 

Hauling  coal  and  water 16.50 

Waiting    for    steam 8.81 

Fixing  machine,   etc. . 32.96 

Driving    piles     25.75 

Time    loafing    3.70 

$148.97 


P1UNG,  TRESTL1NG,  T1MBERWORK.  1025 

Although  this  work  was  mismanaged  many  lessons  can  be  learned 
from  it. 

Cost  of  Driving  Wakefield  Sheet  Piling,  Chicago,  III.*— The  matter 
of  constructing  intercepting  sewers  for  the  purpose  of  diverting 
sewage  into  the  Chicago  Drainage  Canal  was  taken  up  by  the  City 
of  Chicago  in  the  latter  part  of  1897.  In  August,  1899,  bids  were 
received  for  the  construction  of  the  south  arm  of  that  sewer  system. 
All  these  bids  were  rejected,  and  in  1901  the  city  undertook  the  con- 
struction of  this  section  of  the  system,  employing  day  labor,  and 
having  all  work  done  under  the  supervision  of  its  own  engineers. 

We  shall  give  a  brief  description  of  the  manner  and  methods 
of  driving  the  piling  for  Section  G,  which  extended  from  39th  to 
51st  streets,  and  for  Section  H,  between  51st  and  63d 
streets.  As  this  was  the  city's  first  experience  in  con- 
struction work  on  a  large  scale,  it  was  necessary  to  secure  an 
entirely  new  plant.  Accordingly,  the  city  built,  with  its  own  labor, 
a  turntable  drop  hammer  pile  driver,  for  use  on  Section  G.  The 
driver  had  a  hammer  weighing  3,000  pounds,  and  was  equipped  with 
a  7  x  10-in.  double-drum  hoisting  engine  and  a  duplex  steam 
pump  for  jetting.  The  machine  cost  $2,200. 

As  the  sewer  for  a  distance  of  about  2,500  ft.  would  be  under  the 
shoal  water  of  the  lake,  and  for  the  rest  of  the  distance  very  close 
to  the  water's  edge,  it  was  necessary  to  use  sheeting  during  construc- 
tion, which  would  be  practically  water  tight.  Accordingly,  Wake- 
field  sheet  piling  was  used,  the  lumber  employed  in  its  construction 
being  2  ins.  x  12  ins.  x  20  ft.  Norway  and  Georgia  pine,  surfaced 
one  side  and  one  edge.  For  most  of  the  work  Southern  pine  was 
used.  In  practice,  however,  it  was  found  that  Norway  pine  would 
stand  50%  more  blows  under  a  drop  hammer,  and,  in  consequence, 
Norway  sheet  piling  was  used  where  there  was  difficult  driving. 

About  12  ft.  below  city  datum  the  clay  line  was  found;  imme- 
diately above  this  was  a  layer  of  fine  blue  sand  mixed  with  short 
clay.  This  stratum  when  loose  and  wet  acts  very  much  like  quick- 
sand. Above  this  stratum  was  ordinary  lake  sand.  The  sand  was 
very  solid  and  compact,  owing  to  the  action  of  the  waves  of  the 
lake,  buUwith  the  exception  of  gravel  spots  the  seepage  was  small, 
considering  the  nearness  to  the  lake.  The  first  sheeting  was  driven 
nearly  to  the  bottom  of  the  proposed  excavation ;  but  later  it  was 
found  that  sheeting  driven  4  to  5  ft.  into  the  clay  would  do  suffi- 
ciently well.  In  order  to  have  the  sheeting  left  to  a  sufficient  height 
above  the  line  of  the  lake  for  protection  against  high  water,  tides, 
etc.,  20  ft.  of  material  was  used  with  some  exceptions. 

In  the  bracing,  10-in.  x  12-in.  x  22-ft.  stringers  and  10-in.  x  10-in. 
x  20-ft.  braces  were  used.  Three  sets  of  stringers  and  braces  were 
found  sufficient  for  most  of  the  distance.  In  some  places,  however, 
it  was  necessary  on  account  of  bad  ground  and  swelling  clay,  to  re- 


*  Engineering-Contracting,    March,    1906. 


1026  .    HANDBOOK    OP    COST    DATA. 

Inforce   both    stringers   and    braces.      Throughout,    the    entir«>    work, 
12-in.  Dunn  screw-braces  were  used. 

In  construction,  the  top  set  of  stringers  and  braces  followed  the 
scraping  and  leveling.  The  distance  between  the  sheeting  was  22  ft. 
for  the  16-ft.  conduit  and  21%  ft.  for  the  15% -ft.  conduit.  A  clear- 
ance of  about  9  ins.  between  the  sheeting  and  sewer  brickwork  was 
allowed. 

As  was  stated  previously  the  city  had  built  a  turntable  driver  for 
use  on  this  section  of  the  work.  In  the  operation  it  was  found  prac- 
tical to  swing  the  driving  apparatus  about  once  every  day.  Ordi- 
narily about  50  ft.  of  sheeting  in  each  direction  was  driven  on  one 
side,  and  then  50  ft.  in  each  direction  on  the  other  side.  A  water 
jet  for  jetting  to  the  clay  was  used  with  marked  success.  Ordi- 
narily, after  jetting  to  the  clay  and  getting  the  piling  into  position, 
four  or  five  blows  of  the  hammer  were  sufficient.  In  many  cases 
isolated  rocks,  about  1%  ft.  in  their  largest  dimensions,  were  found 
from  2  ft.  to  8  ft.  below  the  surface;  these  were  disposed  of  by 
jetting  a  large  hole  beside  them.  The  piles  were  held  in  place 
during  driving  by  a  %-in.  buck  line,  attached  to  the  front  drum  of 
the  hoisting  engine,  and  leading  through  the  sheaves  attached  to 
the  pile  driver  and  sheeting  in  place,  to  and  around  the  pile  to  be 
driven.  In  making  each  Wakefield  pile,  50-penny  wire  spikes  were 
used.  Half-inch  carriage  bolts  were  tried  as  fastenings,  but  it  was 
found  that  the  carpenters  could  make  at  least  twice  the  number  of 
sheet  piles  when  50-penny  wire  spikes  were  used.  Eight  to  ten 
spikes  were  used  per  pile.  The  pile-driving  crew  followed  the  gang 
setting  the  top  braces ;  and,  on  straight  work  at  least,  it  was 
planned  to  have  a  distance  of  about  400  ft.  between  the  pile  driver 
and  the  excavating  derrick,  because  when  the  driving  was  too  near 
there  was  trouble  with  seepage  water  from  the  jet. 

In  ordinary  driving,  the  crew  averaged  about  90  pieces  of  sheet- 
ing for  8  hrs.  This  is  equivalent  to  45  ft.  of  trench  sheet  piled. 
The  largest  day's  work  was  120  pieces  of  sheeting  placed.  On  some 
days,  however,  when  such  obstructions  as  piers  were  encountered, 
not  more  than  12  pieces  of  sheeting  were  driven  ;  this  occurred  once 
perhaps  in  300  to  400  ft. 

The  pile  driving  crew  consisted  of  the  following :  t 

Per  day. 

1  foreman,   $100   per  month $  4.16 

1  engineman,    $4.80  per  day 4.80 

1  fireman,   $2.50  per  day 2.50 

2  carpenters,    $3.60   per   day 7.20 

4  laborers,    $2.50    per    day 10.00 

1  jet  man,   $3.00  per  day 3.00 

1  ladder  man,    $3.00   per   day 3.00 

.2  winch  men,  $3.00  per  day , 6.00 

Total    $40.66 

1   ton  coal    2.90 


Total,  10.8  M,  at  $4.03 $43.56 

As  about   45    ft.   of  trench  was  sheet-piled  per   8  hrs.,   the  labor 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1027 

cost  per  linear  foot  of  sewer  amounted  to  $0.90.  The  labor  cost  per 
pile  was  45  cts.  The  bill  of  materials  required  for  the  average 
amount  placed  in  an  8-hr,  day  was  as  follows : 

10.8  M  ft.  B.  M.  2  ins.  x  12  ins.  x  20  ft.  timber 

at    $22     $237.60 

900  spikes,  at  $2.65  per  100 ' .      23.85 

Total    materials    $261.45 

Adding  the  total  labor  cost  and  the  total  cost  for  material  we 
have  $305.01  as  the  total  cost  of  90  piles.  From  the  above  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  cost  per  pile  amounts  to  $3.38,  of  which  $0.47  was 
for  labor.  The  cost  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  piling  was  about  $28. 

Another  pile  driver  was  built  by  the  city  for  the  construction  of 
the  sheet  piling  in  that  section  of  the  intercepting  sewer  between 
51st  and  73d  streets,  known  as  Section  H.  This  machine  was  also 
constructed  on  a  turntable  and  could  be  swung  from  one  side  of  the 
trench  to  the  other.  In  order  to  secure  a  good  foundation  bearing 
for  the  runways  and  rollers  the  span  of  the  lower  bed  was  made  34 
ft.  The  driver  was  equipped  with  a  7  x  1 0-in.  double-drum  engine, 
had  40  ft.  leads  and  a  2,500-lb  hammer.  A  jet  pump,  with  water 
tank,  20  ft.  jet  tube  and  other  appliances  were  also  among  the 
equipment. 

As  in  the  first  case,  the  sheeting  was  of  the  ordinary  Wakefield 
pattern,  made  up  of  2-in.  x  12-in.  plank,  fastened  together,  however, 
by  60-penny  spikes.  The  method  of  driving  this  sheeting  was  as  fol- 
lows: The  top  set  of  stringers  and  braces  were  put  in  place  for 
100  ft.  to  200  ft.  in  advance,  and  about  18  ins.  below  the  surface 
of  the  street ;  a  second  set  of  stringers,  parallel  with  the  street, 
made  up  of  4-in.  x  12-in.  plank,  was  put  in  about  5  ins.  outside  of 
the  main  stringers  and  on  the  same  level  as  those  inside,  for  the 
purpose  of  keeping  the  sheeting  in  line.  All  braces  and  timbers 
were  then  covered  with  sand  to  prevent  their  being  washed  out 
by  the  water  jet.  The  sheeting  used  was  18  ft.,  20  ft.,  22  ft.  and  24 
ft.  long,  depending  on  the  depth  of  the  clay.  The  top  of  the  sheet- 
ing was  driven  to  about  1  ft.  below  the  street  grade,  and  the  lower 
end  was  from  2  ft.  to  4  ft.  in  the  clay.  For  each  pile  a  hole  was 
jetted  to  the  clay  line,  and  as  soon  as  the  jet  tube  was  pulled  out, 
a  pile  was  dropped  into  place  and  pulled  over  the  tongue  of  the 
previous  pile.  Excellent  alignment  was  obtained  by  using  a  "buck 
line"  to  hold  the  sheeting  in  place  while  being  driven.  In  this 
case  the  "buck  line"  consisted  of  an  old  cable  having  a  loop  at  one 
end  to  go  over  the  head  of  the  pile,  the  other  end  of  the  cable, 
after  passing  through  a  couple  of  snatch  blocks,  being  attached  to 
the  hoisting  engine. 

From  75  to  110  piles  were  driven  in  eight  hours,  the  number  de- 
pending somewhat  on  the  character  of  the  ground;  85  piles,  how- 
ever, were  considered  a  fair  day's  work. 


1028  HANDBOOK    OF   COST    DATA. 

The  pile  driving  crew  and  their  rate  of  wages  were  as  follows  : 

Per  day. 
1  foreman,   $100  per  month  ....................  $   4.16 

1  jet  man,   $3.50  per  day  ......................      £.50 

2  ladder  men,    $2.50   per   day  ..................      5.00 

2  winch  men,   $3.00  per  day  ...................      b.OO 

1  pile  man,   $2.75   per  day  .....................      2.75 

1  engine  man,   $4.80  per  day  ..................      4.80 

1  fireman,    $2.75    per  day  ......................    -3.76 

4  laborers,  $2.50  per  day  ......................    10.00 

2  carpenters,   $4.20  per  day  ....................      8.0 


Total   labor  per   day 
1  ton    coal 


Total,   10.2  M,  at  $5  .......................  $50.26 

An  average  of  85  piles  per  day  were  driven,  which  is  equivalent 
to  about  42.5  ft.  of  trenc/i  piled.     This  was  at  the  rate  of  $1.11  per 
foot  of  trench  for  the  labor  cost.     The  labor  cost  per  pile  was  55 
cents.     The  bill  of  material  required  for  85  ft.  of  piling  was  as  fol- 
lows: 

10.2    M   ft,    2    ins.    x    12    ins.    x    20    ft.    timber, 

at   $25    ...................................  $255.00 

850  spikes,  at  $2.65  per  100  ..................      22.52 

Total      ..................................  $277.52 

From  the  above  it  will  be  seen  that  the  total  cost  for  material 
and  driving  was  $3.85  for  each  pile,  of  which  $0.55  was  for  labor. 
The  labor  cost  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  piling  was  about  $32. 

Cost  of  Piling,  Cross  References.  —  Data  on  wooden  piling  will  be 
found  in  the  sections  on  Bridges,  Railways,  Sewers,  etc.  Data  on 
concrete  piles  will  be  found  in  the  section  on  Concrete,  and  on 
steel  piles  in  the  section  on  Steelwork.  Consult  the  index  under 
Piles. 

Estimating  Cost  of  Brush  Revetment.  —  A  very  effective  method 
of  protecting  the  banks  of  a  river  from  scour  is  a  revetment  con- 
sisting of  a  brush  mattress  on  that  part  of  the  bank  below  extreme 
low  water  and  a  stone  slope  wall,  or  hand  placed  riprap,  on  the 
part  of  the  bank  above  low  water.  Brush  when  always  submerged 
never  rots,  but  it  is  useless  to  carry  it  much  above  low  water  for 
it  soon  decays.  Such  brushwork  is  a  sort  of  timberwork,  and  is 
therefore  placed  in  this  section  of  the  book. 

Engineers  very  commonly  record  costs  of  revetment  in  the  terms 
of  the  lineal  foot  of  bank  as  the  unit,  and,  while  such  a  unit  is  de- 
sirable, it  is  more  important  to  reduce  the  costs  of  the  mattress 
either  to  the  square  (100  sq.  ft.)  or  to  the  square  yard  as  the 
unit,  for  widths  of  mattresses  vary  greatly.  So  also  should  the 
cost  of  the  slope  wall  or  slope  pavement  be  reduced  to  the  square 
yard  and  the  cubic  yard  measured  in  place  in  the  slope  wall.  While 
data  are  given  in  the  following  pages  as  to  the  cost  of  slope  wall 
paving,  the  reader  should  consult  the  section  on  Masonry  for  more 
complete  discussion  and  data. 

In  making  roughly  approximate  estimates  it  may  be  well  to  re- 
member that  rough  slope  wall  paving  seldom  costs  more  than  $2.00 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TlMBERWORK.  1029 

per  cu.  yd.  in  place  (unless  stone  must  be  brought  long  distances), 
and  that,  a  thickness  of  9  ins.  ordinarily  suffices,  thus  giving  a  cost 
of  50  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  but  when  stone  is  secured  near  the  work  may 
•not  cost  30  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Brush  mattresses  can  ordinarily  be  made  and  ballasted  with 
stone  for  about  the  same  cost  per  square  yard  as  a  rough  stone 
slope  wall,  that  is  for  50  to  60  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  as  a  rather  high 
cost,  to  30  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  as  a  low  cost  attained  only  when  brush 
and  stone  for  ballast  are  near  at  hand.  However,  rough  estimates 
of  this  kind  need  not  be  made,  since  the  following  pages  give  all 
details. 

Cost  of  Brush  Mattress  and  Slope  Wall,  Missouri  River — Mr.  W. 
R.  De  Witt  gives  the  following  relative  to  bank  revetment  built  in 
1901,  on  the  Missouri  River,  by  the  company  forces  of  the  Chicago 
&  Alton  Ry.  In  general  the  work  was  similar  to  that  done  by  the 
Government. 

The  river  bluffs  were  first  graded  to  a  slope  of  1:2,  using  a 
water  jet.  A  barge  carrying  a  force  pump,  delivered  water  through 
a  4-in.  hose  at  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  to  a  1%  or  1%  in.  nozzle.  The 
nozzle  is  fitted  with  a  lever  and  swivel,  the  pin  of  which  is  dropped 
into  a  piece  of  iron  pipe  previously  driven  in  the  ground  at  the 
top  of  the  bank.  This  gives  the  nozzleman  full  control.  Two  labor- 
ers shift  the  hose.  When  the  upper  bank  is  graded  and  most  of 
the  earth  thrown  out  into  the  river  current,  the  nozzle  is  moved 
down  the  slope  near  the  water  surface,  and  the  grading  continued 
under  water.  The  gang  thus  engaged  is  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

1  engineman     $  2.75 

1  fireman     1.50 

1  watchman    1.25 

1  nozzleman 2.25 

2  laborers,   at  $1.25 2.50 

Total     $10*25 

Fuel    and    supplies 2.25 

Grand  total,   800  cu.  yds.,  at  1%    cts $12.50 

I  have  assumed  the  individual  wages,  but  the  totals  are  as  given 
by  Mr.  De  Witt. 

This  crew  graded  100  lin.  feet,  of  bank  about  50  ft.  wide  (about 
800  cu.  yds.)  per  10  hr.  day.  Hence  it  costs  $1.25  per  lin.  ft.  for 
grading,  which  is  an  amazingly  low  cost. 

The  grading  was  followed  closely  by  the  work  of  weaving  a 
willow  brush  mattress  86  ft.  wide,  82  ft.  of  which  were  under  wa- 
ter when  it  was  sunk.  Two  barges  20  x  50  ft.  were  lashed  end  to 
end,  and  a  platform  and  set  of  ways  built  on  them.  Another  barge 
loaded  with  brush  furnished  the  supply  of  willows.  The  weaving 
is  done  on  the  inclined  ways.  When  the  top  of  the  ways  is  reached 
the  men  lift  the  mattress  and  allow  the  boat  to  drop  down  stream 
until  the  edge  of  the  mattress  is  at  the  foot  of  the  ways,  and  so  on. 

The  brush  is  1  to  2  ins.  diam.  and  15  to  25  ft  long,  and  is 
woven  in  and  out,  bundles  of  willows  being  grouped  together,  as 


1030  U.IXDBOOK    ()]*    COST    /MV.I. 

In  braiding  hair.  The  stitch  is  like  that  on  a  cane  seated  chair.  The 
mattress  is  12  ins.  thick,  and  has  a  selvedge  on  both  edges.  It  is 
strengthened  and  held  in  place  by  wire  cables.  Five  pairs  of  %-in. 
galv.  cables  run  longitudinally  (up  and  down  stream),  one  cable  of 
each  pair  under  the  mattress  and  one  on  top,  and  a  single  cable  is 
run  along  the  inshore  selvedge.  Similar  pairs  of  cables  are  trans- 
versely at  intervals  16  ft.  8  ins.  (one  under  and  one  on  top),  and 
are  carried  up  the  bank  and  anchored  to  deadmen  at  the  top. 
Where  the  longitudinal  and  transverse  cables  cross,  an  iron  clip  is 
used  to  fasten  them  together.  The  clip  consists  of  two  7/16  in. 
bolts,  each  bent  at  right  angles,  and  the  threaded  end  of  one  bolt 
passing  through  a  loop  in  the  end  of  the  other,  a  nut  on  each  serv- 
ing to  bind  them.  Before  fastening  the  clips,  the  slack  is  taken 
out  of  the  cables  with  block  and  tackle. 

The  gang  engaged  in  making  the  mattress  was  as  follows : 

1  foreman. 

10  laborers   skilled  in  weaving. 
10  brush  passers. 

3  hand  brush  to  brush  passers. 

5  laborers  handling  cables. 

3  laborers  digging  and  filling  holes  for  deadmen. 

1  water  boy. 

33  total. 

These  men  averaged  $1.50  each  per  day,  or  $49.50,  and  they 
built  90  lin.  ft.  of  mattress,  86  ft.  wide,  or  7,740  sq.  ft.  per  day. 
Hence  each  man  averaged  235  sq.  ft.  per  day,  at  a  cost  of  $0.64 
per  100  sq.  ft. 

A  barge  load  of  stone  is  swung  across  the  mattress,  and  stones 
weighing  100  to  200  Ibs.  are  distributed  over  it  and  it  is  sunk.  A 
gang  of  30  men  empty  a  barge  of  150  cu.  yds.  of  stone  in  3  hrs., 
which  sinks  200  lin.  ft.  of  mattress.  This  is  at  the  rate  of  16% 
cu.  yds.  of  stone  per  man  per  10  hr.  day. 

The  inshore  edge  of  the  mattress  is  then  filled  with  spalls  for 
the  distance  that  is  3  ft.  above  low  water  and  3  ft.  below  low  water. 

The  slope  wall  paving  is  begun  at  a  point  2  ft.  above  high  water, 
and  shingled  down  the  slope,  reversing  the  usual  practice  of  be- 
ginning at  bottom  and  moving  up.  The  reason  for  this  is  that  the 
stones  thus  lean  away  from  the  river,  and  they  catch  and  hold  all 
sediment  as  the  river  rises  and  falls.  The  stone  is  delivered  in 
barges  and  wheeled  in  barrows  up  runways.  The  stones  are  so 
tilted  that  the  wall  is  about  8  ins.  thick  at  the  top  of  the  bank  and 
12  ins.  at  the  water's  edge.  The  paved  slope  is  54  ft.  long,  and  the 
following  gang  will  pave  100  lin.  ft.,  or  5,400  sq.  ft.,  or  600  sq.  yds. 
per  day. 

Per  day. 

4  pavers,    at    $2.50 $10.00 

28  men  loading  and  wheeling,  at  $1.50 42.00 

Total $52.00 

The  average  thickness  is   9   ins.,  hence   150  cu.  yds.   of  stone  are 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  103] 

laid  by  this  gang  per  day,  at  a  labor  cost  of  9  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  or  36 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  *1  per  100  sq.  ft.  The  work  is  very  rough,  no 
stone  dressing  being  required,  as  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  each 
of  the  4  pavers  lays  38  cu.  yds.  per  day. 

Over  the  pavement  is  spread  a  2-in.  layer  of  spalls  or  crushed 
stone,  filling  all  cracks  to  prevent  washouts  from  surface  drainage. 
.  The  following  was  the  average  cost  of  8,250  lin.  ft.  of  bank  revet- 
ment. 

f trading   Bank: 

Labor     $0.10 

Fuel,  etc .( 0.03 

Total  grading  bank $0.13 

Weaving  Mattress  (86  ft.  wide): 

0.6   cords  brush  at  $1.75  deliv $1.05 

8    Ibs.    %-in.   galv.    cable   at    $0.04 0.32 

%    iron   clip   at    $0.05 0.03 

0.06  deadmen   (12x12  ins.  x  4.  ft.)  at  $1 0.06 

Labor    0.55 

Total   weaving  mattress $2.01 

Ballasting  Mattress: 

0.75  cu.  yds.   stone  at  $1  deliv /.  .  .$0.75 

Labor    .  .    0.07 


Total    ballasting    mattress $0.82 

Paving  Bank    (54  ft.   wide): 

1.5  cu.  yds.  stone  at   $1   deliv $1.50 

Labor 0.52 


Total  paving  bank $2.02 

Spawls  on  Pavement: 

0.47  cu.  yds.  spawls  at  $0.50 $0.24 

Labor    .    0.15 


Total   spawls    $0.39 

General  Expense: 

Administration     $0.18 

Care  of  plant 0.07 

Current  repairs  to  plant 0.02 

Hire   of   plant    1.00 

Surveys    0.05 

Ice    0.03 

Towage,  other  than  brush  and   stone 0.08 

Total    general   expense    $1.43 

Grand  total    $6.80 

Add  10%  for  contingencies    $0.68 

Total  for  estimate $7.48 

The  plant  consisted  of  a  grading  boat,  a  small  steam  boat,  a 
mattress  boat,  and  six  barges  (25x100  ft.)  if  all  material  Is 
transported  by  steam,  as  was  the  case  here. 

Cost  of  Brush  Mattress  and  River  Bank  Revetment. — Mr.  Charles 
Le  Vasseur  is  authority  for  the  following. :  -On  the  Mississippi 
River  brush  mattresses  are  now  used  only  to  protect  that  part  of  a 
*>ank  that  is  under  water,  usually  for  a  width  of  250  ft.  Then  the 


1032  HANDBOOK    OF    COST    DATA. 

bank  above  water  level  is  graded  to  a  1  :  1  slope  by  a  water  jet, 
and  paved  roughly  with  stone.  The  brush  mattress  is  woven  by 
men  working  on  scows,  the  scows  extending  out  into  the  river  250 
ft.  The  scows  are  provided  with  "ways"  on  which  the  mattress 
rests,  and,  by  pulling  the  scows  along  as  the  mattress  is  woven,  a 
continuous  mattress  is  launched  into  the  river  along,  the  shore. 
The  brush  is  made  into  small  bundles  (10  or  12  ins.  diam.),  or 
fascines  bound  with  No.  12  wire  (no  brush  being  over  3  ins.  diam.), 
and  these  are  laid  side  by  side  and  bound  with  %  in.  steel  wire, 
woven  in  and  out,  being  drawn  taut  by  a  block  and  tackle.  On  top 
of  the  mattress  ar3  placed  rows  of  poles,  16  ft.  apart,  extending  up 
and  down  stream.  They  are  lashed  to  the  fascines  with  No.  7  sili- 
con bronze  wire  every  5  ft.,  and  at  intermediate  points  with  steel 
wire.  These  poles  prevent  the  stone  ballast  from  slipping  off  the 
mat  when  it  is  sunk  on  a  steep  slope.  Rock  is  wheeled  onto  the 
floating  mat  in  barrows  on  run  planks  from  stone  barges.  The 
materials  and  labor  per  100  sq.  ft.  of  mattress  are: 

1.5  cords  brush. 

0.08  cords  poles. 

0.75   cu.  yd.  stone. 

3  Ibs.  No.  12  galv.  wire. 

6  Ibs.  %  in.  galv.  wire  strand. 

4  Ibs.  5/16  in.  galv.  wire  strand. 
1  Ib.  %  in.  galv.  wire  strand. 
1.35  clamps,  5/16  in. 

0.16  clamps,    %    in. 

0.9  day  labor  building  and  sinking. 

It  costs  about  $6.80  per  100  sq.  ft.  of  this  mattress,  or  about  $17 
per  lin.  ft.  of  river  bank,  the  mattress  being  250  ft.  wide.  In  addi- 
tion it  costs  $1.25  per  lin.  ft.  of  bank  to  grade,  with  a  hydraulic  jet, 
the  bank  above  the  water  edge.  The  hydraulic  grader  is  a  barge 
carrying  a  pumping  plant  discharging  2,000  gals,  per  min.  under 
pressure  of  170  Ibs.  (125  Ibs.  at  the  nozzle)  through  a  4  in.  base 
to  (1%  or  iy%  in.)  nozzles.  This  grading  of  the  upper  bank  is  not 
done  till  the  mattress  is  sunk.  Then  the  upper  bank  is  paved  with 
0.3  cu.  yd.  of  stone  per  sq.  yd.,  at  a  cost  of  $10  per  lin.  ft.  of  bank. 
This  makes  the  total  cost  $28.25  per  lin.  ft.  of  bank. 

In  grading  the  bank  the  nozzle  is  handled  by  men  on  top  of  the 
bank,  directing  the  jet  downward,  and  it  cuts  the  slope  as  true  as 
if  it  had  been  planed. 

Cost  of  Brush  Revetment  Ballasted  With  Concrete.*— The  Depart- 
ment of  Engineering  of  the  State  of  California  is  now  using  a  type 
of  flexible  revetment  as  a  protection  to  river  banks  that  is  quite  a 
departure  from  the  kind  previously  employed  by  the  department. 
The  method  that  was  formerly  used  was  to  make  a  mattress  of 

*  Engineer  ing-Contracting,  Mar.  24,  1909. 


PILING,  TRESTL1NG,  TIMBERWORK.  1033 

brush  fascines  usually  woven  with  wire  or  cable,  and  weighted 
down  with  loose  rock  laid  on  top  of  the  mattress.  If  the  slope  of 
the  bank  below  the  water  line,  where  it  could  not  be  graded,  was 
steep,  no  rocks  would  lie  in  the  mattress.  Should  erosion  take  place 
at  the  lower  edge  of  the  mattress,  the  latter  would  drop  down,  the 
rocks  roll  off  and  then  the  rush  would  rise  with  the  water,  be  torn 
loose  and  carried  away. 

The  type  of  revetment  now  constructed  by  the  Department  of 
Engineering  developed  from  a  plan  originated  by  Nathaniel  Ellery, 
state  engineer,  and  was  successfully  used  by  him  in  bank  protection 
work  along  the  Eel  river  in  Humboldt  county,  California. 

The  plan  consists  of  a  mattress  composed  of  brush  fascines  8  to 
12  ins.  in  diameter  and  about  20  ft.  long,  bound  with  wire.  These 
fascines  are  laid  double,  breaking  joints,  and  woven  over  and  under 
with  three  galvanized  wire  "strands"  or  cables,  %  in.  in  diameter. 
Galvanized  anchor  cables,  %  to  1  in.  in  diameter,  are  laid  on  the 
slope  extending  from  the  barge  floating  in  the  stream  to  upon  ,or 
over  the  levee  to  a  safe  point  where  a  line  of  concrete  blocks  is 
sunk  in  the  soil  and  connected  by  a  %  to  %-in.  diameter  galvan- 
ized cable.  These  anchor  cables  are  fastened  to  the  line  attaching 
together  the  line  of  "deadmen,"  or  as  called  by  the  department,  an- 
chor blocks.  The  anchor  cables  are  spaced  about  8  ft.  centers  and 
are  attached  on  the  water  end  to  a  line  of  cable  passing  through 
heavy  concrete  blocks  made  on  the  barge.  These  concrete  blocks 
are  called  by  the  department  sinker  weights.  After  this  skeleton  of 
cable  and  concrete  work  is  set  and  ready,  the  mattress  is  woven 
on  top  of  these  cables  and  the  mattress  is  tied  or  lashed  to  the 
anchor  cables  beneath  the  mattress  every  6  ft.  After  the  mattress 
is  woven  to  its  desired  width  another  cable  %  in.  in  diameter  and 
galvanized,  is  drawn  down  over  the  mattress  directly  over  the  an- 
chor cable.  It  is  fastened  to  the  anchor  cable  at  6  or  8-ft.  intervals 
through  the  brush.  The  ends  of  this  top  cable  are  fastened  to  the 
anchor  cable  on  the  land  end  by  a  cable  clip  just  above  the  brush 
mat  and  the  water  end  is  made  long  enough  to  reach  the  sinker 
block  where  it  is  fastened.  Also,  just  at  the  water  edge  of  the  mat 
the  anchor  cable  and  the  top  cable  are  fastened  together. 

Above  the  water  the  mattress  is  woven  in  place  on  the  ground 
which  has  been  prepared  by  grading  to  a  uniform  slope.  When 
the  water's  edge  is  reached  the  weaving  takes  place  on  the  cables 
suspended  over  the  water  by  placing  planks  on  the  cables.  The 
barge  is  held  off  shore  by  spars  or  struts  which  are  held  taut  by 
shore  lines  to  the  barge.  Afiter  the  mattress  is  completely  woven, 
blocks  of  concrete  2  or  3  ft.  square  and  from  6  to  12  ins.  thick  are 
placed  on  the  mattress,  the  size  and  distribution  of  which  depends 
upon  the  figured  buoyancy  of  the  brush  and  the  force  of  the  cur- 
rent to  be  resisted.  These  blocks  are  molded  in  place  on  the  mat- 
tress and  thoroughly  fastened  on  the  top  cable  usually  with  a  turn 
or  knot  of  the  cable  firmly  embedded  in  the  concrete.  When  the 
mat  is  thus  made  ready  the  barge  is  shoved  away,  permitting  the 
structure  to  sink  and  conform  to  the  bank  slope.  The  mattress  so 


}034  HANDBOOK    OF   COST    DATA. 

made  will,  because  of  its  flexibility,  conform  to  the  variations  in  the 
slope  of  the  bank  below  the  water  where  it  could  not  be  graded. 
Should  the  current  cut  under  the  edge  of  the  mattress  the  weights 
will  drop  down,  carrying  the  mattress  down  as  the  earth  is  washed 
away,  and  all — mattress  and  weighting — being  secured  by  cables 
to  the  anchorage  on  shore,  will  continue  to  hang  over  the  bank  like 
a  curtain.  No  weights  can  roll  off  and  release  the  brush. 

This  type  of  revetment  was  used  on  Sherman  Island  in  two  places 
where  the  shore  had  been  eroded  by  waves,  and  successfully  pro- 
tected the  bank.  The  revetment  on  Sherman  Island  consisted 
of  a  mattress  of  willow  brush  in  two  sections,  176  ft.  and  352  ft.  In 
length,  making  a  total  length  of  528  ft.  The  average  width  was 
75  ft.,  and  the  average  thickness  16  ins.  The  superficial  area  was 
4,400  sq.  yds.  and  the  cubic  contents  1,984  cu.  yds.  A  total  of  182 
cu.  yds.  of  concrete  was  used.  The  mattress  was  built  from  a  barge, 
the  upstream  sections  overlapping  the  previously  laid  section  down 
stream.  The  work  was  done  in  1908  by  contract  on  the  basis  of 
cost  plus  8  per  cent.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

COST  OF  REVETMENT. 

Per  Per  Per 

Total,  cu.  yd.  sq.  yd.  lin.  ft. 

Labor $     224.70  $0.113  $0.051  $0.432 

Brush     1.489.70  .750  .338  2.865 

Cable    and    clips 903.94  455  .205  1.740 

Equipment     96.10  .048  .022  .182 

Concrete     1,313.35  .663  .301  2.535 

Inspection     74.20  .037  .017  .142 

Contractor's  com 215.40  .109  .049  .421 

Grand  total    $4,316.39          $2.175          $0.983          $8.317 

In  addition,  grading  costing  $75,  or  $0.017  per  sq.  yd.  of  mattress,  . 
was  done.     This   makes  the   total  cost  of   the  revetment   $4,391.39, 
or  $1.00  per  sq.  yd. 

The  item  labor  is  for  the  mattress  work  and  covers  715  hrs.  of 
work,  or  36  hrs.  per  cu.  yd.  of  revetment,  0.16  hr.  per  sq.  yd.  and 
1.35  hrs.  per  lin.  ft.  Labor  was  paid  $2.50  per  day  of  8  hrs.  The 
item  brush  is  for  1,983.99  cu.  yds.  of  brush  at  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
The  item  cable  and  clips  in  for  37,375  ft.  of  cable.  The  item  equip- 
ment covers  the  following  items : 

Barge  hire  and  watchman $170.00 

Launch  hire,  16  days 65.00 

Watchman,   17  days 37.50 

Moving  barge,  checking  gravel,  etc 13.85 

Material,   telephone  calls,  etc 10.97 

Total     $297.32 

This  total  was  distributed  over  the  revetment  work  proper  and 
the  concrete  work.  The  barge  hire  and  watchman  for  barge  cost 
$10  per  day  and  it  cost  $10  for  tonnage  to  the  barge.  The  item 
inspection  covers  surveys  and  inspection  and  was  spread  over  the 
revetment  work  proper  and  the  concrete. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1035 

The  itemized  cost  of  the  concrete  was  as  follows : 

Total.          Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor,   995   lirs $     311.26  $1.729 

Cement,    $1.27    per   bbl 305.64  1.695 

Gravel,   $1.25    per  cu.   yd 218.00  1.211 

Lumber   and    nails    84.07  .466 

Equipment     201.22  1.118 

Inspection     103.56  .575 

Contractor's   commission    89.60  .498     - 


Total     $1,313.35  $7.292 

Another  flexible  brush  mattress  was  placed  on  Brannans  Island, 
the  work  being  done  by  contract  on  the  basis  of  cost  plus  8%. 

The  revetment  consisted  of  a  mattress  of  willow  brush  in  three 
sections,  2,620  ft,  187  ft,  and  175  ft.,  respectively;  total  length, 
2,982  ft.;  average  width,  66%  ft;  average  thickness,  14  ins.;  super- 
ficial area,  21,892  sq.  yds. ;  cubic  contents,  8,586  cu.  yds.  This 
mattress  was  built  from  a  barge,  in  sections  225  ft.  in  length,  the 
up-stream  sections  overlapping  on  the  previously  laid  section  down- 
stream. The  concrete  used  was  700  cu.  yds.  The  unit  cost  of  the 
work  was  as  follows: 

CONCRETE. 

Total  cost     Cost  per  cu.  yd. 

Labor $1,287.01  $1.830 

Cement     1,161.29  1.659 

Gravel     864.35  1.235 

Lumber    and    nails 374.91  0.535 

Equipment     1,198.25  1.711 

Inspection     262.42  0.375 

Commission  382.86  0.547 


Total     $5,553.09  $7.901 

REVETMENT. 

Total  cost.     Cost  per  cu.  yd. 

Grading $       229.59  $0.010 

Labor     1,411.33  0.064 

Brush     6,440.51  0.293 

Cable  and  clips 5,727.24  0.262 

Equipment     1,281.32  0.056 

Concrete     5,531.09  0.252 

Inspection     262.41  0.012 

Commission     1,197.89  0.055 

Total     $22,081.38  $1.004 

At  Merkeleys,  a  revetment  was  constructed  to  protect  a  river 
bank  which  had  begun  to  cave  badly.  The  work  was  done  in  1908 
by  contract  on  the  basis  of  cost  plus  8%.  The  revetment  consisted 
of  a  matjtress  of  willow  brush  in  four  sections,  aggregating  774  ft 
The  average  width  was  40  ft.  and  the  average  thickness  was  8  ins. 
The  superficial  area  was  3,440  sq.  yds.  and  the  cubic  contents  1,912 
cu.  yds.  The  concrete  amounted  to  145  cu.  yds.  The  method  of 
construction  was  the  same  as  at  Brannans  Island,  previously 
mentioned. 


1036  HANDBOOK    OF    COST    DATA. 

The  unit  costs  of  the  work  were  as  follows : 
CONCRETE. 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor     .               i $    332.17  $2.296 

Cement     289.58  1.997 

Rock                       243.61  1.681 

Lumber,    etc 213.75  1.474 

Equipment     196.75  1.357 

Inspection     46.75  .322 

Contractor's    commission     101.00 

Total     $1,423.61  $9.825 

REVETMENT. 

Total.  Per  sq.  yd. 

Labor     $     246.01  $0.0715 

Brush     1,434.39  .416 

Cable    and    clips 1,025.41  .2925 

Equipment     196.50  .0572 

Concrete 1,423.61  .4145 

Inspection     50.06  .0146 

Contractor's  commission    299.00  .0872 


Total     $5,177.10  $1.501 

A  similar  revetmervt  was  also  constructed  in  connection  with  the 
work  of  closing  a  break  in  a  levee  on  the  Kripp  Farm  in  the  city 
of  Sacramento.  The  work  of  closing  the  break  in  the  levee  was 
done  by  day  labor,  the  state  engineer's  department  hiring  a  dredge 
and  crew  at  $160  per  day  of  22  hrs.  The  levee  required  to  close  the 
break  was  1,600  ft.  long,  24  ft.  maximum  height  and  16  ft.  wide  on 
top,  containing  102,489  cu.  yds.  of  eai?th.  The  actual  cost  of  build- 
ing the  levee,  including  superintendence  and  inspection  was 
$5,667.64,  or  5y2  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

The  revetment  was  built  by  contract  on  the  basis  of  cost  plus 
10%.  It  consisted  of  a  mattress  of  willow  brush,  710  ft.  long,  40  ft. 
wide  and  12  ins.  thick.  The  superficial  area  was  3,400  sq.  yds. 
and  the  cubic  conjtent  was  1,172  cu.  yds.  The  concrete  used  amount- 
ed to  100  cu.  yds.  The  mattress  was  made  on  the  bank  and  in 
place.  The  unit  costs  of  the  work  were  as  follows : 

CONCRETE. 

Total  cost.     Cost  per  cu.  yd. 

Labor    $247.06  $2.47 

Cement    163.79  $1.64 

Gravel     135.00  1.35 

Lumber    41.53  0.41 

Equipment     139.28  1.39 

Inspection     25.00  0.25 

Commission     72.66  0.73 


Total     $824.32  $8.24 

REVETMENT. 

Total  cost.     Cost  per  sq.  yd. 

Labor $     174.18  $0.042 

Brush     921.05  0.272 

Cable  and  clips    548.92  0.162 

Concrete     824.32  0.269 

Inspection     148.00  0.044 

Commission     184.48  0.054 


Total     $2,773.95  $0.843 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1037 

Cost  of  Brush  Mattresses.*— Maj.  D.  Fitch  gives  the  following: 
Brush  mattresses,  riprapped  with  stone,  were  used  to  protect  the 
bank  of  the  Upper  White  River,  Arkansas,  in  connection  with  build- 
ing a  timber  crib  dam.  The  cost  of  riprapping  is  given  in  detail 
in  the  section  on  Masonry,  and  the  cost  of  the  timber  crib  is  given 
elsewhere  in  this  section.  Work  was  done  by  Government  forces, 
laborers  receiving  $1.50  per  8-hr.  day. 

The  following  was  the  cost  of  the  protection  mattress  work: 

PROTECTION  MATTRESS    (293   SQ.  YDS.). 

Unit  cost.     Total.  Per  sq.  yd. 

Riprap,  320  cu.  yds $0.74            $237  $0.808 

Inspection  of  riprap,  320  cu.  yds 008                3  .010 

Cutting  and  hauling  brush,  169  cords...    1.669            282  .962 

Weaving  and  sinking,  293  sq.  yds 1.344            394  1.344 

Total    $916         $3.124 

The  total  labor  time  for  cutting  and  hauling  160  cords  of  brush 
was  150  days,  the  work  done  per  man  per  day  being  1.09  cords; 
the  total  labor  time  for  weaving  and  sinking  293  sq.  yds.  of  mat- 
tress was  223  days,  the  work  done  per  man  per  day  being  1.31 
sq.  yds. 

450  Ft.  Bank  Revetment. — This  work  included  the  construction  of 
200  brush  mats,  the  grading  of  the  bank  and  paving  it  with  riprap, 
the  cost  of  the  various  items  being  as  follows:" 

Per 
Brush  Mattress:  Unit  cost.       Total.       square. 

Wire,    etc $108          $0.54 

Riprap,   336   cu.   yds : $.74  248  1.48 

Cutting  and  loading  brush,  289%  days 531  2.60 

Weaving  and    sinking,    213%    days 387        .   1.98 

Inspecting  336  cu.  yds.  riprap,  4  days 7  .... 

Total,    200    squares $1,281         $6.40 

Work  done  per  man  per  day  was  0.93  squares  wove  and  sunk. 
Summary  for  450  ft.  bank  revetment: 

Total.         Unit  cost. 

Brush  mattress,   200   squares $1,281  $6.40 

Grading  bank,    450   lin.   ft 229  .51 

Riprapping  bank,  1,044  cu.  yds 1,000  .96 

A  total  of  450  lin.  ft.  of  bank  was  graded,  the  total  labor  time 
being  123  days  at  a  cost  of  $229  or  $0.51  per  lin.  ft.  Each  man 
graded  3.6  lin.  ft.  of  bank  per  day. 

Summarizing  we  get  the  following  as  the  cost  of  the  450  ft.  revet- 
ment: 

Brush   mattress    $1,281 

Grading   bank    229 

Paving   bank    1,000 

Grand  total,   450  lin.  ft,  at  $5.58 $2,510 

Cost  of  Mattress  and  Slope  Wall,   M.,   K.   &  T.   Ry.f— Mr.  R.  M. 

Garrett  is  authority  for  the  following : 

The  revetment  put  in  by  the  Missouri,  Kansas  &  Texas  along  the 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,   1908.  p.  284. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  March  31.   1909. 


1038  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

Missouri  River,  for  shore  protection,  is  built  like  that  along  the 
Missouri  River,  which  have  been  put  in  by  the  Missouri  River  Com- 
mission, and  averages  about  60  ft.  in  width.  The  first  work  put 
in  by  this  company  was  during  1897,  and  extends  from  the  east  city 
limits  of  St.  Charles  down  the  river  for  9,000  ft.  A  rock  dike  was 
first  built  out  into  the  river,  and  a  boom  made  of  heavy  timbers  was 
anchored  to  the  lower  side  of  the  dike,  and  laid  parallel  with  it. 
From  this  boom  the  mat  was  started,  having  its  full  width  at  the 
beginning.  The  mat  was  first  woven  and  sunk,  and  then  the  bank 
was  graded  by  hydraulic  power  to  a  slope  of  2  to  1,  and  then 
paved  from  the  top  down. 

In  1903,  work  was  extended  3,000  ft.  down  the  river,  and  was 
done  in  the  same  way  as  the  first  section,  with  the  exception  that 
the  mat  was  anchored  at  the  starting  point  with  piles  instead  of 
the  boom. 

In  1906,  revetment  was  again  extended  7,200  ft.  On  this  last 
section  the  bank  was  graded  to  a  slope  of  2%  to  1  in  advance  of 
weaving  the  mat,  as  considerable  trouble  had  been  experienced  on 
former  work,  on  account  of  material  from  the  bank  covering  the 
mat,  so  that  a  connection  between  paving  and  mat  could  not  be 
properly  made. 

Grading  on  this  section  was  done  with  a  small  hoisting  engine 
on  a  barge,  as  follows:  A  derrick  was  erected  on  a  barge,  having 
a  boom  long  enough  to  reach  the  top  of  the  bank  to  be  graded, 
a  No.  3  wheeler  scraper  pan  was  pulled  along  this  boom  from  the 
barge  to  the  top  of  bank,  by  a  mule  on  the  bank,  and  was  held  in 
place  by  two  men  and  filled,  and  then  dragged  down  the  bank  by 
the  hoisting  engine.  The  beginning  of  the  mat  was  anchored  to 
deadmen  on  top  of  the  bank  about  200  ft.  up-stream,  and  weaving 
was  begun  about  100  ft.  back  on  the  old  mat,  so  that  the  full 
width  of  the  new  mat  was  gotten  where  the  unprotected  bank 
commenced. 

In  1908,  4,000  ft.  of  revetment  was  put  on  the  north  side  of  the 
river  just  above  Boonville  bridge.  At  Kingsbury,  there  is  a 
siding  on  the  west  side  of  main  line,  and  out  of  the  south 
end  of  this  track  the  spur  was  built  to  the  river;  this  required 
a  main  track  6,500  ft.  in  length,  and  a  spur  track  900  ft.  in 
length.  Track  was  laid  about  5  to  20  ft.  from  top  of  bank 
all  along  where  revetment  was  to  go  in,  so  that  rock  could 
be  unloaded  and  used  with  as  little  handling  as  possible.  The 
bank  was  first  graded  to  a  slope  of  2  %  to  1  by  teams ;  the  mat 
was  then  woven  and  sunk,  and  the  slope  paved  from  bottom  up. 
It  is  the  description  of  this  last  section  that  will  be  given,  as  the 
only  differences  between  this  and  other  works  are  those  men- 
tioned. 

The  bank  was  about  18  ft.  higher  than  what  was  taken  as  the 
average  low  water ;  the  soil  is  mostly  a  very  fine  sand  and  very 
little  gumbo;  the  bank  was  clear  of  timber  and  brush,  but  there 
were  several  large  snags  where  the  mat  was  to  lie  that  were  taken 
out  by  sawing,  blowing-out  and  using  teams  and  line. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1039 

Shovelers  first  dug  along  the  top  of  the  bank  and  shoveled  down 
all  the  perpendicular  and  overhanging  points,  so  as  to  make  it  safe 
for  a  mule  to  walk  along  close  to  the  edge ;  then  a  two-mule  team 
plowed  two  or  three  furrows  as  close  to  the  edge  of  the  bank  as 
team  could  be  gotten.  The  mules  were  then  hitched  to  a  "go-devil," 
constructed  of  two  2  x  10-in.  plank  8  ft.  long,  fastened  together  at 
the  front  end  and  flared  to  about  4  ft.  at  the  back  end ;  it  re- 
quired one  man  to  drive  the  mules  and  one  man  to  weight  the 
drag.  This  was  then  run  along  the  back  side  of  furrows,  and  the 
loose  earth  shoved  toward  the  river.  After  the  bank  began  to  slope, 
two  or  three  "slips"  (drag  scrapers)  were  put  on,  and  the  bank 
brought  to  the  desired  slope. 

It  will  be  seen  that  only  about  half  of  the  material  in  slope  is 
moved,  as  the  •  excavation  makes  the  fill  and  does  not  wash  away, 
as  it  does  when  grading  by  hydraulics.  It  was  found  that  with 
this  material  the  filled  portion  was  as  solid  as  the  natural  surface. 
Grading  was  never  carried  further  than  200  ft.  in*  advance  of 
weaving,  as  the  barges  from  which  the  mat  was  being  woven 
would  protect  the  bank  from  the  current  for  this  distance. 

The  mat  was  woven  60  ft.  wide  with  a  selvage  edge  on  the  out- 
stream  side,  and  sunk  parallel  with  the  shore  with  the  inner  edge 
about  3  ft.  above  the  average  low  water.  The  mat  was  strength- 
ened with  five  double  rows  of  %-in.  galvanized  steel  cable — 7 
strands  of  No.  11  wire — laid  longitudinally  one  above  and  one 
below,  and  anchored  with  a  double  row  of  similar  cable  laid  trans- 
versely every  15  ft.  and  fastened  to  deadmen,  buried  3  ft.  deep  and 
located  15  ft.  back  from  the  upper  edge  of  slope.  At  every  inter- 
section of  the  longitudinal  with  the  transverse  rows,  the  four  cables 
are  fastened  together  with  a  %-in.  U  clip.  The  transverse  rows  are 
fastened  to  deadmen  by  wrapping  one  cable  around  the  deadman 
twice  and  then  fastening  it  to  the  other  cable  with  two  %-in.  U. 
clip.  The  deadmen  are  pile  butts  about  3  ft.  long,  and  the  object 
in  fastening  the  cable  to  them,  as  mentioned,  is  to  allow  the  cables 
to  slip  when  loaded,  so  that  the  same  strain  will  be  on  both 
the  under  and  upper  cables.  The  willows  were  cut  from  bank  of 
river  about  one  mile  above  the  mat,  and  were  hauled  by  wagons, 
hauling  about  1.6  cords  to  the  load.  The  road  was  bad  at  times, 
and  it  required  a  snap  team  to  pull  out  of  the  mudholes,  but  most 
of  the  time  the  road  was  in  good  shape.  It  required  0.6  cord  of 
brush  to  100  sq.  ft.  of  mat;  average  thickness  of  mat,  about  18  ins. 

Weaving  was  started  at  a  point  at  the  upper  end  and  gradually 
widened  out  to  full  width,  anchors  being  placed  for  longitudinal 
cables  in  the  top  of  the  bank  about  100  ft.  above  the  upper  end. 
The  mat  was  woven  with  four  small  bags  fastened  together,  so  as 
to  make  the  desired  width.  Fingers  of  skids  were  built  on  barges 
out  of  3  x  12 -in.  plank,  24  ft.  long,  and  spaced  5  ft.  apart,  extend- 
ing from  the  water  level  on  up-stream  side  to  an  elevation  of  3  ft. 
above  floor  of  barge  at  a  point  about  3  ft.  back  from  down-stream 
side.  Spools  of  cable  were  set  under  the  down-stream  ends  of  the 
fingers  at  the  proper  position  for  the  under  longitudinal  cables,  so 


1040  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

that  cable  would  unwind  as  the  barge  was  let  down  stream.  The 
barge  was,  anchored  at  the  shore  end  to  the  track,  and  at  the  upper 
end  to  the  mat  that  had  been  woven.  The  mat  was  woven  on  the 
barge  as  high  as  the  fingers  would  permit,  and  cable  and  clip  men 
would  pull  the  under  cables  through  the  mat  by  means  of  an  iron 
hook  about  2  ft.  long,  and  the  top  longitudinal  cables  were  run 
under  these,  and  all  were  fastened  together  with  a  %-in.  clamp. 
The  barge  was  then  pulled  from  under  the  mat  with  a  team,  and 
anchor  ropes  slacked  just  enough  so  that  about  3  ft.  of  mat  would 
be  left  on  fingers/  Top  longitudinal  cables  were  cut  off  of  reel  on 
shore  in  lengths  of  about  100  ft.  and  spliced  together  with  a  square 
knot  on  mat  as  the  work  proceeded. 

The  mat  was  sunk  and  held  down  with  stone  weighing  from  30 
to  50  Ibs.,  an  average  of  1.5  cu.  yds.  of  stone  being  used  per  100 
sq.  ft.  of  mat.  Rock  for  sinking  was  unloaded  from  cars  onto 
shoulder  of  slope  and  wheeled  in  wheelbarrows  out  onto  the  barge, 
anchored  lengthwise  across  the  mat,  and  dumped  along  the  edge 
of  barge.  The  mat  was  sunk  from  the  shore  side  out,  so  that  it 
would  settle  away  from  shore  and  the  transverse  cables  would 
tighten  up.  Sinking  was  kept  at  least  100  ft.  back  from  weaving 
barge  to  prevent  pulling  the  mat  off  of  barge.  When  the  water 
was  higher  than  the  proper  elevation  for  the  shore  side  of  mat,  it 
was  sparred  out,  so  that  in  sinking  it  would  settle  to  its  proper 
position. 

The  rock  for  paving  the  slope  was  unloaded  from  cars  onto  slope 
and  rolled  down  to  the  bottom,  where  paving  was  begun.  Paving 
is  10  ins.  thick,  and  was  paved  from  the  bottom  up,  care  being 
taken  to  fill  all  the  cracks  with  small  stone.  At  the  upper  edge  of 
paving,  spawls  were  piled  so  as  to  keep  the  surface  water  from 
washing  under  the  paving  and  starting  it  to  roll.  As  long  as  the 
water  was  low,  a  good  connection  was  gotten  between  paving  and 
mat,  but  there  were  parts  of  this  work  that  were  paved  during 
high  water,  and  the  rock  slid  in  afterward,  making  repairs  neces- 
sary. The  work  done  on  the  first  section  in  1897  is  in  very  good 
shape  to-day.  The  mat  has  rotted  where  it  has  been  exposed  to  the 
air,  but  the  paving  is  in  good  condition. 

There  have  been  some  slides  on  the  work  done  in  1906.  At  these 
places  it  was  found  that  the  rock  was  settling  under  the  edge  of 
the  mat.  These  were  places  where  the  bank  had  washed  after  mat 
had  been  put  in,  and  the  mat  does  not  lie  up  on  the  bank  as  it 
should. 

Considerable  trouble  has  been  experienced  on  account  of  the  eddy 
caused  by  the  end  of  revetment.  At  Boonville  bridge,  the  revet- 
ment ends  at  an  old  rock  dike,  and  no  difficulty  is  expected  at  that 
point,  but  at  all  of  the  other  places  it  has  given  trouble.  At  the 
end  of  the  work  done  in  1906  it  is  probably  more  noticeable.  The 
revetment  at  this  place  was  ended  at  a  place  where  the  bank  ex- 
tended out  into  the  river  400  or  500  ft.,  and  now  the  bank  is  100  ft. 
further  in  than  the  revetment,  and  the  revetment  has  been  repaired 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1041 

twice  on  account  of  the  river  washing  behind  the  end,  and  allowing 
the  rock  to  fall  in. 

The  cost  of  the  Boonville  revetment  (4,000  lin.  ft.)  is  as  follows: 
Cost  per  linear  foot  for  60-ft.  mat;  banks  18  ft.  above  low  water; 
laborers  paid  $1.50  per  day;  foreman,  $4,  and  teams,  $3.50.  This 
does  not  include  interest  on  investment  or  make  allowances  for 
rainy  days  and  moving,  but  is  the  actual  cost.  The  contractor's 
profit  is  included  in  the  track  work  only : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Grading  bank,   per  lin.   ft $0.130 

Weaving    mat    0.410 

Sinking    mat    0.110 

Paving    slope 0.230 

Willows,    including    cutting,    hauling   and    unloading, 

and    price    paid    landowner 0.340 

Rock,    at    $0.75,    delivered    on    site    (2.3    cu.    yds.    to 

the   lin.    ft.) 1.730 

Unloading    rock     0.120 

Spotting  cars  with  teams 0.004 

Hauling  deadmen  and  cable 0.018 

Taking    out    snags 0.030 

Cable  and  Clips  : 

1,260 — %-in.     clips,     at       .06 $       75.60 

746— %-in.     clips,     at       .035 26.16 

107,150 — %-in.    cable,    at    1.00 1,071.50 


$1,173.26      .0.300 
Deadmen,   270,  at  0.50  =  $135.00 0.035 

Total     $3.457 

Track,   7,500  lin.  ft.  : 

Labor,     grading,     including    contractors' 

profit $1,581.90 

Labor   laying    1,493.20 

Taking    up 1,000.00 

$4,075.10 
Bridge    across    draw 460.00 


Total    track,    etc , $4,535.10        1.140 

Grading   spur  to  quarry 393.50        0.074 

Total   per   lin.    ft $4.671 

Excluding  the  cost  of  grading  the  bank  and  the  cost  of  the  rock 
used  in  paving  the  bank  (but  including  the  rock  used  in  ballasting 
the  mattress),  the  cost  of  the  mattress  was  as  follows  per  square 
of  100  sq.  ft.  : 

Per  square. 

Willows,     0.6     cord $0.57 

Weaving  mat    0.68 

Sinking    mat    0.18 

Rock  for  ballast,   ly?  cu.  yd.,  at  $0.75 1.13 

Unloading  rock,    iy2    cu.   yd.,   at    $0.05 0.08 

Spotting    cars    with    team 0.03 

Hauling  deadmen   and  cable 0.03 

Taking    out    snags 0.05 

Cable     and     clips 0.50 

Deadmen     0.06 

Total      $3.31 

Tracks,  bridge  and  spur,  per  1 y>   cu.  yd.  rock 0.80 

Total  ..$4.11 


1042  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

The  last  item  (tracks,  bridge  and  spur)  has  been  proi'ated  to 
stone  used  on  the  mattress. 

The  slope  wall  on  the  bank  required  1.4  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.,  being 
10  ins.  thick  and  measuring  45  wide  along  the  slope.  The  rock 
cost  $0.75  per  cu.  yd.  delivered  on  cars,  $0.05  for  unloading,  and 
$0.16  for  delivering  and  laying  it  on  the  slope,  or  a  total  of  $0.96 
per  cu.  yd.,  not  including  the  cost  of  the  item  of  tracks,  bridge  and 
spur,  which  amounted  to  $0.53  per  cu.  yd.  of  rock,  there  being  9,200 
cu.  yds.  of  rock  in  the  slope  wall  and  on  the  mattress.  Adding  this 
$0.53  we  have  a  total  of  $1.49  per  cu.  yd.  of  slope  wall,  or  41%  cts. 
per  sq.  yd.  10  ins.  thick. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  on  the  7,500  lin.  ft.  of  track  cost 
as  follows  per  lin.  ft. : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Grading     $0.21 

Laying    truck 0.20 

Taking    up    track '. 0.14 

Total     $0.55 

Cost  of  Brush  Mattresses  and  Dikes.* — The  following  data  relate 
to  levee  protection  work  at  the  West  Pass  Levee,  in  Mississippi. 
The  work  was  done  in  1904  by  Government  forces,  and  consisted 
of  the  construction  at  the  up-stream  end  of  the  levee  of  a  paving 
covering  the  sloping  end  of  the  embankment  and  the  side  slopes  for 
a  distance  of  100  ft.  back  from  the  end  of  the  levee  crown,  to- 
gether with  a  paving  60  ft.  wide  on  the  natural  ground  surface  laid 
continuous  with  the  paving  on  the  slopes.  The  work  also  included 
the  construction  of  paving  on  the  down-stream  end  of  the  levee 
slope,  beginning  100  ft.  back  from  end  of  crown  on  lake  side,  ex- 
tending around  the  sloping  end,  and  continuing  along  the  river  slope 
for  a  distance  of  555  ft,  the  ground  surface  adjacent  to  the  paved 
slopes  being  covered  with  a  mattress  85  ft.  wide,  built  continuous 
with  the  paving.  On  the  up-stream  end  the  paving  consisted  of  rip- 
rap laid  close  by  hand  with  the  larger  voids  clinked  with  spalls, 
except  for  the  sloping  end  and  the  adjacent  pavement,  where  the 
riprap  was  laid  on  a  3-in.  layer  of  spalls.  Around  the  outer  edge 
of  the  paving  was  a  trench  2y2  ft.  deep  filled  with  selected  heavy 
riprap.  The  paving  on  the  downstream  end  was  similar  to  that 
described  above,  but  was  somewhat  lighter.  The  riprap  was  laid 
on  spalls  around  the  sloping  edges,  but  on  "the  earth  slopes  for  the 
remaining  portions.  Rock  for  the  paving  on  the  up-stream  end 
had  been  unloaded  on  the  river  bank,  1,200  ft.  from  the  end  up  the 
levee.  A  portion  of  the  rock,  however,  were  obtained  from  some 
temporary  work  done  the  year  previous.  The  rock  for  paving  and 
ballast  at  the  down-stream  end  of  the  levee  had  been  unloaded  at 
a  point  about  700  ft.  from  the  work,  during  the  preceding  high 
water. 

The  mattress  consisted  of  an  upper  and  lower  pole  grillage  with 
two  layers  of  brush  between,  the  grillage  systems  being  connected 


^Engineering-Contracting,  March  29,  1907. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1043 

by  wires  passing  through  the  brush,  and  carried  about  35  Ibs.  of 
riprap  ballast  to  the  square  foot.  In  addition,  to  prevent  a  con- 
centrated flow  through  a  borrow  pit  in  the  river  side,  the  pit  was 
crossed  by  a  series  of  pile  and  brush  dikes  having  their  crests  on 
a  level  with  the  natural  ground  surface  adjacent.  The  dikes  were 
anchored  to  planks  buried  to  a  depth  of  2%  ft.  and  resting  on 
crossheads  nailed  to  piles,  which  were  set  6  ft.  in  the  ground  with 
post-hole  diggers.  Scour  underneath  the  brush  filling  of  the  dikes 
was  prevented  by  ballasted  foot  mats  around  the  poles. 

Brush  for  the  mattress  was  cut  at  a  point  about  four  miles  from 
the  work,  and  was  hauled  by  teams  to  the  canal  bank,  whence  it 
was  towed  by  a  snagboat  to  the  levee.  This  barge  was  also  used 
for  quarters  for  the  cutting  party.  Piles  for  the  dike  were  obtained 
in  a  willow  flat  about  7,000  ft.  from  the  work.  Brush  filling  for  the 
dikes  was  obtained  from  the  same  willow  flat,  80  cords  being  cnt 
from  the  ground  adjacent  to  the  work  and  100  cords  from  a  point 
about  4,000  ft.  north. 

The  work  was  greatly  handicapped  by  scarcity  of  labor,  and,  in 
addition,  being  low  water  while  the  towing  was  in  progress,  the  flat 
fore  shore  of  the  willow  flat  held  the  barge  some  distance  from  the 
water's  edge,  necessitating  a  long  carry  and  making  this  feature 
of  the  work  slow  and  expensive.  The  lack  of  a  proper  number  of 
barges,  and  of  labor  to  load  and  unload  them  promptly,  rendered 
it  impracticable  to  keep  the  snagboat  steadily  employed  in  towing, 
though  it  was  necessary  to  keep  her  constantly  in  commission.  This 
still  further  increased  the  cost  of  brush  and  poles  delivered  at  the 
mat. 

Part  of  the  men  employed  in  the  work  were  paid  $1.25  per  8-hr, 
day,  and  part  were  subsisted  laborers,  receiving  $30  per  month  and 
rations;  this  latter  amounted  to  32%  cts.  per  day,  including  the 
cook's  and  waiter's  wages.  Subsisted  labor  was  principally  used  in 
cutting  the  brush  for  the  mattress,  and  in  loading  and  unloading  it 
from  wagons.  About  half  of  the  loading  and  unloading  of  the 
barges  was  also  done  by  subsisted  labor.  Teams  including  driver 
and  wagons  were  secured  at  $3.90  per  8-hr,  day  for  hauling  at  the 
place  where  the  mattress  brush  was  cut.  For  hauling  at  the  down- 
stream end  of  the  levee,  $3.50  per  day  was  paid  for  teams.  Rock 
cost  $2.18  per  ton  (.862  cu.  yd.)  delivered  on  river  bank.  The 
hauling  for  the  paving  at  the  up-stream  end  of  the  levee  was  done 
by  contract  at  50  cts.  per  ton  (58  cts.  per  cu.  yd.)  and  33%  cts. 
per  ton  (39  cts.  per  cu.  yd),  for  the  long  and  short  hauls. 

The  cost  of  stone  paving  at  the  up-stream  end  of  the  levee  was 
as  follows  per  square  of  100  sq.  ft. : 

Total.  Per  square. 

Superintendence     $      40  $   0.096 

Labor.    163    days,    at    $1.25 204  0.492 

Hauling,   219   cu.  yds.   rock,    3,700   ft,  at   $0.58..       127  0.307 

Hauling,  1,566  cu.  yds.  rock,  1,200  ft.,  at  $0.39..       605  1.461 

Rock,    1,785    cu.   yds.,   at   $2.53 4,519  10.915 


Total,    414    squares -. $5,495  $13.271 


1044  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  following  is  the  cost  of  stone  paving  at  the  down-stream  end 
of  the  levee  for  694  squares: 

Total.  Per  square. 

Superintendence     $    146  $0.21 

Labor,   320  days,  at  $1.25 400  0576 

Hauling,    2,157  cu.   yds.,   at   $0.23 487  0.720 

Rock,   2,157  cu.  yds.,   at   $2.53 5.461  7.868 

Total,    694    squares $6,494  $9.356 

The  cost  of  constructing  the  brush,  mattress  at  the  down-stream 
end  of  the  levee  was  as  given  below  for  1,162  squares: 

Total.     Per  square. 

Superintendence     $    182  $0.156 

707  days,    at    $1.25 877  0.754 

108  days,    at    $1.00 108  0.093 

Subsistence,    108    days 35  0.030 

Hauling,   1,743  cu.   yds.   rock,  at  $0.23 393  0.338 

Rock,   1,743  cu.   yds.,   at    $2.53 4,414  3.798 

Brush,  at  mattress,   1,139  cords,  at   $2.61 2,976  2.561 

Poles,  at  mattress,  2,560,  at  $0.20 503  0.433 

Wire,   1,100  lbs.,.at   $0.023 ' 26  0.022 

Nails,    600   Ibs.,   at   $0.021 13  0.011 

Staples,    360    Ibs.,   at   $0.022 0.007 

Total,    1,162    squares $9~535  $8^203 

In  addition  a  small  scraper  force  was  employed  for  five  days  in 
smoothing  the  portion  of  the  borrow  pit  to  be  mattressed  and  in 
sloping  off  the  bank  between  the  pit  and  levee  berm.  Stumps  left  in 
the  pit  were  grubbed  out.  The  total  cost  of  this  grading  and 
grubbing  was  $198  or  $0.17  per  mattress  square. 

The  cost  of  the  1,414  lin.  ft.  of  brush  dikes  is  shown  in  the  fol- 
lowing tabulation: 

Total.         Per  lin.  ft. 

Superintendence     $  36.00  $0.025 

Labor  building  dikes: 

73.1   days,   at   $1.25 9140  0065 

46   1/6   days,   at   $1.00 46.60  0.033 

Subsistence,    46    1/6    days 1500  0010 

Piles,   480,   at  $0.07 33.00  0.023 

Brush,    80   cords,    600   ft.   haul,   at    $0.76 6100  0043 

Brush,  10  cords,   4,000  ft.  haul,  at  $0.98 98.00  0.069 

Lumber,   6%   M  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $2.86 82.00  0.058 

Nails,    175   Ibs.,    at   $0.021 4.00  0.000 

Total,   1,414  lin.  ft $467.00  $0.326 

The  approximate  distribution  of  cost  of  the  brush  and  poles  used 
in  mattress  construction  was  as  follows : 

Brush,  Poles, 

per  cord,  per  pole. 

Cutting  privilege $0.02         

Cutting     0.25  $0.02 

Labor,  loading  and  unloading,  haul  to  bank 0.11  0.01 

Team    hire 0.28  0.02 

Loading  and  unloading  barges 0.68  0.06 

Towing     0.44  0.03 

Labor,  loading  and  unloading,  haul  bank  to  mattress  0.12  0  01 

Team  hire    0.19  0.01 

Superintendence     0.1S  0.01 

Subsistence     0.3 }  0.03 

Total $2~.Qi         $0.20 


J 

PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1045 

The  distribution  of  cost  of  hauling  the  rock  used  in  mattress  con- 
struction was  as  shown  below  : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor,   loading  and   unloading  wagons $0.07 

Team  hire 0.14 

Superintendence     0.02 

Total    $0.23 

Cost  of  Clearing  Land. — The  cost  of  clearing  the  margins  of  In- 
dian Lake,  N.  Y.,  for  35  miles,  was  about  $12  per  acre  for  1,160 
acres.  Men  were  paid  $1  a  day  and  board;  and  the  board  cost 
about  50  cts.  a  day.  Foremen  (1  foreman  to  20  men)  were  paid 
$35  a  month  and  board.  Each  acre,  it  was  estimated,  ran  from  50 
to  75  cords  of  wood.  Each  laborer  averaged  one-fifth  acre  cut  per 
day,  including  some  piling,  but  no  burning  of  the  timber ;  so  that 
the  cutting  cost  $7.50  per  acre.  There  was  no  large  merchantable 
timber,  all  having  been  cut  down  years  before.  The  growth  was 
mostly  small  pines,  balsams  and  various  hardwoods. 

In  the  work  for  the  filter  beds  at  Brockton,  Mass.,  1894,  there 
were  18.8  acres  cleared  and  grubbed,  of  which  14.4  acres  were 
standing  pine.  The  trees  varied  from  6  to  24  ins.  in  diameter  ;  and 
there  were  about  3  trees  per  sq.  rod,  or  480  per  acre.  When  cut  up, 
about  35  cords  of  wood  per  acre  were  obtained.  The  total  cost  of 
pulling  and  disposing  of  stumps  was  $112  per  acre,  or  23  cts.  per 
tree.  Wages  of  laborers  were  $1.50  a  day. 

A  very  common  price  for  clearing  and  grubbing  forest  land  in 
the  eastern  part  of  America  is  $50  an  acre,  when  wages  are  $1.50 
a  day. 

For  contract  prices  see  the  section  on  Railways.  Consult  the 
index  under  "Clearing." 

Design  of  Stump  Pullers — The  following  is  a  very  brief  abstract 
of  two  articles  on  grubbing  stumps  in  Engineering-Contracting, 
March  25  and  April  8,  1908.  Several  different  types  of  stump  pull- 
ers are  illustrated  in  detail  and  their  use  described,  but  I  give  here 
only  two,  which  are  not  so  well  known,  but  which  I  have  made  and 
used  with  success. 

A  style  of  stump  puller,  known  as  the  sweep  stump  puller,  is 
shown  in  Fig.  7.  Its  operation  is  simple  yet  very  effective.  One 
end  of  the  sweep  S  rests  on  the  ground,  and  the  other  end  is 
mounted  on  a  wagon  wheel.  The  sweep  is  an  8xlO-in.  timber 
24  ft.  long,  and  at  the  free  end,  B,  there  is  attached  a  single  or 
double  whiffletree,  as  described.  The  arrangement  at  the  fixed  end, 
A,  is  somewhat  more  complex  and  may  well  be  described  in  detail. 
About  3  ft.  from  the  end  is  an  eyebolt,  I,  to  which  is  fastened  an 
anchoring  chain  attached  to  a  convenient  stump  or  "dead  man,"  P. 
On  each  si(Je  of  the  eyebolt,  and  almost  4  ins.  from  it  are  attached 
hookbolts,  hi  and  h2,  and  still  further  away  two  similar  bolts,  ha, 
7i4.  The  stump  pulling  wire  cable  is  fastened  to  a  short  chain,  K, 
and  then  carried  over  on  A  from  F  and  attached  to  a  pile  or  stump 
as  shown.  The  chain  K  is  hooked  to  the  bolt  hi. 

In  operating  it  the  lever  is  drawn  in  the  direction  of. the  arrow, 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


causing  a  strain  on  the  pulling  cable.  The  horse  is  driven  ahead 
until  the  sweep  has  the  position  shown  by  the  dotted  lines,  and 
when  this  position  has  been  reached  a  short  length  of  chain  indi- 
cated by  the  dotted  line  K  is  hooked  at  one  end  to  the  pulling  chain 
and  at  the  other  end  to  the  hook  bolt  Tin.  The  horse  is  then  turned 
and  driven  in  the  opposite  direction,  putting  a  further  strain  on 
the  pulling  chain  and  slacking  the  chain  K  so  that  it  ran  be  short- 
ened and  hooked  up  again  when  the  horse  has  moved  the  sweep  to 


r-'IOftormcre >»*• 
^& 

_^/P 


50 -ft.  or  more  - 


^ 


t>oo<x&K>p! 


\\ 


\\ 

\  \ 


Fig.    7. — Stump   Puller. 

the  position  shown  by  the  left  hand  set  of  dotted  lines.  The  horse 
is  then  started  on  its  forward  trip,  then  back  again,  and  so  on, 
pulling  alternately  on  chains  K  and  KI  and  putting,  ultimately,  an 
enormous  strain  on  the  stump  or  pile. 

An  idea  of  the  power  exerted  is  gained  from  the  following  brief 
calculation.  If  the  distance  between  the  king  bolt  of  the  whiffle- 
tree  and  the  bolt  I  is  20  ft.,  and  if  hi  and  h2  are  4  ins.  (%  ft.) 
from  7,  the  pull  of  the  horse  is  multiplied  3  X  20  =  60  times.  A 
horse  capable  of  pulling  500  Ibs.  would  then  put  a  strain  of 
500  X  60  =  30,000  Ibs.  on  the  chain  K  and  K^  Then  in  the  triangle 
a  be,  ab  represents  30,000  Ibs.  and  ac  represents  the- pull  on  the 
stump,  which  must  always  be  greater  than  30,000  Ibs.  to  an  amount 
depending  upon  the  inclination  of  the  A  frame ;  if  the  batter  of  the 
A  frame  is  1  in  3  the  pull  on  the  stump  will  be  40,000  !bs.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  one  horse  cannot  maintain  a  500-lb.  pull,  and  a  team 
must  be  used  where  such  a  pull  is  necessary. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK. 


1047 


Very  large  stumps  can  be  pulled  with  this  simple  device  and  a 
team  of  horses. 

From  the  figures  given  it  is  evident  that  heavy  chains  and  cables 
must  be  used  or  else  there  will  be  frequent  breaks. 

One  set  up  of  the  machine  can  be  used  to  pull  a  large  number 
of  stumps  or  piles,  since  it  is  necessary  to  move  only  the  compara- 
tively light  A  frame.  With  a  long  cable,  to  give  a  good  reach  to 
the  machine,  there  should  be  used  take  ups,  else  considerable  time  is 
consumed  in  taking  up  the  slack  of  the  cable.  The  crew  to  operate 
this  style  of  machine  consists  of  a  foreman,  three  laborers  and  one 
team,  the  cost  varying  from  $10  to  $15  per  day.  This  machine  and 
the  one  shown  in  Fig.  8  were  both  used  by  one  of  the  editors  of 
this  journal  for  pulling  piles,  the  machines  being  adapted  for  either 
pile  or  stump  pulling. 


Fig.  8. — Stump  Puller. 


The  legs  of  the  tripod  shown  in  Fig.  8  were  8  x  8-in.  timbers, 
10  ft.  long.  The  rope  is  reeved  through  a  set  of  triple  blocks  and 
carried  to  the  4-in.  chain.  The  speed  wheel  and  pinion  are  re- 
spectively 20  ins.  and  4  ins.  in  diameter.  This  arrangement  gives 
a  powerful  strain  on  the  chain  or  cable  fastened  to  the  stump.  The 
stumps  can  be  pulled  by  hand  power  or  horses,  or  a  line  can  be  run 
from  the  12-in.  drum  to  a  small  hoisting  engine  and  the  machine 
operated  by  it.  This  whole  outfit,  though,  must  be  moved  for  each 
stump  that  is  to  be  pulled. 

For  the  cost  of  this  tripod  machine  and  the  cost  of  pulling  piles 
with  it,  see  page  1017. 

Cost  of  Removing  Stumps  In  Clearing  Land.*— Removing  stumps 
by  hand  is  a  slow  and  costly  method  when  the  stumps  are  of  small 
size  and  is  out  of  the  question  for  the  large  stumps  of  fir  and  other 

•Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.   22,   1909. 


1048 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


trees  up  to  5  and  6  ft.  in  diameter.  In  the  last  condition  the  prin- 
cipal up-to-date  methods  are  burning,  blasting  and  pulling  or  some 
combination  of  these.  Burning  is  considered  the  best  way  to  remove 
pine  stumps  which  have  a  large  amount  of  turpentine,  as  this 
greatly  assists  in  the  process,  and  the  long,  deep  roots  of  these 
trees  are  a  great  hindrance  in  pulling.  In  regard  to  burning  these 
stumps  Mr.  Ferris,  of  the  Mississippi  Station,  says : 

"The    common  method     *     *     *     is  to   dig  a  hole  about    12   ins. 
deep  with  spade  or  post-hole  digger  on  one  side  of  the  stump,  as 


Fig.  9. — Machine  for  Boring  Stumps. 

close  to  it  as  possible,  and  to  use  this  as  a  furnace  for  firing  the 
stump.  In  digging  these  holes  it  is  necessary  that  the  dirt  be  re- 
moved from  as  much  of  the  surface  of  the  stump  as  possible,  so  as 
to  allow  the  fire  to  come  in  direct  contact  with  the  side  of  the 
stump  for  at  least  6  ins.  An  ordinary  turpentine  dipper  on  a  suit- 
able handle  makes  one  of  the  best  implements  for  removing  this 
dirt." 

This  is  a  rather  slow  process,  but  may  be  greatly  hastened  by 
boring  a  slanting  hole  through  the  stump  from  the  opposite  side  to 
the  fire  hole.  For  boring,  the  Mississippi  Station  has  used  the 


PILING,  T  REST  LING,  TIMBERWORK. 


1049 


simple  machine  shown  in  Fig.  9,  invented  by  J.  W.  Day.     It  is  thus 
described : 

"A  2-in.  ship  auger  is  welded  onto  one  end  of  a  %-in.  iron  rod 
6  ft.  long.  Four  inches  from  the  other  end  of  this  rod  a  collar  is 
welded  and  the  end  of  the  rod  passed  through  an  iron  box  fastened 
to  a  movable  frame  about  18  ins.  square.  A  bevel  gear  is  then 
fastened  to  the  extreme  end  of  this  rod  either  by  a  key  or  set 
screw  and  works  into  a  second  gear  of  the  same  kind  fastened  on  a 
horizontal  shaft.  This  horizontal  crank  shaft  is  made  of  1-in.  iron 
rod  bent  at  one  end  to  form  a  handle,  with  a  fly  wheel  fastened 
on  the  opposite  end.  It  works  through  two  boxes  fastened  to 
the  movable  frame  and  slides  down  the  main  frame  as  the  auger 
bores  into  the  stump.  The  upper  end  of  the  machine  is  elevated 
about  5  ft.  and  stands  on  two  cart  wheels,  on  which  it  is  easily 
rolled  from  stump  to  stump  or  from  field  to  field  by  a  single  indi- 


Fig.    10.— Blast  Holes  in   Stump. 


vidual.  This  elevation  of  the  frame  helps  to  brace  it  against  the 
stump  in  boring,  raises  the  crank  shaft  to  a  height  at  which  it  can 
be  most  easily  turned,  causes  a  slight  pressure  to  be  constantly  ex- 
erted against  the  auger,  and  makes  it  possible  to  bore  the  hole  diag- 
onally into  the  stump.  At  the  extreme  upper  end  of  the  frame  is  a 
small  windlass  with  ropes  attached  which  is  used  for  pulling  the 
auger  out  of  the  stump." 

This  machine  was  used  to  aid  in  clearing  2.3  acres  of  land  which 
had  been  cut  over  about  seven  years  before.  The  sapwood  had  de- 
cayed, but  the  balance  of  the  stump  above  ground  and  all  below  was 
sound.  On  this  plat  there  were  158  stumps  that  required  boring. 
These  averaged  13.6  ins.  in  diameter,  and  the  length  of  hole  bored 
averaged  19.7  ins.,  the  total  cost  being  less  than  $8  an  acre,  figur- 
ing labor  at  $1.50  per  day. 

For  burning  the  large  stumps  of  fir,  etc.,  in  the  Pacific  Northwest, 
a  quicker  method  is  used,  which  consists  of  boring  two  intersecting 
holes,  as  in  Fig.  10,  and  burning  by  starting  a  fire  at  the  inter- 


1000  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

section  with  the  aid  of  redhot  coals  or  a  piece  of  iron  heated  to  a 
white  heat.  After  the  part  marked  A  is  burned  out  the  fire  is 
maintained  by  filling  the  space  with  bark  and  litter.  While  the 
method  first  described  generally  results  in  burning  the  stump  low 
enough  to  allow  of  cultivating  over  it  in  the  case  of  pine  stumps, 
the  method  used  on  the  western  trees  leaves  the  larger  stringers 
with  their  smaller  roots  to  be  pulled  out  by  steam  or  puller,  or 
"they  may  be  entirely  burned  by  digging  away  the  earth  and  roll- 
ing a  small  log  alongside  of  the  root." 

Other  methods  of  burning  are  to  split  the  stump  with  a  small 
charge  of  powder  and  then  kindle  a  fire  in  the  hole  thus  made,  and 
charcoaling  or  pitting.  The  latter,  which  consists  essentially  of 
keeping  a  smoldering  fire  around  the  base  of  the  stump,  is  reported 
to  be  very  economical  for  large  stumps.  Mr.  Ferris  says  "remov- 
ing stumps  by  this  method  [boring  and  burning]  has  been  decidedly 
cheaper  than  by  any  other  method  tried,  as  it  requires  only  a 
small  expenditure  for  machinery,  practically  no  repair  bills,  and 
can  be  operated  by  a  single  individual." 

It  is  stated  that  in  the  section  reported  on  by  Mr.  Thompson 
scarcely  anyone  undertakes  to  clear  even  a  small  tract  without  the 
use  of  powder.  Powder  is  also  used  on  the  pine  stumps  of  Missis- 
sippi, the  common  method  being  to  bore  a  \%-\n.  hole  from  the 
surface  of  the  ground  diagonally  downward  for  10  to  20  ins.  and 
to  insert  in  this  from  %  to  1  Ib.  of  dynamite.  This  amount  will 
shatter  the  general  run  of  pine  stumps,  and  makes  the  cost  of  this 
part  of  the  work  from  5  to  20  cts.  per  stump.  With  stumps  of  the 
fir  type,  which  do  not  usually  root  deeply,  blasting  is  best  done  by 
placing  several  sticks  of  dynamite  beneath  the  center  on  the  hard- 
pan,  if  not  too  deep,  so  as  to  cause  the  force  of  the  explosion  to  be 
exerted  upward.  Mr.  Thompson  gives  the  following  data  as  to  size 
of  charge  under  ordinary  ground  conditions,  for  shattering  large 
stumps  which  are  to  be  removed  by  stump  pullers,  blocks  or  teams : 

Diam.  of  stump,   ins 18     24      30      36      48     60      72 

Sticks    of    powder 5     .7     10     20     35     50     65 

The  sticks  are  1^x8  ins.,  weigh  a  little  over  %  Ib.  and  cost 
from  10  cts.  to  15  cts.  a  pound.  The  average  cost  of  the  removal 
of  each  stump  from  a  tract  of  120  acres  containing  fir  stumps  from 
1  to  4  ft.  in  diameter  was  reported  as  follows : 

Cents. 

Powder     49.76 

Fuse     2.37 

Caps 0.87 

Labor     30.66 

Total     83.66 

If  dynamite  is  handled  with  ordinary  care  there  is  but  little 
danger  attached  to  its  use  except  in  cold  weather,  when  it  should 
be  kept  warm,  preferably  at  about  70°  F. 

After  loosening  and  shattering  stumps  by  blasting,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  gather  them  in  a  pile  for  burning.  This  is  usually  done  by 
means  of  a  capstan  or  a  donkey  engine.  The  latter  is  reported  to 
have  found  quite  general  application  in  the  Northwest.  A  gin  pole 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1051 

is  set  up,  as  shown  in  Fig.  11,  and  the  stumps  drawn  to  it.  When 
handled  to  advantage  this  method  is  considered  to  be  time-saving 
and  cheaper  than  hand  methods.  Another  type  of  puller  is  the 
vertical  derrick,  which  has  the  advantage  of  applying  the  pull  in  the 
best  direction  for  stumps  having  long  tap  roots,  but  it  is  objected 
to  on  account  of  having  to  be  moved  for  each  stump. 

Cost  of  Clearing  and  Grubbing,  Ohio.* — Mr.  Julian  Griggs  gives 
the  following:  All  trees  and  brush  on  a  reservoir  site,  near  Colum- 
bus, Ohio,  were  cleared  and  grubbed  by  contract  in  1904-5.  The 
work  was  begun  June  14,  1904,  and  cai-ried  on  continuously  till 
Aug.  5,  1905,  the  season  being  unusually  favorable.  The  area 
cleared  was  255%  acres,  lying  in  a  narrow  river  bottom  5.8  miles 
long.  It  was  thickly  covered  with  shrubs  and  trees — elm,  locust 
oak,  hickory,  sycamore,  etc.  There  was  a  rank  growth  of  weeds, 
horse-cane  predominating.  All  was  grubbed  except  about  5  acres. 

A   trimming  gang   first   cleared   and   grubbed    the   brush,    cut    off 


'/js ,_   _J 

Fig.    11. — Method  of  Pulling  and   Handling  Stumps. 

all  low  limbs  and  all  small  trees,  and  piled  the  stuff  ready  to  burn. 
They  were  followed  by  a  pulling  gang  of  6  to  12  men,  a  team  of 
horses  and  a  stump  puller.  During  the  winter  it  was  possible  to 
burn  everything  as  fast  as  cleared. 

A  "Hawkeye  Stump  Puller"  was  used.  (This  type  of  stump 
puller  is  illustrated  and  its  use  described  in  detail  in  Engineering- 
Contracting,  March  25,  1908.)  It  consists  of  a  capstan  or  vertical 
windlass  (operated  by  a  team  of  horses)  that  is  mounted  on  a  bed 
of  two  oak  timbers  (10  x  10-in.  x  16-ft.)  framed  to  form  a  cross. 
The  drum  is  2  ft.  high  and  13  ins.  diam.  The  sweep  (8x8-in. ) 
to  which  the  horses  are  fastened  is  20  ft.  long.  Dragging  from  the 
sweep,  directly  back  of  the  horses,  is  a  stick,  the  end  on  the  ground 
being  shod  with  an  iron  point,  the  purpose  being  to  take  the  strain 
off  the  horses  when  they  are  standing  still.  Two  %-in.  wire  cables, 
each  100  ft.  long,  hooks,  grips,  blocks,  snatch  cables,  etc.,  compose 
the  rest  of  the  outfit.  In  operation,  the  timber  bed  is  buried  in  the 
ground,  and  iron  pins  driven  alongside  the  timbers  into  the  ground, 


' Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   17,   1906. 


1052  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

or  the  timbers  are  loaded  with  stone.  In  pulling  a  tree,  the  snatch 
cable  is  fastened  around 'it  about  15  or  20  ft.  above  the  ground. 
The  cable  is  usually  passed  through  a  snatch  block  fastened  to  a 
tree  near  the  stump  puller,  so  as  to  bring  the  cable  to  a  horizontal 
position  as  it  winds  around  the  drum.  If  the  tree  does  not  yield  at 
first,  some  of  the  roots  are  cut,  or  a  dynamite  charge  is  exploded 
among  the  roots  while  the  strain  is  kept  on  the  cable.  Stumps,  of 
which  there  were  many,  were  much  harder  to  pull  than  trees,  and 
most  of  them  were  dynamited  and  taken  out  in  pieces. 

The  following  was  the  cost  of  clearing  and  grubbing  255  Mi  acres: 

Per  acre.         Per  cent. 

Superintendent,    at    $4.17 $     4.16  2.6 

Timekeeper,    at    $1.75 1.76  1.1 

Foreman,    at    $2.50 14.72  9.2 

Carpenter,    at    $2.00 0.48  0.3 

Dynamite  men,   at   $1.75 3.04  1.9 

Laborers,    at   $1.50 85.28  53.3 

Single    horse,    at    $1.50 1.28  0.8 

Two-horse  team,  at  $3.50 11.68  7.3 

Total   labor    $122.40  76.5 

Dynamite,  at  11%   cts.  per  Ib 30.56  19.1 

Machinery    and    repairs.. 7.04  4.4 

Grand   total    $160.00  100.0 

The  work  required  255  days,  or  an  acre  per  day,  with  an  average 
force  of : 

1  superintendent. 
1  timekeeper. 
5  foremen. 
1/5  carpenter. 
1%  dynamite  men. 
65  laborers. 

1  horse. 

3  Mi  two-horse  teams. 

There  were  266  Ibs.  of  dynamite  used  per  acre. 
Before  the  reservoir  could  be  filled  with  water  it  had  grown  up 
with  weeds,  which  it  cost  $7  more  per  acre  to  cut  and  burn.     This 
was  one  summer's  growth. 

Cost  of  Blasting  3,5CO  Stumps.*— The  Long  Island  R.  R.  bought 
a  tract  of  land,  in  1905,  in  Suffolk  county  on  Long  Island,  in  order 
to  carry  on  experimental  agricultural  work.  The  tract  was  situ- 
ated in  the  waste  lands  of  the  island  and  the  first  work  to  be  done 
was  to  clear  it  of  timber.  A  force  of  men  was  put  to  work  cutting 
down  the  trees  and  undergrowth,  and  this  work  was  followed  by  the 
stump  blasting. 

The  blasting  crew  consisted  of  two  men  only,  except  for  the  three 
last  days  of  the  work  when  a  third  man  was  employed  to  hasten 
the  finishing  of  the  job.  The  work  was  done  during  the  latter  part 
of  the  summer  and  the  fall  of  the  year,  good  weather  prevailing 
most  of  the  time. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  May  13,  1908. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1053 

p 

One  man  employed  was  accustomed  to  handling  explosives  and 
had  experience  in  blasting  stumps.  He  was  paid  $3.50  for  a  10-hr, 
day.  The  second  man  was  a  common  laborer  and  was  paid  $1.50 
per  day.  The  third  man,  used  for  three  days,  also  had  handled  ex- 
plosives. He  was  paid  $3  per  day. 

In  all  10  acres  of  land  were  cleared.  The  blasting  gang  made  the 
hole  under  the  stump  and  charged  it,  setting  off  the  charge,  but  the 
work  of  cleaning  up  after  the  blast  was  done  by  other  men.  The 
stumps  were  mainly  white  oak  and  chestnut,  varying  in  size  from 
18  ins.  to  7%  ft.  in  diameter.  Many  of  the  stumps  ran  from  4  to 
4  Ms  ft.  in  diameter.  Each  acre  of  ground  was  measured  off  and  a 
careful  record  kept  of  the  number  of  stumps  blown  on  each  acre. 

The  following  table  shows  the  number  of  stumps  blasted  and  the 
amount  of  dynamite  used : 


Acre  No. 
1     

Number 
Stumps. 
....        293 

Lbs.  dyna- 
mite used 
per  acre. 
145% 

Lbs. 
dynamite 
per  stump. 
0.50 

2      

310 

152 

0.49 

3      

301 

169% 

0.56 

4     

270 

150% 

0.56 

5     

280 

211% 

0.75 

6 

305 

191% 

0.62 

7     , 

285 

178 

0.62 

8     

337 

188% 

0.56 

9 

334 

198% 

0.59 

10     , 

797 

446 

0.56 

Total     3,512  2,031  0.58 

The  soil  was  a  light  loam  with  sand  or  gravel  underlying  it.  Nat- 
urally the  amounts  of  dynamite  used  per  stump  varied  with  the  size 
of  the  stump.  Small  stumps  up  to  4  ft.  in  diameter  needed  %  Ib.  of 
dynamite.  Stumps  from  4  to  6  ft.  in  diameter  needed  from  1  to  3 
Ibs.,  while  the  largest  stumps,  measuring  from  6  to  8  ft.  in  diameter 
needed  from  3  to  4  Ibs.  of  dynamite.  The  largest  stump  blown 
was  a  chestnut  7%  ft.  in  diameter  which  took  3%  Ibs.  dynamite.  It 
will  be  noticed  that  the  average  per  stump  was  not  quite  0.6  Ib. 
All  the  dynamite  used  was  40%. 

In  blasting  the  stumps  the  helper  made  a  hole  with  an  auger  or 
bar  under  the  stump,  so  the  charge  would  be  close  up  to  the  stump 
and  near  the  center.  The  dynamiter  prepared  a  large  number  of 
cartridges  with  fuse  and  caps  in  them  in  advance,  so  that  when  a 
number  of  holes  had  been  made,  all  he  had  to  do  was  to  place  the 
charge  and  tamp  up  the  hole.  Double  tape  fuse  was  used  to  put 
off  the  blast.  The  fuse  was  cut  to  lengths  to  explode  the  load 
within  a  given  number  of  seconds,  just  enough  tirn^  being  allowed 
for  a  man  to  run  to  a  safe  distance.  For  most  of  the  stumps,  fuse 
a  foot  and  a  half  in  length  was  used,  and  when  the  end  was  split 
to  allow  of  easy  lighting,  it  took  30  seconds  for  this  fuse  to  burn  to 
the  charge,  hence  this  was  known  as  a  "30-second  length."  Care 
was  taken  to  use  enough  dynamite  to  blow  out  the  entire  stump, 
but  not  to  waste  the  explosives.  Small  stumps  were  blown  out 


1054  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

whole,  but  the  larger  ones  were  split  up  by  the  blast  so  they  could 
be  easily  handled. 

The  number  of  stumps  blasted  per  day  varied  somewhat,  accord- 
ing to  the  size  of  the  stumps  and  the  difficulties  encountered.  The 
best  day's  work  for  two  men  was  110  stumps,  while  on  other  days 
they  did  97,  60,  and  99,  the  average  being  84  for  two  men,  for  the 
job.  On  one  day  that  three  men  worked  160  stumps  were  blasted. 
In  clearing  an  adjoining  piece  of  land  1  man  by  himself  blasted  in 
1  day  100  stumps,  but  he  had  prepared  the  charges  the  day  previous. 
The  cost  of  blasting  the  stumps  for  the  10  acres  was: 

Total.  Per  acre. 

1  man,   40  days,   at   $3.50 $140.00  $14.00 

1  man,   40   days,  at   $1.50 60.00  6.00 

1  man,     3   days,   at   $3.00 9.00  0.90 

2,031  Ibs.   40%  dynamite,  at  15  cts 304.65  30.46 

3,600  caps,  at   75   cts.   per   100 27.00  2.70 

7,000  ft.  D.  T.  fuse,  at  45   cts.  per  100..      31.50  3.15 


Total $572.15  $57.21 

This  gives  a  cost  per  stump  of  the  following : 

Labor $0.059 

Dynamite     0.086 

Caps 0.008 

Fuse 0.009 

Total     $0.162 

This  work  was  done  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  H.  B.  Fullerton, 
special  agent  of  the  Long  Island  R.  R.  Co.,  to  whom  we  are  indebt- 
ed for  the  information. 

Cost  of  Blasting  1,100  Stumps.* — In  grubbing  stumps  from  land, 
one  of  the  most  economic  methods  is  by  blasting,  provided  care 
and  judgment  are  shown  in  the  use  of  explosives.  The  tendency 
seems  to  be  to  use  a  larger  amount  of  explosives  than  is  necessary. 
Then,  too,  different  kinds  of  explosives  are  sometimes  used  in  the 
same  charge,  such  as  dynamite  and  Judson  powder.  This  should 
not  be  done.  But  one  kind  of  powder  should  be  used  in  a  hole. 
For  small  and  medium  sized  stumps  dynamite  will  give  the  best 
results,  but  Judson  powder  will  do  efficient  work  on  large  stumps, 
and,  at  times  for  very  large  stumps,  black  powder  is  the  cheapest 
to  use. 

The  charge  should  be  placed  well  up  under  the  stump  and  as 
near  the  center  of  the  stump  as  possible.  A  bar  is  generally 
the  best  tool  for  making  the  hole.  When  only  one  charge  is  placed 
under  the  stump  it  is  more  economical  to  use  fuse  and  a  cap.  It 
is  possible  in  stump  blasting  to  use  single  tape  fuse,  but,  if  the 
ground  is  very  wet,  it  may  misfire.  Under  such  conditions  it  is 
better  to  use  double  tape  fuse.  When  several  charges  are  placed 
under  one  stump,  it  is  always  advisable  to  use  electrical  exploders, 
so  that  the  charges  will  be  exploded  simultaneously.  For  a  single 
charge,  electrical  fuses  are  too  expensive. 

In  the  job,  the  cost  of  which  we  give  below,  dynamite  was  used 


*EnL''iheeri'n  (/-Contracting,  June  3,  1908. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  IGoo 

exclusively,  and  caps  and  fuse  were  used  for  most  stumps,  but 
electrical  exploders  were  used  on  some,  as  several  charges  were 
placed  under  some  of  the  largest  stumps.  There  were  1,100  stumps 
blasted  from  4  acres  of  land,  the  job  being  in  eastern  New  Jersey. 
The  trees  had  been  cut  about  2  years,  and  were  mostly  white 
oak  and  hickory.  They  varied  in  size  from  4  ins.  to  6  ft.,  the 
average  size  of  the  1,100  stumps  being  about  15  ins.  in  diameter. 

The  dynamite  used  was  40  per  cent.  The  ground  was  full  of 
large  boulders,  and  more  fuse,  single  tape,  was  used  than  would 
have  been  required  if  the  ground  had  not  been  full  of  stones. 
The  long  fuse  was  necessary  in  order  to  allow  the  men  time  to  get 
away  from  the  flying  pieces  of  stone.  Two  men  only  were  used. 
One  man  handled  the  dynamite  and  the  other  prepared  the  holes. 
These  men  did  nothing  towards  cleaning  up  th'e  stumps  after  they 
were  blasted. 

The  cost  of  the  labor  was  as  follows : 

Dynamiter,   19   days,   at   $3.50 $  66.50 

Helper,    19    days,   at   $1.50 28.50 

Total $   95.00 

The  cost  of  the  explosives  was : 

850  Ibs.   dynamite,  at  15  cts $127.50 

1,300  caps,  at  75  cts.  for  100 9.75 

1,300  ft,  S.  T.  fuse,  at  45  cts.  per  100 5.85 

300  short  electrical  exploders,  at  6  cts 18.00 


Total    $161.10 

The  total  cost  of  the  4  acres  was  $256.10,  giving  a  cost  per  acre 
of  $64.02. 

The  cost  per  stump  was  : 

Labor     $0.086 

Dynamite     0.116 

Caps     0.009 

Fuse     0.005 

Exploders     0.016 

Total $0.232 

The  average   amount   of   dynamite   used   per   stump   was   0.77   Ib. 

This  is  a  very  economical  job  of  blasting,  both  as  to  labor,  costs 
and  explosives. 

We  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Oscar  Kissam,  of  Halesite,  Long  Island, 
N.  Y.,  for  these  data.  The  work  was  done  under  his  direction  and 
according  to  his  methods. 

Cost  of  Clearing  and  Grubbing  by  Blasting.* — Mr.  Daniel  J.  Hauer 
is  author  of  the  following: 

The  work  was  done  in  1893  in  the  suburb  of  an  Eastern  city. 
Nine  acres  of  closely  spaced  trees,  averaging  about  20  ins.  diam., 
were  cleared.  Trees  ranged  from  6  to  36  ins.  diam.  All  smaller 
than  6  ins.  was  classed  as  brush.  The  trees  were  first  cut  down, 
and  the  brush  and  leaf  wood  piled  and  burned.  The  trunks  were 
made  into  saw  logs  and  cord  wood.  The  timber  was  mostly  oak, 


"Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  27,  1907. 


1056  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

hickory  and  chestnut.  Work  was  done  in  the  spring  of  the  year 
in  good  weather. 

The  tools  were:  33  axes,  29  mattacks,  30  shovels,  1  hatchet, 
1  band  saw,  3  cross-cut  saws,  2  files,  3  water  buckets,  2  grind- 
stones, 1  churn  drill  and  1  auger.  These  tools  cost  about  $80,  which 
could  be  charged  at  a  rate  of  $9  per  acre  to  the  job. 

Foremen  were  paid  $2.50  per  10-hour  day  and  laborers,  mostly 
Italians,  were  paid  $1.25.  One  foreman  looked  after  the  chopping 
and  grubbing,  consequently  his  salary  is  divided  between  these 
items,  while  a  second  foreman  gave  his  time  exclusively  to  the 
blasting. 

The  chopping  down  of  1,212  trees  and  the  brush  took  about  13 
days,  the  cost  being  as  follows: 

Foremen     $   20.00 

Laborers 149.61 

Total     -. $169.61 

This  makes  a  cost  of  $18.84  per  acre.  For  eight  days,  as  the 
above  work  was  going  on,  another  crew  of  men  were  piling  and 
burning  brush  and  grubbing  the  small  stubs  and  stumps.  This 
work  was  done  at  the  following  cost: 

Foreman     $   10.00 

Laborers     129.74 


Total $139.74 

Or  a  cost  of  $15.53  per  acre,  and  a  total  cost  per  acre  for  both 
chopping  and  cleaning  up,  of  $34.37.  This  can  be  divided  as 
follows : 

Foreman     $  3.33 

Laborers     31.04 

When  this  much  of  the  work  was  done  a  foreman  and  a  crew 
of  4  men  began  the  blasting  of  stumps. 

The  following  was  the  cost,  50  stumps  per  day: 

Per 

Per  day.  stump. 

1  foreman  at  $2.50 $  2.50  $0.050 

4  laborers    at    $1.25 5.00       0.100 

200  lin.    ft.    double  tape   fuse   at    50   cts. 

per    100    ft ; . .      1.00       0.020 

50  caps  at  75  cts.  per  100 0.40       0.008 

52  Ibs.   40%   dynamite  at  $0.15 7.80       0.156 

1081/a  Ibs.  Judson  powder  at  $0.10 10.85       0.217 


Total     $27.56     $0.551 

This  work  took  25  days,  and,  as  there  were  134  ftumps  per  acre 
on  the  9  acres,  the  cost  of  blasting  stumps  was  $73.'0  per  acre. 

Both  dynamite  and  Judson  powder  were  placed  in  ^ach  hole. 

The  stumps  were  not  so  large,  except  in  a  few  ^ases,  that  one 
charge  placed  under  it,  by  churning  a  hole  with  the  drill  and 
auger  beneath  the  stump  and  then  loading  it,  did  i  it  either  blow 
the  stump  out  or  shatter  it  so  that  the  grubbers  were  able  to 
handle  it. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1057 

The  cost  of  grubbing  the  roots  after  blasting  was  as  follows: 

Foreman     $  40.00 

Laborers 277.36 


Total     $317.36 

This  makes  a  cost  per  acre  of  $35.26,  or  $0.262  per  etump,  which 
makes  a  total  cost  of  $0.813  per  stump  for  blasting  and  grubbing. 

The  grinding  of  the  axes  for  chopping  cost  $5.87,  or  65  cts.  per 
acre,  and  an  allowance  of  $9  per  acre  must  be  made  for  tools. 

At  the  same  time  the  blasting  began  the  chopping  gang  began 
to  cut  the  tree  trunks  up  into  cord  wood  and  saw  logs,  while  the 
cleaning  gang  was  set  to  grubbing  the  roots  and  the  remains  of 
the  stumps  after  the  blasters.  The  saw  logs  and  cord  wood  were 
hauled  away  under  another  contract. 

The  making  of  cord  wood  took  eight  days  and  cost : 

Foreman     $10.00 

Laborers 81.25 


Total     $91.25 

This  was  a  cost  of  $10.14  per  acre.  Unfortunately  the  wood 
was  not  corded  up  before  being  hauled  away,  so  no  accurate 
record  was  made  of  the  amount,  but  there  were  between  175  and 
200  cords,  indicating  a  cost  of  about  50  cts.  per  cord  after  the  trees 
were  cut  down. 

From  the  above  we  can  obtain  the  total  cost  of  the  entire  job 
'.9  acres),  which  was  as  given  below: 

Total.  Per  acre. 

Chopping     „..$  169.61  $    18.84 

Grubbing  and    clearing 139.74  15.53 

Making    cord    wood 91.25  10.14 

Blasting     663.59  73.73 

'   Grubbing    after    blasting 317.36  35.26 

Grinding    axes 5.87  0.65 

Tools     81.00  9.00 

Total     ." $1,468.42          $163.25 

This  is  not  much  different  from  the  cost  of  the  work  recorded  by 
^  Julian  Grigg  in  the  following  paragraphs. 

.tfost  of  Clearing  and  Grubbing  for  a  Railway.* — One  of  the  items 
•JJ  work  to  be  done  in  grading  a  railroad  is  generally  the  clearing 
»Y»<3  grubbing  of  the  land.  Under  some  contracts  and  specifications 
Uiis  work  is  paid  for  as  one  item,  under  others  as  two  items  as 
clearing  and  as  grubbing,  while  under  other  forms  of  contracts 
this  work  is  included  in  that  of  excavation. 

The  method  of  paying  for  clearing  by  the  acre  as  one  item  and 
grubbing  as  another  item  is  to  be  commended.  In  order  to  do 
the  excavation  all  the  land  must  be  cleared,  but  in  addition  to  the 
area  used  for  the  cuts  and  embankments,  the  entire  width  of  the 
right  of  way  must  be  cleared,  and  overhanging  trees  and  branches 
must  bfl  cut  away.  On  the  other  hand  there  is  no  need  of 
the  area  occupied  by  the  embankments,  nor  that  on  the 

&\     wing-Contracting,  Dec.    25,    1907. 


1058  JUXDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

right  of  way  not  included  in  the  cuts,  hence  there  should  be  no 
reason  why  this  area  should  be  included  in  the  payment.  Likewise 
the  method  of  doing  the  excavation  will  very  materially  effect  the 
cost  of  the  grubbing,  while  it  does  not  play  any  part  in  the  cost 
of  clearing. 

When  steam  shovels  are  used  the  grubbing  cost  is  small,-  as 
this  machine  will  undermine  the  stumps,  causing  them  to  fall 
into  the  pit,  where  they  can  be  loaded  onto  the  cars  by  means  of 
chains,  attached  to  the  dipper  teeth.  This  work  retards  the 
progress  made  by  the  shovel,  but  the  cost  of  grubbing  is  greatly 
reduced,  and  a  contractor  could  "afford  to  bid  a  low  price  on 
the  grubbing  when  done  with  a  steam  shovel,  if  it  is  not  lumped  in 
with  the  clearing  or  other  work. 

When  grubbing  is  done  in  connection  with  rock  excavation,  its 
cost  is  small  as  the  stumps  are  shot  out  with  the  blasting  of 
the  rock,  and  the  only  additional  expense  is  to  dispose  of  the 
stump.  This  will  have  to  be  done  by  hand  and  will  be  work  that 
the  contractor  will  charge  for  under  grubbing. 

When  grubbing  is  done  for  scraper  work  the  stumps  and 
largest  roots  must  be.  blasted  and  dug  out,  and  the  work  is  much 
more  expensive  than  with  rock  excavation  and  steam  shovel  work, 
although  a  large  railroad  plow  in  loosening  the  ground  will  cut 
and  break  up  many  of  the  roots,  so  that  they  do  not  have  to  be 
grubbed. 

The  grubbing  for  elevating  grader  excavation  must  be  done 
much  more  thoroughly,  than  that  for  scraper  work.  The  stumps 
and  large  roots  must  not  only  be  grubbed,  but  all  the  small  bush 
stubs  and  roots  must  also  be  cut  out.  This  is  necessary  as  the 
grader  plow  will  not  cut  these  roots,  as  the  pull  on  the  plow  is  a 
steady  one,  unlike  that  of  a  breaking  plow,  which  can  be  run 
in  jerks,  while  the  plowman  can  shake  up  the  plow,  which  is  a 
considerable  help.  In  grubbing  for  a  grader  it  is  not  advisable  to 
blast  the  stumps,  as  this  makes  large  deep  holes,  which,  after  rains, 
become  full  of  water  and  soft,  thus  causing  the  traction  engine 
and  grader  to  mire  in  these  holes.  For  this  reason  where  there 
are  many  stumps  of  6  ins.  or  more  in  size  a  stump  puller  should  be 
used.  The  stump  puller  does  its  work  much  better  than  blasting, 
as  it  will  not  only  pull  up  the  stump,  but  also  all  the  large  roots 
and  many  of  the  small  ones.  Nor  does  it  leave  as  large  a  hole 
as  a  blast  does.  Its  work  is  as  economical  as  blasting,  and  at  times 
is  much  cheaper.  The  small  stubs  and  roots  must  all  be  grubbed 
by  hand.  To  do  efficient  work  of  grubbing  for  a  grader,  after 
the  large  stumps  have  been  pulled,  men  should  be  spaced  a  few  feet 
apart  and  the  entire  area  gone  over,  the  men  working  in  rows 
grubbing  up  everything  that  may  effect  the  working  of  the  grader. 
This  makes  grader  grubbing  more  expensive  than  that  of  any  other 
grubbing  for  ordinary  excavation  work. 

The  job  to  be  described  was  the  clearing  and  grubbing  on 
nine  miles  of  railroad  construction.  Most  of  the  line  was  through 
cultivated  fields,  but  in  11  places  varying  in  length  from  100  to 


riLIXG,  TRESTUNG,  TIMBERWORK.  1059 

4,600  ft,  there  was  clearing  to  be  done.  In  all  there  were  14*4 
acres,  of  which  1  %  acres  were  over  areas  upon  which  embankments 
were  to  be  made,  while  13  acres  were  in  cuts,  hence  there  was  both 
clearing  and  grubbing  to  do.  The  excavation  was  to  be  done  by  an 
elevating  grader,  and,  as  stated  above,  the  grubbing  had  to  be 
done  more  thoroughly  than  it  would  have  been,  if  other  methods 
of  excavating  had  been  employed. 

The  first  work  done  was  to  clear  the  ground.  Most  of  the 
brush  was  burned,  but  some  of  it  and  the  logs  were  rolled  to  the 
edge  of  the  right  of  way  and  piled  up.  The  trees,  of  the  size  of 
6  ins.  or  more  in  diameter,  numbered  about  40  to  the  acre ;  but 
there  was  a  very  rank  undergrowth  of  bushes  and  saplings,  the 
stumps  and  roots  of  which  all  had  to  be  grubbed.  The  work 
was  done  by  contract,  and  the  men  working  upon  the  job  were  not 
experienced  woodsmen  or  axemen,  but  were  such  as  could  be 
obtained  at  the  labor  market  centers.  Many  of  them  were  for- 
eigners. The  wages  paid  to  the  foreman  was  $2.50  and  to  the  men 
$1.50  per  ten  hour  day.  A  waterboy  was  paid  $1.00  per  day.  In 
the  clearing  gang  an  average  of  12  men  were  worked,  some  using 
axes  and  others  brush  hooks.  The  brush  was  piled  by  hand,  no 
forks  being  used,  and  the  logs,  few  being  more  than  3  ft.  in 
diameter,  were  cut  short  and  rolled  by  means  of  hand  sticks. 
Some  few  were  carried  by  the  men  with  these  sticks. 

The  cost  per  acre,  there  being  as  stated  14^4   acres,  was: 

Per  acre. 

Foreman      $   4.59 

Men     27.10 

Water    boy 1.36 

Total  cost  clearing  per  acre $33.05 

The  grubbing  was  done  by  a  gang  of  men  averaging  15.  The 
wages  were  the  same.  Some  few  of  the  larger  stumps  were  blasted, 
and  their  roots  afterwards  grubbed.  Dynamite,  costing  15  cts. 
per  lb.,  was  used  for  this  blasting.  No  separate  record  of  the 
stumps  that  were  blasted  nor  of  the  explosive  used  for  each  was 
kept,  only  the  total  cost  of  the  explosives  being  kept,  and  the 
labor  of  blasting  was  included  in  with  the  other  grubbing.  About 
6  stumps  were  blasted  to  the  acre. 


The  cost  per  acre,  there  being  but  13  acres  to  grub,  was: 

Per  acre. 

Foreman    $   4.54 

Men 38.84 

Water    boy 1.81 

Explosives     2.54 


Total  cost  grubbing  per  acre $47.73 


The  men  used  long  cutter  mattocks  and  short  handled  shovels  in 
grubbing  the  stumps  and  roots.  There  is  but  little  doubt  that  this 
cost  of  grubbing  could  have  been  reduced  by  the  use  of  a  stump 


lOfiO  JJAXDBOOK    OP   COST   DATA. 

puller,   but   the   contractor   did   not   own   one,    and    thought  the  job 
too  small  to  justify  purchasing  such  a  machine. 

The  total  cost  for  clearing  and  grubbing  was  as  follows : 

Per  acre. 

Foreman $   8.74 

Men     62.54 

Water    boy 3.00 

Explosives     33.00 

Total  clearing  and  grubbing  per  acre $76.60 

The  tools  used  for  this  work  cost  about  $50,  but  with  the 
exception  of  the  brush  hooks,  they  were  all  used  on  other  work, 
hence  to  charge  half  their  cost  to  this  job  would  be  sufficient. 
This  means  a  charge  for  tools  of  $2  per  acre,  making  a  total  of 
$78.60.  This  work  was  being  done  at  the  same  time  that  grading 
and  other  construction  was  going  on,  hence  the  charge  to  be  added 
for  general  expense,  such  as  superintendence  and  office  expenses 
would  be  small. 

This  clearing  and  grubbing  was  not  paid  for  by  the  acre,  but 
the  work  was  included  with  the  grading,  and  the  price  of  excavation 
covered  the  clearing  and  grubbing.  There  was  90,000  cu.  yds.  of 
earth  excavation  on  the  9  miles  of  road,  hence  the  cost  of  clearing 
and  grubbing  amounted  to  about  1^4  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  of  earth.  If 
elevating  graders  had  not  been  used,  the  cost  with  the  same  forces 
doing  the  work,  would  have  been  less  than  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd. 

Another  example  of  clearing  and  grubbing  is  given  below.  Five 
acres  of  woodland  were  to  be  cleared  and  grubbed  of  all  bushes  and 
worthless  saplings,  vines  and  briers.  The  undergrowth  was  dense. 
None  of  the  trees  were  to  be  cut.  The  clearing  was  done  by  a 
contractor,  but  he  was  paid  "force  account,"  that  is  by  the  day 
plus  a  percentage  for  his  work.  The  wages  paid  were  the  same  as 
in  the  example  just  given.  The  brush,  old  logs  and  other  debris 
had  to  be  burned,  and  care  had  to  be  exercised  that  none  of  the 
trees  were  injured,  as  the  woods  was  to  be  made  into  a  park.  The 
cost  of  clearing  was  as  follows: 

Per  acre. 

Foreman      $   7.25 

Men     54.06 

Water    boy 3.00 


Total $64.31 

This  work  was  done  in  the  fall  of  the  year,  and  the  weather  was 
exceptionally  good.  The  following  spring  the  ground  had  to  be 
thoroughly  grubbed  in  order  to  plant  grass  seed  in  the  woodland. 
This  work  was  done  with  mattocks,  every  inch  of  the  ground  being 
gone  over,  brier  roots,  old  stubs  and  all  roots  of  bushes  being  dug 
out.  There  were  also  a  few  old  stumps  that  had  to  be  taken  out, 
but  ""he  work  was  mostly  the  small  surface  roots  of  bushes,  saplings 
and  briers.  After  the  ground  was  gone  over  with  mattocks,  steel 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1061 

rakes  were  used  to  rake  out  the  roots,  and  put  them  in  piles. 
Wheelbarrows  were  then  used  to  haul  them  away  to  a  waste  pile, 
where  they  were  afterwards  burned,  when  they  had  dried 
sufficiently. 

This  work  had  to  be  well  done,  or  else  the  grass  seed  would  not 
make  a  good  sod ;  that  an  excellent  sod  was  obtained  in  one 
season,  was  evidence  that  the  work  was  well  done.  Company 
forces  did  this  grubbing,  the  rates  of  wages  being:  Foreman 
$2.50  for  9  hours,  and  laborers  $1.50  for  9  hours.  The  cost  of  the 
grubbing  was: 

Per  acre. 

Foreman     $  4.20 

Men     51.30 

Total    $55.50 

This  gives  us  a  total  cost  for  clearing  and  grubbing  of  $119.81 
per  acre.  To  this  should  be  added  $2.00  per  acre  for  tools. 

If  this  work  had  been  done  by  contract,  it  could  not  have  been 
done  better,  but  there  is  little  doubt,  that  the  cost  would  have 
been  less. 

Cost  of  Transporting  Logs  by  Driving  and  by  Trains.* — Practi- 
cally one-third  of  the  lumber  used  for  pulp  and  paper  in  the 
state  of  Maine  comes  down  the  Kennebec  waters.  The  annual 
drive  in  the  main  river  usually  amounts  to  about  150,000,000  ft. 
B.  M.  In  Water  Supply  and  Irrigation  Paper  No.  198,  Mr.  H.  K. 
Barrows  gives  some  data  as  to  the  cost  of  driving  on  the  above 
waters,  the  data  being  compiled  from  the  reports  of  the  Kennebec 
Log  Driving  Co.,  which  controls  the  drives  in  the  main  river,  the 
Moose  River  Driving  Co.  and  the  Dead  River  Driving  Co.  These 
companies  drive  the  logs  and  apportion  the  cost  as  a  tax  per  M.  ft., 
this  tax  varying  with  the  distance ;  this  tax  is  the  cost  per  M.  ft. 
for  logs  driven  the  distance  for  which  the  full  tax  applies.  In  the 
table  below  the  cost  of  log  driving  on  Kennebec  River  and 
tributaries,  1901-1905,  is  given,  the  cost  per  ton  mile  being 
approximate  and  calculated  on  the  basis  that  1,000  ft.  B.  M. 
weighs  3,500  Ibs. : 


Di 
Drive.                               H 
Kennebec    river  

stance 
liles. 
91 
24 
43 
17 

9 

Average 
.     tax 
per  M. 
$0.41 
.12 
.38 

t-12 

—  Cost  of  driving  — 
Per  mile.      Per  ton. 
Thousand.        Mile. 
$0.0045          $0.0026 
.0050              .0028 
.0089              .0051 
.024                 .014 

.013                 .0074 

Kennebec    river  

Dead    river   

Moose    river.  .  .'  

Moosehead  lake  (Moose 
river   to   lake   outlet, 
logs   towed   by   boat) 

The  figures  cover,   in  addition   to   the   cost  of   driving  itself,    the 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   13,  1907, 
jContract  price  for  10  years. 


1062  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

other  charges  arising  in  carrying  on  this  work,  such  as  costs  of 
dams,  improvement  of  channel,  booms,  etc.,  as  well  as  executive 
charges.  Many  important  changes  have  been  made  during  the 
period  covered  by  the  above  costs  and  consequently  the  unit  costs 
are  higher  than  they  would  have  been  had  a  longer  series  of  years 
been  considered.  From  the  above  table  it  appears  that  the  cost 
of  log  driving  per  ton  mile  varies  from  about  one-fourth  to  l1/^ 
cts.,  depending  on  the  distance  driven  and  difficulties  experienced. 
The  average  freight  rate  in  the  United  States  at  present  is  about 
0.8  ct.  per  ton  mile  and  for  the  New  England  group  of  railroads 
1.20  cts.  per  ton  mile.  Under  exceptionally  favorable  circum- 
stances rates  as  low  as  0.2  ct.  per  ton  mile  have  been  granted  for 
coal  transportation  from  the  coal  fields  to  tide  water.  For  the 
sake  of  comparison  rates  during  1906  for  log  transportation  on 
the  new  Somerset  Ry.  extension  are  given  below: 


Average  Charge  Cost  of  transportation. 

Logs  shipped        distance,  per  ft.  Per  mile.        Per  ton. 

from  Moscow  to.       miles.  B.  M.  Thousand.             Mile. 

Bingham    12  $1.75  $0.146              $0.080 

Solon     20                 2.00  .100  .057 

North    Anson 29  *1.50  .052                  .030 

*This  price  involves  reshipment  as  manufactured  lumber  on 
Somerset  Railway. 

Cost  of  Cordwood  and  Cost  of  a  Wire  Rope  Tramway. — Mr.  B. 
Mclntire  gives  the  following  about  a  wire  ropeway  built  by  him  in 
1884  in  Mexico.  He  states  that  when  the  inclination  of  an  endless 
traveling  ropeway  is  greater  than  about  1  in  7  it  will  run  by 
gravity,  the  speed  being  controlled  by  a  brake.  A  ropeway 
running  200  ft.  per  min.  with  buckets  at  intervals  of  48  ft.,  each 
carrying  160  Ibs.,  will  deliver  20  tons  per  hr.  By  using  two  clips 
close  together  on  the  rope,  loads  of  700  Ibs.  per  bucket  may  be 
carried.  This  particular  ropeway  was  used  for  carrying  cordwood 
to  a  mine.  Its  total  length  was  10,115  ft.  between  terminals,  and 
the  difference  in  elevation  was  3,575  ft.  The  longest  span  between 
towers  was  1,935  ft.,  the  shortest,  104  f t. ;  there  were  10  towers 
and  two  terminals.  Hewed  timbers  were  used  for  the  towers, 
being  much  better  than  round  timbers  in  maintenance.  The  rope 
was  13/16-in.  diam.,  plow  steel,  of  300,000  Ibs.  strength  per  sq.  in., 
bought  of  the  California  Wire  Works.  It  was  transported  on  7 
mules  in  lengths  of  2,250  ft.,  each  mule  carrying  a  coil  321  ft. 
long,  with  a  piece  10  ft.  long  between  mules.  The  coils  were  24 
ins.  diam.  There  were  3  men  required  to  every  7  mules.  Care 
must  be  taken  to  tead  the  mules  on  a  steep  ascent  to  prevent  a 
sudden  rush  that  may  throw  a  mule  over  a  precipice.  The  rope- 
way, after  erection,  was  lubricated  best  by  using  black  West 
Virginia  oil  (instead  of  tar),  applied  continuously  at  the  rate  of  a 
drop  a  minute.  This  was  vastly  better  than  intermittent  oiling. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1063 

The  cost  of  this  ropeway  was  as  follows: 

Upper    terminal $  192.45 

Lower    terminal 218.00 

5  trees    fitted    for    towers , 103.00 

5  towers     854.25 

Counterweight    tower 

Remodeling    towers 332.00 

Stretching,    splicing  and    mounting    rope,    at- 
taching clips  and  baskets 255.00 

Total  labor  cost  of  construction $   2,123.70 

Opening  and   maintaining  roads 1,822.30 

Ropeway,   materials  and   transportation 15,454.00 

Total  cost  in  running  order $19,400.00 

This  is  equivalent  to  about  $10,000  a  mile.  During  9  mos.  the 
ropeway  was  operated  at  a  cost  of  $400  a  month,  and  handled  660 
cords  per  month ;  the  items  of  cost  being  as  follows  for  9  mos. : 

1  brakeman,  at  $52  per  mo $  468 

3  men  filling,  at  $26  per  mo.  each 702 

1  man  dumping,  at  $40  per  mo 360 

1  man  looking  after  line  and  oiling,  at  $26 234 

Oil     117 

Repairing   (very  heavy,  $2.25  per  day) 526 

2  men  wheeling  wood  away  from  terminal 468 

2  men  receiving  wood  from  choppers  and  deliver- 
ing it  to  packers 702 

Total  for  9  mos $3,577 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  labor  was  low,  being  $1  a 
day  for  common  labor.  The  cost  of  cutting  and  delivering  wood 
to  the  tramway  was  $2.20  per  cord,  and  the  cost  of  transporting 
by  the  tramway,  as  above  given,  was  60  cts.  per  cord  (not 
Including  interest  on  the  plant).  During  the  previous  year  the 
cost  of  cutting  and  teaming  wood  had  been  $12  per  cord.  The 
total  saving  to  the  company,  after  deducting  cost  of  tramway,  was 
$33,500  the  first  year. 

Cost  of  Planting  Trees  at  Washington,  D.  C.*— During  the  fiscal 
year  ending  June  30,  1909,  the  Office  of  Trees  and  Parkings,  of 
the  Engineer  Department  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  set  out 
3,988  young  trees  in  the  various  streets  of  Washington  and  the 
District.  Of  this  total  2,408  trees  were  planted  in  the  fall  season 
and  the  remainder  in  the  spring  season.  The  principal  kinds 
of  trees  planted  were  elm,  626 ;  Norway  maple,  825 ;  pin  oak, 
316;  silver  maple,  495,  and  sycamore,  978.  The  labor  cost  of 
planting  the  trees  was  as  follows  : 

Total.  Per  tree. 

Miscellaneous  nursery  work $   3,165  $0.794 

Digging   tree   holes 9,897  2.182 

Planting  trees 2,394  .600 


Total    labor $15,456        $3.876 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.   29,  1909. 


1064  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  lumber  for  tree  boxes  and  stakes,  straps,  strap  Iron 
and  nails  amounted  to  $1.41  per  tree.  This  added  to  the  labor  cost 
makes  the  cost  per  tree  $5.286.  This  cost  is  an  increase  of  nearly 
16  per  cent  over  the  cost  of  similar  work  in  the  previous  year, 
the  principal  reason  being  the  increased  cost  of  skilled  labor  and 
the  very  large  amount  of  nursery  planting  done. 

Cost  of  Tree  Planting  by  the  Massachusetts  Highway  Commis- 
sion .*— in  1904  the  Massachusetts  Highway  Commission  began  the 
planting  of  trees  along  state  roads.  The  total  number  of  trees 
planted  that  year  was  3,907,  the  varieties  being  as  follows:  1,737 
maples,  sugar,  Norway  and  white;  538  oak,  red,  scarlet,  white  and 
pin  ;  1,000  elm,  207  poplar  and  some  white  pine  and  locust.  The 
total  cost  of  these  trees  in  their  final  location,  including  trans- 
planting in  a  temporary  nursery,  care,  manure,  superintendence 
and  labor,  was  $4,348.59,  or  an  average  of  $1.14  per  tree.  During 
the  fall  of  1904  there  was  an  unusually  severe  drought,  which  had 
a  marked  effect  on  the  trees  planted  at  the  time.  The  total  loss 
of  trees  was  15  per  cent,  this  loss  being  traceable  in  a  large  degree 
to  the  dry  weather.  As  a  result  greater  care  was  taken  in  1905  in 
preparing  the  ground  for  the  reception  of  the  trees.  In  1905  the 
commission  began  placing  in  the  state  nursery  all  trees  received 
from  the  nurserymen,  so  that  the  trees  might  get  added  development 
of  root  fibers.  This  made  necessary  two  transplantings  before  the 
tree  reached  its  final  location.  The  cost  of  trees,  transplanting, 
preparation  of  ground  and  final  planting,  in  1905,  was  $1.01  per 
tree.  The  original  cost  of  each  tree  was  higher  in  1904,  but  more 
care  was  given  to  the  preparation  of  the  ground.  The  work  for 
the  year  was  as  follows:  Trees  replaced,  726  ;  new  plantings,  3,239  ; 
vines  planted,  300.  In  1906  the  systematic  planting  of  trees  along 
the  state  highways  was  continued,  2,511  new  trees  being  planted 
that  year.  In  addition  1,011  trees  were  replaced.  The  cost  of 
planting  the  new  trees  in  1906,  including  the  cost  of  tree  and 
every  expense  connected  therewith  was  $1.10  each.  The  cost  of  the 
maintenance  of  trees  planted  previous  to  1906  was  16  cts.  per 
tree,  and  including  the  cost  of  replaced  trees  20  cts. 

Cost  of  Digging  Holes  and  Planting  Trees  and  Shrubs. f — In  carry- 
ing on  many  earthwork  jobs,  the  engineer  not  only  has  to  think 
and  plan  for  the  engineering  features  of  the  work,  but  also  has 
to  consider  the  artistic  side,  namely,  the  landscape  features.  This 
is  rapidly  becoming  the  case  with  railroad  work,  as  the  right  of 
way  of  some  of  our  larger  roads  is  being  terraced,  hedges  planted, 
and  banks  sodded  or  seeded,  and  the  station  grounds  made  into 
smooth  lawns  with  shrubs  and  trees  to  ornament  them,  and  well 
kept  drives  laid  out  through  the  grounds.  Sewerage  disposal  plants, 
reservoirs  and  filter  beds  are  likewise  treated  in  this  manner.  This 
has  made  landscape  architecture  or  engineering  more  prominent, 
and  the  civil  engineer  finds  that  he  must  give  attention  to  these 

* Engineering-Contracting,  April  29,   1908. 
^Engineering -Contracting,  Jan.  1,  1908. 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1065 

matters.  If  he  has  much  of  this  work  to  do  he  will  call  in  an 
expert  on  the  subject,  but  if  the  work  does  not  warrant  this 
expense,  he  will  attend  to  the  details  himself. 

The  cost  of  trees  can  be  obtained  from  any  nursery  company, 
but  the  cost  of  planting  is  more  difficult  to  obtain. 

One  of  the  editors  of  this  journal  has  done  this  work  upon 
several  occasions,  and  the  following  costs  were  kept  several  years 
ago. 

The  trees  in  the  first  example  were  known  as  4  to  6  in.  trees,  that 
is,  trees  measuring  from  4  to  6  in.  in  diameter.  They  were  maples 
and  poplars,  and  were  bought  in  the  early  spring  and  "healed"  in, 
on  a  nearby  lot  to  be  planted  later. 

Example  I.  In  this  lot  there  were  80  trees.  The  ground  had 
been  graded,  to  a  depth  of  1  to  5  feet,  hence  there  was  no  soil  left. 
For  this  reason  it  was  necessary  to  dig  a  deep  hole  and  fill  it  in 
with  good  soil  so  as  to  give  the  tree  every  chance  of  growing. 
The  spread  of  the  roots  was  about  2%  ft.  on  the  trees,  hence  a  hole 
5  ft.  in  diameter  and  5  ft.  deep  was  dug.  Two  men  working 
together  dug  the  holes,  digging  four  such  holes  in  a  day.  A  pick 
and  short  shovel  were  used  by  them.  The  dirt  was  thrown  on  the 
side  of  the  hole,  wheel  scrapers  moving  it  away,  but  this  cost  was 
not  charged  against  the  tree  planting  as  it  saved  borrowing  that 
much  earth  elsewhere,  hence  this  was  charged  against  the  borrow 
that  was  being  made  to  fill  in  an  adjoining  marsh.  In  each  hole 
there  was  3.6  cu.  yds.  of  earth.  The  wages  paid  for  a  nine-hour 
day  were  as  follows : 

Foreman     $3.50 

Men     1.50 

4-horse   team    and   driver 7.50 

1-horse  cart   and  driver 3.50 

About  six  men  worked  in  the  gang,  and  the  cost  of  digging  the 
80  holes  was : 

Foreman,    6%    days $22.75 

Men,    40    days 60.00 

Total      , $82/75" 

The  cost  per  hole  was: 

Foreman    $0.28 

Men     0.75 

Total     , $1.03 

This  gave  a  cost  per   cubic  yard  of  earth  excavated  as  follows-. 

Foreman     $0.08 

Men     0.21 

Total  cost  per  cubic  yard .m $0.29 

It  must  be  remembered  that  this  kind  of  excavation  is  very 
similar  to  trench  work,  and  also  to  shaft  sinking,  as  the  picking  is 
always  from  the  top  of  the  excavation,  and  in  shoveling,  the 


1066  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

shovel  cannot  be  heaped  as  easily  as  when  working  against  a 
breast. 

In  planting  these  trees  soil  had  to  be  hauled  several  hundred 
feet  from  nearby  stock  piles.  Wood  earth  was  also  hauled  from  a 
piece  of  woodland  a  half  a  mile  away.  Twenty-five  cents  a  yard 
was  paid  for  the  privilege  of  getting  it,  and  the  cost  of  hauling  and 
loading  it  is  included  in  the  cost  of  the  tree  planting.  A  four- 
horse  dump  wagon  that  carried  2  cu.  yds.  each  trip  was  used  for 
this.  This  wagon  also  hauled  some  loads  of  "mulch"  from  the 
seashore  close  by,  a  haul  not  exceeding  700  ft.  A  cart  was  used 
to  haul  soil  and  water. 

The  method  of  planting  the  trees  consisted  in  filling  in  the 
bottom  of  the  hole  for  about  2  ft.  with  soil,  then  using  a  mixture 
of  soil  and  woods  earth,  to  fill  up  the  hole  within  a  few  inches  of 
the  top.  The  roots  of  the  tree  were  covered  with  about  10  in. 
of  this  mixture  of  soil.  The  last  few  inches  was  of  the  "mulch" 
from  the  seashore,  as  this  kept  the  ground  moist  and  prevented 
it  from  baking.  As  the  tree  was  planted,  plenty  of  water  was 
poured  around  it.  The  placing  of  rich  soil  around  the  roots  and 
the  watering  allowed  the  fibrous  roots  to  begin  at  once  to  take 
nourishment  for  the  tree.  The  planting  was  done  in  the  summer 
time,  thus  making  it  necessary  to  take  unusual  precaution  that 
the  tree  should  grow.  After  the  trees  were  planted  they  were 
watered  and  sprayed  each  day  that  it  did  not  rain. 

The  cost  of  the  tree  planting  for  these  80  trees  was  as  follows : 

Foreman,    3%    days ..$12.25 

Men,    20%    days 31.00 

Teams,    4    days 30!00 

Cart,    4    days 14.00 

Wood's  earth,  12  cu.  yds.,  at  25c 3.00 


Total     $90.25 

This  gives  a  cost  per  tree  of  the  following: 

Foreman $0.15 

Men     0.39 

Team     0.37 

Cart    0.18 

Wood's    earth 0.04 

Total    ' $1.13 

This  makes  a  total  cost  per  tree,  of  digging  the  holes  and  plant- 
ing, of  $2.16. 

Example  II.  In  this  case  270  trees  of  about  the  same  size  were 
planted.  The  work  was  done  in  the  fall  of  year,  after  the  sap  was 
down,  and  the  ground  in  which  they  were  planted  had  several  feet 
of  fairly  good  soil  on  it.  The  tree  holes  were  made,  for  this 
reason,  5  ft.  in  diameter,  but  only  4  ft.  deep.  This  meant  the 
excavation  of  2.9  cu.  yds.  for  each  hole.  The  wages  paid  for  a 
9-hour  day  were  the  same  as  in  Example  I,  but,  instead  of  working 
only  about  six  men  in  the  gang,  about  24  men  were  worked.  It 


PILING,  TRESTLING,  TIMBERWORK.  1067 

will  be  noticed  that  this  materially  reduced  the  foreman  cost.     The 
cost  of  digging  the  270  holes  was: 

Foreman,    4    days $-14.00 

Men,    95    days 142.50 


Total     $156.50 

The  cost  per  hole  was  as  follows : 

Foreman    $0.05 

Men     0.53 

Total  for  hole $0.58 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  earth  excavated  from  the  holes  was: 

Foreman     $0.02 

Men     .    0.18 


Total  cost  per  cubic  yard $0.20 

A  comparison  of  this  with  the  cost  of  digging  the  holes  for  the  80 
trees  will  prove  interesting.  The  unit  cost  of  the  foreman  was 
reduced  as  explained  by  increasing  the  size  of  the  crew  of  laborers, 
but  it  will  be  noticed  that  cutting  off  a  foot  of  the  depth  (25  per 
cent)  of  the  hole,  decreased  the  cost  of  digging  about  30  per  cent. 
The  cost  of  excavating  per  cubic  yard  was  decreased  14  per  cent. 
Two  men  working  together  nearly  completed  six  4-ft.  holes  in  a 
day. 

In  planting  the  trees  the  same  earth  and  soil  that  was  dug 
from  the  hole  was  put  back,  hence  the  cost  of  planting  includes  the 
labor  of  back  filling,  the  getting  of  the  tree  from  the  "healing  in 
ground,"  the  placing  of  it,  putting  some  little  manure  around  the 
tree  after  it  was  planted  and  watering  while  planting.  No  teams 
were  necessary  for  this,  the  cost  being  as  follows : 

Foreman,    1%    days $  5  25 

Men,    36    days 54.00 

Total $59.25 

The  cost  per  tree  was : 

Foreman    $0.02 

Men     0.20 

Total     $0.22 

This  makes  a  total  cost  of  planting  each  tree  of  80  cts.,  and 
illustrates  how  much  cheaper  the  work  can  be  done  when  the 
season  is  favorable,  and  the  soil  does  not  have  to  be  hauled  and 
;  prepared  to  place  around  the  trees. 

Example  III.  In  this  case  60  evergreen  trees  of  various  kinds 
from  3  ft.  to  12  ft.  high  were  planted.  Earth  was  taken  up  with 
the  roots,  at  the  nursery  where  they  were  bought,  and  burlap  was 
tied  around  the  roots  to  keep  this  earth  from  falling  off.  As  these 
trees  were  unloaded  from  the  car,  they  were  carried  by  the  men 
directly  to  the  place  they  were  to  be  planted.  Teams  could  not 
be  used  for  this,  as  the  lawns,  which  were  new,  would  have  been 


1068  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

ruined  by  the  passage  of  wheels  over  them.  From  2  to  4  men 
were  needed  with  hand  sticks  to  carry  each  tree.  The  holes  dug 
were  about  2%  ft.  in  diameter  and  about  18  in.  deep,  there  being 
about  6.4  cu.  ft.  of  earth  excavated  from  each  hole.  The  back 
filling  was  done  from  this  material,  which  was  piled  up  around 
the  tree,  leaving  but  little  excess  to  be  hauled  away  in  wheel- 
barrows. Large  pieces  of  canvas  were  laid  down  on  the  grass  to 
hold  the  excavated  earth,  thus  preventing  the  earth  from  injuring 
the  grass.  The  entire  lot  of  trees  was  planted  in  one  day,  and 
the  cost  consists  of  unloading  the  trees  from  the  cars,  carrying 
them  to  place,  digging  holes,  planting  trees,  and  cleaning  up  the 
ground  and  pieces  of  canvas  afterwards.  The  ground  was  wet 
enough  from  recent  rains  to  do  away  with  watering  the  newly 
planted  trees.  The  entire  cost  of  this  work  was : 

2  foremen,    at    $3.50 $  7.00 

33  men,    at    $1.50 49.50 

Total     $56.50 

The  cost  per  tree  was  as  follows : 

Foreman     . .  $0.115 

Men     .  .    0.825 


Total     $0.940 

Example  IV.  This  job  consisted  of  planting  1,200  shrubs.  About 
one-third  of  them  were  planted  as  separate  shrubs  or  three  or 
four  plants  in  the  same  hole,  the  rest  being  planted  as  hedges. 
The  holes  were  dug  1  ft.  deep.  A  foreman  and  3  men  did  the 
work,  taking  the  shrubs  from  the  "healing  in  ground,"  digging 
the  holes,  planting,  back  filling  and  watering.  The  wages  were 
the  same  as  paid  in  the  other  examples.  The  cost  was  as  follows : 

Foreman,    5    days $17.50 

Men,    15    days 22.50 


Total     $40.00 

This  was  a  cost  of  a  little  more  than  3  cents  per  shrub.     All  the 
work  was  done  by  day  labor. 


SECTION  X. 
BUILDINGS. 

Cost  of  Items  of  Buildings  by  Percentages. — In  any  locality,  if  we 
select  buildings  of  any  given  class  and  estimate  the  percentagB  of 
the  total  cost  chargeable  to  each  item,  we  find  a  remarkably  small 


Excavation,    brick    and 
cut  stone   

n  Frame 
3  Buildings. 

*  Brick 
*  Residences. 
5 

£  Brick  Flats 
•5  and  stores. 

»  Brick 
P  Schools. 

5  Brick 
Q  Warehouses. 

£  Machine  Sho 
(150  x400) 

8 

6 

6  % 

6 

Skylights  and  glass.  .  .  . 

'" 

10 

Millwork  and  glass.  .  .  . 
Lumber  

21 
19 

20 
12 

17 

10% 

7 

6 
6% 

Carpenter  labor    

18 

10 

10 

10 

9% 

4 

Hardware  

3% 

3 

2% 

Tin,  galv.  iron  and  slate 
Gravel  roofing   

2% 

4% 

IV 

3% 

2 

1% 

Structural   steel 

5  % 

45% 

Steel   lintels   and   hard- 
ware     

6 

Plumbing  and  gas  fitt'g 
Piping        for         steam, 
water    and    power.  . 

7 

3 

4 

4 

2 

2 

Paint     . 

5 

5% 

4% 

4 

2% 

2 

Total    . 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

Note. — Heating  is  not  included. 

variation.  For  example,  the  hardware  item  in  brick  residences  aver- 
ages about  3%  of  the  total  cost  of  the  building  whether  the  building 
costs  $10,000  or  $50,000.  For  a  $10,000  building  the  hardware  costs 
$10,000  X  3%,  or  $300.  For  a  $50,000  building,  the  hardware  costs 
$50,000  X  3%,  or  $1,500.  In  making  preliminary  estimates  of  cost  it 
is  often  sufficiently  close  to  estimate  one  or  two  of  the  large  items 
and  calculate  the  rest  by  percentages.  Every  builder  and  architect, 
therefore,  should  analyze  the  actual  cost  of  each  item  of  a  number 
of  typical  buildings,  and  reduce  the  analysis  to  percentages.  Where 
foundation  work  is  difficult  and  variable,  it  is  well  to  exclude  the 
foundations  in  forming  a  table  of  percentages,  such  as  the  one  on 
this  page.  It  is  also  well  to  carry  the  subdivisions  of  cost  still 
farther ;  but  for  the  purpose  of  example,  the  foregoing  table  serves 
to  illustrate. 

1069 


1070  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Buildings  Per  Cu.  Ft.— In  order  approximately  to  esti* 
mate  the  cost  of  any  proposed  building  for  which  plans  have  not 
yet  been  prepared,  it  is  convenient  to  estimate  the  cost  in  cents 
per  cubic  foot.  In  the  following  examples  the  cubic  contents  are 
computed  from  the  cellar  floor  to  the  roof  (if  the  roof  is  flat),  or 
(in  a  pitch  roof)  to  the  top  of  the  attic  walls  that  are  finished  or 
may  be  finished ;  but  air  spaces  and  open  porches  are  not  in- 
cluded. Measurements  are  from  out  to  out  of  walls  and  founda- 
tions. 

The  following  figures  were  compiled  by  Mr.  James  N.  Brown,  of 
St.  Louis,  and  form  part  of  the  instructions  to  insurance  adjusters. 
Prices  were  for  the  year  1902. 

Country  Property:  Cts.  per  cu.  ft. 

Frame  dwelling,  small  box  house,  no  cornice 4 

Frame    dwelling,    shingle   roof,    small    cornice,    no    sash 

weights,     plain 5      to    6 

Brick  dwelling,   same  class 7      to    8 

Frame     dwelling,     shingle     roof,     good     cornice,     sash 

Weights,  blinds   (good  house) 7      to    8 

Brick   dwelling,    same    class 9      to  10 

Frame  barn,  shingle  roof,  not  painted,  plain  finish 1  %  to    2  % 

Frame  barn,  shingle  roof,  painted,  good  foundation ....  2  y2  to    3 

Frame  store,  shingle  roof,  painted,  plain  finish 5      to    7 

Brick    store,    shingle    roof,    painted,    good    cornice,    well 

finished    7      to    9 

Frame   church    or    schoolhouse,    ordinary 5      to    7 

Brick    church    or    schoolhouse,    ordinary 8      to  10 

If  slate  or  metal  roof,  add  %  ct.  per  cu.  ft.  to  the  above. 

City  Property: 
Frame  dwelling,  shingle  roof,  pine  floors  and  finish,  no 

bathroom  or  furnace,  plain  finish   (good  house) 6      to    7 

Brick   dwelling,    same  class 8      to    9 

Frame  dwelling,  shingle  roof,  hardwood  floor  in  hall  and 

parlor,  bath,  furnace  and  fair  plumbing 8      to    9 

Brick    dwelling,    same    class 8      to  1 0 

Frame    dwelling,    shingle   roof,    hardwood   in   first   floor, 
good  plumbing,  furnace,  artistic  design,  some  interior 

ornamentation,    well    painted 10      to  12 

Brick  dwelling,  good  plumbing,  bath,  furnace,  pine  fin- 
ish, well  painted 11      to  12 

Cost  of  Miscellaneous  Buildings. — Mr.  Fred  T.  Hodgson  published 
the  following  in  the  Architects'  and  Builders'  Magazine,  May,  1902  : 
Bathhouses,  complete,  or  for  barracks,  but  not 

supplied  with  hot  water,  per  cu.  ft $          .45  to  $  .50 

Or  per  bath 280.00  to       320.00 

Baths,  public,  comprising  swimming  baths,  slip- 
per baths,  laundry,  caretaker's  quarters, 

machinery,  etc.,  complete,  per  cu.  ft .30  to  .36 

Breweries,  complete,  including  buildings,  cel- 
larage, boilers,  engine,  machinery,  coppers, 
liquor  baths,  mash  tubs,  coolers,  refriger- 
ator, ice  storage,  pumps,  and  all  other  re- 
quirements, per  cu.  ft .14  to  .20 

Churches,  plain,  per  cu.  ft.,  from .16  to  .22 

Per  sq.  ft.,  from 4.50  to  6.50 

Per    sitting,    from 40.00  to         55.00 

Churches,  ornamental,  per  cu.  ft.,  from .22  to  .39 

Per  sq.   ft,   from 7.00  to         12.50 

Per  sitting,   from 65.00  to       120.00 


BUILDINGS. 


1071 


Cotton  mills,  as  generally  constructed: 

Per  cu.   ft .09  to  .12 

Per   spindle    .22  to  .30 

Cow  stables,  complete,  with  iron  finishings  and 
fittings : 

Per    cu.    ft .14  to  .16 

Per  sq.   ft 2.20  to  2.80 

Per   cow    170.00  to       190.00 

Second-class  stable  with  common  fittings : 

Per  cu.   ft .11  to  .13 

Per  sq.   ft 1.65  to  2.00 

Per   cow 130. 00  to       145.00 

Third-class,  for  farm,  wood  fittings: 

Per  cu.   ft 07  V2  to  .10 

Per   sq.    ft 1.45  to  1.50 

Per  cow 90.00  to       105.00 

Drill  halls  or  sheds  for  infantry : 

Per  cu.   ft .llto  .14 

Per  sq.   ft 1.60  to  1.70 

Electric  stations  of  power  houses,  buildings 
erected  complete,  exclusive  of  machinery 
and  plant: 

Per  cu.   ft .14  to  .17 

Flats,  as  constructed  in  New  York,  compris- 
ing ornamental  brickwork  in  front,  ele- 
vators, fire-resisting  floors,  and  the  whole 
well  finished  in  ordinary  wood  throughout : 

Per  cu.   ft .28  to  .36 

Hospitals,  complete,  including  administrative 
buildings,  etc. : 

Per  cu.   ft .20  to  .30 

Per    bed    1,550.00  to    2,300.00 

Cottage  hospitals  for  small  towns : 

Per  cu.   ft .17  to  .22 

Per  bed   1,050.00  to    1,550.00 

Hospitals,  isolated,  including  all  nursery 
buildings : 

Per    cu.     ft .17  to  .22 

Per  bed 1,800.00  to    2,300.00 

Hotels,  complete  in  every  particular : 

First-class,   per  cu.   ft .31  to  .41 

Second-class,  per  cu.  ft .23  to  .31 

Third-class,  per  cu.  ft .20  to  .24 

Houses,  complete,  in  brickwork  and  good  sub- 
stantial finishings: 

First-class — Large    mansion    with    elaborate 
finish : 

Main  building,  16-ft.  ceiling,  per  cu.  ft .30  to  .40 

Per   sq.    ft 5.50  to  6.50 

Additions,  11-ft  ceilings,  per  cu.  ft .16  to  .20 

Per  sq.  ft 2.50  to  3.00 

Second-class — Large     mansion     of     ordinary 
character : 

Main  building,  14-ft.  ceiling,  per  cu.  ft .22  to  .30 

Per   sq.    ft 3.50  to  4.50 

Additions,   per  cu.   ft .15  to  .20 

Per   sq.   ft 1.65  to  2.15 

Third-class — Country  houses  : 

Height  of  ceiling,  11  ft.,  per  cu.  ft .15  to  .20 

Per   sq.    ft 2.15  to  2.65 

Fourth-class — Speculative  buildings  : 

Ceilings,  10  ft.,  per  cu.  ft .13  to  .15 

Per    sq.   ft 1.30  to  1.55 

Fifth-class — Tenements  and  cottages  to  rent : 

Ceilings,  9  ft,  per  cu.  ft .10  to  .12 

Per  sq.   ft 1.10  to  1.35 


1072 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


Libraries,  public,  complete  in  every  particular: 

Per  cu.  ft -16  to  -22 

Municipal    lodging-houses    for    cities    and    large 

towns :  1  r  *  1  o 

"Po-r    mi      ft                                                                                 •  !•  tO  .lo 

plr   bed    .'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. !!!!!!!!'  '.! SOO.OOto  375.00 

Museums,  public : 

For  large  cities,  per  cu.  ft .22  to  .33 

Towns    .19  to  .^b 

Music   halls,    complete,    per    head   of   accommo- 

Fo^VaTge  cities    80.00  to  130.00 

For  small  cities  and  towns 40.00  to  70.00 

Town  halls,  complete: 

Large  cities,  per  cu.  ft .31  to  .36 

Small  cities  and  towns .^  to  .60 

Alternative  prices: 

Basement,   per  cu.  ft..... .20  to  .24 

Superstructure,   per   cu.    f t .27  to  .35 

Ornamental  towers,   per  cu.   ft .39  to  .4b 

Theaters,    complete,    per    head    of    accommoda- 

In  large  cities 82.00  to  108.00 

Small   cities   and   towns 50.00  to  80.00 

Per  cu.   ft 28  to  .38 

Chimney    shafts,    plain,    as    for    factories,    etc., 

complete,    including   foundations,    iron    cap, 

etc.,     height     measured     from     surface     of 

ground  to  top  of  cap  :  Per  ft.  in  height. 

Not  exceeding  100  ft.  in  height .".$  40.00  to  $  46.00 

100  ft.  to  180  ft.  high 45.00  to  52.00 

180  ft.  to  250  ft.  high 50.00  to  56.00 


Costs  of  Concrete  Buildings.*— A  common  method  of  stating  the 
cost  of  buildings  for  approximate  estimates  and  comparisons  is  in 
terms  of  dollars  per  square  foot  of  floor  or  cents  per  cubic  foot  of 
space  inclosed.  Either  unit  has  been  supposed  to  be  a  reliable  one 
for  approximate  comparisons  and  both  have  been  used  frequently  to 
proVe  in  individual  cases  the  economy  or  the  high  cost  of  construc- 
tion work.  In  view  of  these  facts  the  following  comparisons  made 
by  Mr.  Leonard  C.  Wason,  president,  Aberthaw  Construction  Co., 

TABLE  I. — COST  OF  FIREPROOF   COMPLETED   CONTRACTS. 


Volume 
Kind  of  Building.      in  cu.  ft. 

Offices  and  stores 1,365,830 

do.  496,780 

Factory    112,440 

do.  746,674 

do.  312,000 

Garage     156,198 

Filter    149,250 

Fire  station    44,265 

Observatory    9,734 

Filter    59,991 

Highest    

Lowest     

Average    


Floor  area 

in  sq.  ft. 

90,474 

39,840 

7,519 

49,546 

24,960 

10,806 

19,208 

2,982 

657 

5,243 


-Unit  cost- 


Per  cu.  ft. 
$0.133 
.124 
.114 
.060 
.127 
.085 
.134 
.153 
.373 
.333 
.333 
.06 
.138 


Per  sq.  ft. 
$2.00 
1.545 
1.70 

.902 
1.60 
1.23 
1.04 
2.26 
5.45 
3.82 
3.82 
.90 
1.72 


•Engineering-Contracting,  March  10,  1909. 


BUILDINGS. 


1073 


TABLE  II. — COST  OF   FIREPROOF   COMPLETE   BUILDINGS. 


Volume 

Floor  area 

Unit  cost  

Kind  of  Building. 

in  cu.  ft. 

in  sq.  ft. 

Per  cu.  ft.     Per  sq.  ft. 

Storehouse     

.  .1,714,448 

168,696 

10.0827            $0.84 

Hospital     

.  .     703,692 

57,654 

.0865               1.05 

Office  building    

.  .     496,780 

39,840 

.124                 1.545 

Cold   storage    

..1,535,000 

154,000 

.13                   1.30 

Factory    

.  .     212,400 

15,000 

.091                 1.28 

do              

.  .1,327,868 

106,022 

.107                 1.335 

Storehouse    

.  .1,140,000 

146,000 

.0685                 .575 

Mfg.    building 
Office    

,1,380,500 
.  .     693,840 

90,240 
56,552 

.067                 1.01 
.197                 2.42 

Factory    

.  .     105,600 

8,800 

.124                 1.485 

do              

.  .1,211,364 

74,604 

.0625               1.01 

do              

.  .     180,000 

16,394 

.129                 1.42 

Highest    

.197                 2.42 

Lowest     

.0625                 .575 

Average   

.1088              1.27 

TABLE  III.  —  COST  OF  FIREPROOF 

BUILDINGS. 

Volume 

Floor  area 

Unit  cost--  

Kind  of  Building. 

in  cu.  ft. 

in  sq.  ft. 

-  Per  cu.  ft.     Per  eq.  f> 

Office  building    .... 

.  .     441,000 

35,854 

$0.159              ?1.97 

Cold   storage    

.  .1,016,400 

101,640 

.13                  1.30 

Hospital     

.-.     348,320 

34,832 

.127                1.27 

Hospital     

.  .     414,732 

29,838 

.124                 1.73 

Bank     

.  .     533,750 

.123                 

Masonic     

.  .1,479,456 

.122                 

Warehouse    

.  .     259,700 

24,500 

.120                  1.28 

Garage     

.  .     497,420 

.118                 

Warehouse    

..2,597,000 

212,000 

.106                 1.30 

Hotel    

..2,116,106 

.104                 

Hospital     

.  .     485,789 

38,247 

.100                 1.30 

Office    

.  .     264,687 

.095                 

Cold    storage    

.  .     909,240 

66,745 

.091                 1.24 

Club    

,  .     513,808 

.085                 

Office    

.  .     501,575 

67,400 

.084                 1  12 

Highest    

•  .159                 3  97 

Lowest     

.084                 1  12 

Average     

.113                 1  39 

Per  cent  variation 

,  high  and 

low  

53.8%          5>.0% 

TABLE  IV.  —  COST  OF 

MILL  CONSTRUCTION  OR  SECOND-CLASS  BUILIHNG. 

T7"/-\1      w»/-». 

T-TI 

Kind  of  Building. 

in  cu.  ft. 

in  sq.  ft. 

Per  cu.  ft.     Per  sq.  ft. 

Mill     , 

,'.     544,788 

44,172 

$0.122               $1.51 

Warehouse    

.  .2,808,850 

.12                     .... 

Mill  

..1,271,300 

129,920 

.0891                 .875 

Storehouse     

.  .1,714,448 

168,696 

.059                   .60 

Mill     

..1,622,128 

152,200 

.056                   .60 

Mill     

.1,331,200 

83,200 

.054                   .865 

Mill     

.  .1,752,609 

SI,  500 

.048                 1.05 

Mill    

.  .2,641,000 

98,059 

.046                 1.25 

Mill     

.  .2,036,731 

174,000 

.046                    .542 

Mill     

.  .2,867,535 

157,730 

.045                    .82 

Highest    

.122                  1.51 

Lowest  

.045                    .542 

Average  

.069                    .90 

Boston,  Mass.,  will  be  of  decided  interest.  In  preparation  for  a 
study  of  the  figures  given  it  is  important  to  note  that  Mr.  Wason's 
conclusions  are  that,  after  making  this  comparison,  he  is  con- 


1074  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

vinced  that  neither  method  is  accurate  enough  to  put  much  reliance 
on,  but  that  the  square  foot  method  is  a  little  safer  than  the  other. 

The  comparative  figures  compiled  by  Mr.  Wason  are  given  in 
Tables  I  to  IV,  inclusive.  In  each  case  the  total  cost  includes 
masonry  and  carpentry  work  without  interior  finish  or  decorating, 
plumbing  and  heating.  The  effort  has  been  made  to  put  the  build-- 
ings upon  a  comparative  basis  as  regards  the  amount  of  work  done 
on  each. 

The  first  table  consists  of  the  total  cost  of  actual  contracts  exe- 
cuted. The  second  table  consists  of  bona  fide  bids  on  complete  build- 
ings on  which  Mr.  Wason' s  company  were  not  the  lowest  bidders, 
but  where  the  difference  was,  not  as  a  rule  very  great.  The  third 
and  fourth  tables  are  bona  fide  bids  on  work  by  another  contractor 
whose  experience  was  similar  to  that  of  Mr.  Wason' s.  As  a  rule, 
cubic  foot  measurements  are  given  in  cents  only,  seldom  being  car- 
ried to  any  closer  subdivision.  In  reference  to  Table  IV  on  second- 
class  buildings,  it  will  be  noted  that  for  the  largest  building  a  vari- 
ation of  1  ct.  per  cu.  ft.,  amounts  to  over  $28,000,  while  the  smallest 
one  in  the  list  amounts  to  only  a  little  over  $5,400.  Again,  on  the 
last  three  items,  the  cubic  foot  price  is  practically  identical,  while 
the  square  foot  measurements  corresponding  vary  by  more  than 
100%,  with  no  easily  apparent  reason  in  the  design. 

In  Table  III  another  discrepancy  is  noticed.  In  the  first  and  the 
last  items,  the  highest  and  the  lowest  per  cubic  foot,  as  well  as  per 
square  foot  are  on  office  buildings  of  similar  type  which  were  within 
one  mile  of  each  other  where  there  is  no  apparent  reason  for  such 
discrepancy  in  the  design  or  difficulty  or  access  in  the  erection  of  the 
building. 

Cost  of  Fireproof  Office  Buildings.— Mr.  P.  J.  T.  Stewart  gathered 
the  following  data  in  1906. 

The  average  cost  of  3  office  buildings  in  Chicago  was  33  cts.  per 
cu.  ft.,  distributed  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

Foundations    ....      4.3 

Steel  frame 15.2 

Mason  work 25.5 

Equipment  (elevators,  plumbing,  lighting,  heating, 

ventilating,  etc.) 25.0 

Trim  and  finish 30.0 

Total 100.0 

The  average  cost  of  4  office  buildings  in  Boston  was  40  cts.  per 
cu.  ft.,  distributed  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

Foundations    7.0 

Steel  frame I 18.4 

Mason  work 35.5 

Equipment 18.5 

Trim  and  finish 20.6 

Total     100.0 

Comparative  Cost  of  Wood  and  Steel  Frame  Factory  Buildings. — 
Mr.  H.  G.  Tyrrell  gives  the  following,  based  on  prices  existing  in 
Ohio  in  the  forepart  of  1905. 


BUILDINGS.  1075 

Slow  Burning  Wood  Construction. — The  building  is  60  x  100  ft., 
six  stories  high,  containing  6  floors,  a  roof  and  a  cellar.  The 
floors  are  designed  for  a  load  of  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  The  building 
has  windows  on  all  four  sides.  The  walls  (brick)  carry  the  ends 
of  the  floor  beams.  The  basement  walls  are  24  ins.  thick.  Walls  of 
first  four  stories  are  17  ins.  thick;  top  two  stories,  13  ins.  thick. 
Eight  tiers  of  columns,  spaced  20  ft.  apart  in  both  directions, 
carry  the  floors  and  roof.  The  columns  of  the  upper  four  stories 
are  yellow  pine,  the  size  being  14  x  14  ins.  for  the  lowest  of  these 
four  stories.  Below  this,  round  cast  iron  columns  are  used, 
11x1^4  in.  in  the  first  story,  and  12x1%  ins.  in  the  basement. 
All  columns  have  cast  iron  bases  3  ft  square  and  16  ins.  high. 
Lengthwise  through  the  building  in  the  floors,  run  two  lines  of  12  x 
20-in.  yellow  pine  header  beams  resting  on  the  brackets  of  the 
cast  iron  column  caps.  The  cross  floor  beams  are  8xl6-in.  yellow 
pine,  spaced  5  ft.  apart.  At  the  columns  they  rest  on  column  caps, 
and  at  intermediate  points  they  hang  from  the  header  beams  by 
wrought  iron  stirrups.  In  the  walls  the  cross  beams  rest  on  cast 
iron  wall  plates,  9  x  20  x  %  in.  The  floor  is  of  %-in.  matched 
maple,  laid  on  1%-in.  yellow  pine.  The  roof  is  similar  in  con- 
struction and  has  a  tar  and  gravel  covering. 

The  following  estimates  are  for  the  structural  part  of  the  building 
only,  including  walls,  columns,  •  floors,  roof,  excavation,  foundation, 
doors  and  windows,  but  not  including  partitions,  stairs,  elevators, 
plumbing,  heating,  lighting  or  wiring. 

1.  Excavation    (cu.  yds.) 1,800 

2.  Cellar  cement  floor  (sq.  ft.) 6,000 

3.  Foundation  concrete   (cu.  yds.) 150 

4.  Brick    (cu.   ft.) 39,000 

5.  Windows,  4  x  7  ft 238 

6.  Roofing    (sq.   ft.) '.  .  .  .  6,000 

7.  Yellow  pine  timber   (M. ) 116 

8.  Yellow  pine  flooring   (M.) 73 

9.  Matched  flooring   (M. ) 46 

10.  Iron  work  (tons) 46 

The  estimated  cost  of  this  design  is  $35,000,  which  is  equivalent 
to  6.1  cts.  per  cu.  ft.,  or  83  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  entire  floor  area. 

The  interior  framing  of  floors  and  columns,  (including  wall  plates, 
columns,  caps  and  bases  and  stirrup  irons),  is  2 7  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 
of  floor  area. 

Fireproof  Steel  Construction. — This  is  similar  in  design  to  the 
above,  as  regards  arrangement  of  beams  and  columns.  Riveted 
steel  columns  are  used,  'and  the  floors  are  framed  with  steel  beams. 
The  flooring  between  the  beams  is  reinforced  concrete. 

The  quantities  are  as  before  for  items  (1)   to  (6)  inclusive. 

The  remaining  items  are : 

7.  Steel  columns   (tons) 105 

8.  Steel  beams  and  wall  plate  (tons) 252 

9.  Concrete  floor  and  roof  (sq.  ft.) 42,000 

The  estimated  cost  is  $57,000,  which  is  equivalent  to  10.2  cts. 
per  cu.  ft,  or  $1.36  per  sq.  ft.  of  total  floor  area.  Floors  and 


1076 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


columns  "cost  75  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor  area,  as  compared  with  27 
cts.  for  the   slow  burning  mill   construction. 

Cubic  Foot  Costs  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Buildings.* — The  follow- 
ing costs  are  for  buildings  actually  erected  and  they  are  given  by 
Mr.  Emile  G.  Per  rot,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E. : 

Cents  per  cu.  ft. 

Warehouses  and  manufacturers 8  to  10 

Stores  and  loft  buildings 11  to  17 

Miscellaneous,  such  as  schools  and  hospitals. .  .15  to  20 


Fig.   1. — One-Story  Buildings. 

These  costs  include  the  building  complete,  omitting  power,  heat, 
light,  elevators  and  decorations  or  furnishings. 

Cost  of  Mill  Buildings.— Mr.  Charles  F.  Main  is  authority  for  the 
following  data,  based  upon  eastern  prices  in  1910. 

It  is  not  an  uncommon  thing  to  hear  the  cost  of  mill  buildings 
placed  from  70  cts.  to  f  1  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor  space,  regardless  of  the 
size  or  number  of  stories.  There  is,  however,  a  wide  range  of  cost 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  27,  1909. 


BUILDINGS. 


1077 


per  square  foot  of  floor  space,   depending  upon  the  width,   length, 
height  of  stories  and  number  of  stories. 

Some  time  ago,  I  placed  a  valuation  upon  a  portion  of  the  prop- 
erty of  a  corporation,  including  some  400  or  500  buildings.  In  order 
to  have  a  standard  of  cost  from  which  to  start  in  each  case,  I  pre- 
pared a  series  of  diagrams  showing  the  approximate  costs  of  build- 
ings varying  in  length  and  width  and  from  one  story  to  six  stories 
in  height.  The  height  of  stories  also  was  varied  for  different 
Widths,  being  assumed  13  ft.  high  if  25  ft.  wide,  14  ft.  if  50  ft. 
Wide,  15  ft.  for  75  ft.,  16  ft.  for  100  ft.  and  over. 


Fig.  2.— Two-Story  Buildings. 

The  costs  used  in  making  up  the  diagrams  are  based  largely 
upon  the  actual  cost  of  work  done  under  average  conditions  01! 
cost  of  materials  and  labor  and  with  average  soil  for  foundations. 
The  costs  given  include  plumbing,  but  no  heating,  sprinklers,  or 
lighting.  These  three  latter  items  would  add  roughly  10  cts.  per 
sq.  ft.  of  floor  area. 

Estimates. — The  accompanying  diagrams,  Figs.  1  to  6,  can  be 
used  to  determine  the  probable  approximate  cost  of  proposed  brick 


1071 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


buildings,  of  the  type  known  as  "slow-burning"  to  be  used  for 
manufacturing  purposes,  with  a  total  floor  load  of  about  75  Ibs. 
per  sq.  ft.  and  these  can  be  taken  from  the  diagrams  readily.  The 
curves  were  derived  primarily  to  show  the  estimated  cost  per 
square  foot  of  gross  floor  area  of  brick  buildings  for  extile  mills, 
and  to  include  ordinary  foundations  and  plumbing.  For  example, 
if  it  is  desired  to  know  the  probable  cost  of  a  mill  400  ft.  long 
by  100  ft.  wide,  three  stories  high,  refer  to  the  curves  showing  the 
cost  of  three-story  buildings.  On  the  curve  for  buildings  100  ft. 


f.90 


00 


/.50 


MO 


1::::::.'::: 


25 


f/y.- Comfy 

Fig-.    3. — Three- Story    Buildings. 

Wide,  find  the  point  where  the  vertical  line  of  400  ft.  in  length  cuts 
the  curve,  then  move  horizontally  along  this  line  to  the  left-hand 
vertical  line,  on  which  will  be  found  the  cost  of  81  cts. 

The  cost  given  is  for  brick  manufacturing  buildings  under  average 
conditions  and  can  be  modified  if  necessary  for  the  following  con- 
ditions : 

(a)  If  the  soil  is  poor  or  the  conditions  of  the  site  are  such  as  to 
require  more  than  the  ordinary  amount  of  foundations,  the  cost  will 
be  increased. 


BUILDINGS. 


1079 


(b)  If  the  end  or  a  side  of  the  building  is  formed  by  another 
building,  the  cost  of  one  or  the  other  will  be  reduced  slightly. 

(c)  If  the  building  is  to  be  used  for  ordinary   storage  purposes 
with  low  stories  and  no  top  floors,  the  cost  will  be  decreased  from 
about    10%   for   large   low   buildings,    to    25%    for    small   high   ones, 
about  20%  usually  being  a  fair  allowance. 

(d)  If  the  buildings  are  to  be  used  for  manufacturing  purposes 
and  are  to  be  substantially  built  of  wood,  the  cost  will  be  decreased 


-Co/?ty 

Fig.  4. — Four-Story  Buildings. 

from    about    6%    for    large    one-story    buildings,    to    33%    for    high 
small  buildings ;   15%  would  usually  be  a  fair  allowance. 

(e)  If  the  buildings  are  to  be  used  for  storage  with  low  stories 
and   built   substantially   of   wood,   the   cost  will   be  decreased   from 
13%  for  large  one-story  buildings,  to  50%  for  small  high  buildings; 
30%  would  usually  be  a  fair  allowance. 

(f)  If  the  total  floor  loads  are  more  than  75  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  the 
cost  is  increased. 

(g)  For    office   buildings,    the    cost   must    be    increased    to    cover 
architectural  features  on  the  outside  and  interior  finish. 


1080 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


The  cost  of  very  light  wooden  structures  is  much  less  than  the 
above  figures  would  give.  Table  IVa  shows  the  approximate  ratio 
of  the  costs  of  different  kinds  cf  buildings  to  the  cost  of  those  shown 
by  the  curves. 

Evaluations. — The  diagrams  can  be  used  as  a  basis  of  valuation 
of  different  buildings. 

A  buildUig,  no  matter  how  built  nor  how  expensive  it  was  to 
build,  cannot  be  of  any  more  value  for  the  purpose  to  which  it  is 


no* 

100 


Fig.   5. — Five-Story  Buildings. 

put  than  a  modern  building  properly  designed  for  that  particular 
purpose.  The  cost  of  such  a  modern  building  is  then  the  limit  of 
value  of  existing  buildings.  Existing  buildings  are  usually  of  less 
value  than  new  modern  buildings  for  the  reason  that  there  has  been 
some  depreciation  due  to  age  and  that  the  buildings  are  not  as 
well  suited  to  the  business  as  a  modern  building  would  be. 

Starting  with  the  diagrams  as  a  base,  the  value  can  be  approxi- 
mately determined  by  making  the  proper  deductions. 

The   diagrams   can   be  used  as  a  basis   for   insurance   valuations 
after  deducting  about  5%  for  large  buildings  to  15%  for  small  ones. 


BUILDINGS. 


1081 


for  the  cost  of  foundations,  as  it  is  not  customary  to  include  the 
foundations  in  the  insurable  value. 

Use  of  Tables. — Table  V  shows  the  costs  which  form  the  basis  of 
the  estimates  and  these  unit  prices  can  be  used  to  compute  the 
cost  of  any  building  not  covered  by  the  diagrams.  The  cost  of 
brick  walls  is  based  on  22  bricks  per  cubic  foot,  costing  $18  per 
thousand  laid.  Openings  are  estimated  at  40  cts.  per  sq.  ft,  in- 
eluding  windows,  doors  and  sills. 


Fig.    6. — Six-Story   Buildings. 


Ordinary  mill  floors,  including  timbers,  planking  and  top  floor 
with  Southern  pine  timber  at  $40  per  M.  ft.  B.  M..  and  spruce 
planking  at  $30  per  M..,  costs  about  32  cts.  per  sq.  ft.,  which  has 
been  used  as  a  unit  price.  Ordinary  mill  roofs  covered  with  tar  and 
gravel,  with  lumber  at  the  above  prices,  cost  about  25  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 
and  this  has  been  used  in  the  estimates.  Add  for  stairways,  elevator 
wells,  plumbing,  partitions  and  special  work. 

Deductions  from  Diagrams. —  (1)  An  examination  of  the  diagrams 
shows  immediately  the  decrease  in  cost  as  the  width  is  increased. 


1082  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  cost  of  the  walls  and  outside  founda- 
tions, which  is  an  important  item  of  cost,  relative  to  the  total  cost, 
is 'decreased  as  the  width  increases. 

For  example,  supposing  a  three-story  building  is  desired  with 
30,000  sq.  ft.  on  each  floor : 

If  the  building  were  600  ft.  x  50  ft.,  its  cost  would  be  about  99 
cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

If  the  building  were  400  ft.  x  75  ft,  its  cost  would  be  about  87 
cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

If  the  building  were  300  ft.  x  100  ft.,  its  cost  would  be  about  83 
cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

If  the  building  were  240  ft.  x  125  ft,  its  cost  would  be  about  80 
cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

(2)  The  diagram  shows  that  the  minimum  cost  per  square  foot 
is  reached  with  a  four-story  building.     A  three-story  building  costs 
a  trifle  more  than  a  four-story.     A  one-story  building  is  the  most 
expensive.     This  is  due  to  a  combination  of  several  features: 

(a)  The  cost  of  ordinary  foundations  does  not  increase  in  pro- 
portion to  the  number  of   stories,   and  therefore  their   cost   is   less 
per  square  foot  as  the  number  of  stories  is  increased,  at  least  up  to 
the  limit  of  the  diagram. 

(b)  The  roof  is  the  same  for  a  one-story  building  as  for  one  of 
any  'Other  number  of  stories,  and  therefore  its  cost  relative  to  the 
total  cost  grows  less  as  the  number  of  stories  increases. 

(c)  The    cost    of    columns,    including    the    supporting    piers    and 
castings,  does  not  vary  much  per  story  as  the  stories  are  added. 

(d)  As  the  number  of   stories  increases,   the   cost   of  the   walls, 
owing  to  increased  thickness,   increases  in  a  greater  ratio  than  the 
number  of  stories,  and  this  item  is  the  one  which  in  the  four-story 
building  offsets  the  saving  in  foundations  and  roof. 

( 3 )  The  saving  by  the  use  of  frame  construction  for  walls  instead 
of  brick  is  not  as  great  as  many  persons  think.     The  only  saving 
is  in  somewhat  lighter  foundations  and  in  the  outside  surfaces  of 
the    building.      The    floor,    columns,    and    roof    must    be    the    same 
strength  and  construction  in  any  case. 

Assumed  Height  of  Stories. — From  ground  to  first  floor,  3  ft. 
Buildings  25  ft.  wide,  stories  13  ft.  high.  Buildings  50  ft  wide, 
stories  14  ft  high.  Buildings  75  ft  wide,  stories  15  ft  high. 
Buildings  100  ft.  wide,  stories  16  ft.  high.  Buildings  125  ft.  wide, 
stories  16  ft.  high. 

Unit  Prices. — Floors,  32  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  gross  floor  space  not 
including  columns.  If  columns  are  included,  38  cts. 

Roof,  25  cts.  per  sq.  ft.,  not  including  columns.  If  columns  are 
included,  30  cts.  Roof  to  project  18  ins.  all  around  buildings. 

Stairways,  including  partitions,  $100  each  flight  Allow  two 
stairways,  and  one  elevator  tower  for  buildings  up  to  150  ft.  long. 
Allow  two  stairways  and  two  elevator  towers  for  buildings  up  to 
300  ft.  long.  In  buildings  over  two  stories,  allow  three  stairways 
and  three  elevator  towers  for  buildings  over  300  ft  long. 

In  buildings  over  two  stories,  plumbing  $75  for  each  fixture  in- 
cluding piping  and  partitions.  Allow  two  fixtures  on  each  floor  up 


p   g 

" 


0  s 


I 


BUILDINGS.  1M 


2 


*m  a    o 

S 


Q 

^     ^  *O^S     S         rHO 

^j    ^  Ifl  Irt  «O  «D  CD 


OlOM<t-OOr-IC<lCOTj<lfteO«Ot- 

t-t-t^t-t-oooooooooooooooo 


Ifl  tO  <£>  OO  Oi  O  r-l  iH  (M  N  CO 

M     I  'O^S    9  t-.t-.t-t-.c--oooooooooooo 

o    I  :      . 

K 

fQ  «o  to  t~  oo  o  »-<  i-H  w  e«?  eo  eo 

,O-Q    „  i>t-t 


^    5  to  t-  00  05  O  C^  (M  CC  Tj<  Tj<  •«)< 

w  "O^S    ^  c-^t>-t~-t-»o  oooooooooooo 


g«  OO  OO  O5  rH  (M  C»5  rt*  ••*<  1C  Ifl  «O 

*O^g  8  t-.c--t-.oooooooooooooooo 

sl 

§    m  .mCJ  7         MCOOiHi-ie0^t<l 

«    W  °+b  O  -^OOO 


O  t-  Oi  O  C<J  -«*•  «O  fc-  OO  Ol  O5  O 

'  ~ 


§  -o,s  8 

"O1CJ      fc  t~t— t—t^-t'-OOOOOOC 


OOOOOOOOOO 


m  IO  t-  OO  O5  T-l  C<)  M*  •*  U5  tft  «D 

'O^g      S  t-t-t-t-  00  00  0000000000 


t-coooaso^coirttot-t-t-oo 
'O^S    S      «ot-t~c-oooooooooooooooooo 


ooooooooooooo 
10000000000000 

OOO 


1084  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

to  5,000  sq.  ft.  of  floor  space  and  add  one  fixture  for  each  additional 
5,000  sq.  ft.  of  floor  or  fraction  thereof. 

(Note. — From  the  above  data  the  approximate  cost  of  any  size 
and  shape  of  building  can  be  estimated  in  a  few  minutes.  After 
the  cost  of  the  items  given  is  determined  about  10%  should  be  added 
for  incidentals.) 

Reinforced  Concrete  Buildings. — From  such  estimates  and  pro- 
posals as  I  have  been  able  to  get  and  from  work  done  it  appears 
that  the  cost  of  reinforced  concrete  buildings  designed  to  carry  floor 
loads  of  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  or  less  would  be  about  25%  more  than 
the  slow-burning  type  of  mill  construction. 

Alternate  Method  of  Estimating  Cost. — Floors. — 38  cts.  per  sq. 
ft.  of  gross  floor  space.  This  price  will  include  column  piers,  column 
castings  and  wrought  iron. 

Roof. — 30  cts.  per  sq.  ft.,  including  projections,  say  18  ins.,  in- 
cluding columns,  etc. 

Stairways  and  Elevator  Towers. — Allow  two  stairways  and  one 
elevator  tower  in  buildings  over  two  stories  high  up  to  150  ft.  long. 
Allow  two  stairways  and  two  elevator  towers  up  to  300  ft.  long. 
Allow  three  stairways  and  three  elevator  towers  over  300  ft.  long. 

Brick  Walls. — Enclosing  stairs  and  elevators,  estimated  as  inside 
walls. 

Stairs. — $100  per  flight,  per  story. 

Plumbing. — Allow  two  fixtures  on  each  floor  up  to  5,000  sq.  ft. 
of  floor  space,  and  add  one  fixture  for  each  additional  5,000  sq.  ft. 
or  fraction  thereof.  Allow  $75  per  fixture. 

Incidentals. — Add  about  10%  for  incidentals. 

TABLE  V. — DATA  FOR  ESTIMATING  COST  OF  BUILDINGS. 

Columns 

Foundations  Brick  Walls,    including 

including  exc.  Cost  per  sq  ft.  piers  and 

Cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  surface,     castings, 

for  outside    inside  outside  for  inside      Cost 

walls.        walls.  walls.        walls.       of  one. 

One  story  building $2.00         $1.75  $  .40         $  .40         $15.00 

Two    story    building 2.90            2.25  .44              .40            15.00 

Three   story   building 3.80            2.80  .47              .40            15.00 

Four  story  building 4.70            3.40  .50              .43            15.00 

Five    story   building 5.60            3.90  .53              .45            15.00 

Six  story  building 6.50            4.50  .57              .47            15.00 

TABLE  VI. — DATA  FOR  APPROXIMATING  COST  OF  MILL  BUILDINGS  OF 
KNOWN  SIZE  BUT  WITHOUT  DEFINITE  PLANS  MADE. 

Brick  walls. 
Including 

Foundations.         doors  and  windows 
including  exc.  Cost  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  surface. 


for  outside 
Height  of  Building.  walls. 


inside      outside  for  inside 
walls.       walls.        walls. 


One    story $2.00  $1.75  $.40  $.40 

Two  stories 2.90  2.25  .44  .40 

Three    stories 3.80  2.80  .47  40 

Four    stories 4.70  3.40  .50  '43 

Five  stories 5.60  3.90  .53  .45 

Six  stories 6.50  4.50  .57  .47 


BUILDINGS.  1085 

Estimating  Quantity  of  Lumber. — Lumber  is  measured  in  feet 
board  measure,  as  explained  on  page  487. 

There  are  15  or  more  associations  in  America  having  rules 
governing  the  inspection  and  classification  of  lumber.  The  following 
three  have  printed  rules  that  are  particularly  valuable  to  have : 
The  National  Hardwood  Lumber  Association,  Chicago ;  Southern 
Lumber  Manufacturers'  Association,  St.  Louis ;  Mississippi  Valley 
Lumbermen's  Association,  Minneapolis,  Minn. 

In  building  a  house,  there  is  always  a  considerable  percentage  of 
waste  lumber.  Then,  too,  there  is  the  loss  in  surface  area  in 
forming  tongues  and  grooves  at  the  mill,  and  in  dressing  the  edges. 
Therefore,  after  computing  the  exact  number  of  pieces,  or  the  exact 
area,  as  shown  in  the  plans  for  the  building,  it  is  necessary  to  add 
considerably  to  the  lumber  bill  to  cover  the  waste. 

To  estimate  the  number  of  joists  for  each  room,  count  the  actual 
number  and  add  1  joist ;  for  an  extra  joist  is  needed  for  the  wall. 
Joists  are  nearly  always  "bridged,"  and  for  this  purpose  2  x  4-in. 
stuff  is  used.  The  "bridging"  is  the  inclined  bracing  between  the 
joists. 

Allow  25  lin.  ft.  of  2  x  4-in.  bridging  for  each  "square"  (100  sq. 
ft.)  of  flooring.  Where  2  x  12-in.  joists  are  placed  16  ins.  apart,  it 
will  be  found  that  the  2  x  4-in.  bridging  amounts  to  about  9%  of  the 
number  of  ft.  B.  M.  of  joists. 

On  a  plain  roof  count  the  number  of  rafters  and  add  1  extra. 

In  estimating  the  number  of  studs  for  walls  and  partitions,  allow 
1  stud  for  every  lineal  foot  of  wall  or  partition  where  studs  are 
"spaced  16  ins.  centers,"  that  is  16  ins.  center  to  center.  This 
seemingly  large  allowance  is  made  to  cover  the  doubling  of  studs 
on  corners,  doors  and  windows.  For  a  stable  or  shed  no  such 
extra  allowance  need  be  made. 

To  estimate  the  quantity  of  sheeting  or  of  shiplap,  calculate  the 
exact  surface  to  be  covered,  deducting  openings,  then  add  the 
following  percentages: 

Sheeting.      Shiplap. 
Per  cent.     Per  cent. 

For  floors   15  17 

For  sidewalks 17  20 

For  roofs 20  25 

Sheeting  is  laid  with  2-in.  spaces  on  cheap  roofs,  then  deduct 
accordingly.  Sheeting  and  shiplap  are  sometimes  laid  diagonally, 
then  add  5%  to  the  above  figures  to  cover  waste  in  sawing  both  ends. 

Remember  that  lumber  comes  in  lengths  of  even  feet,  and, 
with  few  exceptions,  16  ft.  is  the  maximum  stock  length.  Examine 
each  area  to  be  covered  to  see  whether  a  given  number  of  standard 
lengths  will  cover  it,  or  whether  there  will  be  a  waste  on  each 
length. 

To  estimate  the  amount  of  siding,  calculate  the  exact  surface, 
deducting  openings,  and  add  33%,  if  6-in.  siding  with  4%  ins.  to 
the  weather:  but  if  it  is  4-in.  siding:  add  50%  to  the  actual  surface. 

There  are  two  classes  of  flooring,  namely,  "dressed  or  square 
edge  flooring,"  and  "dressed  and  matched  flooring."  The  square 


108G  HANDBOOK    OP   COST  DATA. 

edge  flooring  ordinarily  has  a  face  width  about  %  in.  less  than 
its  nominal  width  ;  thus,  a  piece  of  6-in.  square  edge  flooring  has  a 
face  width  of  5%  ins.,  and  a  piece  of  4-in.  flooring  has  a  face 
width*  of  3l/2  ins.  The  loss  in  the  case  of  the  flooring  with  5% -in. 
face  is  9%,  and  in  the  case  of  the  3%-in.  face,  the  loss  is  14%.  But 
in  addition  to  these  mill  losses,  there  is  generally  waste  owing  to 
bad  ends,  etc.,  so  that  after  estimating  the  exact  area  of  floor,  add 
the  following  percentages : 

Per  cent. 

For  6-in.  flooring,  add 11 

For  4-in.  flooring,  add 20 

The  following  gives  a  fair  extra  allowance  where  dressed  and 
matched  flooring  is  to  be  laid : 

Per  cent. 

For  6-in.  flooring,  add 17 

For  4-in.  flooring,  add 25 

For  2%-in.  flooring,  add 33 

For  1%-in.  flooring,  add 40 

Remember  that  if  the  flooring  is  to  be  laid  under  partitions,  due 
allowance  must  be  made.  If  the  architect  has  so  spaced  the  joists 
that  full  standard  lengths  can  not  be  used,  there  may  be  a  very 
large  waste  not  included  in  the  above  allowances ;  thus,  if  the 
width  of  room  is  such  as  to  require  flooring  12  ft.  2  ins.  long,  it  will 
be  necessary  to  buy  flooring  14  ft.  long,  and  saw  off  nearly  2  ft., 
which  is  wasted.  Flooring  less  than  1  in.  thick  is  estimated  as 
being  1  in.  thick. 

Ceiling  and  Wainscoting  are  estimated  just  as  dressed  and 
matched  flooring  is  estimated. 

Cost  of  Timberwork  in  5  Different  Kinds  of  Buildings. — In  the 
following  table  is  given  the  average  cost  of  timberwork  in  a  number 
of  different  buildings.  Each  building  is  briefly  described  in  the 
table,  and  the  cost  is  the  average  of  all  the  rough  lumber  in  it,  and 
does  not  include  the  work  on  the  milled,  or  dressed  lumber.  Only 
carpenters  were  engaged  on  this  work,  and  they  handled  all  the 
lumber  after  its  delivery  in  wagons  at  the  site  of  the  work.  Wages 
of  carpenters  were  40  cts.  per  hr.  No  common  laborers  employed. 

Cost  per 

Ft.  B.  M.     M.,  wage 
per  man         being 

Building  per  day      $3.20  for 

number  of  8  hrs.         8  hrs. 

1  A  block  of  six  3-story  "flats,"  first  story 

veneered  with  brick  ;  rest  covered  with 

slate;  an  expensive  front;  towers 275  $11.60 

2  Same  type  of  building  with  a  plain  front       375  8.50 

3  Three-story  schoolhouse,  plain  ;   including 

sheeting,   shiplap,  and  all  plain  lumber 
except    flooring 400 

4  Three-story  business  building 475 

5  Heavy  warehouse,  mill  construction 550  5.80 

6  A  plain   two-story  building,    with   a   2-in. 

flooring  roof,  and  plank  under-floors. . .        385  8.30 


BUILDINGS. 


1087 


Cost  of  Framing  and  Placing  Lumber. — The  following  table  gives 
the  actual  cost  of  the  carpenter  work  involved  in  doing  the  different 
classes  of  work  enumerated.  No  common  laborers  were  employed. 


Ft.  B.  M. 

per  man 
per  day 
of  8  hrs. 


Joists:  In  a  four-story  brick  business  block,  hav- 
ing steel  girders,  3  x  14-in.  joists  delivered 
sized,  average  cost  of  work  on  joists  and  sheet- 
ing (not  including  hoisting  which  was  $2  per 

M.  for  second  story  and  up) 850 

Joists:  In  a  three-story,  plain,  electric  light 
building,  with  flat  roof,  3  x  12-in.  joists,  in- 
cluding sizing  of  joists 400 

Joists  and  floor :  In  a  warehouse,  joists  dropped 

into  stirrups,  and  a  heavy  plank  floor 500 

Bridging:  2  x  4-in.  bridging  between  joists 150 

Sleepers:  For  a  railroad  machine  shop,  6  x  8-in. 

sleepers  buried   in  sand 380 

Plank   floor :    The    3-in.    plank   floor   laid   on   the 

sleepers  above  described 450 

Purlins:    For    a    warehouse,    including    hoisting 

60   ft 265 

Plank  floor:  A  2-in.  plank  floor  laid  on  purlins 

that  were  6-ft.  apart 230 

Sheeting  for  floors 800 

Sheeting  for  roof  of  six-story  building 500 

Sheeting  on  frame  building •.        500 

(Note. — If    sheeting    is    laid    diagonally,    add 

15%   to  the  cost  of  laying.) 
Rafters:  2  x  6-in.  rafters  for  plain  gable  roof. . .        300 

Rafters :  2  x  6-in.  rafters  for  a  hip  roof 125 

Roof  boards:  Rough  boards  on  a  plain  gable  roof       600 

Roof  boards  :  Rough  boards  on  a  hip  roof 400 

Siding :  Rough  boards  on  a  barn 800 

Studding :  2  x  4-in 250 

Studding :   2  x  6-in 350 

Sills    and    plates:    6    x    8-in.,    without    gains    or 

mortices     400 

Sills   and  plates:    6   x    8-in.,   with   gains  but   no 

mortices 200 

Sills    and    plates:    6    x    8-in.,    with    gains    and 

mortices     . . .  .• 135 

Platform :  A  rough  timber  platform  on  short 
posts,  around  a  warehouse,  including  posts, 

caps,  joists  and  floor 400 

Board    fence :    A    close    board    fence,    8-ft.    high 

(posts  already   set) 400 


Cost  per 
M.,  wage 

beimr 
$3.20  for 

8  hrs. 


$  5.80 

8.00 

6.40 

21.30 

.8.40 

7.10 

12.10 

13.90 

4.00 
6.40 
6.40 


10.70 

25.60 

5.35 

8.00 

4.00 

12.80 

9.15 

8.00 
16.00 
23.70 


Cost  of  Laying  and  Smoothing  Floors. — In  the  following  table  is 
g^ven  the  cost  of  laying  matched  flooring,  after  the  joists  are  in 
place.  All  the  cost  of  handling  the  flooring  after  its  delivery  at  the 
building  site  is  included.  Where  the  width  of  the  flooring  plank 
is  given,  the  face  width  is  meant,  and  it  should  be  remembered  that 
the  face  width  is  about  %-in.  less  than  the  original  stock  width 
of  the  material  before  milling.  A  flooring  that  is  sold  by  the  mills 
as  4-in.  plank,  has  a  face  width  of  Z%  ins.  The  cost  of  laying  is 
given  in  "squares"  of  100  sq.  ft. 


1088 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


COST  OF  LAYING  FLOORING. 


Squares 
per  man 
per  day 
of  8  hrs. 


Cost  per 
square, 
wages 
being 

$3.20  per 
8  hrs. 


Yellow  pine:  3*4 -in.  face  laid  on  sheeting,  includ- 
ing the  laying  of  paper  between  the  sheeting 

and  the  flooring  and  including  the  smoothing  of 

rough   joints   in    the   flooring,    in   a   four-story 

business  block ?  1.60 

Yellow  pine:  3*4 -in.  face,  including  smoothing 

and    sandpapering,     in    a    five-story     business 

block,  men  worked  very  hard 1  %  1.80 

Yellow  pine:  3 14 -in.  face,  laid  direct  on  joists, 

no  smoothing 1.10 

Maple :  Square  edged,  4-in.  face,  doubled  nailed, 

not  smoothed,  in  a  warehouse 2^4  1.40 

Yellow  pine :  4-in.  face,  nailed  on  one  edge  only, 

not  smoothed,  in  a  six-story  warehouse 2^  1.30 

Yellow  pine:  3% -in.  face,  including  smoothing 

and   sandpapering,    in  a  three-story   seminary, 

ground  floor ll/y  2.10 

Ditto  :  Small  upper  rooms 1*4  2.60 

Maple:  2%-in.  face,  laid  but  not  smoothed 2  1.60 

Maple:  2% -in.  face,  laid  but  not  smoothed,  large 

floor  of  warehouse 3 %  0.90 

Maple:  2^4 -in.  face,  laid  and  smoothed,  houses 

and  offices 1  3.20 

Maple:  1%-in.  face,  laid  and  well  smoothed, 

houses  and  offices %  4.30 

Maple :  Smoothing  only,  not  including  laying 

the  floor 1  3.20 

Oak :  Gluing,  smoothing,  scraping  and  sandpaper- 
ing a  fine  floor,  men  working  hard 14  12.80 

Yellow  pine:  5% -in.  face,  2  ins.  thick,  tongue 

and  groove,  for  mill  building,  not  smoothed. ...  2^  1.30 

Yellow  pine:  5^-in.  face  on  bare  joists,  not 

smoothed  4  0.80 

Ditto  :  Laid  on  top  of  an  under-floor 3  1.10 

Ditto :  Laid  on  a  pitched  roof  without  many 

angles    2  1.60 

Cost    of    Ceiling,    Wainscoting    and    Siding. — The   following    table 
?lves  the  cost  of  ceiling,  wainscoting  and  siding: 

Cost  per 

Squares        square, 
per  man     wages  be- 
per  day      ing  $3. 20 
of  8  hrs.       per  day. 

Ceiling  of  a  store 1 1/2  2.10 

Smoothing  an  oak  ceiling  after  laying %  4.30 

Wainscoting:  Cut,  put  up  and  finished  with  cap 

and  quarter  round 1  %  1.80 

Siding:   Plain,    6-in 2^4  1.40 

Drop-siding:   When   window  casings  and   corner 

boards  are  placed  over  the  siding 4  0.80 

Drop-siding:     When     joints     are    made    against 

casings  and  corner  beads 2^  1.30 

Lap-siding 3  1.05 

Surfaced  barn  boards 7  0.45 


BUILDINGS. 


1089 


Cost  of  Shingling. — The  following  table  gives  the  cost  of  laying 
shingles,   shingles  being  well  laid  with   4% -in.   exposure: 


Plain    roof  

Cost  per 
Squares        square, 
per  man     wages  be- 
per  day      ing  $3.20 
of  8  hrs.       per  day. 
2%            $1.30 

Fancy     roof  

1%              1.80 

Difficult  roof,  much  cutting  

1                   3.20 

Plain  side  walls 

\V<>               2  10 

Difficult  side  walls.  . 

1                   3.20 

The  standard  bunch  of  shingles  is  supposed  to  contain  250 
shingles  averaging  4  ins.  wide.  Hence  if  shingles  are  laid  with  an 
exposure  of  4%  ins.,  each  shingle  covers  4  X  4y2  =  18  sq.  ins.,  or 
800  shingles  to  the  square.  But  the  cutting  for  angles,  the  loss  of 
broken  shingles,  the  double  course  at  the  eaves,  and  the  like, 
necessitate  a  larger  allowance.  On  plain  roofs  allow  8%  more,  and 
on  gables  12%  more  than  the  theoretical  800.  Estimate  as  follows: 


With  4-in  exposure. . .  . 
With  4% -in.  exposure. 
With  5-in.  exposure.  .  . 


Plain  roof.  Cut-up  roof. 

Shingles  Shingles 

per  square.  per  square. 

990  1010 

880  900 

790  810 


Cost  of  Laying  Base- Boards. — The  amount  of  base-board  work  is 
computed  in  lineal  feet,  instead  of  board  feet.  The  following  costs 
relate  to  the  actual  number  of  lineal  feet,  doors  and  openings  being 
deducted : 


Cost  per 

Lin.  ft.  lin.ft. 

per  man  wages  be- 

per  day  ing  $3.20 

of  8  hrs.  per  day. 

Base-board :    In    a    building    with    an    unusually 

large  number  of  pilasters 50  6%  cts. 

Base-board :  Three-membered,  hardwood,  average 

number  of  miters 50  6%  cts. 

Base-board :  In  a  plain  five-story  business  block, 

two-membered  base  scribed  to  floor 80  4      cts. 

Base-board :    In   a   three-story   seminary,    narrow 

birch  ;  fitting  to  the  floor  not  necessary 100  3^  cts. 

Base-board  :  Plain,  quarter-round  at  floor 100  3%  cts. 

Moulding :  Bed,  flat,  3-in 320  1      ct. 


1090 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Cost  of  Placing  Doors,  Windows  and  Blinds.  —  The  following  table 
gives  the  cost  of  labor  on  doors,  windows  and  blinds  : 

Labor 
cost  of 
Number         each, 

of  hrs.      wages  be- 
labor on     ing  40  cts. 
each.        per  hour. 
Windows  :  To  put  frames  together  if  stuff  comes 

knocked   down  ..............................        1%  ?   0.60 

Window  :  Ordinary  pine  window  in  a  frame  build- 

ing  including   setting  frame  ...  ..............        5 

Window:  Same  as  before,  except  hardwood  .....        6^  2.60 

Window:   Ordinary  pine  window  in  brick  build- 

ing, including  setting  frame  ..................        6  V2 

Window:  Same  as  before,  except  hardwood  .....        9  3.60 

Window:  30-light  (lights  10  x  14),  setting  frame, 

fitting  and  hanging  sash,  and  putting  on  hard- 

ware, for  a  machine  shop  ....................        7  2.80 

Window  :  Same  as  before,  but  hung  on  sash  bal- 

ances   .....................................        6  2.40 

Transom:    Fixed  ..........  ....................        1  ;         0.40 

Transom  :    Hung  ..............................        1  V2  0.60 

Door  :  Common  hardwood,  set  jambs,  case,  hang 

and  finish,  including  transom  ................      10  4.00 

Door:  Birch  door,  complete,  for  a  seminary  .....        7  2.80 

Door:  Common  pine  door,  1%-in.,  complete  .....        4%  1.80 

Door  :  Common  pine,  1%-in.,  complete  ..........        5%  2.20 

Door:   Pine,   swinging  door,   no  hardware  except 

hinges    ....................................        4  1.60 

Door  :   Pine,   finish  of  wide  paneled  jambs,   with 

transom,  for  school  house  ...................      10  4.00 

Door:  Same  as  before,  but  hardwood  ...........      12  *£  5.00 

Sliding   doors:   Pine    (framing   not   included),    to 

finish  complete  with  lining,  jambs,  casings,  and 

hardware,  per  pair  .......................... 

Sliding  doors:  Same  as  before,  but  hardwood,  per 

pair     ...................................... 

Outside    doors:    Pine,    6    x    8    ft.,    door    frame, 

casings,  and  hardware,  complete,  per  pair  ..... 
Outside   doors  :    Same   as   before,    but   hardwood, 

per    pair  ................................... 

Outside  double  doors:  Opening  12  x  18  ft.,  in  a 

factory     ............  ..  ...    .................      32 

Sliding  doors:  Opening  12  x  18  ft,  in  a  barn  ----      24 

Blinds:  If  fitted  before  frames  are  set,  per  pair.  .          % 
Blinds:  If  fitted  after  frames  are  set,  per  pair.  .  .        1 
Blinds:  Plain  pine,  inside  blinds,  per  set  ........        3 

Blinds  :  Same  as  before,  but  hardwood  ..........        5 


32 
48 
10 


14 


12.80 
19.20 
4.00 
5.60 

12.80 
9.60 
0.30 
0.40 
1.20 
2.00 

The  labor  cost  of  bedding  and  setting  10  x  14-in.  lights  on  a 
large  building  was  1  y%  cts.  per  light,  or  1  %  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  ;  and 
one-twenty-fifth  of  a  pound  of  putty  per  lineal  foot  around  the  edge 
of  the  glass  was  used.  With  a  deeper  rabbet  and  putty  not  properly 
pressed,  one-fifteenth  pound  per  lineal  foot  of  glass  edge  may  be 
used.  The  cost  of  setting  plate  glass  is  about  7  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 
Floor  and  sidewalk  glass  may  be  set  for  5  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  ;  skylight 
glass  for  8  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 


BUILDINGS.  1091 

Cost  of  Closets  and  Sideboards. — The  following  miscellaneous  la- 
bor costs  will  serve  as*  a  guide :  The  labor  ^costs  are  given  in  dollars 
and  cents,  wages  being  40  cts.  per  hour: 

Cost  of 
Labor. 

Drawers,  if  dovetailed,  each $   1.00 

Drawers,   15   ins.  wide,   18  ins.   deep,   including  racks  and  fit- 
tings,  each 0.80 

Shelves,  in  a  storeroom,  shelves  dadoed  into  compartments  18 

ins.  square,  per  sq.  ft.  of  shelf .'      0.25 

Shelves,  in  pantry,  no  dadoing,  per  sq.  ft 0.15 

Closet  hooks,  on  a  strip  of  wood,  hooks  12  ins.  apart,  per  lin. 

ft.   of  strip 0.06 

Sideboard,  ash,  8x8  ft.,  drawers,  doors,  brackets,  shelves,  mir- 
rors   and    hardware 50.00 

Sideboard,  oak,  less  detail  than  before 40.00 

Sideboard,   pine,   fairly  good 25.00 

Cost  of  Making  Stairs. — The  labor  cost  of  making  a  number  of 
different  kinds  of  stairs  will  be  given,  labor  being  40  cts.  per  hour. 
The  cost  includes  the  making  and  setting  of  the  stairs,  but  does  not 
include  mill  work. 

Cost  of 
Labor. 
Two  flights  of  stairs   (for  a  school),  6  ft.  wide,  with  ceiling 

rail    $   35.00 

Three  flights  of  oak  stairs   (for  a  hospital).   5   ft.  wide  with 

continuous  rail • 90.00 

Three  flights  of  oak  stairs  (for  a  seminary) 120.00 

Box-stair,   long,   without  landing 9.00 

Box-stair,  for  cellar  or  attic,  if  windows  are  used 10.00 

One  flight  of  plain  stairs,  in  a  7-room  house 16.00 

One  flight  of  fine  stairs,  in  a  9-room  house 40.00 

Cost  of  Tin  Roofing. — The  sizes  of  tin  sheets  are  14  x  20  ins.,  and 
20x28  ins.  An  allowance  of  1  in.  must  be  made  for  laps  at 
joints;  with  sheets  20  x  28  ins.,  a  square  (100  sq.  ft.)  requires  29 
sheets.  With  14  x  20-in.  sheets,  allow  63  per  square,  and  50% 
more  of  solder,  rosin,  etc.  A  box  of  tin  contains  112  sheets,  and 
the  large  sheets  of  I.  C.  tin  weigh  225  Ibs.  per  box;  the  I.  X.,  285 
Ibs.  per  box. 

One  man,  at  40  cts.  per  hr.,  will  lay  2  squares  of  plain  roofing  per 
day.  One  man  will  line  about  75  sq:  ft.  of  box  gutter,  or  an  equal 
amount  of  flashing,  per  day.  The  cost  per  square  of  tin  roof  was  as 
follows : 

Per  square. 

29  sheets  of  I.  C.  tin,  55  Ibs.,  at  8  cts 4.40 

5  Ibs.  solder,  at  14  cts 0.70 

1  y2   Ibs.   nails,   at  4   cts % 0.06 

1   Ib.   rosin    0.04 

Labor,  at  40  cts.  per  hr 1.60 

Charcoal     0.10 

Painting  two  coats 1.50 


Total $8.40 

A  man,  at  40  cts.  per  hr.,  will  put  up  plain  metal  ceilings  at  the 
rate  of  1%  to  2  squares  per  day,  including  cornice  and  centers. 
On  a  large  room,  and  plainest  kind  of  work,  he  may  do  3  or  4 
squares.  Wainscoting,  at  the  same  rate. 


1092  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

A  man,  with  a  helper,  will  lay  12  squarps  of  corrugated  iron 
roofing  in  a  day. 

Building  Papers  and  Felts. — The  cheapest  grade  of  building  paper 
is  "rosin-sized"  paper.  It  is  not  waterproof,  and  should  not  be 
used  on  roofs,  or  on  walls  in  a  damp  climate.  It  comes  in  rolls 
36  ins.  wide,  containing  500  sq.  ft.,  weighing  18  to  40  Ibs.,  and 
costs  about  3  cts.  per  Ib. 

There  are  a  number  of  different  kinds  of  waterproof  papers  used 
for  sheathing  under  siding  or  shingles.  P.  &  B.  building  paper, 
for  example,  is  coated  with  a  paraffin  compound.  It  comes  in 
rolls  26  ins.  wide  containing  1,000  sq.  ft.  The  weights  per  roll  are: 

Ply     1-ply.  2-ply.  3-ply.  4 -ply. 

Weight    30  Ibs.          40  Ibs.          65  Ibs.          80  Ibs. 

Price  is  10  cts.  per  Ib. 

Common  dry  felts  are  made  of  wood  fibers  cemented  together 
with  rosin.  They  weigh  about  5  Ibs.  per  100  sq.  ft.  The  best  grades 
of  dry  felt  are  made  of  wool,  and  weigh  11  Ibs.  per  100  ,sq.  ft. 
when  they  are  %-in.  thick;  but  some  brands  are  50%  heavier  than 
this.  The  price  of  dry  wool  felt  is  about  2*4  cts.  per  Ib. 

Tar  felt,  or  common  roofing  felt,  is  made  by  saturating  common 
dry  felt  with  coal  tar.  The  weight  of  a  single  layer  or  ply  is 
12,  15  or  20  Ibs.  per  100  sq.  ft.,  but  the  felt  is  laid  in  several  layers, 
usually  4  or  5-ply,  in  making  a  roof,  each  layer  being  mopped 
with  a  "composition"  of  %  tar  and  %  pitch.  The  price  of  tar  felt 
is  about  1%  cts.  per  Ib. 

There  are  many  kinds  of  patent  roofing  felts.  Ordinarily  they 
come  in  rolls  29  ins.  wide,  and  each  roll  covers  a  square,  allowing 
2  ins.  for  the  lap.  Nails  and  cement  are  supplied  with  each  roll  by 
the  manufacturers.  The  cost  of  the  roofing  is  $3  to  $5  per  square, 
and  the  cost  of  laying  it  is  about  1  hr.  labor  per  square,  or  40  cts. 
The  weight  of  such  roofing  varies  considerably,  but  ordinarily  is 
about  100  Ibs.  per  100  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  Gravel  Roofs. — Tar  felt,  4  or  5-ply,  is  first  laid,  the  sheets 
being  mopped  with  "composition"  of  %  tar  and  %  pitch.  Screened 
roofing  gravel  is  spread  over  the  roof.  A  square  of  gravel  roof 
costs  about  as  follows: 

Per  square. 

1-6  cu.  yd.  (450  Ibs.)  gravel,  at  $2.40.  . $0.40 

40  Ibs.   tar,  at  1  y2   cts 0.60 

80  Ibs.   pitch,  at   1  y2   cts 1.20 

100  sq.  ft.   felt,   4-ply,   75  Ibs.,  at   1  %   cts 1.13 

Labor,  at  35  cts.  per  hr 0.70 

Total  per  100   sq.  ft ?4.03 

Note. — About  20  Ibs.  of  "composition"  per  square  per  ply  is 
ordinarily  sufficient  where  sheets  are  mopped  only  at  the  joints 
instead  of  all  over ;  but  in  the  above  the  sheets  are  assumed  to  be 
mopped  all  over,  which  takes  50%  more  composition. 

Tar  is  usually  sold  by  the  gallon,  or  by  the  oil  barrel  holding  50 
gallons,  present  prices  being  12  cts.  per  gallon.  Tar  weighs  almost 
exactly  as  much  as  water,  or  8%  Ibs.  per  gallon. 


BUILDINGS.  1093 

Cost  of  Slate  Roofs. — Roofing  slate  comes  in  a  great  variety  of 
sizes,  the  most  common  of  which  are  16  x  8,  16  x  10,  and  18  x  9 
ins.  ;  but  sizes  as  large  as  25  x  14,  and  as  small  as  12  x  6,  are  made. 
To  determine  the  number  of  pieces  to  a  square,  deduct  3  ins.  from 
the  length  (for  the  lap),  divide  this  by  2,  multiply  by  the  width  of 
the  slate,  and  divide  the  result  into  14,000.  An.  18x9  slate 
woull  be  estimated  thus:  18  —  3  =  15,  which  divided  by  2 
gives  7%  ;  then  7%  X  9  =  67%  ;  then  14,400  -=-  67%  =  214  pieces. 

Slates  are  sold  by  the  square,  that  is  a  sufficient  number  of 
slates  to  lay  100  sq.  ft.,  each  course  having  a  lap  of  3  ins.  over  the 
head  of  those  in  the  second  course  below.  The  price  f.  o.  b.  Penn- 
sylvania and  Vermont  quarries  varies  according  to  the  grade ; 
but  a  good  No.  1  slate,  3/16-in.  thick,  can  be  bought  for  $5  per 
square.  The  freight  from  Pennsylvania  or  Vermont  to  the 
Mississippi  River  is  about  $2.50  per  square.  Allow  about  1%  waste, 
unless  the  roof  is  perfectly  plain. 

The  weight  of  1  sq.  ft.  of  slate  %-in.  thick  is  3.6  Ibs.  As  there 
are  214  pieces  of  18  x  9-in.  slate  per  square  of  roof;  and  if  it  were 
all  %-in.  thick,  the  weight  would  be  868  Ibs.;  if  it  were  3/16-in. 
thick,  the  weight  would  be  621  Ibs. 

Before  laying  the  slate,  the  roof  is  covered  with  paper.  A  50-lb. 
roll  will  cover  400  sq.  ft.,  and  with  wages  at  40  cts.  per  hr.,  the 
cost  of  laying  the  paper  is  20  cts.  per  square.  The  holes  for  the 
nails  must  bo  punched  in  the  slate  before  laying.  This  may  be  done 
by  the  manufacturers,  but  it  is  usually  done  by  hand  by  the  slaters, 
because  if  a  corner  is  broken  off  in  transport  the  slate  can  be 
turned  end  for  end,  moreover  as  slate  usually  comes  in  three 
thicknesses  it  must  be  sorted  anyway  before  laying,  and  the  punch- 
ing can  as  well  be  done  at  the  same  time.  One  slater,  at  40  cts. 
per  hr.,  with  a  helper,  at  20  cts.  per  hr.,  will  punch  the  holes  in 
10  x  16-in.  slates  at  a  cost  of  45  cts.  per  square. 

In  laying  slates,  about  one  laborer  is  required  for  two  slaters 
on  plain  roofs.  A  slater  will  punch  and  lay  3  squares  per  8  hrs. 
on  plain  straight  work,  2  squares  on  roofs  with  many  hips  and 
valleys,  and  as  low  as  1  sauare  on  difficult  tower  work.  For  fair 
average  work  allow  2%  squares  per  day  per  slater,  and  allow  1 
laborer  to  2  slaters.  This  includes  punching,  and  laying  paper  and 
slate.  The  cost  of  a  slate  roof,  10  x  16-in.  slates,  was  as  follows: 

Par  square. 

Slate  for  1   square $  5.00 

Freight    (650   Ibs.) 2.50 

Loading  and  hauling 0.20 

Wastage,   1%    of   $7.70 0.08 

16  Ibs.   paper 0.50 

1  Ib.  nails 0.05 

21/2  Ibs.  of  3d  galv.  nails  for  slate 0.10 

Slater,   at  40  cts.   per  hr 1.30 

Helper,  at  20  cts.  per  hr 0.30 

Total  per  square $10.03 


1094  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Roofs. — In  the  Proceedings  Assoc.  Ry.  Supts.  of  Bridges 
and  Buildings,  1902,  a  committee  report  gives  the  following  costs  of 
roofs  in  New  England. 

Per  square. 

Slate     $   9.00  to  $12.00 

Tile 30. 00  to    33.00 

Cedar  shingles 4.50  to      5.00 

Tinned  shingles 5.00  to      6.50 

Sheet     tin 6.50  to      8.00 

Tar  and  gravel. 4.00  to      5.00 

Ruberoid 2.75  to       3.75 

Paroid 3.00  to      3.50 

Tar   paper,    two-ply,    laid    double 2.00  to       2.25 

Tar  paper,  three-ply,  laid  single 1.50  to      2.00 

Instances  were  cited  of  slate  roofs  40  years  old.  Shingle  roofs 
28  years  old  were  cited,  but  15  years  seemed  to  be  the  ordinary 
life  of  good  shingles.  Tar  and  gravel  roofs  30  years  old  were  cited, 
but  an  ordinary  life  seemed  to  be  12  to  18  years. 

Cost  of  Ferroinclave  Roof. — This  type  of  roof  was  invented  by 
Mr.  Alexander  Brown,  vice-president  of  the  Brown  Hoisting  Mchy. 
Co.  It  consists  of  corrugated  sheet  steel  plastered  on  both  sides  with 
Portland  cement  mortar,  giving  a  total  thickness  of  l1^  ins. 
The  corrugations  are  in  the  form  of  a  dovetail.  The  steel  sheets 
are  laid  on  purlins  spaced  4  ft.  10  ins.,  and  clipped  to  them.  The 
cement  mortar  is  mixed  1 :2,  and  that  used  on  the  under  side 
contains  a  small  amount  of  lime  and  hair.  When  the  cement  has 
set  for  10  days,  the  upper  side  is  painted  with  two  coats  special 
paint. 

The  cost  per  square  (100  sq.  ft.)  is  said  to  be  as  follows: 

Per  sq. 

Ferroinclave   sheets    ?   8.50 

Fastening    clips 0.48 

Laying   Ferroinclave 1.25 

Cement  mortar  on  upper  side > 3.00 

Cement  mortar  on  lower  side 4.00 

Waterproofing    paint 1.50 

Sundries,  freight,  supt.,  etc 1.27 

Total    $21.00 

The  weight  is  about  15  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft. 

Brick  Masonry  Data. — The  size  of  common  bricks  varies  widely. 
I  have  seen  bricks  as  small  as2x3*4x7%  ins.  used  for  house 
building  in  New  York  City.  In  the  New  England  States,  common 
bricks  are  said  to  average  about  2*4x3%x7%  ins.  In  most  of 
the  Western  States,  common  bricks  average  2%x4%x8%  ins. 
The  size  of  individual  bricks  in  a  car  load  often  varies  considerably ; 
hard  bricks  being  %  to  3/16-in.  smaller  than  soft  (or  salmon) 
bricks.  Pressed  or  face  bricks  are  quite  uniformly  2%x4%x8% 
ins.  A  thousand  bricks,  averaging  2*4x4x814  ins.  weigh  5,400 
Ibs.,  if  there  is  any  standard  size  it  may  be  said  to  be  2  }4  x  4  x  8  *4 
Ibs.,  and  they  weigh  125  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  ;  and  they  occupy  43.2  cu.  ft. 
of  space,  which  is  equivalent  to  23*4  bricks  per  cu.  ft,  if  no 
allowance  is  made  for  joints.  If  these  bricks  are  laid  in  massive 
masonry  with  ^-in.  joints,  about  430  bricks  will  be  required  per 


BUILDINGS.  1095 

cu.  yd.,  or  16  per  cu.  ft.  ;  if  laid  with  %-in.  joints,  515  bricks  per 
cu.  yd.,  or  19  per  cu.  ft. 

Masons  have  empirical  rules  for  estimating  the  number  of  bricks 
in  a  wall.  Their  rules  do  not  give  even  an  approximation  to  the 
actual  number,  or  "kiln  count."  They  often  make  no  deductions 
for  openings,  but  use  a  "wall  measure"  rule,  allowing  7  %  bricks 
per  sq.  ft.  (or  per  superficial  foot)  for  a  wall  that,  is  a  "half  brick 
thick,"  that  is  a  4-in.  wall.  For  "one-brick",  wall,  that  is  8  or  9  ins. 
thick,  they  estimate  15  bricks  per  sq.  ft.  For  a  "one-and-a-half  - 
brick"  wall  (12  or  13  ins.  thick),  they  estimate  22%  bricks  per 
sq.  ft.  This  rule  takes  no  account  of  .the  actual  size  of  the  bricks, 
and  does  not,  therefore,  give  "kiln  count,"  but  gives  "wall  count." 
We  have  seen,  above,  that  "standard  size"  bricks,  laid  with  %-in. 
mortar  joints,  will  actually  average  16  per  cu.  ft.,  as  compared  with 
22  y2  per  cu.  ft.  "wall  count." 

If  all  the  broken  bricks,  or  "bats,"  were  thrown  away,  the 
wastage  would  be  about  2%  with  fair  bricks  to  5%  with  poor  bricks , 
but  it  not  often  that  contractors  are  prohibited  by  inspectors  from 
using  practically  all  the  "bats." 

The  cost  of  loading  and  hauling  paving  bricks  is  given  on  page 
352,  and  practically  the  same  costs  apply  to  building  bricks,  except 
that  the  latter  are  lighter.  As  above  stated,  the  "standard  size" 
hard  brick  weighs  about  5.4  Ibs.,  or  2.7  tons  per  M.,  or  125  Ibs.  per 
cu.  ft.  Soft  bricks  weigh  20%  less,  but  repressed  bricks  weigh  20% 
more  per  cubic  foot.  With  wages  at  15  cts.  per  hr.,  the  cost  of  un- 
loading cars  into  wagons  is  30  cts.  per  M.,  and,  unless  a  dump 
wagon  is  used,  it  costs  another  30  cts.  per  M.  to  unload  the  wagons. 

Cost  of  Laying  Brick. — In  building  brick  walls  there  are  usually 
1  to  iy2  laborers  to  each  brick  mason.  The  laborers  mix  mortar 
and  carry  mortar  and  bricks  to  the  masons,  using  hods  for  the 
purpose.  A  hod  holds  about  18  bricks,  or  approximately  100  Ibs. 
The  wages  of  masons  and  hod  carriers  vary  widely  in  different 
cities,  but  seldom  exceed  $5  per  8-hr,  day  for  masons  and  $3  for 
hod  carriers.  Very  often  the  masons'  unions  have  forced  up  their 
rates  of  wages,  but  the  hod  carriers  have  not,  and  may  receive  but 
little  more  than  other  common  laborers.  With  wages  as  just 
given,  and  one  helper  to  each  mason,  the  labor  cost  of  laying  should 
not  exceed  $6  per  M.  for  common  brick,  and  $10  per  M.  for  pressed 
(face)  brick,  "kiln  count"  in  both  cases. 

On  a  three-story  brick  hospital,  with  a  carefully  laid  front  (%-in. 
"shoved"  joints),  the  labor  cost  was  $5.50  per  M.,  "kiln  count." 
There  were  three  laborers  to  every  two  masons,  and  wages  were 
17%  cts.  per  hr.  for  laborers,  and  45  cts.  per  hr.  for  masons,  work- 
ing 9  hrs.  The  cost  of  the  masons'  wages  amount  to  $3.50  per  M., 
and  the  cost  of  the  helpers'  wages  was  $2  per  M.  This  cost  was 
rather  high,  due  to  the  number  of  deep  flat  brick  arches  over 
basement  openings,  and  to  the  row-lock  arches  over  other  openings, 
as  well  as  a  tower  and  other  puttering  work. 

In  building  warehouses,  where  the  work  was  plain,  wages  being 
as  just  given,  the  cost  was  $4  per  M.,  "kiln  count." 


1096  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

On  several  large  city  buildings,  in  which  15  to  20%  of  the  brick 
masonry  was  pressed  brick,  each  brick  mason  laid  the  following 
average  number,  "kiln  count,"  per  9-hr,  day  : 

Apartment   house,    4    stories 1,200 

Four-story   fronts    1,250 

Heavy  walls,  ground  level 1,500 

Heavy  footings  and  warehouse  basement  walls.  3,200 

A  bricklayer  should  lay  400  or  500  pressed  brick  per  8-hr.  day. 
If  an  ornamental  brick  front  is  to  be  laid,  with  molded  arches, 
buttresses  with  bases  and  caps,  etc.,  the  labor  of  laying  pressed 
brick  may  run  as  high  as  $20  per  M. 

In  veneering  a  frame  building  with  brick,  a  mason  will  average 
400  bricks  per  day. 

In  building  brick  arches  to  support  the  sidewalk  in  front  of  a 
city  building,  after  the  centers  were  set,  each  bricklayer  averaged 
1,800  bricks  per  9-hr,  day;  and  it  required  one  man  to  make  and 
deliver  mortar  and  to  deliver  brick  to  every  two  bricklayers. 
The  brick  arches  were  5-ft.  span,  11  ft.  long,  and  4  ins.  thick. 

Cost  of  Mortar. — With  lime  mortar,  mixed  1  part  lime  to  3  parts 
sand,  it  required  0.9  bbl.  lime  per  M.  of  bricks,  "kiln  count,"  the 
bricks  being  laid  with  %-in.  joints.  A  common  allowance  in  esti- 
mating the  cost  of  mortar,  for  "standard  size"  bricks,  is  1  bbl.  lime 
and  0.6  cu.  yd.  sand  per  M.,  "kiln  count."  About  %  cu.  yd.  of 
mortar  is  usually  allowed  per  cu.  yd.  of  brick  masonry,  or  0.7  cu.  yd. 
mortar  per  M.  of  bricks,  when  bricks  are  laid  with  i^-in.  joints. 
If  cement  mortar  is  used,  the  number  of  barrels  of  cement  per 
cubic  yard  of  mortar  will  be  found  on  page  538.  It  will  seldom 
require  less  than  1.6  bbls.  of  cement  per  M.  of  bricks,  or  0.8  bbl. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  brick  masonry,  for  if  the  mortar  is  made  leaner  it 
will  not  trowel  well,  and  cause  more  loss  in  labor  than  is  saved  in 
cement. 

Rockland,  Me.,  lime  is  sold  by  the  barrel,  220  Ibs.  net.  When 
shipped  in  bulk  2%  bu.,  of  80  Ibs.  per  bu.,  are  usually  called  a 
barrel.  A  barrel  holds  about  3.6  cu.  ft.  The  average  yield  of  lime 
paste  from  the  best  limes  is  2.6  bbls.  of  paste  for  each  barrel  of 
quick  lime.  This  paste  is  usually  mixed  with  2  parts  sand  by 
measure.  It,  therefore,  takes  about  1%  bbls.  of  the  best  quick  lime 
to  make  1  cu.  yd.  of  mortar.  A  poor  lime  does  not  make  %  as  much 
paste  as  a  good  lime. 

The  price  of  lime  is  about  60  cts.  per  bbl. 

Cost  of  Brickwork  in  a  Railway  Repair  Shop.* — Below  is  given  the 
labor  cost  of  some  brickwork  done  in  October,  1896,  for  the  Detroit, 
Lansing  &  Northern  R.  R.  The  work  consisted  of  building  the 
walls  of  the  railroad  repair  shop  at  Ionia,  Mich.  The  work  was 
done  by  contract,  the  contractors,  however,  furnishing  only  the 
labor,  this  being  done  for  a  lump  sum  ;  the  materials  were  furnished 
by  the  railroad  company.  The  face  bricks  were  new,  but  the  back 
was  of  bricks  which  came  from  an  old  building.  The  size  of  the 
bricks  was  2%  x  3%  x  8  in.,  and  the  joints  were  from  %-in.  to 
%-in.  in  thickness.  According  to  these  figures  about  20  bricks  were 


' Engineering-Contracting,  May  16,  1906. 


BUILDINGS.  1097 

used  to  the  cubic  ft.,  and  that  number  was  us.ed  in  computing  the 
number  of  bricks  in  the  building.  In  the  summary  is  given  the 
actual  cubic  contents  of  the  walls,  all  openings  being  deducted. 

As  the  walls  were  only  20  ft.  high,  scaffolds  an.d  runways  were 
built  so  that  wheelbarrows  could  be  used  throughout  the  entire  work 
for  tending  masons.  The  cost  of  laborers  was  thus  reduced.  The 
scaffolding  was  built  by  the  railroad  company.  The  wages  allowed 
were  as  follows:  Foreman,  40  cts.  per  hr.  ;  mason,  30  cts.  per  hr.  ; 
laborers,  12%  cts.  per  hr.  The  \veather  was  favorable  for  good 
work. 

Cubic   ft.    built 5,204.3 

Bricks   laid    104,086 

Foreman,  hrs 161 

Mason,  hrs 439 

Laborers,  hrs 509 

The  average  number  of  bricks  laid  per  mason  per  hour  was  173, 
including  the  time  of  the  foreman,  who  was  a  mason  and  worked 
also. 

.  The  labor  costs  were  as  follows : 

Mason's   wages    -. $196.10 

Laborer's  wages    66.63 

Mason's  wages  per  cu.  yd 1.02 

Mason's  wages  per  M  brick 1.88 

Laborer's  wages  per  cu.  yd 0.33 

Laborer's  wages  per  M  brick 0.61 

Total  cost  of  masons  and  labor  per  cu.  yd 1.35 

Total  cost  of  masons  and  labor  per  M 2.49 

From  the  above  figures  the  cost  of  labor  for  similar  work  can  be 
estimated  as  follows:  Labor  cost  of  1  cu.  yd.  brickwork  is  equal 
to  5/6-hour  wages  of  foreman,  plus  2*4  hours  wages  of  mason, 
plus  2%  hours  wages  of  laborer.  In  the  same  manner,  the  cost 
of  laying  1,000  brick  is  equal  to  5/6-hour  wages  of  foreman,  plus 
4%  hours  wages  mason,  plus  4%  hours  wages  laborer. 

In  the  work  it  was  found  that  0.44  cu.  yd.  of  sand  and  10-11  bbl. 
(bulk)  lime  were  required  to  lay  1,000  brick  with  %-in.  to  %-in. 
joint.  One  barrel  of  lime  equaled  3%  cu.  ft.  and  weighed  201  Ibs., 
the  weight  being  figured  from  car  weight.  Accordingly  1  bbl.  (bulk) 
lime  was  used  for  laying  1,100  bricks,  with  %-in.  to  %-in.  joint;  1 
cu.  yd.  sand  was  used  for  laying  2,260  bricks,  with  %-in.  to  %-in. 
joint. 

Cost  of  Brickwork  in  Five  Buildings  for  Manufacturing  Plant.*— 
Mr.  Sam  W.  Emerson  gives  the  following  record  of  cost  of  brick- 
work in  five  buildings  forming  part  of  a  large  manufacturing  plant. 
The  work  was  done  by  the  owners  hiring  their  own  labor. 

All  joints  in  the  brickwork  were  struck  both  sides,  and  a  first- 
class  job  obtained. 

On  building  No.  1  local  bricklayers  were  used  at  50  cts.  per  hour, 
but  for  the  other  buildings  city  bricklayers  at  60  cts.  per  hour 
were  imported.  The  latter  did  better  work  and  more  of  it,  as  shown 
by  Table  VII. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  April,  1906,  p.  100: 


1008  UAXDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  hod  carriers  were  developed  from  local  laborers,  and  were 
paid  IT1/}  cts.  per  hour. 

Buildings  Nos.  1  and  2  were  long  and  low,  containing  about  equal 
amounts  of  9-in*  and  13-in.  wall. 

Buildings  Nos.  3  and  4  were  higher  and  had  a  somewhat  larger 
proportion  of  13-in.  wall. 

Part  of  the  brickwork  in  No.  4  was  started  from  steel  lintels 
at  some,  distance  above  the  floor  line,  which  explains  the  high 
cost  of  scaffolding. 

Building  No.  5  was  higher  and  contained  more  brick  than  any 
of  the  others.  It  was  composed  of  13-in.  walls,  with  some  17-in.  and 
22-in.  walls.  The  heavier  walls  account  in  part  for  the  lower  cost 
of  laying,  but  better  foremanship  had  something  to  do  with  it. 

The  scaffolds  were  erected  by  carpenters  at  20  and  22^  cts. 
per  hour,  drawn  from  other  parts  of  the  work  when  needed. 

Handling  materials  include  unloading  and  hauling  brick,  sand, 
lime  and  cement,  and  is  the  ax*erage  for  the  job.  About  one-third 
of  the  materials  had  to  be  hauled  from  a  switch  nearly  a  mile  away, 
the  balance  being  delivered  on  a  switch  run  over  to  the  plant  site. 

The  brick  were  large,  so  that  918  laid  up  a  "thousand,"  figuring 
14  brick  per  square  foot  of  9-in.  wall.  All  openings  were  deducted. 

Brick  cost  $5.00  and  $5.25  per  M.,  f.  o.  b.  the  yards;  the  average 
cost  was  $5.08  per  M. 

No  record  was  kept  of  the  cost  of  scaffold  lumber,  as  material 
ordered  for  other  purposes  was  used  and  worked  up  later  in  wooden 
buildings. 

About  two  or  three  weeks  after  the  60-cent  bricklayers  started 
work,  the  writer,  being  dissatisfied  with  the  way  the  work  was 
going,  started  the  practice  of  preparing  careful  estimates  of  the 
brick  laid  each  week  and  figuring  the  cost  per  1,000  for  bricklayers 
and  helpers. 

Within  three  weeks  after  the  first  estimate,  the  output  per 
bricklayer  had  increased  over  40  per  cent,  and  about  30  per  cent 
increase  was  maintained. 

This  illustrates  one  of  the  reasons  for  keeping  "up-to-date"  cost 
records. 

The  cost  of  the  work  per  1,000  brick  was  as  follows: 

TABLE   VII. — LABOR    COST   PER    1,000    BRICK. 

Buildings — Nos.                         1.            2.            3.            4.            5.  Av. 

Bricklayers.t  60  cts.  per  hr.  .$5.56      $4.49      $4.57      $4.68      $3.68  $4.16 

Helpers,*  17 y2  cts.  per  hr..  .    1.95        1.67        2.14        1.95        2.00  1.87 

Carpenters, J  20  and  22  y2  cts.     .70          .71          .88        1.15          .67  .77 

Handling  materials   1.16       1.16       1.16       1.16        1.16  1.16 

Total   labor    .  ..$9.37      $8.03      $8.75      $8.94      $7.51     $7.96 


*Hod  carriers  and  mortar  men. 

tOn  Building  No.  1  bricklayers  received  50  cts.  per  hr. 

^Engaged  in  building  scaffolds. 

Note. — Buildings  Nos.  1  and  2  were  long  and  low,  with  about 
equal  amounts  of  9-in.  and  13-in.  walls;  Buildings  Nos.  3  and  4  had 
larger  proportion  of  13-in.  wall;  Building  No.  5  contained  more 
brick  than  any  of  the  others,  and  had  13-in.  walls,  with  some  17-in. 
and  22-in.  walls. 


BUILDINGS.  1099 

COST  PER  1,000  BRICK. 
Materials: 

Brick,   918,  at  $5.08  .............  ..............  $  4.67 

Brick,  freight  ................................  1.12 

Sand,   %  cu.  yd.,  at  $0.46  ......................  023 

Sand,    freight    ................................  0.13 

Cement,  0.44  bbl.,  at  $2  ........................  0.88 

Lime,  2  bu.,  at  $0.20  .....................  ......  0.40 

Total,    materials  .....................  .  ____  $   7.43 

Total,  labor   (average)  ............  .  .  ..........      7.96 

Grand   total,    material    and   labor,    per    1,000 

brick    ..................................  $15.39 

As  is  stated  elsewhere  in  this  article,  14  brick  were  figured  as 
making  one  square  foot  of  9-in.  wall.  This  would  make  504  bricks, 
wall  measure,  per  cubic  yard.  Accordingly,  if  we  divide  the  figures 
in  the  tabulations  given  above  by  2,  we  will  have  the  cost  per  cubic 
yard  of  brick  masonry.  On  this  basis  we  have  : 

Materials:  Cost  per  cu.  yd. 

459   bricks,  at  $5.08  ............................  $2.33 

Freight     .......................................  56 

J/4  cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $0.46  .........................  11 

Freight   ........................................  06 

.22  bbl.  cement,  at  $2.00  .........................  44 

1  bu.  lime,  at  $0.20  .........................  ...      .20 


Bricklayers     ...............  .  .  $2.08 

Helpers    ......................................      .93 

Carpenters    ....................................  39 

Handling  materials  .............................  58 

Total,   labor    ......  ........................  $3.98 

Total,  material  and  labor  ..................  '.$7.69 

Cost  of  Brick  Chimneys.  —  On  small  chimneys  and  fireplaces  the 
labor  costs  2  to  3  times  as  much  per  M.  as  on  plain  wall  work. 
A  mason  (55  cts.  per  hr)  and  helper  will  lay  600  bricks  in  9  hrs. 
The  labor  costs  30  to  35  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  single-flue  chimneys, 
8  x  8  ins.  square  and  4  ins.  thick;  and  50  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  for  double- 
flue  chimney.  There  is  a  wastage  of  brick  of  about  5%  where  the 
brick  fit,  or  10%  where  cutting  is  necessary. 

Cost  of  High  Brick  Chimney  Stacks.  —  With  wages  of  masons  at 
55  cts.  per  hr.,  and  where  the  flue  is  large  enough  for  men  to  work 
from  the  inside,  the  cost  of  laying  bricks  for  chimney  stacks,  100  to. 
125  ft.  high,  is  $12  per  M  of  bricks.  In  one  case  a  stack  150  ft. 
high,  containing  250,000  bricks,  cost  $7  per  M  for  labor,  wages  being 
as  above  given. 

Cost  of  Brickwork,  Cross-  References.  —  In  various  sections  of  this 
book  will  be  found  further  data  on  brick  masonry,  for  which  con- 
sult the  index  under  "Brickwork." 

Cost  of  Rubble  Walls.  —  Basement  walls  are  commonly  made  of 
rubble.  The  best  work  requires  "two-man  rubble,"  that  is,  stone 
too  heavy  for  one  man  to  lift.  A  common  allowance  for  a  lime- 


1100  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

stone  rubble  wall  is  %  cu.  yd.  sand,  %  bbl.  cement,  and  2,800  Ibs. 
stone,  per  cu.  yd.  of  wall.  If  lime  is  used,  allow  %  bbl.  lime.  A 
mason  and  helper  will  lay  3  cu.  yds.  in  8  hrs.,  so  that  if  wages  are 
50  cts.  per  hr.  for  mason  and  25  cts.  per  hr.  for  helper,  the  cost  of 
laying  is  $2  per  cu.  yd. 

For  further  data,  see  the  sections  on  Masonry  and  Concrete. 
Cost   of  Ashlar. — Ashlar   in   buildings   is    estimated   by   the   cubic 
foot.     In  ordering  "raw  stone"    (uncut  stone)    for  ashlar,   give  the 
quarryman  the  exact  number  of  cubic   feet  measured  in  the  wall. 
He  will  make  allowance  for  the  waste  in  cutting  it. 

The  cost  of  Bedford  ashlar  for  the  moldings,  turrets,  etc.,  in  an 
Omaha  building  was : 

Per  cu.  ft. 

Raw  Bedford    $0.65 

Cutting,  wages  55  cts.  per  hr 1.00 

Setting    in    the    building 0.20 

Washing  and  pointing 0.05 

Total  in  place $1.90 

It  requires  about  1  gal.  muriatic  acid  to  wash  500  sq.  ft.  To 
wash  and  point  the  joints  costs  3  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  Cut  Stone  Work.*— The  walls  for  the  building  of  the 
Government  Printing  Office  at  Washington,  D.  C.,  completed  in  1903, 
were  built  of  red  bricks  trimmed  with  red  sandstone  from  a  quarry 
near  Longmeadow,  Mass.  The  cost  of  this  stone,  ready  to  set, 
was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  ft. 

Plain    ashlar $1.80-$2.00 

Molded  courses    2.00-   2.40 

Sills     2.00-2.40 

Lintels     1.95-   2.15 

Columns    3.00 

In  computing  these  prices,  all  molded  and  curved  or  irregular 
pieces  were  squared  out  to  the  minimum  containing  rectangular  par- 
allelopipedon.  The  cost  of  setting,  etc.,  average  for  all  classes,  was 
as  follows: 

Per  cu.  ft. 

Handling   $0.133 

Setting    179 

Cutting   (corrections,  etc.) 018 

Pointing 041 

Mortar    012 

Miscellaneous   materials 026 

Total    $0.409 

The  high  cost  is  said  to  be  due  to  the  care  with  which  the  joints 
were  calked,  and  to  the  fact  that  there  was  not  enough  stone  to  be 
placed  to  justify  the  purchase  of  a  special  plant  to  handle  it.  Some 
of  the  wages  paid  for  8-hr,  day  on  this  job  were  as  follows:  Labor- 
ers, $1.50  ;  stone  masons,  $4  ;  stone  cutters,  $4. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  19,  1908. 


BUILDINGS.  1101 

Cost  of  Wood  Lathing. — The  standard  size  of  wood  laths  is 
*4-in.  X  iy%  ins.  X  4  ft.  There  is  a  special  lath  made  32  ins.  in 
length.  Laths  are  sold  by  the  1,000  in  bundles  of  50  or  100  laths 
per  bundle.  A  common  price  is  $3  per  1,000.  laths.  It  requires 
1,500  standard  laths  to  cover  100  sq.  yds.  Allow  10  Ibs.  of  3d  fine 
nails  for  100  sq.  yds.  when  joists  are  16  ins.  center  to  center.  Chi- 
cago lathers  have  fixed  1,250  laths  as  a  day's  work  per  man. 
The  cost  per  100  sq.  yds.  is  as  follows: 

100  sq.  yds. 

1,500  laths,  at  $3  per  M $4.50 

10  Ibs.  nails,  at  3  cts 0.30 

Labor,   at   $3.20   per   8-hr,   day 3.84 

Total  per  100  sq.  yds $8.64 

This  is  8.6  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  There  is  no  uniformity  in  practice  as  to 
deducting  window  and  door  openings  from  the  area  lathed. 

Cost  of  Metal  Lathing. — There  are  several  makes  of  wire  lath- 
Ing,  as  well  as  expanded  metal  lathing.  For  plastering,  the  Ex- 
panded Metal  Engineering  Co.,  of  New  York,  furnish  two  styles  of 
expanded  metal  lath,  in  sheets  1%  X  8  ft,  as  follows: 

Lbs.  per  sq.  yd. 

"Diamond"  lath,  Gage  No.  24 3.65 

"Diamond"  lath,  Gage  No.  26 2.66 

"A"   lath,   Gage  No.   24 4.23 

"B"  lath,  Gage  No.   27 2.84 

The  price  of  these  laths  ranges  from  15  cts.  to  20  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

The  cost  per  100  sq.  yds.  is  as  follows: 

100  sq.  yds. 

100  sq.  yds.,  "Diamond"  No.  26 $15.00 

10   Ibs.   staples,   at   3   cts 0.30 

Labor,  at  $3.20  per  8-hr,  day 3.20 

Total  per  100  sq.  yds $18.50 

This  labor  includes  the  cost  of  scaffolding,  and  is  based  upon  some 
6,000  sq.  yds.  of  work.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  is  1.2 
cts.  per  Ib.  of  metal. 

Cost  of  Plaster. — Plastering  on  laths  generally  requires  three 
coats,  occasionally  two  coats.  The  first  is  the  scratch  coat ;  the 
second  is  the  brown  coat ;  the  third  is  the  white  coat,  or  finish.  On 
brick  walls  the  scratch  coat  is  generally  omitted. 

Plaster  is  made  either  with  lime  or  with  cement  plaster.  Cement 
plaster  (or  wall  plaster)  usually  consists  principally  of  plaster  of 
Paris.  Some  plasters  are  made  of  lime  gaged  with  Portland  ce- 
ment. Whatever  kind  of  lime  or  plaster  is  used,  sand  and  hair  are 
mixed  with  the  plaster.  The  hair  is  put  up  in  paper  bags  sup- 
posed to  contain  1  bu.  of  hair  when  beaten  up,  and  supposed  to 
weigh  about  7  Ibs.  Some  cement  plasters  are  sold  with  the  proper 
amount  of  hair  mixed  in.  Cement  plaster  is  commonly  sold  in  100- 
Ib.  sacks,  four  sacks  making  1  bbl.  A  common  price  is  25  cts.  per 
sack, 


*  Engineering-Contracting,   Dec.   4,   1907. 


1102  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

• 

In  making  lime  plaster,  1  part  of  lime  paste  to  2  or  2%  parts  of 
screened  sand  is  used.  About  1%  cu.  yds.  of  sand  are  required  per 
100  sq.  yds.  of  three-coat  plaster,  and  about  4  bbls.  of  lime,  or 
cement  plaster,  and  2  bu.  of  hair. 

The  cost  of  100  sq.  yds.  of  three-coat  plaster  is  about  as  follows: 

100  sq.  yds. 

1.75  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $1 $   1.75 

31/2  bbls.  lime,  or  9  bu.,  at  35  cts 3.15 

2  bu.  hair,  at  40  cts 0.80 

100  Ibs.  plaster  of  Paris,  at  50  cts 0.50 

Labor,  plasterers,  at  55  cts.  per  hr 15.00 

Total,   100  sq.  yds.,  at   21.2  cts $21.20 

Cost  of  Plastering. — Mr.  R.  L.  Brooker  gives  the  following  average 
cost  of  plastering  17  houses  in  Ohio  in  1903.  Each  house  required 
500  to  1,000  sq.  yds.  of  plastering. 

Per  sq.  yd. 
Cts. 

Lath  and  nails 6.5 

Labor  lathing 3.0 

Materials  for  1st  coa,t  mortar 3.5 

Labor  for  1st  coat  mortar 3.8 

Materials  for  white  coat 1.0 

Labor  for  white  coat 3.0 

Total     ' 20.8 

The  following  materials  were  required  per  100  sq.  yds. : 
26  bunches  of  lath. 
7  sacks  Alabastine   (100  Ibs.  ea.),  mixed  1:2. 

150  Ibs.  white  coat  material    (white  enamel  finish). 

In  plastering,  a  man  averaged  16  sq.  yds.  of  first  coat  per  hour, 
although  on  two  jobs  the  average  was  21  sq.  yds.  per  hr.  On  white 
coat  work,  a  man  averaged  19  sq.  yda.  per  hr.,  and  the  best  record 
was  21  y2  sq.  yds.  per  hr. 

The  lowest  labor  cosf  of  lathing  was  2%  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

The  plastering  was  "three-coat"  work,  the  first  and  second  coat 
being  applied  at  the  same  time  and  of  the  same  material,  while  the 
third  or  white  coat  was  not  applied  till  the  other  coats  were  dry. 
The  "brown  wall"  was  rodded  along  angles  and  base,  then  darbied, 
and  just  before  taking  a  set  was  floated  to  an  even  surface. 

Cost  of  Placing  Tile  Fireproofing. — Hollow  tile  used  for  floors  or 
walls,  or  for  protecting  steel  beams  and  columns,  is  measured  by 
the  square  foot.  It  is  desirable  to  purchase  it  from  the  manufac- 
turers on  the  basis  of  the  square  foot  measured  in  the  work.  Where 
the  brick-layers'  wages  were  45  cts.  per  hr'.,  the  tile  work  in  a 
four-story  hospital  cost  5%  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  for  the  labor  on  the  10- 
in.  and  12-in.  tile  floors  and  roof.  This  does  not  include  the  cost  of 
hauling  the  tile  to  the  building,  but  4t  does  include  the  hoisting  and 
delivery  of  the  tile  to  the  masons.  The  labor  cost  of  4-in.  tile  parti- 
tions and  tile  protection  for  I-beams  and  columns  was  4^  cts.  per 
sq.  ft. 


BUILDINGS.  1103 

Cost  of  Terra  Cotta  Brick  Fire  Proofing.* — Solid  brick  of  porous  ter- 
ra cotta  were  used  for  fireproofing  the  floor  arches,  girders  and  col- 
umn coverings  at  the  U.  S.  Government  printing  office,  completed 
in  1903,  at  Washington,  D.  C.  In  connection  with  the  floor  arches 
a  very  heavy  skewback  having  projecting  flanges  1%  ins.  thick  was 
designed.  The  protecting  flanges  are  very  heavy  and  strong,  and 
meet,  with  a  small  mortar  joint,  under  the  beam.  The  lower  flanges 
or  girders  were  covered  with  shoes  of  the  ordinary  form,  meeting 
under  the  girder.  They  were,  however,  much  heavier  than  ordi- 
narily used,  being  solid  and  2y2  ins.  thick.  They  were  filled  with 
mortar  and  squeezed  on,  so  as  to  have  a  solid  bearing,  and  were 
then  wrapped  all  around  with  wire  lathing  and  plastered  with  Port- 
land cement  mortar.  On  top  of  the  shoes,  on  either  side  of  the 
girder,  was  built  a  4 -in.  terra  cotta  brick  wall,  the  wire  lathing 
being  applied  before  the  4  ins.  walls  were  built.  The  4  ins.  walls 
on  the  sides  of  the  girder  were  carried  to  the  top  flange  before  the 
floor  arches  were  built.  The  latter  were  then  built,  abutting  at  their 
ends  against  the  upper  part  of  the  4 -in.  walls,  thus  bracing  them 
securely  in  position.  The  columns  were  covered  with  4-ins.  of  por- 
ous terra  cotta  brick  work  built  around  them.  The  inside  of  the  col- 
umn and  all  space  between  it  and  the  fire  proofing  were  filled  solid 
with  Portland  cement  concrete.  The  work  was  done  by  contract, 
the  following  data  being  obtained  by  keeping  records  of  the  con- 
tractors' work: 

From  time  required  to  set,  it  was  determined  that  the  girder 
shoes  on  the  various  girders  were  equivalent  to  about  8.5  bricks  per 
linear  foot.  This  was  a  little  high  for  beams  smaller  than  20  ins., 
but  it  was  compensated  for  by  increased  cost  of  changing  scaffolds, 
centers,  etc.,  for  the  smaller  girders.  The  figures  of  cost  do  not 
allow  for  power  for  hoisting  furnished  by  the  United  States,  nor 
for  contractor's  general  expense. 

GIRDER  COVERINGS  OF  33-iN.,  30-iN.  AND  24-iN.  GIRDERS. 
Total  labor  cost: 

Per    1,000    bricks $12.80 

Per  linear  foot  of  covering 0.524 

Materials,   exclusive    of    the   terra    cotta   and 

wire  netting: 

Per  1,000  bricks 0.85 

Per  linear  foot  of  covering 0.162 

Average  day's  work  per  man,  bricks 564 

Number  of  bricks  per  barrel  of  cement 546 

GIRDER  COVERINGS  FOR  GIRDERS  20  INS.  AND  UNDER. 

Labor  cost: 

Per  1,000  bricks $12.80 

Per  linear  foot  of  covering 0.323 

Materials,  exclusive   of   terra  cotta   and   wire 
netting: 

Per    1,000    bricks 3.40 

Per  linear  foot  of  covering 0.093 

Average  day's  work  per  man,   bricks 564 

Average  number  of  bricks  per  barrel  of  cement.         615 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  4,  1907. 


1104  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

COLUMN  COVERINGS. 
Labor  Cost : 

Per   1,000   bricks $12.80 

Per  linear  foot  of  covering 0.46 

Average  day's  work  per  man,  bricks 564 

Average  number  of  bricks  per  barrel  of  cement.  .  .    545 
In  the  one  linear  foot  of  beam  covering   (skewbacks)   was  taken 
as  equivalent  to  5.5  bricks  in  time  and  labor,  data  on  the  work  being 
as  follows : 

Total  labor,  per  1,000  bricks $10.64 

Total  labor  per  sq.   ft.   of  floor 0.06 

Total  materials,  except  bricks,  per  1,000  bricks..      3.65 
Total  materials,  except  bricks,  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.   0.021 

Average  day's  work  per  man,   bricks 892 

Average  number  of  bricks  per  barrel  of  cement.  .  .    575 

The  above  figures  are  based  on  the  actual  number  of  bricks  laid 
plus  3  per  cent  for  waste.  The  average  cost  of  all  fireproof  con- 
struction, excluding  ceilings,  but  including  column  and  girder  cov- 
erings, and  including  roof,  was  36.4  cts.  per  square  foot,  of  which 
9.5  cts.  was  labor  applied  at  the  building.  Some  of  the  wages  in 
force  on  the  work  were  as  follows  per  8-hr,  day:  Laborers,  $1.50  to 
$2  ;  bricklayers,  $4  to  $4.50. 

Cost  of  Ornamental  Terra  Cotta  Work.* — In  the  construction  of 
the  new  U.  S.  Government  printing  office  at  Washington,  completed 
in  1903,  19,100  cu.  ft.  or  585  tons  of  ornamental  terra  cotta  was 
used.  All  of  the  ornamental  terra  cotta  was  filled  solid  with  concrete 
and  where  it  projected  considerably,  as  in  the  main  cornice,  it  was 
thoroughly  tied  back  with  steel  anchors.  The  ornamental  terra  cotta 
used  was  built  up  of  relatively  thin  webs,  like  hollow  tiles,  except 
that  it  was  built  up  by  hand  instead  of  by  being  forced  through  a 
die.  The  total  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows  ;  the  price  given  for 
materials,  however,  does  not  include  brick  or  concrete  filling: 

Per  cu.  ft.       Per  ton. 

Handling    $0.0332          $1.0881 

Setting     1301  4.2513 

Cement,    etc 0243  .7944 

Anchors,    etc 0245  .8010 


Total    cost    of    setting.; $0.2121          $6.9348 

Average  price  for  materials 1.5300          50.0000 


Grand  total    $1.7421        $56.9348 

Some  of  the  wages  paid  per  8-hr,  day  during  the  construction 
of  the  building  were  as  follows:  Laborers,  $1.50;  bricklayers,  $4 
to  $4.50. 

Cost  of  Combined  Concrete  and  Tile  Floor  Construction.! — Rein- 
forced concrete  was  employed  in  constructing,  during  1908,  a  150x50 
ft.  extension  from  8  to  10  stories  high  to  the  famous  Quebec  hotel,  the 
Chateau  Frontenac.  Structurally  the  new  building  consists  of  a  rein- 
forced concrete  skeleton  covered  with  brick  outside  walls,  metal  roof, 
etc.  The  floors  were  combined  clay  tile  and  reinforced  concrete  con- 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   20,   1907. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   18,   1909. 


BUILDINGS.  1105 

struction,  and  columns  and  girders  were  of  reinforced  concrete. 
Complete  records  of  the  cost  of  the  work  were  kept,  but  these  are 
not  available  for  publication  except  for  one  typical  floor,  and  the 
cost  of  this  floor  is  given  below. 

The  typical  floor  is  that  located  at  elevation  187.  The  slab  spans 
varied  from  12  to  16  ft.  The  tile  used  were  8  X  12-in.  hard  terra 
cotta.  The  concrete  joists  were  4  ins.  wide,  reinforced  by  one  %  X 
2-in.  Kahn  bar  and  one  Vk-in.  cup  bar.  The  joists  extended  the  full 
depth  of  the  tile  and  were  in  one  piece,  with  the  2-in.  concrete  slab 
which  covered  the  tile.  The  floor  concrete  was  a  1-2-4  mixture,  and 
the  column  concrete  was  a  1-1-2  mixture.  A  %-in.  limestone  was 
used  for  aggregate.  The  concrete  was  machine  mixed  at  basement 
level  and  was  hoisted  to  floor  level,  discharged  into  a  hopper  and 
distributed  over  the  floor  by  wheelbarrows.  The  quantities  re- 
quired for  the  floor  were  : 

Concrete  in  columns,   cu.   yds 43.5 

Concrete  in  floor,  cu.  yds 255.8 

Reinforcing  steel,  tons 25.9 

Tile,   8  x  12-in.,  number 28,000 

Lumber,  forms  and  staging,  ft.   B.  M ! 45,000 

The  cost  of  the  floor  concrete  was  as  follows: 

Concrete:  Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Materials  for  255.8  cu.  yds $1,445  $5.65 

Placing    255.8    cu.    yds 174  0.58 


Totals    $1,619  $6.23 

This  is  the  cost  for  the  floor  slabs  and  beams  above.  The  cost 
of  the  concrete  in  the  columns  (43.5  cu.  yds.)  was  $464,  or  $9.21 
per  cu.  yd.  The  cost  of  reinforcement  for  the  whole  floor,  columns 
included,  was  as  follows: 

Reinforcement:  Total.         Per  ton. 

29.9  tons  steel  at  $75 $1,943          $75.00 

Cartage  on  steel 21  0.80 

Handling  and  placing  steel 130  5.00 


Totals $2,094          $80.80 

This  gives  a  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  for  reinforcement  of 
$6.99 — or  say  $7.     The  cest  of  forms  and  staging  was  as  follows: 
Forms  and  Staging:  Total.       Per  M.  ft. 

45  M.  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  at  $22 $990  $22.00 

Construction     616  13.70 


Totals    $1,606  $35.70 

Summarizing,  we  get  the  following  total  cost  for  concrete,  charg- 
ing everything,  except  tile  work,  to  concrete : 

Item:  Per  cu.  yd. 

Concrete  in  place $6.97 

Reinforcement    6.99 

Forms  and  staging 5.38 

Total   .  $19.34 


1106  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  the  tile  work  in  the  floor  slabs  was  as  follows : 
Tile  Work:  Total.          Per  tile. 

28,000  tile  at  10  cts $280          10.00  cts. 

Cartage    33  0.12  cts. 

Handling  and  laying 42  0.15  cts. 


Totals     $355          10.27  cts. 

The  total  cost  of  the  floor  was  $6,072,  divided  into  the  following 
percentage  items : 

Concrete 33  per  cent 

Steel    35  per  cent 

Forms     . 26  per  cent 

Tile    6  per  cent 

Total    100  per  cent 

Costs  of  Combination  Concrete  and  Tile  Floors  in  Three  Build- 
ings.*— The  following  figures  of  costs  of  similar  construction  are 
from  figures  given  by  Prof.  W.  K.  Hatt,  Purdue  University,  La- 
fayette, Ind.,  who  was  engineer  of  the  work.  The  work  comprised 
three  buildings: 

Indiana  State  Soldiers'  Home. — This  building  is  irregular  in  plan, 
With  two  stories,  attic  and  basement.  It  is  constructed  of  brick  and 
limestone,  with  reinforced  concrete  hollow  tile  floors,  each  floor  cov- 
ering approximately  7,000  sq.  ft.  The  floor  ribs  are  4  ins.  in  width 
and  range  in  depth  from  10  to  6  ins.  The  rib  spans  are  from  8  to 
15  ft.  The  tile  are  12  X  12  ins.  of  projected  area,  and  the  ribs  are 
thus  spaced  16  ins.  centers  in  all  cases.  The  thickness  of  concrete 
over  the  tile  is  2  ins.  Upon  this  floor  is  placed  a  3-in.  cinder  con- 
crete, over  which  there  is  a  %-in.  maple  flooring  upon  nailing  strips. 
The  floor  was  designed  to  hold  a  live  load  of  60  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  for 
the  first  floor  and  second  floor,  and  30  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  live  load  for  the 
attic  floor  in  addition  to  cinder  filling  and  wood  floor.  The  ribs  were 
continuous  from  the  side  rooms  through  into  the  corridor.  The  con- 
crete was  1 :2  :4,  with  a  screened  gravel  aggregate.  The  gravel  and 
sand  contained  about  4%  per  cent  of  clay.  Reinforcing  was  plain, 
round  bars  of  soft  steel.  Forms  consisted  of  %-in.  lagging  'sup- 
ported on  joists,  spaced  24  ins.,  running  between  the  walls.  The 
steel  rods  were  supported  on  a  large-headed  nail  driven  into  the 
centering,  and  the  wire  staple  was  driven  over  the  bar  into  the  same 
centering.  The  channels  of  the  ribs  were  cleaned  of  all  dirt  by  blow- 
ing out  with  steam.  The  tile  were  kept  wet. 

The  attic  floor  was  of  cinder  concrete  slab  construction,  3  ins. 
thick.  Wire  fabric  of  3  X  12-in.  mesh,  3  X  8-in.  and  Nos.  6  and  10 
gage  wires,  respectively,  were  used  for  reinforcing.  The  cinder  con- 
crete was  1 :2  :4.  Cinder  was  of  good  quality  and  screened  of  all 
ashes. 

Most  of  the  floor  construction  was  during  freezing  weather  and 
the  building  was  heated.  Salamanders  were  kept  burning  day  and 
night  and  the  forms  were  sprinkled  to  prevent  baking  the  con- 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.    13,   1909. 


BUILDINGS. 


1107 


crete,  while  the  exposed  surface  of  the  concrete  was  protected  from 
freezing  by  tar  paper,  on  which  was  a  layer  of  manure. 

Table  VIII.  gives  the  unit  cost  of  the  second  floor  of  the  Soldiers' 
Home  Hospital.  The  spans  were  as  follows :  Corridor,  clear  span, 
8  ft.  ;  side  rooms,  clear  span,  from  10  to  15  ft. 

The  unit  stresses  used  for  the  design  were  as  follows:  Tensf.on  of 
steel,  16,000  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  ;  compression  in  concrete,  750  Ibs.  per  sq. 
in.  ;  bond,  75  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  ;  diagonal  tension,  75  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 
(one  bent  rod). 

TABLE  vm. — UNIT  COSTS  OF  SECOND  FLOOR,  SOLDIER'S  HOME 
HOSPITAL. 

Per 
cu.  yd. 
of  con- 

Per  sq.  crete  and 
Total.      ft.  floor,  mortar. 

Tile  laying $108.70          $0.015        $1.40 

Steel: 

Bending  and  placing 36.40 

Cost  f.  o.  b  Lafayette 175.00"  0.030          2.80 

Total    $211.40 

Concrete: 

Cement,  114.5  Ibs.,  $1.75  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette  200.37 
Gravel,  64.24  yds.  at  $1.10  per  yd.,  hauled 

and   screened    70.66 

Sand,  32.12  yds.  at     $1.10  per  yd.,  hauled 

and  screened 35.36  0.044          3.96 

Total $306.39 

Mortar: 

Cement,  16.25  bbls.,  $1.25,  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette     28.44 
Sand,    4.4    cu.    yds.    at    $1.10,    hauled    and 

screened     4.84  0.005          0.43 

Total .$  33.28 

Labor: 
Wheeling,  mixing,  hauling,   tamping,   runs, 

etc.    ...  . ........    255.79  0.036          3.30 

Centering: 
Putting  up  and  tearing  down 414.40  0.060       \  5.35 

Totals    $1,329.93          $0.190      $17.24 

Purdue  University  Experiment  Station  Building. — The-  building  is 
U-shaped,  with  basement,  two  stories  and  attic.  The  first  and 'sec- 
ond floors  were  designed  for  a  live  load  of  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  and 
the  attic  for  a  live  load  of  60  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  in  addition  to  weight 
of  cinder  filling  and  floor.  The  concrete  is  1:2:4;  aggregate  was 
screened  bank  gravel.  The  sand  and  pebbles  were  remixed  in  speci- 
fied proportion.  Reinforcing  was  plain,  round  bars  of  steel.  The 
floors  were  supported  on  girders  and  columns.  The  spans  varied 
from  9  to  23  ft. 

The  centering  is  composed  of  4  X  4-in.  posts  with  2  X  10-in. 
chords  nailed  to  them.  Upon  the  chords  are  joists  supporting  7/s-in. 
lagging.  The  spacing  of  the  chords,  posts  and  joists  varied  accord- 


1108 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


ing  to  the  weight  of  the  floor  supported.  On  the  lagging  tiles  are 
placed  with  a  clearance  of  not  less  than  4  ins.  from  all  walls  and 
girders  and  spaced  17  ins.  centers,  thus  making  a  5-in.  rib.  In  lay- 
ing these  tile,  hard-burned,  small  tile  were  placed  together,  and  soft- 
burned,  large  tile  together,  thus  assuring  a  rib  of  even  width.  The 

TABLE  DC. — UNIT   COSTS   FIRST  FLOOR  EXPERIMENT   STATION. 

Per 

Per  sq.     cu.  yd. 
ft.  of       of  con- 
floor  crete  and 
Total.         area,     mortar. 
Tile: 

Laying   %   43.20 

Hoisting    129.60 

Cost  f.  o.   b.   Lafayette 567.85       $0.0587        $3.47 

Total $740.65 

Steel: 

Bending  and  placing 255.69 

Cost,  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette 582.00          0.0664          3.92 

Total    $837.69 

Concrete,  1,961  yards: 

Cement,  308  bbls.  at  $1.17  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette  360.36 
Sand,  $1  per  yd.,  hauled  and  screened....  86.30 
Gravel,  $1  per  yd.,  hauled  and  screened...  172.60  0.0490  2.90 

Total   $619.26 

Mortar,  178  yards: 

Cement,  $1.17  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette 42.70 

Sand,  $1  per  yd,  hauled  and  screened.  .  .  .      17.80          0.0048         0.28 

Total $   60.50 

Labor: 

Wheeling,  mixing,  hoisting,   tamping,   runs 

and   dumping    542.50          0.0430          2.53 

Centering: 

Let  by  contract  at  $12   per   1,000  ;    67,600 

used   (labor  only)    811.20          0.0642          3.80 

Superintendence     330.00          0.0261          1.54 

Total     $3,941.80        $0.3122        $18.44 

rods  were  held  in  place  by  nails  and  staples  and  were  continuous 
from  one  panel  to  another.  Before  any  concrete  was  deposited  in 
the  ribs  a  1 :3  cement  mortar  was  placed  in  the  bottom  of  the  chan- 
nel and  brought  to  the  level  of  the  middle  of  the  rod.  Great  care 
was  exercised  in  cutting  the  concrete  in  between  the  rods  and 
against  the  faces  of  the  tile.  The  concrete  was  very  wet,  so  that  it 
would  keep  an  even  surface  in  the  wheelbarrow,  but  yet  would  sup- 
port the  pebbles  on  the  surface. 

A  batch  of  concrete  in  the  mixer  was  received  In  a  bucket  and 
hoisted  to  a  large  box  on  the  floor,  and  taken  out  in  barrows  to  be 
dumped. 


BUILDINGS. 


1101) 


TABLE  x. — UNIT  OF  COSTS  OF  SECOND  FLOOR,  EXPERIMENT  STATION. 

Per 

Per  sq.       cu.  yd 
ft.  of       of  con- 
floor  crete  and 
Total.          area,     mortar. 
Tile: 

Hoisting $125.00 

Laying 48.20 

Cost  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette 593.62       $0.0607        $3.42 

Total    $766.82 

Steel: 

Bending  and  placing 178.73 

25.5  tons  at  $30,  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette 765.00          0.0745          4.22 

Total     $943.73 

Concrete,  214  yards: 

Cement,  336.5  bbls.  $1.17,  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette  393.70 
Sand,  94.16  yds.,  at  $1,  screened  and  hauled  94.16 
Gravel,  188.32  yds 188.32  0.0535  3.C; 

Total     • $676.18 

Mortar,  9.5  yards: 

Cement,  26  bbls.  at  $1.16,  f.  o.  b.  Lafayette  30.40 
Sand,  9.5  yds.  at  $1,  screened  and  hauled.  9.50  0.0036  0.18 

Total   $   39.90 

Labor: 

Wheeling,  mixing,  tamping,  dumping  runs  461.38          0.0364          2.06 
Superintendence     145.00          0.0115          0.65 

Centering: 
Set  by  contract   (approximately) 600.00          0.0475          2.68 

Total    $3,633.01        $0.2877      $16.22 

The  first  floor  was  laid  during  freezing  weather.  To  prevent 
freezing,  salamanders  were  kept  burning  day  and  night  and  the 
concrete  was  covered  with  a  heavy  layer  of  straw. 

The  labor  for  the  concrete  was  paid  at  a  rate  of  20  cts.  an  hour. 
The  unit  cost  for  the  first  and  second  floors  of  the  experiment 
station  are  given  by  Tables  IX  and  X,  as  furnished  by  H.  A. 
Wortham,  inspector  on  the  work.  Note  that  these  floors  cost  on  an 
average  of  about  30  cts.  per  square  foot. 

The  unit  stresses  used  were  as  follows:  Tension  in  steel,  16,000 
Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  ;  compression  in  concrete,  750  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. ;  bond 
on  steel,  75  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  ;  diagonal  tension  without  stirrups,  but 
with  one  bent  rod,  75  Ibs.  per  sq.  in. 

The  external  moments  were  figured  V8  W.  L.,  both  at  the  center 
and  over  supports.  The  length  of  span  was  between  centers  of  the 
bearings.  This  design  is  conservative,  and,  in  the  belief  of  the 
writer,  might  be  cut  down  perhaps  25  per  cent  with  safety. 

Shrinkage  stresses  at  the  surface  of  the  floors  are  taken  up  by 
% -in.  wire. 

Cost    of    Bituminous   Concrete   for    a    Mill    Floor.*— In   laying   tar 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   14,   1907. 


1110  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

concrete  base  for  wood  covered  mill  floors,  the  common  practice  is 
to  use  a  mixture  of  steam  cinders  aggregate  and  coal  tar  binder, 
and  to  mix  the  materials  by  hand.  A  departure  from  this  practice 
is  recorded  by  Mr.  C.  H.  Chadsey,  Construction  Engineer,  Northern 
Aluminum  Co.,  Ltd.,  Shawinigan  Falls,  P.  Q.,  Canada,  in  laying 
17,784  sq.  ft.  of  mill  floor.  A  sand,  broken  stone  and  tar  mixture 
was  used  and  the  mixing  was  done  with  a  Ransome  mixer.  The 
apparatus  used  and  the  mode  of  procedure  followed  were  as  follows : 

Tv/o  parallel  8-in.  brick  walls  26  ft.  long  were  built  4  ft.  apart 
and  2  %  ft.  high  to  form  a  furnace.  On  these  walls  at  one  end 
was  set  a  4x6x2  ft.  steel  plate  tar  heating  tank.  Next  to  this 
tank  for  a  space  of  4x8  ft.  the  walls  were  spanned  between  with 
steel  plates.  This  area  was  used  for  heating  sand.  Another  space 
of  4x8  ft.  was  covered  with  1  ^  in.  steel  rods  arranged  to  form  a 
grid  ;  this  space  was  used  for  heating  the  broken  stones.  The  grid 
proved  especially  efficient,  as  it  permitted  the  hot  air  to  pass  up 
through  the  stones,  while  a  small  cleaning  door  at  the  ground 
allowed  the  screenings  which  dropped  through  the  grid  to  be  raked 
out  and  added  to  the  mixture.  A  fire  from  barrel  staves  and  refuse 
wood  built  under  the  tank  end  was  sufficient  to  heat  the  tar,  sand 
and  stone. 

For  mixing  the  materials  a  Ransome  mixer  was  selected  for  the 
reason  that  heat  could  be  supplied  to  the  exterior  cf  the  drum  by- 
building  a  wood  fire  underneath.  This  fire  was  maintained  to 
prevent  the  mixture  from  adhering  to  the  mixing  blades,  and  it 
proved  quite  effective,  though  occasionally  they  would  have  to  be 
cleaned  with  a  chisel  bar,  particularly  when  this  aggregate  was 
not  sufficiently  heated  before  being  admitted  to  the  mixture.  A 
little  "dead  oil"  applied  to  the  discharge  chute  and  to  the  shovels, 
wheelbarrows  and  other  tools  effectually  prevented  the  concrete 
from  adhering  1 3  them. 

The  method  of  depositing  the  concrete  was  practically  the  same 
as  that  used  in  laying  cement  sidewalks.  Wood  strips  attached  to 
stakes  driven  into  the  ground  provided  templates  for  gaging  the 
thickness  of  the  base  and  for  leveling  off  the  surface.  The  wood 
covering  consisted  of  a  layer  of  2-in.  planks,  covered  by  matched 
hardwood  Hooring.  In  placing  the  planking,  the  base  was  covered 
with  a  14 -in.  layer  of  hot  pitch,  into  which  the  planks  were  pressed 
immediately,  the  last  plank  laid  being  toe-nailed  to  the  preceding 
plank  just  enough  to  keep  the  joint  ight.  After  a  few  minutes  the 
planks  adhered  so  firmly  to  the  base  that  they  could  be  removed 
only  with  difficulty.  The  hardwood  surface  was  put  on  in  the  usual 
manner. 

The  prices  of  materials  and  wages  for  the  work  were  as  follows  : 

Pitch,    bulk,    per   Ib $   0.0075 

Gravel   per  cu.   yd 1.50 

Spruce  sub-floor,  per  M.   ft.   B.  M 15.00 

Hardwood  surface,  per  M.  ft.  B.  M 33.00 

"   Laborers    per    10-hour    day „ 1.50 

Foreman,    per    10-hour    day 4.00 

Carpenters,    per     10-hour    day 2.00 


BUILDINGS.  1111 

At  these  prices  and  not  including  a  small  administration  cost  or 
the  cost  of  tools  and  plant,  the  cost  of  the  floor  consisting  of  4  ^  ins. 
of  concrete,  2  ins.  of  spruce  sub-flooring  and  %  in.  hardwood  finish 
was  as  follows : 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Pitch     $0.04 

Gravel 0.02 

Spruce,    for   sub-floor 0.03 

Hardwood    for    surfacing 0.035 

.nv.'O      Labor,    mixing 0.03 

Labor,     laying 0.015  „       ?£ 

Carpenter    work.  . .0.025 

Total  per  sq.  ft $0.195 

Cost  of  Passenger  Stations — In  the  Railroad  Gazette,  Sept.  16, 
1904,  p.  350,  photographs  are  given  of  a  passenger  station  of  the 
Santa  Fe  at  Oakland,  Calif.  It  is  204  ft.  long,  including  arcades, 
and  54  ft.  wide,  total  11,000  sq.  ft,  and  its  cost  was  $12,000.  The 
main  part  is  two  stories  high.  It  has  arcades  12  ft.  wide  running 
entirely  around  it.  The  building  is  Spanish  mission  style,  built 
of  steel  lath  covered  with  concrete  and  with  red  tile  roof. 

A  one-story  brick  passenger  station  built  in  1898  at  Quincy,  111., 
for  the  C.  B.  &  Q.  R.  R.,  cost  $75,000,  or  $4.27  per  sq.  ft  It  is 
58  x  304  ft.,  and  has  a  tower,  20  ft.  square  at  the  roof  level,  rising 
to  a  height  of  150  ft  The  walls  of  the  station  are  of  red  pressed 
brick,  with  trimmings  of  sandstone  and  terra  cotta.  The  walls  are 
22  ft.  high.  The  roof  is  of  Spanish  tile,  with  a  pitch  of  30°.  .The 
interior  finish  is  an  enameled  brick  wainscoting,  and  plastered  walls 
and  ceiling.  The  waiting  room  (54x70  ft)  has  a  marble  tile 
floor,  and  the  other  rooms  have  mosaic  tile  floors. 

Cost  of  Four  Frame  Depots*. — This  is  the  first  of  a  series  of 
articles  that  we  shall  publish  on  the  cost  of  railway  buildings. 
While  they  are  typical  railway  structures,  still  the  cost  data  will  be 
found  equally  valuable  in  estimating  the  costs  of  buildings  erected 
for  other  purposes. 

It  is  a  fact  not  generally  known  that  the  labor  cost  of  framing 
and  erecting  plain  buildings  averages  from  $10  to  $15  per  1,000 
ft.  B.  M.  This  fact  will  be  clearly  brought  out  in  these  articles, 
and  it  will  be  of  great  assistance  to  anyone  who  is  called  upon  to 
estimate  the  cost  of-  a  plain  frame  building.  Wages  will  be  given 
in  each  case,  but  the  reader  is  cautioned  against  supposing  that  an 
increase  in  wages  necessarily  involves  a  corresponding  increase  in 
cost.  A  high  priced  carpenter  is  usually  more  efficient  than  a  low 
priced  carpenter,  the  very  fact  that  he  is  high  priced  often  being 
evidence  in  itself  that  he  is  correspondingly  more  competent  than 
the  low  priced  man.  A  contractor  who  pays  $3.50  a  day  for 
carpenters  will  usually  get  more  work  done  for  the  money  than  will 
a  railway  company  that  pays  $2.50  a  day  for  its  "company  car- 
penters." Railways  have  a  policy  of  paying  very  low  wages,  under 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   28,   1907. 


1112  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

the  mistaken  idea  that  they  are  economizing  thereby.  In  conse- 
quence, they  usually  secure  lazy  or  incompetent  day  workers. 
Perhaps,  with  their  present  lack  of  system  in  keeping  costs  of 
construction,  the  railways  would  gain  nothing  by  employing  higher 
priced  men. 

The  work  that  we  are  about  to  describe  was  done  by  "company 
forces,"  carpenters  receiving  $2.50  for  10  hours.  As  is  usually 
the  case  in  day  labor  jobs,  the  men  were  very  slow. 

The  method  of  summarizing  the  costs  of  buildings  is  our  own. 
Records  kept  by  railways  are  usually  so  jumbled  up  as  to  be  of 
no  use  in  comparing  the  costs  of  similar  structures  or  in  ascertain- 
ing whether  the  cost  of  any  particular  structure  has  been  reasonable 
or  not.  This  is  largely  because  the  engineering  department  is  not 
in  charge  of  building  construction,  or,  if  it  is  in  charge,  the  engineers 
take  little  interest  in  work  which  does  not  seem  to  be  engineering. 
There  is  crying  need  for  cost  analysis  engineering  in  the  manage- 
ment of  all  building  construction,  but  particularly  on  railways. 

The  cost  of  those  plain  frame  depots  may  be  conveniently  dis- 
tributed under  seven  headings: 

Lumber. 

Shingles. 

Millwork. 

Hardware. 

Paint. 

Masonry. 

Labor. 

The  first  six  items  cover  the  materials.  The  labor  item  can  be 
subdivided  to  suit  each  particular  kind  of  work. 

The  weight  of  each  building  of  standard  design  should  be  esti- 
mated, so  that  the  items  of  freight  and  team  haulage,  can  be  ac- 
curately predicted,  but  this  is  rarely  done  by  railway  companies. 

The  number  of  square  feet  of  ground  floor  area  should  be  stated, 
and  the  cost  of  each  building  reduced  to  costs  per  square  foot, 
both  in  dollars  and  cents  and  in  percentages. 

Cost  of  a  2lt  x  60  Ft.  Depot. — This  was  a  small  combination 
passenger  and  freight  depot,  of  very  plain  design,  without  a 
masonry  foundation  and  without  plastering.  The  building  was  one 
story,  24x60  ft.,  surrounded  by  a  wooden  platform  in  front  and 
ends,  and  a  cinder  platform  extension. 

This  depot  had  an  area  of  1,440  sq.  ft.,  exclusive  of  the  platform 

Weight.  Lbs. 

30  M.  at  3,300  Ibs 99,000 

20  M.  shingles  at  150  Ibs 3,000 

Millwork     1,000 

Hardware    1,600 

1,100     brick 6,000 

Total,   55   tons..  110,600 


BUILDINGS.  1113 


Lumber. 


8,025  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8.00 ; $  64.20 

12,800  ft.  B.  M.,  No.  2  com.  a  I.  S.,  at  $8.50 108.80 

1,400  ft.  B.  M.,  1  in.  oak,  at  $10.00 14.00 

3,000  ft.  B.  M.,   %  x  8  ft.  to  18  ft.,  at  $14.00 42.00 

2,700  ft.  B.  M.,  No.  2  D.  siding,  at  $14.40 38.88 

1,100  ft.  B.  M.,  No.  3  flooring,  at  $12.00 13.20 

832  ft.  B.  M.,  No.  1  flooring,  at  $19.10 15.89 

30,057  ft.  B.  M.,  total  lumber,  $13.23  av $T96.97 

Shingles. 

20  M.  shingles,  at  $1.10 $  22.00 

M'llwork. 

900  lin.  ft.  miscel.  moulding,  at  Ic $  9.00 

225  lin.  ft.  5  in.  crown  moulding,  at  3c 6.75 

1  transom,  3  doors,  9  windows 24.00 

Frames  for  doors  and  windows 16.00 

Total   millwork    $  55.75 

Hardware. 

8  rolls  tar  paper  at  75c .  .$   6.00 

900  Ibs.  nails,  at  2y2c 22.50 

Locks,   knobs,   hinges,   etc 9.00 


Total     hardware $37.50 

Paint. 
Paint,  23  gals,  at  70c $16.10 

Masonry. 
Brick,  1,100,  at  $8.00 $   8.80 

Labor. 

Building  depot. 

38  days  foreman,  at  $80.00  per  mo $  98.38 

87  days  carpenter,  at  $2.50 217.50 

51.2  days  helper,  at  $1.75 90.05 

176.2  days  total,  at  $2.32  average $406.38 

Putting  up  ladders. 
2   days  carpenter,   at   $2.50 $     5.00 

Painting  depot. 
14  days  helper,  at  $1.75 $  24.50 

Building  chimney. 
4  days  mason,  at  $4.00 $   16.00 

Filling  cinders  in  platform. 

2  days  section  foreman,  at  $50.00  per  mo $     3.20 

6  days  labor,  at  $1.05 6.30 


8    days  labor,    total $  9.50 

Tools    $  38.50 

Summary : 

Materials.  Total.    Per  cent. 

30,057  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $13.23..                        ..$296.97  33.2 

20  M.  shingles,  at  $1.10      22.00  2.4 

Millwork     55.75  6.1 

Hardware     37.50  4.1 

?3  g\ls.  paint,  at  70c 16.10  1.8 

1,100   brick,    at    $8.00 8.80  1.0 

Total    materials..                                     ..$437.12  48.6 


1114  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Labor. 

176.2   days  labor  building,   at  $2.32 $406.38  45.3 

2  days  labor,  put  up  ladders,  at  $2.50.  .  .  .        5.00  0.6 

14  days  labor,  painting,  at  $1.75 24.50  2.8 

4  days  labor,  building  chimney,  at  $4.00     16.00  1.8 

8  days  labor,  filling  cinders,  at  $1.20.  .  .  .        8.50  0.9 

Total    labor $460.38        51.4 

Total   materials   and   labor $897.50     100.0 

Freight  55   tons,   200  mi.,   y2c  ton  mile..$   55.00 

$952.50 

Tools    (excessive  in   this  case) 38.50 


Materials    

Per.  sq.  ft. 
$0.304 

Per  cent. 
44  2 

Labor 

0  319 

46  5 

Freight    

0.038 

5  5 

Tools 

0  027 

4  o 

Total     $0.688       100.00 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  price  of  lumber  was  very  low. 
The  total  labor  was  $460,  which  is  practically  $15  per  1,000  ft. 
B.  M.  in  the  depot  and  platform.  If  we  exclude  the  labor  of  build- 
ing the  chimney,  painting  the  depot  and  spreading  the  cinder  plat- 
form, the  labor  cost  $406,  or  about  $13  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  yet  some 
time  was  lost  by  the  crew  waiting  for  lumber  to  arrive.  This  lost 
time  should  have  been  recorded,  but  was  not. 

Cost    of    Another    24    x    60    Ft.    Dex>ot. — This    depot    was    similar 
to   the  last,   except  that   7,200   ft.    B.  JM.,   of   second-hand   car   sills 
(8x16    ins.),    were   used   for   posts   and   stringers    of   the   platform. 
Grading  of  the  depot  grounds  was  an  unusually  expensive  item. 
Lumber. 

8,000  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8.50.  ... $   68.00 

7,200    ft.    B.    M.     (8    in.    x    16    in.)    second-hand, 

at   $4.00 .  28.80 

6,400  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  I.  S.,  at  $10.00 64.00 


106.80 
13.12 
45.00 
18.90 
54.60' 
4.50 


8,900  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  I.  S.,  1  in.,  at  $12.00. 
1,050  ft.  B.  M.,  com.  floor,  at   $12.50.... 

3,600  ft.  B.  M.,  com.  ceiling,  at  $12.50 

900  ft.  B.  M.,  clear  floor,  at  $21.00 

2,600  ft.  B.  M.,  drop  siding  No.  2,  at  $21.00.  . 
300  ft.  B.  M.,  com.  ceiling,  at  $15.00 

38,950  ft.  B.  M.,  total  lumber .$403.72 

Shingles. 
23  M.  shingles,  at  $1.60 $   36.80 

Millwork. 

1,200  lin.  ft.  molding,  at   %c  av $     9.. 00 

Doors  arid  Windows  and  frames.  .  70.00 


Total    millwork.  ........... $  79.00 

Hardware. 

5  rolls  tar  paper  at  70c .$  3.50 

Locks,   knobs,    hinges,   etc..  .  ... fr.OO 

1,400  Ibs.  nails,  at  2%c 35.00 

Total     hardware.  .  v  .  £-44.50 


BUILDINGS.  1115 


Paint. 

34  gals,  paint,  at  75c , $  25.50 

16  gals,  boiled  oil  and  turp 9.00 

10  gals.  Roger's  black  paint,  at  $2.00 20.00 

Total    paint $  54.50 

Masonry. 

1    M.   brick $     8.00 

Labor. 


Unloading  lumber. 


2  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 $     5.00 

7  days,  helper,  at  $2.00 14.00 

9  days,  total,  av.  at  $2.10 $   19.00 

Building  and  painting  depot. 

33  days,  foreman,  at  $80.00  per  mo $   86.66 

140.2  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 350.50 

74.1    days,   helper,   at   $2.00 148.20 


247.3  days,  total,  av.  at  $2.41 $585.36 

Grading  depot  grounds. 

5  days,  section  foreman,  at  $65.00  per  mo $   10.45 

153  days,  section  men,  at  $1.10." 168.45 


158   days,   total   grading $178.90 

Tools    .  .  .  -. $  26.00 

Summary : 

Materials.  Totals.     Per  cent. 

38,950  ft.   B.  M.,  lumber $     403.72        32.7 

23  M.   shingles,  at  $1.60. 36.80          3.0 

Millwork    79.00          6.3 

Hardware    44.50          3.6 

44  gals,  paint,  and  16  gals,  oil  and  turp.         54.50          4.4 
1,000   brick 8.00          0.6 

Total    materials 626.52  51.0 

Labor. 

9  days,  unload  lumber,  at  $2.11..        ..$      19.00  1.6 

247.3  days,  building,  at  $2.41 585.36  47.4 

Total     labor $    604.36       49.0 


Total  materials  and  labor $1,230.88     100.0 

Freight,   70  tons  at  $1.00 70.00 

Tools     26.00 

Grading  depot  grounds 178.90 

Grand    total $1,505.78 

Per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials $0.436          41.7 

Labor    0.420          40.2 

Freight      0.049  4.7 

Tools      0.016  1.6 

Grading    0.124          11.8 

Total .  .$1.045        100.0 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  on  the  depot,  exclusive  of  grading 

the  grounds,  amounted  to   $604.     This  is  a  trifle  more  than   $15.50 

per  1,000  ft.  B.  M. 

It   will   be   noted   that   the   paint   for   this   depot   cost   four   times 

what  paint  cost  for  the  other  depot,   indicating  the  necessity  of  so 


1116  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

classifying  costs  as  to  enable  comparisons  to  be  quickly  made  with 
a  view  to  discovering  "leaks." 

Cost  of  a  30  x  48  Ft.  Depot. — This  depot  has  the  same  area, 
1,440  sq.  ft.,  as  those  previously  described,  but  is  wider  and  shorter. 
The  labor  of  building  this  depot  cost  $542,  which  is  equivalent  to 
a  little  more  than  $13  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M. 

Weight.  Lbs. 

41    M.   at   3,300   Ibs ..135,300 

21  M.  shingles,  at  150  Ibs 3,150 

Millwork 1,000 

Hardware     1,600 

1,000     brick 6,000 

6    bbls.    cement 2,400 


Weight,    75    tons 149,450 

Lumber. 

10,255  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $   7.00 ..$  71.79 

10,940  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  I.  S.  2E,  at  $7.50 82.05 

3,920  ft.  B.  M.,   S.  I.   S.,  at  $7.50.  . 29.40 

4,600  ft.  B.  M.,  No.  2  boards,  at  $11.90.  .  .  54.74 

2,800  ft.  B.  M.,  1x6  siding,  at  $14.00 39.20 

1,100  ft.  B.  M.,  1x4  flooring,  D.  M.,  at  $19.00...  20.90 

1,700  ft.  B.  M.,  2x6  selected,  D.  M.,  at  $8.50.  .  14.45 

139  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  4  S.,  No.  2  dr.,  at  $17.00.  .' 2.36 

568  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  I.  S.,  at  $10.00 5.68 

200  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  4  S.,  at  $19.00 7.28 

4,437  ft.  B.  M.,  8  in.  x  16  in.,  S.  H.,  at  $4.00.  .  17.75 


40,729  ft.  B.  M.,  total  av.,  at  $8.50 $345.60 

21  M.  shingles,  at  $1.75 $   36.75 

Millwork. 

1,380  lin.  ft.  molding  at  %c $   10.35 

Windows,   doors  and  frames 48.00 


Total    millwork $  58.35 

Hardware. 

11  rolls  tar  paper  at  65c $  7.15 

750  Ibs.  nails  at  2^4c 16.90 

Locks,   knobs,   hinges,    etc 5.60 

Miscellaneous     9.60 


Total     hardware $  39.25 

Paint. 

30  gals,  outside  paint  at  60c $  18.00 

20  gals,  inside  paint  at  85c 17.00 


Total  paint $  35.00 

Masonry. 

1,000  brick  at  $9.00 $  9.00 

24  sacks  cement  at  $1.00 24.00 

3  sacks  lime  at  60c 1.80 


Total    masonry $  34.80 

La  b  or. 

Unloading  material. 

1  day  foreman  at  $80.00  per  mo $     2.67 

5  day  carpenters  at   $2.50 12.50 

10  day  helpers  at  $2.00 20.00 


16  Total  av.    $2.20 $   35.17 


BUILDINGS.  1117 

Putting  in  foundation. 

6  day  carpenters  at  $2.50 %   12.50 

4  day  helpers  at  $2.00 8.00 

9  Total  av.    $2.30 .  .$   2050 

Building  depot. 

27      days,  foreman,  at  $80.00 $   69.77 

87.5  days,  carpenter,    at    $2.50 218.75 

50.5  days,  helper,    at    $2.00 101.00 

165  days,   total  av.   $2.36 $389.52 

Painting  depot. 

6  days,  carpenter,   at  $2.50 $   15.00 

9  days,  helper,  at  $2.00 18.00 


15  days,   total  av.   $2.20 $  33.00 

Excavating  for  platform  and  privy. 

9  days,  helper,  at  $2.00 $  18.00 

Unloading  cinders  and  build  cinder  platform. 

18.5  days,  helper,  at  $2.00 $  37.00 

Building  chimney. 

1.5  days,  bricklayer,   at  $3.50 $  5.25 

2.0  days,  helper,  at  $2.00 ; 4.00 

3.5  days,  total  av.  $2.70 $  9.25 

Tools    $  60.00 

Summary : 

Materials.  Totals.  Percent 

40,729  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8.50 $     345.60  31.8 

21   M.    shingles  at   $1.75 36.75  3.4 

Millwork    58.35  5.3 

Hardware    39.25  3.5 

Paint 35.00  3.2 

Masonry    34.80  3.2 

Total     $     549.75  50.4 

Labor. 

16  days,  unloading,  $2.20 $       35.17  3.2 

9  days,  put  in  foundation,  at  $2.30.  .  .  .          20.50  1.9 

165  days,  build  depot,  $2.36 389.52  35.8 

15  days,  paint  depot,   $2.20 33.00  3.0 

9  days,  excavation,   $2.00 18.00  1.6 

18.5   days,   build  cinder  platform,   $2.00         37.00  3.3 

3.5  days,  build  chimney,  $2.70 9.25  0.8 

Total     labor $    542.44  49.6 

Total  materials  and  labor 1,092.19  100.0 

Tools     (excessive) 60.00 


Total     $1,152.19 

Freight,  75  tons,  200  mi.,  at  y2c  ton  mi.         75.00 

Grand    total $1,227.19 

Cost 
per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent 

Materials    $0.385  44.8 

Labor    0.378  44.0 

Tools     0.042  5.0 

Freight     0.052  6.2 

Total  $0.857        100.0 


1118  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  a  30  x  60  Ft.  Depot. — This  depot  is  of  the  same  general 
type  as  the  others,  but  larger,  having  an  area  of  1,800  sq.  ft 
It  will  be  noted  that  it  contains  a  large  amount  of  second- 
hand car  sills  (15,200  ft.  B.  M. ),  used  in  building  the  platform. 
The  labor  cost  was  $714,  or  nearly  $12  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  The 
labor  of  painting  the  depot  was  very  high.  The  cost  of  the  paint 
vas  not  $20,  yet  the  labor  of  painting  was  nearly  $70. 

Weight.  Lbs. 

61,000  ft.  B.  M.(  at  3,300 201,000 

26  M.  shingles,  at  150 3,900 

Millwork 1,000 

Hardware     1,600 

Brick 6,000 

Stone    21,600 


Total  weight,   118   tons 235,100 

Lumber. 

8,108  .ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8.50 $   51.92 

6,912  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8.50 58.75 

1,440  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  I.  B.,  $8.50...  12.24 

3,700  ft.  B.  M.,  boards,  $8.50 . 31.45 

4,300  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  I.  S.,   $9.00 38.70 

9,189  ft.  B.  M.,  S.  I.  S.,  $9.00 82.70 

10,900  ft.  B.  M.,  No.  2  floor,  ceiling  and  siding, 

$18.50     201.65 

408  ft.  B.  M.,  No.  2,  S.  4  S.,  $26.00 10.63 

836  'ft.  B.  M.,  S.  1.  S.,  $25.00 20.90 

70  ft.  No.  2,  S.  4  S.,  $1.00 2.17 

15,200  ft.  B.  M..   8  in.  x  16  in.,  S.  H.    (for  plat- 
form),    $4.00 60.80 


61,063  ft.  B.  M.,  total  av.   $8.73 $531.91 

Shingles. 
26  M.  shingles,  $1.72 $  45.00 

Millwork. 

1,540  ft.  moulding  at  lc $   15.40 

6  doors,  9  windows  and  frames 60.60 

Total    millwork $  76.00 

Hardware. 

11  rolls  bldg.  paper,  57c $  6.27 

900   Ibs.   nails,    2y2c 22.50 

Locks,  knobs,  hinges,  etc 21.00 

Total    hardware $  49.77 

Paint. 

13  gals.  O.  B.  paint,  50c.  .  $     6.50 

14  gals,  boiled  oil,  37 %c 5.25 

16  gals,  inside  paint,  50c -. 8.00 

Total    paint $   19.75 

Masonry. 

1,000  bricks,    $9.00 $     9.00 

144  cii.  ft.  undressed  stone,  70c 100.80 

1%  bbls.  lime,  85c 1.28 

Total    masonry $111.08 


BUILDINGS. 


1119 


Labor. 

Unloading  material. 

6,5  days,    carpenter,    $2.50 $  16.25 

17.7  days,   section  men,    $1.15 20.35 

24.2  days,  total  av.  $1.50 $  36.60 

Trucking*  lumber. 

1  day,  foreman,  at  $80.00  per  mo $  2.85 

5      days,    carpenter,    $2.50 12.50 

29.5  days,    helper,    $2.00 59.00           ^ 

35.5  days,    total  av.    $2.09 $  74.08 

*Note. — Track  was  a  long  distance  from  depot. 
Clearing  snow  off  timber. 

3  days,  helper,  at  $2.00 $  6.00 

Erecting  depot. 

21  days,  foreman,  $80.00  per  mo $  54.19          fc, 

114  days,   carpenter,   $2.50 285.00 

24  days,  helper,   $2.00 48.00. soD          ^ 

159  days,  total  av.   $2.44 $387.19 

Painting  depot. 

2  days,  foreman,  $80.00  per  mo $  5.16 

1  day,    carpenter,    $2.50 2.50 

31  days,  helper,   $2.00 62.00      lf:fl> 

—  22 

34  days,  total  av.   $2.05 $  69.66     .    ;:, 

Unloading  cinders. 

10.8  days,  section  foreman,  $55.00 $  19.19 

7.0  days,  section  laborers,  $1.20 7.95                  b| 

15.1  days,  section  laborers,  $1.05 15.90                  Q 

32.9  Total  av.  $1.30 $  43.04 

Building   platform. 

7      days,    foreman,    $80.00 $   18.07 

17.6  days,    carpenter,    $2.50 44.00 

11.2  days,    helper,    $2.00 22.40 

35.8  dayjs,  total  av.  $2.36 $  84.47 

Building  privy. 

5.4  days,  carpenter,  $2.50 $  13.50 

Tools $  51.00 

Summary : 

Materials.                                                    Totals.  Percent 

61,063  ft.  B.  M.,  $8.73 $     531.91  34.4 

26  M.   shingles,   $1.72 45.00  2.9 

Millwork    76.00  4.9 

Hardware    49.77  3.2 

Paint    19.75  1.3 

Masonry     111.08  7.2 

Total    .                                                        ..$    833.51  53.9 


1120  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Labor. 

24.2  days,  unload,   $1-50 $  36.60  2.4 

35.5   days,   trucking,    $2.09 74.08  4.7 

3.0  days,  clear  snow,   $2.00 6.00  0.4 

159.0  days,  erect  depot,  $2.44 387.19  25.0 

34.0  days,  paint  depot,  $2.05 69.66  4.5 

32.9  days,  unload  cinders,  $1.30 43.04  2.8 

35.8  days,  build  platform,  $2.36 84.47  5.5 

5.4  days,  build  privy,  $2.50 13.50  0.8 

Total     . $  714.54  46.1 

Total  materials  and  labor $1,548.05 

Tools    51.00     - 


Total     $1,598.05 

Freight,    118   tons 118.00 

Grand    total $1,716.05 

Cost 
per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials    $0.463          48.6 

Labor.     0.397          41.6 

Tools     0.028  2.9 

Freight     0.066  6.9 

Total     $0.954        100.0 

Cost  of  57  Frame  Depots.— The  following  data  relate  to  a  rather 
cheap  class  of  railway  stations  built  in  the  Pacific  Northwest,  by 
company  labor.  Carpenters  received  $2.50  per  10.  hr.  day.  Lum- 
ber was  exceedingly  cheap,  hence  the  cost  of  materials  is  not  typical. 
I  have  charged  the  entire  cost  of  labor  against  the  lumber,  as  that 
enables  us  to  compare  costs  in  terms  of  the  M.  ft.  B.  M.,  which 
is  the  best  single  unit  for  such  comparisons. 

The  average  cost  of  five,  first  class,  combination,  one-story 
depots  (24  x  75  ft.)  was  as  follows  per  depot: 

Total.    Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials $1,450         $0.80 

Labor 927  0.52 


Total    $2,377      .    $1.32 

There  were  69  M.   (including  platforms)   in  each  depot,  hence  the 

labor  cost  was  $13  per  M. 

The   average   cost   of   three,    third    class,    combination,    one-story 

depots  (24  x  55  ft.)  was  as  follows  per  depot: 

Total.    Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials    $    964          $0.75 

Labor    726  0.55 


Total     $1,690          $1.30 

There  were  39  M.    (including  platforms)   in  each  depot,  hence  the 

labor  cost  was  $18  per  M. 

The    average    cost    of    18    fourth    class,    combination,    one-story 

depots  (16  x  48  ft.)  was  as  follows  per  depot: 

Total.    Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials     $480          $0.62 

Labor     320  0.42 

Total    ..$800          $1.04 


BUILDINGS.  1121 

There  were  20  M.  (including  platforms)  per  depot,  hence  the 
labor  cost  was  $16  per  M. 

The  average  cost  of  15  fourth  class,  combination,  one-story 
depots  (16  x  68  ft.)  was  as  follows  per  depot: 

Total.    Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials $    700          $0.64 

Labor     ,  533  0.49 


Total $1,233          $1.13 

There  were  26  M.  per  depot,  hence  the  average  labor  cost  was 
$20  per  M. 

The  average  cost  of  five,  second  class,  combination,  two- story 
depots  (24  x  59  ft.)  was  as  follows  per  depot: 

Total.    Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials     ... . .. $1,480         $1.04 

Labor    , 1,150  0.81 


Total $2,630          $1.85 

There  were  71  M.  per  depot,  hence  the  average  labor  cost  was 
$16  per  M. 

The  average  cost  of  11  third  class,  combination,  two-story 
depots  (24x55  ft.)  was  as  follows  per  depot: 

Total.    Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials $1,270         $0.98 

Labor    1,000  0.77 


Total $2,270          $1.73 

There  were  51  M.  per  depot,  hence  the  average  labor  cost  was 
nearly  $20  per  M. 

The  Cost  of  Five  Frame  Section  Houses.* — In  this  issue  we  giv< 
the  cost  of  five  frame  section  houses.  These  were  built  in  the 
northwest  and  were  three  room  houses  of  very  cheap  construction, 
the  type  known  in  that  section  as  "Jap  houses."  The  work  was  done 
by  company  forces.  As  is  customary  for  day  labor  work,  nothing 
has  been  allowed  for  superintendence  and  general  office  expenses, 
as  would  have  been  the  case  if  the  houses  had  been  built  by 
contract. 

The  three  room  houses  were  16x24  ft.,  having  384  sq.  ft.  of  room 
space.  The  bill  of  material  for  each  house  was  as  follows : 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  11,  1907. 


H22  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA 

Bill  of  Material  for  16  x  2k  Section  House. 

Ft.  B.  M. 

44  pcs.     2x12—2 176 

5  pcs.     6x6 — 16 240 

18  pcs.     2x8 — 16 384 

18  pcs.     2x4 — 16 , 192 

36  pcs.     2x4 — 12 288 

2  pcs.  1x6 — 14 14 

70  pcs.  2x4—8 373 

24  pcs.  2x4—14 192 

16  pcs.  2x4 — 16 171 

4  pcs.  2x2 — 12 16 

1,940  ft.  com.  boards,  sis 1,940 

95  pcs.  1x10 — 10,  sis 792 

"1  pcs.    2x12 — 12,    sis 24 

6  pcs.    1x6 — 14,    sis 42 

v/iulfc    4  PCS.    1x12 — 14,    sis 56 

8  pcs.    1x6 — 12,    sis 48 

1,700  ft.   1x6  D.  and  M.,  sis 1,700 

270  ft.  1x6  D.  and  M.,  s2s 270 

95  pcs.     1x3—10 237 

7  pcs.    2x4 — 12,    s4s 56 

Il%x%xl2,    %    rd 132 

2  pcs.    2x4 — 14,    s4s 19 

4  pcs.     4x4 — 6 32 

5  M.    shingles. 

15  pcs.   %xl% — 16  cover  moulding. 
18  pcs.  8x10  flashing  tin. 

1  door  2.10x6.10x1%,  4  P.  and  G. 

1  door  frame,  as  above. 

2  doors  2. 8x6. 8x1  ys,  4  P.  and  G. 
4  windows  10x16—1%,  12  Its, 

4  window  frames. 
350  brick. 

10  Ibs.  20d  nails. 
100  Ibs.  8d  nails. 
25  Ibs.  shingle  nails. 
10  sash  spring  bolts. 

3  prs.  wrought  butta 

3  doz.  1-in.  No.  8  screws. 

1  sack  lime. 

2  rolls  tarred  paper. 

3  rim  locks  and  knobs  complete^ 

5  gals,  outside  body  paint. 

1  gal.  outside  trimming  paint. 
5  gals,  inside  body  paint. 
1  gal.  inside  trimming  paint 

The  estimated  weight  is: 

Pounds. 

7,200  ft.  B.  M.  at  3,300  Ibs. 23,760 

5  M.  shingles  at  150  Ibs 750 

Millwork 500 

Hardware  and  paint 400 

Brick    2,100 

Total    .' 27,510 

For  practical  purposes  the  weight  can  be  considered  as  14  tons 
The  cost  of  materials  and  labor  for  each  house  was : 


BUILDINGS. 
HOUSE  No.  1. 


Lumber. 


2,046  ft.   B.    M.,    $7.50 $15.35 

2,902  ft.  B.  M.,  sis,   $8 23.22 

2,207  ft.  B.  M.,  1x6,  D.  and  M.,  $12 26.48 

100  ft.   B.  M.,   $9 .90 


7,255  ft.  B.  M.,  total,  $9.10   (av.) $65.95 

5  M.  shingles,   Star  S,   $1.35 6.75 

Millworlc. 

Moulding $   2.50 

3  doors  arid  4  windows 26.46 

Total    millwork $28.96 

Hardware. 

2  rolls  tarred  paper,  85  cts $   1.70 

135    Ibs.    nails 4.94 

Locks,   hinges,   etc ...,....: 4.82 

18  pcs.  8x10  flashing  tin .48 


Total    hardware $11.94 

Paint. 

5  gals.  o.  s.  body  paint  at  75  cts.. $   3.75 

1  gal.  o.  s.  trimmings  at  70  cts 70 

5  gals.  i.  s.  body  paint  at  80  cts 4.00 

%  gal.  i.  s.  trimmings  at  85  cts 43 


Total    paint $   8.88 

Masonry. 
350  brick  at  $7.50 ..$  2.62 

Labor. 
Engineering    $  4.05 

Building  section  house. 

16.5  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 $41.25 

2.0  days,  bridgeman,  at  $2.25 4.50 


18.5  days,  total,  at  $2.47 $45.75 

Building  flue. 

1  day,  bridgeman,  at   $2.25 $   2.25 

1  day,  helper,  at  $1.75 1.75 


Total    $  4.00 

Painting. 

4  days,  foreman,  at  $2.50 $10.00 

Tools    4.50 

Summary : 

Materials. 

Totals.  Pet. 

7,255  ft.  B.  M.  lumber  at  $9.10 $  65.95  29.0 

5  M.   shingles  at  $1.35 6.75  2.9 

Millwork     28.96  12.8 

Hardware     11.94  5.2 

Paint     .  . 8.88  3.9 

Masonry,  350  brick,   $7.50 2.62  1.1 

Total    materials ..../...                       ..$125.10  54.9 


1124  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Labor. 

Engineering     %     4.05  1.8 

18.5  days  building  house,  $2.47 45.75  20.1 

2  days  building  flue,  $2 4.00  1.8 

4  days  painting,   $2.50 10.00  4.4 

Total    labor .' .  $  63.80  28.1 

Total  material  and  labor 188.90  83.0 

Tools    4.50  2.0 

Freight,   14  tons   (excessive  chg.) 33.44  15.0 

Total   $226.84  100.0 

Per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials     $0.326  55.2 

Labor    0.167  28.3 

Tools     0.012.  2.0 

Freight     0.085  14.5 

Total .$0.590  loTo 

HOUSE  No.  2. 
Labor. 

Unloading  material. 

2  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 $  5.00 

Building  house. 

16.5  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 41.25 

Building  flue. 

1.3  days,  mason,  at  $3 1 3.90 

Painting. 

1  day,  foreman,  at  $2.50 2.50 

3  days,  helper,  at  $1.75 5.25 

Total    labor $  7.75 

Tools    3.65 

Summary : 

Materials. 

Total.  Pet. 

7,255   ft.   B.  M.  lumber  at  $9.10 $   65.95  30.9 

5  M.    shingles   at   $1.35 6.75  3.1 

Millwork     28.96  13.5 

Hardware     11.94  5.6 

Paint     8.88  4.1 

Masonry,   350  brick,  $7.50 2.62  1.2 

Total   materials    $125.10  58.4 

Labor. 

18.5  days,  building  house,  at  $2.50 $  46.25  21.7 

1.3  days,  building  flue,  at  $3 3.90  1.8 

Painting   7.75  3.6 


Total    labor $  57.80  27.1 

Total  material  and  labor 182.90  85.5 

Tools 3.65  1.7 

Freight     27.31  12.8 

Total     $213.86  100.0 

Per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials    $0.326  58.7 

Labor    0.150  27.1 

Tools     0.009  1.6 

Freight     0.071  12.6 


Total     ' $0.556       100.0 


BUILDINGS.  1125 

HOUSE  No.  3. 

Labor. 

Unloading  materials. 
2  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 $  5.00 

Building  house. 
16  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 $40.00 

Cleaning  up  old  material. 
1  day,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 $  2.50 

Painting. 
1  day  foreman,   at  $2.50 $  2.50 

4  days,  helper,  at  $1.75 7.00 

Total    labor $  9.50 

Tools     4.18 

Summary : 

Materials. 

7,255  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  $9.10. $  65.95  33.1 

Total.  Pet. 

5  M.    shingles   at   $1.35 6.75  3.3 

Millwork     28.96  14.6 

Hardware     11.94  6.0 

Paint     8.86  4.4 

Masonry,   350  bricks,   at  $7.50 2.62 

Total   materials    $125.10  62.7 

Labor. 

19  days  building  house,  at  $2.50 $  47.50  23.7 

Painting    9.50  4.7 

Total  labor    $   57.00     .     28.4 

Per  cent. 

Total   materials   and   labor $182.10          91.1 

Tools     4.18  2.0 

Freight     13.79  6.9 

Total    $2WX07  100.0 

Per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials     $0.326  62.7 

Labor    0.148  28.4 

Tools     0.010  1.9 

Freight 0.036  7.0 

$0.520       100.0 
HOUSE  No.   4. 
Labor. 
Building  house : 

16.6   days,    carpenter,   at   $2.50 $41.50 

Building  flue: 
1  day,   carpenter,  at  $2.50 $2.50 

1  day,  helper,  at  $1.75 1.75 

$4.25 
Painting. 
3  days,   foreman,  at  $2.50 $  7.50 

2  days,  helper,   at  $1.75 3.50 

Total  labor $11.00 

Tools    .  %  3.82 


1126 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


SUMMARY. 

Materials.                                                       Total.  Per  cent. 

7,255  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  $9.10 $   65.95  33  6 

5  M  shingles,  at  $1.35 6.75  3  3 

Millwork     28.96  14.7 

Hardware     11.94  6.1 

Paint     8.86  4.5 

Masonry,  350  brick,  $7.50 2.62  1.3 

Total   materials    $125.10  63.5 

Labor. 

16.6  days  building  house,  at  $2.50 $  41.50  21.1 

Building    flue    4.25  2.2 

Painting 11.00  5.6 

Total   labor    $  56.75  28.9 

Per  cent. 

Total  materials  and  labor $181.85  92  4 

Tools 3.82  2.0 

Freight    10.67  5.4 

Total $196.34  100.0 

Per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Material    .' $0.326  63.4 

Labor 0.150"  29.2 

Tools 0.010  2.0 

Freight 0.028  5.4 

$0.514  100.0 

HOUSE  No.  5. 
Labor. 

Unloading  materials: 

1  day,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 . $  2.50 

Building  house: 

20  days,  carpenter,  at  $2.50 50.00 

Building  flue : 

3  days,    carpenter,    at    $2.50 7.50 

Painting : 

5  days,   foreman,  at   $2.50..                                       .  12.50 

1  day,  helper,  at  $1.75 1.75 

Total   labor    ..$14.25 

Tools   $   4.44 

SUMMARY. 
Materials.  Total.     Per  cen^, 

7,255  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  $9.10 .-.$   65.95  32.2 

5   M  shingles,  at  $1.35 6.75  3  2 

Millwork     28.96  14.0 

Hardware    , ..      11.94  58 

Paint    8.86  4.3 

Masonry,   350  bricks,   $7.50 2.62  .    1.3 


Total   materials    $125.10 


60.8 


BUILDINGS.  1127 

Labor. 

21  days  building  house,  at   $2.50 $   52.50  25.4 

Building  flue 7.50  3.6 

Painting    .  .      14.25  7.0 

Total    labor $   74.25          36.0 

Per  cent. 

Total   materials  and   labor $199.35          96.8 

Tools     4.44  2.0 

Freight :      2.51 

Total     $206.30  100.0 

Per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials $0.326  60.6 

Labor     0.193  36.0 

Tools     0.012  2.1 

Freight     ...    0.007 

$0.538        100.0 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  -cost  of  lumber  is  extremely 
low,  even  for  the  section  in  which  this  particular  building  work  was 
done. 

Per  sq.  ft.     Per  cent. 

Materials     $0.326  60 

Labor     0.160  30 

Tools    0.010  .2 

Freight    0.045 

$0.541  100 

Since  the  weight  of  the  buildings  is  given  in  all  cases,  it  is  easy 
to  calculate  the  freight  for  any  given  haul. ' 

The  average  cost  of  the  labor  on  these  section  houses  was  $62  per 
section  house.  There  were  7,250  ft.  B.  M.  in  each  section  house, 
and,  if  we  charge  the  full  cost  of  the  labor  ($62)  against  this 
amount  of  lumber,  we  have  a  trifle  less  than  $9  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M. 

Cost  of  a  Blacksmith  Shop,  Barn  and  Telegraph  Office.*— We 
give  in  this  issue  the  detailed  cost  of  erecting  a  blacksmith  shop,  a 
telegraph  office  and  a  barn  for  railroad  purposes  in  the  Northwest. 
The  work  was  done  by  day  labor.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  price 
of  lumber  is  very  low : 

BLACKSMITH  SHOP. 
Blacksmith  shop,  20  x  30  ft.  ;  area  600  sq.  ft. 

Weight:  Pounds. 

2,120  ft.  B.  M.,  at  3,300  Ibs 6   996 

4  V2   M  shingles,  at  150 675 

Hardware    35 

Total,   4   tons 7,706 

Lumber: 

320   ft.   B.   M.,   at- $8.00 $   2.56 

1,800  ft.  B.  M.  second  hand,  at  $4 7.20 

2.120  ft.  B.  M.  total,  at  $4.60    (av.) $   9.76 

4%  M  shingles,  at  $1.65 7.43 


Engineering -Contracting,  Nov.  6,   1907. 


1128  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Hardware: 

20  Ibs.    8d.   nails,   at  $2.10 $     0.42 

5  Ibs.   20d.   nails,   at   $2.00 10 

10  Ibs.   3d  nails,  at  $2.45 25 

Total  hardware   $   0.77 

Labor: 

Superintendence     $  4.80 

Carpenter,   10.4   days,  at   $2.10 21.82 

Total   labor    $26.62 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:  Totals.         Percent. 

2,120  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $4.60 $   9.76  21.4 

4%   M  shingles,   at  $1.65 7.43  16.7 

Hardware     77  1.9 



Total    materials    -... $17.96  40.0 

Labor    $26.62  60.0 

Grand  total  materials  and  labor.  .$44.58  100.0 

Cost  sq.  ft.     Per  cent. 

Materials    $0.030  40.0 

Labor    0.044  60.0 

Total      $0.074  100.0 

The  low  cost  of  materials  for  this  building  is  explained  by  the 
fact  that  six-sevenths  of  it  was  second-hand  material.  The  build- 
ing had  no  floor,  and  no  studs  were  used  in  the  sides.  The  cost  per 
M  ft.  B.  M.  for  the  labor  on  the  lumber  was  $12.55. 

HAY  BARN. 

Hay  barn,    20x35   ft. ;    area,    700   sq.    ft. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

6,794  ft.  B.  M.,  3,300  Ibs 22,420 

7  M  shingles,   150   1,050 

Hardware,   paint,    etc 475 


Total,   12   tons 23,945 


2,585  ft.  B.  M.  at  $7.50 $19.39 

1,613  ft.  B.  M.  at  $8.00 12  90 

496  ft.  B.  M.  at  $12.00 5.95 

2,000  ft.  B.  M.  at  $8.00 16.00 

100  ft.  B.  M.  at  $17.00 1.70 

6,794  ft.  B.  M.,  total,  at  $8.23   (av.) $55.91 

7  M  shingles,  at  $1.35 $  9.45 

Millwork: 
2   window  sash,  at   $0.75..  1.50 


BUILDINGS.  1129 


Hardware: 


200  Ibs.  20d.  nails,  at  $3.55 7.10 

200  Ibs.  lOd.  nails,  at  $3.55 7.10 

20  Ibs.     3d.  nails,  at  $3.95 79 

3  Ibs.      8d.   nails 15 

3  Ibs.      3d    nails 12 

2  pair  10-in.  strap  hinges 32 

36   1  %-in.    screws    07 

1  8-in.  hasp    07 

2  8-in.  bar  locks 34 

No.   10  screws   , 01 

Total  hardware $16.07 

Paint: 

5  gals,  outside  body  paint,  at  $0.75 ..$  3.75 

2i/2   gals,  oil,  at  $0.58 .      1.45 

Total    paint    $   5.20 

Labor: 
Engineering    $     .80 

Building  hay  barn: 

Foreman,  4  days,  at  $85  per  month 10.95 

Carpenter,   20   days,  at  $2.50 50.00 

Carpenter,  6  days,  at  $2.25 13.50 

Helpers,  5  days,  at  $1.75 7.00 



Total .$81.45 

Moving   material    from    barn,    helper,    1    day,    at 

$1.75    $   1.75 

Cutting  door  in  back  and  placing  it,   carpenter, 

1   day,   at   $2.50 2.50 

Painting  barn : 

Carpenter,    1   day,   at   $2.50 2.50 

Bridgeman,  2  days,  at  $2.25 4.50 

Total    .  .  .$  7.00 

Total   labor $93.50 

Tools    $  4.98 

_ 
SUMMARY. 

Materials:                                                 Totals.  Per  cent. 

6,794   ft.   B.   M.,   at   $8.23 $   55.94  30.0 

7  M  shingles,  at   $1.35 9.45  5.1 

Millwork     1.50  0.8 

Hardware     16.07  8.6 

Paint     .  . .  v 5.20  2.7 

Total   materials    $  88.16  47.2 

Labor: 

Engineering ..$  .80  0.5 

Building    81.45  43.6 

Moving    lumber,    etc 1.75  0.9 

Cutting  door  in  back 2.50  1.3 

Painting   7.00  3.7 

Total   labor    $   93~50  50.0 

Total  materials  and  labor $181.66  97.2 

Tools     4.98  2.8 


Grand  total    $186.64  100.00 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials    $0.126  47.2 

Labor    0.133  50.0 

Tools    0.007  2.8 

Total     $0.266  100.0 

The  cost  of  labor  per  M  ft.   B.   M.   of  lumber  used 
was  $13.76. 

TELEGRAPH  OFFICE. 

Telegraph  office,   12   X   12  ft.  ;  area,   144     sq.  ft. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

2,332  ft.  B.  M.,  at  3,300  Ibs 7,695 

2  M  shingles,  at  150  Ibs 300 

Hardware,    etc 150 

Total,   4   tons 8,145 

Lumber: 

185  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $12.00. $   2.22 

230  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $15.00 3.45 

340  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $16.50 5.61 

431  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $15.00 6.47 

243  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $12.00 , 2.91 

73  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $26.00 2.03 

200  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $20.00 4.00 

630  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $30.00 18.90 

2,332  ft.  B.  M.  total,  at  $19.55   (av.) '.  .  .$45.59 

2  M  shingles,   at  $3.50 $  7.00 

Millwork: 

3  window   sashes $   3.28 

Hardware: 

75  Ibs.  tar  paper , $   1.52 

1   pair  strap  hinges 20 

Screws 04 

1  rim  hook . 30 

6  Ibs.    6d.   nails 18 

5  Ibs.    8d.   nails    (finishing) .31 

10  Ibs.  4d.  nails . .  . 30 

30  Ibs.    lOd.   nails 84 

Total  hardware    $  3.69 

Labor: 

Foreman,  3  days,  at  $80  per  month $  7.74 

Carpenter,  11  days,  at  $2.50 27.50 

Total  labor   $35.24 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:                                                 Totals.  Percent. 

2,332   ft.   B.  M.,  at   $19.55 $45.59  48.0 

2  M  shingles    at  $3.50 7.00  7.3 

Millwork     3.28  3.5 

Hardware 3.69  3.9 


Total   materials    $59.56  62.7 

Labor    35.24  37.3 

Grand  total   $94.80  100.0 

Cost  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials $0.413  62.7 

Labor    .                                                              .    0.245  37.3 


$0.658  100.0 


BUILDINGS.  1131 

The  cost  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  used  for  labor  on  the  office 
was  $15.11.  This  building  had  a  floor  in  it  and  a  ceiling,  hence  the 
cost  per  sq.  ft.  of  area,  and  the  cost  per  M  ft.  of  lumber  used 
would  naturally  be  higher  than  in  the  other  two  buildings. 

Cost  of  Forty  Hand-Car  Houses.* — In  this  article  we  give  the 
cost  in  detail  of  erecting  40  frame  hand-car  houses  on  a  division  of 
a  Western  railroad.  The  price  of  lumber  is  given  and  other  ma- 
terials, as  well  as  the  labor  costs.  The  work  was  done  by  "com- 
pany men." 

Forty  hand-car  houses  built  on  one  division ;  size,  8x12  f t. ; 
area,  96  sq.  ft. 

Weight:  Pounds. 

48,055  ft.  B.  M.,  at  3,300  Ibs 158,581 

50  M  shingles,  at  150 7,500 

Hardware    and    paint 2,400 


Total,     84    tons 168,481 

Timber: 

9,207   ft.   B.    M.,   at   $11.50 $105.88 

6,400    ft.    B.   M.,   at   $11.50 73.60 

1,200  ft.  B.  M.  S.  1  S.,  at  $13.75 16.50 

4,053  ft.  B.  M.  S.  1  S.,  at  $28.75 116.52 

3,407   ft.    B.    M.,   at   $19.00 64.73 

1,760   ft.    B.   M.,   at   $19.00 33.44 

2,333  ft.  B.   M.   ceiling,  at  $32.50 75.82 

2,725  ft.  B.  M.  S.   1  S.,  at  $14.00 38.15 

2,270  ft.  B.  M.  S.   1  S.,  at  $28.75 65.26 

8,500  ft.  B.  M.  S.   1   S.,  at  $28.75 244.33 

6,200   ft.    B.    M.,   at   $13.00 80.60 

48,055  ft.  B.  M.  total,  at  $19.03   (av.) $914.83 

50   M.   shingles,  at   $1.25 62.50 

Hardware: 

80  pairs  12-in.  hinges,   $1.21  per  doz $  8.06 

80  5-in.    hasp   and   staples 1.20 

140  doz.  1%-in.  screws,  at  $0.23y2  per  gross 2.74 

27  doz.  %-in.  screws,  at  $0.08  per  gross .18 

200  Ibs.   3d  nails,  at  $2.85 5.70 

100  Ibs.   6d  nails,  at   $2.25 2.25 

200  Ibs.  16d  nails,  at  $2.00 4.00 

40  8-in.    hinge   hasps 1.25 

40  padlocks     9.00 

250  Ibs.   20d  nails,  at   $2.00 5.00 

800  Ibs.  lOd  nails,  at  $2.05 16.40 

Total  hardware   .  .  ... $   55.78 

100  gals,   railroad  paint,   at   $0.75 $   75.00 

Labor: 

Superintendent     $   23.73 

Foreman,    29    days,    at    $3.00 87.00 

Carpenters,   121.5   days,   at   $2.50 303.75 

Total    labor     .                                                          ..$414.48 
Tools      .$      3.75 

Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  20,   1907. 


1132  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

For  one  hand-car  house,  weighing  2.1  tons,  we  give  the  following 
summary : 

Materials:  Total.  Per  cent. 

1,201  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $19.03 $22.87  60.0 

114    M    shingles,    at    $1.25 1.56  4.1 

Hardware     1.39  8.7 

Paint     1.87  4.9 

Total   materials    $27.69  72.7 

Labor $10.36  27.1 

Total  materials  and  labor..         ..$38.05  99.8 

Tools     $   0.09  0.2 

Grand  total   $38.14  100.0 

Cost  per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent 

Materials     $0.288  72.7 

Labor     0.108  27.1 

Tools    0.001  0.2 

Total      $0.397  100.0 

The  cost  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  for  the  entire  labor  on  these  buildings 
was  $8.62,  which  was  quite  low. 

Cost  of  Six  Tool  Houses.* — In  this  article  we  give  the  cost  in 
detail  of  building  six  frame  tool  houses  for  use  on  railroads.  The 
labor  was  performed  by  company  forces.  The  costs  are  summarized 
so  as  to  allow  of  comparison  with  other  cheap  structures,  like  those 
that  have  appeared  in  our  previous  issues  in  this  series  of  articles. 
Lists  of  materials  and  prices  are  given  as  well  as  wages.  The  cc-^t 
of  lumber  was  very  low. 

EXAMPLE  I. 

Tool  house,  8  x  12  f t. ;  area,  96  sq.  ft. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

1.000  ft.   B.   M.,   at    3,300   Ibs 3,300 

1  %   M  shingles,  at  150 188 

Hardware     . 50 

Total,    1%    tons. 3,538 

Lumber: 

323  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $9 ; $   2.91 

630  ft.   B.   M.,   at   $11 6.93 

48  ft.   B.   M.   flooring,   at   $20 96 

1.001  ft.  B.  M.  total,  at  $10.80   (av.)' $10.80 

1%    M  shingles,   at   $1.80 $  2.25 

Hardware: 
Bolts    $     .82 

3  Ibs.    3d   nails,    $2.76 08 

10  Ibs.    8d   nails,    $2.35 24 

5  Ibs.  20d  nails,  $2.25 11 

1  gal.   paint    60 

2  pr.  8-in.  tie  hinges,  4  ct 08 

1   8-in.  hinge  hasp,   5  ct 05 

%   gross  1-in.  No.  10  screws,  14  ct 07 

1  Yale    padlock     43 

Total $  2.48 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  30,  1907. 


BUILDINGS. 


1133 


Labor: 

Engineering $   1.65 

Building  house,  4.5  days,  carpenter,  $2.50 11.25 

Total    $12.90 

This  includes  painting. 
Tools   .'..$     .48 

SUMMARY.. 

Materials:                                                 Totals.  Percent. 

1,001  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $10.80..                      ..$10.80  38.0 

Shingles    2.25  7.4 

Hardware     2.48  8.5 

Total  materials $15.53  53.9 

Labor: 

Engineering $   1.65  5.7 

Carpenter     11.25  38.9 

Total   labor    $12.90  44.6 

Total    materials    and    labor $28.43  98.5 

Tools    48  1.5 

Freight     00  0.0 

Grand  total   .  . $28.91  100.0 

Cost  per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials    $  .161  53.9 

Labor     134  44.6 

Tools    005  1.5 

Total    $   .300  100.0 

It  will   be  noted  that  the   carpenter  labor,    as  above   given,   cost 
$11.25  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  tool  house. 

EXAMPLE  II. 

Tool  house,    12  x  14    ft.,   and   oil   house,    10x32;     area, 
168  sa.  ft.  and  320  sc. 'ft.     Total  area,   488  sq.  ft. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

Lumber  and  millwork 13,700 

5 y2   M  shingles,  at  150 825 

Hardware  and  paint 200 

Total,    7 V2    tons .14,725 

Lumber: 

416   ft.   B.  M.  at   $9    .                                                 .  .$   3.74 

700  ft.   B.  M.    at   $12    8.40 

1,360  ft.   B.   M.     at  $8.50     11.56 


1,100  ft.   B.   M. 
450  ft.   B.  M. 


at    $12 


13.20 


at   $9    4.05 


4,026  total,  at  $10.17    (av.) $40.95 

Millwork: 
Battens    $   1.92 

1  door  frame  and  door 2.95 

2  window  frames  and  sash 5.90 

Total    $10.77 

1%  M  shingles,  at  $1.45 $   7.98 


1134  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Hardware : 

100  Ibs.  8d  nails $   2.56 

20  Ibs.   30d  nails,  at  $2.46 .49 

1  hasp     05 

2  hinges  and  hasps 10 

1  pair    butts    04 

20  Ibs.  6d  nails,  at  $2.66 .53 

1  galv.   iron   chimney 1.04 

Paint: 

6  gals,   outside  body  paint,   75   cts $   4.50 

1  gal.  outside  trim  paint 70 

%   gal.    turpentine    22 

^4   gal.  Japan  dryer 20 

$   5.62 

Labor: 

Building  tool  and  oil  house : 
Carpenters,   20  days,  at  $2.50 $50.00 

Putting  up  shelving: 

Carpenter,  4  days,  at  $2.50 10.00 

Painting,  helper,   1  day,  at  $1.75 1.75 

Total    labor    $61.75 

Tools    $  2.34 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:                                                Totals.  Per  cent. 

4,026  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $10.17. $  40.95  30.5 

Millwork     10.77  8.0 

Shingles    7.98  5.9 

Hardware     4.81  3.5 

Paint     5.62  4.1 

Total   material    $  70.13  52.0 

Labor: 

Building $60.00  44.7 

Painting     1.75  1.3 

Total   labor $   61.75  46.0 

Total  material  and  labor    $131.88  98.0 

Tools     2.34  2.0 

Freight     00  0.0 

Grand    total     $134.22  100.0 

Cost  per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials    .                                                   ..$0.144  52.0 

Labor      0.126  46.0 

Tools     0.005  2.0 

Total     $0.275  100.0 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  about  $15  per  M. 
It  is  noteworthy  in  this  instance  to  record  that  the  foreman  car- 
penter on  this  job  was  discharged  for  inefficiency,  owing  to  the  high 
cost  of  building  these  two  sheds.  One  of  these  buildings  had  win- 
dows in  it  and  shelving,  which  should  have  made  the  labor  costs 
higher  than  in  Example  I,  where  neither  windows  nor  shelves  were 
used.  A  comparison  shows  that  the  cost  per  square  foot  of  area  in 
Example  II  was  lower  than  in  all  the  cases  given  except  Example 
V.  The  cost  was  2V,  cts.  lower  than  Example  I.  1  ct.  of  which  was 


BUJLDIXGS.  1135 

in  the  reduced  cost  of  labor.  This  makes  evident  the  fact  that  cost 
data  and  their  analysis  form  the  only  true  way  of  telling  of  the 
efficiency  of  workmen  and  methods,  provided  the  records  are  kept 
honestly  and  intelligently. 

EXAMPLE  III. 

Tool  house,  8  x  12  ft. ;  area,  96  sq.  ft. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

1,110  ft.  B.  M.  lumber,  at  3,300 3,663 

1   1/5  M  shingles,  at  150 180 

Hardware  and  paint 50 

Total,    2   tons 3,893 

Lumber: 

758   ft.  B.  M.,  at  $10.50 %   7.95 

352   ft.  B.  M.,  at  $7.50 2.64 

. 


1,110  ft.  B.  M.  total,  at  $9.54  (av.) $10.59 

1,200  shingles,    at    $1.90 $  2.28 

Hardware : 

3-in.  bolts $   1.60 

5  Ibs.  20d  nails,  at  $2 10 

5  Ibs.   8d  nails,  at  $2.10 11 

10  Ibs.   lOd  nails,  at  $2.05 20 

Total $     2~01 

Paint: 

2  gals,  outside  body  paint,  at  60  cts $  1.20  . 

Labor: 
Loading  material   for  tool  house : 

Carpenter,  1  day,  at  $2.50 $  2.50 

'  Erecting  tool  house  : 

Carpenter,  2  days,  at  $2.50 5.00 

Helper,   6  days,  at  $2 12.00 

Total    $19.00 

This  includes  painting. 
Tools    $   1.57 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:                                              Totals.  Per  cent 

1,110  ft.-B.  M.,  at  $9.54 $10.59  28.8 

1,200  shingles,  at  $1.90 2.28  6.2 

Hardware     2.01  5.5 

Paint     1.20  3.3 

Total  material    $16.08  43.8 

Labor    ...$19.00  51.9 


Total  materials  and  labor $35.08  95.7 

Tools 1.57  4.3 

Freight    0.00  0.0 

Grand  total   $36.65  100.0 

Cost  per  sq.  ft  Per  cent. 

Materials    $0.167  43.8 

Labor 0.198  51.9 

Tools    0.016  4.3 

Total                                                  ....$0.381  100.0 


1136  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  nearly  $17.50  per  M,  which  is 
excessive. 

EXAMPLE  IV. 

Tool  house,  8x12  f t. ;  area,  96  sq.  ft. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

1,247  ft.   B.  M.,  at  3,300  Ibs 4,115 

1  %   M  shingles,  at  150 187 

Hardware  and  paint 65 

Total,    2    tons 4,367 

Lumber: 

577  ft.   B.  M.,  at  ?7. $  4.04 

180  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $7 1.26 

490  ft  B.  M.,  at  $8 3.92 

1,247  ft.  B.  M.  total  at  $7.40   (av.)  . .  $  9.22 

1%   M  shingles,  at  $1.50 $  1.87 

Hardware: 

10  Ibs.  20d  nails,  at  $2.46 $     .25 

20  Ibs.   8d  nails,  at  $2.56 51 

5  Ibs.   3d  nails,  at  $2.91 15 

2  prs.  hinges     12 

1  hasp    05 

1  padlock     16 

Total     $  1.24 

Paint: 

4%   gals,  outside  body  paint,  at  75  cts $  3.38 

%  gal.  boiled  oil,  at  70  cts. 35 

Total    $~3~73 

Labor: 

Carpenter,  3  days,  at  $2.50 $  7.50 

Carpenter,   1   day,   at   $2.25 . , 2.25 

Helper,  1  day,  at  $1.75 1.75 

Painting,  helper,  1  day,  at  $1.75 1.75 

Total    $13.25 

Tools    95 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:  Totals.  Per  cent 

1,247  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $7.40 $   9.22  30.4 

1^4  M  shingles,  at  $1.50 1.87  6.1 

Hardware     1.24  4.1 

Paint     3.73  12.3 

Total  materials    $16.06  52.9 

Labor: 

Building     $11.50  38.0 

Painting    1.75  6.7 

Total  labor   $13.25  43.7 

Total   material  and  labor $29.31  96.6 

Tools    95  3.4 

Freight     .00  0.0 

Grand  total  $30.26        100.00 


BUILDINGS.  113? 


Cost  per  sq.  ft.     Per  cent. 

Materials $0.167  52.9 

Labor    0.138  43.7 

Tools 0.001  3.4 

Total     $0.306  100.0 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  $10.50  per  M. 

EXAMPLE  V. 

Double  tool  house,  12x30  ft.;  area,  360  sq.  ft. 
Weight :  Poundi ». 

J,606-ft.  B.  M.,  at  3,300  Ibs 11,36  f 

3 V2  M  shingles,  at  150  Ibs 52U 

Hardware    75 

Total,   6  tons .  .  11,965 

T 

Lumber: 

1,019  ft.  B.  M.,  at   $8    $  8.15 

708  ft.  B.  M.,   S.   1   S.,  at  $8.50 6.02 

879   ft.  B.  M.,  at   $8    7.03 

288  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8.50 2.45 

232  ft.  B.  M.,  at   $8    1.86 

318  ft.  B.  M.,  at   $4    1.27 

3,444  ft.  B.  M.   total,   at   $7.77    (av.) $26~78 

3y2   M  shingles,   at  $1.40 $  4.90 

Hardware: 

20  Ibs.  4d  nails,  at  $3.80 $  .76 

6  Ibs.  20d  nails,  at  $3.50 21 

8  Ibs.  8d  nails,  at  $3.60 29 

24  Ibs.  lOd  nails,  at  $3.55 85 

6  Ibs.  30d  nails,  at  $3.50 21 

4  pairs  hinges 48 

2  pairs  hasps 14 

2  Yale  padlocks  88 

Total    $~3~82 

Labor: 

Carpenter,  12.1  days,  at  $2.50 $30.25 

Tools    2.21 

Freight    76 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:  Totals.          Per  cent 

3,444  ft.   B.   M.,  at  $7.77 $26.78  39.0 

Shingles  3 V2  M,  at  $1.40 4.90  7.2 

Hardware     3.82  5.6 

Total   materials    $35.50  51.7 

Labor    $30.25  43.8 

Total  materials  and  labor $65.75  95.5 

Tools    2.21  3.3 

Freight 76  1.2 

Grand  total   ,  ..$68.72  100.0 


1138  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials    $0.0j8  51.7 

Labor    0.084  43.8 

Tools   0.007  3.3 

Freight ._0.002"  1.2 

Total ..$0.191  100.0 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  $8.60  per  M>    ' 

EXAMPLE  VI. 

Tool  house,  8x12  ft.  ;  area,  96  ft. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

1,247  ft.  B.  M.,  at  3,300  Ibs 4,115 

1^4  M  shingles,  at  150 187 

Hardware     60 

Total,   2   tons 4,362 

Lumber: 

577   ft.  B.  M.,  at  ?7 $.  4.04 

180  ft.   B.   M.,   at   $7 .      1.26 

490  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8 3.92 

1,247  ft.  B.  M.  total  at  $7.3'i    (av.)  .....  .  .$   9.22 

1  %  M  shingles,  at  $1.50 $   1.87 

Hardware: 

Bolts .- .  . '.  $     .42 

10  Ibs.  20d  nails,  at  $2.46 jr, 

20  Ibs.  8d  nails,  at  $2.56 .51 

5  Ibs.  3d  nails,  at  $2.91 15 

2  pairs  hinges 12 

1  hasp     05 

1  padlock .16 

Total $  1.66 

Paint: 

2y2  gals,  outside  body  paint,  at  75  cts.. .$  1.88 

y2  gal.  oil,  at  70  cts ; .35 

r2:s 

Labor: 

Carpenter,   6.3  days,  at  $2.50 £15  75 

Carpenter,   1   day,   at  $2.25 • 2.25 

Helper,    2.5   days,   at   $1.75 4.37 

Total    $22.37 

Tools     , 92 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:                                                  Totals.  Per  cent. 

1,247  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $7.39 $    9.22  ">4  0 

1%  M  shingles,  at  $1.50 1.87  49 

Hardware     166  43 

Paint     2.23  5> 

Total   materials $14.98  39.1 

Labor     22.37  58.4 

Total  materials  and  labor $37.35  97  5 

Tools    92  2  f> 

Freight    00  O/o 

Grand  total $3S.27          ioo.O 


BUILDINGS.  1139 

Cost  per  sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials    $0.156  39.1 

Labor    0.233  58.4 

Tools    0.001  2.5 

Total 10.390  100.0 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  cost  $18  per  M,  which  is  excessive. 
A  number  of  these  tool  houses  were  8x12,  giving  96  sq.  ft.  of 
area  in  the  building  and  needing  for  their  construction  a  little  more 
than  a  thousand  feet  of  lumber.  Their  cost  ran  from  $28  to  $38 
.  A  comparison  of  these  buildings  with  the  cost  of  building  a  large 
number  of  shacks  for  camps  in  building  railroads  in  the  South  will 
be  of  interest.  These  camps  were  built  by  one  of  the  editors  of  this 
journal. 

They  were  about  10  x  10,  and  had  a  slanting  roof.  A  door  made 
from  boards  was  used  in  it,  and  a  sliding  board  window  was  put 
in  one  side.  A  bunk  was  also  built  in  it,  but  there  was  no  floor.  A 
thousand  feet  of  lumber  was  used  in  building  the  shack.  The  roof 
was  covered  with  tar  paper,  and  strap  hinges,  hasp  and  padlock 
were  used  on  the  door.  The  lumber  on  a  large  number  built  in  Ten- 
nessee cost  $10  per  M ;  the  tar  paper,  nails  and  hardware  cost  $2, 
making  a  cost  of  materials  of  $12.  Carpenters  were  paid  $3.50  per 
day,  and  3  carpenters  completed  a  building  in  a  day,  making  a  cost 
of  about  $10  for  labor,  or  a  total  cost  of  $22  per  shack. 

A  comparison  with  the  tool  houses  shows  that  if  paint  and 
shingles  had  been  used  these  shacks  would  have  cost  a  few  dollars 
more  for  materials  and  slightly  raised  the  cost  of  labor  ;  but  wages 
paid  by  the  contractor  on  the  shacks  were  $1  per  day  higher,  which 
about  offsets  the  increased  cost  of  materials. 

We  have  pointed  out  before  that  a  contractor  who  pays  $3.50  a 
day  for  carpenters  will  usually  get  more  work  for  the  money  than 
will  a  railroad  company  that  pays  $2.50  to  its  carpenters.  A  com- 
parison of  the  cost  of  labor  per  square  foot  as  listed  above  with 
10  cts.  per  square  foot  as  paid  for  these  shacks  shows  plainly  that 
this  is  true. 

Capacity  and  Cost  of  Ice  Houses.— The  nominal  capacity  of  an 
Ice  house  is  generally  stated  in  tons  of  ice,  and  is  generally  taken  to 
mean  the  capacity  up  to  the  eaves.  By  stacking  the  ice  up  higher 
under  the  roof,  working  from  doors  in  the  roof  or  gable  ends,  the 
capacity  can  be  increased  10%  or  more.  About  34  cu.  ft.  of  ice 
make  a  ton  of  2.000  Ibs.,  the  ice  weighing  58.7  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  It 
Is  not  unusual  to  assume  a  weight  of  60  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  for  con- 
venience of  calculation.  Allowing  for  voids  between  the  cakes  of  ice 
it  is  customary  to  allow  36  cu.  ft.  per  ton,  but  this  is  usually  too 
low,  a  fair  average  being  nearer  40  cu.  ft.  per  ton  of  2,000  Ibs.  In  a 
large,  well-built  ice  house,  only  10%  of  the  ice  is  lost  annually  by 
melting  and  evaporation,  but  in  smaller  houses  the  loss  is  larger. 


1140  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  following  are  dimensions  and  nominal  capacities  of  some 
standard  ice  houses  on  the  Lehigh  Valley  R.  R. : 

Size.  Capacity  Capacity 

cu.  ft.  tons. 

18  X    32  ft.  X  12  ft.  height  of  frame 6,912  150 

32  X    86ft.  X  28  ft.  height  of  frame....  1,500 

30  X  120  ft.  X  24  ft.  height  of  frame 86,400  2,000 

If  frame  ice  houses  cost  5  cts.  per  cu.  ft.  to  build,  the  equivalent 
cost  is  $2.00  per  ton  of  ice  capacity. 

Cost  of  Six  Ice  Houses.* — The  work  was  done  by  railway  com- 
pany forces.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  price  of  lumber  was  very 
low. 

EXAMPLE  I. 

Ice  House  30  X  48  ft. 
Weight.  Pounds. 

26,000  ft.  B.    M.  at  3,300  Ibs.  equals 85,800 

17^4  M.  shingles  at  150  Ibs 2,600 

Hardware,  etc 2,000 

Total,   45   tons 90,400 

Lumber: 

1,280  ft.  B.  M.    at    $8 %   10.24 

7,333ft.  B.  M.    at    $8 58.66 

2,432  ft.  B.  M.    at    f  8.50 20.67 

2,053  ft.  B.  M.    at    $7.50 15.40 

4,360  ft.  B.  M.,   1  in.,  at  $11 47.96 

777  ft.  B.  M.,  1  in.,  at  $12 9.32 

4,420  ft.  B.  M.  drop  siding  at  $13.50 59.67 

400  ft.  B.  M.  flooring  at  $18.50 7.40 

3,072  ft.  B.  M.   S.   H.,   8  X   16-in.,  at  $4 12.28 

26,127  ft.  B.  M.  total  at  $9.20   (av.) $241.54 

17%  M.  shingles  at  $1.75... $30.19 

Hardware: 

390  Ibs.  rods  and  bolts  at  $2.55  per  100  Ibs $   9.95 

1,300  Ibs.  at  $2  per  100  Ibs 26.00 

Bolts,    nuts   and   washers : 11.75 

6  padlocks  at  13  cts 78 

Total  hardware   $48.48 

Paint: 

27  gals,  paint  at  50  cts. .  $13.50 

3  gals,  oil  at  37.5  cts 1.12 

Total    paint $14.62 

Labor: 
Engineering    $20.80 

Loading  material: 

1.6  days  carpenter  at  $2.50 $  4.00 

3.2  days  laborer  at  $2 6.40 

4.8   total    ! $10.40 

Unloading  material: 
1   day   carpenter $  2.50 

* Engineer ing-Contracting,  Oct.  9,  1907. 


BUILDINGS. 


1141 


Building  ice  house: 

18.5  days  foreman  at   $80  per  mo $  47.74 

102.1  days  carpenter  at   $2.50 256.75 

43.1  days   helper   at    $2 86.20 

163.7  days   total  at   $2.37 $390.69 

Painting  ice  house: 

1  days  helper  at  $2 $14.00 

Tools    32.50 

SUMMARY. 
Materials:  Totals.     Per  cent. 

26,127  ft.  B.  M.  at  $9.20 $241.54  28.4 

Shingles    30.19  3.5 

Hardware 48.48  5.5 

Paint 14.62  1.7 

Total   material    $334.83          39.1 

Labor: 

Engineering    .  .  $  20.80  2.5 

4.8    days    loading 10.40  1.2 

1    day    unloading 2.50  .3 

163.7   days  building  at   $2.37 390.69  46.0 

7  days  painting  at  $2 14.00  1.4 

Total   labor    $439.39  51.7 

Total   materials   and   labor $774.22  90.8 

Tools     32.50  3.8 

Freight 45.00  5.4 

Grand  total   $851.72~     loToO 

Cost  per 
sq.  ft.    Per  cent. 

Materials    : $0.232  39.1 

Labor 305  51.7 

Tools     022  3.8 

Freight .031  5.4 

Total     .To^       10*0 

EXAMPLE  II.. 

Ice  House  30  X  60. 
Weight :  Pounds. 

18,600  ft.  B.  M.  at  3,300  Ibs.  equals 61,380 

Hardware ..       700 

Total,   31   tons 62,080 

Lumber: 

10,196  ft.  B.  M.  at  $6.50 .  .  $  66.27 

5,414ft.  B.  M.  at  $7 37.90 

1,520  ft.  B.  M.    at    $7.50  ...-.- 11.40 

192  ft.  B.  M.   sis,   at  $9 1.73 

320  ft.  B.  M.,   s4s,   at  $9.50 ' 3,04 

300  ft.  B.  M.,  ceiling1,  at  $10.50 3.15 

675  ft.  B.  M.,  1  X  3  battens,  at  $1G 10.80 

18,617  ft.  B.  M.   total  at  $7.22    (av)  ,?. $134.29 

19  M.  shingles,  Star  A,  at  $1.15 $  21.85 


1H2 


HANDBOOK  OP  COST  DATA. 


Hardware: 
680  Ibs.  nails  at  .016  ct $   10.04 

Paint: 
10  gals,  outside  paint  at  70  cts $     7.00 

Labor: 

Unloading  lumber: 

1  day  carpenter  at  $2.50 $     2.50 

3  days  laborers  at  $1.60 4.80 

4  days  total  at  $1.82 $     7.30 

Erecting  ice  house: 

93.5  days  carpenter  at  $2.50 , $233.75 

12.5  days  helper  at  $1.75 21.85 

106  days  total  at  $2.40 $255.60 

Painting : 
4   days  foreman  at   $75   per  month... $     9.67 

2  days  painter  at  $2.50 5.00 

6  days  total  at  $2.45 $   14.67 

Tools     19.00 

SUMMARY. 
Materials:  Totals.    Per  cent. 

18,617  ft.   B.  M.  at  $7.22 $134.29  25.1 

19  M.  shingles  at  $1.15 21.85  4.1 

690  Ibs.  nails  at  1.6  cts 10.04  1.8 

10  gals,  paint  at  70  cts.  .. 7.00  1.5 

Total    $173.18          32.5 

I/a  &  or: 

4  days  unloading  lumber  at  $1.82.  .      .  .$     7.30.  1.3 

106  days  erecting  at  $2.40 255.60  47.5 

6  days  painting  at  $2.45 14.67  2.6 

Tools     , 19.00  3.5 

Total  materials  and  labor $470.75          87.4 

31  tons  freight,  actual   (excessive) 67.70          12.6 

Total $538.45  100.0 

Cost  per 

sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials $0.096  32.5 

Labor    0.164  54.9 

Freight     0.037  12.6 

Total    $0.297        100.0 

EXAMPLE  No.  III. 
Ice  House  24  X  48. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

16,665  ft.   B.  M.  at  3,300  Ibs ..54,994 

15%  M.  shingles  at  150  Ibs 2,325 

Hardware    1,500 

Total    (29    tons) 58,819 


BUILDINGS. 


1143 


Lumber: 

624  ft.  B.  M.   S.   H.  at  $7 ."$  4.37 

6,420ft.  B.  M.    at    $11.50 73.83 

240  ft.   B.  M.  at  $12.50 3.00 

112  ft.  B.  M.,    s2slE,    at    $13.40 1.50 

328  ft.  B.  M.,    at   $17.50 5.74 

5,441  ft.  B.  M.,  sis,  No.   1,  at  $17.25 93.86 

3,500  ft.  B.  M.,  ship  lap,  No.  2,  at  $21 73.50 

16,665ft.  B.  M.   total    (av.),   $15.35 $255.80 

15  %   M.  shingles  at  $2 $  31.00 

Hardware  : 

125  Ibs.  20d  wire  nails  at  $1.60 $  2.00 

355  Ibs.  lOd  wire  nails  at  $1.75 6.21 

70  Ibs.  4d  wire  nails  at  $2.10 1.47 

Bolts,  plates,  nuts  and  washers 10.19. 

Padlocks  and  hinges 1.78 

Total  hardware   $  21.65 

Paint: 

10  gals,  outside  at  84  cts $  8.40 

9  gals,  oil  at  55  cts 4.95 

Total    paint    $  13.35 

Labor: 
Building : 

10  days  carpenter  at   $2.64 $  26.40 

41  days  carpenter  at  $2.25. 92.25 

6  3-10  days  foreman  at   $2.50 15.75 

$134.40 
Painting : 

6  days  painter  at  $2 $  12.00 

Foreman    .  1.56 


Total     $   13.i 


SUMMARY. 


Materials: 


16,665    ft.   B.    M.    at    $15.35 $255.80 

Shingles    31.00 

Hardware 21.65 

Paint 13.35 


Total   materials    $321.80 

Labor: 

Building    $134.40 

Painting    13.56 

Total  labor $147.96 

Total  materials  and  labor $469.76 

Tools     ,  2.94 


Per  cent. 

50.9 
6.2 
4.3 
2.6 

63.9 


Total     $472.70 

Freight     29.00 

Grand  total   .  $501.70       100.0 


1144  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  per 

sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials ..$0.280          64.0 

Labor    0.130          29.8 

Tools     0.005  .5 

Freight    0.015  5.7 

Total     $0.430       100.0 

EXAMPLE  IV. 
Ice  House  24  X  48. 
Weight:  Pounds. 

16,694  ft.  B.  M.  at  3,300  Ibs 55,090 

15  M.  shingles  at  150  Ibs 2,250 

Hardware    1,000 

Total  (29  tons) 58,340 

Lumber: 

3,200  ft.  B.  M.  at  $18. $  57.60 

256  ft.  B.  M.  at  $9 2.30 

960  ft.  B.  M.  at  $9.50 9.12 

4,500  ft.  B.  M.,  sis,  at  $17.50 78.75 

108  ft.  B.  M.,  sis,  at  $17.25 1.86 

221  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $13 2.87 

2,498  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $10 •. 27.24 

312  ft.  B.  M.,  flooring,  at  $27.50 8.58 

719ft.  B.  M.  at  $6.50 4.67 

3,120  ft.  B.  M.   at   $11 34.32 


16,694  ft.  B.  M.,  total   average,    $13.35 $227.31 

15    M.    shingles  at   $2 $  30.00 

Hardware: 

Rods,  washers,  etc .  ,$  12.67 

200  Ibs.  20d  nails 3.20 

60   Ibs.   4d  nails 1.29 

400  Ibs.   lOd  nails 7.00 

Locks,    hinges,    etc 2.08 

Total    hardware    $  26.24 

Paint: 

12.5  gals,  paint  at  90-cts ..$  11.35 

5.5  gals,  oil  at  59  cts 3.25 

Total   paint    .' $  14.60 

Labor: 

Building  house : 

Supervision     $   31.19 

11.5   days  foreman  at  $85   per  month 34.91 

45.5   days   carpenter    at    $2.48 112.73 


Total    $178.83 

Banking  cinders  around  house: 

1     day  foreman  at  $1.74 $1.74 

6  days  laborers  at  $1 .  . 6.00 


Total $7.74 

Painting : 

2  days  painter  at  $2.25 ..$450 

3  days  painter  at   $1.75 .   5.25 


Total $9.75 


BUILDINGS. 


SUMMARY. 

, 

16,694  ft.  B.   M.  at  $13.35 $227.31 

15  M.  shingles  at  $2 30.00 

Hardware    26.24 

Paint    .  14.60 


1145 


Material: 


$298.15 


Labor: 


Building    house $178.83 

Banking  cinders   7.74 

Painting 9.75 

$196.32 

Materials  and   labor $494.47 

Tools 77 


Total     $495.24 

Freight     . 29.00 


Per  cent. 

43.3 
5.7 
5.0 
2.8 

56.8 


34.1 
1.5 
1.8 

37.4 

94.2 

0.1 

94.3 
5.7 


Grand   total    , $524.24        100.0 

Cost  per 
sq.  ft.     Per  cent. 


Materials    $0.259 

Labor 0.170 

Tools     0.001 

Freight    0.025 


56.8 

37.4 

0.1 

5.7 


Total    $0.486        100.0 


EXAMPLE  V. 


Ice  House  24  X  48. 


Weight: 


Pounds. 


18,247  ft.   B.  M.  at  3,300  Ibs 60,325 

14  M.   shingles  at  150   Ibs 2,100 

Hardware     


Total    (32    tons) 
Lumber: 


1,000 
,63,425 


576  ft.  B.  M. 
4,560  ft.  B.  M. 
3,500  ft.  B.  M., 

224  ft.  B.  M., 
4,500  ft.  B.  M., 

662  ft.  B.  M. 

225  ft.  B.  M. 


at    $12.50 $  7.20 

at    $11.50 52.44 

not  ship  lap,  at  $27.50 96.25 

No.  2  flooring,  at  $13.50 3.02 

No.  2  sis,  at  $13.75 61.88 

at    $11.50 7.61 

at    $13 2.93 


18,247  ft.  B.  M.  total    (av)    $12.68 $231.33 

14  M.  shingles  at  $2.75 $  38.50 

Hardware: 

2  kegs  20d  nails  at  $2 $  4.00 

2  kegs  lOd  nails  at  $2.05 4.10 

80  Ibs.  4d  nails  at  $2.45 .  . 1.96 

Locks,  hinges,   etc 1.08 

Total  hardware   .                                               ..$  11.14 


1146 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 


Labor: 

21  days  foreman  at  $3 $  63.00 

25  days  carpenter  at  $2.75 67.25 

12.5  days  carpenter  at  $2.50 31.25 

1  day  foreman  at  $2.14 2.14 

19  days  laborer  at  $1.50 28.50 

Total $192.14 

SUMMARY. 

Materials:  Per  cent 

Lumber,   18,247   ft.   B.   M.   at   $12.68 $231.33          45.8 

Shingles,    14   M.   at   $2.75 38.50  7.6 

Hardware     11.14  2.2 

$280.97          55.6 

Labor    $192.14          38.1 

Freight    .  . 32.00  6.3 

$505.11        100.0 
Cost  per 
sq.  ft.     Per  cent. 

Materials $0.243          55.6 

Labor    0.167          38.1 

Freight 0.028  6.3 

Total     $0.438       100.0 

EXAMPLE  VI. 

Ice  House"  24  X  48 

Per  cent. 

Materials    , $322.81          62.2 

Labor     164.72          31.8 

Tools 1.69  0.3 

Freight 29.00  5.7 

$518.22  100.0 
Cost  per 

sq.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Materials '.'.'/ $0.280  62.2 

Labor     0.143  31.8 

Tools 0.001  0.3 

Freight     0.025  5.7 

Total     $0.449        100.0 

The  labor  cost  per  thousand  feet  of  lumber  in  place  was  as  fol 
lows: 

PerM. 

Example   No.    I . .  $16.00 

Example   No.    II 15.60 

Example  No.   Ill 8.70 

Example  No.  IV 11.00 

Example  No.  V 10.70 

Example  No.   VI 10.00 

Average $12.00 

Cost  of  11  Ice  Houses. — The  following  costs  relate  to  work  done 
by  railway  company  labor  in  the  Pacific  Northwest,  carpenters 
receiving  $2.50  per  10-hr,  day. 


BUILDINGS.  1147 

A   200-ton  ice  house.   22  x   31   ft.,   contained  18  M.  The  average 
cost  of  five  of  these  houses  was : 

Totals.  Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials $270  $0.40 

Labor   .                                                                      177  0.26 


Total $447          $0.76 

Since  there  were  18  M.  in  each  house,  the  labor  cost  was  $10 
per  M. 

A  1,000-ton  ice  house,  30  x  86  ft.,  contained  54  M.  The  average 
cost  of  six  of  these  houses  was : 

Total.   Per  sq.  ft. 

Materials $    670          $0.26 

La*)or 500  0.20 

Total $1,170          $0.46 

The  labor  cost  was  a  little  more  than  $9  per  M. 

Cost  of  Car  Shops. — Car  shops  were  built  in  six  months  (1906) 
by  contract  for  the  Wabash  Ry.,  at  Decatur,  111. 

The  total  cost  of  the  plant  was  $368,000,  including  buildings, 
machinery,  shop  yard,  grading  and  track. 

The  cost  of  the  different  buildings  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  ft. 
cts. 

Car  shop,  88  X   464  ft 2.7 

Blacksmith  and  machine  shop,  80  X  294 3.0 

Storehouse    and    2-story    office    bids    at    one    end, 

40  X   464. 5.5 

Wood  mill,  80   X  238.  .  .  . .  . 2.9 

Cabinet,  upholstering,  etc.,  shop  40  X  350 4.5 

Power  house,  60  X  108,  brick * 3.4 

Lavatory  building   5.4 

Dry  kiln,  reinforced  concrete  roof,  floor,  etc 11.1 

Dry    lumber    sheds 2.3 

Iron,  coal  and  coke  sheds 3.5 

Material  sheds  and  racks 5.8 

All  the  large  shop  buildings  have  timber  frames  with  hollow  walls 
formed  of  plaster  (1  to  1%  ins.  thick),  on  expanded  metal  lath  (24 
gage),  secured  to  1%-in.  round  rods  stapled  to  the  timbers.  The 
shop  buildings  have  maximum  window  area. 

Cost  of  Engine  Roundhouses.— Mr.  R.  D.  Coombs  gives  the  fol  • 
lowing  bills  of  materials  and  estimated*  costs  of  wooden,  of  steel 
framed,  and.  of  reinforced  concrete  roundhouses.  Each  stall  is  73 
ft.  long,  24  ft!' wide  at  one  end  and  14  ft.  wide  at  the  other,  giving 
an  average  width  of  19  ft.,  or  an  area  of  912  sq.  ft. 

The-' estimated  cost  of  one  stall  of  the  wooden  roundhouse  with 
brick  walls  is : 


1148  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

WOODEN  ROUNDHOUSE. 

Roof  and  Center  Columns: 

380ft.  B.  M.  spruce  monitor  sheathing  at  $35.00...$  13.30 

320  ft.  B.  M.  pine  monitor  purlins  at   $40.00 12.80 

345  ft.  B.  M.   cypress  monitor  framing  at   $60.00.  .  .  20.70 

1  512  ft.  B.  M.   spruce  roof  sheathing  at   $35.00 52.92 

2  238  ft.  B.  M.  pine  roof  purlins  at  $40.00 89.52 

675  ft.  B.  M.  pine  girders  at  $40.00 27.00 

601  ft.  B.  M.  pine  columns  and  caps  at  $40.00 24.04 

65  ft.  B.  M.   spruce  bridging,  etc.  at  $40.00 2.60 

6  136  ft.  B.  M.  total  timber $242.88 

70  Ibs  bolts  at  $0.03 2.10 

8  pivot   windows,    incl.   painting,   at    $4.00 32.00 

2  fixed  windows,  incl.  painting,  at  $2.50 5.00 

2.92  cu.  yds.  concrete  column  foundation  at  $6.00..  17.52 

1,513  sq.  ft.  tarred  felt  roofing  at  $0.04 60.52 

Smoke-jack- 30.00 

4,200  sq.  ft.  painting  at  $0.0225 94.50 

700  Ibs.  cast  iron  column  base  at  $0.0275 19.25 

Total  for  roof  and  center  columns , $503.77 

Walls: 

12.5  cu.  yds.  brick  wall  at  $6.50 $  81.25 

1.8  cu.  yds.  brick  arch  at  $8.00 14.40 

3,200  Ibs.  cast  iron  column  at  $0.0275 88.00 

7.2  cu.  yds.  concrete  wall  foundation  at  $6.00 43.20 

1.46  cu.  yds.  concrete  post  foundation  at  $6.00 8.76 

2  lifting  windows,  incl.  painting,  at  $10.00 20.00 

200  ft.  B.  M.  cypress  window  framing  at  $60.00....  12.00 

1   double  door,    incl.    painting 50.00 


Total  for  walls $317.61 

Grand  total  for  one  stall $822.38 

The  cost  of  each  stall  of  a  steel  framed  roundhouse  with  brick 
walls  is  estimated  as  follows: 

STEEL  FRAMED  ROUNDHOUSE. 

Roof  and  Center  Columns: 

380  ft.  B.  M.  spruce  monitor  sheathing  at  $35.00.  .  .$   13.30 

320  ft.  B.  M.  pine  monitor  purlins  at  $40.00 12.80 

345  ft.  B.  M.  cypress  monitor  framing  at  $60.00.  .  .  .  20.70 

2,330  ft.  B.  M.  spruce  roof  sheathing  at  $35.00 81.55 

135  ft.  B.  M.  spruce  nailing  strips  at  $40.00 5.40 

1,550  Ibs.   steel  columns  at   $0.03 46.50 

7,650  Ibs.  steel  purlins  at  $0.03 228.00 

1,900  Ibs.  steel  girders  at  $0.03 57.00 

450  Ibs.   steel  knees,  etc.  at  $0.03 13.50 

100  Ibs.  bolts  and  fillers  at  $0.03 3.00 

8  pivot  windows,  incl.  painting,  at  $4.00 32.00 

2  fixed  windows,  incl.  painting,  at  $2.50 5.00 

2.26  cu.  yds.  concrete  column  found,  at  $6.00 13.56 

0.14  cu.  yds.  column  found,  cap  at  $10.00 1.40 

1,470  sq.   ft.   roofing  at   $0.04 58.80 

Smoke  jack    30.00 

1,250  sq.  f t.   painting,   steel  at   $0.01 12.50 

-       1,900  sq.  ft.  painting,  wood  at  $0.0225 42.75 


Total  for  roof  and  center  columns $677.76 

Brick  walls    (same  as  for  wood  roundhouse) 317.61 

.     Grand    total    .  ..$995.37 


BUILDINGS.  U49 

The  cost  of  one   stall   of  reinforced  concrete  roundhouse   is   esti- 
mated thus: 

REINFORCED  CONCRETE  ROUNDHOUSE. 

Roof  and  Center  Columns: 

3,770  Ibs.  reinforcing  rods  at  $0.03 $113.10 

42.56  cu.  yds.  concrete  superstructure  at  $15.00 638.88 

2.3  cu.  yds.  concrete  col.  bases  at  $6.00 13.80 

410ft.  B.  M.   pine,   monitor  purlins  at   $40.00 16.40 

420  ft.  B.  M.  spruce,  monitor  sheathing  at  $35.00.  . .  14.70 

280  ft.  B.  M.  cypress  monitor  frame  at  $60.00 16.80 

8  pivot  windows  at  $4.00 32.00 

2  fixed  windows  at  $2.50 5.00 

1,440  sq.   ft.  roofing  at  $0.04 57.60 

38   ft.   gutter  at   $0.16 6.08 

18  ft.  down  spout  at  $0.30 5.40 

Smoke  jack 30.00 

700  sq.  ft.  painting  at  $0.0225 15.75 

Total  for  roof  and  center  columns $965.51 

Walls: 

640  Ibs.  reinforcing  rods  at  $0.03 $   19.20 

350  Ibs.   channels  at  $0.03 10.50 

2,330  Ibs.  cast  iron  column  at  $0.0275 64.07 

215  sq.  ft.  expanded  metal  No.  10  at  $0.027 5.80 

6.42  cu.  yds.  reinforced  concrete  walls  at  $15.00 96.30 

7.09  cu.  yds.  concrete  foundations  at  $6.00 42.54 

0.74  cu.  yds.  concrete  door  post  at   $6.00 4.44 

4   lifting  windows  at   $10.00 40.00 

Double  door    .               40.00 


Total  for  walls $346.85 

Total  for  one   stall .  $1,312.36 

Cost    of    Roundhouse,    Coaling    Station,   Turntable,    Etc.*— Mr.    A. 

O.  Cunningham  gives  data  of  which  the  following  is  a  brief  abstract. 
See  Engineering-Contracting  for  full  description  of  the  plant  with 
drawings. 

In  1907,  the  Wabash  R.  R.  built  a  new  engine  terminal  plant  at 
Decatur,  111.,  where  100  engines  are  cared  for  daily. 

The  roundhouse  has  a  wooden  frame  resting  on  concrete  founda- 
tions. The  walls  are  of  wooden  girts  to  which  expanded  metal  is 
fastened  on  both  sides.  The  expanded  metal  on  the  outer  surface  is 
plastered  on  both  sides  with  a  mixture  of  Portland  cement,  lime  and 
sand,  and  cocoanut  fiber.  The  expanded  metal  on  the  inner  surface 
is,  of  course,  only  coated  on  one  side  with  the  same  kind  of  plaster. 
This  construction  provides  a  wall  with  a  hollow  space  of  air  between, 
so  that  dampness  cannot  penetrate  to  the  inner  surface.  The  air 
space  forms  a  good  insulator  to  keep  the  building  warm  in  winter 
and  cool  in  summer.  The  plaster  applied  to  these  walls  consists  of 
1  bbl.  of  lime  mixed  with  15  bbls.  of  sand  and  4  Ibs.  of  cocoanut 
fiber,  the  whole  being  mixed  thoroughly  with  water  and  allowed  to 
stand  for  at  least  two  weeks  so  as  to  give  the  lime  time  enough 
to  slack  thoroughly.  One  part  of  Portland  cement  is  added  to  three 
parts  of  this  mixture,  with  enough  water  added  to  make  a  plastic; 

^Engineering-Contracting,  Apr.   28,  1909. 


1150  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

mortar.  This  is  applied  to  the  expanded  metal  and  allowed  to 
harden.  This  is  called  a  scratch  coat.  On  this  coat  is  plastered 
another  layer  of  mortar,  composed  of  3  parts  of  sand  to  1  part  of 
cement.  The  plaster  on  the  expanded  metal  on  the  outer  surface 
of  the  house  is  1^  ins.  thick,  and  that  on  the  inner  surface 
about  %  in.  thick.  This  hollow  wall  extends  completely  around 
the  outside  of  the  house,  and  from  the  ground  to  a  height 
of  5  ft.  The  exterior  face  of  the  wall  is  painted  with  a  water- 
proofing compound.  On  this  wall  is  placed  a  continuous  line  of 
windows,  which  extend  to  the  underside  of  the  eaves  of  the  building, 
thus  providing  plenty  of  light,  which  is  very  essential  in  such  build- 
ings. The  cost  of  a  wall  of  this  description  is  slightly  less  than 
brick,  but  a  saving  is  made  because  brickwork  requires  foundations 
to  support  it,  while  this  construction  requires  only  those  necessary 
to  support  the  posts.  Also  lintels  are  required  over  openings  in 
brickwork,  and  none  are  required  in  this  kind  of  a  wall.  A  further 
advantage  in  this  construction  is  that  a  continuous  line  of  windows 
may  be  used,  while  with  brickwork  this  is  not  possible,  on  account 
of  the  pilasters.  The  windows  are  made  so  that  the  two  lower 
sashes  are  hung  together  with  copper  chains  over  pulleys ;  thus 
when  one  is  raised  the  other  is  lowered ;  consequently  they  are 
counterbalanced  without  going  to  the  expense  of  providing  box 
frames  with  counterweights. 

The  floor  of  the  roundhouse  is  of  concrete,  built  similarly  .to  a 
sidewalk,  and  placed  on  cinders.  It  is  laid  out  in  squares  of  about 
3  ft.  to  the  side,  so  if  any  square  gets  broken,  as  it  is  liable  to  be 
on  account  of  the  heavy  pieces  handled  in  a  house  of  this  description, 
it  can  be  repaired  at  small  cost. 

The  foundations  carrying  the  posts  are  of  concrete  and  are 
entirely  separate  from  the  floor,  so  if  any  settle,  the  floor  will  not 
be  disturbed. 

On  the  roof  sheathing  is  laid  a  built-up  roof  of  5-ply  tar  and 
crushed  limestone.  The  crushed  limestone  not  only  adds  weight  to 
hold  the  built-up  roof  in  place,  but,  being  white  in  color,  helps  to 
protect  the  tar  from  the  rays  of  the  sun.  The  cost  of  this  roof 
covering  in  place  was  about  the  same  as  that  of  a  prepared  roofing. 

The  turntable  foundations  are  supported  by  piling  and  are  of 
concrete.  The  center  or  pivot  foundation  is  reinforced  with  rods 
just  above  the  head  of  the  piles.  The  circle  rail  is  spiked  to  short 
ties  laid  without  any  fastenings  on  the  circle  wall.  The  pit  is  paved 
with  concrete  in  a  manner  similar  to  that  in  the  house  and  is  drained 
by  a  4-in.  tile  into  the  catch  basin  previously  mentioned. 

The  turntable  is  of  the  deck  type,  75  ft.  long,  with  a  live  load1 
capacity  of  215  tons,  and  is  turned  by  means  of  a  tractor  wheel 
running  on  the  circle  rail  and  operated  by  electricity.  The  steel 
work  of  the  turntable  was  built  by  the  American  Bridge  Co.,  and 
installed  by  employes  of  t..e  Wabash  R.  R.  Co. 

There  are  70  cu.  yds.  of  cinders  removed  daily  from  the  cinder 
pits  by  means  of  an  electric  gantry  crane  and  clamshell  bucket,  this 
part  of  the  plant  being  made  by  the  Case  Mfg.  Co.,  of  Columbus, 


BUILDINGS.  1151 

Ohio.     There  are  two  cinder  pits,  each  150  ft.   long,  and  the  crau^ 
travels  on  a  track  between  them. 

The  cost  of  work  is  given  below  in  detail ;  but,  as  will  be  noticed, 
it  does  not  include  the  value  of  the  old  buildings  utilized  (machine 
shop,  blacksmith  and  boiler  shop  and  sand  house),  nor  the  value  of 
the  old  machinery  and  cost  of  labor  for  installing  it  in  the  machine 
shop. 

42  stall  engine  house,  incl.  turntable  foundations $60,000 

Roofing    2,000 

Heating  system  with  pump,  well,  etc 6,220 

Smoke   jacks    2,100 

Door  anchors  , 100 

Drainage   and   sewerage 1,950 

Wiring  and  lights 1,000 

Grading 600 

Engineering   in   field 1,000 

Track  inside  of  engine  house  (value  new) 1,675 

Telpher  hoist   1,000 

Washout  system  and  motors • 6,900 

$   84,545 

Track  between   turntable  and  engine  house  and  la- 
bor laying   (value  new) $     1,955 

Turntable  pit  and  foundation $  3,360 

Turntable   2,430 

Circle  rail  and  track  on  turntable  (value  new) 685 

Machinery  for  operating  turntable 1,075 

7,550 

Cinder  pit   $  6,875 

Gantry  crane    835 

Machinery  for  gantry  crane 2,950 

Clam-shell  bucket   (value  new) 600 

11,260 

Coaling   station    (200-ton) 8,775 

Sand  house  and  machinery    (value   new) 2,000 

50,000-gal.  water  tank  and  fixtures  (value  new)  ....  1,100 
Three  water  cranes  with  water  pipes  and   fixtures, 

etc.  (value  new) 1,000 

$118,185 

NOTE. — Items  with  the  words  "value  new"  written  after  them  indi- 
cate that  the  material  or  structure  had  been  formerly  used  with  the 
old  facilities.  The  amount  given  is  the  cost  if  new. 

Cost  of  a  Brick  and  Steel  Building.*— Mr.  A.  E.  Duckham  is 
author  of  the  following : 

In  the  spring  of  1907  the  writer  was  called  upon  to  design  a 
building  for  a  wire-glass  plant  in  South  Greensburg,  Pa.,  for  the 
Arbogast-Brock  Glass  Co.  ;  the  wire-glass  to  be  made  under  a  new 
process  of  Mr.  John  Arbogast,  who  is  now  superintendent  of  the 
plant  which  has  been  completed.  The  building,  which  is  60  x  170 
ft.,  was  started  (breaking  ground)  on  May  20  and  was  finished  by 
the  author  on  Aug.  1.  This  includes  the  lehr  (furnace)  foundations. 

The  foundations  up  to  the  level  of  the  ground  are  of  concrete, 
made  of  1  part  cement  (Portland),  3  parts  sand,  and  7  parts  gravel. 
They  were  carried  down  to  clay,  which  on  an  average  was  3  ft. 
below  the  surface  of  the  ground,  which  was  level.  As  the  ground 

*Engineering-Contracti>i(i,  Apr.    l.r»,   1908. 


1152  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

was  marsh-like,  the  trenches  were  dug  and  immediately  filled  up 
with  concrete,  mixed  on  the  board  and  deposited  by  wheelbarrow 
from  a  plank  runway  into  the  bottom.  No  water  was  required  in 
the  mixing-board  for  the  bottom  layens  of  concrete,  owing  to  the 
trenches  being  partly  filled  with  surface  water.  After  standing  all 
night  we  would  find  the  trenches  filled  with  water  in  the  morning; 
this  we  pumped  out  with  an  ordinary  hand-pump  and  trench  suction 
hose  (about  3  ins.  in  diameter).  At  times,  it  kept  one  man  busy 
pumping  all  day,  owing  to  the  heavy  rains  to  which  we  were  subject, 
which  kept  the  ground  saturated. 

Above  the  level  of  the  ground  the  building  is  of  brick.  The 
roof-trusses  are  of  steel,  including  the  purlins.  They  rest  on  the 
pilasters  of  the  wall,  and  are  attached  to  them  by  anchor  bolts.  The 
latter  were  set  loose  in  the  walls ;  and,  after  the  erection  of  the 
steel,  were  grouted  with  cement  mortar.  This  was  to  facilitate  the 
erection  of  the  steel-work. 

The  roof  was  covered  as  fellows :  Nailing  strips  of  2  x  4  in. 
hemlock  were  bolted  (every  3  ft.)  to  the  steel  purlins,  and  upon 
them  was  nailed  1  %  in.  matched  yellow-pine  sheathing ;  upon  this 
was  laid  and  fastened  Carey's  Magnesia  Flexible  Cement  Roofing. 

The  building  was  well  situated  for  receiving  materials,  as  it  was 
located  118  ft.  from  the  railroad  and  75  ft.  from  a  street.  The 
cement,  sand,  gravel  and  brick  were  obtained  from  local  dealers 
within  a  mile  of  the  place ;  the  first  three  were  hauled  by  wagon 
(with  the  exception  of  one  carload  of  sand),  and  the  last  one  was 
shipped  in  by  car  on  a  siding  opposite  the  building,  and  slipped 
in  by  a  chute,  the  railroad  track  being  about  8  ft.  above  our 
ground. 

The  walls  between  the  pilasters  are  only  9  ins.,  but  the  pilasters 
project  9  ins.,  thus  making  an  1 8-in.  pillar  or  column  under  each 
truss  to  carry  the  load  ;  the  9-in.  wall  between  acting  as  a  curtain 
wall.  The  brick  wall  was  laid  complete  in  cement  mortar,  no  lime 
being  used.  The  mortar  was  composed  of  1  part  of  cement  and 
2%  parts  of  clean  river  sand.  When  the  building  was  finished,  the 
mortar  was  so  hard  that  it  was  difficult  to  break  it  with  a  hammer. 
We  had  some  trouble  at  first  with  the  bricklayers  to  get  them  to  use 
this  mortar  without  the  addition  of  lime,  as  it  is  not  easy  to  spread. 
When  set  up,  however,  it  lasts  for  all  time. 

The  cement,  an  American  Portland,  gave  us  perfect  satisfaction. 
This  was  used  throughout — in  foundations,  brick  walls  and  lehr 
.'furnace)  foundations.  Partly  in  the  lehr  foundation  we  used 
furnace  slag  from  the  steel  works  in  place  of  gravel,  being  unable 
to  obtain  the  latter  in  time.  It  was  very  satisfactory,  but  required 
much  more  water  in  mixing,  which  had  to  be  carried  from  a  creek 
about  100  ft.  distant. 

The  steel  half  trusses  were  skidded  off  the  cars  onto  the  ground, 
brought  into  the  building  after  the  erection  of  the  walls  through 
one  of  the  large  doorways  on  a  "buggy,"  riveted  together  to  form 
complete  trusses,  and  then  raised  into  position  by  a  gin-pole, 
block  and  tackle,  and  crab  (the  latter  being  operated  by  six  men). 
There  were  ten  steel  erectors,  and  it  took  them  about  ten  days  to 


BUILDINGS.  1153 

I  erect  the  steel-work,  including  trusses,  purlins,  lateral  bracing  (in 
three  bays)  and  "sag  rods."  A  day  or  so  was  lost,  however,  waiting 
for  tools  and  material. 

On  the  original  plans  we  figured  on  regular  ventilators  or  lanterns 
with  side  louvres  of  sheet  steel  extending  the  whole  length  of  the 
ridge  of  the  roof  for  ventilation ;  but,  at  the  suggestion  of  the 
owners,  to  save  cost,  these  were  omitted,  and  four  ordinary  circular 
ventilators  were  used  along  the  ridge.  As  there  were  many  large 
windows  along  the  sides  of  the  building,  as  well  as  the  ends,  these 
were  considered  enough  for  the  purpose.  The  windows  had  boxes 
for  pulleys  and  weights.  There  were  two  sash  to  each  window. 
The  bottom  sash  weighed  39  Ibs.  including  the  glass;  this  was 
weighed  to  determine  the  size  of  counter-weights. 

The  122  squares  of  roof-covering  took  one  week  to  lay,  nail, 
cement,  and  paint.  There  were  five  men  for  three  days  and  two 
men  for  six  days.  Two  men  (experts)  came  up  on  the  job,  and 
three  ordinary  local  mechanics  were  hired.  The  extra  men  cost  $20. 

In  unloading  the  brick  from  the  cars  on  the  railroad  track,  in  one 
case  it  took  five  hours  to  unload  one  box  car  of  12,000  brick  with 
four  men  (two  inside  and  two  outside),  with  chute;  and  in  another 
it  took  3%  hours  for  five  men  to  unload  the  same  car. 

The  building  was  not  only  designed  by  the  author  as  engineer  and 
architect,  but  he  also  had  the  contract  to  erect  the  building  complete 
on  the  ^'cost-plus-a-fixed-sum"  plan.  By  this  method,  the  owners 
saved  at  least  $2,000  figuring  on  the  lowest  bids,  or  about  25  per 
cent  of  the  net  cost  (not  taking  into  account  the  architects  and 
contractors'  commission).  The  building  was  originally  intended  to 
be  built  at  Carnegie  (about  five  miles  from  Pittsburg),  but  was 
finally  built  at  Greensburg  (over  30  miles  from  Pittsburg),  where 
everything,  owing  to  the  increased  distance  from  a  large  city  and  a 
river  (for  sand  and  gravel),  cost  more.  The  bids  were  figured  on 
the  Carnegie  location,  consequently  the  percentage  showing  the 
amount  saved  in  cost  should  be  increased. 

The  average  lump  bid  of  the  contractors  was  about  $11,500,  but 
this  was  for  the  Carnegie  location.  To  show  the  increased  cost  of 
the  same  building  at  Greensburg,  we  got  a  bid  on  the  brickwork 
from  the  same  man  of  $1,955  at  Carnegie  and  $2,400  at  Greensburg, 
or  an  increase  of  over  22  per  cent.  Again  cement  cost  $1.75  per 
barrel  at  Carnegie  and  $1.85  at  Greensburg,  while  sand  cost  7% 
ots.  a  bushel  at  Carnegie  and  9  cts.  at  Greensburg. 

The  detailed  cost  of  the  building  as  built  was  as  follows : 

Steel-work    $2,730.00 

Lumber,  doors  and  windows,  sheathing,  etc...  1,283.64 

Roof  covering  (cement  roofing  felt) 412.50 

Cement,  sand  and  gravel 938.04 

Brick 738.4-5 

Labor   (including    common '  labor,    bricklayers 

and  carpenters)    2,175.58 

Bolts  to  fasten  nailing  strips  to  purlins 28.88 

Hardware    79.54 

Ventilators    (circular)     18.00 

Total    .  ..$8,404.63 


1354  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  the  building  per  cubic  foot  of  space  from  the  ground 
level  to  the  roof  was  3%  cents.  The  cost  per  square  foot  of  floor 
space  was  82.4  cts.  The  above  does  not  include  the  architect's  fee 
of  5  per  cent  or  the  contractor's  fee  (of  approximately  8  per  cent)  ; 
this  would  bring  the  cost  per  cubic  foot  up  to  3.6  cts.,  and  the  cost 
per  square  foot  up  to  93.1  cts. 

The  building  was  filled  in  to  a  depth  of  4  ft.  with  dry  earth  and 
burnt  sand  (from  a  foundry  nearby).  It  was  originally  intended  to 
lay  a  cement  floor  upon  this,  or  a  brick  floor  (preferably  the  latter, 
as  being  easier  to  take  up  for  the  additional  lehrs)  ;  but  this  was 
abandoned  for  the  present,  until  the  filling  would  become  well 
tamped  down  by  walking  and  by  rolling  trucks  over  it. 

The  lehr  walls  (foundation)  were  built  by  the  writer  under  a 
separate  contract  with  the  furnace  contractors.  This  work  he  did 
for  $6.50  a  cubic  yard  for  the  concrete  walls  (3  ft.  under  ground 
and  4  ft.  above  ground)  and  50  cts.  a  yard  extra  for  excavating 
the  trenches.  At  this  figure,  he  made  18  per  cent  profit.  There 
were  some  advantages  and  some  disadvantages.  Under  the  head 
of  advantages  were  the  facts  that  his  foreman,  who  was  overlooking 
the  main  building,  also  took  charge  of  this  work ;  then  for  casing  or 
forms  for  the  concrete  we  used  sheathing  and  lumber  afterwards 
used  on  the  building;  under  the  head  of  disadvantages  were  the 
handicaps  of  having  to  carry  water  for  the  concrete  and  that  we 
were  held  up  by  the  steel  erectors,  who  got  in  our  way.  The  car- 
penter work  in  building  the  forms  for  the  concrete  lehr  foundations 
amounted  to  10  per  cent  of  the  total  labor  bill.  The  total  labor 
bill  amounted  to  28  per  cent  of  the  total  cost,  and  the  materials 
(cement,  gravel,  slag,  and  sand)  consequently  run  up  to  72  per  cent 
of  the  total  cost.  Runways  were  built  of  inclined  planks,  and  the 
concrete  was  deposited  by  wheelbarrows  directly  into  the  forms  and 
then  tamped.  The  writer  believes  in  rather  a  wet  mix  of  concrete, 
tamped  enough  to  bring  the  water  to  the  surface,  and  make  it  livei 
like  (quaking). 

Inclined  runways  and  scaffolding  of  2-in.  plank  and  doubled  2  x  4~ 
in.  studs  as  posts  were  also  used  in  the  main  building  to  supply 
the  bricklayers  with  brick  and  mortar.  Up  these,  common  laborers 
wheeled  the  material  in  barrows ;  thus  doing  away  with  the  slow 
and  more  expensive  hod-carriers  and  ladders.  The  material  used 
in  the  construction  of  the  runways  and  scaffolds  was  afterward 
used  in  the  room,  so  there  was  but  little  waste  of  lumber. 

The  plans,  with  the  exception  of  the  details,  were  made  on  7&-in. 
scale,  instead  of  the  usual  ^-in.  scale.  This  smaller  scale  made 
it  more  convenient  in  the  field,  and  not  so  cumbersome,  especially 
when  there  was  a  strong  wind.  The  writer  believes  that  as  small 
a  scale  as  possible  should  be  used,  and  all  details  should  be  made 
on  a  separate  sheet  on  say  1-in.  or  1%-in.  scale.  Figures  in  all 
cases  should  be  given  instead  of  depending  on  the  scale.  This  would 
remove  all  doubt  and  controversy.  In  fact  we  should  follow  the 
procedure  of  the  bridge  drafting  room. 


BUILDINGS.  1155 

In  designing  the  building,  no  attempt  was  made  at  ornamentation, 
as  the  owners  wanted  the  building  to  cost  as  little  as  possible ;  but 
the  writer  saw  to  it  that  everything  was  strong  and  efficient. 

The  brickwork  was  laid  in  English  Bond,  the  strongest  kind ;  and 
the  writer  was  surprised  to  find  how  few  "of  the  so-called  practical 
bricklayers  knew  what  it  was  or  how  to  lay  it.  Most  of  them 
thought  that  it  was  Flemish  bond — or*  alternate  headers  and 
stretchers — instead  of  alternate  layers  of  headers  and  stretchers, 
which  is  the  English  Bond. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Buildings. — The  following  is  a  very 
brief  abstract  of  a  five-page  article  by  Mr.  Leonard  C.  Wason, 
President  Aberthaw  Construction  Co.,  in  Engineering-Contracting, 
Jan.  13,  1909.  [The  labor  unit  costs  are  rather  high.  The  work 
was  done  in  New  England.] 

It  is  well  known  that  the  cost  of  materials  and  labor  in  different 
parts  of  the  country  vary  somewhat.  Having  the  unit  items  all 
sub-divided  into  their  elementary  parts,  it  is  an  easy  matter  after 
determining  the  cost  of  materials  in  any  locality  to  make  the  exact 
corrections  to  the  re.^'ilts  obtained  on  a  previous  job.  Similarly, 
when  a  difference  in  tne  rate  per  hour  for  wages  is  known,  if  the 
same  efficiency  is  obtained  from  the  men  it  is  very  easy  to  make  a 
correction,  or  if  the  efficiency  varies,  judgment  must  be  applied  to 
determine  the  correct  rate  to  use.  It  has  been  the  writer's  experi- 
ence that  although  the  rate  of  wages  and  cost  of  materials  vary 
somewhat  in  different  parts  of  the  country,  the  variations  frequently 
offset  one  another  so  nearly  that  the  sum  total  of  the  unit  cost 
obtained  in  one  place  may  be  used  in  another,  very  seldom  needing 
correction.  For  instance,  within  one  month,  after  careful  investiga- 
tion, a  bid  was  made  up  on  a  structure  at  San  Juan,  Porto  Rico, 
using  the  same  unit  costs  as  foi*  a  building  in  Boston.  In  the  report 
that  is  given,  the  costs  relate  to  strictly  first  class  material  and 
workmanship  in  every  case,  as  it  has  been  the  endeavor  of  the 
writer  to  establish  and  maintain  one  standard  for  all  work.  In 
general  I  would  say  that  the  standard  mixture  for  all  floors  has 
been  either  1-3-6,  or  1-2-4  if  the  floor  is  subjected  to  extremely 
heavy  loads  and  service.  Walls  are  mixed  1-3-6  and  columns 
usually  1-2-4  ;  in  some  cases  where  they  are  very  heavily  loaded  a 
richer  mixture  is  used.  As  these  mixtures  are  common  to  nearly  all 
construction  the  costs  here  given  may  be  applied  with  little  danger 
of  error  from  neglecting  the  mixture  on  any  work.  Of  course  it  can 
readily  be  understood  that  in  the  large  number  of  jobs  which  have 
entered  into  the  averages  given,  there  being  as  many  as  18  in  the 
case  of  beam  floors,  different  methods  of  conducting  the  work  have 
been  used  and  many  different  foremen.  Therefore,  while  the  general 
average  is  doubtless  safe  for  any  work  of  an  average  character,  some 
latitude  may  be  allowed  the  judgment  in  determining  whether  any 
specific  case  is  likely  to  be  difficult,  easy  or  average.  The  writer 
has  found  quite  a  difference,  for  instance,  in  cost  of  identical  work 
handled  by  different  foremen,  due  to  the  personal  equation  of  their 
painstaking  supervision  and  ability. 


1156  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost    of    Columns. — The    following    costs    are    the    average    of    9 
buildings : 

Per  cu.  ft. 
of  concrete. 

Cement   $0.085 

Sand  and  stone 0.049 

Labor  on  concrete.- 0.096 

General  labor 0.027 

Team  and  miscellaneous 0.021 

Plant    0.023 

Total,  exclusive  of  steel  and  of  forms $0.301 

The   cost  of  forms  i>er   square   foot   of   concrete   surface   encased 
was  as  follows: 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Lumber  at  $22   per  M $0.036 

Nails  and  wire 0.001 

Carpenter  labor   0.082 

Total $0.130 

This  includes  all  necessary  posts  and  staging,   also  wheelbarrow 
runs  for  placing  the  concrete. 

Cost  of  Beam  Floors. — The  average  cost  for  18  buildings  was: 

Per.  cu.  ft. 
of  concrete. 

Cement    $0.106 

Sand  and  stone 0.063 

Labor  on  concrete 0.111 

General   labor    0.020 

Team  and  miscellaneous 0.025 

Plant 0.024 

Total,  exclusive  of  steel  and  of  forms $0.354 

The  cost  of   forms  per   square   foot   of   concrete   surface   covered 
was: 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Lumber  at  $22  per  M $0.045 

Nails  and  wire    0.002 

Carpenter   labor    0.070 

Total $0.116 

Cost  of  Flat  Slab  Floors. — The  average  cost  of  3  buildings  was : 

Per  cu.  ft. 
of  concrete. 

Cement    $0.096 

Sand  and  cement 0.070 

Labor  on   concrete 0.097 

General    labor 0.009 

Team   and   miscellaneous 0.019 

Plant 0.024 

Total,  exclusive  of  forms $0.315 


BUILDINGS.  1157 

The  cost  of  forms  was: 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Lumber  at   $22   per  M $0.038 

Nails   and   wire 0.002 

Carpenter    labor 0.071 

Total $0.111 

Cost  of  Concrete  Slabs  Between  Stc-el  Beams. — The  average  cost 
for  13  buildings  was: 

Per  cu.  ft. 
concrete. 

Cement     $0.128 

Sand  and  stone 0.068 

Labor  on   concrete 0.102 

General    labor 0.019 

Team  and  miscellaneous 0.024 

Plant    0.017 

Total,  exclusive  of  steel  and  of  forms $0.359 

The  cost  of  forms  was : 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Lumber  at  $22  per  M $0.032 

Nails  and  wire 0.002 

Carpenter    labor 0.061 

Total .$0.095 

Cost  of  Walls. — The  average  cost  of  concrete  walls  (above  grade) 
for  17  buildings  was: 

Per  cu.  ft. 
concrete. 

Cement $0.073 

Sand  and  stone 0.076 

Labor   on   concrete 0.090 

General    labor 0.016 

Team    and    miscellaneous 0.025 

Plant    .    0.019 


Total,  exclusive  of  steel  and  of  forms $0.301 

The  cost  of  forms  was  : 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Lumber  at  $22  per  M $0.036 

Nails  and  wire 0.002 

Carpenter    labor 0.085 

Total    . $0.128 

Cost  of  Foundation  Walls. — The  average  cost  for  14  buildings  was: 

Per  cu.  ft. 
concrete. 
Cement $0.080 


Sand  and  stone 

Labor  on   concrete 

General    labor 

Team    and    miscellaneous. 
Plant    . 


0.062 
0.076 
0.015 
0.019 
0.017 


Total,  exclusive  of  forms. $0.269 


1158  HANDBOOK    OP   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  forms  was : 

Per  sq  ft. 

Lumber  at  $22  per  M $0.033 

Nails    and    wire 0.002 

Carpenter    labor 0.068 

Total    $0.103 

Cost  of  Footing  and  Mass  Foundations. — The  average  cost  for  10 
buildings  was : 

Per  cu.  ft. 

concrete. 

Cement     $0.071 

Sand  and  stone 0.077 

Labor  on   concrete 0.045 

General    labor 0.007 

Team   and    miscellaneous 0.007 

Plant    0.021 

Total,  exclusive  of  forms $0.229 

The  cost  of  forms  was : 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Lumber  at  $22  per  M $0.034 

Nails    0.002 

Carpenter    labor 0.057 


Total     . $0.093 

Cost  of  Labor  on  Reinforcing  Steel. — Table  XI  omits  entirely  the 
first  cost  of  the  material.  After  it  is  received  at  the  site  of  the 
work  in  the  shape  sold  by  the  manufacturer,  these  prices  cover  the 
cost  of  fabricating  into  units  for  columns  or  beams,  bending  the 
stirrups,  placing  and  all  incidentals  whatsoever  prior  to  the  actual 
embedding  in  concrete.  In  the  case  of  the  highest  cost,  a  coal 
pocket,  there  was  very  limited  storage  space,  1^4  -in.  bars  had  to  be 
bent  diagonally  so  as  to  pass  over  the  top  of  the  support  at  columns, 
and  there  were  numerous  stirrups,  all  of  which  had  to  be  made  by 
hand.  The  job  was  too  small  to  justify  any  mechanical  arrangement 
for  bending  or  for  handling  material.  The  next  highest,  office  build- 
ing, Portland,  Me.,  there  was  a  sufficient  amount  to  require  proper 
machinery.  The  hoops  for  columns  were  all  welded.  The  vertical 
bars  were  all  wired  inside  of  these  hoops.  There  was  a  mushroom 
head  of  bent  and  circular  bars  wired  together  at  the  top  and  great 
numbers  of  long  bars  of  small  section  spread  in  all  directions  over 
the  floor.  The  lowest  price,  filter  at  Lawrence,  was  made  entirely 
of  straight  bars  placed  loose,  the  only  expense  being  cutting  them 
in  a  hand  shear  to  length  and  placing  them. 


BUILDINGS. 


1159 


TABLE  XI. — STEEL. 

Weight.  Cost  of  Cost  per 

Location.                                                  Tons.  handling.  ton. 

Office  building,   Portland,  Me 324%  $5,115.32  $15.76 

Fire  station,  Weston,  Mass 8%  40.26  4.74 

Mill,    Chelsea,    Mass 65%  548.81  8.41 

Coal   bins,  Dalton,   Mass 8%  61.75  7.26 

Dam,  Auburn,   Me 55  506.76  9.18 

Filter,  Warren,  R.  1 19  102.59  5.40 

Tank,    Lincoln,    Me 8%  69.38  8.16 

Tar  well,   Springfield 15%  59.21  3.82 

Monument,    Provincetown 24%  136.84  5.58 

Mill,    Greenfield 92%  1,232.01  10.20 

Machine  shop,  Milton,  Mass 20%  177.16  8.75 

Coal  pocket,  Lawrence,  Mass 28  461.16  16.47 

Mill,    Southbridge 53%  142.76  2.67 

Mill,  S.  Windham,  Me 293  3,079.60  10.51 

Mill,   Attleboro,   Mass 49%  286.02  5.78 

Garage,    Newton,    Mass 20  86.55  4.33 

Mill,  Southbridge,  Mass 30  100.03  3.34 

Coal  pocket,  Hartford,  Conn 195  2,316.60  11.88 

Filter,    Lawrence,    Mass 44y2  112.84  2.54 

Warehouse,    Portland,    Me 62  462.99  7.47 

Standpipe,    Attleboro,    Mass 199%  1,547.00  7.75 

Highest    16.47 

Lowest     2.54 

Average  of  21 8.52 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Building  Construction.*— Mr.  T. 
Herbert  Files  is  author  of  the  following: 

The  costs  here  given  are  those  of  labor  only,  as  labor  costs  are 
usually  the  unknown  ones  in  estimating,  the  material  costs  being 
easily  obtained  from  the  schedule  of  quantities  and  the  market 
prices. 

These  costs  are  taken  from  different  work  which  the  writer  has 
been  on  and  are  known  to  be  correct  for  that  kind  of  work.  They 
are  not  obtained  from  rough  figures  after  the  work  was  finished,  but 
from  carefully  kept  cost  records.  All  of  the  costs  are  from  jobs 
consisting  of  a  number  of  buildings. 

The  cost  analysis  was  kept  in  the  following  manner.  Each  job 
had  a  cost  keeper  whose  only  duties  were  those  of  keeping  the 
average  weekly  cost  of  the  different  work  of  construction.  The 
distribution  of  the  time  was  taken  either  from  foreman's  reports  or 
from  time  cards.  Most  of  the  costs  given  in  this  article  are  obtained 
by  means  of  time  cards. 

Time  cards  are  rather  difficult  to  get  from  the  ordinary  labor 
employed  on  construction  work,  but  this  difficulty  was  overcome  by 
having  the  foreman  of  the  labor  gangs  make  out  cards  for  each  man 
in  his  crew.  The  carpenters  and  better  class  of  laborers  made  out 
their  own  cards.  Each  man  had  to  pass  in  a  time  card  as  he  checked 
out  at  the  timekeeper's  window  at  night.  In  this  way  the  record  of 
each  man's  time  and  how  it  was  spent,  was  passed  into  the  office 
each  night,  and  no  special  men  were  lost,  as  usually  happens  when 
the  distribution  is  taken  from  foremen's  cards. 


"Engineering-Contracting,  Apr.   7,  1909. 


1160  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  keeper  would  go  over  these  cards  the  next  day  and 
enter  the  totals  of  the  labor  of  each  class  of  work  on  the  cost 
keeping  sheets.  The  record  was  divided  into  different  accounts, 
one  for  each  division  of  the  work,  such  as  excavation,  concreting, 
forms,  floor  finish,  steel,  etc.  All  time  was  charged  against  its 
proper  account  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  the  date,  kind  of  work, 
total  time,  and  wage  rate,  as  shown  by  the  accompanying  form. 

The  total  number  of  hours  in  the  analysis  was  checked  up  each 
day  with  the  total  number  of  hours  on  the  timekeeper's  sheets. 
At  the  end  of  each  week  the  total  cost  of  each  kind  of  work  for 
the  week  and  the  unit  cost  were  figured  up  and  a  summary  made  of 
the  totals  of  the  different  accounts.  This  total  was  then  compared 
with  the  pay-roll.  If  everything  has  been  carried  through  correctly, 
the  two  totals  should  check  within  a  few  dollars.  They  will  not 
check  exactly,  as  average  wage  rates  are  used  in  the  cost  keeping. 

Wages. — As  cost  figures  do  not  mean  much  unless  the  rates  of 
wages  are  known,  the  average  rates  paid  will  be  given.  They  are 
as  follows: 

Common  labor,  as  used  in  excavating,  unloading  materials,  and 
unskilled  work,  17^  cts.  per  hour;  foreman,  30  cts. ;  concrete  labor, 
19  cts.  per  hour ;  foreman,  40  cts. ;  steel  labor,  25  cts.  per  hour ; 
foreman,  30  cts. ;  form  labor,  used  for  stripping  and  rough  carpenter 
work,  30  cts.  ;  carpenters  41  cts.  per  hour,  and  foreman,  50  cts. 

Cost  of  Unloading  Materials. — Cement  is  usually  unloaded  by 
laborers  carrying  the  bags  on  their  shoulders  from  the  car,  or  by 
wheeling  in  wheelbarrows.  If  a  car  can  be  unloaded  direct  from  the 
car  into  the  storage  shed,  with  very  little  carrying,  six  men  can 
unload  600  bags  equivalent  to  150  bbls.,  in  3  hours,  at  a  unit  cost  of 
2  cts.  per  bbl.  If  unloaded  by  wheelbarrows  with  a  distance  of  100 
ft.,  it  will  cost  4  cts.  per  bbl.,  but  may  run  up  to  5  cts.  or  6  cts.  if 
the  men  are  not  handled  in  the  proper  manner. 

Sand  and  gravel  will  cost  on  an  average  of  8  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
unloading,  laborers  shoveling  it  from  the  car  to  the  storage  pile 
nearby.  The  cost  varies  from  6  to  10  cts.,  depending  upon  con- 
ditions. 

Reinforcing  steel  bars  can  be  unloaded  at  a  cost  varying  from 
35  cts.  to  |3.00  per  ton,  depending  upon  the  carrying  distance.  Here 
are  some  actual  costs: 

Unloading  %  in.  x  20  ft.  twisted  steel,  from  box  cars  and  piling 
it  on  ground  beside  car  32  cts.  per  ton. 

Unloading  from  gondola  cars,  carrying  300  ft.  and  piling  on  racks 
in  steel  shed,  $3.00  per  ton. 

The  unloading  of  lumber  differs  considerably  in  cost,  same 
depending  upon  the  distance  carried  and  the  size  of  the  sticks.  It 
was  found,  however,  from  our  records  that  it  cost  from  70  cts.  to 
$1.00  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  to  unload,  haul  200  ft.  and  pile,  form 
sheathing. 

Form    Work. — The   cost   of  form   work   is   the  most   difficult   cost 

to  get  in  reinforced  concrete  construction.     This  is  especially  so  in 

regard  to  the  making  of  forms,  as  the  work  on  construction  jobs  is 

'  usually  done  in  such  a  manner  that  it  is  hard  to  distribute  the  costs 


BUILDINGS.  1161 

properly  and  have  the  correct  amount  of  work  done,  reported.  The 
cost  work  here  referred  to  was  not  started  in  the  best  way  to  give 
good  costs  of  the  making  of  forms  and  for  that  reason  the  costs 
of  making  forms  will  not  be  as  complete  as  might  be.  The  unit  costs 
were  figured  on  the  number  of  square  feet  of  form  surface  in  contact 
with  the  concrete. 

The  following  are  some  of  the  labor  costs  of  forms  made  in  a  field 
carpenter  shop,* which  consisted  of  two  saw  machines,  a  planing 
and  a  boring  machine,  with  a  shop  foreman  in  charge. 

Per  sq.  ft. 
of  surface. 

Columns   cts. 

Girders  and  beams 5  cts. 

Floor   panels 2  cts. 

Wall    panels 3  cts. 

The  cost  of  setting  forms  for  the  floors,  which  included  time 
spent  in  the  moving  of  the  forms  from  one  floor  to  another,  erecting 
and  setting  the  forms  of  columns,  beams,  and  floor  panels  and  the 
falsework  supporting  them,  was  figured  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor  surface. 
The  costs  of  different  floor  set-ups  varied,  because  the  men  at  first 
were  unskilled  and  not  well  organized.  From  1,300  to  1,800  sq.  ft. 
of  floor  were  set  up  in  a  day.  These  costs  ranged  from  13  cts.  per 
sq.  ft.  for  the  first  set-up  to  4.7  cts.  for  the  roof  set-up,  making  an 
average  of  8.4  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

The  stripping  of  the  floor  forms  cost  from  2.5  cts.  to  1.5  cts.  per 
sq.  ft,  or  an  average  of  1.9  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.  This  makes 
the  cost  of  setting  up  and  stripping  of  forms  for  floors  average  10.3 
cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

The  curtain  walls,  between  columns,  were  put  in  place  after  the 
floors  and  cost  from  6  to  10  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  form  surface  for 
setting  up,  or  an  average  of  8  cts.  The  cost  of  stripping  these  was 
%  ct.  per  sq.  ft.  Partition  walls  and  outside  plain  walls  cost  from 
4  to  8  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  form  surface  or  an  average  of  5  cts.  for 
setting  and  %  ct.  per  sq.  ft.  for  stripping. 

Reinforcing  Steel. — The  steel  used  for  reinforcing  was  twisted 
rods.  The  column  cages,  beam  and  girder  reinforcements  were 
made  up  into  units  in  the  steel  yard.  From  there  they  were  carried 
and  hoisted  to  the  different  floors,  as  they  were  made  ready  for 
concreting,  and  were  put  in  place  by  the  steel  gang  before -con- 
creting. The  floor  steel  was  placed  as  the  floor  was  concreted. 

The  cost  of  the  steel  work  is  divided  as  follows: 

Per  ton. 

Unloading    I  2.00 

Making  up   steel 5.50 

Carrying    1-75 

Placing LOO 

Total     $10.25 

Concreting. — The  labor  costs  in  concreting  vary  a  great  deal  with 
the  plant  and  method  of  conveying.  On  this  work,  the  concrete 
was  machine  mixed,  the  materials  being  run  into  storage  hoppers 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

over  the  mixer,  by  a  self  dumping  car,  on  an  inclined  track,  from 
the  material  pile,  where  it  was  loaded  by  hand.  The  concrete  after 
being  mixed,  was  raised  to  the  proper  floor  by  a  hoist,  which  dumped 
automatically  into  a  hopper.  From  this  hopper  the  concrete  was 
wheeled  to  the  desired  location  by  means  of  concrete  carts.  The 
greatest  wheeling  distance  was  350  ft.  and  the  least  50  ft.,  making 
the  average  distance  200  ft.  The  costs  of  concreting  columns  and 
floors  ranged  from  2.8  cts.  to  4.2  cts.  per  cu.  ft.,  or^m  average  cost 
of  3.5  cts.  per  cu.  ft. 

In  concreting  footings,  the  material  was  moved  to  the  mixer  by 
means  of  wheelbarrows  instead  of  self  dumping  cars,  and  wheeled 
to  the  desired  location  over  plank  runs.  Under  these  conditions  the 
cost  of  concreting  was  5  cts.,  with  the  carrying  distance  the  same 
as  for  the  floors. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Factory.* — Mr.  D.  L.  C.  Raymond 
gives  the  following  relative  to  a  building  erected  in  1907  at  Walker- 
ville,  Ontario.  It  is  a  two  story  factory,  100  x  100  ft.,  with  18  ft. 
clearance  on  the  first  floor  and  12  ft.  on  the  second.  It  is  skeleton 
type  of  construction,  16  x  16  ft.  floor  panels,  and  6-in.  curtain  walls. 
Steel  rods  were  used  for  reinforcement  with  wire  mesh  in  the  slabs. 
A  1 :2  :4  mixture  was  used,  the  mortar  finish  on  the  floors  being  1 :2. 

The  columns  and  beam  forms  were  2-in.  dressed  pine,  supported 
by  4  x  4  stuff.  The  floor  forms  were  1  in.  laid  on  2  x  4  pieces  spaced 
18  ins. 

The  men  were  all  green  at  the  work.  There  were  847  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete,  the  cost  of  which  was  as  follows: 

Materials:  Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement  at  $2.05  per  bbl $   3,314     $   3.91 

Sand  and  gravel  at  $1.25  per  cu.  yd 1,054          1.25 

Reinforcement  at  $55  per  ton 2,314          2.73 

Lumber  for  forms  at  $27  per  M 4,944          5.84 

Nails... 107          0.13 

Total    materials $11,733     $13.86 

Labor: 

Building  runs,  mixing  and  hoisting  concrete.  $  872  $1.03 

Placing  and  tamping  concrete. 562  0.66 

Placing    reinforcement 221  0.26 

Stripping  and  cleaning  forms,  etc 380  0.45 

Carpenters  building  and  setting  forms 2,010  2.38 

Superintendence    714  0.84 

Tools  and  depreciation  of  plant 338  0.40 

Total   labor .  .$   5,097     $  6.02 

Grand  total 16,830       19.88 

It  will  be  noted  that  no  salvage  is  allowed  for  the  lumber,  and 
that  216  ft.  B.  M.  were  used  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete.  The  carpenter 
work  on  the  lumber  cost  $11  per  M.  The  cost  of  stripping  lumber 
and  cleaning  up  amounted  to  a  little  more  than  $2  per  M. 

There  were  100  Ibs.  of  reinforcement  per  cu.  yd.,  and  the  labor 
of  placing  it  was  only  a  trifle  more  than  *4  ct.  per  Ib. 

^Engineering-Contracting,  Apr.  29,  1908. 


BVJLDJXGS.  1163 

This  building  contained  about  320,000  cu.  ft.  of  space.  Hence  the 
cost  of  the  concrete  alone  was  5*4  cts.  per  cu.  ft.,  which  is  a  low 
cost.  The  cost  per  square  foot  of  floor  area  (2  stories)  was  84  cts., 
not  including  windows,  etc, 

Cost  of  a  House  of  Separately  Molded  Concrete  Members.* — The 
construction  of  a  kiln  house  of  separately  molded  reinforced  concrete 
columns,  girders  and  slabs  for  the  Edison  Portland  Cement  Works 
at  New  Village,  N.  J.,  was  described  in  our  issue  of  Oct.  2,  1907. 
(See  also  "Concrete  Construction,"  by  Gillette  and  Hill.)  This 
article  gave  for  the  first  time  costs  of  molding  and  erecting  sepa- 
rately molded  concrete  structural  members  for  building  work.  Since 
it  was  published  the  same  company  has  built  a  cement  storage 
house  for  which  the  columns,  girders  and  roof  slabs  were  separately 
molded  and  erected.  In  a  paper  by  Mr.  W.  H.  Mason,  superintendent 
Edison  Portland  Cement  Works,  some  of  the  costs  of  this  later 
work  were  given.  We  give  these  costs  in  different  form  and  more 
fully  analyzed  in  the  following  paragraphs. 

The  storage  house  is  144  x  360  ft.,  in  plan  with  a  clear  height 
of  30  ft.  The  exterior  walls  are  of  retaining  wall  section,  they 
having  to  take  the  thrust  of  the  stored  cement,  and  they  were  built 
in  place.  Between  walls  are  five  longitudinal  rows  of  columns ;  the 
rows  are  spaced  24  ft.  apart  and  the  columns  in  each  row  are  12  ft. 
apart.  Transverse  roof  girders  12  ft.  apart  cap  the  columns  and 
carry  a  roof  of  6  x  12  ft.  x  4-in.  slabs.  For  column  footings 
5  x  5  x  5 -ft.  plain  concrete  cubes  with  20-in.  square  sockets  molded 
in  their  tops  were  used. 

Materials  and  Labor. — The  concrete  used  was  a  1 :6  mixture,  using 
crushed  run  stone,  all  of  which  would  pass  a  %-in.  screen.  The 
Edison  company  furnished  both  cement  and  stone,  charging  up  the 
cement  at  $1  per  barrel  and  the  stone  at  60  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The 
lumber,  of  which  7,000  ft.  B.  M.,  were  used,  cost  $27  per  thousand. 
The  reinforcing  steel,  of  which  201,400  Ibs.  were  used,  cost  delivered 
2.03  cts.  per  pound.  A  force  of  23  men  was  employed;  eleven  of 
them  were  classed  as  carpenters  at  an  average  wage  of  24  cts.  per 
hour  and  12  as  laborers  at  an  average  wage  of  15  cts.  per  hour. 

Casting  Floor  and  Plant. — The  casting  floor  on  which  the  columns, 
girders  and  slabs  were  molded,  was  located  some  half  a  mile  from 
the  building.  A  %  cu.  yd.  Ransome  mixer  was  set  lip  under  the  mill 
conveyor  which  carries  crushed  cement  rock  for  cement  making  to 
the  stock  house  and  from  this  conveyor  the  stone  was  chuted  directly 
into  the  mixer  stock  bins  as  wanted.  The  mixer  discharged  directly 
into  3  cu.  yd.  cars  which  ran  out  on  a  track  between  casting  floors 
on  each  side.  The  casting  floors  consisted  of  trowel  finished  con- 
crete slabs  4  or  5  ins.  thick  laid  on  a  4-in.  sub-base  of  compacted 
cinders.  These  casting  floors  cost,  Mr.  Mason  states,  4  cts.  per 
square  foot.  So  far  as  possible,  members  were  cast  side  by  side  and 
in  tiers  so  as  to  reduce  floor  space  and  form  work.  The  concrete 
cars  discharged  by  spout  directly  into  the  molds,  the  mixture  being 
made  wet  enough  to  flow  easily. 


11  Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.  18,  1908. 


1164 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Molding  Columns. — There  were  141  columns,  having  18  x  18-in. 
shafts  32  ft.  long  with  two  triangular  brackets  at  the  top  for  girder 
seats,  and  each  column  contained  very  closely  2.8  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  and  275  Ibs.  of  reinforcement  or  closely  98  Ibs.  of  steel 
per  cubic  yard  of  concrete.  These  quantities  are  computed  from 
drawings.  The  construction  of  the  forms  for  molding  the  columns 
is  shown  by  Fig.  7.  Each  complete  form  contained  about  535  ft. 
B.  M.  of  lumber  and  seven  were  used  for  molding  141  columns  and 
were  still  in  good  condition  after  the  work.  The  seven  molds  con- 
tained about  3,745  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  and  molded  141  X  2.8  =  395 


Fig.   7. 

cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  so  that  the  amount  of  form  lumber  used  per 
cubic  yard  of  concrete  molded  was  about  9.7  ft.  B.  M.  The  costs 
of  molding  per  column  and  per  cubic  yard  were  as  follows : 

Item.  Per  col.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Steel  reinforcement $   7.57          $2.70 

Concrete    materials 5.48  1.96 

Labor,     carpenters 4.27  1.52 

Labor,   concrete  and  steel 1.95  0.70 

Total    cost $19.27          $6.88 

Molding  Girders. — There  were  187  girders,  each  12  x  26  ins.  x  24 
ft.  and  each  containing  1.9  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  and  about  320  Ibs.  of 
steel  or  about  168  Ibs.  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete.  A  complete 
girder  form  is  shown  by  Fig.  8.  A  complete  form  contained  ap- 
proximately 370  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  and  five  forms,  or  1,850  ft. 
B.  M.,  were  used  for  molding  187  girders,  or  about  5.2  ft.  B.  M. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  in  girders.  It  should  be  noted  that  many  of 
the  girders  were  molded  between  other  girders  without  using  any 


BUILDINGS. 


1165 


wooden  forms  at  all.     The  average  cost  of  molding  a  girder  complete 

was  as  follows  : 

Item.  Per  girder.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Steel    ...............................  $   5.53          $2.91 

Concrete    material  ....................      3.51  1.90 

Carpenter   labor  ......................      2.26  1.18 

Labor,  mixing,  placing,  etc  ............ 


1.34 


Totals     $12.64 


Fig.  8. 

Molding  Roof  Slabs. — The  roof  slabs  were  6  x  12  ft.  x  4  ins. 
and  each  contained  0.88  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  and  about  83  Ibs.  of 
reinforcing  steel  or  about  95  Ibs.  of  steel  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete. 
The  slabs  were  molded  in  tiers,  using  the  form  shown  by  Fig.  9, 
made  8  ins.  deep  so  as  to  be  clamped  onto  each  slab  in  molding  the 
slab  above.  There  are  about  52  ft.  B.  M.  in  a  slab  form,  as  28  forms 
molded  720  slabs,  about  2%  ft.  B.  M.  of  form  lumber  were  required 


Fig.   9. 

per  cubic  yard  of  concrete.     The  cost  of  molding  roof  slabs  was  as 
follows : 

Item.  Per  slab.  Per  cu.  yd. 


Steel    $1.69 

Concrete    material 1.85 

Carpenter   labor 0.423 

Labor    . 6.405 


Totals 


,$4.368 


$1.92 
2.10 
0.48 
0.46 

$4.96 


1166  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Each  slab  covered  6  x  12  =  72  sq.  ft.  of  roof,  so  that  the  cost 
of  molding  was  6.06  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  or  $6.06  per  100  sq.  ft. 

In  casting  columns,  girders  and  slabs  side  by  side  and  in  tiers 
in  contact  the  fresh  concrete  was  prevented  from  adhering  to  the 
member  already  molded  by  coating  the  contact  surface  of  the 
molded  member  with  two  coats  of  ordinary  whitewash.  This  method 
proved  far  superior  to  using  paper,  as  had  been  done  in  previous 
work.  The  paper  stuck  to  the  concrete  so  fast  that  it  was  difficult 
to  remove  it.  It  should  be  noted  also  that  in  the  preceding  cost 
figures  the  cost  of  form  lumber  is  apparently  included  in  "carpenter 
labor."  There  was  7,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  form  lumber  at  $27  per  M.  ft. 
required  for  molding  1,048  members,  or  about  1,384  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete.  The  cost  of  form  lumber  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  was, 
therefore,  $189  -7-  1,384  =  13.65  cts. 

The  labor  cost  of  erecting  the  molded  concrete  members  with  a 
Browning  locomotive  crane  was  as  follows : 

Per  on.  yd. 

Columns     , $2.63 

Girders 1.57 

Roof    slabs. 1.75 

The  details  of  this  cost  of  erection  and  the  methods  are  given  in 
Gillette  and  Hill's  "Concrete  Construction." 

Comparative  Cost  of  Constructing  Two  Identical  Reinforced  Con- 
crete Buildings— One  of  Separately  Molded  Members  and  One  of 
Members  Molded  in  Place.*— Mr.  Mason  D.  Pratt  is  author  of  the 
following : 

In  1904  the  Central  Pennsylvania  Traction  Co.  of  Harrisburg,  Pa., 
built  a  car  barn  and  a  repair  shop  of  reinforced  concrete,  probably 
the  first  buildings  in  this  country  built  entirely  of  this  material  for 
this  purpose.  The  buildings  are  one  story  in  height  and  were  con- 
structed in  the  usual  manner  by  erecting  wooden  forms  and  casting 
all  concrete  work  in  place.  The  same  company  has  just  completed 
a  second  barn  adjacent  to  the  one  above  described  of  the  same 
dimensions  as  the  first  barn,  viz. :  75  ft.  wide  by  360  ft.  long.  The 
last  barn  is  also  of  reinforced  concrete,  but  owing  to  conditions 
which  seemed  favorable  for  the  purpose,  an  entirely  different  mode 
of  construction  was  followed.  All  of  the  members  for  that  portion 
of  the  building  above  the  foundation  and  floors,  including  columns, 
beams,  wall  and  roof  slabs,  were  separately  molded  on  the  ground 
and  afterwards  erected  by  means  of  a  traveling  stiff-leg  derrick. 
This  method  of  construction  proved  economical  and  owing  to  the 
close  similarity  of  the  two  buildings  in  size  and  general  design  it  is 
possible  to  make  an  accurate  comparison  of  the  costs.  In  describing 
the  two  buildings,  Barn  A  refers  to  the  original  building  and  Barn  B 
the  last  one  erected. 

Barn  A  was  built  on  ground  which  was  from  2  to  10  ft.  below  the 
floor  level.  The  column  footings  were  placed  on  solid  ground  6  to 
12  ins.  below  the  sod  and  carried  up  within  1  ft.  of  floor  level,  the 
ground  being  filled  in  after  the  building  was  under  roof.  In  general 


'Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  19,  1910. 


BUILDINGS.  1167 

plan  the  building  had  three  rows  of  non-reinforced  hexagonal  col- 
umns spaced  15  ft.  centers  longitudinally  and  37  ft.  centers  trans- 
versely. The  roof  consisted  of  transverse  beams,  resting  on  the 
columns,  longitudinal  purlins  and  a  3-in.  slab  cast  in  place,  the  col- 
umns being  connected  longitudinally  with  beams  6  ins.  thick  and  2 
ft.  deep.  After  the  forms  were  removed  from  this  skeleton  the  three 
longitudinal  walls  were  filled  in  place.  Provision  was  made  for 
future  extension  laterally  by  casting  brackets  in  the  columns  to 
support  roof  girders  for  an  adjacent  bay.  The  barn  also  had  a  wing 
16  ft.  wide  and  90  ft.  long,  containing  barn  foreman's  office,  lockers 
and  lavatory  for  the  use  of  motormen,  conductors  and  barn  men. 

Concrete  for  this  building  was  mixed  in  a  rotary  batch  mixer,  into 
which  the  aggregate  was  dumped  directly  from  wheelbarrows,  and 
the  concrete  distributed  from  the  mixer  to  the  job  in  wheelbarrows 
by  means  of  runs  and  an  elevator  operated  by  a  power  hoist. 

Barn  B  was  built  entirely  independent  from  Barn  A,  the  first  wall 
being  placed  37  ft.  beyond  the  wall  of  Barn  A,  thus  permitting  the 
increase  of  the  plant  by  one  addition  bay  in  the  future  by  simply 
adding  a  roof  between  the  two  buildings.  Column  spacing  was  made 
the  same  as  Barn  A,  but  the  columns  were  square.  In  order  to 
get  roof  slabs  of  a  size  which  coujd  be  conveniently  handled,  the 
roof  beams  were  spaced  10  ft.  centers  and  alternated  in  the  two 
bays.  Thus  on  the  outer  walls  a  roof  beam  came  at  every  other 
column,  while  on  the  center  wall  each  column  carried  a  beam  and  a 
longitudinal  beam  between  columns  supported  the  ends  of  two  roof 
beams.  The  roof  proper  consisted  of  slabs,  3%  ins.  thick,  10  ft. 
long  and  6  ft.  and  7  ft.  wide,  which  were  laid  directly  on  the  roof 
beams.  Two  slabs  at  the  center  of  every  alternate  10  ft.  bay  were 
omitted  to  allow  placing  skylights.  The  walls  were  6  ins.  thick,  as 
in  the  case  of  Barn  A,  but  were  made  up  of  slabs  of  various  sizes. 
These  slabs  were  all  tongued  and  grooved,  as  were  also  the  columns. 
Three-eighths  of  an  inch  was  allowed  for  all  joints,  the  horizontal 
joints  being  mortared  as  the  work  was  laid  Up  and  the  vertical  joints 
filled  and  pointed  after  everything  was  in  place.  A  small  percentage 
of  reinforcement  was  placed  in  all  slabs  as  an  insurance  against 
breakage  in  handling. 

The  concrete  for  this  building  was  mixed  in  the  same  mixer  used 
on  Barn  A,  located  at  a  central  point,  the  materials  being  moved  in 
wheelbarrows  as  before. 

Barn  A  had  about  290  ft.  of  open  pits  under  each  track,  60  ft. 
of  the  front  end  of  each  bay  being  paved  with  granolithic  floor  and 
used  as  space  for  washing  cars.  Barn  B  had  the  same  arrangement 
in  one  bay,  the  other  bay,  which  was  intended  for  storage  purposes 
only,  had  granolithic  floor  from  end  to  end.  The  ground  on  which 
Barn  B  was  built  had  been  filled  in  with  various  materials,  mostly 
cinder  from  a  nearby  steel  plant,  and  excavations  had  to  be  made 
for  all  foundations.  In  the  figures  given  below,  all  labor  for 
excavation  in  both  buildings  is  omitted.  In  Barn  B  each  column 
had  a  separate  footing  as  in  Barn  A,  which,  however,  was  carried 
to  a  point  15  ins.  above  floor  level,  and  provided  with  a  pocket  to 


1168  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

receive  the  column.  A  layer  of  sand  was  put  in  each  pocket  to 
give  the  column  good  bearing  and  to  adjust  height.  A  beam  12  ins. 
wide  and  2  ft.  deep  connected  these  footings,  being  cast  at  the  same 
time  with  the  footings. 

The  tracks  were  laid  in  the  storage  bay  and  the  granolithic  floor 
cast  in  place  at  the  time  of  starting  excavations  for  the  foundations, 
and  as  soon  as  the  .floor  was  in  place  the  casting  of  beams,  columns 
and  slabs  began.  The  beams  and  columns  were  nested  by  casting 
the  alternate  pieces  a  suitable  distance  apart,  and  after  removing 
the  forms  these  became  the  forms  for  the  intermediate  pieces.  The 
slabs  were  cast  in  piles,  the  ends  being  offset  to  enable  rapid  hand- 
ling. The  pieces  were  separated  by  means  of  40-lb.  waxed  manila 
paper.  No  difficulty  whatever  was  experienced  during  the  erection  in 
separating.  In  some  instances  soap  was  used,  but  the  results  were 
not  as  satisfactory  and  the  cost  was  higher  than  with  the  paper. 
The  surface  of  the  pieces  formed  by  paper  separation  showed  a 
close,  smooth,  dull  surface,  except  for  the  wrinkles  formed  by 
the  paper,  which  was  not  heavy  enough  to  prevent  wrinkling.  The 
paper  was  also  responsible  for  other  defects  in  the  surface  finish, 
owing  to  the  mortar  running  in  between  joints  where  the  paper 
overlapped  and  forming  thin  slivers.  The  paper  was  easily  removed 
with  water  from  a  1-in.  hose,  with  nozzle  ^4  in.  The  top  surfaces 
of  all  pieces,  of  course,  were  troweled.  This  gave  a  rather  variegated 
wall  surface  to  the  structure,  but  a  coat  of  cement  wash  using  a  thin 
mixture  of  about  equal  parts  of  cement  and  limestone  dust  applied 
with  whitewash  brushes  produced  a  fairly  uniform  appearance. 
This  method  of  construction  involved  the  use  of  slightly  more 
reinforcing  steel  and  a  larger  yardage  of  concrete,  but  the  saving 
in  forms,  lumber  and  carpenter  work  was  more  than  sufficient  to  pay 
for  this  difference  and  the  additional  cost  of  derrick  and  erection 
labor. 

The  number  of  loose  pieces  required  was  1,400.  These  were  com- 
pletely erected  in  33  working  days,  with  a  loss  of  only  three  slabs 
from  breakage. 

The  derrick  used  was  a  standard  stiff -leg  with  60-ft.  boom  and 
38-ft.  mast,  mounted  on  a  truck  so  that  it  could  be  moved  around 
the  work.  Power  was  furnished  by  a  regular  street  railway  motor 
through  a  gear  bolted  to  the  flywheel  on  the  driving  shaft  of  a 
two-drum  hoist,  the  motor  being  equipped  with  standard  street 
railway  controller  and  suitable  resistance  coils.  A  traction  com- 
pany motorman  operated  the  hoist  and  a  rigger  crew  placed  the 
material.  The  heaviest  pieces  handled  were  the  roof  beams,  which 
weighed  iy2  to  8  tons.  A  number  of  special  devices  were  used  to 
handle  the  various  pieces.  For  the  heavy  beams  a  loop  was  formed 
at  the  quarter  points  by  bending  a  reinforcing  rod,  bringing  it  flush 
with  the  top  of  the  beam  and  scooping  out  a  portion  of  the  concrete 
while  green,  and  a  special  hook  used  to  engage  this  loop.  These 
hooks  entered  the  slotted  ends  of  a  steel  spreader.  The  rig  was 
thus  adjustable  for  variable  spacing  of  the  loops  and  for  balancing. 
The  slabs  were  handled  by  means  of  slings,  holes  being  formed  in 


BUILDINGS. 


1169 


TABLE  XII. — COST  OF  CONCRETE   IN  SEPARATELY  MOLDED  CONCRETE 
CAR  BARN. 

BARN  B. 
Foundations  and  Floors,  710  cu.  yds. : 

Materials:  Total.       Per  cu.yd. 

Stone  at   |1.25    cu.   yd $       856.00  $   1.20 

Sand  at  $1.30  cu.  yd 432.00  .61 

Cement  at  $1.15  bbl 1,082.50  1.53 

Steel   120.00  .17 

Lumber    633.00  .89 

Tools    100.00  .14 

Total     $   3,223.50  $   4.54 

Labor: 

Placing  reinforcement $         19.00  $   0.03 

Forms    771.00  1.09 

Concreting     1,015.00  1.43 

Total     $  1,805.00  $   2.55 

Total  materials  and  labor $  5,028.50  $   7.09 

Building  above  Foundations,  948  cu.  yds.: 

Material: 

Stone  at  $1.28  cu.  yd $   1,085.00  $   1.16 

Sand  at  $1.30   cu.   yd 546.00  .58 

Cement  at  $1.15  bbl 1,735.00  1.86 

Steel     1,755.00  1.87 

Tools    140.00  .24 

Lumber    220.00  .15 

Total    $  5,481.00  $  5.86 

Labor: 

Forms    $       818.00  $0.87 

Bending    and    placing    reinforcement       360.00  .39 

Concreting     1,152.00  1.23 

Erection     1,776.00  1.89 

Pointing  and  cement  wash 617.00  .66 

Total     $   4,723.00  $   5.04 

Total  labor  and  materials $10,204.00  $10.90 

Totals,  1,648  cu.  yds 15,232.50  9,245 

Area  covered  by  building,  360  X  75  ft.  =  27,000  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  foundations  and  floors 18.5  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost    of    building. 38.0  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

Total    56.5  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 


1170  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

TABLE  XIII. — COMPARISON-  OF  COST  BETWEEN  CAR  BARNS,  SEPARATELY 
MOLDED  AND  CAST  IN  PLACE. 

(Average   including 'Foundations   and   Superstructure.) 

Per  cu.  yd. 


Barn  B. 

Barn  A.  ( Separately 

Materials:                               (Cast  in  place.)  molded  pieces.) 

Stone,  sand  and  cement $   3.480  $3.480 

Steel     reinforcement 915  1.140 

Lumber     1.335  .480 

Paper    .040 

Tools,  wheelbarrows,  etc .145  .145 


Total $5.875  $5.285 

Labor: 

Carpenters   $   3.250  $0.965 

Bending  and  placing  steel 095  .230 

Concreting    2.210  1.685 

Erection 1.080 


Total    $   5.555  $3.960 


Total  cost   per   cu.   yd $11.430  $9.245 

9.245 


Dif.  in  favor  Barn  B $  2.185 

the  slabs  with  a  short  section  of  %-in.  gas  pipe  for  receiving  bolts. 
In  setting  up  the  side  walls,  these  holes  were  used  to  fasten  3  x  4-in. 
sticks  on  each  side  of  the  three  wall  slabs  of  each  bay,  thus  keeping 
them  in  line,  and  by  means  of  props,  in  a  vertical  position  until 
erection  had  proceeded  far  enough  to  remove  them. 

Table  XII  gives  complete  detailed  cost  of  all  the  concrete  work  in 
Barn  B. 

Table  XIII  is  a  comparison  of  the  average  costs  of  all  the  con- 
crete work  on  Barns  A  and  B,  the  figures  covering  all  charges 
except  general  supervision.  The  concrete  aggregate  is  put  at  same 
figure  in  each  to  eliminate  any  difference  in  unit  cost  of  these 
materials.  The  mix  was  practically  the  same  in  each,  the  largest 
percentage  being  1:2:4.  Unit  costs  for  labor  were  the  same  in 
both  cases,  viz. :  ordinary  labor,  $1.25  per  day,  and  carpenters,  $2.50 
per  day. 

It  will  be  noted  more  steel  was  required  in  B,  but  very  much  less 
form  material  and  labor.  The  roof  of  Barn  B  required  more  con- 
crete, as  all  beams  and  slabs  had  to  be  treated  as  simple  members, 
whereas  in  Barn  A  full  advantage  was  taken  of  the  T  sections. 
Making  full  allowance  for  these  differences  the  actual  cost  of  the 
concrete  structure  of  Barn  A  over  Barn  B  was  15  per  cent.  Both 
buildings  were  constructed  by  day  labor  from  plans  made  by  the 
writer  and  under  his  direct  supervision. 

Cost  of  Metal  Forms  For  Concrete  Building  Work.*— In  Engi- 
neering-Contracting for  Sept.  16,  1908,  we  describe  a  system  of 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  10,  1909. 


BUILDINGS.  1171 

metal  column  and  floor  forms  for  concrete  building  work  that  had 
been  worked  out  by  Mr.  W.  L.  Caldwell  of  Canton,  Ohio.  In  a 
paper  read  at  the  recent  annual  convention  of  the  National  Cement 
Users'  Association  Mr.  Caldwell  gives  some  estimates  of  the  cost 
of  these  forms  which  are  of  interest.  These  costs  are  based  on  a 
16-in.  square  column,  with  a  girder  beam  8  ins.  wide  and  18  ins. 
deep  below  floor  slab,  and  with  the  lateral  beams  6  ins.  wide  and 
12  ins.  deep,  and  floor  slab  4  ins.  thick. 

For  a  structure  of  this  character,  Mr.  Caldwell  recommends  the 
use  of  10-gage  material  for  the  angles  at  the  four  corners  of  the 
columns,  14 -gage  for  the  lining  of  the  columns,  14 -gage  for  the 
girder  boxes,  16-gage  for  the  lateral  beam  boxes  and  18-gage 
material  for  the  channel  boards  forming  the  intercolumn  area  -for 
carrying  the  floor  slab,  with  all  necessary  reinforcing  angles,  bolts, 
etc.,  to  set  up  the  work  complete  ready  for  receiving  the  concrete. 

The  costs  are  as  follows : 

Column   centering  per  lineal   foot $1.75 

Girder  centering  per  lineal  foot 1.00 

Lateral  beam  centering*  per  lineal  foot 0.50 

Floor   area   per    square   foot 0.13 

Adjustable  girder  and  beam  box  posts  per  lin.  ft.. .    0.05 

Throwing  the  cost  of  all  of  these  items  against  the  floor  area, 
the  average  is  about  45  cts.  per  sq.  ft. 

This  price  is  arrived  at  by  taking  a  building  50  x  100  ft.  with  , 
28  columns  and  18  bays  or  intermediate  column  spaces,  each  space 
or  bay  containing  237  sq.  ft.,  in  round  numbers,  each  bay  divided  by 
two  intermediate  cross  beams,  or  three  spans  to  each  bay.  These 
figures  will  vary  somewhat  with  the  different  types  of  buildings  but 
will  give,  it  is  stated,  a  fair  idea  of  the  average  cost. 

Under  ordinary  conditions  these  centers  can  be  erected  at  a  cost 
of  approximately  1%  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  for  labor. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Building  Blocks.— Mr.  L.  L.  Bingham  gives  the 
following  data.  Letters  were  sent  (1905),  to  more  than  a  hundred 
makers  of  concrete  blocks  in  Iowa.  Most  of  the  replies  gave  data 
relating  to  blocks  for  walls  10  ins.  thick.  The  average  cost  per 
square  foot  of  blocks  for  a  10-in.  wall  was: 

Cts. 

Sand 2.0 

Cement,  at  $1.60  per  bbl 4.5 

Labor,  at  $1.83  per  day 3.8 

Total,  per  sq.  ft 10.3 

The  labor  of  making  the  blocks  includes  mixing,  molding,  sprink- 
ling, piling  and  re-piling  during  or  after  curing.  The  average  out- 
put per  man  was  48%  sq.  ft.  (1%  cu.  yds.)  per  day. 

The  10%  cts.  however,  does  not  include  all  costs  of  manufacture, 
for  it  does  not  include  interest,  depreciation  and  repairs,  purchase 
of  improved  machinery,  superintendence  and  office  expense.  One 
maker  who  turned  out  20,000  blocks  (40  car  loads)  had  a  general 
expense  of  nearly  5  cts.  per  sq.  ft.,  besides  the  above  given  10  V2  cts. 
The  selling  price  of  10-in.  blocks  averaged  21  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  of  wall. 


1172  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Buildings,  References. — For  further  data  on  this 
subject  consult  "Concrete  Construction"  by  Gillette  and  Hill. 

Weight  of  Steel  in  Buildings.— Mr.  H.  G.  Tyrrell  states  that 
weight  of  steel  for  buildings  not  more  than  11  stories  high  is 
approximately  as  follows  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor  area : 

Per  sq.  ft. 

Lbs. 
Apartment  houses  and  hotels,  with  outside  frame..    14 

Apartment  houses,  without  outside  frame 9 

Office  buildings,  with  outside  frame 23 

Office  buildings,  without  outside  frame 15 

Warehouses,  with  outside  frame 28 

Warehouses,  without  outside  frame 18 

Mr.  Edward  Godfrey  gives  the  following: 

The  Phipps  Power  Building,  Pittsburg,  Pa.,  is  100x100  ft,  10 
stories  high,  the  first  three  stories  being  24  ft,  the  rest  being  13  ft 
floor  to  floor.  The  live  load  was  assumed  at  250  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  The 
total  weight  of  steel  and  castings  was  5,742,500  Ibs.,  or  3.5  Ibs.  per 
cu.  ft.  of  volume  of  building.  Of  this  weight,  1,829,400  Ibs.  were  in 
the  columns,  and  305,500  Ibs.  in  the  38  cast  iron  column  bases. 
The  following  is  the  weight  of  steel  in  other  Pittsburg  buildings: 

Lbs.  per 
cu.  ft. 

Arrott  Building   2.8 

Farmers  Bank  Building 2.3 

Empire   Building   2.1 

Oliver  Building    1.8 

Mr.  J.  S.  Branne  gives  the  following  estimate  of  the  cost  of  the 
steel  framework  of  an  office  building.  The  building  is  50  x  100 
ft,  16  stories  high  in  the  front  and  13  stories  high  in  the  rear. 
The  first  story  is  17  ft.  high,  and  all  others  are  12  ft  high  from 
floor  line  to  floor  line.  All  curtain  walls  (outside  walls)  are  13  ins. 
thick ;  inside  tile  partitions  4  ins.  thick ;  floors  of  concrete.  Live 
loads  are  assumed  at  60  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft. ;  dead  loads  are  75  Ibs. 
per  sq.  ft  Using  outside  dimensions,  there  are  745,000  cu.  ft.  in 
the  building,  and  the  steel  weighs  795  tons,  or  2.13  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft 
of  building.  The  price  of  the  steel  is  estimated  at  3  cts.  per  Ib. 
in  place. 

Weight   of   Park    Row    Bldg.,    New   York.— The   main   part   is   26 
stories  high,  surmounted  by  two  4-story  towers.     The  area  covered 
is    15,000   sq.   ft.      It  rests  on    3,500   piles.      The   basement  was  ex- 
cavated 34  ft.  below  the  street  level. 
The  weight  of   the  building  is: 

Tons. 

Steel 9,000 

Masonry  and  other  materials 56,200 


Total    65,200 

The  estimated  cost  (in  1906)   was  $2,000,000. 

The  total   height   from   street   level   to   top   of   cupolas  on   towers 
is  386  ft.     The  first  story  is  17  ft.  high  in  the  clear,  the  second  ia 


BUILDINGS.  1173 

13    ft.,    the   third   and    fourth   are    12    ft,    the   fifth   is    11    ft,    the 
rest  are  9  ft  11  ins.  in  the  clear.  • 

Weight  of  Steel  Dome. — The  steel  dome  of  the  Emporium  build- 
ing, San  Francisco,  is  102  ft.  diameter  and  52  ft  high,  su  mounted 
by  a  "lantern,"  22^  ft  diameter  and  15  ft  high.  The  weight  is 
200  tons. 

Weight  of  Largest  Steel  Dome. — The  largest  steel  dome  in  the 
world  forms  the  roof  of  the  West  Baden  Hotel,  West  Baden,  Ind. 
Its  span  is  195  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  pins.  It  is  an  aggregation  of  two- 
hinge  arches,  a  drum  at  the  center  forming  their  common  connec- 
tion. The  weight,  including  the  steel  framework  and  its  covering 
is  475,000  Ibs.,  or  about  15  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  of  horizontal  projection 
of  roof  surface. 

Weight  of  Steel  Arch  Roof.— The  Government  building  at  the 
St.  Louis  Exhibition  in  1904  contained  steel  roof  trusses,  which 
were  three-hinged  arches  of  172  ft  span  and  70  ft.  rise.  The 
trusses  were  spaced  35  ft.  c.  to  c.  The  weight  per  square  foot  of 
horizontal  projection  was: 

Per  sq.  ft. 
Lbs. 

Steel    13.1 

Roofing    6.6 

Tin  covering 0.5 


Total 20.2 

Weight  of  Steel  Fink  Roof  Trusses.— Mr.  H.  G.  Tyrrell  gives  the 
following  formula  for  the  weight  of  steel  roof  trusses,  based  upon 
data  of  146  separate  trusses.  The  weight  includes  trusses  complete, 
with  rafter  clips  and  shoe  plates,  but  without  ventilators. 

S  12 

"  ~20  iT' 

W  =  weight  (Ibs.)   per  sq.  ft.  of  ground. 
8  =  span  in  feet 
D  —  distance  (in  feet)   c.  to  c. 

Steel  Frame,  St.  Louis  Coliseum. — Mr.  B.  W.  Stern  gives  the  fol- 
lowing relative  to  a  coliseum  built  in  1897.  The  steel  frame  for  the 
roof  is  an  oblong  dome,  186  x  298  ft.  The  4  main  trusses  are  three- 
hinged  arches,  176  ft.  span.  There  are  6  radial  trusses  at  each  end 
of  the  building.  A  traveler  derrick,  63  ft  long,  31  ft.  wide,  arid 
42  ft.  high,  carried  two  derricks  used  to  erect  the  trusses.  The  total 
weight  of  steel  was  9.500  tons.  There  were  4,188  days'  labor  spent 
on  the  work  in  the  shops,  and  3,550  days'  labor  for  erection,  the 
average  number  of  men  in  thp  erecting  force  being  50. 

Each  of  the  main  arches  weighed  64,000  Ibs. ;  each  radial  arch, 
21,000  Ibs. 

Materials  In  Large  Grain  Elevator.— A  fireproof  grain  elevator, 
having  a  capacity  of  3,100,000  bushels,  was  built  in  1900  for  the 
Great  Northern  Ry.,  at  West  Superior,  Wis.  It  is  124  x  364  ft.  in 


1174  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

plan  and  246  ft.  high.  It  has  505  steel  bins.  It  rests  on  a  pile  andi 
grillage  foundation.  The  following  are  the  quantities : 

Foundation  and  Walls  in  Main  Stor  y : 

Piles,  number 4,570 

Timber  and  sheet  piling,  M 380 

Excavation,    cu.    yds 23,000 

Masonry,  cu.  yds .' 1,500 

Concrete,  cu.  yds 3,000 

Cut  stone,  cu.  ft 1,300 

Brick,    cu.   ft 45,000 

Superstructure : 

Structure  below  bins,  tons 1,850 

Bins  proper,   tons 6,500 

Cupola,  tons 1,450 

Legs  and  spouts  below  bin  floor,  tons 450 

Legs  and  spouts  above  bin  floor,  tons 350 

Total  steel,   tons 10,600 

There  are  42  electric  motors,  having  a  total  of  2,110  hp. 

Cost  of  Fabricating  and  Erecting  Steel  Mill  and  Mine  Buildings 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  data  given  in  Ketchum's  "Steel 
Mill  Buildings,"  a  book  containing  much  excellent  information  on 
estimating  steel  work : 

The  drawings  for  steel  mill  buildings  usually  show  only  the 
dimensions  of  the  "main  members."  The  estimator  usually  calcu- 
lates the  weights  of  these  main  members  and  adds  a  percentage  to 
provide  for  the  weight  of  the  "details."  The  "details"  are  the  plates 
and  rivets  used  in  fastening  the  main  members  together.  The 
weight  of  the  "details"  of  trusses  will  commonly  be  25  to  35%  of 
the  weight  of  the  "main  members,"  being  usually  nearer  25%. 
After  computing  the  actual  weights  of  details  for  a  few  buildings,  the 
estimator  will  seldom  blunder  in  computing  by  percentages. 

In  estimating  the  weight  of  corrugated  steel,  add  25%  for  laps 
where  the  side  lap  is  two  corrugations,  and  the  end  lap  is  6  ins. ; 
add  15%  where  the  side  lap  is  one  corrugation  and  the  end  lap  is 
4  ins.  Corrugated  steel  is  usually  made  with  corrugations  2%  ins. 
wide  (from  ridge  to  ridge)  and  %-in.  deep.  The  thickness  of  the 
steel  is  usually  given  in  U.  S.  Standard  Gage.  The  following  are 
the  weights  per  100  sq.  ft.  of  black  corrugated  steel : 

Gage,    No ...16       18       20       22       24       26       28 

Lbs.  per  100  sq.  ft. 275     220     1«5     138     111        84        69 

Add  16  Ibs.  per  100  sq.  ft.  if  the  steel  is  galvanized. 

The  cost  of  steel  mill  buildings  is  divided  into  four  items:  (1) 
cost  of  steel;  (2)  cost  of  shop  work;  (3)  cost  of  transportation, 
and  (4)  cost  of  erection.  The  price  of  structural  steel  may  be  found 
in  current  numbers  of  "Iron  Age,"  published  in  New  York.  The 
price  is  now  (1905)  about  1.8  cts.  per  Ib.  at  New  York. 

The  following  are  actual  shop  costs,  in  a  shop  having  a  capacity 
of  1,000  tons  per  month,  and  with  labor  estimated  at  40  cts.  per  hr., 
which  includes  also  the  cost  of  management  and  the  cost  of  operating 
and  maintaining  the  shop  equipment : 


BUILDIXGS.  1175 

Cost  of  shop-work: 

Columns,  made  of  2  channels  and  2  plates,  1,000  Ibs 0.8 

Columns,  made  of  single  I-beam,  or  single  angle 0.5 

Columns,  Z-bar .  0.8 

Columns,  plain,  cast  iron 0.8  to  1.5 

Riveted  roof-trusses,  1,000  Ibs.  each 1.2 

Riveted  roof-trusses,    1,500   Ibs.   each 1.0 

Riveted   roof-trusses,   2,500   Ibs.    each..... 0.8 

Riveted  roof-trusses,  3,500  to  7,500  Ibs.  each 0.6  to  0.75 

Plate-girders,  for  crane  girders  and  iloors 0.6  to  1.3 

Eye-bars,   %  x  3  ins.  x  16  to  30  ft 1.2  to  1.8 

Eye-bars,  large 0.5  to  0.8 

Steel  frame  transformer  building,  60  x  SO  ft.,  with  20-ft. 
posts,    pitch    of   roof    %,    55,700    Ibs.    steel    framework, 

including    drafting • .  .  1.0 

Smelter  building,  270  tons,  including  drafting 0.86 

Six  gallows  frames,   including  drafting 1.0  to  2.0 

Drafting  design  of  "details"  for 

Ordinary  buildings 0.1  to  0.2 

Headworks  for  mines 0.2  to  0.3 

Roof-trusses 0.3  to  0^4 

With  skilled  labor  at  $3.50  and  common  labor  at  $2  per  9-hr,  day, 
the  cost  of  erecting  small  buildings  is  about  0.5  ct.  per  lb.,  or  $10 
per  ton,  if  trusses  are  riveted  and  other  connections  bolted. 

The  cost  of  erecting  small  buildings  in  which  all  connections  are 
bolted  is  about  0.3  ct.  per  lb.,  or  $6  per  ton. 

The  cost  of  erecting  heavy  machine  shops,  all  material  riveted,  is 
about  0.45  ct.  per  lb.,  or  $9  per  ton,  including  labor  of  painting. 

The  cost  of  erecting  6  gallows  frames  was  0.65  ct.  per  lb.,  or  $13 
per  ton. 

The  cost  of  laying  corrugated  steel  roof  is  about  $0.75  per  square, 
or  $9  per  ton  for  No.  20  steel,  when  laid  on  plank  sheathing; 
it  is  $1.25  per  square,  or  $15  per  ton,  when  laid  directly  on  the 
purlins ;  it  is  $2  per  square,  or  $24  r>er  ton,  when  laid  with  anti- 
condensation  roofing.  The  erection  of  corrugated  steel  siding  costs 
$0.75  to  $1.00  per  square,  or  $9  to  $12  per  ton  for  No.  20  steel. 

Cost  of  Erecting  the  Steel  in  Buildings — The  costs  are  given  in 
tons  of  2,000  Ibs.  On  a  four-story,  fireproof  hospital  the  cost  of 
erecting  the  steel  and  cast  iron  was  $4.50  per  ton;  hand  derricks 
were  used,  and  the  work  was  all  done  by  common  laborers,  at  $1.50 
per  day.  With  a  steam  derrick  the  cost  might  have  been  reduced  to 
$3.50  per  ton.  On  a  three-story  business  block,  under  the  same  con- 
ditions as  before,  the  store  fronts  were  erected  for  $5  per  ton. 

On  a  large  railroad  machine  shop,  with  structural  steel  workers 
at  40  cts.  per  hr.,  the  cost  of  erecting  was  $8  per  ton.  In  this  case 
the  work  was  all  heavy,  the  lightest  truss  weighing  5  tons.  On  train 
sheds,  and  where  lighter  sections  were  used,  and  where  there  were 
more  field  rivets  to  the  ton,  the  cost  was  $10.  Ordinarily  there  are 
about  10  field  rivets  to  the  ton,  and  it  is  safe  to  allow  10  cts.  each, 
or  $1  per  ton  for  riveting  alone.  There  are  buildings  in  which  25 
field  rivets  per  ton  are  required.  The  foregoing  costs. of  steel  erec- 
tion include  unloading  from  cars,  setting  derricks  and  scaffolding. 

The  cost  of  erecting  large  electric  cranes  is  about  $3  per  ton  if 
put  in  place  directly  from  the  cars.  Add  $1.50  per  ton  if  unloaded 
from  cars  before  erecting. 


1176  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  steel  frames  of  modern  office  buildings  are  usually  erected  by 
derricks  high  enough  to  erect  two  or  three  floors  without  shifting. 
The  cost  of  erecting  and  riveting  the  steel  is  $10  to  $15  per  ton. 
The  trusses  of  small  roofs  can  be  erected  cheaply  by  the  use  of  one 
or  two  gin  poles. 

Area  of  Passenger  Stations. — In  the  Proc.  Am.  Ry.  Eng.  and  Mn. 
of  Way  Assoc.,  1904,  a  committee  report  gives  the  average  area  of 
passenger  stations  for  cities  of  10,000  to  15,000  population  on  31 
different  railways,  as  follows: 

Sq.  ft. 

Waiting  rooms 1,160 

Toilet  rooms 186 

Baggage    rooms 433 

Ticket   offices 218 

Total     1,997 

Such  a  station  would  measure  about  24  x  84  ft.  inside. 

Cost  of  Moving  a  Frame  Dwelling  House.* — This  building  was 
moved  at  Secaucus,  N.  J.,  during  the  month  of  July,  1906,  under  con- 
tract, to  make  room  for  freight  yard  extensions.  The  house  (weigh- 
ing about  50  tons)  was  30  ft.  square,  two  stories  in  height,  with  a 
one-story  extension  in  the  rear  12  x  18  ft.,  all  resting  upon  brick 
piers  standing  2  ft.  above  level  of  ground.  The  building  was  first 
raised  about  14  ins.  with  jack  screws  and  blocking.  Several  long  12- 
in.  x  12-in.  timbers  were  then  placed  under  the  joists  lengthwise  and 
crosswise,  all  properly  cleated  and  fastened,  care  being  taken  to  sup- 
port the  two  chimneys.  The  movement  was  accomplished  with  wind- 
lass, team,  driver  and  about  1,000  ft.  of  2-in.  manilla  rope  passed 
through  the  blocks,  the  building  sliding  forward  upon  greased  sup- 
ports of  way  of  long  timbers  blocked  up  to  the  proper  height.  II 
Was  moved  forward  a  distance  of  115  ft.,  then  turned  about  90°  and 
pulled  backward  a  distance  of  435  ft.  to  its  new  location,  making  a 
total  distance  traveled  of  548  ft. 

During  the  moving  the  force  was  kept  busy  greasing  timbers  with 
soap  and  carrying  blocking  forward.  At  intervals  the  moving 
was  stopped,  the  team  detached  from  the  windlass  and  used  to 
haul  the  long  timbers  ahead.  In  moving  it  was  necessary  to  cross 
over  two  roads  and  pass  under  three  lines  of  light  and  telephone 
wires.  Men  were  stationed  upon  the  top  of  the  house  to  lift  the 
wires  over  the  roof  and  chimneys.  Previous  to  moving,  the  building 
was  strengthened  to  prevent  racking,  by  placing  several  temporary 
bents  in  rooms  on  first  floor.  The  only  damage  occurred  from 
plaster  cracking  around  chimneys,  and  this  was  slight.  The  tenants 
occupied  the  house  during  the  moving  period. 

Wages  for  laborers  were  $2.00  per  day,  hours  from  7  a.  m.  to  6 
p.  m.,  and  half  days  on  Satxirday,  for  which  they  received  a  full 
day's  pay.  The  foreman  received  $3.50  per  day,  utility  man  $3.00 
per  day,  night  watchman  $2.00  per  day.  Teams  were  paid  at  the 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  30,  1907. 


BUILDINGS.  1177 

rate  of   $1.50  per  day  and  75   cts.  per   day  was  paid  for  a  horse. 
During  the  moving  drivers  worked  as  laborers. 
The  actual  labor  cost  is  divided  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 
Hauling  blocking,  lumber  and  tools   (9  miles 

for   round   trip) %  27.00          9.1 

Placing  and  removing  blocking  timbers,  rais- 
ing and  lowering  before  and  after  moving  102.00        34.5 
Moving  building  (548  ft.) 166.75        56.4 

Total    moving |295.75     100.0 

The  time  occupied  in  doing  the  work  including  the  time  lost  for 
Sundays,  holidays  and  rain  was  24  days.  Actual  number  of  days 
worked  was  16.  The  total  cost  of  this  moving  to  contractor  was 
$357.50,  the  extra  $61.75  (added  to  $295.75)  being  wages  paid  to 
foreman,  2  drivers  and  watchman  for  Sundays,  holidays  and  days 
lost  on  account  of  rain. 

For  the  above  information  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  A.  L.  Moore- 
head,  C.  E. 

References. — Any  one  engaged  in  estimating  the  cost  of  very 
many  buildings  will  do  well  to  consult  Arthur*s  "Building  Esti- 
mator," Tyrrell's  "Mill  Buildings,"  Ketchum's  "Steel  Mill  Buildings," 
and  Kidder's  "Architects'  and  Builders'  Pocket  Book." 

The  prices  of  hardware  may  be  obtained  from  "The  Iron  Age 
Standard  Hardware.  List"  ($1),  published  by  The  Iron  Age,  New 
York  City.  The  current  discounts  are  given  in  The  Iron  Age,  a  copy 
of  which  costs  10  cts. 

The  prices  of  lumber  are  quoted  weekly  in  such  papers  as  the 
"New  York  Lumber  Trade  Journal."  Different  mills  issue  catalogs 
giving  prices  of  mill  work. 


SECTION   XI. 
RAILWAYS. 

Cross- References  on  Cost  of  Grading — The  reader  is  referred  to 
the  Earth  Excavation  and  Embankment  Section,  and  to  the  Rock 
Excavation  Section,  for  costs  of  grading.  The  cost  of  tunneling  is 
given  on  page  1180,  etc. 

Cross- References  on  Bridges,  Culverts  and  Buildings — For  data 
on  these  subjects,  consult  the  "Bridges  and  Culvert  Section,"  the 
"Timber-work  Section,"  and  the  "Building  Section,"  of  this  book. 
Use  the  index  for  the  item  in  question. 

Cost  of  Transporting  Men,  Tools  and  Supplies  on  Railroads  for 
Grading.* — In  carrying  on  construction  work  it  is  the  custom  of 
railroads  to  charge  to  construction  certain  rates  of  fares  oh  the 
men  employed,  and  freight  on  tools  and  supplies.  This  charge 
against  the  new  work  is  credited  to  the  operating  department.  En- 
gineers in  the  employ  of  a  railroad  company  in  making  up  esti- 
mates for  new  work  must  include  these  charges,  else  the  cost  of  the 
work  is  likely  to  overrun  the  estimate.  To  do  tnis  there  must  be 
some  basis  of  the  amount  of  work  that  a  man,  horse  and  machine 
will  do  in  a  given  time,  and  an  approximate  tonnage  of  machines 
and  supplies  needed  to  excavate  a  given  unit. 

The  same  assumption  applies  to  track  work,  bridges  and  build- 
ings, but  in  this  article  we  consider  only  the  grading  of  a  railroad. 

The  following  figures  have  been  used  by  one  of  the  editors  of  this 
journal  in  estimating  the  cost  of  railroad  construction.  The  fig- 
ures of  work  done,  and  men,  horses  and  tools  and  supplies  needed 
are  based  on  large  jobs  of  construction,  and  are  safe  averages. 
The  fares  for  men  and  the  freight  rates  are  those  ordinarily 
charged  by  railroads  for  such  movement  of  men  and  freight. 

The  costs  follow : 

One  horse  plus  1%  men  readily  excavate  ai.d  move  15  cu.  yds.  of 
earth  per  day.  Hence  allow  360  cu.  yds.  per  month  per  horse  and 
250  cu.  yds.  per  month  per  man. 

One  man  requ'res  transportation  at  1  ct.  per  mile,  and  freight 
on  200  Ibs.  of  bedding,  cooking  utensils,  tents,  small  tools,  etc. 

^Engineering-Contracting,  July    8,    1908. 
1178 


RAILWAYS.  1179 

Hence  for   100   miles  transportation   each  way,   or  200  miles  round 
trip,  we  have 

200  passenger  miles  at  1  ct $2.00 

1/10    ton    bedding,    etc.,    200    miles    at    %    ct.    per 
ton    mile 10 

Total $2.10 

Since  one  man  will  excavate  250  cu.  yds.  per  month,  it  costs  $2.10 
divided  by  250,  or  0.8  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  if  the  job  lasts  only  one 
month  ;  but  if  the  job  lasts  four  months  it  costs  0.8  ct.  divided  by 
4,  or  0.2  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  because  in  that  time  a  man  will  move  4 
times  250  cu.  yds.,  or  1,000  cu.  yds.,  and  will  only  require  transporta- 
tion once  at  a  cost  of  $2.10.  Other  months  are  in  proportion.  For 
any  other  haul  than  100  miles  multiply  accordingly. 
Each  horse  requires  the  following  equipment : 

Lbs. 

%   wheel  scraper,   at  500  Ibs 250 

%   wagon,   at   2,000   Ibs 1,000 

Tents,    harness,   etc •    250 


Total 1,501) 

Allowing  16  horses  per  car  of  24,000  Ibs.,  each  horse  stands  for 
freight  equivalent  to  1,500  Ibs,  hence: 

Lbs. 

'Equipment  for  each  horse 1,500 

Weight    of    horse 1,500 

Total,   l1^    tons  or 3,000 

For  each  100  miles  of  haul  we  have,  therefore,  200  miles  round 
trip;  hence  200  miles  X  1%  tons  X  0.4  ct.  =  $1.20. 

Since  each  horse  moves  360  cu.  yds.  per  month,  we  have  $1.20  ^ 
360,  or  0.3  ct.  per  cu.  yd.,  if  the  job  lasts  only  one  month.  But  if 
the  job  lasts  four  months  we  have  *4  of  0.3  ct.,  or  0.075  ct.  per  cu. 
yd.  Other  lengths  of  time  and  other  hauls  are  in  proportion. 

Each  horse  consumes  %  ton  of  food  per  month  ;  hence  if  food 
is  hauled  100  miles  we  have  %  ton  X  100  miles  X  0.4  ct.  =;  20  cts. 

Since  the  horse  moves  360  cu.  yds.  per  month,  we  have  20  cts. 
~-  360,  or  0.05  et.  per  cu.  yd.  for  each  100  miles  of  haul. 

Summing  up,  we  have  the  following  costs: 

Cost  per  cu  yd.  for  transportation        rt 

100  miles  and  return. 
Men.    Horses.     Food.     Total- 
Duration  of  work.  Cts.         .Cts.          Cts.         Cts. 

1     mo. . .  ... 0.80          0.30          0.05          1.15 

4     mos 0.20          0.08          0.05  0.33 

6     mos 0.13          0.05          0.05          0.23 

8     mos 0.10          0.04          0.05          0.19 

12     mos 0.07          0.03          0.05          0.15 

Note.— If  the  haul  is  300  miles,  multiply  by  3.  If  the  haul  is  500 
miles,  multiply  by  5.  If  the  haul  is  1,000  miles,  multiply  by  10.  . 

The  above  is  for  work  done  by  wheel  scrapers  and  wagons  and 
carts,  but  for  steam  shovel  work  the  following  would  be  the  ap- 
proximate cost  for  transportation: 


1180  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Tons. 

1    shovel 70 

60   dump  cars 120 

Rail    65 

Cross    ties    (6"x6"x6') 75 

Three   small   locomotives 35 

Pumps,    drills,    etc 35 

Total     400 

400  tons  X  100  miles  X  0.4  ct.  =  $160. 

Such  a  shovel  as  this  will  average  at  least  20,000  cu.  yds.  per 
month,  hence  we  have  $160 -f- 20,000,  or  0.8  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
transporting  the  shovel  100  miles.  This  is  equivalent  to  1.6  cts.  for 
transporting  the  shovel  the  round  trip  of  200  miles,  when  the  job 
lasts  only  one  month.  For  four  months  the  cost  would  be  *4  of  1.6 
cts.,  or  0.4  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  Other  months  would  be  correspondingly 
in  proportion. 

Such  a  shovel  does  not  consume  more  than  60  tons  of  fuel  and 
supplies  per  month;  hence  we  have  60  tons  X  100  miles  X  0.4  ct.  = 
$24.  Since 'with  this  60  tons  of  fuel  there  are  20,000  cu.  yds.  exca- 
vated, we  have  $24  -h  20,000,  or  0.12  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  With  such  a 
shovel  there  will  never  be  more  than  40  men  engaged  in  operating 
the  shovel,  operating  the  dump  cars  and  trains,  as  well  as  in  making 
temporary  roadways  and  repairing  equipment ;  hence  each  of  these 
40  men  averages  500  cu.  yds.  per  month,  which  is  double  the  out- 
put where  men  are  working  with  wheel  scrapers,  carts,  etc.,  as 
above  given  ;  therefore  the  cost  of  transporting  men  per  cu.  yd.  on 
shovel  work  is  approximately  one-half  the  amount  given  in  the 
previous  table. 

Summing  up  we  have  the  following: 

Cost  per  CH  yd.  for  transportation 

100  miles  and  return. 
Shovel.     Men.       Fuel.       Total. 
Duration  of  work.  Cts.         Cts.          Cts.         Cts. 

1    mo 1.60          0.40          0.12          2.12 

4     mos 0.40          0.10          0.12          0.62 

6     mos 0.26          0.07          0.12          0.45 

12     mos. 0.13          0.03          0.12          0.28 

The  above  is  for  a  haul  of  100  miles,  and  for  any  other  hauls 
multiply  according  to  the  length  of  haul. 

If  the  workmen  are  of  a  restless  disposition,  and  remain  only  a 
month  or  two  on  the  job  before  quitting,  the  cost  of  their  transporta- 
tion varies  not  with  the  length  of  the  job  but  with  the  average  time 
they  remain  on  it.  When  they  quit  of  course  their  return  fare  is 
not  paid. 

Cost  of  Three  Short  Single-Track  Tunnels.*— Short  tunnels  are 
usually  constructed  at  less  cost  than  long  tunnels,  not  only  because 
of  the  less  cost  of  hauling  and  "muck"  and  the  ease  of  ventilating  the 
tunnel,  but  because  a  very  inexpensive  plant  can  be  used.  In  limestone 
and  sandstone  formations  the  present  contract  prices  average  about 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   21,   1907. 


RAILWAYS.  1181 

$45  per  lin.  ft.  of  single-track  tunnel  for  all  lengths  up  to  1,000  ft. 
or  so,  even  where  common  laborers  receive  $2.25  a  day.  The  fol- 
lowing data  give  the  cost  (at  contract  prices)  of  three  tunnels  built 
in  the  West,  and,  both  as  to  prices  and  as  to  quantities,  these  ex- 
amples will  be  useful  to  engineers  and  contractors : 

TUNNEL  No.  1   (900  LIN.  FT.). 

Per  lin.  ft 

Excavating    tunnel $45.00 

2.7  cu.  yds.  enlargement  for  lining,  at  $3.00 8.10 

350  ft.  B.  M.  timber  lining,  at  $20 7.00 

5.7  Ibs.  iron,  at  $0.03 0.17 

Total     $60.27 

TUNNEL  No.  2   (600  LIN.  FT.). 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Excavating    tunnel $45.00 

2.7  cu.  yds.  enlargement,  at   $3.00 8.10 

370  ft.  B.  M.  lining,  at  $20.00 7.40 

5.5   Ibs.   iron,  at  $0.03 0.17 

Total     $60.67 

TUNNEL  No.  3    (400  LIN.  FT.). 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Excavating    tunnel $42.50 

2.8  cu.  yds.  enlargement,  at  $3.00 8.40 

400  ft.  B.  M.  lining,  at  $20.00 8.00 

7.4  Ibs.   iron  at  $0.03 0.22 


Total $59.12 

In  addition  to  the  above  costs  which  are  based  on  the  contractor's 
final  estimate,  there  was  a  cost  of  $3  per  lin.  ft.  (or  about  5%) 
for  engineering  and  superintendence,  and  a  cost  of  $0.50  per  lin.  ft. 
for  train  service. 

Cost  of  the  Stampede  Tunnel.* — Mr.  Charles  W.  Hobart  gives  the 
following  data  on  the  Stampede  or  Cascade  Tunnel  of  the  Northern 
Pacific  R.  R.  Bids  were  opened  in  New  York  Jan.  21,  1886,  for  a 
single-track  tunnel,  9,844  ft.  long,  to  be  completed  in  28  mos.  Of 
the  12  bids,  that  of  Mr.  Nelson  Bennett  was  lowest  and  was 
accepted.  A  forfeit  of  $100,000  and  10%  of  the  contract  price  for 
failure  to  complete  within  the  time  was  required.  Mr.  Bennett  tele- 
graphed his  general  manager  to  gather  men  and  clear  a  road  to 
get  the  machinery  on  the  ground.  The  plant  was  purchased  for 
$100,000  in  New  York  and  shipped.  It  consisted  of  5  engines,  2 
water  wheels,  5  air  compressors,  5  boilers  of  70-hp.  each,  4  fans, 
2  electric  arc  light  plants,  2  miles  of  6-in.  wrought  iron,  2  miles  of 
water  pipe,  2  machine  shop  outfits,  36  air  drills,  2  locomotives,  60 
dump  cars,  2  saw  mills  and  other  necessaries.  This  plant  had  to  be 
transported  on  wagons  and  sleds  from  Yakima,  Wash.,  a  distance  of 
82  miles  to  the  east  portal  of  the  tunnel  and  87  miles  to  the  west 
portal.  The  first  wagon  loads  started  Feb.  1,  and  the  first  boiler 

*Gillette's  "Rock  Excavation." 


1182  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

Feb.  22.  By  June  19  the  plant  for  the  east  portal,  and  by  July  15 
the  plant  for  the  west  portal  had  reached  its  destination.  On 
Feb.  13  hand  drilling  was  begun  on  the  east  portal  and  411  ft. 
of  tunnel  had  been  driven  when  the  machines  began  June  19.  On 
March  15  hand  drilling  started  at  the  west  end  and  by  Sept.  1, 
when  the  machines  started,  488  ft.  had  been  driven.  The  last  15 
miles  of  the  hauling  before  reaching  the  mountains  was  in  mud,  so 
that  wagons  were  hauled  by  block  and  tackle,  planks  being  laid 
down  in  front  of  the  wheels  and  taken  up  as  fast  as  the  wagons 
passed.  About  one  mile  a  day  was  covered  in  this  way.  When  the 
mountains  were  reached  sleds  were  improvised  and  hauled  by  blocK 
and  tackle  with  teams.  Wagons  lightly  loaded  with  provisions  trav- 
eled 12  miles  a  day. 

The  cost  of  clearing  the  way  and  getting  the  machinery  and  ma- 
terials on  the  work  was  $125,000,*  and  6  mos.  time  was  required. 
The  tunnel  was  to  be  9,950  ft.  long,  16%  x  22  ft.  in  the  clear;  900 
ft.  had  been  driven  by  hand,  leaving  9,050  ft.  to  be  driven  in  22  mos. 

An  8-ft.  heading  was  driven  along  the  top  of.  the  tunnel  and  was 
kept  30  ft.  ahead  of  the  bench.  The  tunnel  was  timbered- as  work 
progressed.  The  average  number  of  men  employed,  after  the  ma- 
chinery was  installed,  was  350.  They  worked  10-hr,  shifts,  receiv- 
ing $2.50  to  $5  a  day.  Contractor  boarded  men  at  75  cts.  a  day.  A 
bonus  of  25  cts.  a  day  was  paid  each  laborer  for  every  foot  gained 
during  the  month  over  the  necessary  average  of  13.6  ft.  a  day  in 
both  headings  C9mbined,  and  each  driller  received  a  bonus  of  50  cts. 
per  day  per  ft.  gained.  Every  day  of  the  year  was  worked,  requir- 
ing two  shifts  of  75  men  each,  beside  the  engineers,  firemen,  car- 
penters, machinists,  etc.,  making  a  monthly  payroll  of  $30,000. 
The  best  month's  progress  was  April,  1888,  when  a  total  advance 
of  540  ft.  was  made  in  the  two  headings,  or  9  ft.  a  day  per  head- 
ing. The  average  progress  for  21%  mos.,  with  power  drills,  was  413 
ft.  per  month  for  the  two  headings.  On  May  3,  1888,  the  headings 
met,  and  on  May  14  the  excavation  was  completed,  7  days  before 
the  time  limit.  The  track  was  laid  in  two  days  more  and  on  May 
22  the  first  regular  train  passed  through  the  tunnel. 

The  total  explosives  used  were  309,625  Ibs.,  as  follows: 

No.  of  50  Ib.  boxes. 

Giant  No.   1,   60  per  cent..                                403% 

Giant  No.   2,   45  per  cent 2, 123 1/2 

Hercules  No.  1,  60  per  cent 1,609% 

Hercules  No.  2,  45  per  cent. .                     1,781% 

Nitro  glycerin  No.   2 232 

Forcite    No.    2 41  % 


Total  No.  of  50-lb.  boxes. 6,192 

The  average  price  of  all  explosives  was  $10  a  box,  or  20  cts.  per 
Ib.  The  total  number  of  men  killed  in  the  two  years  was  13.  The 
following  data  were  furnished  by  Mr.  Andrew  Gibson,  Assistant 
Engineer.  The  American  center-cut  system  of  blasting  was  used  ; 


*Wages  were  $2.50  for  laborers,  which  is  a  high  price. 


RAILWAYS.  1183 

20  to  23  holes,  12  ft.  deep,  being  drilled  in  the  heading,  and  about 
18  holes  in  the  bench.  Each  drill,  in  medium  hard  rock,  would 
make  6  or  7  holes  in  5  hrs.,  although  at  times  in  an  exceedingly 
hard  layer  15  hrs.  would  be  required.  About  400  Ibs.  of  dynamite 
were  used  at  each  blast  in  each  of  the  headings  and  benches.  This 
would  break  8  to  12  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  although  in  very  hard  rock 
at  times  only  half  this  progress  was  made.  The  rock  is  basaltic,* 
with  a  dip  of  5°  to  the  west.  It  required  immediate  timbering, 
which  delayed  the  drillers  and  muckers  about  25%  of  the  time. 
During  the  period  of  hand  drilling  there  were  17  men,  with  about  23 
muckers,  employed  in  each  heading,  and  4  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  in 
24  hrs.  were  averaged.  During  the  period  of  air  drilling,  10  drills 
were  used,  5  in  each  end,  and  the  progress  was  6.9  ft.  in  24  hrs. 
per  heading,  or  207  ft.  per  mo.  of  30  days.  While  the  contract  size 
of  the  tunnel  was  16%  ft.  wire,  and  22  ft.  from  subgrade  to  face 
of  arch,  the  timbered  sections  had  to  be  excavated  19%  ft.  wide  by 
24  ft.  high,  thus  requiring  15.7  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  per  lin.  ft. 
where  timbering  was  used,  as  against  12.36  cu.  yds.  where  no  timber 
was  used.  Timbers  were  12  x  12  ins.,  except  the  8  x  12-in.  sills. 
Five  segments  were  used  in  the  arch,  lagged  with  4  x  6-in.  pieces. 
Bents  were  spaced  2  to  4  ft.  Water  gave  no  trouble. 

Mules  were  used  for  hauling  up  to  the  first  half  mile ;  then 
small  locomotives,  which  hauled  8  to  12  cars.  A  "go-devil"  or  plat- 
form on  wheels  was  used  to  great  advantage  in  loading  cars.  The 
men  wheeled  the  rock  on  plank  runways  from  the  heading  to  the 
"go-devil,"  dumping  directly  into  cars  below ;  and  the  muckers  on 
the  heading  never  interfered  with  those  on  the  bench.  It  was  also 
a  great  convenience  in  timbering.  Before  blasting  the  drills  were 
loaded  upon  the  "go-devil,"  and  it  was  pushed  back  some  distance 
from  the  face.  Endless  belt  conveyors  for  removing  muck  to  the 
"go-devil"  were  contemplated,  but  they  were  never  used,  as  with  the 
large  force  of  men  at  work  they  would  have  been  in  the  way. 

The  swelling  of  the  shale  on  exposure  often  reduced  a  12-in.  tim- 
ber to  4  ins.  ;  hence  it  was  necessary  to  line  the  tunnel  with 
masonry.  Concrete  side,  walls  and  a  brick  arch  were  used  for 
lining.  The  concrete  mortar  was  brought  in  on,  cars  and  run  back 
of  the  forms  through  spouts,  without  shoveling ;  then  the  broken 
rock  was  shoveled  into  the  mortar  from  a  flat  car. 

The  total  cost  of  the  tunnel  to  the  N.  P.  R.  R.  under  Mr.  Ben- 
nett's contract  (which  did  not  include  masonry  lining)  was  $118 
per  lin.  ft.  Mr.  Bennett's  brother  was  the  superintendent  of  the 
work.  The  actual  cost  of  tunnelling  the  west  end  during  the  month 
of  November,  1887,  was  $75.75  per  ft.  for  the  258  ft.  driven,  dis- 
tributed as  follows : 


•Elsewhere  it  is  stated  that  the  rock  was  shale; 


1184 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Lab.or. 

Superintendent,    V2   mo.,  at  $500 $  250.00 

Superintendent,   1  mo.,  at  $250 250.00 

Master  mechanic,   %   mo.,  at  $150 75.00 

Engineers,  4  x  30  =  120  days,  at  $4 480.00 

Machine  repairers,  3  x  30  =  90  days,  at  $3. 50  315.00 

Firemen,  4  x  30  =  120  days,  at  $2.50 300.00 

Blacksmiths,  2  x  30  =  60  days,  at  $4.00 '     240.00 

Blacksmiths   helpers,   2   x   30   =   60   days,   at 

$2.50     150.00 

Carpenters,    396   days,  at   $3.00 1,188.00 

Foremen,    160   days,  at   $4.50 720.00 

Drillmen,   294   days,  at   $3.50 1,029.00 

Chuckmen,    293    days,    at    $3.00 879.00 

Muckers,  1,138  days,  at  $2.75 3,129.50 

Nippers,  60  days,  at  $2.50 150.00 

Dumpmen,   60  days,   at  $2.50 150.00 

Car  drivers,  60  days,  at  $2.50 150.00 

Timekeeper,  30  days,  at  $2.50 75.00 

Lampmen,   60   days,  at   $2.50'. 150.00 

Laborers,   662   days,  at  $2.50 1,655.00 

Bonus  for  daily  progress  over  6  ft 500.00 

Total  labor  for  258  ft,  at  $45.90  per  ft $11,835.50 

Material. 

78,000  ft.  B.  M.  timber,  at  $10 $  780.00 

800  Ibs.  wrt.  iron,  at  6  cts 48.00 

64 y2   cords  wood,  at  $3 193.50 

240  tons  coal,  at  $4 960.00 

900   caps,   at   1   ct 9.00 

14,400  ft.  fuse,  at  1  ct 144.00 

13,800  Ibs.  dynamite,  at  16  cts ^ 2,208.00 

Total  materials  for  258  ft.,  at  $16.80  per  ft.$  4,342.50 

Plant. 

6  per  cent  of  $50,000  plant,  1  mo $  250.00 

1/28  of  75  p.  c.  depreciation  *  of  $50,000  plant  1,339,28 
10   p.    c.    on    all   above   to   cover   all   possible 

omissions     fl.776.72 


Total  plant  charges  for  258  ft,  at  $13.05..$   3,366.00 

*Note    that    a    liberal    but    not    unusual    allowance    is    made    for 
plant  depreciation. 

tThis    10   per  cent,    practically   covers  the  cost   of  installing  the 
plant. 

Summary   of  cost  per  ft. 

Labor $45.90 

Material     ,  .16.80 

Plant     ,  .    13.05 


Total 


$75.75 


During  this  month  the  entire  length  was  lined  with  timber,  the 
rock  being  a  soft  basaltic  rock  that  drills  well  but  goes  to  pieces 
rapidly  on  exposure.  There  were  no  accidents  or  delays. 

On  the  east  end  during  this  same  month,  with  an  equal  force,  the 
progress  was  246  ft.,  at  a  cost  of  $72.70  per  ft.  It  will  be  noted 
that  wages  were  high.  It  will  also  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  haul- 
ing and  installing  the  plant  is  not  included,  although  a  liberal  al- 
lowance is  made  for  plant  depreciation  and  in  the  10%  added  to 
cover  omissions. 


RAILWAYS.  1185 

The  contractor  received  for  his  month's  work  on  the  west  end 
of  the  tunnel : 

258-ft.  tunnel,   standard  sections,  at  $78.  ..'...  .$20,124 

862  cu.  yds.  extra  excav.,  at  $4.50 3,879 

78,000  ft.   B.   M.  lining,  at  $35 2,730 

258  ft.  of  tunnel,  timbered,  at  $103.62 $26,733 

The  best  month's  record  in  driving  a  heading  was  274  ft.  but,  ai, 
before  stated,  the  average  progress  with  the  air  drills  was  207  ft. 
per  mo.  per  heading,  although  in  the  month  of  November,  1887,  258 
ft.  were  progressed  on  the  west  end,  which  was  25%  better  than 
the  average  progress.  Assuming  that  15.7  cu.  yds.  were  excavated 
per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  the  total  excavation  at  the  west  end  for 
November  was  4,052  cu.  yds.  It  is  probable  that  the  862  cu.  yds. 
extra  excavation,  above  given,  are  included  in  this  estimate,  because 
the  "standard  section"  differed  from  the  timbered  section  by  3.3 
cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.,  and  in  258  ft.  this  would  amount  to  852  cu.  yds. 
On  this  assumption  (of  4,052  cu.  yds.)  the  labor  cost  $2.92  per  cu. 
yd.  ;  the  materials,  $1.07  per  cu.  yd.  ;  and  the  plant,  $0.83  per  cu. 
yd.  ;  total,  $4.82  per  cu.  yd.  for  the  best  month's  work. 

Further  data  on  this  tunnel  are  given  in  the  following  para- 
graphs. 

Cost  of  the  Stampede  Tunnel  and  Its  Masonry  Lining.* — The 
Stampede  Tunnel  on  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  is  9,844  ft.  long  and 
was  built  in  1886  to  1888  by  contract.  The  contract  work  included 
the  excavation  of  this  tunnel  and  the  timber  lining.  Subsequently 
this  timber  lining  was  replaced  with  a  masonry  lining  by  the  rail- 
way company's  own  forces.  This  article  gives  in  detail  the  cost 
of  the  permanent  masonry  lining.  To  make  the  cost  figures  com- 
plete, however,  we  itemize  the  contract  costs  of  the  original  con- 
struction as  follows: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Excavation,   standard  section,  at   $78 $  78.00 

Extra  excavation,  3.2  cu.  yds.,  at  $4.50 14.40 

Timber  lining,  305  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $35 10.68 

Traffic    charges 0.77 


Total     $108.85 

Ballast     0.90 

Track    materials 1.23 

Track    laying 0.18 

Track    surfacing 0.16 

Engineering    5.00 

Total    $111.32 

The   above   figures   are   the   contract  costs    to   the  Northern  Pa- 
cific Ry. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  June  3,  1908. 


1180  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  permanent  masonry  lining  work,  whose  cost  is  given  here, 
was  begun  June  16,  1889,  and  completed  Nov.  16,  1895,  the  progress 
in  lineal  feet  per  year  being  as  follows : 

Walls.  Arch. 

1889     1,176  

1890  .  .  ..          1,280  538 

1891     2,549  871 

1892     5,038  1,402 

1893  2,930  911 

1894 3,229  2,812 

1895  2,301  2, 887 

The  side  walls  were  of  concrete  and  the  arch  was  of  brick,  there 
being  30,259  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  side  walls  and  18,426  cu.  yds.  of 
brick  arch,  or  a  total  of  48,683  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  lining  in  the 
9,311  lin.  ft.  that,  were  lined.  There  were,  therefore,  3*4  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  side  walls  and  2  cu.  yds.  of  brick  arch,  or  a  total  of 
5%  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel. 

The  average  cost  of  the  lining  was  as  follows : 

Concrete  Side   Walls:                       Per  cu.  yd.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Cement,   at  $2.90  per  bbl $4.27  $13.95 

Rock,  at  31  cts.  per  cu.  yd 0.24  0.80 

Sand,  at  21  cts.  per  cu.  yd 0.12  0.40 

Traffic   charges    0.35  1.13 

Train     service 0.96  3.12 

Labor    2.10  6.87 

False  work 0.08  0.27 

Tools,    lights,    etc 0.10  0.33 

Engineering  and   superintendence.  .  0.16  0.53 

Total     $8.38  $27.40 

Brick  Arch:                                      Per  cu.  yd.  Per  lin.  ft. 

Cement,  at  $2.90  per  bbl $   2.93  $   5.80 

Brick,   at  $7.12   per  M 3.56  7.04 

Rock  backing,  at  59  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  0.41  0.81 

Sand,   at   40  cts.   per  cu.   yd 0.14  0.27 

Traffic  charges   0.36  0.71 

Train    service    1.21  2.39 

Labor     ... 4.20  8.32 

Falsework     0.22  0.43 

Tools,    lights,    etc 0.21  0.41 

Engineering   and   superintendence..  0.25  0.50 

Total $13.49  $26.68 

Since  the  concrete  side  walls  cost  $27.40  per  lin  ft.  and  the  brick 
arch  cost  $26.68,  the  total  cost  was  $54  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel, 
which,  if  added  to  the  $111  above  given,  makes  a  grand  total  of 
$165  per  lin.  ft.  Had  the  masonry  lining  been  built  in  the  first 
place,  the  cost  would  have  been  considerably  less. 

The  item  of  "traffic  charges"  covers  freight  on  materials  at  1  ct. 
per  ton-mile.  The  item  of  "train  service"  covers  hauling  of  sand, 
rock,  etc.,  with  a  work  train. 

The  cost  of  this  lining  was  very  much  higher  during  the  first 
years  of  the  work.  This  was  due  partly  to  the  greater  thickness  of 
the  lining  used  at  first,  but  it  was  principally  due  to  the  inexperi- 


RAILWAYS. 


1187 


ence  of  the  men  and  the   higher  cost  of  materials, 
table  shows  the  cost  by  six-month  periods  : 


The  following 


6  mos. 
ending. 
June    30      1889 

—  Brick  Arch.  —     —  Cono 
Lin.           Cost             Lin. 
ft.      per  lin.  ft.         ft. 
33 

-etc  Wall. 
Cost 
per  lin.  f1 
$61.72 
61.72 

5V.92 
40.94 
40.94 
22.06 
19.80 
19.48 
19.40 
16.55 

iV.oi 

Total 
..      per  lin.  ft. 

Dec.      31,    1890.. 
June    30,    1890.  . 
Dec.    31,    1890.. 
June    30,    1891.. 
Dec.     31,    1891.. 
June    30,    1892. 
Dec.      31,    1892. 
June    30,    1893. 
Dec.      31,    1893. 
June    30,    1894. 
Dec.      31,    1894. 
June    30,    1895. 
Dec       31     1895 

1,143 
.       257             63.24            
281             63.24           1,280 
.       600            51.64             733 
271            51.64          1,816 
517            34.90          2,422 
885            27.13          2,616 
496            25.35          2,219 
415            20.96             711 
904            20.21          3,229 
1,898            19.40          
1,225            18.90          2,187 
114 

$124.96 
120.15 
92.58 
92.58 
56.96 
46.93 
44.83 
40.36 
36.76 

36.94 

Total    

ease   in   the   cost   per 
crease  in  the  cost  per 

Concrete  Walls. 
Cost 
Cu.  yds.     per  cu.  yd. 
83               $12.26 
2,876                 12.26 

.  .  9.311                             18,503 

The   foregoing 
lineal  foot.     The 
cubic  yard  : 

Six  mos. 
ending. 
June    30    1889 

shows   the   progressive    deer 
following  table  shows  the  de 

Brick  Arch. 
Cost 
Cu.  yds.      percu.yd. 

Dec      31    1889 

June    30    1890 

617              $26  35 

Dec      31    1890 

674                 26.35 

3,224 
1,303 
3,228 
3,582 
3,488 
2,951 
1,139 
4,720 

3,495 
170 

11.30 
11.51 
11.51 
7.33 
7.42 
7.32 
6.05 
5.66 

"5.64 

June     30,   1891.  . 

.  .  1,740                 17.90 

Dec      31    1891 

786                 17  90 

June    30    1892 

1  092                 16.53 

Dec      31    1892.  . 

.'  1,634                 14.69 

June    30,    1893.  . 
Dec       31     1893 

916                 13.72 

751                 11.58 

June    30    1894.  . 

1,645                 11.10 

Dec       31     1894 

3  479                 10.55 

June     30    1895    . 

.  .  2,322                 10.21 

Dec.      31,   1895.  . 

..  2,770 

Total    and    av 18,426  $13.49  30,259  $8.38 

The  cost  of  lining  the  tunnel  during  the  six  months  ending  Dec. 

31,  1892,  represents  about  an  average  of  the  whole  job.     It  was  as 

follows : 

CONCRETE  SIDE  WALLS. 
Materials:  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement,  1.5  bbls.,  at  $2.36 $3.54 

Sand,  0.33  cu.  yd.,  at  36  cts 0.12 

Rock,  0.5  cu.  yd.,  at  55  cts 0.28 

Dry  rock  backing,  0.04  cu.  yd.,  at  55  cts 0.02 

Total     $3.96 

Traffic  Charges: 

Cement  , $0.24 

Sand     0.17 

Rock . 0.18 

Total     ,  J0.59 


1188  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Work  Train  Service: 

Hauling   concrete,    removing   old   timbers  and   excavating   ma- 
terial, 0.031  day  of  work  train,  at  $26.90 $0.83 

Labor: 

Mixing  cement  dry,  0.104  day,  at  $2.50 $0.26 

Building  walls,    0.247   day,    at   $2.84 0.70 

Removing  timbers,  excavating  and  preparing  panel  for  concrete, 

0.226    day,    at   $2.83 0.64 

Placing  rock  backing,  0.02  day,  at  $2.50 0.05 

Total     $1.65 

Engineering,  Superintendence  and  Miscellaneous: 

Engineering    $0.29 

Falsework,   timber  and   iron 0.06 

Lights,  wear  on  tools,  etc 0.03 

Interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,   10%   per  annum  on  $1,500, 
for.  3y2    mos 0.01 

Total    $0.39 

Total  per  cu.  yd.   in  place $7.42 

The  proportions  were  1  cement,  3  sand  and  5  rock.  The  dimen- 
sions of  each  side  wall  were  2  ft.  3  ins.  thick  and  16  ft.  high.  There 
were  1.33  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per  lin.  ft.  of  side  wall,  or  2.66  cu. 
yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel.  The  average  daily  force,  not  including 
the  work  train  crew,  was : 

1  foreman,  at  $135  per  mo. 
1  foreman,  at  $3.75  per  day. 
1  foreman,  at  $3.25. 

3  carpenters,  at  $3. 
22  laborers,  at  $2.50. 

4  laborers,  at  $2. 

The  average  daily  progress  was  38.75  cu.  yds.  per  day. 
The  average  daily  force  "building  the  side  walls"  was: 

1  foreman,  at  $135  per  mo. 

2  foremen,  at  $3.25  per  day. 
4  carpenters,  at  $3. 

12  laborers,   at  $2.50. 

The  averagt  daily  force  engaged  in  "removing  timbers,  exca- 
vating, etc."  : 

1  foreman,  at  $135  per  mo. 

2  foremen,  at  $3.75  per  day. 
2  carpenters,  at  $3  per  day. 

14  laborers,  at  $2.50  per  day. 

The  cost  of  the  brick  arch  during  the  same  period  was : 

BRICK  ARCH. 
Materials:  Per  cu.  yd. 

Brick,   526,  at  $7  per  M $   3.68 

Cement,   1.18  bbls.,  at  $2.40 2.83 

Sand,   0.263   cu.  yd.,  at  82   cts 0.21 

Dry  rock  backing,  0.483  cu.  yd.,  at  75  cts 0.36 

Total    materials    .  ...$7.08 


RAILWAYS.  1189 

Traffic  Charges: 

Brick    $  0.8S 

Cement 0.19 

Sand     ' 0.13 

Total $  1.21 

Work  Train  Service: 

Hauling  brick  and  cement  and  removing  debris  and  old  timber, 

0.046   day,   at    $26.70 $   1.23 

Labor: 

Mixing  mortar  and  building  arch,  0.78  day,  at  $4.06 $  3.16 

Placing  rock,   backing,   0.135  day,  at  $2.66 0.36 

Moving    centers,    preparing    for    work    and    removing    timber 

0.383   day,    at    $2.87 1.10 

Total    $  4.62 

Engineering,  Superintendence  and  Miscellaneous: 

Engineering   and    superintendence $   0.44 

Falsework,    timber    and    iron 0.05 

Changing   lights,   wear   on   tools,   etc 0.04 

Interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,  10%   per  annum  on  $1,500, 

for   2V2    mos 0.02 

Total     $   0.55 

Total  per  cu.   yd $14.69 

The  brick  arch  was  5  rings  thick,  or  1  ft.  9  ins.,  and  28%  ft. 
around  the  arc.  The  bricks  were  2  %  x  3  %  x  8  ins.  There  were 
1.85  cu.  yds.  of  -brick  masonry  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  making  the 
cost  $27.13  per  lin.  ft.  for  the  brick  arch.  The  average  daily  prog- 
ress was  25.9  cu.  yds.,  with  the  following  force,  not  including  v/ork 
train  crew : 

1  foreman,  at  $135  per  mo. 

1  brick  mason  foreman,  at  $6.50  per  day. 

1  foreman,  at  $3.75  per  day. 

1  foreman,  at  $3.25  per  day. 

7  brick  masons,  at  $6  per  day. 

3  carpenters,  at  $3  per  day. 
25  laborers,  at  $2.50  per  day. 

The  average  gang  engaged  in  "mixing  mortar  and  building  arch" 
was: 

1  foreman,  at  $135  per  mo. 

1  foreman,  at  $3.75  per  day. 

2  brick  foremen,  at  $6.50  per  day. 
7%   brick  masons,  at  $6  per  day. 

1  carpenter,  at  $3  per  day. 
21  laborers,  at  $2.50  per  day. 
The  average  gang  engaged  in  "placing  rock  backing"  was: 

1  foreman,  at  $135  per  mo. 

2  foremen,  at  $3.25  per  day. 

4  carpenters,  at  $3  per  day. 
30  laborers,  at  $2.50  per  day. 


1190  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  average  gang  engaged  in  "removing  timbers,  excavation,etc.," 
was: 

1  foreman,  at  $135  per -mo. 

2  foremen,  at  $3.75  per  day. 
5  carpenters,  at  $3  per  day. 

12  laborers,  at  $2.50  per  day. 

As  above  stated,  the  cost  during  the  last  year  of  the  work  was 
very  much  reduced. 

During  the  six  months  ending  June  30,  1895,  the  cost  of  lining 
was  as  follows: 

CONCRETE  SIDE  WALLS. 
Materials:  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement,   1.33  bbls.,   at   $2.25 $2.99 

Sand,  0.47  cu.  yd.,  at  18  cts 0.09 

Rock,  0.79  cu.  yd.,  at  39  cts 0.31 

Total $3.39 

Work  Train  Service: 

Hauling  concrete,  removing  debris  and   old   timber,   0.022   day, 
at    $22.90 $0.51 

Labor: 

Mixing  cement,   0.07   day,  at   $2.14 $0. 

Building  walls,    0.28  day,   at   $2.40 0.66 

Removing   timbers,    excavating   and   preparing   panel    for    con- 
crete, 0.21  day,  at  $2.62 0.54 

Total    $1.35 

Engineering  and  Miscellaneous: 

Engineering  and  superintendence $0.22 

Falsework,    timber  and   iron 0.06 

Tools,   lights,   etc 0.10 

Interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,    10%   per  annum  of  $1,500, 
for  3  mos 0.01 

Total $0.39 

Total  per  cu.   yd $5.64 

It  will  be  noted  that  "traffic  charges"  (freight  on  the  materials 
for  concrete)  appear  to  have  been  omitted. 

The  proportions  of  the  concrete  were  1:3:5.     The  side  wall  was 
2  ft.  7   ins.  thick  by  16   ft.   high,  and  each  side  wall  contained   1.6 
cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.     The  average  progress  per  day  was  46  cu.  yds., 
and  the  working  force  was  as  follows: 
1  foreman,  at  $112.50  per  mo. 
1  foreman,  at  $90  per  mo. 
1  foreman,  at  $3.50  per  day. 

1  blacksmith,  at  $3  per  day. 

2  carpenters,  at  $3  per  day. 
19  laborers,  at  $2.25  per  day. 

7  laborers,  at  $1.75  per  day. 


RAILWAYS.  1191 

The  cost  of  the  brick  arch  during  the  same  period  was  as  follows  : 

BRICK  ARCH. 
Material.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Brick,    500,    at    $6.35 $  3.18 

Cement,    0.98   bbl.,   at   $2.25 2.21 

Sand,  0.34  cu.  yd.,  at  28  cts 0.09 

Total     $  5.48 

Work  Train  Service: 

Hauling  material,  debris,  etc.,  0.037  day,  at  $24.25 $  0.91 

Labor: 

Mixing  mortar  and  building  arch,  0.57  day,  at  $3.15 $   1.80 

Placing  rock  backing,   0.09   day,  at   $2.29 0.21 

Removing  old  timbers,  excavating  and  preparing  for  arching 

and  moving  centers,  0.32  day,  at  $2.48 0.80 

Total     $  2.81 

Engineering  and  Miscellaneous: 

Engineering   and    superintendence $  0.23 

Falsework,  timber  and  iron 0.09 

Tools,     lights,     etc 0.20 

Interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,   10%  per  annum  on  $1,500, 

for    3    mos 0.02 

Total     $   0.54 

Total  per  cu.  yd $10.21 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  item  of  "traffic  charges"  appears  to  have 
been  omitted. 

There  were  5  rings  of  brick  in  the  arch,  giving  a  thickness  of  1  ft. 
9  ins.,  and  the  length  of  the  arc  was  28  ft.  There  were  1.85  cu.  yds. 
of  brick  masonry  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel.  The  bricks  were  2  %  x  3  % 
x  8  ins. 

The  average  progress  per  day  was  44.2  cu.  yds.  with  the  follow- 
ing force: 

1  foreman,  at  $112.50  per  mo. 
1  foreman,  at  $90  per  mo. 
1  foreman,  at  $3.50  per  day. 
1  brick  mason  foreman,  at  $5.50  per  day. 
8  brick  masons,  at  $5  per  day. 
1  carpenter,  at  $3  per  day. 
1  blacksmith,  at  $3  per  day. 
27  laborers,  at  $2.25  per  day. 

The  gang  when  engaged  in  "mixing  mortar  and  building  arch" 
was  as  follows: 

1  foreman,  at  $112.50  per  mo. 

2  foremen,  at  $3.50  per  day. 

2  mason  foremen,  at  $5.50  per  day. 

1  timekeeper,  at  $60  per  mo. 

17  brick  masons,  at  $5  per  day. 

1  blacksmith,  at  $3  per  day. 

25  laborers,  at  $2.25  per  day. 


1192  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  gang  when  engaged  in  "placing  rock  backing"  was  as 
follows: 

1  foreman,  at  $112.50  per  mo. 

%   timekeeper,  at  $60  per  mo. 

y2  blacksmith,  at  $3  per  day. 

*4  carpenter,  at  $3  per  day. 

22  laborers,  at  $2.25  per  day. 

The  gang  when  engaged  in  "removing  old  timbers,  etc.,"  was  as 
follows : 

1  foreman,  at  $112.50  per  mo. 
3  foremen,  at  $90  per  mo. 
1  timekeeper,  at  $60  per  mo. 
3  blacksmiths,  at  $3  per  day. 
1  carpenter,  at  $3  per  day. 

17  laborers,  at  $2.25  per  day. 

Cost  of  the  Cascade  Tunnel.— The  tunnel  is  13,813  ft.  long  through 
the  Cascade  Mountains  on  the  line  of  the  Great  Northern  Ry.  The 
width  in  the  clear  is  16  ft.,  and  the  height  from  top  of  rail  to  bot- 
tom of  arch  is  21  %  ft.  It  was  begun,  from  two  headings,  Aug.  20, 
1897,  and  completed  Oct.  13,  1900.  A  top  heading,  10  x  20  ft.,  was 
driven  from  each  end ;  and  the  bench  was  taken  out  in  two  lifts. 
The  average  monthly  progress  was  175  ft.  at  each  heading,  or  5.76 
ft.  per  day  of  24  hrs.  The  best  year's  work  was  from  June  1,  1899, 
to  June  1,  1900,  in  which  time  5,575  ft.  were  driven  from  the  two 
headings,  the  monthly  average  being  232  ft.  per  heading.  The  best 
month's  progress  was  527  ft.  from  two  headings;  the  best  week's 
progress  was  143  ft.  from  two  headings;  the  best  month's  prog- 
ress from  a  single  heading  (east)  was  301  ft.  The  rock  was 
medium  hard  granite,  very  seamy  and  very  wet.  Although  hard  to 
drill  and  blast,  the  granite  disintegrated  so  rapidly  that  a  tem- 
porary timber  lining  was  necessary  throughout,  and  it  was  after- 
ward replaced  with  concrete. 

The  work  was  all  done  by  day  labor,  no  contracts  being  let,  and, 
in  consequence,  it  cost  considerably  more  than  would  have  been  the 
case  had  it  been  built  by  contract.  Three  8-hr,  shifts  were  worked. 
There  were  600  to  800  men  employed,  and  they  were  not  very 
efficient. 

Four  columns  in  a  heading  carried  6  drills  (3*4 -in.  size).  From 
24  to  28  holes  were  drilled  12  ft.  in  the  heading,  and  fired  in  three 
rounds  by  electricity.  Including  the  bench  work  there  were  14 
drills  used  at  each  end  of  the  tunnel.  Rock  from  the  heading  and 
top  bench  was  wheeled  in  barrows  out  onto  the  "jumbo,"  or  "go 
devil,"  and  dumped  through  into  cars  below.  A  compressed  air 
hoist  on  the  "jumbo"  served  to  lift  large  rock  and  to  shift  the 
"jumbo"  back  before  firing.  Eight  electric  motor  cars  were  used 
to  haul  the  muck,  etc.  One  motor  hauled  16  to  20  dump  cars  of 
1  cu.  yd.  each  up  the  1.7%  grade  to  the  east  portal,  at  10  miles 
an  hour.  The  rails  were  50-lb.  rails  lajd  to  a  gage  of  2  ft. 

Large  power  houses  were  built  at  each  portal.  The  east  power 
house  contained  1  Ingersoll-Sergeant  duplex  compressor,  18  x  24 


RAILWAYS.  1193 

Ins. ;  1  straight  line  compressor,  18x24  ins. ;  1  Rand  duplex  com- 
pressor, 20x36  ins.;  1  Buckeye  high-speed  engine,  12x16  ins.; 
1  Chandler  &  Taylor  high-speed  engine,  13  x  14  ins. ;  6  150-hp. 
boilers ;  pumps,  dynamos,  fans  and  water  heaters.  Compressed 
air  was  delivered  through  6-in.  mains  to  the  drills,  at  an  initial  pres- 
sure of  100  Ibs. 

The  tunnel  was  lined  with  concrete  from  end  to  end,  the  tem- 
porary timber  lining  being  removed.  The  concrete  is  nowhere  less 
than  2  ft,  and  in  places  it  is  3  %  ft.  thick ;  spawls  and  broken 
stone  were  packed  above  the  concrete  where  necessary.  To  place 
the  concrete  without  interfering  with  the  muck  trains,  a  platform 
500  ft.  long  was  erected,  and  the  cars  loaded  with  concrete  were 
hauled  up  an  incline  by  a  compressed  air  hoist.  The  concrete  was 
dumped  on  the  platform  and  shoveled  into  the  forms.  While  this 
was  going  on  another  500-ft.  platform  was  being  built  in  advance. 
Side  walls  were  built  in  alternate  sections  8  to  12  ft.  long,  the 
weight  of  the  timber  arches  being  thus  transferred  to  the  walls. 
The  concrete  arch  centers  were  made  in  12-ft.  lengths,  of  which 
there  were  10  in  each  end  of  the  tunnel.  When  the  concrete  had 
set,  the  12-ft.  arch  center  was  lowered  with  screw  jacks  onto 
"dollies,"  pushed  forward  12  ft.  and  jacked  up  again.  Concrete 
was  mixed,  1  cement,  3  sand  and  5  parts  rock.  About  95,000  bbls. 
of  Portland  cement  were  used  in  lining  the  tunnel,  an  average  of 
7  bbls.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel.  Work  of  lining  was  begun  in  De- 
cember, 1899,  and  finished  November,  1900;  more  than  1,000  ft. 
of  lining  having  been  placed  in  October,  1900,  in  the  west  end, 
although  the  general  average  was  about  600  ft.  of  lining  per  month 
from  each  end.  The  tunnel  was  opened  for  operation  Dec.  20,  1900. 

Mr.  Willard  Beahan  says  that  it  was  a  serious  mistake  to  have 
driven  the  heading  in  rock  by  hand  300  ft.  in  advance  of  the  bench 
While  waiting  for  the  power  plant  to  arrive,  for  the  long  heading 
overtaxed  the  transportation  so  that  work  on  the  heading  had  to 
be  stopped  until  the  bench  was  brought  up.  The  use  of  four  drill 
columns  he  regards  as  novel,  and  adds  that  there  was  plenty  of 
room  in  which  to  work  six  drills,  and  that  it  was  not  necessary  to 
shift  any  of  the  columns  in  drilling  a  set  of  holes. 

The  actual  cost  of  this  tunnel,  as  originally  printed  in  Engi- 
neering-Contracting, Dec.  8,  1908,  was  as  follows : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Engineering    $  4.30 

Labor    excavating     tunnel 60.60 

Explosives     7.40 

Power     22.50 

Tools    ($137,000)     10.00 

Machinery    ($223,000)     16.20. 

Buildings     3.50 

Timber    lining    9.40 

Concrete   lining    43.50 

Personal    injuries    2.10 

Hospital    expenses    1-10 

Permanent  track  through  tunnel 2.80 

Total     .  $183.40 


1194 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


A  comparison  of  this  cost  with  that  of  the  Stampede  Tunnel, 
through  the  same  mountain  range,  shows  that  the  Stampede  Tun- 
nel was  built  at  less  cost,  although  high  contract  prices  were  paid. 

Wabash  R.  R.  Tunnels.*— I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  T.  H.  Loomis,  Div. 
Eng.  P.,  T.  &  W.  R.  R.  (Wabash  system)  for  much  of  the  follow- 
ing data  kindly  furnished  by  him  when  I  went  over  the  line  in 
1903  studying  the  methods  and  cost  of  excavation.  Eight  double- 
track  tunnels  were  under  way,  the  cross-section  of  each  being  as 
shown  in  Fig.  1.  The  material  encountered  was  shale,  sandstone, 
fire  clay  and  occasional  seams  of  coal — characteristic  of  eastern 
Ohio  "and  western  Pennsylvania.  The  section  above  the  wall  plates 
(i.  e.,  the  longitudinal  timbers  on  top  of  the  posts)  requires  an  ex- 


•EN&.  NEWS. 


Fig.   1. — Double  Track  Tunnel. 

cavation  of  15  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  The  clear  width  between  wall 
plates  is  34^4  ft.  The  segmental  arch  timbers  are  12x12  ins., 
lagged  with  4-in.  plank,  the  arch  ribs  being  3  to  4  ft.  c.  to  c.  The 
favorite  method  of  attack,  as  shown  in  Fig.  2,  was  by  what  I  will 
term  the  twin-heading  method ;  two  8  x  8-ft.  headings  being  driven 
as  shown,  and  afterward  enlarged.  The  floor  of  these  headings  is 
12y2  ft.  above  subgrade,  thus  leaving  a  12y2-ft.  bench,  ACDE,  to 
be  taken  out.  One  machine  drill  is  operated  in  each  heading  (two 
could  be  worked)  for  the  drilling  is  easy.  The  rivalry  between  the 
two  drilling  gangs  in  these  twin  headings  appeared  to  me  to  be  one 
of  the  best  features  of  this  method  of  attack.  It  is  certain  that  no 
hitherto  published  data  show  as  low  a  cost  per  cubic  yard  for 
tunnel  work  as  the  data  which  I  secured  on  this  work.  The  weekly 

'Gillette's  "Rock  Excavation." 


RAILWAYS. 


1195 


progress  was  not  rapid,  but,  as  all  the  tunnels  were  comparatively 
short,  there  was  no  necessity  of  going  to  great  expense  in  securing 
rapid  progress — a  fact  that  tunnel  contractors  should  bear  in  mind. 
Steam  drills  were  used  in  some  of  the  short  tunnels.  The  following 
is  the  actual  cost  of  excavating  and  timbering  the  section  of  a 
tunnel  above  the  wall  plates  (15  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.),  using  air 
drills,  for  a  distance  of  100  lin.  ft. : 

Labor $2,527.45 

2,000  Ibs.  40%   dynamite,  at  12  cts 260.00 

470  gals,   kerosene  oil,    at   12   cts 56.40 

1,875  gals,   gasoline,   at   12   cts 225.00 

3,000  bus.  coal  for  compressor,  at  9  cts 270.00 

Machine    and     lubricating    oils 62.50 

Blacksmith   shop    150.00 

41,649  ft.  B.  M.  timber,  at  $23 957.93 


Total  cost  of  100  lin.  ft $4,509.28 

Cost  per  lin  ft.  above  wall  plates 45.09 

Cost  per  cu.  yd.  including  timber 3.06 

Cost  per  cu.  yd.,  excluding  timber 2.60 

The  material  in  this  case  was  sandstone. 

On  another  tunnel  the  section  above  the  wall  plates  was  exca- 
vated by  hand  at  a  cost  $40.90  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $2.73  per  cu.  yd., 
for  a  distance  of  110  ft.,  the  material  being  hard  fire  clay  in  the 


/H 

A    L __1 


Fig.    3. 


upper  half  and  shale  in  the  lower  half  of  the  section  excavated, 
making  easier  excavation  than  in  the  sandstone.  The  force  engaged 
in  hand  drilling,  by  the  twin-heading  method,  was: 

Wages  per 
10-hr,  shift. 

1  general   foreman    $  4 

1  foreman    

1  blacksmith     

2  carpenters,    at    $3 

10  miners,   at   $2 

10  muckers,   at    $1.50 

1  team     


3 

6 

20 
15 

4 


Total    per    shift    (10-hr.) $55 

While  these  men  took  out  the  whole  section  above  the  wall  plates 
(16  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.)  for  $2.73  per  cu.  yd.  for  labor  and  ex- 
plosives (not  including  cost  of  timber),  working  in  shale  and  fire 


1196  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

clay,    they    excavated    a    7  x  8-ft.    heading    in    sandstone    for    $3.75 
per  cu.  yd.,  distributed  as  follows : 

Per 
10-hr,  shift. 

Labor  on    7  x  8   heading $18.00 

Dynamite     3.84 

Repairs 90 

Light 32^ 

Total   per   shift $23.06 

Each  shift  excavated  6.2  cu.  yds.  of  this  7  x  8-ft.  heading,  making 
the  cost  $3.75  per  cu.  yd.,  as  above  stated,  equivalent  to  an  ad- 
vance of  3  ft.  per  shift. 

No  night  shifts  were  being  worked  on  the  eight  tunnels,  and  the 
progress  per  week  in  shale  was  25  ft.  when  working  by  hand  and 
excavating  15  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  ;  and  50  ft.  a  week  working 
with  machine  drills.  In  hard  sandstone  the  weekly  progress  was 
about  15  ft.  by  hand  and  30  ft.  with  machine  drills,  in  all  cases 
working  only  1  10-hr,  shift  in  the  24-hr,  day. 

The  following  is  the  actual  cost  of  timbering  on  one  job  : 

Per  M. 

Georgia  pine  f.  o.  b.  cars $23.60 

Hauling   6   miles 3.00 

Cost    of    framing 5.00 

Cost   of  erecting 3.00 

Total  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M $34.60 

The  carpenters  received  $3  per  10-hr,  day,  and  laborers  erecting 
received  $1.50.  The  cost  of  framing  and  erecting,  including  super- 
vision, was  $8  per  M,  which  was  about  $2  more  than  it  should  have 
cost  had  there  been  more  workers  and  fewer  bosses.  Over  the 
rough  roads  each  team  hauled  about  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  per  load  and 
made  one  trip  of  6  miles  each  way  in  a  day.  The  cost  of  "pack- 
ing" (i.  e.,  placing  small  stones)  above  the  lagging  was  80  cts.  per 
cu.  yd. 

We  now  come  to  what  I  have  said  are  the  lowest  records  of  tun- 
neling cost  yet  made  public : 

Tunnel  heading  in  sandstone,  double  track  full  section  above  the 
wall  plate  grade  (15  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.)  : 

Cu.  yd. 

Drilling     $0.60 

Explosives     40 

Mucking .      .85 

Total     $1.85 

Tunnel   bench  in   same  tunnel : 

Cu.  yd. 

Drilling     $0.40 

Explosives     20 

Mucking     22 

Total     .  ..$0.82 


RAILWAYS.  1197 

The  sandstone  was  very  hard,  breaking  in  large  blocks,  which 
have  to  be  drilled  and  shot  before  mucking.  A  steam  shovel  is 
used  in  the  bench,  and  material  of  heading  is  carried  about  400  ft. 
and  dumped  over  the  breast  of  bench,  whence  steam  shovel  loads  it 
along  with  bench  material. 

In  another  tunnel,  in  a  formation  of  practically  level  strata  of 
slate,  limestone  (thin)  and  fire  clay  (a  stone  hard  as  limestone  to 
drill,  but  disintegrating  in  the  air)  the  cost  was  as  follows: 

Heading— full  double-track  sections — all  above  wall  plates : 

Cu.  yd. 

Drilling    $0.48 

Explosives    30 

Mucking     80 


Total     $1.58 


same  tunnel — full   section  : 


Cu.  yd. 

Drilling     $0.30 

Explosives     20 

Mucking     18 

Total $OJ58 

In  the  case  of  another  tunnel  in  coal  formation  with  a  5-ft.  vein 
of  coal  running  all  through  on  the  wall  plate  grade  ;  steam  drills 
used  in  rock,  and  steam  coal  augers  in  the  coal,  with  steam  shovel 
for  mucking,  the  costs  were  as  follows: 

Headings — per    cubic    yard — double    track  : 

Labor     $0.966 

Explosives    and    materials 090 

Total     ,. $1.056 

Bench — same   tunnel   and    formation  : 

Cu.  yd. 

Labor     $0.38 

Explosives   and    materials 04 

Total    $0.42 

This  last  may  seem  too  low,  but  it  was  in  all  probability  the 
cheapest  material  a  tunnel  is  ever  built  in,  and  the  organization 
was  so  good  that  it  was  worked  with  extreme  economy.  A  core 
of  about  2  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  was  left  in  the  middle  of  the  heading 
(between  the  twin  headings)  and  taken  out  along  with  the  bench. 

Mount  Wood  and  Top  Mill  Tunnels.— Mr.  W.  J.  Yoder  gives  the 
following  data:  The  tunnels  (built  in  1888-1889)  are  within  the 
northern  city  limits  of  Wheeling,  W.  Va.,  and  the  material  pene- 
trated was  for  the  most  part  shale  of  the  coal  measures.  The  shale 
disintegrates  rapidly  upon  exposure  and  must  be  supported.  The 
block  or  American  system  of  timbering  was  used  for  lining,  and  was 
kept  never  more  than  50  ft.  back  of  the  face.  All  drilling  was  done 
by  hand.  A  top  heading  10x34  ft.  was  driven,  and  then  widened; 
the  bench  was  taken  out  in  two  lifts.  The  first  or  cut  holes  in  the 
heading  were  drilled  so  as  to  blast  out  a  long  horizontal  wedge 


1198  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

of  rock  near  the  roof;  these  holes  being  5  to  6  ft.  deep.  Then  a 
lower  row  of  5-ft.  lift  holes  was  fired.  Finally  the  bottom  of  the 
heading  was  taken  out  like  a  bench  by  a  row  of  vertical  holes  and  a 
row  of  horizontal  holes.  In  all  33  holes  were  fired  in  the  heading, 
aggregating  160  lin.  ft.,  and  requiring  60  Ibs.  of  40%  Forcite  to  load 
them.  The  effect  of  the  firing  was  to  make  an  advance  of  2%  ft., 
displacing  25  cu.  yds.  [The  heading  gang  consisted  of  1  foreman, 
14  drillers,  12  muckers  and  1  nipper.]  About  25  lin.  ft.  of  drilling 
was  considered  a  day's  (10  hrs.)  work  for  2  men.  The  muck  was 
wheeled  in  iron  barrows  to  a  traveler  and  dumped  down  chutes  into 
cars.  The  heading  gang  timbered  and  placed  the  packing  above  the 
arch;  two  10-hr,  shifts  per  week  being  needed  for  this  work,  leaving 
10  shifts  per  week  for  advancing  the  heading.  The  timbering  is 
fully  described;  660  ft.  B.  M.  of  white  oak  were  used  per  lin.  ft. 
of  tunnel.  The  bench  holes  were  8  ft.  deep,  churn  drills  being 
used  except  for  the  corner  holes  and  for  blockholing.  The  bench 
force  consisted  of  1  foreman,  6  drillers,  18  muckers,  2  mule  drivers, 
3  dump  men  and  1  nipper.  The  average  haul  was  about  800.  ft. 

The  maximum  monthly  progress  (working  two  10-hr,  shifts)  in 
a  heading  on  the  Mount  Wood  Tunnel  was  130  lin.  ft.,  the  average 
monthly  progress  being  84  ft.  The  maximum  monthly  progress  on 
the  bench  was  125%  ft.,  the  average  being  97  ft.  The  average  ex- 
cavation was  10.2  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft,  of  heading  and  enlargement, 
and  18  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  bench.  The  total  excavation  in  both 
tunnels  was  49,670  cu.  yds.,  and  the  excavation  in  approaches  was 
25,751  cu.  yds. 

The  number  of  men  employed  was  350.  The  heading  men  were 
composed  of  two-thirds  negroes  and  one-third  Austrians.  The 
foremen  were  Irish.  The  best  drillers  were  negroes.  No  work 
was  done  Sundays  or  Saturday  nights.  The  scale  of  wages  (10-hr, 
shift)  was  as  follows: 

HEADING  GANG. 

1  foreman     $4.00 

14  drillers 1.75 

10  muckers     1.50 

1  nipper     1.25 

BENCH  GANG. 

1  foreman                                                                      .  .$3.00 
6  drillers     1.75 

16  muckers     1.50 

2  men    (lagging)    1.50 

1  nipper     . 1.25 

2  drivers     1.50 

3  dumpmen     1.50 


2  mules 

MISCELLANEOUS. 

1  carpenter     $2.50 

4  sawyers     1.75 

1  trackman 2.50 

3  blacksmiths 3.00 

1  walking   boss    4.00 

1  timekeeper .  2.25 

1  engineer     and     fireman 2.50 

1  electrician                                                                       .  2.50 


RAILWAYS.  1199 

COST  OF  LABOR  PER  LIN.  FT.  OF  TUNNEL. 

Labor      excavating      (heading,      $22.79  ;      bench, 

$20.95)      $43.74 

Hauling    and    dumping 5.65 

Labor  timbering    4.19 

Labor    framing    timber -. 77 

Blacksmithing     1.00 

Track   repairs .21 

Labor  electric   lighting 88 

Superintendence    and     accounts 2.00 

Total    labor    $58.44 

*  Cost  per  cu.   yd 2.0C 

The  above  does  not  include  the  cost  of  timber,  oil,  fuel,  wear  of 
tools  or  explosives.  About  1  Ib.  of  40%  Forcite  was  used  per  cu.  yd. 
of  tunnel  excavation,  or  28  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The  labor  cost  was 
$2.34  per  cu.  yd.  of  heading,  and  $1.10  per  cu.  yd.  of  bench  exca- 
vation, making  an  average  of  $1.55  per  cu.  yd.,  not  including  the 
items  of  timbering,  etc.  The  labor  cost  of  erecting  arch  and  packing 
back  of  it  was  $3.19  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel;  or  $7.80  per  1,000  ft. 
B.  M.  The  labor  cost  of  erecting  plumb  posts  and  side  lagging  and 
packing  same  was  $2.33  per  lin.  ft.;  or  $4.27  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M. 
The  contractors  were  Paige*,  Carey  &  Co.,  of  New  York,  whose  super- 
intendent was  Mr.  Frank  Moran. 

Tunnel  Driven  by  Hand  on  the  B.  &  O. — Mr.  J.  G.  G.  Kerry  gives 
description  and  cost  of  a  short  single-track  tunnel  built  in  1891  on 
the  W.  Va.  &  P.  R.  R.,  a  feeder  of  the  B.  &  a  system.  The  tunnel 
is  on  a  *4%  grade  falling  to  the  south,  with  a  length  of  624  ft.,  in 
a  soft  blue  clay  shale,  nearly  dry  and  showing  little  stratification. 
This  shale  disintegrates  rapidly  on  exposure.  The  width  was  23  ft., 
height  from  floor  to  spring  line  13  ft. ;  semi-circular  arch  of  11%  ft. 
radius.  The  area  of  the  heading  was  208  sq.  ft. ;  bench,  299  sq.  ft. ; 
total,  507  sq.  ft.  Work  was  all  done  by  hand.  The  heading  gang 
consisted  of  1  foreman,  8  miners,  6  muckers  and  1  nipper.  Common 
laborers  were  paid  $1.45  and  miners  $1.75  per  10-hr,  day.  Three 
sets  of  holes  (2  wet  and  1  dry)  were  drilled  in  the  heading; 
each  set  consisting  of  4  holes  about  4  ft.  deep ;  and  24  ft.  of 
holes  was  considered  a  good  day's  work  for  two  miners.  Each 
hole  was  loaded  with  4  to  6  sticks  (%  Ib.  per  stick)  of  dynamite; 
and  the  average  advance  from  a  blast  was  2%  ft.  A  scaffold 
car,  or  go-devil,  was  used  in  handling  the  muck.  It  was  provided 
with  a  derrick  and  also  used  for  handling  timbers,  lagging  and 
packing. 

The  bench  gang  consisted  of  1  foreman,  8  drillers,  10  muckers 
and  1  nipper.  The  bench  was  shot  down  in  4-ft.  holds  or  lifts, 
two  half-depth  blasts  being  made  for  each  hold.  Each  blast  con- 
sisted of  four  holes,  two  being  center  holes,  and  two  nearly  vertical 
under  the  wall  plate.  The  charge  was  10  sticks  to  an  outside  hole 
and  15  sticks  to  a  center  hole.  Muck  was  taken  out  in  1  cu.  yd. 
dump  cars  in  trains  of  two.  Stone  flat  cars  with  platforms  flush 
with  top  of  wheels  were  used  for  handling  large  rocks.  The 
bench  was  kept  two  wall  plate  lengths  behind  the  heading,  making 


1200  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

the  same  progress,  2%  ft.  per  shift.  The  actual  excavation  was 
at  the  rate  of  5  ft.  per  shift,  but  the  time  consumed  in  pointing 
down  projections,  timbering  and  packing  being  equal  to  the  time 
spent  in  excavation,  reduced  the  average  progress  to  2^  ft.  per 
shift.  The  work  was  done  by  contract,  and  it  cost  the  company 
at  contract  prices  as  follows : 

11,726  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  at  $2.85 $33,419 

742  cu.   yds.   of  packing,   at  $1.75 1,298 

256  cu.  yds.  of  fallen  rock,  at  $1.25 320 

303,000  ft.    B.   M.,    at   $30.00 9,090 


Total  624  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  at  $70.70 $44,127 

The  actual  cost  to  the  contractor  was  about  $35,000. 

The  method  of  handling  and  placing  the  segmental  arch  timber- 
ing is  described  in  detail.  The  timbering  consisted  of  a  7-segment 
arch  of  12  x  12-in.  white  oak  resting  on  12  x  14-in.  wall  plates 
on  top  of  the  posts.  The  16 -ft.  wall  plates  were  jointed  by  halving 
for  a  foot  at  each  end,  so  that  the  forward  end  always  showed 
the  lower  half  of  the  joint.  The  arches  were  8  ft.  c.  to  c.  The 
segments  of  the  arches  were  erected  on  temporary  centers  made  of 
2-in.  plank.  These  centers  were  erected  in  two  parts  and  joined 
at  the  crown  by  bolts ;  a  long  dog-hook,  fastened  to  the  center, 
was  driven  into  the  preceding  arch  to  hold  it  in  place  laterally.  The 
arch  timbers  were  wedged  solidly  against  the  roof,  and  the  centers 
withdrawn.  The  lagging  was  close  laid,  all  voids  being  packed 
with  broken  sandstone. 

Each  end  of  the  tunnel  was  lined  with  masonry  for  50  ft,  the 
centers  used  in  this  lining  being  25  ft.  long  and  mounted  on 
rollers.  During  use  the  centers  were  supported  on  wedges,  which 
upon  being  struck  lowered  the  center  enough  to  clear  the  rock- 
faced  Voussoirs.  A  hole  was  left  in  the  crown  of  the  arch-center 
lagging  so  that  the  voussoirs  could  pass  through.  Above  this  a 
piece  or  two  of  the  tunnel  lagging  was  removed,  and  an  iron  bar 
placed  on  the  timber  arches.  A  set  of  blocks  was  hung  from  this 
iron  bar,  and  used  to  raise  the  voussoir  stone.  Gas  pipe  rollers 
were  put  under  the  stone  to  roll  it  to  place  on  the  center  lagging. 
The  stone  was  then  canted  up,  and  a  rope  slung  around  it,  six 
men  then  sliding  it  to  place. 

The  contract  prices  were  $9  per  cu.  yd.  for  portal  masonry,  $8 
for  side  walls  and  $14  for  arch  sheeting.  The  cost  at  contract 
prices  per  lin.  ft.  of  that  part  of  the  tunnel  which  was  lined 
(excluding  portals,  fallen  material,  etc.),  was: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Excavation,   at  $2.85  per  cu.  yd $  53.55 

Packing,    at   $1.75    per   cu.    yd 2.08 

Timbering,  at   $30.00  per  M 14.75 

Side    walls    20.56 

Arch     21.42 

Total   per   lin.    ft $112. 36 


RAILWAYS.  1201 

Cost  of  the  Busk  Tunnel. — The  Busk  Tunnel  Ry.  Co.  built  a  tun- 
nel 9,395  ft.  long  on  the  Colorado  Midland  R.  R.  through  the 
Rocky  Mts.,  11.7  miles  S.  W.  of  L-eadville.  The  contract  was  let 
to  Keefe  &  Co.,  and  work  was  begun  Sept.  15,  1890.  After  all  but 
921  ft.  had  been  driven  the  work  was  turned  over  to  the  railway 
company  and  finished  under  the  direction  of  their  chief  engineer, 
Mr.  B.  H.  Bryant.  The  tunnel  is  single  track,  15  x  21  ft.,  with  10.2 
cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  excavation  in  rock  and  13.8  cu.  yds.  where 
timbered.  The  heading  was  7  ft.  high  and  the  full  width  of  the 
tunnel.  The  first  8  holes,  8  ft.  deep,  were  drilled  in  two  rows 
from  the  top  to  bottom,  holes  being  about  2  ft.  apart  at  surface 
and  converging  toward  the  center.  The  firing  of  these  holes  made 
a  V-shaped  opening.  A  second  set  of  holes  was  drilled  parallel 
to  the  sides  of  the  tunnel,  and  when  fired  the  remaining  rock  was 
blown  into  the  V-shaped  opening.  The  bench  was  excavated  in 
the  same  way.  The  progress  was  as  follows: 

Driving  the  2  headings 1,118      days 

Av.   daily  progress   8.4  ft. 

Av.  daily  progress,  best  month 10.9  ft. 

Best  month's  (28  days)  progress,  1  heading    202.5  ft. 

The  rock  was  granite,  and  in  places  it  disintegrated  on  exposure, 
requiring  timbering;  in  other  places  it  was  so  full  of  seams  as  to 
require  timbering;  so  that  78  per  cent  of  the  tunnel  was  timbered. 
The  contractor  was  paid  for  the  tunnel  as  follows: 

9,393%  ft.  of  tunnel  at  $62.50 $587,103.75 

32,575  cu.  yds.  enlargement  for  timbering  at  $2.50      81,437.50 

Cost  of  timber,  2,723,000  ft.  B.  M.  at  $30 81,690.00 

Labor  timbering  at  $12  per  M 32,676.00 

Total   9,393%   ft.  at  $82.30 $782,907.50 

The  plant  at  the  Ivanhoe  end  consisted  of  three  100  hp.  boilers, 
two  20  x  24-in.  Ingersoll  compressors,  one  20  x  24-in.  Norwalk 
compressor,  one  10  hp.  engine  to  drive  electric  light  dynamo,  one 
20  hp.  engine  to  drive  a  No.  6  Blake  blower,  14-in.  air  pipe,  two 
pumps  with  14-in.  steam  cylinders  and  10-in.  stroke,  six  3%-in. 
Ingersoll  drills  (4  in  the  heading  and  2  on  the  bench),  a  small 
traction  engine  running  on  a  20-in.  gauge  track  hauling  nine  3-yd. 
dump  cars.  Coke  was  used  as  fuel  for  the  traction  engine,  so  that 
the  smoke  did  not  inconvenience  the  tunnel  workmen. 

Cost  of  a  Tunnel  Near  Peekskill,  N.  Y. — The  following  data  are 
given  by  Mr.  Geo.  W.  Lee,  engineer  for  Sundstrom  &  Stratton,  the 
contractors  who  built  the  double  track  tunnel  described.  The 
tunnel  is  only  275  ft.  long,  and  is  on  the  line  of  the  New  York 
Central  R.  R.,  2%  miles  north  of  Peekskill.  The  yardage  as  shown 
on  the  plans  was  7,028  cu.  yds.,  but  as  the  rock  lay  in  strata  dipping 
at  an  angle  of  45°,  it  broke  out  on  the  uphill  side  so  as  to  leave 
large  pockets,  in  consequence  of  which  the  contractor  took  out 
10  per  cent  more  rock  than  he  was  paid  for.  Owing  to  the  seamy 
condition  of  the  rock,  and  the  proximity  of  the  tunnel  to  the  main 
line  traffic,  very  light  charges  of  dynamite  were  used,  which 


1202  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

increased  the  cost  and  delayed  the  progress.  Rand  steam  drills, 
3-in.,  were  used.  A  heading  8  x  10  ft.  was  run  and  the  bench 
was  kept  close  behind.  Rock  from  the  heading  was  removed  in 
small  narrow  gage  cars;  rock  from  the  bench  was  loaded  into 
standard  gage  cars  by  derrick  cars.  The  following  was  the  cost 
of  the  tunnel  excavation : 

Equipment    (less    present    value),    supplies    and 

repairs     $   2,893.52 

Dynamite  and  exploders - 1,604.58 

Coal 570.80 

Oil,    waste,    etc 92.80 

Lumber  for  houses  and  shops 129.88 

Miscellaneous 92.10 

Labor    22,212.86 

Total     $27,596.54 

Average  cost  per  cu.  yd.  paid  for 3.93 

Average  cost  per  cu.  yd.  taken  out 3.54 

The  tunnel  was  lined  with  1:2:4  concrete ;  692  cu.  yds.  in  the 
bench  walls;  932  cu.  yds.  in  the  arch;  the  portal  head  walls  were 
of  1:3:6  concrete,  324  cu.  yds.  The  cost  of  the  concrete  was  as 
follows  for  the  1,948  cu.  yds.: 

Cement  at  $1.63  per  bbl $  5,755.50 

Sand  at  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd 662.94 

Crushed  stone  at  80  cts.  per  cu.  yd ....      1,303.20 

Lumber. 

Mixing  platforms  and  runways $336.89 

Ribs,    including   hand    sawing 234.10 

Backing    boards 134.44 

Lagging    341.04 

Sheathing    268.49 

Plates,  sills,  studs  and  braces 182.75 

1,497.71 

Coal 118.73 

Oil    16.12 

Hardware,   nails,   spikes,   etc 224.39 

Tools     181.10 

Freight  on  stone,  cement,  etc 3,089.86 

Labor,  including  supt.,  foreman,  etc 8,036.31 


Total,  $10.72  per  cu.  yd $20,885.86 

In  the  approaches  to  the  tunnel  and  in  widening  cuts  south 
of  the  tunnel  45,698  cu.  yds.  of  rock  were  removed.  On  account 
of  proximity  to  traffic,  blasting  could  be  done  only  at  limited  periods, 
which  made  the  cost  of  excavation  high.  Rock  was  loaded  on  flat 
cars  with  stiff  leg  derricks  provided  with  bull  wheels.  The  cost 
was  as  follows : 


RAILWAYS.  1203 

Equipment     (less    present    value,     supplies    and 

repairs     $11,673.60 

Dynamite  and   exploders 6,588.82 

Coal     2,490.13 

Oil,  waste,  etc 370.59 

Lumber    for    buildings 634.22 

Miscellaneous 373.19 

Labor    69,550.66 

Total     $91,681.21 

Average  cost  per  cu.  yd.  paid  for 2.24 

Average  cost  per  cu.  yd.  taken  out 2.01 

Cost  of  Tunnelling,  Alaska  Central  Railway. — From  data  com- 
piled by  Mr.  G.  A.  Kyle,  and  given  in  a  great  detail  in  Engineering- 
Contracting,  April  7,  1909,  I  have  prepared  the  following  condensed 
summary. 

The  work  comprises  seven  short  tunnels  located  on  the  Alaska 
Central  Ry.,  between  miles  48  and  52.  The  work  was  begun  by 
a  contracting  firm,  but  taken  over  by  the  railway  and  finished  with 
company  forces.  The  costs  are  all  high,  not  only  because  wages 
were  high  and  because  of  location  in  an  inaccessible  country,  but 
because  work  done  with  company  forces  is  almost  invariably  more 
expensive  than  work  done  by  contract. 

Table  I  shows  the  length  of  each  tunnel,  and  the  cross-section. 
It  is  worthy  of  note  that  the  "overbreak"  averaged  12.1%.  The 
rock  was  a  "hard  blocky  slate  with  fractures  at  right  angles  to  the 
axis  of  the  tunnels."  It  broke  easily  and  almost  to  the  theoretical 
lines  of  the  tunnel,  and  required  no  timbering. 

The  standard  cross-section  was  14  ft.  between  side  walls  and  21 
ft.  between  top  of  rail  and  top  of  tunnel. 

Tunnel  No.  1  was  built  by  company  forces  and  was  begun  Jan. 
16,  1906.  This  tunnel  was  located  1%  miles  from  the  end  of  com- 
pleted track.  The  tunnel  was  driven  entirely  from  the  north  end 
on  account  of  a  snow  slide  on  the  south  end,  making  it  Impossible 
to  work  on  that  end,  as  the  work  was  mostly  done  in  the  win- 
ter months.  The  tunnel  is  699  ft.  long.  The  first  250  ft.  was 
driven  with  steam  power  and  drills.  The  character  of  ma- 
terial is  of  a  hard  rocky  slate  and  is  evidently  in  an  ancient 
slide  from  the  mountains,  as  the  strata  were  badly  broken  up, 
which  caused  a  great  amount  of  overbreak  outside  of  the  standard 
sections,  the  same  being  27  per  cent.  This  tunnel  was  on  a  14° 
curve  and  was  widened  to  give  a  minimum  clearance  of  18  ins. 
for  the  maximum  length  passenger  car.  The  size  of  the  tunnel 
was  17  ft.  wide  between  timbers,  and  21  ft.  from  top  of  rail  to 
clearance  at  top  of  tunnel.  Timber  was  used  for  396  ft.  in  the 
north  end.  The  balance  was  left  unlined,  but  later  had  to  be  lined 
nearly  its  whole  length  at  an  extra  high  cost,  which  is  not 
included  in  the  costs  as  shown  below. 

The  steam  plant  used  In  driving  the  first  250  ft.  of  the  tunnel 
was  one  40  hp.  boiler,  one  10  hp.  boiler;  three  3% -in.  Rand  drills 
were  used  in  the  heading.  The  work  carried  on  with  the  following 


1804 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


g 

fcfc^rt  £w  -10  -^s^  '  > 

is 

1 

*6~| 

^ 

g 

r£    OO<M     *00      -t^t-CO      -     *CO 

• 

^J 

f-jW^i>.f—     »csj      '^IC^D     •     »O 

t* 

p   1 

^Wg'-^lOO     «C<1      «^C<1<D      •     -CO 

lO 

a 

O   ^r    y    00  CO      .  rH      .  rH  (M*  ^      *      *  CO 

en 

« 

§ 
H 

M 

i  J  too    -m    -cooot>-    •    «oo 
fc,'3  oo    -o    -OOIMCO    •    -t~ 

^S\OO      'lO      '^O5O      •      «iH 

1  II 

J 

a 

S       OA™                ~       * 

fe 

0 

.S    *° 

» 

K!  'd 

S   ^oS  ^^  :£  :ss^  '  *S 

§" 

t>  « 

(1(          §   o   S    lrt0      '^      •aiCO?0      •      "TH 

fco 

w  >» 

•M      CQ  •fC'q    .0      OTHCO    *    'e>i 

CQ                THTH        TH        iHrHTH      '      'iH 

•StS 

r  3 

Si 

G    CO  C*l      •  TH     •  O5  CO  O      •     •  Tj< 

oo 

0 

t- 

gs 

O  u  o  c^Tco"   t  cT   |  ^"00"^   '    '  t^ 

co" 

s  « 

H  u  gj  TH          TH 

"4| 

H    § 

w 

1   X   00     «0     -OIMO     •     -00 

(H  rt  °o    -o    -oooo    •    «t^ 

S 

2 

Qp^)OOco    »co    «c^ic<ic<i    •    »co 

o 

j 

w          >  %  <fi 

BO-" 

3 

g 

00 

^ 

nS  w  o  OOIM    .^i    -COTJ<CO    •    .00 

•f 

£ 

r^_^THCO      -C<1      •LrtTfCO      •      «O5 

c 

C  t,  o  oco*  "o"  '^H«fe>4    '    'co* 

" 

EH 

rt  o  <u  TH        'TH    '                •    • 

S    " 

n< 

& 

0 

^      •    Gv  O      •  tO      •  ^  -^  CO      •      -CO 

P^ 

*O<W    CT>°      tl^>      'THOO      •      •(>. 

t^ 

r^          CD  CO     •  Ci      •  -^  CO  rH     •     •  10 

*M 

§    ' 

I 

co 

. 

O  C 

*7  C    TH  (M  CO  CO 

5 


RAILWAYS.  1205 

force    in    each    shift   of   10    hours    (although    work   was   carried    on 
with  day  and  night  shifts  during  a  short  period)  : 

1  foreman. 

3  machine   drillers. 

3  machine  driller  helpers. 

1  muck  boss. 
10  muckers,  2  in  head  and  8  on  bench. 

1  light  tender. 

1  man  on  dump. 

1  man  on  cars. 

1  horse. 

1  engineer. 

1  fireman. 

1  blacksmith. 
Making  24  men  and  1  horse  per  shift. 

The  timbering  was  not  kept  up  with  the  bench,  as  the  material 
stood  sufficiently  well  for  the  men  to  work,  although  it  was  con- 
sidered dangerous  at  times. 

There  were  used  in  blasting  21  or  22  holes  in  the  heading  8  to  10 
ft.  deep,  and  the  bench  was  taken  out  in  two  lifts  generally.  The 
heading  was  run  from  40  to  60  ft.  ahead  of  the  bench  and  scaffold- 
ing used  to  dump  the  muck  from  heading  directly  into  the  cars 
from  above,  two  plank  runways  supported  on  trestle  being  used  for 
the  purpose. 

The  steam  plant  was  discontinued  on  April  14,  1906,  as  the  heat 
from  the  escaping  steam  at  the  drills  made  the  tunnel  too  hot  for 
the  men  to  work.  The  progress  with  the  steam  plant  was  satis- 
factory with  the  above  exception  and  seemed  to  be  about  the  limit 
that  steam  can  be  used  economically,  viz.,  250  ft.  from  the  end  of 
tunnel.  The  steam  was  carried  from  the  boilers  to  the  drills  in  a 
2y2-in.  pipe  and  the  escaping  steam  was  carried  from  the  drills  back 
out  of  the  tunnels  in  a  2-in.  pipe  enclosed  in  a  wooden  box  with 
the  2^ -in.  steam  pipe  to  decrease  the  heat.  The  progress  during 
the  84  days  that  the  steam  plant  was  used  was  250  ft.,  and  the 
progress  made  while  the  air  drills  were  working  was  about  26  ft. 
per  day,  so  that  about  the  same  progress  was  made  during  the 
steam  plant's  operation  as  with  the  air  plant,  which  was  26.2  -ft. 
This  might  be  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  from  the  time  that 
the  steam  plant  was  discontinued,  April  14,  1906,  until  April  28, 
1906  (14  days),  when  the  air  plant  was  started,  there  was  not 
much  work  done  in  the  tunnel  excepting  to  work  on  the  bench, 
which  was  considerably  behind  at  that  time.  From  the  time  the 
air  plant  was  installed  until  Sept.  25,  1906,  150  days,  the  tunnel 
was  worked  continuously  and  was  practically  finished.  The  time 
from  Sept.  25  to  Oct.  8,  the  time  that  the  tunnel  is  shown  as 
completed  in  Table  II,  was  employed  in  dressing  up  and  completing 
the  timbering  of  tunnel.  The  actual  days  worked  on  the  tunnel 
were  234,  making  the  actual  progress  while  work  was  going  on  3 
ft.  per  day.  Considerable  trouble  was  had  in  keeping  the  force 


1206 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Is 


C  • 

1  g 


us 

co     oo 


I 


as  - 


®    3 
fa  t-s 


:     :  SS  3 

I      !  &  £? 

.  to  to 

.  o  o 


:    :  £  5 


o  o 

O    <M 


to  to 
o  o 

to  oo 


• 

I! 

. 


s  s 


w    .  g   ;^  -J3^   ;^     >?  .^>? 

^optliii^^-l^Iji  sffi^i 


RAILWAYS. 


120' 


t-  1-1  >> 

05  Ifl    C 

00  N  «  ^£J 

«5  t—  —  « 


®b 

co  C 


05               0 

C                  co 

t-  ^_,rrt 
(BUg 

05               00 

N~sK    ^2 

:        uw 

c 

S             0  . 
q             C*  C 

0 

o          co'          c. 
co          10 

;      "  gi      ^S 

« 

I 

< 

rt-             « 
0                r-3                C 

5             <M  >. 

1              10   g 

0             C<i  rf  .               rH<55 

BUn              <M 

c 

CN 

C 

:;     H^.-^bol^s 

-co^w^voS 


73  .        n2  C 


8S««J«-*-s?ay|DB«sS  ^Pgp'-s^o    t-«->> 

lfili!:ll|llfll^  JlilliM^ 


c 

1 


1208 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


up  to  the  standard   number  in  this  tunnel  on  account  of  the  dan- 
gerous character  of  the  rock. 

The  cost  of  this  tunnel  was  as  shown   in  Table  III    (the  length 
being  699  ft,  involving  12,988  cu.  yds.  excavation)  : 

TABLE  III — COST  OF  TUNNEL. 


Compressor  and  Steam  Plant. 
Lighting  compressor  house,  125  gals,  oil  at  40c....$ 
Dep.    of    boilers    comp.    plant    drills,    etc.,    30%    of 
original  cost  at  end  of  track                    

Per 

[in.  ft. 
0.072 

3.044 

Per 
cu.  yd. 
$0.004 

0.164 

Lubricating  oil  for  compressor    

0.086 

0.005 

Freighting  machinery  for  plant,  25  tons  at  50c  per 
ton  mile  

0.072 

0.004 

Lubricating  oils  for  drills 

0  046 

0.002 

Machinist   repairing  plant  

0.153 

0.008 

Building   for    compressor    plant    (mtls.    $184,    labor 
$330)      

0  470 

0.025 

Total  compressor  and  steam  plant        .  .        :        $ 

3  943 

$0.212 

Fuel. 
Coal  at  end  of  track  (266  tons  at  $8  80)    $ 

3.346 

$0.181 

Freighting  266  tons  coal  from  end  of  track,  at  50c 
per  ton  mile          

0.761 

0.041 

Miscellaneous  labor  hauling  coal  and  ashes  8  mos. 
at    $85  00                             .           

0  972 

0.052 

Horses,  hauling  coal  and  ashes  8  mos.,  at  $48.00.  .. 

0.549 

0.030 

Total    fuel  $ 

5.628 

$0.304 

Enginemen,  Etc.  —  Compr.  Plant. 
5  mos.  engrs.,  at  $250  per  mo.   (2  men)  $ 

1.788 

$0.096 

150  days  firemen    at  $3  00              ...           .  .        

0.644 

0.035 

82  days  firemen    at  $6  00   (2  men) 

0  704 

0  038 

Total  engineers  and  firemen  $ 

3.136 

$0.169 

Pipe  Line. 
Dep.  of  pipe  line  and  fittings,  60%  of  1st  cost  $ 

0.359 

$0.019 

Hose  and  parts,   1st  cost  

1.762 

0.095 

Laying  pipe  line    800  ft    at  20c 

0  229 

0  012 

Total  pipe  line                                                                 $ 

2  350 

$0  126 

Lighting  Tunnel. 
Candles    $ 

0.705 

$0.038 

Coal    oil 

1  043 

0.056 

Gasoline     

0.300 

0.016 

Buckeye  lights  and  torches  (dep.,  50%  of  $160,  first 
cost)      

0  113 

0.006 

Freight  hauling  17  tons  4  miles,  at  40c  per  ton  mile 
Labor,  245  days,  attended  lights,  at  $6  day  

0.039 
2.103 

0.002 
0.114 

Total,  lighting  tunnel.  .                                                $ 

4  303 

$0.232 

Blacksmithing. 
265  days,  at  $9.00   (2  men)                                                $ 

5  686 

0.307 

14.8  tons  coal,  at  $20  per  ton,  at  end  of  track  
14.8  hauled  from  end  track  to  tunnel,  at  40c  per  ton 
mile,  —  $1.60  per  ton  

0.423 
0.034 

0.023 
0.002 

Depreciation  of  tools  (50%  of  $316,  first  cost)  

0.226 

0.012 

Total    blacksmithing.  .                                               ..$ 

6.369 

$0.344 

RAILWAYS. 


1209 


Engineering  and  Superintendence. 


Engineering     

$     2  861 

$0  155 

Superintendence    .  .  .  .-  

2  575 

0  139 

Total  engineering  and  superintendence. 

$      5  436 

$0  294 

Labor  Excavating. 
Bonus    

$      2  111 

$0  114 

Labor,  including  shift  bosses  

76  226 

4  116 

Horses,  496  days  at  $1.50  

1  064 

0  058 

Total  labor  in  tunnel  excavation  

.  .  .$   79.401 

4  288 

Explosives. 
Explosives,    powder  

$   11  273 

$0  601 

Fuses,  caps,  exploders,  lead  wires  

1  072 

Total  explosives  

$   12  345 

$0  668 

Materials. 
Tools,   hand  

$      0  193 

$0  Oil 

Tools,  drill  steel,  dep.  50%  first  cost.  . 

0  317 

0  017 

Cars,    tracks,    dep  . 

0  556 

0  030 

Miscellaneous  hardware  and  sundries  

.  .  .        0  614 

0  033 

Lumber  for  scaffolding  and  miscl.,   39,383  ft.  B. 
at    $12.00  

M., 

0  684 

0037 

Hauling  above  material,  112  tons,  at  $1  60 

0  256 

0  014 

Total    materials  

$      2  620 

$0  14? 

Total  making  roads  and  trails  

$      1  717 

$0  093 

Total    excavation  

$   96  083 

Total  timber  lining   (see  Table  IV)  .. 

$   11  205 

$0  60b 

Total  cost  of  tunnel  

$138  453 

$7  477 

Summary. 
Compressor  and  steam  plant    . 

Per 
lin.  ft. 
$      3  943 

Per 
cu.  yd. 

$0  212 

Fuel  compressor  and  steam  plant  

5  628 

0  304 

Engineers  and  firemen  compressor  plant  

3.136 

0.169 

Total   compressor   plant 

$   12  707 

$0  685 

Pipe  line  connections,  etc  

2  350 

$  126 

Grand  total   compressor  plant 

$    15  057 

$0  811 

Lighting    tunnel  

4  303 

0  232 

Blacksmithing     

6  369 

0.344 

Labor   on    excavation 

79  401 

4  288 

Explosives    

12  345 

0  668 

Material  used  in  excavation  for  scaffolding,  etc.. 

2.620 
1  717 

0.142 
0  093 

Timber    lining 

11  205 

0  605 

Engineering  and   superintendence  

5  436 

0  294 

Total  cost  of  tunnel.  . 

..$138.453 

$7.477 

There  were  63.3  Ibs.  of  dynamite  used  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  or 
3.57  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd. 

There  were  nearly  30  lin.  ft.  of  hole  drilled  per  lin.  ft.  of 
tunnel,  or  1.6  lin.  ft.  of  drill  hole  per  cu.  yd.  The  extravagantly 


1210  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

expensive   cost   of   this   drilling  is   seen  when   reduced   to   the   cost 
per  lin.  ft.  of  drill  hole: 

Per  ft. 
of  hole. 

Total  compressor  plant  charges  ($15.057  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel)  .$0.51 
Wages  of  drillers  and  helpers 0.23 

Total  per  ft.  of  drill  hole $0.74 

The  plant  used  on  this  tunnel  was  as  follows : 

1  40  hp.  firebox,  water  bottom  boiler  with  stack  injector  and 
feed  pump. 

1  12x12x14  inch  Franklin  straight  line  air  compressor,  steam 
driven,  capacity  350  cu.  ft.  of  air  per  minute. 

1  30-inch  by  10  ft.  air  receiver. 
750  ft.  4-inch  gas  pipe. 

400  ft.  2  % -inch  gas  pipe. 

300  ft.  1-inch  gas  pipe. 

450  ft.  1-inch  armored  rubber  air  hose. 

150  ft.  2-inch  armored  rubber  air  hose. 

2  314  Rand  drills. 
43%  Rand  drills. 
22%  Rand  drills. 
5  tripods. 

3  columns. 
5  arms. 

1,000  Ibs.  X  steel. 

Blacksmith  outfit. 

Pipe  tools. 

Pipe  fittings. 

Repair  parts  for  drills. 

TABLE  IV — COST  OF  TIMBER  LINING. 

Per 
Company  force,    148   ft.   tunnel   lining.  Total.         lin.  ft. 

80  cords  wood,  at  $3.32  per  cord $    266.57         

80  cords  wood,  at  $3.00  per  cord 240.00         


Total  cord  wood $    506.57 

5,400  ft.  B.  M.   timber,  at  $22.22 1,199.88 

566  Ibs.  iron,  at  5c 28.33 

5,400   ft.   B.   M.   timber,  at   $12..  ...       648.00 


Total    for    timber $1,876.21 


Total  for  148  ft.  lin.  lining $2,382.78     $16.010 


RAILWAYS.  1211 

Contract  for  248  lin.  ft. 

952   Ibs.   iron,   at  5c 47.60  $   0.192 

Lumber  on  hand 667.76  2.693 

106,530  ft.  B.  M.  timber,  at  $12,  at  end  of  track.  .  1,278.36  5.154 

106,550  ft.  B.  M.  timber,  at  $20 2,130.60  8.591 

Timber  framed  on  hand 84.00  0.339 

Total  timber  for  248  ft.  tunnel .  .$4,208.32  $16.969 

99.74   cords   wood,   at   $4,   labor 398.96         

90.56   cords   wood,    at    $3,    labor 271.68         

190.30   cords  wood,  at  $3,  material  end  track.  .  .  .  570.90 


Total   cords  wood   back   filling $1,241.54     $  5.006 

Cost   of   248   lin.   ft.   lining ....$5,449.86      $21.975 


Total  for   396   lin.   ft.   tunnel   lining $7,832.64      $19.782 


Total  for   699   lin.   ft.   tunnel  lining $7,832.64      $11,205 

The  wage  scale  was  as  follows: 

Position.                                                                   Per  month.  Per  day. 

Superintendent    *$300 

Walking   boss *   175 

Shift    bosses t$5.00 

Muck  bosses t  4.00 

Machine    drillers t  4.00 

Machine    helpers f  3.00 

Carpenters     f  4.00 

Blacksmiths    t  4.50 

Powder    thawer t  3.50 

Machinist     t  125  

Engineers    t  125  .... 

Firemen     |3.00 

Muckers     t2.75  to  3.00 

Carmen     f2.75  to  3.00 

Other  general  labor f  2.75 

*And  board.     tPaid  their  own  board  at  $6  per  week. 

The  prices  of  explosives  were  as  follows : 

Per  Ib. 

Dynamite,  70  per  cent $0.186 

Dynamite,  60  per  cent 0.170 

Dynamite,  40  per  cent 0.160 

Black  powder , 075 

Champion  powder 110 

Vigorite 120 

Trimiff  .110 

per  100. 

Caps $0.90 

Per 

100  ft. 

Fuse $0.75 

Electric  exploders,  4'  to  14'  leads,  average  all  lengths,- 10  ft...  5.00 

Tunnels  Nos.  2,  3,  6  and  7. — The  character  of  rock  in  all  these 
tunnels  was  practically  the  same,  being  a  hard  blocky  slate  with 
fractures  at  right  angles  to  the  axis  of  tunnels.  The  rock  drilled 
and  broke  easily  and  almost  to  the  theoretical  lines  of  the  tunnel, 
and  did  not  require  any  timbering,  for  the  present  at  least. 


1212  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  standard  cross  section  was  14  ft.  wide  between  side  walla 
and  21  ft.  between  top  of  rails  and  clearance  at  top  of  tunnel. 

The  lighting  was  with  torches  and  Wells  standard  lights,  one 
of  the  latter  in  each  face  of  tunnel,  and  gave  good  satisfaction,  the 
electric  lighting  plant  that  was  bought  for  the  purpose  not  being 
used. 

Lbs. 

Explosives  used  in  these  tunnels  were 90,394 

Per  lineal  foot  of  tunnel 44.7 

Per  cubic  yard  in  tunnel 3.57 

Per  lineal  foot  of  hole  drilled  in  tunnel 1.46 

The  work  was  carried  on  in  the  same  manner  as  tunnel  No.  1, 
viz.:  using  21  holes  in  the  heading,  8  ft.  deep,  and  the  bench 
taken  out  generally  in  two  lifts,  the  muck  taken  from  the  headings 
on  wheelbarrows  by  two  men  and  wheeled  on  planks  supported 
by  trestles  and  dumped  directly  into  the  cars  from  the  wheel- 
barrows. The  work  was  carried  on  in  shifts  of  10  hours  each, 
part  of  the  time  day  and  night,  with  the  following  force  in  each 
shift,  viz. : 

1  horse. 

1  foreman. 

1  muck  boss. 

3  machine  drillers. 

3  machine  driller  helpers. 

1  light  tender. 

8  muckers,  2  in  heading,  6  on  bench. 
•  1  dump  man. 

1  car  man. 

1  blacksmith. 

1  engineer. 

1  fireman. 

Making  23  men  and  1  horse  in  all  per  shift. 

When  the  company  took  these  tunnels  over  from  contractors, 
Mr.  Martin  Moran,  who  is  an  experienced  tunnel  man,  was  hired  as 
general  superintendent  to  look  after  the  work. 

There  was  also  trouble  in  keeping  men  on  these  tunnels  on 
account  of  scarcity  of  labor  at  that  time,  and  a  system  of  paying 
a  bonus  of  so  much  per  foot  to  each  man  connected  with  the  work 
after  a  certain  number  of  feet  per  day  was  driven,  was  put  into 
effect,  which  is  shown  in  Table  II. 

The  actual  work  of  driving  tunnel  No.  2  by  air  was  begun  Feb. 
20,  1906,  and  finished  May  12,  1906,  requiring  81  days  to  complete 
the  remaining  280  ft.  or  an  average  of  3.46  ft.  per  day. 

Tunnel  No.-  3  was  driven  from  both  ends;  from  the  south  end 
529  ft.  and  from  the  north  end  426  ft.  by  air  drills!  75  ft.  of  the 
south  end  was  driven  by  hand,  and  the  remaining  454  ft.  by  air 
drills.  Work  on  the  south  end  began  with  the  air  drills  on  Feb. 
20,  1906,  and  finished  July  11,  1906.  The  north  end  was  begun 
Feb.  28  and  finished  July  11,  1906,  an  average  of  3.20  lin.  ft.  per 
day  on  the  south  end  and  the  same  on  the  north  end. 


RAILWAYS. 


1213 


Tunnel  No.  6  was  begun  with  air  June  18,  1906,  and  finished  Oct. 
15,  1906,  requiring  120  days  to  finish  at  an  average  per  day  of  1.61 
lin.  ft.  The  slow  progress  of  this  tunnel  is  evidently  on  account  of 
the  lack  of  power  to  run  three  headings  at  a  time,  as  they  were 
working  in  tunnel  No.  7  at  both  ends  at  the  same  time,  and  it  was 
impossible  to  carry  all  the  headings  on  full  force  at  once. 

Tunnel  No.  7  was  driven  from  both  ends  at  once  time,  but  the 
exact  data  are  not  available  to  segregate  the  number  of  feet 
driven  on  each  end.  This  tunnel  was  begun  May  24,  1906,  and 
finished  Nov.  4,  1906,  requiring  145  days  to  complete  at  an  average 
of  4  ft.  per  day. 

See  Table  II  for  other  data.  Wages  and  prices  of  materials  were 
the  same  as  for  tunnel  No.  1,  above  given. 

These  four  tunnels  (Nos.  2,  3,  6  and  7)  had  a  total  length  of 
2,024  ft,  involving  the  excavation  of  25,257  cu.  yds.  of  rock. 
|  There  were  31.5  ft.  of  drill  hole  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  or  2.43  ft. 
of  drill  hole  per  cu.  yd. 

The  itemized  cost  of  the  work  on  these  four  tunnels  averaged  as 
given  in  Table  V. 

TABLE  V. — AVERAGE  COST  OF  4  TUNNELS. 

Per  Per 

Compressor  Plant:  lin.  ft.  cu.  yd. 

Dep.    compressor    plant,    interest,    etc.    (30%    first 

cost     $   2.402  $0.192 

Lubricating   oil   f9r   compressor 0.032  0.003 

Compressor  building    0.207  0.016 

Machinist    labor    repairing    plant 0.092  0.007 

Freighting  machinery    (60  tons,   at   $2.50) 0.074  0.006 

Lighting  compressor  building    (125  gals,   coal  oil, 

at    40    cts. ) 0.024  0.002 

Total    compressor    plant $  2.831  $0.22f> 

Pipe  Line: 

Pipe  and  fittings   (60%  first  cost,   for  dep.  and  in- 
terest)        0.563  0.045 

Hose   and   parts 0.246  0.020 

Lubricating  oil  for  drills 0.059  0.005 

Laying  pipe  line  from   compressor   to  tunnels 0.673  0.054 

Hauling     (35    tons    pipe,    at    $2.50) 0.043  0.003 

Total    pipe    line $1.584          $0.127 

Fuel: 

Coal  at  end  of  track  (980  tons,  at  $8.80)..  ..$  4.261  $0.341 

Hauling  (at  $2.50  per  ton) 1.211  0.097 

Miscellaneous  labor  hauling  coal  and  ashes  (8 

mos.,  at  $125) 0.494  0.039 

Fire  wood  0.138  0.011 

Horses  hauling  coal  and  ashes,  at  compressor  8 

mos.,    at   $72) 0.284  0.023 

Total   fuel    for    compressor $  6.388  $0.511 

Enginemen,  Etc.: 

Engineers   (8  mos.,  at  $250) ..$  0.988  $0.079 

•    2  firemen   (245  days,   at  $6.00  per  day) 0.726  0.058 

Total   engineers   and   firemen $   1.714          $0.137 

• 


1214 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Excavating: 

Bonus $  1.853 

Labor,   including  shift  bosses  and  muck  bosses.  . .    50.845 
Horses  on  cars,  etc * 0.563 

Total   labor  on   tunnels    $53.261 

Total   roads   and   trails $  0.791 

Explosives: 

Explosives — powder     $  7.593 

Fuse,   caps,  exploders,   lead  wire,   etc 0.722 

Total    explosives    •. $  8.315 

Tools: 

Hand    tools    .  .$   0.130 

Drill  steel    (50%    original  cost  for  dep.) 0.214 

Cars,   tracks,   etc.,    depreciation 0.374 

Total    tools    $~o7718 

Materials: 

Miscellaneous   hardware    and   sundries $  0.414 

Lumber  for  scaffolding  (77,837  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $12)      0.461 
Hauling    (216    tons   lumber,    at   $2.50) 0.267 

Total   lumber   and   hardware $  1.142 

Engineering,  Etc.: 

Superintendence     $   1.253 

Engineering     1.778 

Total  engineering  and  superintendence $  3.031 

Lighting: 

Candles     .  . $  0.474 

Coal   oil 0.704 

Gasoline     0.202 

Buckeye    lights    and    torches    (50%    original    cost 

dep.    and    interest) 0.077 

Hauling  (33  tons  at  §2.50  per  ton,  5  mi.) 0  041 

Labor  attending  lights   (245  days,   at  $6) 0.726 

Total  lighting  tunnel $  2.224 

Blacksmithing  : 
284  days  blacksmithing,   at   $4.50..:..  ..$   0.631 

500  days  blacksmithing,   at  $4.00 0.988 

663  days   blacksmithing  at    $3.00 0983 

19.82  tons  blacksmith  coal,  at  $20.00  end  track...      0.196 

19.82  tons  freight   same,    $2.50   per   ton 0.025 

Blacksmith  tools,   dep.    50%    cost 0.104 

Total    blacksmithing $   2.927 

Grand    total     : $84.927 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  the  foregoing: 

Per 

Compressor  Plant:  lin.  ft. 

Machinery  dep.,  lighting,   frt.    on  same,   etc $  2.831 

Fuel    for    compressor 6  388 

Engineer   and   fireman 1.714 

Total    compressor    plant $10.933 

Pipe    line     $1.584 


RAILWAYS.  1215 

Excavating: 

Tools     $   0.718  $0.057 

Labor   (compressor  plant,  drilling,  etc.) 53.261  4.261 

Roads  and  trails 0.791  0  063 

Explosives,    cap   and   fuse 8.315  0  665 

Lumber,   etc 1.142  o'.091 

Engineering   and    superintendence 3.031  0.242 

Total   excavation    $67.259         i5~379 

Total    lighting    tunnel $  2.224         ?0~m 

Total   blacksmithing    $   2.927          $0.234 

Grand    total     $84,927 '       ?6~791 

The  very  high  cost  of  the  drilling  is  shown  by  the  following  cost 
per  lin.  ft.  of  drill  hole : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Compressor  plant  ($12.52  per  lin.  ft.  tunnel) $041 

Drillers   and   helpers 0.22 


Total     

Tunnels  Nos.  4  and  5. — These  tunnels  were  driven  by  contract, 
and  hand  drills  were  used  entirely.  See  Table  II  for  time  data  as 
to  these  tunnels,  and  Table  I  for  "overbreak"  data. 

The  advantage  of  doing  this  work  by  contract  is  well  shown  by 
the  following  costs,  which  were  the  costs  to  the  railway  company 
at  contract  prices. 

COST  OF  TUNNEL  No.  4   (404  LIN.  FT.). 


2,078 
972G6r 

cu. 
cu. 
cu. 

yds. 
yd. 
yds. 

tunnel 
tunnel 

excavation, 
excavation, 

at 
'at 

$4. 
'$5 

50 

$ 

Total. 

9,351.00 
4,863.00 

Per 
lin.  ft. 

Per 

cu.  yd. 

1,403.5  cu.  yds.  tunnel  excavation,  at  $4.75     7,094.12 

4,544.1   cu.  yds.   tunnel  excavation $21,308.12  $51.47  $4.497 

Use  of  2  cars  160  days,  at  $1.00 160.00  .38  .034 

Horses    for    cars 70.00  .17  .015 

Engineering     670.00  1.62  .141 

Superintendence 392.46  .95  .083 


Total     $22,600.58      $54.59  $4.770 

COST  OF  TUNNEL" No.  5   (304  LIN.  FT.). 

Per  Per 

Total.       lin.  ft.  cu.  yd. 

3,726  cu.  yds.  tunnel  excavation,  at  $4.50.  $16,767.00     $55.15  $4.50 

Use  of  two  cars  136  days,  at  $1  per  day.  .         136.00          0.45  .04 

Engineering     530.00          1.74  .14 

Superintendence      ^.  .  .         389.60          1.28  .10 

Total    cost     $17,822.60     $58.62  $4.78 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  tunnels  driven  by  company  forces  cost 

50%  more  than  the  tunnels  driven  by  contract. 

Cost  of  the  New  Raton  Tunnel.* — Mr.  Joseph  Weidel,  Asst.  Etigr., 

A.,  T.  &  S.  F.  Ry.,  gives  the  following: 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  3,  1909. 


1216  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

During  the  latter  seventies  of  the  past  century,  when  the  Santa 
Fe  Railway  was  built  westward  and  southward  through  Colorado 
and  New  Mexico,  a  tunnel  was  found  to  be*  necessary  in  crossing  the 
divide  of  the  Raton  Range,  a  spur  of  mountains  projecting  eastward 
from  the  Taos  Range  in  southern  Colorado.  This  tunnel  was  built 
during  the  years  of  1878  and  1879,  and  while  it  was  under  con- 
struction a  switch  back  was  used  in  crossing  the  range.  Its 
length  is  2,037  ft.,  and  it  is  on  an  ascending  grade  of  2%  from 
the  east ;  the  summit  being  at  the  west  portal.  The  grades  ap- 
proaching the  tunnel,  from  either  end,  are  184.8  ft.  per  mile.  The 
tunnel  is  18%  ft.  high  above  top  of  rail  and  has  a  clear  width  of 
14  ft.  About  50%  of  the  tunnel  is  lined  with  timbers. 

This  original  tunnel  had  been  in  constant  use  for  about  29  years 
when  the  increase  in  traffic,  size  of  rolling  stock,  and  loads,  and  the 
necessity  of  extensive  repairs  forced  the  company  to  build  a  new 
tunnel.  The  new  tunnel  occupies  a  site  adjacent  to  the  old  one  and 
at  the  east  portal  the  two  are  only  40  ft.  apart,  center  to  center.  At 
the  east  portal  the  subgrade  of  the  new  tunnel  is  about  12  ft.  lower 
than  the  subgrade  of  the  old  tunnel.  The  new  tunnel  is  on  an 
ascending  grade  of  0.50%  from  the  east;  the  summit  being  at  the 
west  portal. 

The  new  tunnel  is  2,786  ft.  long,  17  ft.  wide  at  spring  line,  and  24 
ft.  high  above  top  of  rail  and  is  lined  throughout  with  a  concrete 
wall  of  an  average  thickness  of  24  ins.  There  are  two  shafts  ap- 
proximately 6x10  ft.  in  the  clear.  One  of  these  shafts  is  686  ft. 
from  the  east  portal  and  the  other  1,100  ft.  from  the  west  portal. 

The  contract  for  the  construction  of  the  tunnel  was  awarded  to 
The  Lantry  Contracting  Co.,  a  Kansas  corporation,  organized  for 
this  particular  purpose.  The  papers  were  signed  on  April  5,  1907, 
and  stipulated  that  the  tunnel  was  to  be  completed,  ready  for  track 
laying,  by  March  1,  1908.  There  was  a  penalty  and  premium  clause 
in  the  contract  of  $100  per  day  for  every  day's  variation  from  the 
stipulated  time  of  completion. 

In  what  follows,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  contractor  had 
not  hitherto  been  in  the  business  of  tunnel  building  and  he  conse- 
quently found  himself  without  a  suitable  working  plant  or  organiza- 
tion at  the  time  the  contract  was  signed. 

Mr.  Charles  E.  Higbee,  of  Denver,  Colo.,  was  engaged  as  Super- 
intendent of  Tunnel  Excavation  and  Mr.  S.  A.  Maley,  of  Kansas 
City,  Mo.,  was  engaged  as  Superintendent  of  Concrete  Work.  Both 
of  these  gentlemen  had  had  wide  experience  in  their  respective 
fields,  and  it  was  under  their  direction  that  the  work  was  success- 
fully completed. 

A  central  power  plant  was  installed  near  the  west  end  of  the 
tunnel.  The  principal  items  of  this  central  plant  were,  one  bat- 
tery of  two  horizontal  tubular  boilers  of  100  hp.  and  80  hp.,  re- 
spectively;  one  Sullivan  Straight  Line  Air  Compressor  W.  B.  2, 
20  x  22-in.  cylinder;  one  90-hp.  Armington  &  Sims  steam  engine  for 
driving  the  generators;  two  25-kilowatt  Bipolar  Edison  Generators 
of  125  volts;  together  with  pumps,  tanks,  steam  and  water  pipes 


RAILWAYS.  1217 

and   such   other   appliances  as  are   needed   in   an   up-to-date  power 
house. 

A  secondary  steam  plant  was  located  on  top  of  the  mountain  for 
the  purpose  of  supplying  power  for  operating  the  hoists  at  the 
shafts.  A  100-hp.  boiler  was  installed  and  the  steam  was  carried 
in  pipes  laid  on  the  surface  of  the  ground,  from  the  boiler  to  the 
hoist,  for  a  distance  of  500  ft.  each  way. 

From  the  central  power  plant  at  Lynn  a  4-in.  air  line  was  laid 
along  the  surface  of  the  ground,  over  the  top  of  the  mountain,  to  the 
Wootton  portal.  At  the  Lynn  portal,  as  well  as  each  of  the  shafts, 
2 -in.  tees  were  inserted,  from  whence  the  air  was  carried  down 
into  the  headings  and  shafts  by  2-in.  pipes. 

The  drilling  machinery  consisted  of  10  Sullivan  piston  and  TO 
Jeffrey  rotary  power  drills.  For  ventilating,  2  No.  4%  Baker's 
rotary  blowers  were  secured.  These  were  operated  by  2  7%-hp. 
motors  of  230  volts  and  28%  amperes.  This  outfit  was  moved  from 
place  to  place  as  needed.  The  cages  in  the  shafts  were  operated  by 
hoisting  engines,  using  either  compressed  air  or  steam. 

For  excavating  the  bench,  a  No.  20  Marion  steam  shovel  was 
used.  This  shovel  was  operated  by  compressed  air  from  the  central 
power  plant.  Three  dinky  engines  kept  the  shovel  supplied  with 
cars.  Ten  3-cu.  yd.  dump  cars  were  needed  to  supply  the  shovel, 
5  in  a  train. 

The    rock    crushing    and    concrete    mixing    plant    consisted    of    1 
Ajax  boiler,  an  engine  mounted  on  wheels,   1  Simmons  No.   10  rock 
crusher,    1     %-cu.    yd.    concrete    mixer    of    the    Ransome    type,     10 
1%-cu.   yd.   dump  cars  and  an  incline  for  hoisting  the  loaded  cars 
from  the  tunnel  grade  onto  the  working  platform  at  the  spring  line. 
There  was  also  constructed  an  electric  light  and  power  line  over 
the  mountain  for  supplying  light  and  power  to  'the  camps  and  tun- 
nel.    A  telephone  system  was  also  installed. 
The  grading  outfit  was  of  the  usual  kind. 

Owing  to  the  lack  of  water  on  top  of  the  mountain  the  company 
shipped  in  four  tank  cars  full  every  24  hrs.,  approximately  40,000 
gals,  being  required  for  all  purposes  each  day. 

On  April  25,  1907,  ground  was  broken  for  the  power  plant  at 
Lynn.  While  the  camp  and  power  plant  were  in  course  of  con- 
struction work  on  excavating  the  approaches  at  Wootton  and  Lynn 
was  in  progress.  On  April  3  work  was  begun  excavating  the  shafts. 
The  drilling  was  done  by  hand  and  the  excavated  material  was 
hoisted  by  animal  power.  These  shafts  were  dug  about  8x12  ft. 
in  the  clear  and  were  109  and  115  ft.  deep,  respectively,  measured 
from  the  crown  of  arch  in  tunnel.  The  material  penetrated  was  soft 
sandstone,  hard  shale  and  some  coal. 

By  May  9,  when  the  power  plant  was  ready  for  service,  the  ex- 
cavation of  the  shafts  had  been  practically  completed,  all  of  the 
work  having  been  done  by  hand  and  animal  power.  For  the  benefit 
of  those  who  may  have  occasion  to  construct  shafts  under  similar 


1218 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


conditions,    I  submit  the  following  table,  which  shows  the  cost  of 

excavating  Shaft  No.  1 : 

Foreman,     at     $4.50 %    375.25 

Shaft   men,    at    $3 1,792.50 

Nippers,     at    $2 32.00 

Timber   men,    at    $3.50 56.00 

Teams,    at    $2.50 132.50 

Teamsters,    at    $2 96.00 

327  cu.  yds.  excavation,  at $2,484.25 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  excavation  was,  then,  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor     $7.60 

Explosives     75 

Supervision     65 

Total $9.00 

It  may  be  stated  that  this  includes  the  placing  of  approximately 
20,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  timber  lining. 

On  May  9  the  actual  work  of  tunnel  excavation  was  begun  by 
shooting  the  first  round  of  holes  in  heading  No.  6  at  the  Lynn  portal. 
On  May  24  heading  No.  5  was  started  and  on  May  28  heading  No.  1 


/0N 


Sfcrtoff'ff'  3fcr/i 

Fig.   4. — Cross-Sections  of  Tunnel. 


was  started.  On  July  9  headings  No.  5  and  No.  6  met  at  Station 
7  +  12,  Lynn  end,  and  on  same  date  headings  Nos.  2,  3  and  4  were 
started.  Headings  Nos.  1  and  2  met  on  Aug.  8  at  Station  8  +  10, 
Wootton  end.  Headings  Nos.  3  and  4  met  on  Sept.  8  at  Station 
2  +  00,  Wootton  end,  thus  completing  a  hole  through  the  mountain 
2,786  ft.  long  in  122  days  from  time  of  beginning. 

In  taking  out  the  headings  it  was  found  that  from  12  to  18  holes 
were  necessary  to  cover  the  face  in  a  satisfactory  manner.  The 
center  set  of  holes  was  pointed  so  as  to  remove  a  wedge  of  rock ; 
other  holes  were  then  pointed  straight  ahead.  Those  at  the  sides, 
top  and  bottom  were  pointed  slightly  outward.  The  average  depth 
of  these  holes  was  8  ft.  and  the  diameter  2~y2  ins.  Sullivan  piston 
and  Jeffrey  rotary  drills,  the  former  mounted  on  tripods  and  col- 
umns and  the  latter  on  the  usual  frames,  both  operated  by  com- 
pressed air  at  90  Ibs.  pressure,  were  used. 


RAILWAYS.  1219 

As  soon  as  the  drilling  was  finished  the  holes  were  cleaned  by 
blowing  compressed  air  into  them.  They  were  then  charged  with 
dynamite,  which  was  exploded  by  fuse.  Fuses  instead  of  electric 
exploders  were  used  because  of  tho  former  permit  of  timing  each 
shot  in  such  a  way  as  to  give  the  best  results  from  the  explosives 
used.  For  instance,  the  central  set  of  holes  is  fired  first,  removing 
a  wedge  so  that  the  succeeding  shots  will  have  two  free  faces  toward 
which  they  can  break  the  rock.  The  "muckers"  at  the  bottom  are 
fired  last.  Their  function  is  to  throw  back  the  debris  so  that  the 
drillers  will  be  delayed  as  little  as  possible  before  they  can  proceed 
with  the  next  set  of  holes. 

The  shots  were  generally  fired  just  before  meal  time.  Immedi- 
ately after  they  had  been  fired,  compressd  air  was  permitted  to 
escape  into  the  headings  and  the  ventilating  fans  were  started.  It 
was  thus  possible  to  clear  the  headings  of  gases  so  that  they  could 
be  entered  after  the  meal  hour  without  loss  of  time.  Before  firing 
the  shots,  sheets  of  boiler  iron  were  spread  on  the  ground  just  in 
front  of  the  holes  to  facilitate  the  handling  of  debris  after  blasting. 
When  the  workmen  returned  from  their  meals  the  headings  had 
usually  been  cleared  of  gases  and  fumes  and  the  drillers  and  their 
helpers  would  enter  and  proceed  to  shovel  back  any  rock  that  was 
found  to  obstruct  the  working  front.  As  soon  as  this  was  done,  they 
proceeded  to  drill  a  new  set  of  holes  for  the  next  blast.  The 
debris  was  loaded  by  from  6  to  10  laborers  onto  cars  of  1%  cu.  yds. 
and  %  cu.  yd.  capacity.  The  former  were  used  in  the  headings  No. 
1  and  No.  6,  while  the  latter  were  used  in  headings  Nos.  2,  3,  4  and 
5.  The  former  were  pulled  by  animal  power  to  the  portals  and  the 
latter  were  propelled  by  man  power  to  the  shafts.  From  the  por- 
tals the  1%  cu.  yd.  cars  ran  by  gravity  to  the  waste  bank,  the 
empties  being  brought  back  by  horses  or  mules.  The  smaller  cars 
at  the  shafts  were  raised  to  the  surface  by  hoisting  engines  operat- 
ing cages. 

The  following  is  a  statement  of  the  cost  of  excavating  heading 
No.  6: 

Rate.  Total. 

Machine   foremen    *. $4.50  $    495.00 

Machine  men    4.00  1,196.00 

Machine    helpers     3.50  1,046.00 

Nippers     2.50  507.50 

Muck    foremen     .  . : 3.50  387.00 

Laborers     2.25  2,975.50 

Teams     2.50  315.00 


2,897   cu.    yds.   material  excavated...  $6,922.00 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  for  excavation  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Field   labor    $2.39 

Labor    operating    power    plant 0.31 

Labor   in    camp   and    supervision 0.88 

Powder,  fuse  and  caps 0.55 

Coal     0.30 

Depreciation     0.65 

Total  .  $5.08 


1220  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

A  summary  of  the  total  and  unit  costs  of  all  6  headings  is  given 
below : 

Length.  Cost. 

No.  Ft.       Cu.  yds.                       Total  cost.  per  cu.  yd. 

1  476          3,165 $17,534.10  $5.54 

2  210          1,026 5,550.56  5.41 

3  400          1,845 8,320.95  4.51 

4  600          2,334 13,233.78  5.67 

5  312           1,564 9,274.52  5.93 

6  788          2,897 14,716.76  5.08 

The  material  penetrated  in  heading  No.  1  was  soft  sandstone, 
while  the  other  headings  were  mixed  sandstone,  coal  and  shale.  The 
most  rapid  progress  was  made  in  heading  No.  6,  where  there  was  no 
timber  lining  to  contend  with.  The  average  daily  progress  in  this 
heading  was  12y2  ft.,  while  for  the  last  nine  days  the  daily  average 
was  17  ft.  This,  of  course,  means  per  24  hrs.  About  55%  of  the 
headings  were  taken  out  through  the  shafts. 

In  moving  the  bench,  holes  were  drilled  vertically  about  7  ft. 
apart.  These  were  shot  as  in  open  cut  work.  The  muck  was  loaded 
by  a  No.  20  Marion  steam  shovel,  operated  by  compressed  air.  Ten 
3-cu.  yd.  dump  cars  were  used,  five  in  a  train.  These  trains  were 
operated  by  three  dinky  engiries,  one  switching  at  the  shovel,  one 
taking  the  excavated  material  to  the  waste  dump  and  one  in 
reserve. 

Following  is  the  steam  shovel  monthly  progress. 

July    50  ft.     October    .  ., 355   ft. 

August     420  ft.     November     565  ft. 

September     540  ft.     December    500  ft. 

About  88%  of  the  bench  was  removed  by  steam  shovel  and  12% 
by  hand.  If  we  take  into  account  the  entire  tunnel  excavation, 
25%  came  out  through  the  shafts  and  75%  through  the  portals. 

The  steam  shovel  began  work  on  July  29  and  finished  on  Dec.  23. 
a  period  of  148  days.  Below  follows  a  table  showing  the  cost  of 
removing  29,417  cu.  yds.  of  bench  excavation  by  steam  shovel: 

Rate.  Total. 

Foremen    $4.50  $1,300.50 

Steam    shovel    engineer 6.50  1,839.50 

Crane  men    3.50  897.00 

Dinky    engineers     3.50  1,791.00 

Machine  men    4.00  3,604.00 

Machine    helpers     3.50  3,244.50 

Pit    men    3.00  5,793.00 

Laborers     2.00  6,151.75 


29,417   cu.   yds .  . $24,621.25 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Field   labor    $0.88 

Labor  operating  power  plant 0.09 

Camp  labor   and   supervision 026 

Powder,  fuse  and  caps .    0.17 

Coal    0  09 

Depreciation     o!l9 

Total     ..$T68 


RAILWAYS.  1221 

In  excavating  the  tunnel  no  unusual  difficulties  were  encountered. 
There  was  very  little  water  to  contend  with  and  the  material  pene- 
trated was  sandstone,  shale  and  coal.  About  two-thirds  of  the  en- 
tire tunnel  had  to  be  temporarily  lined  with  timbers.  The  work  was 
done  in  the  following  manner : 

As  soon  as  the  headings  had  advanced  sufficiently  a  gang  of  drill- 
ers was  set  to  work  enlarging  the  section  to  the  full  semi-circle  re- 
quired. Sills  consisting  of  12  x  12-in.  timbers  were  bedded  at  the 
spring  line  on  each  side  of  tunnel,  so  that  the  outer  face  was  a  uni- 
form distance  of  6  or  12  ins.  from  the  face  of  the  concrete.  Engi- 
neers gave  grade  and  centers  for  these  and  in  placing  them  they 
were  set  4  ins.  higher  than  the  theoretical  requirements.  This  was 
done  to  allow  for  subsequent  settlement  during  the  excavation  of 
the  bench.  As  soon  as  the  sills  were  bedded  to  proper  grade,  the 
segments,  six  in  number,  were  placed.  These  were  made  of  10  x  12- 
in.  pieces,  or  an  equivalent  section  of-  3  x  12-in.  or  4  x  12-in.,  was 
built  up.  The  sill,  by  the  way,  was  also  built  up  of  3  x  12  or  4  x  12- 
in.  pieces,  set  edgewise.  The  segments  were  spaced  3  ft.  on  centers. 
'Over  the  segments  3-in.  lagging  was  placed,  this  having  previously 
been  cut  into  3-ft.  lengths  by  means  of  a  circular  saw.  As  soon  as 
the  lagging  was  placed,  the  void  spaces  between  the  lagging  and 
the  roof  of  the  excavation  were  packed  solid  with  stones  of  various 
sizes.  As  fast  as  the  bench  was  excavated  by  the  steam  shovel,  it 
was  of  course  necessary  to  support  the  sills  at  spring  line.  In  this 
case  ordinary  piles  about  12  ins.  in  diameter  were  used.  These 
were  spaced  variously  from  3  to  6  ft.  apart,  according  to  the  load 
to  be  supported.  Where  the  loads  were  light  it  was  found  that 
short  stulls  from  4  to  6  ft.  long  made  of  8  x  8-in.  stuff  answered 
Very  well  for  supporting  the  roof  timbering.  In  such  cases,  hori- 
zontal struts  had  to  be  inserted  to  prevent  the  timbers  from  kick- 
ing in  at  spring  line. 

The  work  of  enlarging  the  section,  the  placing  of  timbers  and  the 
back  filling  was  done  by  the  same  set  of  men.  Owing  to  this  cir- 
cumstance the  records  of  cost  data  are  somewhat  less  satisfactory 
in  this  case  than  in  other  portions  of  the  work.  Of  these  three 
items  the  records  for  the  cost  of  enlarging  the  tunnel  section  are 
quite  reliable.  By  subtracting  this  cost  from  the  total  cost  of  per- 
forming the  different  classes  of  work,  we  have  an  amount  which  rep- 
resents the  cost  of  labor  placing  the  timbers  and  the  cost  of  labor 
placing  the  backfilling. 

The  cost  of  enlarging  the  tunnel  section  was  $2.55  per  cu.  yd. 
After  repeated  trials  the  cost  of  placing  the  timbers  was  ascer- 
tained to  be  $15.55  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  By  subtracting  these  two,  the 
cost  of  enlarging  the  section  and  the  placing  of  the  timbers,  the 
remainder  was  assumed  to  represent  the  cost  of  back  filling.  By 
this  process  of  reasoning  it  was  found  that  the  cost  of  placing 
the  backfilling  was  $1.50  per  cu.  yd.  In  the  abstract  such  reason- 
ing may  be  correct,  but  practically  the  writer  has  little  faith  in  the 
results.  Summing  up,  then,  it  may  be  assumed  that  the  cost  of 
enlarging  the  section  is  correctly  represented  by  $2.55  per  cu.  yd., 
that  the  cost  of  placing  the  timbers  lies  between  $12  and  $18  per  M 


1222  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ft.  B.  M.  and  that  the  cost  of  placing  the  backfilling  was  not  ascer- 
tained. 

While  the  steam  shovel  was  taking  out  the  bench  a  gang  of  men 
was  excavating  for  the  footing  course  of  the  concrete  walls.  As 
Boon  as  portions  of  these  trenches  were  excavated  another  gang 
placed  the  concrete  in  the  foundation.  The  mixing  was  done  by 
hand  on  sheets  of  boiler  iron  placed  in  front  of  the  trenches.  These 
were  moved  from  place  to  place  as  required.  However,  before  any 
concrete  was  placed,  carpenters  erected  a  sufficient  amount  of  forms 
to  define  the  neat  line  of  concrete  at  grade.  For  setting  these  forms 
engineers  gave  the  grade  and  center  points  and  after  the  concrete 
was  once  placed  to  this  line  no  further  instrumental  work  was  re- 
quired. All  of  tile  foundation  concrete,  up  to  the  grade  line  of  the 
tunnel,  was  placed  in  the  manner  indicated  above. 

For  the  real  work  of  lining  the  tunnel  the  contractor  installed  a 
rock  crushing  and  concrete  mixing  plant  in  the  approach  at  Lynn, 
about  200  ft.  from  the  portal.  The  rock  was  quarried  from  the  ad- 
jacent hill,  within  100  ft.  of  the  crusher,  which  was  a  No.  10  Sim- 
mons. The  mixer  was  of  the  Ransome  type,  mixing  %  cu.  yd.  per' 
charge.  The  crusher  was  at  the  top  of  the  approach  slope,  about 
20  ft.  above  grade.  A  bin,  divided  into  three  compartments,  was 
placed  above  and  to  one  side  of  the  track  in  the  approach.  In  the 
bottom  of  the  compartments  were  chutes  discharging  into  a  meas- 
uring hopper.  Immediately  below  the  hopper  was  the  mixer  and 
below  the  mixer  and  a  little  to  one  side  stood  the  cars  that  re- 
ceived the  mixed  concrete.  The  rock  was  carried  from  the  crusher 
Into  the  bin  by  a  small  chain  elevator  and  the  sand  was  handled 
in  a  similar  manner.  The  cement  was  carried  to  the  bin  in  sacks. 
Water  was  supplied  by  a  2-in.  pipe  discharging  into  the  mixer,  the 
amount  being  controlled  by  a  boy  operating  a  valve.  One  man  oper- 
ated the  measuring  apparatus  and  one  attended  the  mixer. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  entire  process  of  handling  the  material 
from  the  crusher  until  the  concrete  reached  the  cars  was  mechan- 
ical and  from  the  bin  to  the  cars  gravity  did  the  work. 

The  crusher  was  operated  by  a  stationary  engine  and  the  mixer 
and  elevators  by  independent  electric  motors.  The  cars  were  handled 
by  dinky  engines.  The  sand  was  shipped  from  La  Junta.  The 
crushing  and  mixing  plant  was  a  complete  success  from  every  poxnt 
of  view. 

Originally  it  was  the  contractor's  intention  to  place  all  of  the  con- 
crete lining,  above  foundation  line,  off  a  movable  platform  at 
spring  line.  With  this  idea  in  view  a  standard  flat  car  was  secured 
from  the  railway  company  and  by  means  of  framework  placed 
upon  this  car  a  platform  17  ft.  wide  and  50  ft.  long  was  supported 
at  the  elevation  of  spring  line.  This  car  was  carried  on  a  track 
laid  in  the  center  of  the  tunnel.  In  order  to  elevate  the  concrete 
cars  as  they  arrived  from  the  mixing  plant  to  spring  line,  an  in- 
clined plane  (Fig.  5)  with  a  narrow  gage  track  and  mounted  on 
wheels  was  coupled  onto  the  platform  mentioned  above.  On  the  flat 
car  was  mounted  a  hoisting  engine  operated  by  compressed~air. 
The  cars  were  pushed  to  the  bottom  of  the  incline  by  dinky  engines. 


RAILWAYS. 


1223 


where  a  cable  was  hooked  onto  them  and  they  were  then  hoisted  to 
the  top  of  platform  by  means  of  the  hoisting  engine.  Once  on  top 
the  concrete  was  dumped  onto  thp  platform  and  cars  returned  by 
gravity  to  tunnel  grade.  The  concrete  was  then  shoveled  into  the 
forms  and  the  idea  was  that  the  arch  ring  would  also  be  turned 


. 


Fig.  5. — Method  of  Handling  Concrete  for  Lining. 

at  once  before  advancing  the  incline  and  platform  to  a  new  posi- 
tion. It  was  found  to  be  impossible  to  turn '  the  ring  fast  enough 
without  delaying  the  placing  of  concrete  in  bench  walls.  A  feature 
of  the  forms  was  to  use  two  40-lb.  bent  rails,  one  on  each  side  and 
meeting  at  soffit  line,  as  ribs  for  supporting  lagging  for  concrete.  It 
is  evident  that  a  movable  platform  will  not  permit  of  bracing  these 


1224  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

ribs  crosswise  of  the  tunnel  axis.  Owing  to  this  circumstance  these 
ribs  lacked  stiffness  and  bulged  out  considerably  when  concrete  was 
shoveled  into  the  forms.  The  long  and  heavy  bent  rails  were  also 
very  difficult  to  handle.  Owing  to  these  drawbacks,  this  method  of 
placing  the  concrete  was  abandoned. 

During  the  short  time  that  the  above  method  of  placing  the  con- 
crete was  in  vogue  it  became  evident  that,  in  order  that  work  might 
be  carried  on  without  interruption,  a  platform  of  considerable  length 
was  necessary.  It  was  decided,  therefore,  to  erect  a  fixed  platform 
at  spring  line  17  ft.  wide  and  500  ft.  long.  Instead  of  the  bent 
rails  for  ribs,  6  x  8-in.  vertical  studding  spaced  4  ft.  on  centers  was 
used.  These  pieces  extended  from  grade  line  to  spring  line  and  were 
cross  braced  about  10  ft.  above  grade  line.  On  top  of  these  uprights 
were  placed  6  x  10-in.  caps,  which  acted  as  beams  for  carrying  the 
loose  2-in.  platform  floor.  The  lagging  was  placed  directly  behind 
the  vertical  studs,  to  which  it  was  loosely  nailed.  The  old  movable 
platform,  mounted  on  a  flat  car,  and  the  inclined  plane,  were  then 
run  up  to  the  500-ft.  fixed  platform  and  the  concrete  was  hoisted 
as  before. 

While  the  carpenters  were  placing  the  fixed  platform,  the  mixed 
concrete  was  brought  in  and  dumped  onto  sheets  of  boiler  iron  at 
grade  line  and  .from  there  was  shoveled  into  the  forms  to  a  height 
of  about  6  ft,  above  grade.  By  the  time  that  this  height  was 
reached  the  platform  was  ready  and  all  concrete  above  this  6-ft. 
line  was  then  placed  from  the  fixed  platform  at  spring  line.  In  the 
center  of  this  platform,  for  its  full  length,  was  a  track  connecting 
with  the  track  on  the  incline.  The  cars,  after  they  had  been  hoisted 
to  the  platform,  were  pushed  by  men  to  different  places  and 
dumped.  The  cars  were  then  pushed  back  to  the  incline  and  lowered 
to  tunnel  grade  by  gravity,  controlled  by  hoisting  engine  on  mov- 
able platform.  The  concrete  was  shoveled  into  the  forms  until  the 
spring  line  was  reached.  As  soon  as  a  portion  of  the  bench  walls 
had  reached  spring  line  a  gang  of  men  erected  rail  ribs  of  a  40-lb. 
section  bent  into  the  form  of  a  semi-circle  to  receive  the  lagging 
for  turning  the  arch  ring.  These  rails  were  generally  made  in  two 
pieces  and  were  spaced  4  ft.  on  centers.  The  lagging  was  2-in.  stuff 
and  was  placed  as  fast  as  the  placing  of  concrete  required  it. 
The  distance  from  spring  line  to  soffit  line  is  8y2  ft.  The  placing  of 
concrete  in  the  arch  ring  for  the  first  6  ft.,  did  not  differ  materially 
from  the  method  of  placing  it  in  bench  walls,  only  a  little  more 
tamping  was  necessary  to  fill  the  voids.  After  a  point  was  reached 
where  it  was  too  high  to  cast  in  the  concrete  from  the  platform 
at  spring  line,  a  small  movable  platform  on  wheels,  about  8x10  ft. 
and  4  ft.  high,  was  pushed  under  the  arch  and  the  concrete  was 
shoveled  from  platform  at  spring  line  onto  this  smaller  platform 
and  from  there  into  arch  ring  until  only  a  3-ft  gap  remained  to  be 
closed. 

This  was  an  awkward  job  and  required  the  closest  attention  on 
the  part  of  the  foreman  to  prevent  the  men  from  slighting  their 
work.  The  concrete  had  to  be  shoveled  in  endwise  and  to  facilitate 
this  the  length  of  the  lagging  for  the  last  3  ft.  of  arch  ring  was  cut 


RAILWAYS.  1225 

down  to  3-ft.  lengths.  The  concrete  for  this  was  made  dryer  to  pre- 
vent it  from  sloughing  back  when  the  tamper  was  withdrawn. 

The  temporary  timber  lining  was  imbedded  in  the  concrete  and  had 
been  so  placed  that  at  least  6  ins.  of  concrete  was  in  front  of  all 
ribs  and  sills.  In  places  where  the  timber  had  settled  or  swung 
out  of  line,  the  timbers  had  settled  to  such  an  extent  as  to  weaken 
the  arch,  the  wooden  ribs  were  replaced  by  bent .  rails. 

The  progress  made  in  lining  the  tunnel  by  months  was  as 
follows : 

Cu.  yds. 

October 326 

November . .  .  1,000 

December     .....;...     985 

January     v .1,986 

February .4,173 

March     '.  .  .  .2,931 

April 1,025 

Besides  the  tunnel  lining  proper,    che  two  shafts  were  also  lined 

with  concrete.      This  was  done  by  force  account.      At  the  Wootton 

end  a  reinforced  concrete  portal  wall  was  built  and  at  the  Lynn  end 

one  of  plain  concrete  was  constructed. 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  placing  concrete,  exclusive  of  the  cost 

of  cement,  was  found  from  records  kept  by  the  assistant  engineer 

to  be  as  follows : 

Fer  cu.  yd. 

Forms  and  platforms,    labor $0.63 

Forms  and  platforms,  lumber 0.54 

Crushing  and   quarrying  rock 0.89 

Cost  of    sand    (no   freight) 0.18 

Cost  of  handling  sand  at  tunnel. 0.18 

Cost  of  handling  cement  at  tunnel. ...  .  0.17 

Cost  of  housing  cement  at  tunnel. 0.04 

Mixing    and    transporting    concrete 0.41 

Placing  concrete  into  forms 0.81 

Removing    forms   and   pointing 0.32 

Supervision   and  camp  labor 0.66 

Labor  operating  power  house.  .  . 0.20 

Coal    0.34 

Depreciation   of   plant 0.65 

Nails,  oil  and  candles 0.03 

Rental  on  rails  and  ties 0.03 

Total     $6.08 

The  lining  of  the  tunnel  proper  was  completed  on  April  15,  while 
the  whole  contract  was  finally  completed  on  June  20,  1908,  444  days 
after  ground  was  broken. 

The  cost  of  the  contractor's  plant  in  this  case  was  estimated  at 
$55,000.  The  outfit  was  purchased  especially  for  this  contract  and 
at  the  conclusion  of  the  work  the  contractor  offered  to  sell  the  plant 
at  50  cts.  on  the  dollar.  This  fact  accounts  for  the  heavy  depre- 
ciation charge  in  the  unit  costs. 

The  unit  costs  given  in  this  article  are  based  upon  records  kept 
by  the  writer  as  assistant  engineer  in  charge  for  the  railway  com- 
pany. A  man  was  employed  to  keep  this  record,  who  had  no  other 
duties  to  perform,  and  the  results  were  tabulated  every  day.  From 
facts  known  to  the  writer  it  is  his  belief  that  10%  should  be  added 
to  these  figures  to  arrive  at  the  actual  total  cost. 


122b 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


The  work  was  planned  and  carried  on  under  the  direction  of  Chief 
Engineer  C.  A.  Morse,  of  Topeka,  Kan.,  and  Engineer  F.  M.  Bisbee 
of  La  Junta,  Colo.  The  field  force  consisted  of  Assistant  Engineer 


Fig.    6. — Cross-Section   of   Tunne:. 


Original  ground 

Fig.    7. — Longitudinal   Section  of   Tunnel. 

Jos.  Weidel  with  an  instrument  party  and,  latterly,  during  the  con- 
struction of  concrete  work,  one  day  and  one  night  inspector. 

Cost  of  Driving  a  Tunnel   in   Earth.* — During  the  past  decade  a 
*  Engineering-Contracting,  July  1,  1908. 


RAILWAYS.  1227 

large  number  of  descriptions  have  been  written  of  driving  tunnels 
through  rock,  but  only  a  few  tunnels  excavated  through  soft  ma- 
terials have  been  described  in  engineering  literature,  and  then  only 
those  in  which  special  methods  were  used,  or  unusual  difficulties 
encountered.  The  tunnel  described  in  this  article  could  not  be 
classed  as  unusual  in  any  respect,  nor  were  any  novel  methods  used 
on  the  work,  but  inasmuch  as  we  are  able  to  give  the  itemized  cost 
of  the  tunnel,  it  may  prove  of  interest. 

The  tunnel  was  on  the  line  of  one  of  the  large  western  roads,  on 
the  outskirts  of  a  town,  crossing  under  some  of  the  streets,  but 
without  many  houses  in  that  neighborhood.  The  length  of  this 
single-track  tunnel  was  2,360  ft.  It  was  lined  with  timber  as  shown 
in  Figs.  6  and  7.  The  cross-section  was  designed  to  have  ultimately 
a  lining  of  concrete.  There  were  about  15  cu.  yds.  of  excavation 
to  the  running  foot  figured  for  the  cross-section  as  designed,  which 
meant  a  total  excavation  of  35,385  cu.  yds.,  not  including  any  slips 
or  falls. 

The  material  excavated  was  mostly  a  glacial  deposit  or  till,  there 
being  at  one  end  some  cemented  gravel  that  had  to  be  blasted  while 
the  other  end  was  mostly  sand.  Temporary  timbers  had  to  be  used 
and  some  trouble  was  experienced  with  the  earth  slipping,  as  the 
method  of  putting  in  the  timber  roof  shows. 

The  work  was  done  by  company's  forces  and  the  following  wages 
were  paid,  the  working  day  being  10  hrs. 

Resident    engineer $250.00  per  mo. 

Assistant    engineer 125.00  per  mo. 

Transitman     85.00  per  mo. 

Draftsman     75.00  per  mo. 

Rodman     50.00  per  mo. 

Chainman    40.00  per  mo. 

Axeman     2.25  per  day 

Extra    chainman 2.25  per  day 

Superintendent     225.00  per  mo. 

Accountant    75.00  per  mo. 

Purchasing     agent 70.00  per  mo. 

Material    clerk 70.00  per  mo. 

Clerk 40.00  per  mo. 

Cook 45.00  per  mo. 

Heading    foremen 5.00  per  day 

Bench    foremen 4.00  per  day 

Track    foremen . 2.50  per  day 

Foremen    2.50  per  day 

Miners     3.00  per  day 

Muckers     2.00  per  day 

Nippers    , 2.00  per  day 

Team   and    driver 5.00  per  day 

Horse  and   driver 3.00  per  day 

Rail     drillers 2.50  per  day 

Trackmen    2.00  per  day 

Dumpmen    2.00  per  day 

Carpenter    foreman "  3.50  per  day 

Carpenters    . .  . .' 2.50  per  day 

Blacksmith     3.00  per  day 

Helper    2.00  per  day 

Timber    inspector 2.50  per  day 

Timekeeper     2.25  per  day 

Mortormen    2.75  per  day 


1228  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  following  men  were  used  at  times  and  paid  tae  following 
wages : 

Electrician     $100.00  per  mo. 

Linemen    $2.50   to       2.75  per  day 

Ceirshop    foreman 3.00  per  day 

Carshop    carpenter 2.50  per  day 

Machinists    $2.50    to        3.50  per  day 

Masons 4.00  per  day 

Engineering  and  Superintendence. — Under  this  head  is  given  the 
cost  of  superintendence  and  the  engineering  work.  The  superin- 
tendence was  a  cost  that  would  have  come  under  the  contractor's 
item  of  general  expense,  if  the  work  had  been  done  by  contract. 
The  two  items  of  engineering  and  superintendence  were  kept  to- 
gether, but  the  superintendence  was  more  costly  than  the  engineering, 
as  the  resident  engineer  gave  only  part  of  his  time  to  the  tunnel 
work,  and  even  the  assistant  engineer's  salary  was  not  charged 
in  full  against  the  tunnel.  The  items  going  to  make  up  this 
charge  were : 

Payroll    $4,582.67 

Supplies   and   inciujatals 174.81 

Board     663.99 

Telephone    for    office 21.30 

Light    for    office 61.16 


Engineering  and   superintendence $5,544.03 

This  gives  a  cost  of  16  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation  and  a 
cost  of  $2.35  per  lineal  ft.  of  completed  tunnel. 

Camp  and  Offices. — A  camp  was  built  near  the  tunnel  site  for  the 
men  to  live  in,  and  an  office  was  also  established  for  the  superin- 
tendent and  the  engineers.  A  temporary  depot  was  built,  and  a 
freight  house  to  store  supplies.  Electric  lights  were  used  in  some 
of  these  buildings,  and  water  was  also  placed  in  some,  being 
procured  from  the  town. 

The  total  cost  of  camp  was  $3,177.93,  and,  as  some  of  the  builJ- 
ings  were  sold  and  the  depot  was  given  to  the  operating  department 
of  the  road,  a  credit  of  $492  was  made  to  this  account,  making  the 
net  cost  of  the  camp  $2,685.93.  This  means  a  cost  per  cu.  yd. 
of  excavation  of  8  cts.,  and  a  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  of  $1.14. 
When  work  is  done  by  contract  the  item  of  camp  comes  under 
general  expense,  but,  as  a  contractor  usually  charges  his  men  a 
small  rental  for  houses  or  bunks,  there  are  generally  enough  credits 
made  to  the  camp  account  to  balance  it. 

Plant. — In  spite  of  the  length  of  this  tunnel,  being  such  as  to 
class  it  as  a  long  tunnel,  a  compressor  plant  was  not  used,  but 
an  electric  motor  was  installed  and  used  in  operating  a  motor  car  to 
haul  material  from  the  tunnel.  The  motor  had  been  used  on  some 
other  job  and  had  to  be  repaired.  The  total  charge  for  motor, 
supplies,  repairs,  operation  and  power  was  $3,132.29.  When  the 
tunnel  was  finished  the  motor  was  sent  to  another  tunnel  that 
was  being  driven  and  a  credit  was  made  for  the  motor  of  $1,606.36, 
and  $360  for  power  furnished  for  other  purposes,  leaving  a  net 
•harge  of  $1,165.93.  The  cost  per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation  was  3  cts., 


RAILWAYS.  1229 

while  the  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  was  49  cts.     In  contract  work 
this  item  would  be  classed  under  the  head  of  plant. 

Tools. — The  tools  used  on  the  job  were  small  ones  for  the  excava- 
tion and  timber  work,  with  the  exception  of  the  electric  locomotives 
and  the  cars  for  hauling  earth  and  timber.  The  cost  of  the  tools 
and  supplies  was  $6,520.04.  The  cost  of  repairing  and  maintaining 
these  was : 

Labor     .  ..$2,684.95 

Coal 135.38 

Lumber     195.76 

Iron     417.64 


Total 


This  makes  a  total  expenditure  for  tools  of  $9,953.77.  .  At  the 
end  of  the  job,  a  credit  was  made  of  $3,929.16  for  tools  and  supplies 
sent  to  another  job,  leaving  a  net  charge  for  tools  of  $6,024.61. 
This  charge  properly  belongs  under  the  item  of  plant,  yet,  inasmuch 
as  the  depreciation  on  small  tools  is  much  greater  than  on  ma- 
chinery, it  is  well  to  keep  a  separate  account  of  tools.  The  cost 
per  cu.  yd.  for  tools  was  17  cts.,  while  the  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of 
tunnel  was  $2.55. 

Explosives. — A  car  load  of  Forcite  dynamite  was  bought  for  the 
job,  but  only  a  small  part  of  it  was  used.  The  strength  was  40 
per  cent,  and  it  cost  12%  cts  per  Ib.  Two  30-hole  exploding 
batteries  were  bought,  and  electrical  exploders  to  use  with  the 
batteries.  The  total  cost  of  explosives  was: 

Dynamite   and   exploders $2,638.48 

2    batteries    80.00 

Wire     40.00 

Total     $2,758.48 

At  the  end  of  the  job,  the  batteries  and  unused  explosives  were 
sent  to  another  piece  of  work.  A  credit  of  $60  was  made  for  the 
two  batteries,  and  $2,030.29  was  credited  for  the  explosives. 
Consequently  there  remained  a  net  charge  of  $668.19  for  blasting. 
This  makes  a  charge  of  2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  and  28  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 
of  tunnel. 

Tunnel  Excavation. — The  excavation  was  done  in  the  usual 
manner.  The  heading  was  excavated  and  timbered,  then  widened 
out  and  the  roof  supported  in  the  manner  shown  in  the  illustrations, 
with  the  addition  of  temporary  props.  Then  the  bench  was 
excavated  and  the  permanent  timbering  finished.  The  excavated 
material  was  wheeled  out  of  the  heading  in  wheelbarrows,  and 
horses  were  used  in  pulling  the  cars  from  the  bench  excavation  to 
the  dump,  but  as  the  haul  became  long,  the  electric  locomotives 
previously  referred  to  were  used.  Candles  were  used  to  give  light 
in  the  headings,  the  expense  for  this  being  $116.71.  Electric  wire 
was  strung  for  the  motors  and  also  for  lighting  purposes.  The 
costs  for  the  hauling  has  been  included  in  that  for  plant,  but  this 
work  for  the  lighting  and  the  power  rented,  with  the  lights,  wires, 
etc.,  cost  $1,191.57,  making  a  total  cost  of  $1,308.28.  This  makes  a 


1230  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

cost  of   4   cts.   per  cu.   yd.   for  lights,   and   55   cts.   per  lin.   ft.   of 
tunnel. 

Another  item  of  cost  was  some  incidentals  on  the  outside  of  the 
tunnel,  such  as  small  drains  at  street  crossings,  some  clearing, 
a  temporary  trestle,  the  blocking  up  of  a  warehouse,  and  other 
details  on  which  $1,158.27  was  spent  for  materials  and  labor. 
For  these  incidentals  the  cost  per  cu.  yd.  was  3  cts.  and  the  cost 
per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  was  49  cts. 

The  expenses  for  labor  and  teams  was  $75,762.10,  making  a 
cost  per  cu.  yd.  of  $2.14  and  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  of  $32.12. 

Timber  Lining. — The  total  amount  of  timber  used  was  2,434,200 
ft.  B.  M.,  costing  $20,223.18.  This  is  exclusive  of  wedges,  cord- 
wood  and  iron.  Cordwood  was  used, for  packing,  the  plans  calling 
for  533  cords,  but  only  451  cords  were  bought,  the  price  per  cord 
being  $1.50.  The  deficiency  was  made  up  by  using  old  pieces  of 
temporary  timbers  and  scraps.  The  cost  of  the  cordwood  was 
$658.16.  Wedges  were  made  from  2x12  boards,  and  cost  to  make 
from  1^4  to  2  cts.  a  piece.  These  were  made  by  contract,  about 
15,000  being  used,  costing  $2,586.95.  The  iron  and  nails  used  cost 
$669.79. 

The  amount  of  permanent  timber  called  for  by  the  plans  was 
1,687,200  ft.  B.  M.  The  average  price  paid  for  this  was  $8.40 
per  M.  In  addition  to  this  747,000  ft.  B.  M.  were  used  as  temporary 
timbers  and  for  other  purposes.  This  cost  an  average  price  of 
$8.10  per  M.  The  cost  of  labor  for  framing  and  placing  timber, 
exclusive  of  the  time  of  the  men  from  the  mucking  gangs  that  may 
have  been  used  temporarily,  was  $8,615.40.  This  gives  a  cost  for 
framing  and  placing  per  M.  ft.  of  timber  as  called  for  by  the 
plans  of  $5.10,  while  the  cost  per  M.  for  the  total  amount  of  timber 
used  was  $3.54.  Separate  record  was  not  kept  of  placing  the 
cordwood.  The  total  cost  of  the  lining  was: 

Lumber     $20,223.18 

Cord    wood     658.16 

Wedges     2,586.95 

Iron     669.79 

Labor 8,615.40 


Total     $32,753.48 

The  cost  of  each  of  these  items  per  cu.   yd.  of  excavation  was. 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Lumber,    at   $8.30 $0.57 

Cordwood     0.02 

Wedges     0.07 

Iron 0.02 

Labor     0.24 

Total     $0.92 

The  cost  of  lining  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  was: 

Per  lin.  ft 

Lumber,    at    $8.30 $8.53 

Cordwood     0.28 

Wedges     1.09 

Iron      0.28 

Labor     3.65 

Total     $13.83 


RAILWAYS.  1231 

Personal  Injury. — No  one  was  killed  in  building  this  tunnel ; 
however,  a  number  of  men  were  hurt,  but  none  seriously.  Various 
expenses  were  incurred  on  account  of  those  injured,  there  having 
been  paid  out  $2,170.45,  making  a  cost  per  cu.  yd.  of  6  cts.,  and  per 
lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  of  92  cts. 

Summary  of  Cost. — The  total  cost  of  the  entire  work  was : 

Engineering    and    superintendence $     5,544.03 

Camp 2,685.93 

Personal    injury 2,170.45 

Plant     . 1,165.93 

Tools 6,024.61 

Expenses     668.19 

Tunnel  Excavation: 

Light     1,308.28 

Incidentals     1,158.27 

Labor     75,762.10 

Timber  Lining: 

Lumber     : 20,223.18 

Cord  wood    658.16 

Wedges     2,586.95 

Iron    669.70 

Labor    -. 8,615.40 


Total     $129,241.27 

The  cost  per  cu.  yd.  for  each  of  these  items  was: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Engineering    and    superintendence $0.16 

Camp     0.08 

Personal   injury    0.06 

Plant     0.03 

Tools    0.17 

Explosives     0.02 

Tunnel  Excavation: 

Light 0.04 

Incidentals 0.03 

Labor 2.14 

Timber  Lining: 

Lumber     0.57 

Cord   wood    0.02 

Wedges     0.07 

Iron     0.02 

Labor 0.24 

Total     $3.65 

The  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel  for  each  item  was: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Engineering    and    superintendence $  2.35 

Camp 1.14 

Personal    injury    0.92 

Plant    0.49 

Tools    2.55 

Explosives 0.28 

Tunnel  Excavation: 

Light     0.55 

Incidentals     0.49 

Labor     32.12 

Timber  Lining: 

Lumber 8.53 

Cord   wood    0.28 

Wedges     1.09 

[Iron     0.28 

Labor    3.65 

Total $54.82 


1232     .  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  total  payroll  on  the  job  amounted  to  about  $90,000  and  it  will 
be  noticed  that  the  amount  paid  out  for  personal  injuries  was 
$2,170.45.  If  liability  insurance  had  oeen  taken  out  for  this  job 
the  rate  would  have  been  less  than  2  per  cent,  hence  money  would 
have  been  saved.  It  is  always  well  on  construction  work  to  carry 
this  kind  of  insurance. 

No  record  was  kept  of  the  slips  and  slides  that  occurred  in  the 
tunnel,  but  some  must  have  occurred  as  glacial  drift  is  apt  to 
be  treacherous  material  to  tunnel  through,  and  this  must  not 
have  been  an  exception  to  the  rule,  as  the  large  amount  of  tem- 
porary timber  used  bears  witness. 

Considering  the  high  wages  paid,  and  the  fact  that  the  work  was 
done  by  day  labor,  the  cost  is  not  excessive,  but  no  doubt  timber 
was  wasted,  yet  the  prompt  use  of  temporary  timbers  in  some 
places  may  have  saved  money  when  heavy  slips  were  threatened. 

The  engineering  and  superintendence  together  were  less  than 
5  per  cent  of  the  total  cost.  This  would  mean  that  the  engineering 
expense  did  not  exceed  2  per  cent,  arid  the  cost  of  locating  the 
work  is  included  in  this.  The  item  of  general  expense,  as  a 
contractor  would  have  classified  it,  including  superintendence,  camp, 
and  personal  injury,  was  about  6  per  cent.  This  could  have  been 
cut  down  a  little  by  taking  liability  insurance,  and  charging  rent 
for  the  camp.  The  plant  and  tool  charge  was  a  little  more  than 
5  per  cent.  The  tunnel  lining  was  25  per  cent  of  the  total  cost. 

The  excavation  of  the  heading  was  commenced  in  March.  Work 
was  started  at  both  ends  of  the  tunnel.  During  April  no  work 
was  done  inside  the  tunnel,  but  in  May  active  operations  were 
commenced  and  night  and  day  forces  were  put  to  work.  The 
headings  were  finished  in  August,  and  the  benches  cleaned  up 
by  the  middle  of  September.  Each  heading  foreman  worked  from 
9  to  10  men,  while  the  bench  foremen  worked  from  15  to  20  men  in 
their  gangs.  At  one  end  of  the  tunnel  a  bench  sub-foreman  with 
extra  men  were  used  for  several  months.  When  work  first  com- 
menced, the  track  gangs  had  from  10  to  15  men  in  them,  there 
being  a  track  gang  for  each  end  of  the  tunnel ;  but,  as  soon  as  the 
work  was  well  under  way,  these  gangs  were  cut  down  to  6  men 
each,  and  at  the  end  only  4  men  were  kept  in  a  gang.  The  timber 
gangs,  consisted  of  a  foreman,  from  7  to  10  carpenters  and  a  timber 
inspector.  There  was  a  night  and  day  gang  of  carpenters  from 
May  to  September. 

Cost  of  Lining  the  Mullan  Tunnel.— The  tunnel  is  3,850  ft.  long, 
20  miles  west  of  Helena  on  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  Falls  of  rock 
and  fires  in  the  tunnel  had  caused  numerous  delays.  The  original 
timbering  consisted  of  sets  4  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  12  x  12-in.  timbers,  with 
4-in.  lagging.  The  size  was  16  x  20  ft.  in  the  clear. 

Concrete  side  walls  (30-in.)  and  four-ring  brick  arch  were  built 
in  place  of  the  old  timbering.  A  7-ft.  section  was  first  prepared 
by  removing  one  post  and  supporting  the  arch  by  struts.  Two 
temporary  posts  were  sent  up  and  fastened  by  hook  bolts ;  and  a 
lagging  was  placed  back  of  them  to  make  forms  to  hold  the 


RAILWAYS.  1233 

concrete.  Several  of  these  7-ft.  sections  were  prepared  at  a  time, 
each  two  being  separated  by  a  5-ft.  section  of  the  old  timbering. 

The  mortar  car  delivered  Portland  cement  mortar  (1  to  3) 
through  a  chute,  making  an  8-in.  layer  of  mortar  into  which  broken 
stone  was  shoveled  until  all  the  mortar  was  taken  up  by  the  stone 
voids.  In  10  to  14  days  the  walls  were  hard  enough  to  support  the 
arches  which  were  then  allowed  to  rest  on  the  walls,  and  the  posts 
of  the  remaining  5-ft.  sections  were  removed,  and  concrete  placed 
as  before.  About  4  parts  of  mortar  were  used  to  5  parts  of 
broken  stone,  which  is  a  very  rich  concrete.  The  average  prog- 
ress per  working  day  was  30  ft.  of  side  wall,  or  45  cu.  yds. 
From  3  to  9  ft.  of  brick  arch  were  put  in  at  a  time,  depending 
.upon  the  nature  of  the  ground.  To  remove  the  old  timber  arch, 
one  of  the  segments  was  partly  sawed  through,  and  a  small  charge 
of  dynamite  exploded  in  it ;  the  debris  being  caught  on  a  platform 
car,  from  which  it  was  removed  to  another  car  and  conveyed 
away.  The  center  was  then  placed,  and  the  cement  car  used  to 
mix  mortar  on.  Brick  were  2y2  x  2%  x  9  ins.,  four  ringings, 
making  a  20-ft.  arch  and  giving  1.62  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel. 
The  bricks  were  laid  in  rowlock  bond.  Two  gangs  of  3  brick- 
layers and  6  helpers  each,  laid  12  lin.  ft.,  or  19.4  cu.  yds.,  of 
brick  arch  per  day. 

The  foregoing  description  of  the  work  is  given  by  Mr.  H.  C.  Relf. 
The  following  data  were  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  July 
17,  1907. 

For  most  of  the  distance  it  was  lined  with  concrete  side  walls 
and  concrete  arch,  but  for  part  of  the  distance  a  brick  arch  was 
used  instead  of  concrete.  T-he  brick  was  used  only  where  it  was 
necessary  to  support  the  roof  by  timbering,  for  wherever  the  roof 
would  stand  without  props  the  concrete  was  used  on  account  of  its 
much^  greater  cheapness. 

The  concrete  side  walls  were  14  ft.  high  and  had  an  average 
thickness  of  2%  ft.  Therefore  each  side  wall  averaged  nearly 
1.3  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.,  and  the  two  walls  averaged  2.59  cu. 
yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel.  The  concrete  was  mixed  1:3:5, 
being,  we  believe,  unnecessarily  rich  in  cement.  The  average 
amount  of  concrete  placed  in  the  walls  per  day  was  50  cu.  yds. 

COST  OF  SIDE  WALLS. 
Materials:  Per  cu.  yd. 

1.33  bbl.    cement,   at   $2.00 $2.66 

0.5     cu.  yd.  sand,  at  $0.18 0.09 

0.75  cu.  yd.  stone,  at  $0.55 0.41 

Total '. $3.16 

Labor  on  Concrete: 

0.01  day  foreman,   at   $5.00 $0.05 

0.03  day   foreman,   at   $3.00 0.09 

0.03  day  engineman,    at    $3.00 0.09 

0.35  day  laborer,   at   $1.75 0.61 

0.42     Total     .  ..$0.84 


1234  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Labor,  Removing  Timber,  Building  Forms, 
Excavating  Etc.: 

0.02  day  foreman,   at  $5.00 $0.10 

0.05  day    foreman,    at    $3.00 0.15 

0.40  day  laborer,   at  $1.75 0.70 

0.47     Total     $0.95 

Miscellaneous : 

0.02  day  engineer  and  superintendent,  at  $5 $0.10 

Falsework  and  forms,  timber  and  iron 0.07 

Tools,    light,    etc 0.10 

Interest  and  depreciation  of  $1,800  plant  at  20% 

per  annum    0.09 

Train  service,  0.03  day  work  train,  at  $25 0.75 

Summary  Concrete  Side  Walls: 

Materials $3.16 

Labor  on   concrete 0.84 

Labor  removing  timber,  etc 0.95 

Train    service    0.75 

Miscellaneous     0.34 

Total     $To~4 

In  the  two  side  walls  there  were  2.59  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per 
lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  hence  the  cost  of  the  side  walls  was  $6.04  X  2.59  = 
$15.64  per  lin.  ft  of  tunnel. 

The  concrete  arch  varied  in  thickness,  averaging  from  14  to 
20  ins.  at  the  springing  line  to  8  to  14  ins.  at  the  crown.  The 
arch  averaged  1.2  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel.  About  20  cu.  yds. 
of  arch  were  placed  per  day.  The  arch  concrete  was  mixed  1:3:5 
and  the  cost  was  as  follows : 

COST  OF  CONCRETE  ARCH. 
Materials:  Per  cu.  yd. 

1.36  bbls.   cement,    $2.00 $2.72 

0.05  cu.   yd.   sand,    $0.18 0.09 

0.75  cu.   yd.    stone,    $0.55 0.41 

Total     $3.22  * 

1.8     cu.  yds.   dry  rock  backing,  at  $0.55 0.99 

Labor  on  Concrete: 

0.02  day  foreman,  at    $5.00  $0.10 

0.12  day  foreman,   at 3.00  0.36 

0.88  day    laborer,    at 1.75  1.54 

1.02  Total     $1.96  $2.00 

Labor    Placing    1.08    Cu.    Yds.    Rock 
Backing: 

0.01  day  foreman,   at $5.00  $0.05 

0.51  day  foreman,   at .$3.00  0.15 

0.55  day  laborer,   at 1.75  0.96 

0.61     Total     $1.90  $1.16 

Labor  Removing  Timbers,  Removing 
Forms,  Excavation,  Etc.: 

0.02  days   foreman,    at $5.00  $0.10 

0.04  days   foreman,    at 3.00  0.12 

0.06  day     carpenter,    at 2.50  0.15 

0.40  day    laborer,    at 1.75  0.70 


0.52     Total     $2.06  $1.07 


RAILWAYS.  1235 

Train  Service: 
0.06  day,  at  $25 $1.50 

Miscellaneous: 

Engineering    and    superintendence $0.07 

Falsework,  timber  and  iron 0.13 

Tools,   light,    etc 0.12 

Interest  and  depreciation,   $1,800  plant,   20%   per 

annum    0.09 

Summary  Concrete  Arch: 

Concrete  materials   : $3.22 

Dry  rock  backing  (1.8  c.  y.) 0.99 

Labor  and  concrete 2.00 

Labor  placing  1.8   cu.   yds.   rock  backing 1.16 

Labor  removing  timber,   etc 1.07 

Train  service  hauling  materials 1.50 

Engineering    and    superintendence 0.07 

Falsework,  timber  and  iron .    0.13 

Tools,  light,   etc 0.12 

Interest  and   depreciation  plant 0.09 

Grand   total    $10~35 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  "train  service"  is  an  item  that  really 
should  be  considered  as  a  part  .of  the  cost  of  the  materials,  for 
the  cost  of  the  sand  and  stone  is  the  cost  f.  o.  b.  cars  at  the  sand 
pit  and  at  the  quarry,  to  which  should  be  added  the  cost  of  hauling 
them  to  the  tunnel — to-wit,  the  "train  service." 

Summing  up,  we  have  the  following  as  the  cost  per  lineal  foot  for 
lining  this  single-track  tunnel  with  concrete : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

2.59  cu.  yds.  side  walls,  at $  6.04  $15.64 

1.20  cu.   yds.    arch,    at 10.33  12.40 

3.79  cu.  yds.      Total .$9.38  $28.04 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  higher  cost  of  the  arch  concrete 
is  due  in  large  measure  to  the  fact  that  1.8  cu.  yds.  of  dry  rock 
packing  above  the  arch  Is  included  in  the  cost  of  the  concrete. 
Strictly  speaking,  this  dry  rock  packing  should  not  be  charged 
against  the  arch  concrete,  and,  segregating  it,  we  have  the  fol- 
lowing : 

Per  lin.  ft. 
2.59  cu.  yds.  concrete  side  walls,  at.. $6. 04  $15.64 

1.20  cu.   yds.   concrete  arch,   at 8.18  9.82 

2.16  cu.  yds.  dry  rock,  at 0.55  1.19 

Labor  placing  2.16  cu.  yds.,  at 0.64 

Total     $28.04 

This  is  a  much  more  rational  analysis  of  the  cost  and  a  still 
further  reduction  in  the  cost  of  the  arch  concrete  might  be  made  by 
prorating  the  train  service  item  ($1.50  per  cu.  yd.  concrete). 
At  least  half  of  this  train  service  should  be  charged  to  the  dry 
rock  backing,  for  there  are  1.25  cu.  yds.  of  sand  and  broken  stone 
to  1.80  cu.  yds.  of  dry  rock  backing. 

The  amount  of  this  dry  rock  backing,  or  packing,  varies  greatly  in 
different  parts  of  a  tunnel.  In  the  first  half  of  this  tunnel  it 
averaged  1.8  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.,  while  in  the  second  half  it  averaged 


1236  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

nearly  2.4  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  In  a  subsequent  issue  we  shall  give 
the  cost  of  lining  a  tunnel  that  averaged  1.4  cu.  yds.  of  dry  rock 
packing  per  lin.  ft. 

As  previously  stated,  part  of  this  tunnel  was  arched  with  brick 
instead  of  concrete.  About  one-third  of  the  tunnel  was  thus 
arched  with  brick,  laid  2  to  5  rings  thick,  and  averaging  1.28 
cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel. 

The  average  progress  was  13   lin.   ft.   per  day.     The  brick  were 
2^x4x8   ins.   in   size.     The 'cost  of  the  brick  arch  was  as  follows: 
Materials:  Per  cu.  yd. 

500  brick,   at    $7.00  $3.50 

1.02  bbl.    cement,    at 2.00  2.04 

0.4     cu.   yd.    sand,    at 0.25  0.10 


Total     $5.65 

1.5  cu.  yds.  dry  rock  backing  at $0.55  $0.83 

Labor  and  Masonry: 

0.03  day    foreman,    at    $5.00  $0.15 

0.03  day  foreman,   at    3.00  0.09 

0.32  day    masons,    at 3.00  0.96 

0.65  day    laborers,     at 1.75  1.14 

0.06     day    sta.    engr.,    at 3.50  0.21 

1.09  days.     Total     $2.34  $2.55 

Labor    Removing    Timbers,    Moving 
Centers,  Excavating,  Etc.: 

0.02  day  foreman,   at $5.00  $0.10 

0.07  day   foreman,   at 3.00  0.21 

0.07  day  carpenter,    at 2.50  0.18 

0.46  day   laborer,   at 1.75  0.81 


0.62  day.      Total    $2.10  $1.30 

Labor  Placing  Rock  Backing: 

ft. 01  day  foreman,   at... $5.00  $0.05 

0.06  day   foreman,   at 3.00  0.18 

0.52  day  laborer,   at 1.75  0.91 

0.59  day.      Total    $1.93  $1.14 

Train  Service: 
0.06    day,    at $25.00  $1.50 

Miscellaneous: 

Engineering  and  superintendence $0.04 

Falsework,  timber  and  iron 0.12 

Tools,   light,   etc 0.12 

Interest  and  depreciation,   $1,800  plant,   20%   per 

annum     0.09 


Total     $0.37 

Summary  of  Brick  Arch: 

Materials   for   masonry $  5.64 

Labor    on    masonry 2.55 

Labor  removing  timber,   etc 1.30 

Train  service   1.50 

Miscellaneous     , 0.35 

Total $1124 

Dry    rock    backing 0.83 

Labor  placing  rock  backing 1.14 

Grand    total  ......$13.21 


RAILWAYS.  123? 

The    cost    per    lin.    ft.    of    tunnel    for    lining    with    a    brick    arch 
resting  on  concrete  side  walls  was  as  follows: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

2.50  cu.  yds.  concrete  side  walls  at  $6.04 $15.64 

1.28  cu.  yds.  brick  arch  at  $11.24 14.39 

1.92  cu.  yds.  rock  backing  at  $0.55 1.06 

Labor  placing  1.92  cu.  yd.  rock  backing  at  $0.76     1.46 


Total     ^ $32.55 

The  previous  remarks  about  train  service  apply  in  this  case  also. 
Not  much  has  ever  been  published  on  the  cost  of  tunnel  lining. 
Several  examples  of  such  cost  are  given  in  Gillette's  "Rock  Ex- 
cavation," but  the  costs  there  given  are  considerably  higher  than 
those  above  recorded.  In  making  comparisons,  however,  the  reader 
is  cautioned  to  compare  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  lining  as  well 
as  the  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  tunnel.  The  character  of  the  ground 
and  the  opinion  of  the  engineer  influence  the  thickness  of  the  lining 
used,  so  that  one  tunnel  may  contain  twice  as  many  cubic  yards 
per  lineal  foot  as  another  tunnel  of  equal  size. 

Masonry  lining  put  in  at  the  time  of  construction  is  obviously 
cheaper  than  lining  put  in  to  replace  an  old  timber  lining.  Not 
only  does  the  passage  of  trains  delay  work,  but  the  cost  of  removing 
the  old  timber  lining  is  no  small  item  itself.  The  work  above 
described  involved  the  removal  of  an  old  timber  lining,  yet  it  was 
done  at  a  very  low  cost,  particularly  when  one  considers  thut  it 
was  done  by  company  forces  and  not  by  contract. 

Cost  of  Lining  a  1,000  Ft.  Railway  Tunnel.* — This  tunnel  was 
lined  with  concrete  side  walls  and  a  brick  arch,  the  length  of  the 
lining  being  about  1,000  lin.  ft.  The  two  concrete  side  walls 
averaged  3.2  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel,  and  the  cost  was  as 
follows,  per  cu.  yd. 

Per  cu  yd. 

1.1  bbl.  cement  at  $2.00 $2.20 

0.9   cu.   yd.    stone  at    $0.60 0.54 

0.5  cu.  yd.  sand  at  $0.12.  . '. 0.06 

Tools 0.04 

Light     0.01 

Falsework,   timber   and   iron 0.07 

Labor  excavating  for  and  building  side  walls 1.75 

Engineer   and    superintendence 0.15 

Work   train    service 0.90 

Total $5.75 

Laborers  received  $2.00  a  day  on  the  concrete  work.  We  are 
unable  to  give  the  cost  of  the  labor  in  as  much  detail  as  was  given 
in  our  Issue  of  July  17,  but  the  total  cost  per  cubic  yard  is  nearly 
the  same  in  both  cases.  The  cost  of  the  sand  was  merely  the 
cost  of  loading.  Work  train  service  (90  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete) 
covers  the  cost  of  hauling  sand  and  broken  stone. 

There  were  four  rings  of  brick  in  the  arch  which  averaged  1.8 
cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  tunnel.  The  brick  measures  2%x3%x8  ina 
The  cost  of  the  brick  arch  was  as  follows  per  cu.  yd. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   14,  1907. 


1238  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Materials.  Per  cu.yd. 

1.1  bbls.  cement  at  $2.00 $2.20 

480   brick  at   $7.00 3.36 

0.4  cu.  yds.   sand  at  $0.50 0.20 

Total     $5.76 

Labor :    Excavating  and   Preparing  for  Arching 
Moving  Centers. 

0.03  day  foreman  at  $4.00 $0.12 

0.06  day  foreman    at    $3.50 0.21 

0.01  day  timekeeper  at   $2.50. 0.03 

0.02  day  blacksmith   at    $2.50 0.05 

0.27  day  laborer    at    $2.00 0.54 

0.39  day  at   $2.44" $0.95 

Mixing  Mortar  and  Building  Brick  Arch. 

0.03  day  foreman    at    $4.00 $0.12 

0.06  day  foreman    at    $3.50 0.21 

0.01  day  timekeeper   at   $2.50 0.03 

0.05  day  brick  mason  at  $3.50 0.18 

0.23  day  brick  mason  at  $3.00 0.69 

0.35  day  laborer    at    $2.00 0.70 

0.73  day  at  $2.65 $1.93 

Quarrying  Rock  for  and  Filling  Over  Arch. 

0.07  day  at  $2.15 $0.28 

Engineering   and    superintendence 0.16 

Work    train    service 0.56 

Falsework,  timber  and  iron 0.07 

Tools,   light,   etc 0.05 

Summary  of  Brick  Arch. 

Materials     $5.76 

Labor,   excavating,   etc 0.95 

Labor,  mix  mortar,  etc 1.93 

Quarrying  rock  and  filling  over  arch 0.15 

Engineering   and    superintendence 0.16 

Work   train    service 0.56 

False    work 0.07 

Tools,   light,   etc 0.05 

Total $9.63 

Summary  of  Tunnel  Lining.  Per  lin.  ft. 

3.2  cu.  yd.  concrete  sidewalls  at  $5.72 $18.30 

1.8  cu.  yd.  brick  arch  at  $9.63 17.33 

Total $35.63 

The  two  portals  were  of  concrete  and  each  contained  250  cu.  yds. 
The  average  cost  of  each  portal  was  as  follows: 

Per  portal. 

275  bbls.  cement  at  $2.00 $    550 

225  cu.  yds.  rock  at  $0.60 135 

110  cu.  yds.  sand  at  $0.12 13 

Work  train  service 150 

Lumber  for  forms 70 

Labor,  erecting  and  removing  for-ms 140 

Labor  excavating  for  and  building  portals 500 

Engineering  and  superintendence 50 

Total $1,608 

This  is  equivalent  to  $6.45  per  CTI.  yd.  of  concrete  in  the  portals. 
The  cost  of  two  portals,  $3,216,  distributed  over  a  tunnel  1,000  ft. 
long,  adds  $3.22  per  lin.  ft.  to  the  cost  of  the  masonry  lining. 


RAILWAYS.  1239 

Cost  of  a  Brick  and  Stone  Lining. — (The  data  on  tunnels  above 
described  should  be  consulted  for  data  on  concrete  lining.)  Drinker 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  ILiing  or  Carr's  Tunnel  (825  ft.) 
on  the  Pennsylvania  R.  R.  in  1868-1869.  Brickwork:  609,000  brick 
in  the  arch  (5  per  cent  broken  and  lost)  ;  10.44  bushels  of  neat 
cement  (no  sand  used  in  the  mortar)  laid  1,000  bricks,  the  mortar 
forming  30  per  cent  of  the  brick  masonry;  the  arch  was  25  ins. 
thick,  24%-ft.  span  and  9-ft.  rise: 

Cost  per  M. 

Bricks  f.  o.  b $   8.80 

Loss    in    handling 51 

Unloading  and  delivering. 1.92 

Laying 5.84 

Cement     5.10 


Total     .....................................  $22.17 

Bricklayers  received  40  cts.  per  hr.  ;  helpers,  17%  cts.  per  hr.  ; 
carpenters,  27%  cts.  per  hr.  ;  laborers,  17  cts.  per  hr. 

Stonework:  1,730  perches  (25  cu.  ft.)  of  rough  masonry  for  side 
walls,  presumably  sandstone;  187  perches  of  ring  stone;  25  perches 
wasted  in  dressing.  The  bench  walls  were  4  ft.  wide  at  the  bottom, 
3  ft.  at  the  top  and  13  ft.  high  : 

Cost  per  perch. 

8uarrying    (1,730   perches)  ....................  $  4.80 
utting   (  1,730   perches)  .......................      4.36 

Hauling    (1,942    perches)  ......................      1.06 

Handling  and  laying   (1,917  perches)  ...........      2.80 

Cement,  1.65  bu.  per  perch  (8  1/6  per  cent  of  the 

Masonry)     ..................................  81 

Total     ....................................  .$13.83 

Stone  cutters  and  masons  received   35   cts.    per  hr.  ;   quarrymen, 


cts.;  laborers,  17  cts.  The  stone  side  walls  were  laid  in  8 
courses  averaging  2  ft.  thick  each;  hence  there  were  52,800  sq.  ft. 
of  beds  cut  ;  and  estimating  each  stone  3  ft.  long  and  dressed  for 
1%  ft.  back  of  the  face  on  joints,  there  were  14,300  sq.  ft.  of  joints; 
making  a  total  of  67,100  sq.  ft.  of  cutting  which  cost  11.2  cts. 
per  sq.  ft.  This  is  said  to  have  been  too  high  a  cost,  if  the  measure- 
ments were  correct. 

Arch  centering  cost  $1,400,  to  which  was  added  $600  for  moving 
the  centering  forward  from  time  to  time  ;  making  $2.40  per  lin.  ft. 
of  tunnel,  to  which  must  be  added  $0.70  per  ft.  for  scaffolding. 

Weights  and  Price  of  Rails.  —  Steel  rails  are  sold  by  the  ton  of 
2.240  Ibs.  The  standard  price  for  many  years  past  has  been  $28 
per  ton  at  the  mills,  Pittsburg,  Chicago,  etc.  Railways  have 
charged  one  another  %  ct.  per  ton-mile  freight  on  rails. 

The  number  of  tons  of  rails  per  mile  of  single  track  is  exactly 
11 

—  of  the  weight  of  the  rail  in  pounds  per  yard  of  length.     Thus  a 
7  11 

track  laid  with  80-lb.  rails  will  require  —  X  80  =  125.5  +  tons  per 

7 
mile  of  single  track. 


1240 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


$41.25 
35.25 
33.75 
41.25 
49.25 
47.13 
45.50 


Prices  of  Rails  Since  1876.*—  We  publish  below  the  price  of  steel 
rails  at  Pittsburg  for  the  years  1876  to  1907  inclusive.  We  also 
include  the  price  of  iron  rails  from  1876  to  1882.  After  the  last 
named  date  iron  rails  were  seldom  laid. 

It  will  be  noted  that  since  1888  the  price  of  rails  has  never  varied 
much  from  the  present  price,  except  in  the  years  1897  and  1898. 

PRICE    OF  RAILS  AT  PITTSBURGH,  PA. 
(Statistical  abstracts  of  U.    S.   Dept.   Commerce   and   Labor,    1905, 

page    539.) 
(Ton  equals  2,240  Ibs.) 

Price  per  ton,  Price  per  ton 
Year.  steel  rails.        iron  rails. 

1876  .........  ......  $59.25 

1877  .............................  45.58 

1878  .............................  42.21 

1879  ................  .  ............  48.21 

1880  ..............  ...............  67.52 

1881  ............  .................  61.08 

1882  .............................  48.50 

1883  .............................  37.50 

1884  .............................  30.75 

1885  .............................  28.52 

1886  .............................  34.52 

1887  .............................  37.08 

„   1888  .....  .  .......................  29.83 

1889  .............................  29.25 

1890  .............................  31.78 

1891  ............................  29.92 

1892  ...................         .  30.00 

1893  .............................  28.12 

1894  .............................  24.00 

1895  .............................  24.33 

1896  .......................      .  28.00 

1897  ..............................  18.75 

1898  ...........  ..................  17.62 

1899  .............................  28.12 

1900  .............................  32.29 

1901  .............................  27.33 

1902  to  1907  ......................  28.00 

The  Cost  of  Track  Laying.!  —  Contracts  for  track  laying  on  new 
railway  construction  are  not  at  all  uniform  as  to  specified  methods 
of  payment,  largely  because  of  varying  practice  as  to  the  time  and 
method  of  ballasting.  If  the  ballast  is  not  placed  at  the  time  of 
track  laying,  it  is  customary  to  divide  the  payment  for  track  work 
in  two  parts  —  (1)  track  laying  and  (2)  surfacing  track. 

Track  laying  involves  the  unloading  of  the  ties  and  rails  from 
the  cars,  trimming  the  earth  to  true  grade  to  receive  the  ties,  deliv- 
ering and  placing  the  ties  and  rails  thereon,  curving  the  rails  and 
joining  them. 

The  railway  company  usually  stands  the  cost  of  loading  the 
ties,  rails,  etc.,  at  the  material  yard  and  the  transportation  to  the 
site  of  track  laying  work.  This  expense  is  charged  upon  the 
railway  company's  books  as  "train  service." 


* '-Engineering  Contracting,  July  8,  1908. 
^Engineering-  Contracting,  Oct.  7,  1908. 


RAILWAYS.  1241 

Surfacing  track  consists  in  shoveling  earth  in  between  the  ties, 
aligning  the  track  and  tamping.  "Where  suitable  material  for  filling 
between  the  ties  is  not  at  hand,  it  is  hauled  in  on  cars  at  the 
expense  of  the  railway  company,  and  the  contractor  loads  and 
unloads  these  cars  at  a  separate  unit  price  agreed  upon.  Such 
material  if  hauled  in  is  usually  gravel,  and  is  called  ballast. 

On  the  Northern  Pacific  Railway  the  contract  prices  for  track 
laying  and  surfacing  have  been  quite  constant  for  the  last  30  years, 
being  about  $250  per  mile  for  track  laying  and  $200  per  mile  for 
surfacing.  The  engineer's  preliminary  estimates  of  the  cost  of 
"train  service"  have  usually  been  about  $100  a  mile,  but  the  actual 
cost  has  ranged  from  $75  to  $150  a  mile.  Summarizing  we  have: 

Per  mile. 

Tracking   laying    (contract    price) $250 

Surfacing    (contract  price) 200 

Train   service    (including  loading) 125 

Total    $575 

Of  course  the  length  of  all  permanent  siding  is  included  in  arriv- 
ing at  the  mileage. 

In  addition  to  this  item  of  "train  service"  there  is  the  cost  of 
transporting  workmen  to  the  site  of  the  work,  for,  under  most 
contracts,  the  railway  company  agrees  to  carry  the  contractor's 
workmen  free  over  its  own  lines.  The  railway  also  frequently 
agrees  to  carry  the  contractor's  plant,  including  animals,  free  for 
some  prescribed  distance.  This  cost  of  transporting  men  and  plant 
has  seldom  exceeded  $25  per  mile  of  track.  This  brings  the  total 
cost  up  to  about  $600  a  mile.  An  allowance  greater  than  this  is 
usually  an  error  on  the  side  of  liberality. 

The  item  that  we  have  called  "train  service"  is  commonly  under- 
estimated by  engineers  who  have  not  had  access  to  the  books  of 
railway  companies,  so  that  an  analysis  of  items  that  go  to  make  up 
this  cost  of  train  service  will  prove  of  decided  value  to  the  majority 
of  railway  engineers.  Such  an  analysis  follows : 

Per  day. 

1  engineman     $   3.60 

1  fireman 2.00 

1  conductor     3.00 

2  brakemen    at    $2 4.00 

1  engine     7.50 

14  flat  cars  at  35  cts 4.90 

4  tons  coal  at   $3 12.00 

Oil  and  waste 0.75 

Total     $37.75 

In  round  numbers  we  may  call  it  $40  a  day  for  a  train  and 
train  crew. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  the  train  crew  is  paid  by  the  month 
and  not  by  the  day.  Hence  the  average  number  of  miles  Of  track 
laid  per  month  should  be  divided  by  the  total  number  of  working 


1242  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

days  in  the  month  and  not  by  the  number  of  days  actually  worked 
in  arriving  at  an  average  daily  mileage  for  track  laying  to  be 
divided  into  the  cost  of  train  service. 

It  must  also  be  remembered  that  the  number  of  trains  required 
can  not  be  determined  by  the  average  haul  of  materials,  but  by  the 
longest  haul  from  the  material  yards  to  the  front. 

Usually  three  trains  are  needed  in  building  a  long  line,  where 
the  track  laying  gang  is  large  enough  to  lay  2  miles  of  track  a  day 
when  working.  Due  to  spells  of  bad  weather,  delays  occasioned  by 
non-completion  of  bridges,  etc.,  the  monthly  average  will  not  be 
more  than  40  miles,  or  1.5  miles  per  working  day.  Hence  3  trains 
at  $40  equals  $120,  which  divided  by  1.5  miles  gives  $80  per  mile 
for  train  service. 

To  this  must  be  added  the  cost  of  unloading  rails  and  ties  in 
the  material  yard.  The  rails  and  fastenings  weigh  about  120 
tons  per  mile,  and  the  ties  weigh  about  200  tons  per  mile  of  track. 
Practically  all  the  steel  has  to  be  unloaded  and  loaded  again, 
but  usually  the  ties  are  delivered  with  such  regularity  that  only 
a  small  portion  of  them  needs  to  be  stored.  Contract  prices  for 
loading  rails  at  10  cts.  a  ton  are  not  uncommon,  although  the 
price  frequently  runs  as  high  as  25  cts.  By  common  forces,  ma- 
terials should  be  unloaded  and  reloaded  for  25  cts.  a  ton.  Hence, 
if  all  the  track  materials  were  thus  handled,  the  yard  expense  would 
not  exceed  $80  per  mile  of  track.  Under  ordinary  conditions  not 
more  than  half  the  materials  are  thus  handled  in  the  yard,  so  that 
the  yard  cost  averages  about  $45  per  mile  of  track.  Adding  this  to 
the  item  of  train  service  we  have  the  total  of  $125  per, mile  of  track, 
as  above  stated. 

Where  all  the  track  is  to  be  ballasted  at  once,  the  present 
practice  is  to  include  the  cost  of  "surfacing  track"  as  a  part  of  the 
cost  of  ballasting. 

To  indicate  how  the  contract  prices  run  under  such  conditions, 
we  may  cite  the  bids  on  the  Portland  &  Seattle  Ry.,  in  1906,  which 
were  as  follows : 

Track  laying,  including  loading  of  track  materials  but  not 
including  unloading  in  the  yard,  $300  per  mile. 

Tie  plating  (fully  tie  plated),  $75  per  mile. 

Labor  on  single  tie  plates,  1%   cts.  each. 

Labor  on  switches,  $25  each. 

Ballast,  27  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

This  price  is  for  gravel  ballast  and  includes  all  the  cost  of 
loading  and  unloading  the  same  and  tamping  it  under  the  ties, 
'and  lining  up  the  track,  but  does  not  include  the  train  service  nor 
the  wear  and  tear  on  the  steam  shovel  which  is  furnished  bv  the 
railway  company.  The  train  service  rarely  exceeds  8  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
and  another  1  ct.  will  usually  cover  steam  shovel  repairs  and 
depreciation.  This  9  cts.  added  to  the  contract  price  of  27  cts.  gives 
a  total  of  36  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  gravel  ballast  in  place.  This  is 
a  liberal  estimate  under  ordinary  conditions. 


RAILWAYS.  1243 

We  give  the  following  as  confirming  the  above  given  estimate 
of  $150  per  mile  for  "train  service,"  yard  work  and  transportation 
of  men  in  track  laying: 

On  the  Seattle  and  Montana  Ry.,  built  in  1891,  the  train  service, 
etc.,  cost  $67  per  mile  of  track  for  79  miles. 

On  the  Idaho  division  of  the  Great  Northern  Ry.  (110  miles 
long),  built  in  1892,  the  train  service,  eta,  cost  $125  per  mile  of 
track. 

On  the  Cascade  division  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.,  built  in  1884, 
the  cost  of  train  service,  etc.,  was  $170  per  mile  of  track.  This  was 
a  difficult  section  over  the  Cascade  Mountains.  On  an  easier  section 
the  corresponding  cost  was  $150  per  mile. 

On  the  Snake  River  branch  of  the  O.  R.  &  N.,  built  in  1899,  the 
cost  of  train  service,  etc.,  was  $154  per  mile,  to  which  must  be 
added  $18  per  mile  for  the  cost  of  transporting  men,  etc. 

It  will  be  seen  from  these  figures  that  engineers  quite  commonly 
underestimate  the  total  cost  of  track  laying  and  surfacing.  Fre- 
quently estimates  may  be  seen  that  contain  no  allowance  whatever 
for  train  service  and  work  at  the  material  yards. 

Cost  of  Tracklaying,  M.,  St.  Paul  &  S.  S  .M.  Ry.— About  263  miles 
of  track  were  laid  in  1892-3  from  Valley  City  across  North  Dakota. 
The  tracklaying  and  surfacing  were  done  by  the  railway  company, 
not  by  contract.  The  track  was  72-lb.  rails  laid  on  16  ties  to  the 
30-ft.  rail.  The  construction  train  was  made  up  of  32  cars,  the  loco- 
motive being  in  the  middle  of  the  train.  The  next  car  behind  the 
locomotive  was  an  ordinary  flat  car  loaded  with  telegraph  material ; 
then  followed  15  box  cars  loaded  with  ties.  In  front  of  the  locomo- 
tive were  the  following  cars,  No.  1  being  the  one  farthest  front. 

No.  1,  Pioneer  car.  This  was  double  deck,  containing  blacksmith 
shop,  store  room,  general  foreman'^  office,  telegraph  office,  two  sleep- 
ing rooms,  and  three  extra  berths.  In  front  of  the  car  was  a  plat- 
form carrying  extra  splice  bars,  bolts  and  spikes. 

No.  2,  store  car.  This  was  double  deck,  and  had  a  store  room  for 
provisions  and  one  for  clothes,  sleeping  berths  for  cooks  and  a 
sleeping  apartment  above. 

Nos.  3  and  4,  dining  and  sleeping  cars,  double  deck. 

No.  5,  kitchen  car,  single  deck. 

No.  6,  dining  and  sleeping  car,  double  deck. 

No.   7,  feed  and  fuel  car,  ordinary  box  car. 

No.  8,  water  car,  flat  car  with  a  2,000-gal.  tank  at  each  end. 

Nos.  9  to  16,  flat  cars  with  rails  and  spikes. 

Work  commenced  at  7  a.  m.,  the  teams  hauling  ties  from  the 
five  rear  cars.  The  ties  were  shoved  from  the  car  down  a  tie  chute, 
provided  with  three  rollers,  and  were  loaded  into  a  V-shaped  rack 
on  a  wagon  holding  25  ties.  The  rails  were  unloaded  onto  the 
ground  from  both  sides  of  the  cars,  and  the  train  pulled  back  out 
of  the  way.  The  rails  were  loaded  onto  two  "iron  cars"  and  hauled 
to  the  end  of  the  track  by  horses.  The  iron  car  gang  would  "drop" 
100  rails  (1,500  ft.  of  track)  in  half  an  hour.  As  soon  as  a  pair  was 
dropped  upon  the  ties,  a  hook  gage  was  thrown  over  them,  at  the  for- 
ward end,  and  the  horse  pulled  the  car  forward  30  ft.  Two  more 


1244  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

rails  were  then  run  out,  and  so  on.     The  tracklaying  force  was  as 
follows : 

Per  day. 

Iron  car  gang,  who  dropped  rails,  22  men  at  $2.25 $  49.50 

Strappers,  who  adjusted  and  bolted  splices,  6  men  at  $2.00.  .  .  12.00 

Spike  peddlers,  2  men  at  $1.50 3.00 

Tie-spacing  gang,  12  men  at  $1.50 18.00 

Men  lining  ties,  with  rope  and  stakes,  2  men  at  $1.75 3.50 

Men  spacing  joint  ties,  2  men  at  $1.75 3.50 

Men  leveling  grade  cut  by  tie  wagons,  4  men  at  $1.50 6.00 

Spikers,   16  men  at  $2.00 32.00 

Nippers,  holding  up  end  ties  for  spikers,  8  men  at  $1.50 12.00 

Tracklining  gang,  6  men  at  $1.75 10.50 

Teamsters  for  tie  wagons   ($35  per  mo.  and  board),  40  men 

at    $2.00 80.00 

Men  unloading  ties  from  cars,  15  men  at  $1.75 26.25 

Men  unloading  rails  and  fastenings  from  cars,  4  men  at  $1.75  7.00 

Telegraph  gang,  8  men  at  $1.75 14.00 

Telegraph  operator  ($50  per  mo.),  1  man  at  $2.00 2.00 

Drivers  of  iron  car  horses,  2  men  at  $1.75 3.50 

Blacksmith,  1  man  at  $2.25 2.25 

Night  watchman,  1  man  at  $1.50 1.50 

Cooks  ($50  per  mo.),  2  men  at  $2.00 4.00 

Baker,  working  nights,  1  man  at  $2.50 2.50 

Waiters,  5  men  at  $2.00 10.00 

Storekeeper,   1  man  at   $2.50 2.50 

Foremen   ($65  per  mo.  each),  5  men  at  $2.80 14  00 

General  foreman  ($150  per  mo.),  1  man  at  $6.00 6.00 


Total     $325.50 

Note  that  the  teams  of  horses  are  not  included,  but  the  drivers  of 
the  teams  are  included  in  the  above.  The  men  were  boarded  for 
$3.50  a  week,  and  this  was  deducted  from  the  wages  of  all  except 
teamsters. 

The  average  daily  wage  of  these  167  men  was  $1.95. 

The  telegraph  gang,  consisted  of  8  men  and  1  foreman.  The  cedar 
poles  were  25  ft.  long,  spaced  30  to  the  mile,  set  5  ft.  in  the  ground. 
The  wire  was  stretched  from  a  reel  on  a  small  hand  wagon  pushed 
by  the  men. 

This  force  of  167  men  and  about  90  horses  averaged  3  miles  of 
track  per  day.  If  we  consider  horses  (not  including  driver)  as 
costing  $1  per  day,  we  have  a  total  daily  cost  of  $415.50,  not  includ- 
ing the  cost  of  operating  two  locomotives  and  trains,  which  may  be 
rated  at  $40  each  (including  wages,  fuel,  interest  and  depreciation). 
This  brings  the  total  cost  to  $495.50  per  day,  or  $165  per  mile, 
including  the  erecting  of  the  telegraph  line,  but  not  including  the 
cost  of  surfacing  the  track.  On  one  occasion  the  above  force  laid 
4  miles  in  10  hrs.  In  dry  open  country,  like  North  Dakota,  this 
method  was  faster  than  working  with  track  machines  and  no  more 
expensive.  In  swamp,  very  hilly  or  timbered  country,  the  track- 
laying  machines  are  especially  serviceable. 

The  track  surfacing  gangs  followed  the  tracklayers  and  surfaced 
the  track  so  as  to  make  a  safe  roadway  and  prevent  bending  of  the 
rails  and  splices  before  the  ballasting  was  done.  These  gangs 
numbered  40  to  45  men  under  a  foreman  and  sub-foreman.  About 
250  men  were  required  for  surfacing,  and  they  went  to  and  from 
work  on  hand  cars,  their  boarding  cars  being  located  on  the  sidings 


RAILWAYS.  1245 

which  were  put  in  about  every  10  miles.  If  these  men  received 
$1.50  per  day,  the  surfacing  cost  $375  per  day,  or  $125  per  mile. 
Hence  the  total  cbst  of  laying  and  surfacing  would  be  $290  per  mile. 

Cost    of    Tracklaying,    50-lb.    Rails. — In    1881    the   following   gang 

averaged  one  mile  of  track  laid  per  day  by  contract.  The  track 
was  not  surfaced  by  this  force. 

This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  "surfacing,"  nor  does  it  include 
'train  service." 

Tie  gang.  Per  day. 

1  panel   spacer,    at    $1.50 $  1.50 

1  tie  surfacer,  at  $1.50 1.50 

2  tie  liners,  at  $1.50 3.00 

3  tie  unloaders,  at  $1.50 4.50 

6  tie  spreaders,  at  $1.50 9.00 

1  waterboy,   at   $1.25 .  1.25 

1  foreman,  at   $3.00 3.00 

Iron  gang. 

1  gager,    at   $2.00 '.  . : 2.00 

2  heelers,   at   $2.00 4.00 

.2  unloaders,  at  $2.00 4.00 

6  iron  men,  at   $2.00 12.00 

1  waterboy,  at   $1.25 1.25 

1  foreman,  at  $3.00 3.00 

Front   gang. 

1  tie   spacer,   at   $1.50 1.50 

1  spike  peddler,   at  $1.50 1.50 

2  nippers,  at  $1.50 3.00 

4  spikers,   at   $2.00 8.00 

5  strappers,   at   $1.50 7.50 

1  waterboy,   at   $1.25 ' 1.25 

1  foreman,  at   $3.00 3.00 

Tie  loading  gang. 

16  men  (4  gangs  of  4  each),  at  $1.50 24.00 

1  waterboy,   at   $1.25 .• 1.25 

1  foreman,  at   $3.00 3.00 

Backspiking  gang. 

1  tie  spacer,  at  $1.50 1.50 

2  spike  peddlers,   at   $1.50 3.00 

4  nippers,  at  $1.50 6.00 

8   spikers,   at   $2.00 16.00 

1  waterboy,   at   $1.25 1.25 

1  foreman,  at  $3.00 3.00 

Lining  gang. 

5  men,    at    $1.50 7.50 

1  waterboy,   at  $1.25 1.25 

Backfilling  gang. 

15   men,    at    $1.50 22.50 

1  waterboy,   at   $1.25 1.25 

1  foreman,  at  $3.00 3.00 

Hauling   gang. 

18  teamsters,  at  $1.80 32.40 

1   waterboy,   at   $1.25 1.25 

40  mules'   feed,   at   $0.40 16.00 

1  wagon   master,    at   $3.00 3.00 

General  force. 

1  camp  boss,  teamsters'  camp,  at  $2.25 2.25 

1  blacksmith,    at    $2.25 2.25 

2  night  watchmen,   at  $2.25 4.50 

1   tool   man,   at   $2.00 2.00 

1  bookkeeper,    at   $4.00 4.00 

1   superintendent,   at   $5.00 5. Of 

Material  train,  fuel  and  wages 24.  ^ 

Total  per  day  and  per  mile $266. 3t 


1246  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  force,  as  above  given,  can  lay  1 V2  miles  of  steel  track  per  day, 
but  cannot  keep  up  the  back  work  and  average  mugh  more  than  one 
mile.  All  ties  are  full  spiked ;  15  ties  to  a  30-ft.  rail ;  50-lb.  steel 
rails.  The  ties  and  steel  are  delivered  to  the  contractor  on  cars  at 
the  last  side  track ;  and  side  tracks  are  about  8  miles  apart. 

A  material  train  is  made  up  of  10  tie  cars,  each  holding  135  ties, 
and  3  steel  cars,  each  holding  60  rails.  This  train  is  at  the  boarding 
train  at  6  a.  m.,  in  time  to  take  the  force  to  the  front  after  break- 
fast. The  backfillers,  liners  and  backspikers  are  dropped  where 
work  had  stopped  the  day  before,  and  the  10  cars  of  ties  (which 
are  in  the  rear  of  the  locomotive)  are  uncoupled  far  enough  back  to 
give  the  train  room  to  move  ahead  with  the  3  cars  of  steel  (which 
are  in  front  of  the  loctimotive)  as  far  as  the  "iron  car"  upon  which 
30  rails  at  a  time  are  loaded  and  pushed  up  front.  The  two  un- 
loaders  in  the  iron  gang  assist  in  loading  the  iron  car ;  and,  while 
the  rails  on  the  iron  car  are  being  laid,  they  throw  off  another 
30  rails  from  the  flat  cars  ready  to  be  loaded  on  the  iron  car.  The 
10  cars  of  ties  are  brought  up  as  fast  as  the  track  will  allow,  and 
only  enough  are  unloaded  by  the  tie  loaders  at  one  time  to  keep  the 
wagons  busy.  At  noon  the  train  carries  the  force  back  to  dinner,  the 
empty  flat  cars  are  sidetracked,  and  another  train  of  10  tie  cars  and 
3  steel  cars  brought  up  in  time  to  take  the  men  back  after  dinner. 

In  laying  the  track,  the  panel  spacer  with  a  30-ft.  pole  and  pick 
keeps  far  enough  ahead  to  do  duty  as  the  roadmaster.  The  front 
gangs  of  spikers  (2  on  each  rail)  spike  3  ties  in  each  panel,  always 
the  joint  and  the  6th  and  llth  ties,  skipping  4  ties  each  time.  Of 
the  5  strappers,  one  untrims  the  plates,  leaving  plates,  nuts  and  bolts 
on  the  joint  tie,  and  the  other  4,  working  2  on  a  side,  strap  up  and 
bolt  the  joints.  Should  the  backspikers  get  behind,  they  are  assisted 
by  the  frontspikers.  Should  the  backfillers  get  behind,  they  are 
reinforced  by  the  tie  gangs,  and  the  iron  gang  and  strappers  can  be 
putting  in  the  sidings. 

Of  the  teams,  16  are  used  to  haul  ties,  1  to  pull  the  iron  car,  and  1 
to  haul  water  to  the  boarding  train.  The  16  teams  haul  14  loads  of 
12  ties  each  per  day,  making  2,688  ties. 

Cost  of  Tracklaying  on  the  A.,  T.  &  S.  Fe  R.  R.— With  a  well- 
organized  force  the  cost  of  laying  and  surfacing  the  Arkansas  City 
extension  of  the  A.,  T.  &  S.  Fe,  in  1888,  was  $292  per  mile  for  a 
month's  work.  On  the  same  road  the  following  force  laid  2  miles 
per  day: 


RAILWAYS.  1247 

Laying.  Per  day. 

15  men   running  iron   cars,    at    $1.75 $  26.25 

2  men  unloading  iron,  at  $1.75 3.50 

24  men   spiking,   at   $1.75 42.00 

8  men  strapping,  at  $1.75 14.00 

5  men    spacing   ties  and   "squaring"   joints,    at 

$1.75     8.75 

4  men  lining  track,  at  $1.75 7.00 

7  men  setting  "joint  and  center"  ties,  at  $1.75  12.25 

2  men  carrying  gages,  at  $1.75 3.50 

2  men  distributing  spikes,  at  $1.75 3.50 

1  man  caring  for  tools,  at  $1.75 1.75 

42  men  bedding  ties,  at  $1.40 58.80 

12  men    ("nippers"),  at  $1.40 16.80 

18  men   handling  ties,   at    $1.40 25.20 

2  men  stretching  tie  line,  at  $1.40 2.80 

4  men  carrying  water,  at  $1.40 5.60 

1  general    foreman 3.33 

1  foreman   iron   car 2.50 

1  foreman   tie    bedding 2.50 

1  foreman  handling  ties 2.50 

1  foreman  tracklining   2.50 

1  foreman  spiking  gang 2.00 

10  extra  men,  at  $1.40 14.00 

22  teams  hauling  ties,  at  $3.50 77.00 

1  team  hauling  iron  car,  at  $3.50 3.50 

Total  laying  2  miles  at  $170.76 $341.53 

In  addition  to  this  the  surfacing  of  2  miles  of  track  per  day  cost 
as  follows : 

Surfacing. 
80  shovelers,   at   $1.40 $112.20 

2  "back-bolters,"    at    $1.75 3.50 

1  foreman  raising  track 2.00 

1  foreman     v. f. 2.50 

Total  surfacing  2  miles  at  $60.10 $120.20 

Train  Service  and  General. 

Superintendent    of    tracklaying $   5.00 

Timekeeper     3.00 

Train  and  engine  crews 15.04 

Engineering    10.97 


Total,  train  crews,  etc.,  2  miles  at  $17.00 $34.01 

Summary.  Per  mile. 

Tracklaying    $170.76 

Tracksurfacing     60.10 

Train    service,    etc 17.00 


Total     *. $247.86 

This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  supplying  and  distributing  of 
ballast  by  train.  On  the  Lamed  branch  15  miles  were  laid  in  7  days, 
but  under  the  favorable  circumstance  of  light  grades,  light  work, 
light  earth  for  ballast,  and  roadbed  in  first-class  condition. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  "train  service"  appears  not  to  in- 
clude the  delivery  of  materials  from  material  yards,  nor  does  it  in- 
clude fuel,  and  interest  and  depreciation  on  plant. 

Cost  of  Tracklaying,  A.,  T.  &  S.  Fe  R.  R. — Some  rapid  work 
was  done  (1899)  in  the  extension  of  the  A.,  T.  &  S.  F.  Ry.  from 
Stockton,  Cal.,  to  Port  Richmond.  The  rails  were  laid  with  broken 


1248  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

joints,  17  ties  per  rail.  One  stretch  of  11  miles  (62y2-lb.  rails)  was 
laid  at  the  rate  of  2,846  ft.  per  day,  with  a  force  of  45  men,  on  level 
grade.  Another  stretch  of  17  miles  (75-lb.  rails)  was  laid  at  the 
rate  of  3,500  ft.  per  day,  with  48  men,  on  a  descending  grade  of  1%, 
with  curves  at  intervals  of  %  mile.  The  best  day's  work,  on  the 
level  grade,  was  5,400  ft.,  with  52  men.  The  force  was  as  follows: 

Foreman     1 

Sub-foreman    3 

Strappers    4 

Iron  car  men 10 

Spikers 8 

Nippers 4 

Tie    line    man 1 

Lining    ties '. 2 

Tie    plater 1 

Spike    peddler : 1 

Spacing    ties 2 

Spacing     rails 2 

Back  bolting   2 

Tie    carriers 10 

Picking  up   materials 1 

Total     52 

Cost  of  Tracklaying,  P.,  S.  &  N.  R.  R.— Mr.  G.  C.  Woollard 
gives  the  following  on  tracklaying  on  the  Pittsburg,  Shawmut  & 
Northern  R.  R.  The  length  of  track  laid  was  8  miles.  With  a  gang 
of  46  men  and  3  foremen  the  average  day's  work  was  2,870  ft.  of 
track  laid;  the  best  day's  work  was  3,290  ft.  There  were  18  men 
and  a  foreman  in  the  tracklaying  gang;  17  men  and  a  foreman  in 
the  supply  gang;  11  men  and  a  foreman  in  the  backtieing  gang. 
Beside  these  men  there*  were  a  locomotive  engineer,  fireman,  con- 
ductor and  a  brakeman.  No  teams  were  used.  Trucks  passed  one 
another  by  raising  one  truck  to  a  vertical  position  on  the  cross-ties 
and  then  allowing  it  to  drop  back  to  an  oblique  position,  keeping  it 
from  turning  over  by  means  of  a  prop  while  the  loading  truck 
passed.  There  were  18  oak  ties  to  a  rail,  and  rails  were  85-lb.  All 
the  work  was  on  a  2%  down  grade,  which  facilitated  delivery  of 
materials  by  gravity. 

Cost  of  Tracklaying  with  Machines.  —  Tracklaying  machines 
do  not  lay  the  track,  but  merely  facilitate  the  delivery  of  ties  and 
rails  on  a  series  of  rollers  from  the  cars  to  the  tracklaying  gang 
of  men.  In  rugged  or  swampy  country  a  tracklaying  machine  is 
especially  economic,  because  the  ties  cannot  be  easily  delivered  by 
teams. 

With  a  Holman  tracklaying  machine,  120  miles  of  the  Washing- 
ton County  Ry.  (Maine)  were  laid  in  1899.  The  best  day's  work 
was  2  miles  laid  in  9  hrs.  with  110  men. 

On  the  Burlington  &  Missouri  River  Ry.,  with  a  gang  of  85  men 
and  a  Holman  machine,  1%  miles  per  day  were  laid  at  a  cost  of  $100 
per  mile.  The  rails  were  65-lb.  rails,  with  18  ties  to  a  rail.  Curves 
<**  j°  t«  ie°  WPJ-A  Jaid.  Equally  good  work  was  done  with  the  Harris 
tracklaying  macTiirnj. 


RAILWAYS.  1249 

On  the  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific  Ry.,  1,300  miles  of  track 
were  laid  with  a  Harris  machine  in  1886  and  1887.  The  average  cost 
of  laying  2  miles  per  day  was  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

1  general    foreman $     5.00 

2  assistant  foremen,  at  $3 6.00 

109  laborers,    at    $2 218.00 

1  engine  and  train  crew 20.00 


Total,    2    miles,    $124.50 $249.00 

To  this  must  be  added  $10  per  mile  for  preparatory  work  in  trans- 
ferring material  to  cars  in  the  yard,  and  $5  per  mile  royalty  for  use 
of  the  Harris  machine,  bringing  the  total  to  $140  per  mtte.  It  will 
be  noted  that  this  does  not  include  the  cost  of  surfacing. 

The  Harris  machine  is  said  to  be  quicker  than  the  Holman, 
where  long  stretches  are  to  be  laid ;  but  the  Holman  is  more  eco- 
nomical for  short  stretches  or  where  delays  are  frequent,  as  the 
gang  is  smaller. 

Another  machine  that  has  been  extensively  used  is  the  Roberts. 

The  Hurley  Tracklaying  Machine  Co.,  of  Chicago,  make  an  ex- 
cellent machine  with  which  2  to  4  miles  per  day  can  be  laid  and 
quarterspiked  with  a  gang  of  40  men. 

Cost  of  Laying  a  Narrow  Gage  Track. — Where  ties  and  rails  are 
dumped  along  in  small  piles,  and  where  no  grading  has  to  be  done, 
a  gang  of  3  men  will  average  210  ft.  of  track  laid  in  10  hrs.  This 
applies  to  a  light  3-ft.  gage  track  made  of  30-lb.  rails  on  6  x  6-in. 
ties,  5  ft.  long,  spaced  3-ft.  centers:  With  wages  at  15  cts.  per  hr., 
the  labor  cost  is  practically  2  cts.  per  ft.  of -track,  or  $100  per  mile, 
after  the  materials  are  delivered. 

A  Method  of  Unloading  Rails. — An  effective  method  of  unloading 
rails,  along  a  track  where  new  rails  are  to  be  put  in,  is  as  follows : 
The  car  is  provided  with  a  tail  board  that  hangs  down  and  drags 
along  on  the  track,  forming  an  inclined  plane.  A  hook  on  a  rope  is 
hooked  into  a  rail,  and  another  hook,  on  the  other  end  of  the  rope,  is 
hooked  over  a  tie.  As  the  car  moves  slowly  forward  the  rail  is 
dragged  out.  By  having  two  of  these  ropes  and  hooks,  pulling  out 
two  rails  at  a  time,  71  rails  were  unloaded  in  25  mins.  from  a 
drop  end  gondola,  and  86  rails  in  42  mins.  from  a  solid  end  gondola. 

Cost  of  Renewing  Rails  on  the  C.,  C.,  C.  &  St.  L.  Ry.*— The  fol- 
lowing is  given  by  Mr.  John  Barth,  and  relates  to  the  cost  of  taking 
up  80-lb.  rail  and  laying  90-lb.  rail. 

To  unload  the  new  rail  I  used  a  rail  unloader,  which  was  oper- 
ated by  air,  furnished  by  the  work  engine,  which  took  a  foreman 
and  five  men  besides  the  train  crew  to  operate.  Any  good  handy 
man  could  run  the  loader.  I  made  comparison  with  loading  and 
unloading-  ran,  and  found  that  we  could  handle  the  rail  considerably 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   6,  1909. 


1250  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

cheaper   with   the   machine.      It   cost   to    unload    the   new    rail   and 
fastenings,  per  mile : 

Labor     %  9.75 

Work    train    service 9.58 

Fuel,  oil  and  waste 7.58 


gs 


Making,  per  mile  for  unloading,  a  total  of $26.91 

This  was  on  single  track  where  we  had  an  average  of  17  trains 
during  the  10  working  hours.  To  get  the  above  estimate  of  cost  of 
unloading  I  took  total  cost  of  unloading  65  miles  of  rail,  and  divided 
by  65  which  gives  the  average  cost  per  mile.  Some  days  we  were 
hung  up  on  account  of  trains  and  did  very  little  work,  and  other 
days  we  could  do  more. 

"We  loaded  the  old  rail  with  the  rail  loader,  and  it  cost  practically 
the  same  to  load  it  as  it  did  to  unload  the  new  rail. 

In  laying  this  rail  I  used  gangs  of  one  foreman,  assistant  fore- 
man, timekeeper,  and  two  flagmen,  and  44  men.  Had  my  gangs 
organized  as  follows: 

Six  men  with  claw-bars  pulling  spikes. 

Three  men  with  spike  mauls  to  loosen  up  spikes  that  were  stuc 
and  to  knock  down  stubs. 

Four  men  throwing  out  the  old  rail. 

One  man  with  nipping  bar  to  cant  the  old  rails  up  out  of  the  old 
bed,  and  3  men  to  shove  it  out. 

Three  men  driving  plugs  in  the  old  holes,  which  should  be  dis- 
tributed ahead  of  the  work. 

In  taking  up  light  rail  and  laying  heavier  rail,  pull  the  outside 
spikes.  In  doing  this,  I  had  1  man  with  an  adze  to  adze  off  the  very 
highest  ties  only  and  to  cut  off  the  plugs  that  stick  up. 

Twelve  men  with  tongs  to  set  in  the  new  rail,  which  should  be 
set  in  one  rail  at  a  time. 

One  good  hustling  fellow  to  put  in  the  expansion  shims  and  keep 
the  rail  gang  moving,  using  steel  cut  nails  for  shims,  making  the 
expansion  according  to  the  thermometer  by  using  different  sizes  of 
nails,  putting  the  nail  in  crosswise  against  the  ball,  so  that  it  will  be 
out  of  the  way  in  putting  on  the  angle  bars.  The  first  few  trains 
over,  this  nail  will  slip  out. 

Two  men  with  bars  with  claws  on  one  end  and  pointed  on  the 
other  to  shove  the  rail  into  the  spikes  at  center  and  quarters. 

Four  men  with  spike  mauls.  These  men  start  off  leaving  eight  ties 
unspiked  between  each  man,  and  go  ahead,  each  man  spiking  every 
eighth  tie  from  the  last  one  that  he  spiked.  This  spikes  every  other 
tie,  and  prevents  the  men  running  around  each  other. 

One  man  with  a  claw  bar  and  adze  to  pull  out  the  spikes  that  come 
in  the  way  of  the  angle  bars  at  the  new  joint,  and  to  adze  down  the 
high  ties  at  the  new  joint. 

Five  men  putting  on  angle  bars,  and  bolting  up,  putting  two  bolts 
at  each  joint,  all  bolts  and  angle  bars  to  be  distributed  ahead  of 
the  rail  laying  for  each  day's  work  only.  Have  plenty  of  wrenches 
and  spike  mauls,  and  when  connection  is  being  made,  or  waiting  for 


RAILWAYS.  1251 

trains,  turn  the  men  that  are  working  in  the  tong  gang  and  those 
throwing  out  rail,  back  to  do  full  bolting  and  full  spiking. 

Two  men  with  a  push  car,  to  keep  the  connection  rails,  off-set 
splices,  and  everything  needed  in  making  a  connection,  and  extra 
tools,  right  up  with  the  rail-laying,  so  that  when  connection  is  to 
be  made  they  will  be  on  the  ground.  Have  the  spikers  and  bolters 
fn  starting  out  assist  these  two  men  in  loading  the  connection  rails. 
Always  move  the  last  new  rail  ahead  and  use  it  as  a  connection  rail 
all  the  way  through.  This  will  always  give  you  a  good  joint. 

The  foreman  should  watch  the  time  of  the  regular  trains,  and  go 
ahead  of  the  spike  pullers,  and  pick  out  his  place  for  making  a  con- 
nection, and  have  four  picked  men  out  of  the  gang  that  set  in  the 
rail  to  make  the  connection,  using  short  pieces  of  rail.  I  used  pieces 
from  4  ft.  to  4  ins.  long  and  used  off-set  bars  from  90  Ibs.  to  80  Ibs. 
I  always  found  that  my  new  rail  fell  short.  I  was  putting  down 
33-ft.  rail  and  taking  up  30-ft.  rail,  and  every  ten  rail  lengths  we 
could  make  a  good  connection  by  pulling  the  80-lb.  rail  against  the 
90-lb.  and  using  short  pieces  of  80-lb.  rail  to  fill  in  the  gap.  In  clos- 
ing up  at  night,  if  I  thought  it  necessary,  I  would  cut  in  a  long 
piece  of  rail. 

The  two  men  handling  the  push  car  and  keeping  the  tools  and  con- 
nections up  with  the  rail  laying,  should  also  keep  the  tools  in  good 
repair,  such  as  keeping  handles  in  the  mauls,  and  have  a  general 
supervision  of  the  tools. 

The  assistant  foreman  should  be  back  among  the  workmen  and 
see  that  the  track  is  kept  safe  spiked  and  bolted,  and  ready  for  trains 
by  the  time  a  connection  is  made. 

Section  men  should  follow  up  and  tamp  any  ties  that  may  be 
hanging  or  shim  them  up  as  the  season  of  the  year  may  require. 

Gage  the  track  when  you  space  the  ties,  as  you  will  have  to  do 
it  at  that  time  any  way,  and  it  avoids  cutting  up  the  ties  with  spikes. 

In  taking  up  80-lb.  rail  and  putting  down  90-lb.  rail,  pull  the  out- 
side spikes  of  both  rails.  In  doing  this  you  avoid  adzing,  as  the 
new  rail  will  set  up  on  the  shoulder  of  the  tie  on  the  outside  and 
give  the  wheels  a  full  bearing  on  the  ball  of  the  rail.  In  taking  up 
and  laying  rail  of  the  same  size,  pull  the  inside  spikes  on  both  rails, 
and  adze  the  ties  down  so  as  to  give  the  wheel  a  perfect  bearing  on 
the  ball  of  the  rail.  To  do  this  it  would  take  five  extra  men  to  do 
the  adzing  above  the  44. 

Full  bolt  and  spike  the  new  rail  and  uncouple  the  old  rail  as  far 
as  you-  go  each  day.  This  usually  can  be  done  while  waiting  on 
trains.  If  not,  take  the  time  to  do  it.  This  is  the  reason  I  did  not 
work  larger  gangs  of  men,  as  44  or  46  men  just  about  cleaned  up 
each  day's  work  even. 

This  rail  laying  was  done  on  single  track  where  we  had  an 
average  of  17  trains  in  our  10  working  hours,  and  was  laid  at  a  cost 
of  $134.24  per  mile.  We  laid  an  average  of  3,500  ft.  of  rail  per  day. 

Since  there  are  141  tons  of  90-lb.  rails  per  mile,  this  cost  is  equiva- 
lent to  $0.95  per  ton. 


1252  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Rail  Relaying  Gang.* — At  the  last  annual  convention  of  the 
Headmasters'  and  Maintenance  of  Way  Association  a  committee  re- 
port was  read  on  relaying  rail  and  the  organization  for  the  work. 
According  to  the  report  51  men  will  make  a  good  rail  gang  for  85 
to  100-lb.  rails,  this  gang  being  made  up  as  follows:  1  foreman, 
1  assistant  foreman,  12  men  on  the  tongs,  7  men  pulling  spikes, 
6  men  adzing,  1  man  plugging  spike  holes,  4  men  throwing  out  old 
line  of  rails,  10  men  spiking,  5  men  bolting,  2  flagmen,  1  tool  man, 
and  1  water  man.  All  rails  should  be  laid  one  at  a  time,  except  in 
a  yard  where  business  is  too  heavy  to  permit  of  the  use  of  the 
tracks.  Heavy  adzing  should,  if  possible,  be  done  in  advance  of  rail 
laying. 

A  gang  of  this  size  can  lay  one  mile  of  track  per  day  on  the 
average  railroad.  At  this  rate,  and  assuming  wages  to  average  $2 
per  man,  it  would  cost  $100  per  mile  for  relaying  rails. 

Labor  Cost  of  Renewing  Rails. — During  a  traffic  of  one  train  per 
hour,  in  winter,  the  cost  of  taking  up  old  rails,  unloading  and  placing 
new  72-lb.  rails  on  a  single  track,  was  $140  per  mile.  The  wages 
of  common  laborers  were  $1.25  per  10  hrs. 

Labor  Cost  of  Renewing  Rails.— In  1904  and  1905,  old  72-lb  rails 
were  taken  up  and  new  85-lb.  rails  laid  on  certain  sections  of  track 
in  the  state  of  Washington  at  the  following  costs  per  mile.  The  first 
work  involved  27  miles  of  single  track. 

Per  mile. 

Unloading  and   distributing $   34.60 

Laying  and   surfacing 294.15 

Picking  up  and  piling  old  steel 38.15 

Total     $366.90 

Since  85-lb.  rails  weigh  134  tons  per  mile,  the  labor  cost  of  re- 
newing these  rails  was  $2.75  per  ton. 

On  another  18-mile  stretch,  the  cost  was  as  follows : 

Per  mile. 

Unloading  and   distributing $   35.05 

Laying  and   surfacing 393.70 

Picking  up  and  piling  old  steel 38.60 

Total     $467.35 

This  is  equivalent  to  nearly  $3.50  per  ton,  which  is  an  unneces- 
sarily high  cost.  The  wages  of  laborers  were  $1.75,  and  of  spikers 
$2.25  per  day. 

Cost  of  Laying  Side  Tracks  and  Switches.!— Practically  nothing 
has  ever  been  printed  as  to  the  cost  of  laying  sidetracks  and  spurs. 
We  purpose  giving  in  this  article  eight  examples  of  the  actual  cost 
of  this  sort  of  work  on  a  western  railway. 

The  grading  was  done,  in  most  cases,  by  contract  and  its  cost  is 
not  included  in  the  following  costs,  unless  specifically  mentioned. 
The  tracklaying  and  surfacing  were  done  by  company  forces. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  15,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  4,  1908. 


RAILWAYS.  1253 

Example  1. — This  is  a  spur  track  400  ft.  long. 
Labor. 

8  days,   foreman   at   $1.50 $12.00. 

16  days,    laborers,   at   $1.25 20.00 

Total  labor,  400  ft.  at  $0.08 $32.00 

Materials. 

158  cedar  ties  at  $0.35 $  55.30 

1  set  stub  switch  ties,  3,200  ft.  B.  M.  at  $15 48.00 

800  ft.  S.  H.    (second  hand),   56  Ib.   rail,   6   and 

1886/2240  tons  at  $16 109.31 

52  S.  H.  angle  bars,  728  Ibs.,  at  $1.37 9.97 

100  S.  H.  track  bolts,  85  Ibs.,  at  $1.95 1.66 

400  Ibs.  new  spikes  at  $1.85 7.40 

1   frog   (56   Ib.) 8.00 

1  S.  H.  switch  lock 0.25 

2  S.  H.  2  way  switch  chairs,  190  Ibs.,  at  $1.65..        3.14 

6  connecting  rods,   5'   2",  at  $1.35 8.10 

1  S.  H.  long  connecting  rod 2.50 

1  high  switch  stand,  2  way 8.00 

Total   materials $261.63 

Grand  total,   400  ft.,  at  $0.73 $293.63 

Example  2. — This  work  involved  putting  in  a  switch  to  connect  two 
tracks,  the  length  of  track  laid  being  118  ft. 
Labor. 

4%  days,  foreman  at  $1.80 $   8.10 

14 y2    days,    laborer  at    $1.25 18.13 

4   days,  laborer  helping  engineer  stake  out  spur, 

$1.25      s 5.00 


Total  labor,   118  ft.  at  $0.265 $31.23 

Materials. 

19  S.  H.  switch  ties  at  $0.10 $  1.90 

1  set  switch  ties,  2,677  ft.  B.  M.  at  $14 37.48 

108  ft.  new  75  Ib.  rail,  1  460/2240  tons,  $27 32.54 

127  ft.  S.  H.  75  Ib.  rail,  1  935/2240  tons,  $16.  ...  22.68 

22  new  25  Ib.  angle  bars,  528  Ibs.,  $1.45 7.66 

62   track  bolts,   52.7   Ibs.,   $2.00 1.05     . 

256  track  spikes,  143.4  Ibs.,  $1.68 2.41 

1  new  75  Ib.   1-7  frog 16.65 

1  new  sw.  lock 0.46 

1  S.  H.  sw.  stand,  2  way,  low 4.40 

'     2  new  switch  points  (75  Ib.)  at  $7.40 14.80 

12  new  tie  plates  at  $0.25 3.00 

8  new  rail  braces  at  $0.155 1.24 

1  main  rod 0.90 

3  connecting  rods  at  $0.50 1.50 

8  clips  at  $0.27 2.16 

24  clip  bolts,   12  Ibs.,  at  $3.10 0.37 

1  S.  H.  short  connecting  rod 1.10 

Total   materials $152.32 

Grand   total,   118  ft,  at  $1.55 $183.55 

Example   S.-. — This  work   consisted   in   putting  in  a  passing   track 
2,500  ft.  long. 

Labor  tracklaying. 

20  days,  foreman  at  $1.80 $   36.00 

78  days,  laborer  at  $1.35 105.30 

Total  labor,  2,500  ft.  at  $0.056 $141.30 


1254  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Materials. 
2  S.  H.  head  blocks,  224  ft.  B.  M.t  at  $6.  .          .  .$     1.34 

1,245  S.  H.  ties  at  $0.145 180.53 

2  sets  sw.  ties,  34,045  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $20.00 68.09 

42  planks  (3  x  12-16),  2,016  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $11 ...  22.17 

4,969  ft.  S.  H.  56  Ib.  rail,  41  911/2240  tons,  at  $16  662.51 

340   S.  H.   A  bars,  4,590  Ibs.,  at  $0.88 40.39 

182  new  trk.  bolts,  155  Ibs.,  at  $1.85 2.86 

592  S.  H.  trk.  bolts,  503  Ibs.,  at  $1.40 7.04 

5,100  spikes,  2,856  Ibs.,  at  $1.65 47.12 

2  frgs   (1-9),  60  Ibs.,  at  $13.25 26.50 

2  H.  T.  2  way  sw.  stands  at  $7.25 14.50 

2  long  conn,  rods  at  $2.10 4.20 

2   S.   H.  conn,   rods  at  $1.05 2.10 

14  S.  H.   conn,   rods  at  $0.53 7.42 

8  sw.  stand  bolts,  12  Ibs.,  at  $2.25 0.27 

8    sw.    nuts 0. 3^ 

40  sw.  chairs  (60  Ib.),  357  Ibs.,  at  $1.45 5.18 

2  sw.  locks  at  $0.29 0.58 

2  S.  H.  guard  rails  (60  Ibs.)  at  $1.27 2.54 


Total    materials $1,095.67 

4,720  cu.  yds.  grading  at  13  cts 613^60 

Labor  ballasting. 

5%  days,  foreman  at  $1.80 $        9.90 

11  days,  laborer  at  $1.35 14.85 

Total   labor   ballasting $      24.75 

Grand  total,  2,500  ft.,  at  $0.75 1,875.32 

Example  1,. — The  work  consisted  in  laying  a  passing  track  2,500  ft 
long,  including  grading,  ballasting  and  surfacing. 
Labor  grading: 

15  days,  foreman  at   $1.80..  ..$      27.00 

10  days,  laborer  at  $1.25 22.48 

195  days,   team  at   $3.50 ' 682.50 

Total     grading $    731.98 

Labor  laying  track. 

4   days,   foreman  at   $1.80 $         7.20 

80  days,  laborer  at  $1.25 100.00 


Total,  2,500  ft.  at  $0.043 $  107.20 

Labor  moving  a  switch. 

1    day,    foreman .' $  1.80 

8y2    days,   laborer  at   $1.25 10.63 

Total    $  12.43 

Labor  surfacing  track. 

4  days,  foreman  at  $1.80 $  7.20 

20  days,  laborer  at  $1.25 . 25.00 

Total $  32.20 

Work  train  service  ballasting. 

1.4  days,  engine  service   (140  mi.)  at  $27.50..$  38.50 

1.5  days,   conductor  at   $80  mo 4.44 

3  days,  brakeman  at  $60  mo 6.67 

Total                                                $  49.61 


RAILWAYS.  1255 

Materials. 
4,760    lin.    ft.    S.    H.    56   Ib.    rail,    39    1493/2240 

tons,    at    $16 $  634.66 

128  lin.   ft.   S.   H.   50   Ib.   rail,    2133/2240   tons, 

at  $16 15.24 

1   new  No.   9   frog 13.25 

1  new  No.    1   frog    (56  Ib.) 12.25 

4   guard   rails  at   $1.27 5.08 

1,088    ties    at    $0.23 250.24 

2  sets  sw.  ties,  5,354  ft.  B.  M.,  $12.00 64.25 

4  H.  B.  bolts,   12  Ibs.,   $2.25 0.27 

318  S.  H.  56  Ib.  A  bars,  4,452  Ibs.,  $0.88 39.18 

2   sw.   stands,    $7.25. • 14.50 

12  S.  H.  50  Ib.  splice  bars,   108  Ibs.,   $0.88...  v  0.95 

8  sq.   nuts,   2   Ibs.,   $2.90 0.06 

648  new  track  bolts,  551  Ibs.,  $1.85 10.19 

2    sw.   locks,    $0.45 0.90 

4,990  new  track  spikes,  2,974  Ibs.,   $1.65 46.11 

2   long  conn,    rods,    $2.10 4.20 

4  new  2  way  sw.  chairs,  cast  382  Ib.,  at  $1.45  5.54 

2  new  tie  rods,   $1.10 2.20 

10  new  conn.  sw.   rods,    $1.10 11.00 

8  rail  braces,  $0.91 0.73 

12  crossing  plank   (3   x  12 — 16),   576  ft.  B.  M. 

at    $10.00 5.76 

12   Ibs.   spikes,    $1.85 0.22 

2   sets  frog  blocking,   $1.20 2.40 

Total    materials $1,139.18 

Grand  total,    2,500  ft.   at   $0.829 $2,072.60 

Example  5. — This  is  an  industry  spur  550  ft.  long,  and  the  cost 
of  labor  only  is  given.  The  rail  wras  56-lb.,  and  the  cost  of  materials 
can  be  easily  estimated  from  the  examples  previously  given. 

10  days,   foreman,   $1.80. $   18.00 

30  days,  laborer,   $1.50 , .  .      45.00 

24  days,  team  and  driver,  $4.00 96.00 

Total,    550  ft.,  at  $0.28 $159.00 

Note  the  high  cost  due  to  team  work. 

Example  6. — This  consisted  in  making  an  extension  180  ft.  long  to 
an  existing  spur,  so  that  no  switch  was  put  in. 

Labor : 

3.6  days,   foreman,   at    $55    mo $  6.75 

11.6  days,    labor,   at   $1.50 14.16 

4.8  days,    labor,    at    $1.20 5.04 

Total   labor,    180   ft.,   at    $0.144 $25.95 

Material : 

360  ft.  S.  H.  60-lb.  rail,  3  480/2240  tons,  $24.20..$  77.79 

24  S.  H.  A.  bars,  342  Ibs.,  $1.53 5.23 

190  track  spikes,  106  Ibs.,  $1.59 1.69 

48  S.  H.  tr.  bolts,  41  Ibs.,  $2.04 0.84 

90  treated  ties,  $0.36 32.40 

Total $117.95 

Grand  total,   180  ft.,  at   $0.80 $143.90 


1256  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Example  7. — This  consisted  in  building  an  industrial  spur  550  ft. 
long.     The  low  cost  of  the  labor  should  be  noted,  as  compared  with 
that  in  Example  5,  where  an  inordinately  high  team  cost  appears. 
Engineering : 

8  hrs.   asst.  engr.,   at   $100  mo $     2.58 

8  hrs.,   roadman,  at   $50   mo 1.29 

8  hrs.,  chainman,  at  $40  mo 1.03 


Total    engineering     $     4.90 

Labor : 

55  hrs.  foreman,  at  $55  me $     9.75 

475  hrs.   laborer,    at   $1.25   day 59.20 


Total  labor,    550   ft,   at   $0.126 $   68.95 

Material : 

1,052   ft.  S.  H.  56-lb.  rail,  19,637  lbs.t  at  $24.20. .  $212.10 

30  ft.  scrap  rail   (56-lb.),  560  Ibs.,  at  $7.37..  1.84 

76  A  bars    (56-lb.),    1,083  Ibs.,  at   $2.25 27.62 

129  Ibs.   tr.    bolts,   at    $3.19 4.12 

700  Ibs.   tr.    spikes,    at   $2.98 18.06 

1   rigid    frog     (1-9),    60-lb 21.05 

1   sw.    stand     6.68 

4   sw.    bolts    0.20 

1  long   conn,    rod 2.33 

1  split  sw.   compl.    (60-lb.) 23.52 

2  guard  rails,   10  ft.,   50-lb 6.56 

12  S.   H.   rail  braces,   8%    cts 1.02 

1   sw.    lock    0.38 

1   set  sw.   ties,  3,283  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $8.50 27.91 

1  sand    bumper 9.20 


Total    materials     $362.59 

Grand   total    .' $436.44 

It  will  be  noted  that  no  charge  for  cross  ties  (other  than  the  set 
of  sawed  switch  ties)  is  made.  Hence  the  cost  of  materials  is  in- 
complete. 

Example  8. — This  is  a  crossover  track,  496  ft.  long. 
Engineering : 

1  day,    asst.    engr $     2.75 

1   day,    rodman    1.60 

1  day,    chainman    1.30 

Engr.   expense    4.35 

Total     $   10.00 

Labor : 

Putting  in  sw.  ties  and  grading  new  crossover 
track : 

1.5  day,  foreman,  at  $75  mo.  .  .  1 $     3.75 

1.5  day,   timekeeper,   at   $60 3.00 

1.5  day,   asst.  foreman,  at  $60 3.00 

38  day,    laborers,    at    $1.75 67.35 

Total     $  77.10 

Putting  in  crossover  track  : 

1  day,    foreman,   at    $75 $  2.42 

1  day,   timekeeper,   at   $60 1.93 

1   day,   asst.  foreman,  at  $60 1.94 

39.8  day,    laborers,    at    $1.75 69.65 

Total  ?   75.94 


RAILWAYS,  1257 


Surfacing  crossover  track : 

0.4  day,   foreman,   at  $75 $  0.97 

0.4  day,   asst.  foreman,  at  $60 0.97 

0.5  day,  timekeeper,  at  $60 096 

11.5  day,   laborers,   at   $1.75 20.10 


Total     $  22.80 

Materials : 

50  ft.  80-lb.  1st  qual.  rail,  1,333  Ibs.,  at  $29.30.$  17.43 
87   ft.    80-lb.    2d   qual.    rail,    1    80/2240    tons,    at 

$29.30     28.89 

679  ft.    S.    H.    68-lb.    rail,    6    1951/2240    tons,    at 

24.20 166.27 

41  S.    H.   ties,   at   $0.10 4.10 

130  treated    ties,    at    $0.37 48.10 

1  set    sw.    ties 27.81 

1  set    sw.    ties 22.51 

14  new  24-in.   80-lb.  A  bars,   290   Ibs.,   $1.30...  3.77 

2  new  W.   joints,    $0.96 1.92 

50   S.  H.  36-in.  68-lb.  A  bars,  1,200  Ibs.,  $0.98..  11.76 

4  new   24-in.   offsets,    68   Ibs.,    $1.37 0.93 

185   new  tr.  bolts,   157  Ibs.,    $2.48 3.89 

1,331  new   spikes,    745    Ibs.,    $1.88 13.97 

1  new  No.   9  sprg.  rail  frog   (77^-lb.) 35.50 

1  new  No.  7  frog  (68-lb.) 13.70 

IS.    H.    sw.    stand 2.98 

1  new    sw.    stand .  . 5.55 

8  sw.    stand   bolts,    14   Ibs.,    $3.66 0.51 


1  sprg.    switch   comp.,    15    pts.    (68-lb.)  ......  18.11 

1  sprg.    switch   comp.,    15    pts.    (68-lb.)  ......  9.41 

1  S.  H.  long  conn,  rod  ........  ...  .^w^H.  tx>  •  0.70.^uO 

1  short  conn,   rod  ..........................  0.34 

2  guard   rails   comp.     (80-lb.)  ...............  13.65 

2  S.   H.   68-lb.   guard  rails,    680  Ibs.,    $13.80..  -4.19 

2   sw.     locks    repd.,     $0.18  ...................  0.36 


^s,m0fo<:n.s'..:::::  ::::::::          : 

68  new  tie  plates,   273  Ibs.,   $2.15  .............        5.87 

415   S.   H.   tie  plates,    1,177   Ibs.,   $1,875  .........      22.07 

9   S.   H.  wall  rail  braces,  22  Ibs.,   11.05  cts...        0.12 

Total    material     .........................  $486.56 

Grand  total,  496  ft.,  at  $1.366  ............  $672.40 

The  high  cost  of  the  labor  is  attributed  to  "extra  labor  expended 
In  clearing  and  to  considerable  interference  by  switch  engine,  this 
work  being  done  in  the  yards." 

Summary.  —  On  short  sidetracks  or  cross-overs  the  cost  of  putting 
in  a  switch  constitutes  a  much  larger  percentage  of  the  total  cost 
than  on  long  sidetracks.  Hence  the  cost  of  labor,  as  well  as  of 
materials,  is  greater  per  lineal  foot  of  short  sidetrack  than  of  long 
sidetrack. 

Estimated  Cost  of  Growing  Tie  Timber.*—  In  a  paper  read  before 
the  Engineers'  Club  of  Philadelphia,  Mr.  E.  A.  Sterling,  Forester  of 
the  Pennsylvania  Lines,  stated  that  in  their  work  on  the  Penn- 
sylvania Lines  east  of  Pittsburg  and  Erie,  over  2,000,000  trees  had 
been  planted  on  lands  acquired  in  connection  with  widen- 
ing and  straightening  the  main  line,  and  in  the  construction  of  low 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  April  22,   1908. 


1258  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

grade  lines.     The  actual  cost  of  plant  material  and   planting  last 
spring  was  $11.29  per  thousand  trees. 

Mr.  Sterling  gave  the  following  as  an  estimate  of  the  returns  per 
acre,  which  may  be  expected  from  such  work,  if  red  oak  is  planted 
on  land  valued  at  $10  per  acre,  with  interest  at  4%%,  compounded 
annually,  and  the  crop  maturing  in  40  yrs. : 

Land  at  $10,  at  4%%,  for  40  yrs $  58.16 

Plant  material  and  planting  $10,  at  4y2%  for 

40  yrs 58.16 

Taxes,  3  cts.  per  annum,  at  ?%_%  for  40  yrs...  3.21 
Management  and  protection,  15  cts.,  at  41/.% 

for  40  yrs 16.05 

Sawing  or  hewing  400  ties,  at  10  cts 40.00 

Hauling  400  ties,  at  5  cts 20.00 

Total,  400  ties,  at  48  cts $195.58 

By  the  above  estimate  400  ties  would  be  produced  per  acre  every 
40  yrs.  at  a  cost  of  48  cts.  each,  including  compound  interest 
charges  at  4%%.  Mr.  Sterling  states  that  the  estimate  of  40  yrs. 
will  hold  for  red  oak  and  Scotch  and  red  pines ;  while  chestnut 
should  make  ties  in  30  to  35  yrs.  and  locust  in  25  to  30  yrs., 
if  not  eaten  up  by  the  borers.  The  trees  at  the  end  of  this  period 
should  average  15  ins.  on  the  stump.  The  tax  rate  of  3  cts.  per 
acre,  used  above,  is  far  below  the  present  rate,  but  is  what  would 
be  considered  a  fair  charge  in  a  European  forest. 

Cost  of  Making  Hewed  Ties. — From  a  pine  tree  that  is  14  ins. 
diameter  at  the  height  of  a  man's  shoulder,  from  3  to  5  pole  ties 
may  be  made.  The  ties  are  hewed  8  to  8%  ft.  long,  6  ins.  thick, 
with  two  hewed  faces  8  ins.  wide,  and  the  bark  on  the  sides  is 
peeled  with  a  tie  peeler.  It  is  said  that  a  skillful  man  can  cut  and 
make  40  to  50  of  these  ties  per  day,  but  it  would  not  be  safe  to 
figure  on  such  an  output.  In  the  state  of  Washington,  25  to  35  fir 
ties  per  man  per  day  are  a  fair  output.  This  includes  cutting 
down  the  small  fir  trees  from  which  the  ties  are  made.  The  men 
who  do  this  work  are  called  "tie  hackers." 

In  Missouri  25  white  oak  ties  per  man  per  day  are  regarded  as  a 
good  output,  the  men  receiving  10  cts.  per  tie. 

A  Cheap  Way  of  Loading  Ties.— The  following  described  device 
is  simple  and  well  adapted  to  handling  other  materials  than  ties. 
It  consists  of  an  overhead  trolley,  traveling  on  a  4-in.  I-beam  that 
serves  as  a  rail.  In  loading  box  cars  with  ties,  one  end  of  this 
I-beam  is  supported  on  a  light  wooden  A-frame,  7  ft.  high  and 
standing  about  15  ft.  from  the  car  door;  the  other  end  of  the 
I-beam  enters  the  car  door,  and  inside  the  door  it  is  fastened  to  two 
bars  ( 14  x  3  ins.)  that  branch,  forming  a  Y  with  curved  branches, 
so  that  one  trolley  can  run  toward  one  end  of  the  car,  another  trol- 
ley toward  the  other  end.  The  trackway  in  the  car  is  hung  from  the 
roof  rafters  by  clamps.  From  each  of  the  trolleys  is  suspended,  by 
a  chain,  an  L-shaped  tie  stirrup  for  carrying  a  tie.  Two  men  un- 
load a  tie  from  a  truck  and  place  it  on  the  tie-stirrup,  one  man 
(one  on  each  trolley)  runs  the  tie  into  the  car,  the  track  having 
a  slight  down  grade,  and  one  man  (one  at  each  end  of  the  car) 


RAILWAYS.  1259 

assists  in  unloading  and  piling.  The  man  then  takes  the  trolley  off 
the  track  and  carries  it  back  to  the  loaders,  Thus  with  a  gaog 
of  6  men  as  much  work  is  done  as  with  10  men  unaided  by  this 
device.  A  gang  of  6  men  loaded  3,325  large  creosoted  hewn  ties  in 
9  hrs.,  no  effort  being  made  to  make  a  record.  When  timed  they 
unloaded  a  truck  of  30  ties  into  the  car  in  2  mins.  Creosoted  ties 
weigh  200  to  250  Ibs.  each,  and  as  one  man  by  using  a  trolley  can 
easily  transport  them  it  is  evident  that  much  labor  is  saved.  I 
would  suggest  the  use  of  a  similar  device  for  handling  sacks  of 
cement  (2  sacks  on  a  double  stirrup),  for  handling  brick,  two-man 
stone,  etc. 

Cost  of  Burnettizing  Timber  and  Ties.* — The  following  data  re- 
late to  the  cost  of  treating  timber  by  the  zinc  chloride  process, 
known  as  burnettizing.  The  extremely  low  cost  of  preserving  tim- 
ber in  this  manner  will  doubtless  astonish  many  of  our  readers  who 
are  more  familiar  with  the  relatively  high  cost  of  creosoting.  In 
this  article  we  shall  show  that  burnettizing  costs  about  $2.50  per 
1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  or  3  cts.  per  cu.  ft. ;  and  in  a  subsequent  article  we 
shall  give  similarly  detailed  figures  showing  a  cost  of  $16  per  M, 
or  19  cts.  per  cu.  ft.  for  creosoting. 

The  plant  has  a  capacity  of  2,500  ties  per  day,  and  the  following 
is  the  average  cost  of  a  year's  work: 

Cts. 
per  cu.  ft. 

0.3  Ib.  zinc  chloride,  at  3.8  cts 1.14 

Fuel,   at   $3.50   per  ton 0.25 

Oil,    etc 0.06 

Current    repairs     0.10 

Switching   engines,    etc 0.10 

Depreciation,    10%    of    $75,000    plant    divided    by 

2,500,000    cu.    ft 0.30 

Labor     1.05 

Total    per    cu.    ft 3.00 

The  ties  were  7x9  ins.  by  8  ft.,  containing  3.5  cu.  ft.  each,  hence 
the  cost  per  tie  and  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  was  as  follows: 

Cts.  Per 

,per  tie.        M  ft.  B.  M. 

Zinc  chloride,  at  3.8  cts.  Ib 4.00  $0.95 

Fuel 0.87  0.21 

Oil,    etc 0.21  0.05 

Current    repairs    0.35  0.08 

Switching   engines,    etc 0.35  0.08 

Depreciation     1.05  0.25 

Labor     3.67  0.88 

Total    10.50  $150 

The  amount  of  zinc  chloride  per  cubic  foot  is  somewhat  less  than 
is  commonly  used,  being  0.3  Ib.  as  compared  with  0.4  to  0.5  Ib. 
per  cu.  ft. 

Cost  of  Burnettizing  Ties  on  the  S.  P.  Ry.— On  the  Southern 
Pacific  Ry.,  in  1893,  the  cost  of  burnettizing  ties  was  9%  to  12  cts. 

*Engmeering-Contracting,    July    3,    1907. . 


1260  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

per  tie  6  x  8  ins.  x  8  ft.  About  221,000  "sap"  ties  were  treated 
during  the  year,  these  ties  being  purchased  at  the  mills  h»  Texas 
for  23  cts.  each. 

Cost  of  Creosoting  Piles  and  Ties.* — In  our  issue  of  July  3  we 
gave  the  itemized  cost  of  burnettizing  ties,  the  total  cost  being 
$2.50  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  or  10%  cts.  per  tie  of  7  x  9  ins.  x  8  ft.  The 
following1  data  relate  to  the  cost  of  creosoting  ties  and  piles. 
Creosoting  is  a  much  more  expensive  process,  but  the  burnettizing 
treatment  is  of  no  use  where  timber  is  constantly  exposed  to  the 
action  of  water,  as  is  the  case  wherever  piles  are  used.  Water 
leaches  out  the  zinc  chloride  in  a  comparatively  small  time  when- 
ever the-  timber  is  constantly  submerged,  and,  even  where  it  is  ex- 
posed to  frequent  rains  the  zinc  chloride  is  dissolved  little  by  little 
until  there  is  no  longer  enough  left  in  the  timber  to  protect  it  from 
the  fungus  of  decay.  Could  someone  devise  a  method  of  filling  the 
outer  pores  of  burnettized  wood  with  some  waterproof  compound 
it  would  be  possible  to  use  the  zinc  chloride  for  preserving  the 
body  of  timber  that  is  exposed  to  water.  For  example,  it  might 
be  practicable  to  treat  the  surface  of  burnettized  timber  with  the 
Sylvester  process  which  has  been  so  successfully  used  in  water- 
proofing masonry,  namely,  by  coating  with  soft  soap  and  alum  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  fill  the  pores  with  a  curd  like  precipitate. 
Indeed,  it  might  be  practicable  to  treat  timber,  first  with  zinc 
chloride  and  subsequently  with  creosote,  so  that  the  creosote  would 
form  the  outer  protective  shell. 

The  following  costs  represent  the  average  of  a  year's  work  in  a 
plant  having  a  capacity  of  500,000  cu.  ft.,  or  6,000,000  ft.  B.  M. 
per  annum. 

The  cost  of  treating  the  timber  was  as  follows,  per  cu.  ft. : 

Cts. 
per  cu.  ft. 

1.05  gals,  creosote,  at  11.5  cts 12.08 

Fuel  ($3.50  per  ton)  and  other  supplies 1.82 

Labor     3.75 

Depreciation,    maintenance  and   repairs 1.50 

Total     19.15 

This  is  equivalent  to  $16  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  which  is  more  than 
six  times  as  expensive  as  burnettizing. 

A  7  x  9-in.  x  8-ft.  tie  contains  3.5  cu.  ft.,  hence  the  cost  of  creo- 
soting each  tie  was  67  cts.,  as  compared  with  10%  cts.  by  the  zinc 
chloride  process  (burnettizing). 

About  300,000  lin.  ft.  of  piles  were  creosoted,  and  it  was  found 
that  the  piles  average  1.11  cu.  ft.  of  timber  per  lin.  ft.  of  pile. 
Hence  the  cost  of  creosoting  was  21%  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  pile. 

In  analyzing  the  above  costs  per  cu.  ft.  it  will  be  noted  that  the 
item  of  depreciation  and  maintenance  is  1.5  cts.  per  cu.  ft.,  which  is 
equivalent  to  $1.80  per  M.  This  item  is  based  on  an  allowance  of 
10%  per  annum  for  depreciation  of  a  $75,000  plant,  plus  current 
repairs  and  insurance. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   7,  1907. 


RAILWAYS.  12G1 

See  the  section  on  Timber  in  this  book  for  further  data  on 
creosoting. 

Cost  of  Treating  Ties  With  Zinc  Chloride  and  Creosote,  Gales- 
burg,  III.* — The  Chicago,  Burlington  &  Quincy  Ry.  has  built  a  plant 
for  treating  ties  at  Galesburg,  111.  The  plant  is  situated  on  a  tract 
of  80  acres  with  a  space  for  tracks  having  a  capacity  of  2,000,000 
ties,  although  at  present  there  are  tracks  for  a  storage  of  only 
1,000,000.  For  fire  protection  in  the  yard,  hydrants  are  spaced 
300  ft.  apart,  being  supplied  with  water  from  a  100,000-gal.  storage 
tank,  fed  by  a  well  1,300  ft.  deep.  The  tracks  in  the  yard  are  laid 
with  three  rails,  as  narrow  gage  cars  are  used  to  deliver  the  ties 
to  the  retorts. 

The  plant  was  located  at  Galesburg  as  it  is  the  connecting  point 
of  the  Burlington  lines  with  the  south,  the  principal  source  of  the 
supply,  and  on  this  part  of  the  system  there  are  always  available 
stock  cars  for  the  shipment  of  the  treated  ties.  Box  cars  cannot  be 
used  for  this  purpose  on  account  of  the  odor  which  is  retained  in 
the  cars  when  loaded  with  creosoted  timber. 

The  main  building  is  152  x  115  ft,  divided  into  three  rooms,  one 
containing  three  retorts,  another  the  engines  and  tanks,  the  third 
being  the  boiler  room.  There  is  also  a  test  room,  fitted  up  for 
treating  four  ties.  The  building  is  of  reinforced  concrete  through- 
out. The  window  sashes  are  of  metal,  glazed  with  wire  glass,  while 
the  doors  are  all  covered  with  sheet  metal. 

The  retort  room  is  the  full  length  of  the  building  and  38  ft.  wide, 
the  retorts  being  132  ft.  long  and  6  ft.  in  diameter,  made  of  %-in. 
steel,  furnished  by  the  Allis-Chalmers  Co.  Each  has  a  capacity  of 
650  ties,  while  the  plant  treats  6,000  ties  in  24  hrs. 

There  are  three  150-hp.  boilers,  one  being  for  emergencies.  There 
is  no  chimney,  induced  draft  system  being  used.  The  engine  room, 
30  x  115  ft,  contains  an  Ingersoll-Rand  compressor,  with  a  capacity 
of  525  cu.  ft.  of  free  air  per  min.,  a  Knowles  fire  pump,  three 
Knowles  pressure  pumps,  one  Knowles  oil  pump  and  one  Battle 
Creek  vacuum  pump.  There  is  also  a  small  electric  light  plant  in 
this  room. 

The  tank  room,  39  x  50  ft,  contains  a  25,000-gal.  steel  working 
tank  and  a  100,000-gal.  steel  mixing  tank  for  creosote.  On  the 
outside,,  close  to  the  main  building,  are  the  storage  and  measuring 
tanks,  one  500,000-gal.  steel  tank  for  creosote  storage  and  two 
5,000-gal.  steel  tanks  for  measuring  creosote,  two  50,000-gal.  wooden 
tanks  for  zinc  chloride  and  one  25,000-gal.  iron  storage  tank  for  zinc 
chloride.  The  two  steel  outside  tanks  are  arranged  for  heating 
with  steam  coils. 

The  plant  is  arranged  with  its  pipe  connections  between  pumps, 
tanks  and  retorts,  so  that  the  straight  zinc  chloride  process,  of  the 
two,  known  as  the  Card  process,  may  be  used  on  one  retort  or  on  all 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  2,  1908,  an  abstract  of  an  article 
The  Railway  Age. 


1262  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

three.  In  the  Card  process,  which  is  a  modification  of  the  Rutger, 
the  zinc  chloride  and  creosote  are  continuously  agitated  under  pres- 
sure by  centrifugal  pumps,  and  ordinary  coal  tar  creosote  can  be 
used.  Each  retort  is  connected  with  an  electrically  driven 
centrifugal  pump,  which  forces  the  liquid  in  at  the  bottom  and  ex- 
hausts it  from  the  top  of  the  retort.  The  vacuum  in  retorts  is 
obtained  by  a  Baragwauth  barometric  condenser,  with  an  auxiliary 
air  pump  6^x12x12  ins.  having  a  connection  with  the  air 
chamber  of  the  condenser.  The  condensing  pipes  are  placed  on  the 
roof  of  the  engine  room. 

The  Rutger  process  has  been  used  in  Germany,  but  it  requires  a 
creosote  having  special  qualities  and  is  expensive.  In  the  Allar- 
dyce  process  the  zinc  chloride  is  put  in  first  and  then  the  creosote, 
while  the  Ruping  process  aims  to  reduce  the  expense  for  creosote 
by  first  filling  the  wood  cells  with  compressed  air  and  then  coating 
them  with  creosote. 

Seasoned  ties  are  treated  directly,  but  if  green  they  are  first 
steamed  under  pressure  of  5  to  20  Ibs.  from  1  to  2  hrs.  The  sap 
is  blown  off  every  15  to  30  mins.  With  the  Card  process  a  vacuum 
of  27  to  28  ins.  is  held  on  the  retort  for  an  hour,  and,  with  the 
vacuum  still  on,  the  mixture  of  zinc  chloride  and  creosote  is  run 
in  by  gravity,  entirely  filling  the  retort,  and  requires  about  18,000 
gals.  The  liquid  is  heated  to  180°  F.,  and  at  this  temperature  the 
two  ingredients  do  not  separate  as  rapidly  as  in  a  cold  solution. 
The  centrifugal  pumps  are  then  started  and  the  liquid  is  circulated 
at  the  rate  of  2,500  gals,  per  min.  and  the  whole  charge  is  changed 
every  7  or  8  mins.  At  the  same  time  the  pressure  pumps  are 
started  and  pressure  gradually  increased  to  150  Ibs.  and  held  at 
that  for  2  to  4  hrs.,  or  until  a  sufficient  amount  of  the  liquid  is  ab- 
sorbed by  the  timber. 

The  pressure  pumps  are  connected  to  the  5,000-gal.  measuring 
tanks  which  have  gauges  operated  by  floats,  and  in  this  way  the 
volume  of  liquid  forced  into  the  timber  is  known.  When  the 
gauges  show  a  sufficient  amount  the  pressure  is  released  and  the 
remaining  liquid  is  forced  back  into  the  mixing  tank.  Then  a 
vacuum  of  24  to  28  ins.  is  created  and  held  for  an  hour,  taking  out 
all  surplus  liquid  into  the  underground  tanks,  where  it  is  allowed 
to  settle  and -then  returned  to  the  mixing  tank.  This  last  treatment 
is  for  the  purpose  of  removing  the  surplus  creosote  remaining  on  the 
surface  of  the  ties,  so  they  can  be  handled  comfortably,  g,nd  506 
gals,  saved  from  each  retort. 

The  retort  door  is  then  opened  and  the  cars  withdrawn  by  wire 
cable  operated  by  electric  motor  and  switched  to  the  platform, 
where  they  are  loaded  directly  for  shipment.  Each  tie  is  marked 
with  a  short  thick  nail  having  the  year  of  ti-eatment  on  its  head,  j 
The  ties  are  loaded  by  the  Anzier  loader  at  a  cost  of  25  cts.  per  j 
tram. 


RAILWAYS.  1263 

An  approximate  cost  of  the  new  plant  is  as  follows: 

Land $  28,000 

Tracks 50,000 

Sewers      5,000 

Well     6,000 

Platform     3,000 

Building     30,000 

Three    retorts     30,000 

Tanks  of  all  kinds 10,000 

Pipes  and  valves  and   labor 20,000 

Pumps     6,000 

Boiler    and    settings 5,000 

Klectric    light    plant 3,000 

Mundy   hoists    2,500 


$198,500 

Thirty  men  are  employed  in  the  offices  and  plant,  there  being  a 
chief  engineer  and  chemist,  2  engineers  and  2  assistant  engineers 
for  day  and  night,  3  sub-foremen  and  2  motormen,  besides  the 
laborers. 

The  liquid  used  is  a  mixture  of  17%  creosote  and  83%  zinc  chloride 
solution,  the  latter  containing  3%  chloride  and  the  rest  water.  The 
creosote  .has  a  specific  gravity  of  1.045  and  contains  about  35% 
naphthaline  and  5%  tar  acid.  The  cost  of  creosote  is  6%  to  7  cts. 
per  gal. 

The  cost  of  treating  a  pine  tie  is  estimated  as  follows : 

Per  Per  tie 

cu.  ft.         (3cu.  ft.) 

0.5  Ib.  dry  zinc  chloride,  at  4cts $0.020  $0.060 

0.8  Ib.  creosote,  at  3  cts. 0.024  0.072 

Labor,   fuel,    supplies  and  supt *.    0.013  0.040 

Interest    and     depreciation 0.005  0.15 

Total     $0.062  $0.187 

This  figure  is  the  cost  during  the  winter  months.  The  cost  is 
less  in  warm  weather — probably  as  low  as  16  cts.  About  46%  of 
the  ties  treated  at  this  plant  are  red  oaks,  and  35%  yellow  pine,  the 
rest  being  gum,  elm,  beech,  birch,  etc. 

The  plant  was  designed  under  the  supervision  of  T.  E.  Calvert, 
chief  engineer,  and  F.  J.  Creiger,  who  now  has  charge  of  the  plant. 

It  will  be  noted  that  at  6.2  cts.  per  cu.  ft.,  the  cost  of  treatment 
is  equivalent  to  $5.17  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M. 

Cost  of  Treating  Ties  and  Their  Life.— In  1885  the  A.,  T.  &  S.  F. 
Ry.  began  treating  ties  by  the  zinc-tannin,  or  Wellhouse,  process. 
Up  to  1901,  its  cost  of  treating  some  4,000,000  ties  is  said  to  have 
been  15  to  18  cts.  per  tie. 

New  Mexico  mountain  pine  ties  having  a  life  of  4  yrs.  when  un- 
treated have  a  life  of  of  lO1/^  to  11  yrs.  when  treated. 

In  1886  the  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific  Ry.  contracted  to 
have  ties  treated  for  1.6  cts.  per  tie. 

Some  4,750,000  hemlock  and  tamarack  ties  had  been  treated  up 
to  1901,  and  the  average  life  of  these  ties  has  been  10%  to  11% 
yrs.,  depending  on  location. 


1264  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  1887  the  Southern  Pacific  Ry.  began  burnettizing  ties  (zinc 
chloride  process)  without  subsequent  treatment.  Up  to  1901  it  had 
treated  2,500,000  pine  ties,  which  last  4  yrs.  when  untreated.  The 
life  of  the  treated  ties  was  7  yrs.  where  the  rainfall  was  heavy 
(Glidden  Division)  to  more  than  9  yrs.  where  the  rainfall  was  light 
(Del  Rio  Division).  The  average  of  all  was  8^4  yrs.  life. 

Not  including  interest  or  depreciation  of  plant,  the  cost  of  treat- 
ment was  only  6.44  cts.  per  tie,  in  1898. 

About  0.24  Ib.  dry  zinc  chloride  was  used  per  cu.  ft.  of  timber, 
or  half  the  standard  used  in  Europe. 

Life  of  Treated  Ties. — The  records  of  treated  pine  ties  taken  out 
of  the  A.,  T.  &  St.  F.,  showed  the  following  averages : 

Life,  yrs. 

1897 10.18 

1898 10.56 

1899 10.61 

1900 10.78 

1901 10.58 

1902 10.70 

These  ties  were  treated  with  the  two-injection  Wellhouse  process. 
These  figures  relate  only  to  the  ties  removed  on  account  of  rot. 

Life  of  Ties. — For  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1901,  seven 
railways  reported  that  untreated  oak  ties  (white,  post,  burr,  etc.) 
were  in  use  on  the  following  mileage: 

.                                        Miles  of  Miles  of 

main  line.  all  track. 

Chicago  and   Northwestern    (Madison  Div.)..         614  764 

Illinois  Central   (Eighth  Div.) 286  332 

Illinois  Central    (Springfield  Div.) 454  552 

Nashville,  Chattanooga  &  St.  Louis 1,195  1,414 

Penn.   Lines    (Pittsburg  Div.) 442  594 

Southern  Ry.    (Eastern  Dist.) 3,200  3,749 

Southern   Pacific    (Atlantic   System) 2,107  2,607 


Total     8,298  10,012 

There  were  17,471,116  oak  ties  in  these  tracks,  and  2,147,684,  or 
12.3%  more  renewed  during  the  year,  which  is  equivalent  to  a  life 
of  about  8  yrs. 

The  average  life  of  ties,  as  estimated  by  different  railways,  was 
as  follows:  . 

Kind  of  Life  in  Tears. 

Railway.         .                                    tie  Main  track.  Side  track. 

Chicago  and  Great  Western....       Oak                       8  10 

Chicago   and    Northwestern 7  10 

Illinois    Central     "                           7  9 

Nash.,    Chatta.   &    St.    L "                           7  9 

Norfolk    &   Western White  Oak                  8.5  9.5 

Pitts.   &  Lake  Erie "                            8  10 

Boston    &    Maine Chestnut                    8  12 

Illinois    Central    (Louisiana)  .  . .    Cypress                     9  13 


RAILWAYS.  1265 

The  French  State  Railway  gave  the  following  as  the  life  of  creo- 
soted  ties: 

Life  Years  on 

Main  line.       Siding.         Total. 

Creosoted   pine    15  5  20 

Creosoted    oak    18  7  25 

Creosoted  beech 20  10  30 

Estimated  Life  of  Ties  in  1894.— Bulletin  No.  9  (1894)  of  the  For- 
estry Division,  U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agriculture,  states  that  when  there 
were  235,000  miles  of  track  (all  main,  branch  and  side  tracks)  in 
the  U.  S.,  76,000,000  ties  were  annually  required  for  renewals.  This 
is  equivalent  to  324  ties  renewed  per  mile  of  all  tracks.  If  there 
were  2,800  ties  per  mile,  the  life  was  8.7  yrs.  The  estimate  of  76,- 
000,000  ties  for  renewals  may  be  accurate,  since  the  reports  of 
the  railways  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  give  the 
number  of  ties  used  each  year  for  renewals. 

Due  to  the  use  of  heavier  rails  than  were  common  in  1894  (15  yrs. 
ago),  the  life  of  ties  is  greater  now  than  then. 

Life  of  Ties  as  Affected  by  Weight  of  Rail.— Mr.  P.  H.  Dudley 
states  that  on  the  New  York  Central  RyM  when  65-lb.  rails  were 
used,  the  life  of  a  yellow  pine  tie  was  8  or  9  yrs.  Since  the  intro- 
duction of  100-lb.  rails,  the  life  has  increased  to  11%  yrs.  The  tiea 
are  no  longer  cut  by  the  rails  nor  injured  by  the  frequent  tamping 
required  with  lighter  rails.  He  states  (in  1901)  that  not  5%  of 
the  ties  are  now  removed  for  other  causes  than  decay,  whereas  40% 
of  the  ties  under  65-lb.  rails  were  taken  out  because  of  cutting 
under  the  rail  and  other  injury.  Eighteen  ties  used  per  30-ft.  rail 
length,  or  3,168  per  mile.  The  average  tie  renewals  -from  1890  to 
1900,  was  293  ties  per  mile,  or  91/4%,  for  untreated  ties  of  all  kinds. 
Spacing  of  Ties  on  Different  Railways. — In  1901  the  following  was 
*the  spacing  of  ties  on  different  railways : 

Ties  per  mile. 

Main  track.     Side  track. 

Baltimore  &    Ohio 2,850  .2,650 

Chicago   &   Great   Western 3,000  2,800 

Chicago   &   Northwestern 2,990  2,500 

C.,   M.   &   St.   P 3,000  2,640 

C.,  C.   &  St.   L 3,000  2,800 

Illinois    Central    3,168  2,640 

Louisville    &    Nashville 2,816  2,112 

Michigan    Central    3,168  2,375 

Nashville,  Chatta.  &  St.  L 2,900  2,640 

New    York    Central 3,000  2,500 

Norfolk  &  Western 2,816  2,600 

Penn.    Lines    (Pittsburg   Div.) 2,816  2,288 

Pittsburg   &    Lake   Erie 2,640  2,640 

Southern  Pacific   (Atlantic  Syst.)...      2,816  2,664 

Southern  Ry.    (Eastern  Dist.) 2,816  2,640 

Wabash    (Detroit  Div.) 2,990  2,800 

Union  Pacific   (2,816  on  branches)..      2,992  2,640 

It  is  probably  very  close  to  an  average  to  say  that  there  are 
2,900  ties  per  mile  of  main  line  and  branches,  and  2,640  per  mile 
of  sidetrack  and  yards,  in  the  railways  of  the  United  States.  Since 
;here  are  0.4  mile  of  sidetracks  and  yards  per  mile  >f  main  track 


-1266  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

and  branches  the  average  of  all  tracks  would  then  be  2,820  ties  per 
mile  of  track. 

Labor  Cost  of  Renewing  Ties. — The  cost  of  distributing  new  ties, 
taking  out  old  ties  and  laying  new  ones,  and  disposing  of  the  old 
ties  by  burning,  averaged  as  follows  for  the  years  1904  and  1905 
on  one  of  the  divisions  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  in  Washington  : 

Per  new  tie. 

Distributing $0.028 

Laying    0.110' 

Disposing   of   old    tie 0.009 



Total $0.147 

Wages  averaged  $1.45  per  day  for  section  men  and  $2.00  per  day 
for  section  foremen.  The  ties  were  laid  on  a  gravel  ballast. 

Prices  of  Ties  and  Labor  Cost  of  Renewals. — In  1901  the  follow- 
ing was  the  cost  of  ties  and  of  placing  them  in  track  on  several 
typical  railways : 


Road. 


- 

frt    tjD          '^ 

'     tj 
" 


So.   Pacific    Redwood 

Mich.    Cent Oak  45     1V2      4%      1          10          60 

Wabash    Oak  40     1%     5          1          10          55 

N.    Y.   Cent Y.   Pine  59 

Louisville  &  N Y.  Pine  45 

Denver  &  R. -I Red  Spruce  33     1  %      1  1%      37 

Mo.  Pacific   Oak  32 

Lake  Shore  &  M.  S Oak  58 

Union  Pacific .  Oak  56      .  . . 

Union  Pacific   Wyo.  Pine  40      ...      2%      2          11          57% 

Average  Price  of  Ties  in  America. — The  annual  reports  made  by 
the 'different  railways  of  America  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission contain  statements  of  the  number  of  ties  used  in  renewals 
and  of  the  average  price  paid  for  ties  at  the  point  of  distribution. 
Unfortunately  the  reports  made  by  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
•missioij  contain  none  of  these  data.  However,  the  reports  give  the 
total  cost  of  tie  renewals  each  year,  which  is  approximately  $130 
per  mile  of  all  track.  If  there  are  2,800  ties  per  mile,  and  if  10% 
are  renewed  annually,  then  the  average  cost  of  ties  is  46.4  cts.  This 
does  not  include  the  cost  of  distributing  and  laying  the  ties.  If  11% 
of  the  ties  are  renewed  annually,  the  average  cost  of  ties  is  42.2  cts. 
per  tie.  It  is  reasonably  certain  that,  including  side  tracks  and 
yard  tracks,  tie  renewals  (untreated  ties)  average  10  to  11%  per 
year  for  American  railways,  variations  from  this  average  depend- 
ing on  kind  of  wood,  climate,  weight  of  rail,  etc. 

Cost  of  Gravel  Ballast. — A  common  amount  of  gravel  ballast  is 
1,600  cu.  yds.  per  mile  of  track,  and  rarely  need  the  cost  exceed  40 
i-ts.  per  cu.  yd.,  including  the  labor  of  putting  the  ballast  under  the 
"ties  and  surfacing  the  track.  A  not  unusual  contract  price  is  27  cts. 


RAILWAYS.  1267 

per  cu.  yd.  for  loading  ballast  on  flat  cars  with  steam  shovels, 
unloading  with  ballast  plows,  and  putting  under  the  ties,  and  sur- 
facing of  track.  In  addition  to  this  the  railway  company  must 
pay  the  cost  of  hauling  the  ballast — work  train  service — which 
should  not  exceed  17  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  even  for  a  haul  of  100  miles. 

The  following  is  a  typical  gang  for  loading,  hauling  and  unloading 
ballast : 

Steam  Shovel  Per  day. 

1  foreman,   $150  per  mo $     6.00 

1  engineman,   $125  per  mo 4.80 

1  cranesman,   $90  per  mo 3.50 

1  fireman,  $60  per  mo , 2.30 

1  watchman,    $60   per  mo -.        2.30 

1  timekeeper,  $60  per  mo 2.30 

6  pit  laborers,  at  $2.00 12.00 

6  laborers  "throwing"   pit  tracks  and   repairing     12.00 

Total     .- $   45.20 

Repairs  to  steam  shovel 8.00 

Total  steam  shovel  loading $  53.20 

Hauling  Ballast. 

1  conductor    $     3.50 

2  brakemen,    at    $2.50 5.00 

Engine   service   on   work   train. 

1  engineman $  4.50 

1  fireman   2.50 

Coal  and  oil 8.50 

Engine  rental  and  repairs 12.00 

—     27.50 

Engine  service  "spotting"  cars 27.50 

Rental  and  repairs,  40  flat  cars,  at  $0.50.  ......      20.00 

Total  hauling  ballast $  83.50 

Unloading  and  Distributing  Ballast. 

1  operator  of  unloading  plow $  3.00 

10  laborers,   at   $2.00 20.00 

Coal  and  oil  for  unloader 4.00 

Rental  and  repairs  of  unloader 4.00 

Total  unloading  ballast $   31.00 

Grand    total $167.70 

When  this  crew  is  handling  800  cu.  yds.  of  gravel  per  day  the 
cost  is  : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cts. 

Loading     ••        6.7 

Hauling 10.4 

Unloading 3.9 

21.0 

In  addition  to  this,  the  labor  cost  of  tamping  ballast  under  ties 
and  track  surfacing  is  about  12  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

It  often  happens  that  gravel  pits  must  be  stripped  of  overlying 
earth,  that  considerable  grading  is  necessary  for  tracks  into  the 
pit,  that  the  gravel  is  cemented  and  requires  some  blasting,  and 
that  "pit  rent"  must  be  paid  for  the  gravel.  All  these  items,- how- 
ever, will  rarely  amount  to  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  so  that  the  total 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

cost  of  the  gravel  in  the  track  should  rarely  exceed  40  cts.   per 
cu.  yd. 

Where  traffic  on  a  road  is  so  congested  that  a  ballast  train  cannot 
average  more  than  100  miles  traveled  per  Gay,  and  where  the  load 
hauled  is  only  160  cu.  yds.  per  train,  it  is  evident  that  5  trips  of 
10  miles  and  return  will  be  required  to  haul  800  cu.  yds.,  and  to  the 
figures  above  given  must  be  added  another  train  for  each  additional 
10  miles  of  distance  from  the  gravel  pit  to  the  dump.  However, 
on  long  hauls  it  is  obvious  that  much  heavier  train  loads  will  ordi- 
narily be  used,  thus  keeping  the  cost  down. 

Cost  of  Gravel  and  Rock  Ballasting  Old  Track.*— The  following 
matter  has  been  taken  from  the  report  of  a  committee  read  before 
the  1907  convention  of  the  Roadmasters  and  Maintenance  of  Way 
Association :  On  a  northern  division  of  the  Chicago  &  Northwestern 
Ry.  the  cost  of  ballasting  one  mile  of  track  with  gravel  was  $1,020, 
figured  on  the  basis  that  3,400  cu.  yds.  of  material  would  be  used 
per  mile.  The  gravel  was  unscreened  and  unwashed  and  was  used 
just  as  it  came  from  the  pit.  The  gravel  was  placed  for  a  12-in. 
raise  with  standard  gravel  roadbed  on  the  top  of  Iiy2-ft.,  slope 
iy2  to  1,  and  16  ft.  wide  from  bottom  ballast  line  to  ballast  line. 
The  itemized  cost  per  cubic  yard  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  gravel  loaded  on  cars  at  pit $0.070 

Hauling  and  unloading,   50-mile  haul 0.107 

Ballasting    0.123 

Total   $C.300 

On  a  division  of  the  Lake  Shore  &  Michigan  Southern  Ry.  for  the 
year  1906  the  cost  of  ballasting  with  gravel  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Gravel,  washing  and  loading $0.18 

Hauling    0.07 

Digging  out  old  ballast 0.15 

Unloading   and   placing   in   track 0.15 

Total     $0.55 

For  crushing  limestone  %  to  1%  ins.  in  size  the  cost  was  as 
follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cost    of    stone $0.535 

Digging  out  old  ballast 0.150 

Hauling,  unloading  and  placing  in  track 0.400 

Total $1.085 

For  ballasting  with  crushed  stone  on  a  division  of  the  Atchison, 
Topeka  &  Santa  Fe  Ry.  the  cost  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Crushed  stone  at  crusher,  loaded  on  cars $0.615 

Haul,  50  miles 0.055 

Labor    (Mexican)    inserting 0.330 

Total    $1.00 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  25,  1907. 


RAILWAYS.  1269 

For  a  12-in.  raise  3,400  cu.  yds.  of  ballast  are  used  per  mile, 
talking  the  cost  $3,400.  The  present  standard  on  this  road  requires 
the  ballast  to  be  dressed  level  with  the  top  of  the  ties  for  the  full 
length  of  the  tie  and  6  ins.  beyond  the  ends  of  ties,  making  the  top 
widths  of  the  ballast  9  ft.  and  giving  a  slope  of  1  %  to  1  ;  this  gives 
a  roadbed  16  ft.  wide  from  ballast  line  on  one  side  to  ballast  line  on 
the  other  side,  with  a  12-in.  raise. 

Cost  of  Gravel  Ballasting. — About  30  miles  of  single  track  rail- 
road were  ballasted  with  gravel  sufficient  to  raise  the  ties  8  ins. 
Ties  had  10-in.  face,  were  8%  ft.  long,  and  there  were  16  ties  to  a 
30-ft.  rail.  A  2% -yd.  steam  shovel  was  used  to  load  flat  cars. 
About  4  ft.  of  earth  had  to  be  stripped  off  the  gravel  pit.  The 
gravel  was  hauled  by  two  trains  of  35  apron  flat  cars  each,  each 
car  holding  6  to  7  cu.  yds.  Two  locomotives  were  used  to  haul  these 
trains  and  one  locomotive  in  the  pit  to  spot  cars.  The  cars  were 
unloaded  with  a  plow,  and  it  will  be  noticed  that  the  damage  to 
the  cars  caused  by  the  plow  was  very  high.  The  cost  to  the  rail- 
way company  per  cubic  yard  of  ballast  in  place  was  as  follows : 

Cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Pit  rent    1  % 

Loading,  hauling  and  dumping 15^ 

Repairs  to  cars 5 

Shoveling  and  tamping  ballast  in  track 8      . 

Total  per  cu.  yd 30 

Common  laborers  were  paid  $1.25  per  10  hrs. 

Cost  of  Cemented  Gravel  Ballast.* — There  are  two  principal  points 
In  the  territory  east  of  Memphis  where  cementing  gravel  is  worked 
for  the  purpose  of  supplying  ballast  to  railroads  ;  one  at  luka,  Miss., 
on  the  Southern  Ry.,  known  as  the  Tishomingo  Gravel  Pit,  owned 
and  operated  by  the  Tishomingo  Gravel  Co.,  of  Memphis,  Tenn., 
and  one  at  Perry ville,  Tenn.,  on  the  Memphis  &  Paducah  Division 
of  the  Nashville,  Chattanooga  &  St.  Louis  Ry.,  owned  and  operated 
by  the  Perryville  Gravel  &  Ballast  Co.,  of  Memphis,  Tenn. 

As  the  character  of  the  gravel  and  the  manner  of  working  the 
two  pits  are  somewhat  different,  they  will  be  handled  separately. 

Tishomingo  Gravel. — This  is  a  water-worn  gravel  lying  in  a 
compact  mass  requiring  blasting  before  it  can  be  handled  with  a 
steam  shovel.  It  is  composed  of  20%  clay,  5%  sand,  and 
75%  gravel.  This  gravel  as  a  rule  is  small  and  none  of 
it  large  enough  to  require  crushing  to  make  it  suitable 
for  ballasting  purposes.  In  order  to  get  it  in  shape  to 
load  with  steam  shovel,  it  is  loosened  up  by  blasting.  This  is  ac- 
complished by  digging  a  tunnel  about  20x26  ins.  in  cross-section 
into  the  material  a  distance  of  about  26  ft.,  then  turning  at  right 
angles  for  a  distance  of  10  ft  (see  Fig.  8).  This  digging  is  done 
by  a  man  lying  down  using  a  pick  with  a  very  short  handle.  The 
cost  of  digging  these  tunnels  is  50  cts.  per  ft. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  April  14,   1909. 


1270 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


The  charge  is  placed  in  the  extreme  end  of  the  tunnel  and  a 
portion  of  it  refilled  as  shown  on  sketch.  From  75  to  100  carloads 
of  material  is  loosened  up  at  each  blast.  This  material  is  then 
loaded  by  steam  shovel  onto  cars.  The  cost  of  this  material  is  as 
follows  : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Loading ?0.09 

Hauling    0.20 

Unloading  and   distributing 0.07 

Putting  under  ties  and  surfacing 0.11 

Total     .  ..$0.47 


The  advantages  of  its  use  are  :  Small  cost,  quick  cementing  quali- 
ties, holds  track  in  line  and  surface  well  under  fairly  heavy  traffic, 
does  not  churn,  very  little  dust  and  has  great  resistance  to  erosion 


vo'te**                       | 

1* 

1 

i 
f 

1 

I 

Fig.    8. — Chamber    Blast. 


by  water.  Considered  an  excellent  ballasting  material.  Has  the 
disadvantage  of  growing  prolific  crops  of  weeds  and  grass,  making 
it  costly  to  keep  clean. 

Perryville  Gravel. — This  is  an  angular  gravel  lying  in  compact 
mass  requiring  blasting  before  it  can  be  handled. 

Large  pockets  of  clay  are  encountered,  making  it  preferable  to 
load  by  hand  in  order  to  get  the  best  material.  It  is  composed  of 
10%  clay  and  90%  gravel,  with  chemical  analysis  of  97%  silica, 
2.5%  alumina  and  0.5%  iron.  There  is  found  in  this  pit  considerable 
large  stone,  which  has  to  be  crushed  before  it  is  suitable  for  use. 
The  cost  of  this  gravel  per  yard  is  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

F.  o.   b.   cars  at  pit • $0.27 ya 

Hauling,   100-mile  train  service 0.20 

Unloading    and    distributing 0.04 

Stripping,   putting  under  and  surfacing 0.20 


Total     $0. 


RAILWAYS.  1?71 

Cost  of  Washing  Gravel.— A  large  gravel  washing  plant  was  built 
in  1906  by  the  Lake  Shore  &  Michigan  Southern  Ry.,  at  Pleasant 
Lake  on  the  Ft.  Wayne  branch  of  the  Lake  Shore.  The  plant 
handles  3,000  cu.  yds.  of  raw  gravel  daily.  A  75-ton  steam  shovel 
with  a  3%  -yd-  bucket  loads  dump  cars,  which  are  dumped  into 
two  hoppers  that  discharge  upon  two  inclined  conveyors  (made  by 
the  Link-Belt  Co.),  having  a  capacity  of  4,000  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr. 
day.  The  conveyors  discharge  upon  a  short  flume  ( 8  ft.  long)  where 
the  gravel  encounters  the  water.  Thence  the  material  passes  over 
several  fixed  screens,  all  material  larger  than  2-in.  being  shunted 
to  a  gyratory  rock  crusher. 

The  washed  gravel  for  ballast  collects  in  hoppers  whence  it  is 
drawn  oft  into  cars,  and  the  sand  (all  material  larger  than  %-in.) 
collects  in  other  hoppers,  whence  it  is  drawn  off  into  cars. 

The  output  for  a  typical  day  is  as  follows : 

Cu.  yds. 

Raw   gravel 3,270 

Washed  gravel    1,335 

Washed  sand    1,850 

The  following  is  the  crew  required  to  operate  the  plant : 
1  foreman. 
1  clerk. 

1  engineman   at  plant. 
1  fireman  at  plant. 
1   shopman. 

1  carpenter. 

2  men  on  two  sand  settlers. 
4  men  dumping  gravel  cars. 

4  men  keeping  track  clean  at  washer. 
10  men  repairing  cars  and  calking  ballast  cars  with  hay. 

2  locomotive  crews  delivering  gravel. 

2  locomotive  crews  removing  washed  gravel. 

1  steam  shovel  crew. 
30  men  in  section  gang. 

The  washing  plant  is  driven  by  a  200-hp.  Erie  steam  engine,  but 
the  driving  load  on  the  engine  is  only  132  hp.,  of  which  105  hp.  is* 
required  to  operate  the  pump  supplying  the  wash  water.  A  10-in. 
single-stage  centrifugal  turbine  pump  (Worthington),  having  a 
2,400-gal.  rating  under  a  90-ft.  head,  is  used  ;  but  the  pump  is  not 
called  upon  to  deliver  more  than  1,650  gals. 

The  cost  of  the  plant  and  land  was  as  follows: 

Plant  for  washing $25,000 

Land 15,000 

Grading 10,000 

Bridge  work    2,500 

Miscellaneous   5,000 

Track 36,000 

Total     .  ..$93,500 


1272  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Assuming  that   the  gravel   pit   will   be  exhausted  in    5   years,  we 

have  the  following  annual  and  daily  cost   (200  days  per  year)  : 

Per  year.  Per  day. 

Plant,  15%   of  $25,000 $   3,750  $18.75 

Track,    10%    of  $36,000 3,600  18.00 

Grading,  20%   of  $10,000 2,000  10.00 

Bridging,   20%    of  $2,500 500  2.50 

Miscellaneous,  20%   of  $5,000 1,000  5.00 

Land,    20%    of   $15,000 3,000  15.00 


Total    $13,850  $69.25 

Assuming  that  3,000  cu.  yds.  of  sand  and  gravel  are  produced 
daily,  half  of  which  is  sand,  for  which  there  is  no  market,  we  have 
the  following  cost : 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Per  day.          of  gravel. 

Operating    expense $250.00  $0.167 

Plant   and   land    depreciation 69.25  0.046 

Plant  interest  (at  5%  of  $93,500)..     23.35  0.015 


Total     $362.60  $0.228 

This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  stripping  the  gravel  which  was 

about   6V6    cts.    per   cu.    yd.,   making  the   total   cost  of  this  washoJ 

gravel  nearly  30  cts.   f.   o.  b.   cars. 

For    description    and    drawings    of    this    Pleasant    Lake    washing 

plant,    and    for    hints    on    ballasting,    see    Engineering-Contracting, 

April   14,   1909. 

Cost  of  Ballasting,  Using  Dump  Cars. — The  Goodwin  steel  car  is 
largely  used  by  contractors,  and  railway  companies,  for  ballasting 
and  for  dumping  earth  and  rock  on  standard  gage  tracks.  Its 
dimensions  are  36  ft.  long,  9  ft.  %  in.  height  above  rails,  and  it 
weighs  47,500  Ibs.  Its  capacity  is  40  cu.  yds.,  or  80,000  Ibs.  A 
train  of  cars  can  be  dumped  at  one  time  all  together,  or  one  at  a 
time,  by  one  man  operating  a  compressed  air  valve,  or  they  can  be 
dumped  by  hand.  The  car  is  so  designed  that  its  load  may  be 
placed  between  the  rails ;  on  either  side  of  the  track,  or  on  both 
sides,  or  in  any  combination  of  ways  desired.  In  grading  and  bal- 
lasting 22  miles  of  track  with  30,000  cu.  yds.  of  gravel,  during  the 
winter  of  1904-5,  an  average  train  of  8  40-cu.  yd.  Goodwin  cars  was 
used,  the  average  haul  being  14^  miles.  The  gravel  came  from 
the  pit  quite  wet,  but  required  little  or  no  spreading  as  plows  and 
scrapers  are  not  needed  when  these  cars  are  used. 

Mr.  W.  B.  Stimson,  Superintendent  Grand  Rapids  &  Indiana  Ry., 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  loading  and  hauling  of  gravel  for 
ballast : 


RAILWAYS.  1273 

Rodger  ballast  cars  were  used,  working  two  trains  of  25  cars  per 

train.     Sixteen  miles  of  track  were  ballasted  with  1,039  carloads,  or 

20,800  cu.   yds.    of  gravel,   or   1,300  cu.   yds.   per  mile,  the  average 

haul  being  7  miles.     The  cost  was  as  follows  for  the  16  miles: 

Total.  Per  day. 

Two  train  crews,  12  days  each $    175.00  $14.58 

Locomotives,  enginemen  and  watchmen.       199.25  16.60 

Fuel   for   locomotives 254.10  21.17 

Telegraph    operator    15.50  1.28 

Pit  foreman 28.84  2.40 

Pitmen    100.35  8.36 

Steam   shovel,   including  rent  of  shovel, 

fuel  and  wages 323.52  26.96 


Total,  at  5.3  cts.  per  cu.  yd $1,096.56         $91.35 

In  addition  to  this  it  cost  6.7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  to  spread  and  tamp 
the  gravel  in  the  track,  each  laborer  averaging  75  ft.  of  track  per 
day.  Including  in  the  expense  of  5.3  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  is  the  cost 
of  moving  the  two  trains  and  the  steam  shovel  166  miles  to  the 
pit,  and  half  a  day's  time  setting  up  the  shovel  and  getting  ready 
to  work ;  so  that  the  actual  working  time  of  the  shovel  was  only 
10%  days,  making  an  average  of  2,000  cu.  yds.  loaded  per  day  of  12 
hrs.  The  depth  of  the  face  at  which  the  shovel  worked  was  only 
8  ft.  The  above  is  an  exceedingly  low  cost. 

The  Rodger  ballast  car  is  8  ft.  9  Ins.  x  34  ft.  over  sills,  weighs 
28,000  Ibs.  and  its  capacity  is  60,000  Ibs.,  or  20  cu.  yds.  of  gravel 
heaped  measure.  The  car  is  hopper  bottomed,  with  plows  and 
scrapers  for  spreading  the  ballast.  One  car  is  dumped  at  a  time  and 
fills  about  80  ft.  of  track. 

Cost  of  Rock  Ballast. — The  Railroad  Gazette,  Nov.  16,  1906,  p. 
438,  gives  the  following  cost  of  re-ballasting  an  Eastern  railway: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Rock  on  cars  at  Rockland  Lake $0.575 

Floatage  from  Rockland  Lake 0.086 

Distribution   by    train    (Rodger   cars  and   ballast 

plow)      •• 0.035 

Labor  putting  in  track 0.058 

Total     $0.754 

This  does  not  include  cost  of  preparing  the  old  track,  forking  up 
old  ballast,  lifting  track,  etc. 

It  is  estimated  that  $0.15  per  cu.  yd.  would  cover  the  added  cost 
of  putting  rock  ballast  in  a  new  track,  including  cost  of  lifting 
track,  tamping,  surfacing,  etc. 


1274  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Prices  of  Frogs  and  Crossings,  Etc. — The  prices  used  in  esti- 
mating the  cost  of  frogs,  etc.,  on  the  New  York  Central,  in  1902, 
were  : 

Wt.  of  Rail, 

No.                     Lbs.  Description.  Price. 

6  80  Rigid,   Bolted  $27.00 
10                      80  Rigid,  Bolted  32.00 
10                       65  Spring  R.  48.50 

8  60                             Rigid,  Bolted  23.00 

8  65                             Rigid,  Bolted  24.00 

8  75                             Rigid,  Bolted  28.50 

Type  A  80                             Crossing  Bolted  335.00  to  365.00 

10  75                              Spring  R.   Bolted  51.00 

7  80                             Rigid,  Bolted  27.50 
10  80  (5%")               Spring  R.  49.25 
10  67  (4%")               Spring  R.  44.50 
18  80  (5%")              Rigid,   Bolted  45.00  to  70.00 

Rail  braces,   3.32  Ibs.  each,  each %       .10% 

Rail  joints  (80-lb.  rail),  Weber,  insulated 5.25 

Rail  joints,   Atlas,   com 3.75 

Rail  joints,   22-in.   for  60-lb.   rail 2.50 

Replacers,  Little  Giant   15.00 

Rail    bender,    roller 143.00 

Rail   chairs,  cast,  per   100   Ibs 2.48 

Rail  chairs,  weights : 
'  4   ins.   high,   19.5  Ibs. 

3  ins.  high,   18.6  Ibs. 

Switch  stand,  Ramapo,  low 10.00 

Smoke   jack    in    place 40.00 

Track    drill     18.00 

Track  jack 3.00 

Cost  of  Track  Scales.— On  the  N.  Y.  Central  a  100-ton  track 
scales,  42  ft.  long,  cost  as  follows,  in  1902  : 

Scales    and    materials $1,760 

Labor 640 

Total $2,400 

8.7  tons  rails    (relayers),   at   $20 174 

15   ties,  at  $0.60 9 

Miscellaneous  material    150 

Labor  laying  track,   etc 70 

Grand   total    $2,803 

No  piles  were  used  in  foundation. 

The  cost  of  50-ton  track  scales,  42  ft.  long,  on  the  Northern  Pa 
ciflc,  in  1899,  averaged  as  follows: 

Scales,    delivered     $    580 

Other    materials    170 

Labor    ($175    to    $300) 250 

Total     $1,000 

The  cost  of  80-ton  track  scales,  50  ft.  long,  in  1905,  was  as 
follows : 

Scales    and    materials $1,250 

Labor    ($500    to    $700) 650 

Tv>tvii  si  inn 


RAILWAYS.  1275 

Cost  of  Water  Tanks. — On  the  Chicago  &  Northwestern,  in  1896, 
the  following  was  the  cost  of  four  different  50,000-gai.  tanks' 
16x24  ft.,  on  24-ft.  posts: 

TANK  No.   1. 
Material: 

Water  tank,  including  hoops,  etc $  275 

Two    8-in.    standpipe 380 

540  ft.  8-in.  pipe,  valves,  etc 315 

1   bbl.   pitch  and   1   bbl.   oakum 7 

Posts,  caps  and  braces 209 

Stone,    cement,    etc.,    for   foundation 309 

108  ft.  4-in.  gas  pipe 22 

Total    material     $1,517 

Labor: 

Building   tank $  263 

Building    masonry    foundation 209 

Painting  tank,   2   coats 26 

Laying  pipe  and   setting  standpipes 178 

Total    labor    $  676 

Grand    total     - ..  $2,193 

TANK  No.  2. 
Material: 

Tank,  and  posts,  braces  and  caps $  304 

One    8-in.     standpipe 190 

Two    8-in.    gate   valves 45 

608  Ibs.    lead .  21 

660  ft.    8-in.    cast-iron   pipe 255 

Lumber    for    well,    pump    house    and    standpipe 

foundation     23 

80   ft.   4-iri.   gas  pipe 16 

Paint 20 

Stone,    cement,    etc 289 

Total   material     $1,163 

Labor: 

Building   tank    '.'..: $  201 

Building  foundation    120 

Laying  pipe    199 

Painting  tank,    3   coats 35 

Digging  well  (16  x  18)  and  walling  it  up. 290 

Total    labor $  845 

Grand    total    $2,008 

TANK  No.   3. 
Material: 

Tank $  275 

One   10-in.    standpipe 225 

90   ft.    10-in.    cast-iron   pipe 72 

Fittings  for  pipe  and  standpipe 65 

Foundation    for    tank   and    standpipe 150 

Paint 13 

Total    material  ' ! ....;.. $  780 

(Posts,  etc.,  seem  to- have  been  omitted.) 


1276  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Labor: 

Building   tank    $  238 

Building  foundation    133 

Laying    pipe 93 

Painting,    2    coats 31 

Total    labor    ..$595 

Grand   total $1,375 

TANK  No.  4. 
Material: 

Tank $    304 

10-in.    standpipe 225 

60  ft.    12-in.    cast-iron   pipe 72 

Valves,    elbows,    etc 65 

2,586  Ibs.   lead,   at   3%    cts 87 

250  pieces  6-in.   cast-iron  pipe 1,230 

Paint     20 

.      Material   for   standpipe 21 

Material    for    tank 129 

Total    material     $2,153 

Labor: 

Building   tank    ' $  228 

Laying  3,000  ft.  pipe,  at  30  cts 600 

Building  foundation  of  tank 112 

Building   foundation    of    standpipe 18 

Painting,    2   coats 29 

Total    labor    $    987 

Grand   total    $3,140 

The  cost   of  a   16  x  24-ft.    tank,    on   the   C.,    R.    I.    &   P.,   in    1896, 
was: 

Tank  with    12   hoops '. $275 

Indicator      5 

Set    7-in.    fixtures 68 

12    iron    post   caps 24 

Rail  joists,  at  $5  per  ton 19 

Substructures    (incl.    frost    proof g.) 198 

Paint 15 

Foundation    stone     69 

Labor    erecting   tank 165 

Labor   painting  tank 24 

Labor  on  foundation 116 

Total     $978 

On    the    Lehigh    Valley    Ry.,    in    1896,    a    20-ft.     tank    cost    as 
follows : 

2,720  Ibs.  wrought-iron  hoops,  at  3  cts $   82 

4,560  ft.    B.    M.    of    3-in.    cypress    for    staves    and 

bottom,    at    $28 128 

700   ft.   B.   M.   yel.   pine    (1x3)    for  false  bottom, 

at    $20 28 

6,000  ft.  B.  M.  white  pine,  at  $30 180 

Nails,    door,    ladder,    etc 30 

56  cu.  yds.  masonry  foundation,  at  ?,"  °0 280 

Lead,    etc • 35 

Labor  erecting  tank 175 

Total  $938 


RAILWAYS.  1277 

On  the  Northern  Pacific,  from  1890  to  1900,  the  average  cost  of 
25  tanks,  16x24  ft.,  was  as  follows: 

Materials     $  900 

Labor     800 

Total     $1,700 

In  no  case  does  this  include  pump,  pump  house,  well,  etc.,  but  it 
does  include  pipe,  foundation,  etc. 

The  cost  of  a  typical  water  tank  on  the  Erie  Ry.,  in  1901,  was  a3 
follows  for  a  50,000-gal.,  16  x  24-ft.  tank: 
Tank  and  Substructure: 

16  x  24-ft.    pine    tub $  275 

30,270   Ibs.    steel   trestle,   at   $2.25 832 

49  ft.  iron  ladder 13 

9  squares  slate  for  roof 27 

9  squares   tar    paper 3 

40  Ibs.   yellow   metal   slate  nails 7 

128  ft.  galv.  ridge  roll 4 

Pine     80 

Nails,  etc 10 

14  gals,    paint    16 

63  bbls.  cement 86 

30  cu.  yds.  crushed  stone 12 

31  cu.  yds.  sand   15 

9,000    brick    63 

Mason    labor    . 239 

Carpenter   labor    187 


Total    $1,869 

Plumbing: 

Standpipe,    10-in.,    complete $    225 

1.75   tons   10-in.   cast-iron  pipe 237 

1  length    (12  ft.)    10-in.   flanged  pipe 17 


10.75   tons   10-in.   cast-iron  pipe 237 

1  length    (12  ft.)    10-in.  flanged  pipe 17 

3  elbows  (10-in.)  and  1  sleeve  (10-in.) 35 


552  Ibs.    lead    24 

130  ft.    galv.    pipe    (3-in.) 47 

1  Worthington    meter     (3-in.) 78 

1  gate    valve     ( 3-in. ) 4 

1  angle    valve     ( 2-in. ) 3 

70  ft.   sewer  pipe    ( 4-in. ) 2 

1  iron    grating   for    drain    pit 4 

1  galv.    iron    float,    beam    and    chain 4 

4  pr.    pipe   flanges    ( 3-in. ) ,    etc 5 

6  nipples  (3-in.),  4  elbows  and  1  tee 

Labor    of    plumbers 153 

Total    plumbing     ?    840 

Grand   total    $2,709 

Cost  of  Track  Tank.— The  form  of  track  tank  shown  in  Fig.   9, 

1,200  ft.  long,  on  the  B.  &  O.  R.  R.,  cost  as  follows,  in  1890: 

Repairing  roadbed    : $  1,094 

Labor   placing  trough   and   pipe 2,135 

Trough,    including   shop  work 4,159 

Cross-ties,   pipe  and   other   material 2,936 

Hauling    61 

Total     $10,385 

The  trough  was  of  steel  3/16  in.  thick,  made  in  30-ft.  sections. 
The   above  cost  includes   75   ft.   of   8-in.   cast-iron   pipe  and   two 
standpipes  for  use  of  freight  engines. 


1278 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 


The    cost    of    operating    such   a    track    tank    was   as    follows    per 
month : 

Two  pumpmen,  at  $45.00 %  90.00 

15  tons  coal,  at  $1.50 22.no 

Ordinary    repairs    20.00 


Total     $132.50 

Examples  of  Practice  in  Turntable  Construction,  With  Some  Data 
on  Costs.* — The  following  text  consists  of  a  series  of  letters  dis- 
cussing seven  subjects  suggested  by  a  committee  as  follows : 

(1)  Proper  length,  allowing  for  probable  future  increase  in 
length  of  locomotives.  (2)  Plate  girder  tables,  and  cost.  (3)  Cast- 
iron  tables,  and  cost.  (4)  Gallows  frame  tables,  and  cost.  (5) 
Other  designs,  and  cost.  (6)  Foundation,  circle  wall,  paving  if  any 
and  pit  drainage.  (7)  Power  for  operation;  electricity,  air  and 
other  power. 


Fig.    9. — Track    Tank. 

J.  P.  Canty,  Boston  &  Maine  R.  R. — Anticipating  the  probable 
length  of  a  turntable  required  for  future  locomotive  service,  is 
rather  an  uncertain  problem  just  at  this  period.  However,  it  is  the 
opinion  of  many  that,  on  the  division  where  I  am  located,  the  lately 
purchased  steam  locomotives  have  apparently  reached  their  eco- 
nomical limits  in  both  length  and  weight,  provided  the  class  of 
traffic  remains  similar  to  that  which  is  now  being  handled. 

The  largest  engines  on  our  division  are  turned  easily  on  turn- 
tables 70  ft.  long.  This  is  now  our  standard  length,  and  as  far  as 
we  are  able  to  predict,  will  answer  for  future  requirements. 

The  steel  work  in  these  tables  cost  approximately  $2,500  on 
board  cars  delivered  to  our  road  by  the  contracting  bridge  "com-' 
pany.  There  is  nothing  unusual  about  the  design.  However,  I  will 
mention  that  we  specify  that  four  cast  steel  end  wheels  shall  be 
furnished  on  each  end  of  table  and  the  center  pivot  bearing  shall  be 
of  the  disc  pattern  ;  meaning  that  the  table  turns  on  a  composi- 
tion disc  on  top  of  the  center  cast  steel  pivot  casting,  instead  of  on 
the  familiar  roller  bearing. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   27,  1909. 


RAILWAYS.  1279 

Our  turntable  center  foundations  have,  of  late,  been  made  of 
concrete,  being  10x10  ft.  on  bottom  and  bearing  on  piles  when 
there  is  doubt  about  the  earth  being  sufficiently  solid  to  carry  the 
maximum  load  on  this  area  without  settling.  The  bottom  course  of 
concrete  is  generally  2  ft.  in  depth.  The  foundation  is  then  stepped 
I1/?  ft.  square  by  2  ft.  thick,  and  a  granite  cap  5  ft.  square  by  2  ft. 
in  depth  is  placed  on  top  to  receive  the  cast  steel  center  pedestal. 

There  are  330  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  in  our  70-ft.  turntable  pits. 
The  whole  outfit,  including  turning  motor,  costs  us  between  $6,000 
and  $7,000.  Figures  vary  for  different  locations,  depending  upon 
whether  or  not  we  are  obliged  to  drive  piles,  provide  expensive 
drainage,  etc. 

Practically  all  of  these  new  outfits  have  been  put  in  where  older 
and  smaller  tables  were  installed  and  as  the  older  tables  were 
kept  in  service  just  as  long  as  possible  so  as  to  avoid  delays  to 
engines,  our  work  has  always"  been  made  more  expensive  than  if 
new  tables  were  constructed  where  we  would  not  be  handicapped 
by  keeping  the  old  table  in  use. 

We  use  gasoline  power  turning  device. 

The  floors  of  the  turntable  pits  are  covered  with  a  coal-tar  con- 
crete paving,  about  two  and  one-half  inches  thick,  somewhat  sim- 
ilar to  that  which  is  used  extensively  in  small  cities  and  towns  in 
New  England  for  sidewalk  surfaces.  This  gives  a  fairly  hard  and 
elastic  surface,  and  does  not  crack  when  soil  underneath  heaves 
with  frost,  and  is  comparatively  smooth,  so  that  it  is  easily  kept 
clean  and  snow  may  be  removed  from  pit  without  much  trouble. 
The  cost  is  about  50  cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

A.  H.  Beard,  Philadelphia  &  Reading  Ry. — The  cost  of  our  plate 
girder  standard  75-ft.  table  in  place  ready  for  the  tiack  rails  is 
$7,785.00,  as  follows: 

Masonry     $2,500.00 

Miscellaneous     -     500.00 

Table     4,785.00 

$7,785.00 

A  65-ft.  plate  girder  table  has  been  in  service  at  the  roundhouse 
at  Reading  since  1897.  This  was  manufactured  by  the  Pottstown 
Bridge  Co.  Engines  of  all  classes  are  turned  on  this  table,  the 
number  turned  every  24  hrs.  (although  the  table  is  short  for  some 
engines)  is  75  to  80.  The  cost  of  this  table  in  place  was  $5,825. 
This  table  at  present  is  operated  by  an  8-hp.  gasoline  engine,  manu- 
factured by  the  Williamsport  Gasoline  Engine  Co.,  the  cost  of  same 
in  place  was  a  fraction  over  $1,000,  and  costs  for  operating  about 
$165  per  month,  this  includes  labor,  oil,  gasoline  and  repairs;  we 
are  now  arranging  to  install  an  electric  motor  on  the  same  table 
to  replace  the  gasoline  engine. 

E.  E.  Schall,  Lehigh  Valley  R.  R. — Our  80-ft.  turntable  is  con- 
structed as- follows:  Deck  plate  girders  5  ft.  6%  ins.  deep  at  cen- 
ter and  2  ft.  8*4  ins.  at  ends,  spaced  6  ft.  c.  to  c.,  conical  wheel 
center  bearings  with  live  ring,  built  for  a  moving  load  of  Cooper's 


1280  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

B.   50  engines  or  4,500  Ibs.  per  Hn.  ft.  of  table.     Cost  about  $3,200 
delivered  f.  o.  b.  cars  within  200  miles  of  bridge  shop. 

The  center  foundations  and  circular  rim  walls  are  generally  of 
concrete,  the  circular  rail  resting  on  short  sawed  ties.  The  top 
of  rim  is  covered  by  a  white  oak  timber  coping  to  act  as  a  cushion 
with  rail  tie-plated.  The  pit  is  paved  with  concrete  about  6  ins. 
thick,  and  provided  with  drainage.  For  outlying  districts,  and 
tables  not  used  extensively,  the  rim  wall  is  at  times  omitted,  using 
only  a  segmental  wall  at  entrance  and  run-off  of  table,  using  bal- 
last under  the  ties  of  circular  rail. 

For  operation  we  have  in  use  electric  motors,  gasoline  engine 
motors  and  air  motors  ;  all  are  giving  satisfaction.  When  electric 
power  is  at  hand,  it  is  the  most  suitable  power  to  use ;  when 
electric  current  must  be  purchased  from  other  parties  or  when  none 
is  available,  gasoline  engine  motors  of  from  8  to  10  hp.  will  prove 
very  satisfactory.  The  air  motor  will  also  prove  efficient  if  properly 
installed  and  arranged  to  take  proper  adhesion  on  circular  rail,  ob- 
taining a  sufficient  supply  of  air  from  locomotives  to  be  turned, 
unless  the  air  can  be  taken  from  a  compressor  near  by.  The  air 
motor  will  not  turn  as  many  engines  in  a  given  time  as  either  of  the  - 
other  two  kinds,  on  account  of  the  time  required  in  making 
couplings,  but  for  outlying  districts  it  is  the  best  motor  attach- 
ment available  at  this  time.  The  cost  of  installing  one  of  the  motors 
ranges  from  $900  to  $1,200. 

A.  A.  Wolf,  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul  Ry. — "We  use  85-ft. 
turntables  on  mountain  division  where  the  heaviest  power  is  used, 
and  75-ft.  tables  on  other  main  line  divisions.  We  have  three  types 
of  the  plate  girder  tables,  which  we  distinguish  as  through,  semi- 
through  and  deck.  The  reason  for  these  various  designs  is  occa- 
sioned by  the  difficulty  in  many  places  of  getting  drainage  from  the 
pit  to  a  sufficient  depth  to  accommodate  a  deck  table.  These  plate 
girder  tables  cost  from  $6,000  to  $8,500,  varying  somewhat  with 
local  conditions,  pertaining  to  the  nature  of  foundations,  etc.  The 
labor  amounts  to  from  35  to  40%  of  the  total  cost. 

For  plate  girder  tables,  we  use  a  concrete  center  pier,  circle  wall 
and  circle  rail  foundation  ;  the  circle  wall  and  foundation  for  circle 
rail  being  of  monolithic  construction.  Piles  are  always  used  under 
center  foundation,  except  at  places  where  solid  ledge  rock  is  found. 
Piling  is  used  under  circle  wall  except  where  rock  or  other  firm  soil 
is  found.  We  do  not  make  it  a  practice  to  pave  the  pits.  Drain- 
age is  provided  by  means  of  connection  to  roundhouse  sewer  or  to 
low  adjacent  ground,  according  to  local  conditions. 

We  use  gasoline  and  electric  motors  only  for  power  ;  the  electric 
motor,  in  our  estimation,  furnishes  the  ideal  power  for  turntable 
operation  where  it  can  be  procured  without  excessive  cost.  At 
several  of  our  division  points  we  have  our  own  generators  and  con- 
sequently the  current  required  for  operating  turntable  costs  but  very 
little. 

/.  O.  Walker,  Nashville,  Chattanooga  &  St.  Louis  Ry. — Our  stand- 
ard length  is  70  ft.  Plate  girder  tables  cost  with  ties,  latches,  etc., 


RAILWAYS.  1281 


in  place,  $3,200.     Masonry  and  foundations  $2,000.     The  cost  of  the 
masonry  is  extremely  variable,  however. 

W.  T.  Main,  Chicago  &  North  Western  Ry.  —  Turntables  newly  in- 
stalled in  the  future  should  be  80  ft.  in  length.  A  70-ft.  King 
Bridge  Co.,  deck  plate  girder  turntable  installed  at  Chicago  Ave.,  in 
1907,  cost  as  follows: 

Material     ..................................  $2,570.46 


2'262-00 
Total     ................................  $4,832.46 

This  table  replaced  an  old  60-ft.  deck  plate  girder  and  was  in- 
stalled under  continuous  traffic  except  for  two  days  while  new 
concrete  center  pier  was  allowed  to  set.  Over  400  engines  were 
turned  every  24  hrs.  on  old  table  during  construction  of  new  circle 
wall  which  will  give  some  idea  of  conditions  under  which  work  was 
done  and  reason  for  high  cost.  Table  is  operated  by  10-hp.  electric 
motor  which  was  used  on  an  old  table  but  furnished  with  new  frame. 
A  70-ft.  King  Bridge  Co.,  deck  plate  girder  turntable  installed  in 
1907  cost  as  follows: 

Material    ..................................  $2,890.00 

Labor    ....................................    2,262.00 

Total    .................................  $5,380.00 

This  table  replaced  an  old  60-ft.  Lassig  plate  girder  and  was 
installed  under  traffic  in  same  manner  as  the  one  before  mentioned. 
About  $500  of  the  cost  was  due  to  renewal  of  radial  tracks.  The 
circle  wall  was  built  of  concrete  and  the  center  pier  of  concrete,  re- 
inforced with  scrap  rails  in  order  to  spread  the  load  over  old 
masonry  foundation.  The  table  is  operated  by  10-hp.  Pilling  air 
motor  and  has  six  reservoirs  under  runways,  the  air  being  furnished 
by  air  compressor. 

A  60-ft.  Stroebel  deck  plate  girder  table  installed  at  Chicago 
Ave.,  in  1899,  on  old  masonry  wall  and  new  center  pier,  cost  $2,500. 
A  60-ft.  Greenleaf  cast-iron  table  installed  at  Milwaukee,  1899,  in- 
cluding new  center  pier,  cost  $3,100  ;  the  table  alone  cost  $1,160. 
A  50-ft.  gallows  frame  turntable  installed  at  Evanston  in  1896  with 
timber  circle  wall  and  center  pier  cost  $983. 

Circle  walls  should  preferably  be  built  of  concrete  except  when 
table  is  renewed  under  traffic,  where  rubble  masonry  can  be  used 
to  better  advantage  while  working  in  cramped  space.  Center  pier 
may  require  pile  foundation  unless  subsoil  is  good,  where  a  spread 
foundation  of  concrete  or  masonry  12  ft.  square  will  serve.  The 
advantage  of  paving  in  pit  will  hardly  justify  the  additional  expense 
though  it  is  easier  to  keep  pit  clean  when  paved  and  helps  the  drain- 
age. The  best  drainage  possible  should  always  be  secured.  Circle 
walls  should  have  an  offset  at  one  point  to  allow  of  examination 
and  repairs  to  end  rollers  and  boxes,  particularly  where  table  has 
rollers  between  girders.  Masonry  circle  rail  seat  should  be  extended 
at  two  points,  diametrically  opposite,  to  afford  support  for  jacks 
for  raising  table  and  examining  center.  This  saves  placing  cribbing 


1282  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

on  soft  ground  when  using  jacks  and  renders  the  operation  much 
safer. 

Would  recommend  the  use  of  electric  motor  for  operating  tabU- 
wherever  possible  and  where  service  demands  the  quick  handling  of 
engines ;  second  choice,  gasoline  engine ;  third  choice,  air  motor. 
The  latter  gives  excellent  service,  where  there  is  plenty  of  time  for 
handling  engines  and  where  there  is  sufficient  supply  of  compressed 
air  which  can  be  piped  to  reservoirs,  but  it  is  slow  in  operation  i 
where  engine  to  be  turned  must  supply  the  air. 

A.  O.  Cunningham,  W abash  R.  R. — No  table  less  than  75  ft.  should 
be  used.  Deck  tables  of  this  length  cost  $2,600.  The  foundation 
of  circular  wall  and  paving  should  always  be  of  concrete ;  pit  should 
be  well  drained ;  the  cost  of  this  for  75-ft.  deck  table  would  be 
$3,700. 

Electricity  is  the  ideal  power  for  operating  a  table.  If  this  can- 
not be  obtained  a  gasoline  engine  may  be  employed  of  about  6  hp. 
The  cost  of  the  electrical  equipment  would  be  $1,150,  and  for  the 
gasoline  engine  equipment  $1,000. 

W.  H.  Moore,  New  York  Haven  d  Hartford  R.  R. — The  standard 
length  for  turntables  on  our  road  is  75  ft.,  but  we  build  some  tables 
80  ft.  long.  The  approximate  average  cost  for  a  75-ft.  deck  plate 
girder  turntable  is  about  $3,500,  and  for  a  half  through  plate  girder 
turntable  about  $5,750.  The  cost  of  foundation  of  the  circular  wall, 
etc.,  varies  so  much,  depending  on  the  nature  of  the  ground,  that  it 
would  be  hardly  proper  to  name  any  average.  I  may  say,  however, 
that  for  a  concrete  pit  with  granolithic  floor  and  granite  center 
stone,  in  a  location  where  there  was  good  firm  sand  requiring  no 
piles  and  where  drainage  could  be  cheaply  taken  care  of,  the  total  i 
cost  is  about  $3,800.  For  power  operation  we  use  mostly  gasoline 
motors ;  some  air  motors,  and  electric  motors  where  current  can 
be  conveniently  obtained.  The  cost  of  power  installation  averages 
about  $1,000. 

G.  Aldrich,  New  York,  New  Haven  d  Hartford  R.  R. — For  the  re- 
quirements of  modern  engines,  75-ft.  minimum ;  80-ft.  recommend  ; 
75-ft.  deck  plate  girder,  erected  complete  $3,600,  base  of  rail  on 
table  to  top  of  center  pier,  6  ft.  4  ins. ;  base  of  rail  on  table  to  top 
of  circular  rail,  4  ft.  8  ins.  ;  75-ft.  through  plate  girder,  cost  with 
floor  erected  complete,  $5,750.  Base  of  rail  on  table  to  top  of  center 
pier,  3  ft.  11  ins.  ;  base  of  rail  to  top  of  circular  rail,  2  ft.  9  ins. 
The  foundation,  circular  wall  and  center  pier  are  constructed  of  con- 
crete ;  the  pit  is  usually  paved  with  granolithic  pavement.  The 
cost  varies  in  accordance  with  local  conditions,  ranging  from  $2,500 
to  $4,000. 

For  power  we  use :  (a)  air  supplied  by  the  engine  being  turned ; 
(b)  air  supplied  from  compressors  in  adjacent  shops;  (c)  gasoline 
engines;  (d)  electric  motors.  Electric  motors  preferred  where 
current  is  available  ;  air  motors,  supplied  by  compressors,  second, 
and  gasoline  motors  third  choice.  The  cost  of  power  installation 
varies  from  $900  to  $1,200. 

N.  F.  Helmers,  Northern  Pacific  Ry. — The  Northern  Pacific  Ry. 
are  installing  80  and  85-ft.  tables.  I  do  not  anticipate  any  power 


RAILWAYS 


in  the  future  which  will  call  for  the  use  of  a  larger  table.  An  80-ft. 
through  table,  without  the  circle  rail,  and  weighing  114,855  Ibs..  cost 
in  place  $4,600.  Such  a  table  was  installed  at  Staples,  Minn.,  with 
concrete  circle  wall  and  center  foundation.  The  masonry  was  done 
by  contract,  and  the  installation  of  the  table  by  the  company  at  an 
expense  of  $3.92  per  ton.  The  framing  of  ties,  and  other  timber 
cost  $4.05  per  thousand  feet.  The  cost  was  as  follows: 

Labor.  Material. 

Turntable      $211.44  $4.1!>8.52 

False    work     I  :.:•:: 

Timber,    ties,    planking,    etc 35.2;:  77.4!» 

Painting     27.4!)  44. 78 

$274.16          $4,333.72 
Total  cost  (not  including  masonry) ....          $4,607.88 

In  1908  an  80-ft.  table  of  the  same  type  was  installed  at  Minne- 
apolis replacing  one  64  ft.  In  length.  The  foundation  work  was 
done  under  traffic,  and  the  change  of  tables  was  done  with  a  total 
int.iruption  of  15  hrs.  ;  itemized  statement  follows: 

Labor.  Material. 

Excavation     $    463.94          

Gravel     92.14          

Concrete   work    408.28          $    651.52 

Forms     21.76  1 ;:».!!» 

Circle  rail    38.74          

Table    proper    361. 3fi  4,040.95 

False  work  for  curbing 66.36 

Removal   of   old    brick    curbing. .       104.42          

Cleaning   girders    37.98          

Painting     23.76  21.04 

Ties    and    coping 7,9.71  188.89 

Engineering    14.66 


The  total  cost  was  $6,749.70. 


$1,632.09          $5,117.61 


I  consider  that  ordinary  conditions  do  not  require  the  neces- 
sity of  paving  for  the  pit,  but  good  drainage  is  essential  in  most 
cases. 

For  power  we  are  using  electricity  and  compressed  air,  while  some 
the  80  and  85-ft.  tables  are  being  turned  by  hand.     Air  motor  in 
at  Jamestown,  N.  D.f  cost  at  St.  Paul,  $450  ;  installation,  $19.81  ; 
il.    $469.81.     Electric   tractor  furnished  by  Nichols  &  Bro.,   cost 
L.104.37  ;    installation,   $115.86  ;    total,   $1,220.23. 
W.    T.   Powell,   Colorado   <C-    Southern   Ry. — The   up-to-date    table 
lid  be   80  ft.  long,  with  a   capacity  for  turning  200-ton  engines. 
We  installed  recently  an   80-ft.,   200-ton,  through-plate  girder  table 
which  cost  as  follows: 

Table  f.  o.  b.  Denver,  Including  circle  rails $3,700.00 

Material  for  concrete  foundations  and  walls 1,090.00 

Labor 1,600.00 

Total   cost    $6,390.00 

This  table  replaced  a  66-ft.  table  and  we  were  compelled  to  ex- 

ravate   and   put    in    the   curbing   under    l:J    tracks  and   keep    them   safe 


1284  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

while  in  use.  We  drove  24  piles  for  center  foundation  and  capped 
it  with  a  block  of  concrete  12  ft.  square  and  4  ft.  thick;  a  deck 
table  of  this  length  and  capacity  would  cost  about  $600  less.  We 
use  concrete  entirely  for  masonry  ;  rails  are  fastened  with  bolts  and 
cast  clips,  the  bolts  being  set  in  the  concrete  ;  no  paving ;  drained 
when  necessary.  We  use  air  power  with  a  two-cylinder  motor. 

J.  S.  Browne,  New  York,  New  Haven  &  Hartford  R.  R. — We  have 
recently  installed  an  80-ft.  table  at  Providence.  The  center  pier  is 
of  concrete,  reinforced  with  steel  rails,  on  account  of  the  irregularity 
of  the  supporting  material,  as  it  was  feared  that  the  concrete  might 
be  fractured  by  the  load  if  laid  without  reinforcement.  The  outer 
wall  of  the  pit  and  the  paving  are  also  of  concrete. 

While  an  accurate  record  was  not  kept  of  the  cost  it.  was  approxi- 
mately as  follows : 

80-ft.  steel  table  delivered  at  Providence $3,400.00 

Placing  coping  and  circular  rail  and  moving  table 

into   pit    800.00 

Concrete  in  outer  wall  and  center,  including  forms.    2,800.00 

Excavation,   including  disposal   of  material 1,500.00 

Paving    300.00 

Drain  pipe  to  connect  with   sewer 200.00 

Total     $9,000.00 

The  work  was  done  by  the  company's  force,  and  the  high  cost  of 
excavation  was  due  to  the  fact  that  a  portion  of  the  work  was  dore 
in  freezing  weather,  and  it  was  necessary  to  handle  the  material 
more  than  once  before  its  final  disposal  by  work  trains. 

The  company's  standard  main  line  turntable  is  75  ft.  long,  but 
80  ft.  is  considered  better  at  points  where  the  largest  type  engines 
are  turned,  to  permit  of  properly  balancing  them.  Deck  plate 
girder  tables  are  used  where  sufficient  depth  is  available  without 
excessive  cost,  but  where  this  is  not  feasible,  half  through  plate 
girder  tables  are  used.  The  superstructure  of  deck  tables  is  about 
30%  cheaper  than  that  of  half  through  tables,  but  this  saving  is 
balanced  by  the  greater  cost  of  the  pit,  so  that  under  ordinary  condi- 
tions the  total  cost  of  these  two  types  is  about  equal.  Gasoline 
motors  are  generally  used  for  power,  although  electric  motors  may 
be  used  to  considerable  extent  in  the  future. 

J.  N.  Penwell,  Lake  Erie  d  Western  R.  R. — On  our  main  line,  we 
are  taking  out  62-ft.  tables  and  replacing  with  80-ft.  tables,  using 
the  old  ones  on  the  branch  lines.  We  have  two  of  the  old  cast-iron 
tables,  5,0  ft.  in  length,  which  have  been  in  use  20  yrs.,  one  of 
which  is  in  perfect  condition  and  the  other  about  worn  out.  We 
have  only  one  of  the  old  style  gallows  frame  tables,  but  it  is  out  of 
date  and  will  be  replaced  with  a  more  modern  structure  within  two 
years.  For  the  foundation  and  circle  walls  we  are  using  concrete. 
If  foundation  is  not  absolutely  reliable,  we  drive  piles.  Drainage 
is  important  and  the  very  best  should  be  provided.  Our  tables  are 
all  operated  by  hand,  except  one  which  we  are  now  operating  with 
air.  Would  recommend  electricity  wherever  it  can  be  had.  In 
erecting  new  tables  we  make  provision  for  air  pipes  in  the  founda- 
tion, so  that  we  can  use  air  in  the  future  if  we  desire. 


RAILWAYS.  1285 

Cost  of  Turntables.— The  following  was  the  estimated  cost  of 
turntables  for  the  N.  Y.  Central  Ry.,  in  1902  : 

Size  of   Turntable.                         70ft.  75ft.  80ft.  85ft. 

Turntable  delivered,  f.  o.  b $1,965  $2,400  $2,600  $2,800 

Labor  erecting    395  430  460  500 

Pit     3,600  3,800  4,000  4,200 

Mortar   for   turning 900  900  900  900 

Total     $6,860          $7,530          $7,960          $8,400 

Cost  of  Ash  Pit. — On  the  Northern  Pacific  a  standard  ash  pit 
with  brick  side  walls  and  concrete  bottom  was  built  at  a  cost  of 
about  $3  per  lin.  ft.  in  1890.  The  width  between  the  side  walls  is 
4  ft.,  and  the  clear  depth  of  the  walls  is  3^  ft.  below  top  of  rail. 
The  brick  side  walls  are  17  ins.  thick.  The  sides  of  the  pit  are 
protected  by  cast-iron  plates,  y2  in.  thick,  18  ins.  wide,  and  3  ft.  4 
ins.  long.  The  bottom  of  the  pit  is  paved  with  hard  brick  set  on 
edge  and  bedded  on  8  ins.  of  concrete.  This  concrete  foundation  ex- 
tends under  the  side  walls  where  it  is  thickened  to  12  ins.  for  a 
width  of  2  ft. 

On  the  N.  Y.  Central  in  1902,  the  following  was  the  cost  of  differ- 
ent types  of  ash  pits : 

Elevated  ash  pit,  $13  per  lin.  ft.,  plus  $39  for  the  two  ends. 

Semi-depressed  pits  on  the  main  line,  $20  per  lin.  ft. 

Ditto,  for  minor  pits,  $15  per  lin.  ft. 

Cost  of  Snow  Sheds.— On  the  Northern  Pacific  R.  R.  (in  1890)  the 
standard  snow  shed  on  level  ground  consisted  of  timber  bents 
(8xlO-in.),  6  to  10  ft.  apart,  to  which  were  fastened  horizontal 
studding  (4xlO-in. ),  and  to  the  studding  was  spiked  2-in.  upright 
siding.  The  roof  was  double-pitched,  with  rafters  4  x  10-in.,  and 
sheeted  with  2-in.  plank.  For  wet  snow,  the  bents  were  spaced 
6  ft.  apart,  requiring  304  ft.  B.  M.  and  13.3  Ibs.  of  iron  per  lin.  ft. 
of  snow  shed.  At  $30  per  M,  and  5  cts.  per  lb.,  the  cost  was  not 
quite  $10  per  lin.  ft.  of  shed. 

The  standard  snow  shed  in  through  cuts  (single  track)  has  bents 
6  ft.  apart,  and  it  requires  484  ft.  B.  M.  and  14  Ibs.  of  iron  per  lin. 
ft.,  the  cost  being  $15  per  lin.  ft. 

A  standard  side-hill  snow  shed,  with  a  flat  roof,  with  bents  6  ft. 
apart,  contains  634  ft.  B.  M.  and  10  Ibs.  of  iron  per  lin.  ft.,  costing 
$20  per  lin.  ft. 

None  of  the  foregoing  have  any  cribwork,  being  entirely  sawed 
timber.  Nor  is  any  extra  excavation  involved  in  their  construction. 
These  sheds  are  not  designed  to  resist  snow  slides  or  avalanches. 

In  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  29,  1888,  Mr.  Thomas  C.  Keefer 
has  described  and  illustrated  the  types  of  snow  sheds  built  (1887) 
in  the  Selkirk  Mts.,  on  the  Canadian  Pacific  Ry.  Fifty-three  sheds, 
total  7  miles  long,  were  built. 

The  typical  "avalanche  shed"  has  a  log,  rock-filled  crib,  forming  a 
retaining  wall  back  of  which  is  an  earth  fill.  This  forms  the  uphill 
side  of  the  shed.  The  roof  and  downhill  side  are  of  sawed  timber. 
The  cost  ranged  from  $40  to  $70  per  lin.  ft.  of  "avalanche  shed." 


1286  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

AVhere  cribwork  was  not  needed,     "gallery  sheds"   were  built  at  a 
test  of  $15  to  $40  per  lin.  ft. 

Cost  of  Snow  Fences. — The  standard  portable  snow  fence  of  Chi- 
cago, Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul  haa  the  following  bill  of  material  for  a 
panel  16  ft.  long: 

Legs,  3  pieces  2  x  6-in.  x  14 -ft,  No.  1  Common. 

Boards,  11  pieces  1  x  6-in.  x  16 -ft.,  No.  2  Fencing. 
3  carriage  bolts,   %  x  5  ins. 
3  No.   10  =  0.1  Ib. 

66  wire  nails,  8d.  =  0.5  Ib. 

60  wire  nails,  lOd.  =  0.7  Ib. 

When  stakes  are  used  to  hold  the  legs  down,  use  6  stakes  cut 
from  2  x  4-in.  x  2-ft.  No.  1  common  ripped  diagonally,  and  fastened 
to  the  legs  with  a  total  of  12  wire  nails  (20d.). 

When  ground  is  frozen,  use  drift  bolts  instead  of  stakes,  using 
6  drift  bolts  (%  x  15-in.)  and  12  wire  staples  (3-in.). 

This  fence  contains  130  ft.  B.  M.  per  panel  16  ft.  long,  and  weighs 
327  Ibs.  when  made  of  green  lumber.  In  1899,  the  cost  was  $1.60 
per  panel,  f.  o.  b.  cars,  complete  with  stakes  and  spikes. 

On  another  Northwestern  railway,  the  cost  per  16-ft.  panel  was: 

126   ft.   B.   M.,   at   $15,   incl.  nails $1.89 

Labor     0.11 

Total $2~00 

On  another  road  the  cost  per  16-ft.  panel  was: 

152  ft.   B.  M.,  at  $17 $2.58 

Nails 0.10 

Bolts     0.05 

Labor    0.35 

Total $3.08 

On  the  G.  &  N.  W.  Ry.  a  stationary  snow  fence  is  largelj  used. 
Cedar  posts,  12  ft.  long,  are  set  4  ft.  in  the  ground  and  8  ft.  »part. 
The  boards  are  1  x  10-in.,  spaced  2  ins.  apart,  leaving  an  open  apace 
of  12  ins.  next  to  the  ground.  The  cost  of  this  fence  per  16-ft.  panel 
was  as  follows,  in  1900: 

96  ft.  B.  M.  boards,  at  $14.50 $1.39 

2  cedar  posts,  at  30  cts 0.60 

1%  Ibs.  lOd.  nails,  at  $2.40 0.04 

Labor     0.60 

Total    ?^.63 

For  costs  of  right  of  way  fences  see  the  index  under  Fences. 
Cost  of  Mail   Cranes.— On  the  St.   Louis  &  Southwestern  Ry.,  in. 
1902,  the  standard  mail  crane  cost: 

Crane  and  materials $13.00 

Labor 6.35 

Total     .  $19.35 


RAILWAYS.  1287 

This  was  a  wooden  mail  crane.  A  common  cost  of  wooden  mail 
cranes  is  $12  to  $15,  erected  in  place.  Iron  mail  cranes  cost  about 
$35  in  place. 

Cost  of  Interlocking  Signal  Plant  and  of  Operation. — Mr.  J.  A. 
Peabody  estimates  that  the  average  interlocking  plant  will  have  a 
life  of  20  yrs.,  but,  to  be  on  the  conservative  side,  assumes  15  yrs. 
He  estimates  such  a  plant  will  cost  $8,000,  including  cross-over, 
4  derails,  4  high  signals  and  6  dwarfs. 

To  operate  and  maintain  this  plant  would  cost : 

Per  year. 

Interest,   4 %    of   $8,000 $    320 

Depreciation,    7  %    560 

Maintenance,    10.5%    840 

Operation 1,440 

Total     $2,800 

He  estimates  that  where  there  are  17  trains  stopped  daily,  at  a 
cost  of  45  cts.  per  stoppage,  the  yearly  cost  is  $2,800  for  stopping 
trains.  Any  greater  number  of  trains  would  justify  an  interlock- 
ing plant  merely  to  save  the  expense  of  stopping  trains. 

See  Engineering-Contracting,  February,  1906,  p.  49,  for  Mr.  Pea- 
body's  complete  discussion. 

Definition  of  "Mile  of  Railway."— In  discussing  railway  costs  per 
"mile,"  there  is  great  danger  of  confusion,  for  there  are  three 
kinds  of  "miles  of  railway":  (1)  The  mile  of  roadbed,  equivalent 

rto  the  mile  of  right  of  way  ;  (2)  the  mile  of  trackway,  including  all 
1st,  2d,  3d  and  4th  tracks  upon  which  trains  travel  regularly  be- 
tween stations ;  and  ( 3 )  the  mile  of  track,  including  all  tracks  of 

f-every  nature,  main,  branch,  side  tracks,  yard  tracks,  etc.  Due  to 
the  different  meanings  assigned  to  the  "mile  of  railway,"  I  have 
abandoned  the  use  of  that  term,  and  for  this  book  I  have  adopted 
the  three  terms  above  used:  (1)  Roadbed,  (2)  trackway,  and  (3) 
track. 

The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  uses  the  word  "line"  when 
referring  to  "roadbed." 

Many  engineers  use  the  word  "line"  when  referring  to  "roadbed." 

The  term  "main  line"  is  also  ambiguous,  as  many  people  use  it 
to  include  "branch"  lines. 

The  word  "branch"  has  no  definite  meaning,  as  a  rule,  and  re- 
fers merely  to  lines  having  a  light  traffic,  and  generally  to  lines  that 
branch  from  the  main  line  and  do  not  carry  "through  traffic." 

"Spurs"  is  another  ambiguous  term.  A  short  branch  line,  espe- 
cially one  that  serves  only  one  class  of  traffic,  is  commonly  called  a 
spur. 

Logging  "spurs"  are  often  merely  temporary  lines,  too  long  to  be 
called  "sidings,"  and  yet  not  of  a  character  worthy  of  being-  desig- 
nated as  branch  lines. 

"Sidings"  are  short  lengths  of  track  at  stations,  where  train* 
pass,  and  where  cars  await  loading  and  unloading ;  also  short  tracks 


1288  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

serving  factories,   mills,   etc.     SiCings  merge   into   "yard  tracks"   at 
large  stations. 

Average  Cost  of  Railways  in  America. — Many  generalizations 
founded  on  meager  data  have  been  made  as  to  the  probable  average 
cost  of  American  railways.  The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
receives  annual  reports  from  all  railways,  and  those  reports  give  the 
"cost  of  road."  The  last  report  of  the  Commission,  for  the  year 
1906,  gives  the  following  as  the  total  of  all  roads,  taken  from  the 
general  balance  sheets  of  American  railways : 

Cost   of   road $11,588,922,421 

Cost   of   equipment 831,365,517 

Neither  of  these  figures  means  what  it  seems  to  mean. 
The  following  was  the  total  mileage : 

Single    track    (-  roadbed) 222,340 

1st,  2d,   3d  and  4th  track    (=  trackway) 243,322 

All  tracks,   including  sidings,   etc 317,083 

According  to  this,  the  "cost  of  road"  would  be  $50,200  per  mile 
of  roadbed,  and  cost  of  equipment  would  be  $3,7.40  per  mile  of 
roadbed.  The  first  is  too  high  and  the  second  is  too  low.  The  "cost 
of  road"  is,  in  large  part,  the  price  paid  for  it  by  its  present 
owners ;  and,  as  nearly  all  American  roads  have  changed  hands 
at  least  once,  it  is  evident  that  this  price  is  more  nearly  a  function 
of  value  based  on  net  earnings  than  it  is  a  function  of  actual  cost 
of  construction. 

The  "cost  of  equipment"  is  far  below  the  actual  cost  of  new 
equipment,  since  most  roads  report  the  depreciated  or  second-hand 
cost  of  equipment.  Indeed,  it  seems  that  some  roads  report  merely 
a  nominal  cost  of  equipment  to  escape  taxation. 

The  capital  stock  and  funded  debt  (=  bonds)  reported  for  19'J6 
was  as  follows  : 

Funded  debt    %   8,068,004,746 

Capital   stock    6,929,670,224 


Total     $14,997,674,970 

From  this  it  follows  that  the  following  stock  and  bonds  were  out- 
standing per  mile  of  roadbed : 

Funded   debt    $36,300 

Capital    stock     31,200 

Total     $67,500 

Since  nearly  all  American  railways  have  been  built  with  money 
secured  by  the  sale  of  bonds,  it  is  evident  that  the  average  Ameri- 
can railway  (including  equipment)  has  cost  at  least  $36,300  pei 
mile  of  roadbed.  The  capital  stock  largely  represents  the  capital- 
ized value  of  the  net  earnings,  although  in  some  instances  it  repre< 
sents  money  actually  expended  in  construction  and  equipment. 

Of  the  $75,458,000  spent  in  building  and  equipping  the  1,645  mile 
of  the  Northern  Pacific  Railway  in  Washington,  $8,848.000  was  ex. 


RAILWAYS.  1289 

pended  for  improvements  (exclusive  of  equipment)  since  the 
original  construction.  If  this  is  typical  of  average  expenditures 
for  railway  improvements  throughout  America,  it  would  be  neces- 
sary to  add  about  10%  to  the  $36,300  above  given,  which  would 
make  the  average  cost  of  construction  and  equipment  about  $40,000 
per  mile.  It  has  been  the  common  practice  to  make  most  improve- 
ments out  of  earnings,  without  issuing  bonds  ;  hence  it  is  reason- 
ably certain  that  American  railways  have  actually  cost  at  least 
$40,000  per  mile  of  roadbed  for  construction,  land  and  equipment. 
Nor  do  I  believe  that  this  cost  has  been  much  exceeded.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  cost  of  reproducing  the  same  roads  to-day  would 
probably  exceed  this  sum,  and  might  exceed  it  very  much,  the 
reason  being  that  land  values  have  appreciated  so  greatly  since  the 
roads  were  built.  This  is  well  brought  out  elsewhere  in  this  book 
where  the  original  costs  and  costs  of  reproduction  of  Washington 
railways  are  given. 

Cost  of  Railway  Lines. — In  Engineering  Magazine,  December, 
1S95,  Mr.  J.  P.  Wallace  gives  the  following  estimates  of  the  average 
cost  per  mile  of  single  track  roadbed  in  the  United  States: 

Class   of   Railway.  A.  B.  C. 

Right    of   way $  1,000          $   1,500  $  2,000 

Proportionate  expense  of  terminals.  . .  500  1,500  5,000 

Bridges  and  culverts 1,500  2,500  4.000 

Grading     3,000  6,000  12,000 

Track   laid    6,000  6,500  7,000 

Ballast    (rock) 2,500  3,000 

Fencing     300  400  400 

Telegraph    200  250  250 

Stations  and  water  supply 500  800  1,200 

Engineering    400  500  700 

General  and  legal  expenses 200  400  600 

Equipment,  cars  and  locomotives 1,500  2,500  4,000 


Total     $15,100          $25,350          $40,150 

Class  "A"  is  a  branch  line,  2  passenger  and  4  daily  freight  trains. 

Class  "B"  is  a  secondary  line,  connecting  small  cities. 

Class  "C"  is  a  trunk  line,  90-lb.  rails. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  item  of  "Engineering"  is  considerably 
below  what  it  actually  cost  the  various  railways  in  the  state  of 
Washington.  See  pages  1303,  1306  and  following. 

In  fact,  Mr.  Wallace  is  low,  in  my  judgment,  on  nearly  every 
item  enumerated,  excepting,  perhaps,  general  and  legal  expense. 

Cost  of  a  Mining  Railway. — Mr.  John  H.  Pearson  gives  the  fol- 
lowing cost  of  The  Winchester  &  Beattyville  R.  R.,  built  in  1893. 
The  road  is  8  miles  long,  and  has  9  miles  of  track  including  sidings. 
It  was  built  to  open  up  a  mining  district,  and  it  runs  through  rugged 
country.  No  grades  exceed  1%,  and  the  maximum  curve  was  6°, 
except  two  12°  curves.  The  cost  per  mile  of  roadway  (8  miles) 
was  as  follows : 


V290  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Per  mile 
of  roadbed. 

1.  Preliminary  surveys   $  19 

2.  Locating  surveys Ill 

3.  Engineering  during  construction 375 

4.  Stationery    28 

5.  Office  furniture    6 

6.  Tools    83 

7.  Grading  roadbed    2233 

8.  Trestles    (at   $23   per  M   IP   place  and   iron  at 

5  cts.  per  Ib.) 1,393 

9.  Culverts    159 

10.  Legal    expenses    10 

11.  Right    of    way 428 

12.  Cross  ties  (31  cts.  each)   and  handling..  696 

13.  Rails  (56-lb.  relayers,  at  $25  per  ton) 2,370 

14.  Track    fastenings     506 

15.  Switches     140 

16.  Ballast  (1,000  cu.  yds.) 330 

17.  Fences  and  cattle  guards 41 

18.  General    expenses    220 

19.  Tracklaying  and  surfacing  and  repairs 988 

20.  Water  station    ($1,380) 172 

21.  Depot  and   other   buildings    ($1,320) 165 

22.  Engines,  cars  and  repairs   ($6,013) 752 

23.  Fuel,  oil  and  waste 83 

24.  Conducting    transportation    321 

25.  Telegraph   line    

26.  Three  coal  and  lumber  switches 2,021 


Total    $13,650 

Net  revenue  from  operation    ($6,000)... 750 


Balance     $12,900 

Deduct  equipment    714 

Total  cost  of  construction $12,186 

Since  there  was  1  mile  of  side  track  to  8  miles  of  roadway,  the 
above  costs  should  be  divided  by  1.125  to  arrive  at  the  cost  per  mile 
of  track.  Multiplying  by  0.9  will  give  almost  the  same  result. 

Wages  were  low  at  that  time,  common  laborers  receiving  $1.25 
a  day ;  teams,  $3.50;  single  mule  and  driver,  $1.75;  foremen,  $2.00. 

Cost  of  a  Logging  Railway,  Pennsylvania.— Mr.  William  Barclay 
Parsons,  In  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  25,  p.  119,  briefly  describes 
the  location  and  construction  of  7  miles  of  standard  gage  logging 
railroad  built  in  Northwestern  Pennsylvania  in  1890.  The  maxi- 
mum curve  was  18°,  and  the  ruling  grade,  3.3%.  The  country 
was  heavily  wooded  with  hemlock  and  very  rough ;  clearing  and 
grubbing  costing  $50  to  $60  an  acre  for  a  right  of  way  50  ft.  wide. 
Cuts  were  16  ft.  wide  and  fills  12  ft.  Log  culverts  were  used  under 
banks  10  ft.  or  less  in  height.  The  excavation  averaged  nearly 
11,000  cu.  yds.  per  mile,  of  which  7.6%  was  rock,  11%  loose  rock, 
35.2%  tough  clay  (1  pick  to  1  shovel),  and  46.2%  earth,  most  of 
which  was  heavy  soil.  The  clearing  and  grubbing,  log  culverts  and 
excavation  when  charged  up  to  the  excavation  cost  46%  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.,  or  about  $5,000  per  mile.  (The  excavation  alone  probably  cost 
about  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  The  toughness  of  the  earth  and  the  pres- 
ence of  roots  made  the  excavation  expensive.  Wages  were  prob- 


RAILWAYS.  1201 

ably  $1.25  per  10-hr,   day.)      The  cost  of  one  mile  of  finished  road 
on  the  heaviest  part  of  the  line  was  as  follows: 

61'. S6   tons  of   10-lb.   rails,   at   $33.00 $2,074.38 

352    joints   complete,    at    $0.55 193.60 

6,200  Ibs.    spikes,    at    $0.0225 139.50 

3,000  cross    ties,    at    $0.15 450.00 

Freight   on   materials 159.00 

Tracklaying    400.00 

Grading    5,026.89 

Trestles  (at  $17  per  M  in  place) 250.45 

Surveys,    inspection,    etc 400.00 

Total  per  mile $9,093.82 

Cost  of  a  Short  Branch  Line,  Texas. — In  1903  a  first-class  branch 
line  was  built  in  Texas  to  give  the  St.  Louis  Southwestern  an 
entrance  into  Dallas.  The  line  is  12.13  miles  single  track  and  has 
1.52  miles  of  sidings,  total  13.65  miles  of  track.  The  line  is  almost 
entirely  tangent,  and  follows  a  ridge. 

Total. 

Engineering    $     6,323 

Grading    48,924 

Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts. 41,C61 

Ties     26,838 

Rails   (75-lb.) 37,607 

Track    fastenings    5,596 

Frogs  and  switches 1,177 

Ballast    30,526 

Tracklaying   and    surfacing 9,511 

Crossings,    cattle   guards   and    signs 1,929 

Total .$210,092 

It  will  be  noted  that  land  and  equipment  are  not  included,  nor 
interest  during  construction. 

Engineering  cost  about  3%,  and  tracklaying  and  surfacing  cost 
about  $700  per  mile  of  track. 

Cost  of  a  Cheap  Railway,  Georgia. — Mr.  A.  Pew,  in  Trans.  Am. 
Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  23,  in  a  paper  entitled  "The  Cheapest  Railway  in 
the  World,"  gives  the  following  as  the  cost  of  a  19-mile  railway  in 
Georgia : 

Cost  per  mile  of  road  and  track $3,440 

Cost  per  mile  for  equipment 1,000 

The  roadbed  was  only  10  ft.  wide  in  fills  and  14  ft.  in  cuts,  and 
the  excavation  averaged  4,000  cu.  yds.  per  mile.  The  excavation 
cost  only  9  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages  of  laborers  being  $1  per  10-hr, 
day.  The  ties  cost  only  10  cts.  each,  and  45-lb.  rails  were  used. 

Report  of  H.  P.  Gillette  to  the  Washington  Railroad  Commission 
on  the  Valuation  of  the  Railways.*— Before  explaining  the  methods 
pursued  in  making  the  appraisal,  it  is  as  well  to  record  the  fact 
that  the  state  of  Washington  is  the  first  state  in  the  Union  to  com- 
plete  the  valuation  of  its  railways  for  the  express  purpose  of  using 
these  values  as  a  basis  for  rate  making.  Only  one  other  State 

* Engineering-Contracting,  April   7.  1909. 


1292  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Railway  Commission  takes  priority  over  the  Washington  Railroad 
Commission  in  point  of  time  of  completing  a  valuation  of  the  rail- 
ways within  the  state,  namely,  the  Texas  Railway  Commission  ;  but 
it  should  be  remembered  that  the  object  of  the  valuation  of  the  rail- 
ways of  Texas  was  not  for  the  purpose  of  rate  making,  but  for  the 
purpose  of  limiting  the  issues  of  stocks  and  bonds — that  is,  to  pre- 
vent "stock  watering" — which  presents  quite  a  different  problem 
from  that  presented  to  the  Washington  Railroad  Commission. 
Vastly  greater  interests  are  at  stake  than  when  railway  values  are 
to  be  used  merely  to  limit  the  issue  of  stocks  and  bonds  of  railways 
chartered  within  the  state.  Hence,  both  the  scope  of  my  investiga- 
tion of  railway  values,  and  the  methods  used  were  radically  differ- 
ent and  necessarily  much  more  complex  than  prevailed  in  the  Texas 
appraisal.  For  example,  in  the  following  out  of  the  requirements 
of  the  Washington  statute,  you  felt  impelled  to  secure  all  the  data 
enumerated  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  the  cele- 
brated Nebraska  rate  case  known  as  the  Smythe  v.  Ames  case. 
The  Supreme  Court  held  in  its  decision  of  that  case  that  a  rate- 
making  body  must  consider,  among  other  things: 

First.  The  original  cost  of  the  railway,  plus  improvements  and 
betterments. 

Second.     Its  cost  of  reproduction  new. 

Third.  Its  present  value,  ascertained  by  deducting  its  depreci- 
ation from  its  value  new. 

Prior  to  this  Washington  railway  appraisal,  no  railway  com- 
mission in  America  had  ever  attempted  to  comply  with  the  de- 
cision of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  Nebraska '  case,  and  T  believe 
that  all  the  failures  on  the  part  of  other  railway  commissions  In 
their  rate-making  efforts  may  be  traced  directly  to  their  funda- 
mental failure  to  follow  the  Nebraska  rate  case  decision.  Flat  rate 
making  has  proven  abortive,  because  of  attempts  to  make  rates 
without  full  knowledge  of  all  the  factors  which  the  Supreme  Court 
has  held  'to  be  necessary  in  forming  an  intelligent  judgment ;  and 
prominent  among  these  factors  are  the  original  cost,  the  cost  ot 
reproduction,  and  the  present  value. 

Two  other  states  besides  Texas  have  made  railway  appraisals, 
namely  Michigan  and  Wisconsin  ;  but  in  neither  of  these  instances 
was  the  appraisal  made  by  a  railroad  commission.  Both  the 
Michigan  and  Wisconsin  appraisals  were  made  for  the  purposes  of 
taxation,  and  we^e  not  governed  by  the  Nebraska  rate  case  decision. 

The  state  of  Washington  is  the  first  state  to  secure  the  original 
cost  of  the  railways  within  its  boundaries  and  is,  therefore,  the 
first  state  to  investigate  the  accounting  records  of  the  railways  with 
the  object  of  ascertaining  the  actual  original  cost  and  the  cost  ot 
improvements  and  betterments. 

I  mention  this  fact  not  merely  for  the  purpose  of  putting  on 
record  the  priority  which  the  Washington  Railroad  Commission  can 
justly  claim  in  following  the  law  as  laid  down  by  the  Supreme 
Court,  but  for  the  purpose  of  making  clear  the  magnitude  of  the 
task  confronting  the  commission  and  its  engineers  and  experts. 


RAILWAYS.  1293 

Speaking  for  myself,  I  found  the  precedents  established  by 
Texas,  Michigan  and  Wisconsin  of  little  value,  either  in  deciding 
the  methods  to  be  pursued  in  making  the  appraisals  or  in  esti- 
mating the  probable  cost  of  the  appraisal.  I  ascertained  that  the 
state  of  Wisconsin  had  spent  about  $11  per  mile  of  railway  for 
making  the  appraisal  and  the  railways  themselves  had  spent  an 
equal  sum,  making  a  total  of  about  $22  per  mile  for  the  joint  work 
done  by  the  state  and  by  the  railways,  for  they  both  worked  to- 
gether in  making  the  appraisals.  When  I  started  the  appraisal  of 
the  railways  of  Washington  I  believed  that  the  appraisal  would  cost 
far  less  than  $11  per  mile,  and  I  am  glad  to  say  that  the  cost  has 
actually  been  not  more  than  $13  a  mife,  although  I  regret  that 
it  was  even  as  much  as  that.  I  had  no  precedent  to  guide  me  In 
estimating  the  cost  of  going  through  the  accounting  records  of  the 
railways,  and  I  underestimated  the  time  and  labor  involved  in  that 
undertaking.  Railway  accounting  records  nearly  40  years  old  had 
to  be  discovered  and  analyzed.  I  say  "discovered,"  for  the  rail- 
ways themselves  did  not  know  the  nature  of  these  early  records, 
even  if  they  knew  of  their  very  existence,  which  in  many  cases 
they  did  not. 

At  this  point  it  may  be  well  to  explain  that  these  early  records 
are  far  from  being  worthless,  as  many  persons  have  assumed,  for 
the  subsequent  improvements  and  betterments  can  be  added  to  these 
original  costs,  and  thus  bring  the  total  cash  expenditures  down  to 
date.  This  total  cash  expenditure  is  a  wonderful  aid  to  the  engi- 
neer in  estimating  the  cost  of  reproduction.  To  illustrate  by  an 
example,  take  the  actual  cost  of  the  item  of  "Engineering"  on  the 
Northern  Pacific  Railway.  Up  to  June  30,  1906,  it  has  amounted 
to  $2,900,000  for  the  state  of  Washington,  or  about  5%  of  the  total 
actual  cost  of  construction  and  betterments.  An  investigation  of 
this  seemingly  high  percentage  disclosed  two  big  items,  one  being 
about  $300,000  for  the  exploration  surveys  in  the  Cascade 
Mountains.  At  the  time  these  surveys  were  made,  no  maps  were 
in  existence,  and  the  railway  engineers  were  compelled  to  explore 
the  entire  Cascade  Range  from  the  Canadian  boundary  south  to 
tha  Columbia  River.  To-day,  in  reproducing  the  Northern  Pacific 
Railway,  no  such  elaborate  exploration  is  necessary,  and,  if  it  were 
eliminated,  the  cost  of  engineering  would  be  reduced  to  $2,600,000. 
In  like  manner  -certain  other  items  of  engineering  would  be  reduced, 
so  that  the  total  cost  of  engineering  should  not  exceed  $2,500,000, 
which  is  the.  sum  that  I  used  in  estimating  the  item  of  engineering 
when  making  my  estimate  of  the  cost  of  reproduction.  It  would 
take  several  hundred  pages  to  explain  my  analysis  of  the  original 
costs,  and  my  use  of  the  data  thus  obtained  in  guiding  my  judg- 
ment as  to  a  proper  allowance  for  the  cost  of  reproduction  of  eatfh 
item.  I  wish,  however,  to  say  had  I  not  secured  the  original  costs 
I  am  positive  that  my  costs  of  reproduction  would  be  nothing  better 
than  engineering  guesses  in  so  far  as  certain  items  are  concerned. 
For  example,  the  cost  of  grading,  especially  through  rough  and 
mountainous  country  cannot  be  accurately  ascertained  to-day  by 


1294  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

any  engineer  not  possessed  of  the  original  records  showing  the 
quantities,  and  classification  of  excavation,  or  of  the  actual  costs  of 
doing  the  grading  work.  It  is  true  that  in  the  entire  absence  of 
original  records  of  any  sort,  an  engineer  can  go  into  the  field,  and 
cross-section  the  existing  "cuts"  and  "fills,"  and  make  an  estimate 
of  yardage  of  the  different  classes  of  excavation,  but  I  should  never 
do  this  except  as  the  very  last  resort,  and  then  with  the  determina- 
tion of  adding  a  very  large  percentage  for  contingencies. 

I  may  state  at  this  point  that  one  of  the  most  potent  reasons  for 
securing  the  original  quantities  and  original  costs  is  to  eliminate 
the  item  of  "contingencies"  entirely.  It  sounds  little  enough  to 
speak  of  10%  added  for  "contingencies,"  but  it  would  have  meant 
adding  just  $5,000,000  to  my  estimate  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Rail- 
way alone. 

Reverting  briefly  to  the  cost  of  appraising  the  railways  of  Wash- 
ington, attention  should  be  called  to  the  lack  of  logic  in  estimating 
the  cost  of  such  appraisals  in  terms  of  the  mile  as  the  unit.  The 
Wisconsin  appraisals  cost  $22  a  mile,  but  the  Wisconsin  -railways 
have  an  appraised  value  of  only  $30,000  a  mile;  hence  the  Wis- 
consin appraisal  cost  70  cts.  per  $1,000  appraised.  The  Wash- 
ington appraisal  cost  $13  a  mile,  but  the  Washington  railways  have 
an  appraised  value  of  $60,000  per  mile;  hence  the  Washington  ap- 
praisal cost  20  cts.  per  $1,000  appraised,  as  against  70  cts.  in  Wis- 
consin. There  is  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  it  costs  more  per  mile 
to  appraise  a  line  worth  $60,000  a  mile  than  to  appraise  one  costing 
$30,000  a  mile,  if  the  same  methods  of  appraisal  are  used  ;  for  the 
$60,000  line  contains  many  more  structures  and  details  per  mile, 
and  higher  land  values,  involving  more  labor  on  the  part  of  both 
accountants,  engineers  and  right-of-way  appraisers.  If  this  is  so, 
it  will  be  asked  why  the  Washington  appraisal  cost  less  per  mile 
than  the  Wisconsin  appraisal.  An  answer  leads  me  into  the  subject 
of  the  methods  used  in  making  the  Washington  appraisal,  for  upon 
those  methods  depends  the  relative  economy. 

Methods  of  Appraisal. — Before  entering  upon  the  task  of  apprais- 
ing the  Washington  railways  I  had  secured  all  desired  information 
as  to  the  appraisals  of  the  railways  in  Texas,  Michigan  and  Wis- 
consin. I  also  saw  the  engineer  of  the  Minnesota  Railway  and 
Warehouse  Commission,  who  had  been  engaged  for^six  months  on 
the  appraisal  of  the  Minnesota  railways.  I  found*  that  the  Wis- 
consin and  Minnesota  methods  of  appraisal  were  practically 
identical.  Both  states  furnished  printed  blanks  to  the  railways,  and 
required  the  railways  to  make  a  detailed  estimate  of  the  cost  ot 
their  own  property.  Upon  securing  such  estimates,  the  states'  engi- 
neers checked  up  the  appraisal.  This  method  is  advocated  largely 
on  the  ground  that  it  avoids  duplicating  the  expense  of  an  appraisal, 
the  assumption  being  that  each  railway  itself  will  make  its  own 
appraisal  in  any  event,  whether  asked  to  or  not.  Therefore,  if  the 
railway  is  required  to  make  its  own  appraisal  first,  the  state's  engi- 
neer need  not  go  through  all  the  details,  but  can  accept  most  of 
the  matter  after  a  more  or  less  cursory  inspection. 


RAILWAYS.  -1295 

T  was  wholly  dissatisfied  with  this  method,  for  I  felt  that  it  would 
make  it  almost  imperative  for  me  to  accept  the  appraisals  made  by 
the  railways,  practically  at  their  own  figures,  or  to  undertake  in 
the  end  what  I  could  just  as  well  undertake  in  the  beginning, 
namely  an  independent  investigation  of  my  own.  I  need  scarcely 
say  that  the  results  of  the  investigation  have  served  to  confirm  my 
position  on  this  point. 

Neither  the  state  of  Minnesota  nor  Wisconsin  had  gone  into  the 
matter  of  the  actual  cost  of  the  original  railway  property.  This 
seemed  to  me  a  serious  omission,  not  merely  because  of  the  Ne- 
braska rate  case  decision,  but  because  of  the  invaluable  data  that 
an  investigation  into  actual  costs  would  disclose. 

In  estimating  the  present  or  depreciated  value  of  structures, 
rolling  stock,  etc.,  both  Michigan  and  Wisconsin  had  sent  experts 
into  the  field  to  estimate  the  percentage  of  present  value  of  each 
unit.  In  this  manner  40,000  freight  cars  were  inspected  in  Michi- 
gan, and  their  "present  value"  estimated.  To  me  this  seemed  to  be 
not  only  a  useless  procedure,  but  very  erroneous.  Aside  from  the 
great  expense  of  thus  inspecting  each  car  and  structure,  I  was  in- 
fluenced by  a  belief  in  the  far  greater  accuracy  of  applying  what 
might  be  termed  "mortality  tables  of  structures."  If  the  age  of  a 
man  is  known,  his  expectation  of  life  can  be  estimated  from  mor- 
tality tables.  Insurance  companies  do  not  have  their  doctors  guess 
at  the  man's  probable  life.  The  doctor  merely  reports  the  man  as 
not  suffering  from  disease,  and  the  insurance  company  having  the 
man's  age,  applies  its  mortality  tables.  In  like  manner,  it  seemed 
to  me,  the  "present  value"  of  a  car  or  locomotive  could  be  accu- 
rately estimated  if  its  present  age  were  known.  It  is  a  well- 
established  fact  that  a  freight  car  has  a  useful  life  exceeding  20 
or  25  yrs.  If  the  average  car  has  a  life  of  25  yrs.,  it  loses  4%  of  its 
life  every  year.  Hence,  by  multiplying  its  age  in  years  by  4%,  its 
lost  life  or  depreciation  is  accurately  ascertained ;  and  by  sub- 
tracting this  depreciation  from  100  the  remainder  will  give  its 
"present  value,"  expressed  as  a  percentage  of  its  value  new. 

I  believed  that  it  would  be  far  less  expensive  to  ascertain  the  age 
of  each  car  and  each  structure  from  the  records  of  the  companies, 
and  to  estimate  the  present  value  by  the  method  just  explained, 
than  to  inspect  each  structure  in  the  field.  This  proved  to  be  tlr? 
case,  and  it  effected  a  very  substantial  saving  in  the  cost  of  ap- 
praisal, while,  at  the  same  time,  it  yielded  more  reliable  results. 

In  some  cases  the  records  in  the  engineering  offices  of  the  rail- 
ways did  not  show  the  ages  of  existing  structures,  but  in  such  cases 
their  accounting  records  showed  the  dates  when  structures  were 
built,  or  when  cars  were  purchased. 

If  practically  all  the  structures  shown  in  the  accounting  records 
are  still  in  existence,  and  the  money  expended  each  year  for  each 
class  of  structure  is  known,  it  is  a  very  simple  matter  to  figure  the 
average  age  of  the  money  invested  in  such  structures,  which,  after 
all,  is  what  is  needed  in  estimating  present  value.  To  illustrate. 


1296  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

suppose  there  are  a  number  of  station  buildings  in  existence,  whose 
age  is  not  known.  Suppose,  however,  that  $10,500  was  spent  for 
such  buildings  in  1896,  $20,000  in  1900,  and  $5,000  in  1902.  Then, 
in  1906,  the  average  age  of  the  money  invested  in  these  buildings  is 
ascertained  thus : 

$10,500  x  10  yrs.  equals  $105,000  one  year 

$20,000  x     6  yrs.  equals  $120,000  one  year 

$5,000  x     4  yrs.  equals     $20,000  one  year 


$35,500  x     7  yrs.  equals  $248,500  one  year 

This  gives  a  total  or  $35,500  invested  7  yrs. ;  for  $35,500  X  7  yrs, 
equals  $248,500  one  year. 

The  rule  to  be  followed  in  all  such  cases  is  to  multiply  the  money 
expended  each  year  for  structures  of  a  given  class  by  the  age  In 
years,  add  all  these  products  together,  and  divide  by  the  total 
cost  of  all  the  structures  under  consideration.  The  quotient  is  the 
average  age  of  all  the  structures,  or,  more  strictly  speaking,  the 
average  age  of  the  money  invested  in  the  structures.  If  some  of 
the  structures  are  no  longer  in  existence,  this  method  can  still  be 
applied.  Take  railway  cross-ties,  for  example.  Ascertain  the  total 
value  of  cross-ties  in  the  track,  then  go  back  through  the  records 
of  cost  and  tie  renewals,  by  years,  until  the  total  cost  of  the 
renewals  adds  up  to  the  total  value  of  ties  now  in  the  track. 
Then  compute  the  average  age  as  above  shown.  If  the  price  of  ties 
has  fluctuated,  ascertain  the  actual  price  paid,  and  reduce  all  yearly 
expenditures  of  renewals  to  the  present  price. 

It  will  be  impossible,  as  well  as  undesirable,  in  a  report  of 
this  character,  for  me  to  indicate  all  the  methods  pursued  in  the 
appraisal  of  railways,  but  some  of  the  radical  departures  from 
precedent  should  be  outlined,  particularly  where  a  result  is  secured 
in  more  thorough  or  in  a  more  economic  manner.  Moreover,  any 
chief  engineer  who  may  be  in  your  employ  in  the  future  will  be 
greatly  handicapped  without  an  outline  of  the  methods  pursued  in 
this  original  appraisal. 

In  searching  the  records  of  the  railways,  I  did  not  confine  myself 
merely  to  their  engineering  and  their  accounting  books,  but  often 
found  missing  links  of  information  in  the  most  incongruous  places. 
The  Oregon  Railroad  &  Navigation  Company,  for  example,  had 
practically  none  of  its  "construction  ledgers,"  and  at  first  we  de- 
spaired of  being  able  to  piece  together  a  complete  itemized  summary 
of  original  cost.  Finally  we  found  an  old  tissue  copy  book,  Book 
No.  51,  at  the  Ash  St.  Dock  in  Portland,  containing  copies  of  the 
auditor's  distribution  sheets,  showing  costs  of  engineering,  grad- 
ing, etc.,  etc. 

For  several  months  our  work  was  considerably  retarded,  not  only 
by  the  reluctance  of  several  of  the  railway  companies  to  assist  us 
in  finding  their  records,  but  by  the  incompleteness  of  the  records 
when  found.  Little  by  little,  however,  we  were  able  to  fill  in  the 
gaps,  until  there  remained  not  10%  of  the  original  unascertained. 


RAILWAYS.  1297 

For  the  guidance  of  any  engineers  whom  you  may  employ  in  the 
future,  I  give  a  list  of  the  most  important  records  to  be  looked 
for  in  making  an  appraisal  of  this  character. 

1.  Annual  reports  to   stockholders. 

2.  Annual  reports  to  Interstate  Commerce  Commission. 

3.  Annual  report  of  chief  engineers  and  superintendents  to  the 
president  of  the  road. 

4.  Reports  of  minor  officials. 

5.  Progress  profiles. 

6.  Cross-section  and  quantity  books. 

7.  Final  estimates  on  contract  work. 

8.  Tissue  copy  books   of  final  estimates. 

9.  Rail  and  ballast  charts. 

10.  Bridge  books    (engineering  department). 

11.  Building  books. 

12.  Work  orders. 

13.  A.  F.  E.'s   (authorization  for  expenditure). 

14.  Accounting  records    (a)    Construction  Ledgers,    (b)    General 
Ledgers    and    their    accompanying    journals,    (c)    Vouchers,    Regis- 
ters,  (d)  Vouchers,    (e)  Auditor's  Distribution  Sheets,  and  the  like. 

15.  Equipment  Registers. 

16.  Distribution  Book,  or  Disbursement  Accounts  Books,  contain- 
ing directions  for  accountants  to  follow. 

17.  Confidential  Reports. 

In  my  judgment  the  first  step  to  be  taken  in  appraising  a  rail- 
way is  to  ascertain  its  physical  and  financial  history.  For  this  pur- 
pose the  annual  reports  to  stockholders  are  an  invaluable  source  of 
information.  By  a  perusal  of  these  reports  an  historical  map  or 
chart  can  be  prepared  showing  the  limits  of  each  "construction 
division"  or  branch  of  the  railway,  and  the  dates  of  beginning  and 
completing  the  construction  work  on  it.  The  present  "operating 
divisions"  often  have  the  same  names  as  certain  "construction 
divisions"  of  the  road,  but  wholly  different  limits.  Hence  the  ne- 
cessity of  an  historical  map  in  order  to  avoid  confusion  in  interpret- 
ing the  accounting  records  of  the  road. 

Having  prepared  a  map,  and  a  brief  history  of  the  road,  the  next 
step  should  be  an  investigation  of  the  accounting  department  rec- 
ords. The  tendency  of  a  civil  engineer  is  to  go  to  the  engineering 
records  first,  but  this  is  a  mistake,  for  the  accounting  records  are 
usually  kept  in  a  much  better  shape,  and  contain  fewer  gaps.  From 
the  construction  ledgers,  an  itemized  account  of  the  original  cost  of 
each  construction  division  is  secured,  and  having  been  secured,  the 
next  step  is  to  check  it  by  the  records  of  the  engineering  depart- 
ment, where  quantity  books  and  tissue  copy  books  of  final  esti- 
mates paid  to  contractors,  and  the  like,  are  usually  to  be  found. 
Frequently,  however,  it  happens  that  a  line  has  been  purchased,  and 
that  only  the  engineering  records  were  transferred  at  the  time  of 
the  purchase.  In  which  event  it  may  be  impossible  to  secure  the 


1298  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

accounting  records,  except  by  going  to  the  original  owners  of  the 
property. 

Having  gone  rapidly  through  all  the  accounting  and  engineering 
records  to  ascertain  what  gaps,  if  any,  exist  as  to  original  construc- 
tion data,  the  next  step  is  to  put  engineers  into  the  field  to  supply 
the  missing  links  by  actual  inspection,  measurement,  etc.  An 
attempt  to  estimate  by  field  survey  should  be  the  last  resort,  not 
only  on  account  of  the  greater  cost  of  field  work,  but  because  of 
its  greater  inaccuracy,  and  finally — but  not  to  be  ignored — because, 
in  case  of  a  legal  dispute  as  to  the  estimated  cost,  field  surveys,  and 
estimates  made  by  different  engineers  are  likely  to  differ  widely. 
There  is  always  so  much  that  cannot  be  seen,  like  the  foundation  of 
bridges,  the  percentage  of  loose  rocks  in  embankments,  etc.,  that  a 
field  survey  should  be  used  only  as  a  last  resort.  And,  in  our  ap- 
praisal of  the  Washington  railways,  field  surveys  were  made  only 
for  a  very  small  percentage  of  the  total  mileage. 

A  field  inspection  of  every  mile  of  track  should  be  made,  prefer- 
ably by  an  engineer  riding  on  a  handcar.  This  engineer  should  be 
provided  with  complete,  up-to-date  profiles,  and  small  scale  plans 
of  the  road,  showing  all  structures  and  their  dimensions,  etc.  1 
made  the  mistake  of  accepting  the  existing  profiles  and  plans  for 
use  by  the  field  inspectors.  These  records  were  so  often  incorrect, 
through  not  having  been  kept  up  to  date,  as  to  cause  much  unnec- 
essary work  subsequently  in  checking.  Haste  in  sending  out  field 
inspectors  is  a  mistake,  as  field  inspection  of  this  sort  is  the  most 
inexpensive  item  of  an  appraisal,  and  can  be  quickly  done  even  with 
a  comparatively  small  force.  One  man  on  foot  will  inventory 
about  12  miles  of  ordinary  track  each  day,  or  twice  that  amount 
on  a  handcar.  Field  inspection,  therefore,  should  not  be  begun 
until  corrected,  up-to-date  profiles  and  maps  have  been  prepared, 
and  until  the  investigation  of  the  engineering  records  has  been  car- 
ried far  enough  to  disclose  the  particular  structures  upon  which 
the  office  records  are  incomplete.  By  doing  this,  the  field  inspec- 
tion resolves  itself  into  a  checking  off  of  structures  with  an  occa- 
sional pause  to  measure  some  structure  on  which  the  office  records 
are  defective. 

The  appraisals  heretofore  made  in  other  states  have  been  based 
almost  entirely  upon  field  surveys  and  inspection,  no  attempt  having 
been  made  to  secure  the  necessary  data  from  the  engineering  and 
accounting  records  of  the  railways.  Why?  The  answer  is  found  in 
the  purpose  of  the  appraisal.  As  previously  stated,  the  purpose  of 
the  appraisals  in  Texas,  Michigan  and  Wisconsin  was  not  the  same 
purpose  as  in  Washington.  Where  the  purpose  is  taxation,  a  rail- 
way naturally  seeks  a  low  valuation  for  its  property,  hence  it  pre- 
fers to  refuse  access  to  its  own  records,  believing — and  believing 
rightly — that  what  cannot  be  seen  with  the  eyes  will  not  be  likely 
to  appear  in  the  appraisal.  An  appraisal  by  field  examination 
solely  is  very  apt  to  be  below  the  true  value  of  the  property,  hence 
the  acceptability  of  such  an  appraisal  by  the  railways  where  taxa- 
tion is  the  purpose  of  the  appraisal. 


RAILWAYS.  1299 

Several  of  the  principal  railway  system  in  Washington  at  first 
Desisted  our  efforts  to  secure  the  records  in  their  offices,  and  stated 
that  the  records  were  so  incomplete  as  to  be  valueless.  In  some  in- 
stances I  have  no  doubt  that  this  was  an  honest  opinion.  I  am  in- 
clined to  believe,  however,  that  their  motive  in  resisting  an  ex- 
amination of  the  records  was,  in  some  cases  at  least,  to  secure  an 
appraisal  which  could  be  fought  in  the  courts,  and  probably  upset 
by  documentary  evidence  to  prove  its  unreliability  in  parts,  if  not 
in  its  entirety.  Therefore,  I  hold  to  the  belief  that  an  investigation 
of  both  the  accounting  and  engineering  records  of  the  railways 
would  have  been  the  best  policy,  even  had  it  cost  many  times  what 
it  did  cost.  And,  to  show  my  reason  for  this  belief,  I  will  cite 
just  one  example.  In  testifying  before  your  honorable  body,  Mr. 
Hogeland,  chief  engineer  of  the  Great  Northern  Railway,  has  esti- 
mated the  cost  of  earth  excavation  to  be  made  up  of  three  different 
items,  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Average  contract  price  up  to  1,000  ft.  haul $0.230 

Average    overhaul     .  .  .  : 0.035 

Transportation   of   men's   tools,    supplies 0.045 

Total $0;310 

Had  we  not  secured  the  actual  records  in  the  Great  Northern 
offices,  it  might  have  been  a  difficult  matter  to  convince  the  court 
that  the  last  two  items  of  the  above  estimate  are  ridiculously  high. 
Having  the  records,  it  will  not  be  so  difficult.  For  example,  the 
actual  cost  of  the  item  of  "average  overhaul"  was  just  one-seventh 
of  Mr.  Hogeland' s  estimate,  or  one-half  cent  per  cubic  yard,  as 
shown  in  my  statement  of  the  actual  cost  of  construction  of  the 
Great  Northern  Railway  in  the  state  of  Washington.  The  item  of 
transportation  of  men  was  similarly  overestimated. 

I  will  not  enter  into  such  details  further,  but,  in  justice  to  myself 
and  you,  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  explain  why  a  departure  from  prece- 
dent in  railway  appraisal  was  the  best  policy.  Such  an  illustra- 
tion as  the  above  will  serve  better  than  many  generalities  to  show 
the  character  of  the  reasons  for  our  exhaustive  investigations  into 
the  original  cost  of  the  railways  of  this  state.  Were  you,  as  a  court, 
or  were  any  other  court,  confronted  by  the  conflicting  testimony 
of  expert  engineers,  it  would  be  difficult  to  arrive  at  a  just  opinion 
as  to  proper  quantities  and  prices,  unless  the  actual  data  were  avail- 
able to  guide  you.  The  data  are  available  and  are  now  in  your 
possession. 

I  have  not  touched  upon  the  very  important  matter  of  the  ap- 
praisal of  the  rolling  stock,  or  equipment,  further  than  to  say  that  I 
did  not  make  a  field  inspection  of  it.  The  office  records  were  so 
complete  that  such  an  inspection  was  superfluous,  and  for  the 
reason  above  given.  In  order  to  apportion  to  the  state  of  Washing- 
ton its  share  of  the  cost  of  the  rolling  stock,  it  was  necessary  to 


1300  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

appraise  the  entire  equipment  of  every  railway  system  entering 
the  state.  This,  in  itself,  is  no  slight  task.  Several  states  should 
share  the  cost  of  appraising  the  equipment  of  the  railways,  so  that 
the  whole  cost  would  not  fall  on  one  state,  as  in  this  instance. 

If  Washington,  Idaho,  Montana,  the  Dakotas  and  Minnesota 
could  have  acted  in  concert,  the  cost  of  railway  appraisal  would 
have  been  very  much  less,  not  only  because  of  the  distribution  of 
the  cost  of  appraising  the  equipment,  but  because  of  the  facility 
with  which  an  entire  railway  system  can  be  appraised  once  an 
engineer  becomes  familiar  with  the  accounting  and  engineering  rec- 
ords of  that  railway  system.  For  this  reason,  as  well  as  for  others, 
the  railroad  commissioners  of  certain  groups  of  states  should  strive 
to  act  together. 

The  appraisal  of  right-of-way  lands  and  station  grounds,  as  far 
acj  present  value  goes,  was  delegated  principally  to  three  right-of- 
way  experts,  men  who  had  been  buying  lands  for  railway  purposes 
in  Washington  and  were  -familiar  with  prices.  Your  honorable  body 
adopted  a  method  of  arriving  at  land  values  which  was  entirely 
novel,  and,  to  my  mind,  a  vast  improvement  over  any  other 
method  hitherto  used  in  other  states.  The  method  consists  in  call- 
ing in  real  estate  men  in  all  the  large  cities,  and  securing  testi- 
mony from  those  men  as  to  land  values.  Your  honorable  body, 
sitting  as  a  court,  hears  the  testimony  not  only  of  the  regularly  em- 
ployed right-of-way  experts,  but  of  expert  real  estate  witnesses, 
which  those;  right-of-way  experts  have  consulted,  and  other  real 
estate  experts  which  the  railways  may  bring  in.  Hitherto  the 
practice 'has  been  to  examine  all  real  estate  transfers  within  a  cer- 
tain distance  of  the  railway  property,  and  for  a  period  of  years 
prior  to  the  appraisal,  and  to  base  the  appraisal  upon  these  trans- 
fers. Since  property  for  railway  purposes  usually  costs  more  than 
for  other  purposes,  it  is  necessary  to  multiply  the  value  ascertained 
from  transfers  of  adjacent  property  by  some  factor,  this  factor 
being  ascertained  from  expert  testimony  or  otherwise.  Unfortu- 
nately the  records  of  the  real  estate  transfers  are  not  the  best  evi- 
dence of  the  value  of  the  property  transferred.  Indeed  the  records 
are  often  made  so  as  to  conceal  the  real  value  of  the  property.  For 
this  reason  alone  the  method  devised  by  your  honorable  body  is 
much  to  be  preferred.  Moreover,  it  is  a  less  expensive  method  of 
appraising  lands. 

As  to  my  methods  of  appraisal  I  need  say  little  more.  My  testi- 
mony before  your  honorable  body  is  complete  on  those  matters,  but, 
being  of  great  length,  I  have  thought  it  wise  to  summarize  certain 
features  in  this  report,  giving  also  a  few  suggestions,  which  may 
assist  any  engineer  who  may  be  in  the  employ  of  the  Washington 
Railroad  Commission  in  future. 

It  is  needless  to  tell  you,  but  for  the  sake  of  public  record  I 
desire  to  say  that  on  all  the  smaller  railways  in  Washington  I  was 
given  most  courteous  treatment,  and  had  ready,  access  to  all  rec- 
ords. On  the  three  large  systems,  namely  the  Great  Northern,  the 


RAILWAYS.  1301 

Northern  Pacific,  and  the  Oregon  Railway  &  Navigation  Com- 
pany, I  met  with  much  resistance  at  first,  and  lost  several  months  of 
time  in  consequence.  Denial  as  to  the  existence  of  certain  important 
records  was  repeatedly  made — records  that  I  subsequently  found. 
Possibly  these  denials  were  made  in  good  faith,  but,  since  free 
access  to  all  records  was  not  given  me  by  the  Great  Northern  and 
the  Northern  Pacific  for  a  long  time,  and  then  only  after  I  pieced 
together  enough  information  to  prove  the  existence  of  the  desired 
records,  my  work  was  greatly  retarded.  I  think  that  these  rail- 
ways came  ultimately  to  see  that  it  was  an  error  not  to  put  all 
records  at  my  disposal,  and  all  I  regret  is  that  they  were  not 
prompt  in  reaching  that  conclusion.  I  regret  it  not  only  because 
of  the  increased  cost  of  the  appraisal,  but  because  I  had  business 
duties  in  New  York  that  made  my  return  imperative  at  as  early  a 
date  as  possible. 

In  conclusion  I  wish  to  express  my  hearty  appreciation  of  the 
loyalty  and  zeal  with  which  my  assistants  worked.  Those  in  the 
most  important  positions  worked  not  only  by  day  but  by  night.  1 
know  of  no  one  who  seemed  swayed  by  the  fear  of  "working 
himself  out  of  a  job."  My  two  principal  assistants,  Mr.  Francis 
W.  Collins  and  Mr.  H.  L.  Gray,  deserve  special  recognition  in  this 
report,  for  upon  them  fell  the  brunt  of  the  task.  Mr.  Collins  was 
located  in  St.  Paul,  at  the  offices  of  the  Great  Northern  and  the 
Northern  Pacific  railways,  with  a  corps  of  men  under  his  direction. 
Mr.  Gray  was  located  in  Portland,  in  the  offices  of  the  Oregon 
Railway  &  Navigation  Company,  with  a  similar  corps. 

To  your  honorable  body  I  wish  to  express  my  sincere  thanks  foi 
the  many  valuable  suggestions  that  came  from  you  as  to  the  con- 
duct of  my  appraisal.  I  wish  it  were  possible  for  me  to  convey 
to  the  people  of  "Washington  my  unbiased  opinion  of  your  honor- 
able body.  As  a  non-resident  my  opinion  is  unbiased.  I  believe 
you  have  shown  great  wisdom  in  not  allowing  yourselves  to  be 
hurried  into  action,  for  the  sake  of  being  able  to  point  to  "results." 
No  ordinary  citizen  can  realize  the  magnitude  and  the  intricacy  ot 
the  problem  before  you.  It  can  become  appalling  only  to  one  who 
has  come  face  to  face  with  it,  and  has  delved  into  its  details.  So 
far  as  I  know,  you  are  the  first  state  railway  commission  in 
America  that  has  not  allowed  itself  to  be  drawn  into  action  on  rate 
making  before  securing  the  fundamental  facts  that  should  govern 
such  action.  One  of  those  fundamental  facts  is  the  physical  value 
of  the  railways  in  the  state.  A  physical  valuation  is  absolutely 
essential,  if  for  no  other  purpose  than  to  determine  a  reasonable 
amount  to  set  aside  annually  from  earnings  to  cover  the  depreci- 
ation from  natural  agencies  and  from  wear  and  tear.  Tell  me  the 
physical  value  of  a  given  structure,  and  I  can  estimate  its  de- 
preciation in  dollars  closely.  Conceal  that  value,  and  I  am  utterly 
in  the  dark.  It  has  become  the  fashion  to  "poo-hoo"  the  necessity 
of  a  physical  valuation  of  railways  by  com-nisc-i'ir.s  having  rate- 
making  powers.  Even  had  the  Supreme  Court  not  ruled  as  to  the 
necessity  of  a  physical  valuation,  the  necessity  would  exist,  if  for 


1302  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

no  other  reason  than  to  solve  the  important  problem  of  annual  de- 
preciation. 

Original  Cost  and  Cost  of  Reproduction  of  the  Great  Northern 
Railway  (768  Miles)  in  the  State  of  Washington.*— This  article  will 
contain  data  that  have  not  hitherto  .appeared  in  print.  In  fact 
the  detailed,  actual  cost  of  construction  of  no  large  mileage  of 
American  railway  has  ever  before  been  published,  so  far  as  we 
know. 

Two  years  ago  the  Railroad  Commission  of  Washington  con- 
ducted a  hearing  at  which  the  data  collected  by  the  Chief  Engi- 
neer of  the  Commission,  Mr.  Halbert  P.  Gillette,  were  put  in  evi- 
dence, together  with  testimony  as  to  the  methods  used  in  securing 
the  data.  Mr.  Gillette  subsequently  condensed  his  testimony,  as  to 
sources  of  information  and  general  methods  used,  into  a  brief  re- 
port which  formed  part  of  the  annual  report  of  the  Commission, 
and  was  reprinted  in  Engineering-Contracting,  April  7,  1909.  It 
was  obviously  impracticable  to  print  in  the  report  the  mass  of  type- 
written statistics  forming  Mr.  Gillette's  exhibits,  so  the  Commis- 
sion wisely  printed  only  the  results  of  its  "findings"  after  listening 
to  testimony  submitted  by  the  railways. 

The  gathering  of  the  data  kept  a  corps  of  some  20  engineers 
and '  land  experts  busy  for  a  year  in  the  office  and  in  the  field. 
Many  of  the  data  are  of  a  character  meriting  publicity.  We  have, 
therefore,  selected  the  most  important  parts  from  Mr.  Gillette's 
exhibits  and  testimony,  and  will  publish  them.  The  first  install- 
ment is  in  the  present  article  and  relates  to  the  Great  Northern 
Railway. 

The  major  portion  of  this  road  in  Washington  was  built,  as  a 
single-track  line,  in  the  years  1891  to  1894.  It  was  built  by  con- 
tract at  reasonable  prices,  and,  in  spite  of  the  fact,  that  a  rugged 
range  of  mountains  was  crossed,  the  original  cost  of  488  miles  or 
line  was  only  $21,673,780,  as  shown  by  the  accounting  records,  or 
$44,400  per  mile,  including  right  of  way  and  all  costs  except  roll- 
ing stock.  As  will  be  noted  below,  the  item  of  engineering  was  3% 
of  the  total  cost. 

While  the  accounting  records  of  the  Great  Northern  did  not  com- 
ply precisely  with  the  requirements  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission,  still  the  departures  were  few — and  for  the  best — so  the 
items,  as  given  below,  are  practically  self-explanatory. 

The  section  of  line  whose  costs  follow  embraces  the  line  as 
originally  built  (not  including  subsequent  additions  and  improve- 
ments) from  the  Idaho-Washington  boundary  to  Everett,  from 
Seattle  to  Belfast,  and  from  Anacortes  to  Rockport,  a  total  distance 
of  487.6  miles.  The  original  cost  of  this  mileage  was  as  shown 
in  Table  VI. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.    8.    1909. 


RAILWAYS. 


1303 


TABLE  VI. — ORIGINAL  COST  OF  488  MILES  OF  GREAT  NORTHERN  RAIL- 
WAY LINE  IN  WASHINGTON. 

Per  Mile 

of  Line  or 

Item.  Total.               Roadbed. 

1.  Engineering     $       643,513.39  $   1,319 

2.  Right    of    way 1,978,874.53  4,056 

3.  Real    estate '     112,064.64  230 

4.  Clearing   and    grubbing 536,157.05  1,098 

5.  Grading     5,534,879.90  11,343 

6.  Tunnels     2,744,686.14  5,624 

7.  Masonry     459,436.06  942 

8.  Cribbing    and     bulkheading 348,287.42  714 

9.  Bridges    and    culverts 2,106,876.45  4,318 

10.  Cattle    guards,    road    crossings    and 

signs 114,274.79  234 

11.  Ties 584,464.37  1,198 

12.  Rails     2,894,548.33  5,932 

13.  Rail   fastenings 377,508.94  774 

14.  Frogs,    switches,    etc 82,423.78  169 

15.  Tracklaying    and    surfacing 259,005.76  532 

16.  Ballasting 530,483.41  1,088 

17.  Surfacing,   filling  and  lining  track.  .  30,256.99  61 

18.  Transportation    dept.    buildings 300,141.08  615 

19.  Road    dept.     bldgs 43,294.71  88 

20.  Roundhouses   and   shops 159,715.46  328 

21.  Fuel  and  water   stations 125,811.22  25S 

22.  Docks,    wharves    and    inclines 21,476.57  44 

23.  Columbia    River    incline 59,485.91  122 

24.  Other   buildings   and    structures.  .  .  .  12,136.70  25 

25.  Fences     11,219.03  22 

26.  Telegraph     22,921.68  47 

27.  Shop  tools  and   machinery 47,233.90  96 

28.  Protection  against   snow  and  ice...  77,187.95  158 

29.  Locomotive   and    car   service 42,287.03  86 

30.  General    expense     52,854.13  108 

31.  Transportation   men  and   materials.  45,065.31  92 

32.  Insurance     ' 549.90  1 

33.  Operating  expense    251,323.52  514 

34.  Interest    on    advances 244,442.95  501 

35.  Bond    expenses    36,065.80  74 

36.  Bond   interest  during  constr 766,139.99  1,569 

37.  Wagon    roads     15,778.78  32 

Total $21,672,873.57  $44,412 

There  were  488  miles  of  railway  line,  or  roadbed,  and  the  side 
tracks,  etc.,  amounted  to  about  8%  additional;  so  that  the  costs 
per  "mile  of  line"  in  Table  VI  should  be  divided  by  1.08  to  arrive 
at  the  costs  per  "mile  of  track." 

Three  items  in  Table  VI  bring  out  very  clearly  the  rough  char- 
acter of  the  country,  namely.  Items  5,  6  and  9.  The  Cascade 
Tunnel  comprised  almost  the  whole  of  Item  6,  the  actual  cost  of 
that  tunnel  being  $2,524,212,  including  masonry  lining. 

The  original  grading  quantities  and  classification  were  as  given 
in  Table  VII. 

The  part  of  the  Idaho  Division  that  lies  within  the  state  of 
Washington  was  48.77  miles  long.  The  Washington  Division  ex- 
tended to  the  foot  of  the  "switchback"  line,  which  was  called  the 
"Overhead  Line,"  over  the  Cascade  Mountains.  The  "switchback" 
was  subsequently  abandoned  in  part  when  the  tunnel  was  com- 


1304 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


so  co  30  to  I-H  o  to  «o  I  c>  ro  t~  ••*«  o 

C-rH  SO  SO  M  rH  lO  iO  \    t~  ?-  *?  X  ^> 

_•    ^  »  i-^SP  N  O  O  30  j    U5  *»•  lO  30  O 

•g     Tt<  O  t- r-t  CO  C^  t^  OS  i    3030MC~N 

£r       30  rq  30 1- o  t>  M  !c-r~- 

i-TrH~S<f       I<TcC 

^    ^^O^OO^O^U      -30  I    SOO^COOiCO 

CQ       co      w             •  eg  o  IH 

bjTH35OrOS5<MCr)      •  IdSOi-HOO 

COI<J«>30O05OIM      •  •*OCOt~-O 

oot>  ooi>e<i 
oT-^     I-HIO 

CO  IOCO 

OCI^ 

O    <£>  iH  «O  rH  iH  OO  i-H      •  OO  t- N  O  O 

<  O5  •<*<  CO  CJ5  O5  ITS      •  OOlOt-O 

•*-(        •OOC^lO'-HCOO      •  C^lOC5COt>- 

•  oo'oo" 
Qj       •*  •*  co  10  M  en 

CQ        ^  C<liHsOC<l30CO 

M 

H      'O  o  co    -t-oo?ocn 

co      «oooo 

IO  T—    I."      X> 

a  g  *|V";'* 

p     O 

M        •  GO  co  10  rt<  ia  er>  t-    .  cocoocoo 

Q       ^Oi-t-eocoeftO    .  (Mi/siorHCi 

I.         ^J    ^  O  CO  00  i-H  00  TH      .  COCgt-IMt- 

*S        "H    ^  IACO<M"o"rH'Tl''     ;  00"co"        rH  CO" 

CJ      72<Mr-(i-^-H<<r!co«o.  ooto          cxi 

^          IO  •*  (M  CO  Oi  OO      .  COCO 

J.     ^               rn"         rt  in" 

t>          r~«D35'M^?qco    •  -j'soerisoo 

rt  t>-  to  •«*•  o  -^  in  si    •  os^oco< 

Pq          in     ^  3S  T-H  O  IM  CXI  rH 


••3  m^< 

O  13   02 


82 

o  rt 


ou 


3 

ueo 


RAILWAYS.  1305 

pleted.  The  Seattle  and  Montana  (S.  &  M.)  extended  along  Puget 
Sound  from  Seattle  to  Belfast.  The  Seattle  and  Northern  (S.  &  N.) 
extended  from  Anacortes  to  Sauk. 

The  contract  prices  were  quite  uniform,  and  were  about  as  fol- 
lows per  cubic  yard : 

Earth  excav.  hauled  less  than  300  ft. $0.17 

Earth  excav.   hauled   300   to   1,000   ft 0.21 

Cemented  gravel   hauled  less  than   1,000   ft 0.38 

Loose   rock    0.42 

Solid    rock    1.05 

Embankment    from   borrow   pits 0.17 

Overhaul,   for   each    100   ft.    beyond   the   free  haul 
of   1,000   ft 0.01 

Grading  was  paid  for  but  once. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  average  grading  was  26,000 
cu.  yds.  per  mile,  classified  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

Earth  excav.  within  300  ft 14.4 

Earth  excav.  within   1,000  ft 10.3 

Cemented    gravel     22.6 

Loose   rock    5.9 

Solid   rock    16.6 

Embankment   from    borrow   pits 30.2 

_____ 

Total     100.0 

There  was  less  than  50  ft.  of  overhaul  on  the  average  cubic 
yard  of  excavation,  or  less  than  %  ct.  per  cu.  yd  ^or  overhaul. 

The  average  cost  of  grading,  including  overhaul,  was  about  40  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  all  excavation. 

The  price  of.  clearing  ranged  from  $28  an  acre  in  the  Idaho 
Division  to  $139  in  the  Pacific  Division.  Grubbing  ranged  from 
$14  a  station  in  the  Idaho  Division  to  $25  a.  station  in  the  Pacific 
Division. 

The  price  of  tracklaying  was  about  $230  per  mile  and  the  price 
of  surfacing  was  about  $200  per  mile. 

Items  29,  30  and  31  are  especially  interesting  in  view  of  the 
absurd  testimony  that  has  often  been  given  as  to  these  items. 

Item  33,  Operating  Expense,  is  the  cost  of  operating  trains  over 
the  line  prior  to  its  being  turned  over  to  the  operating  department. 

Items  34,  35  and  36,  total  $2,144  per  mile,  or  about  4.8%  of 
the  total  cost,  which  shows  that  an  allowance  of  5%  for  interest 
during  construction  is  ample,  although  it  has  been  frequently 
claimed  that  double  this  amount  should  be  allowed. 

A  'short  line  was  built  in  northwestern  Washington,  from  Belling- 
ham  northward  and  southward,  called  the  Fairhaven  Southern  Ry. 
Part  of  it  was  subsequently  abandoned.  The  remaining  part  was 
32.3  miles  long.  Its  cost  was  determined  from  the  accounting  rec- 
ords of  its  original  builders,  to  which  was  added  the  costs  shown 
in  the  Great  Northern  Ry.  after  it  had  passed  into  the  latter's 
hands.  This  total  cost  for  the  32.3  miles  of  line  was  as  given  in 
Table  VIII. 


1306  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA, 

TABLE   VIII. — COST    OF   FAIRHAVEN    SOUTHERN    RY.    (32.3   MILES   OF 
LINE  OR  ROADBED). 

Per  mile 
Item.  of  line. 

1.  Engineering    ?      749 

2.  Right  of  way 2,230 

3.  Real   estate    84 

4.  Clearing  and   grubbing    (very  heavy) 1,083 

5.  Grading    4,013 

6.  Masonry 436 

7.  Cribbing    and    bulkheading 248 

8.  Bridges  and  culverts    4,196 

9.  Cattle  guards  and  signs ? 

10.  Ties 751 

11.  Rails    4,303 

12.  Rail    fastenings    498 

13.  Progs,    switches,    etc 16 

14.  Tracklaying    and    surfacing 396 

15.  Ballasting 653 

16.  Transportation    department    buildings 545 

17.  Road    department    buildings 149 

18.  Roundhouses  and  shops   158 

19.  Fuel  and  water  stations 273 

20.  Other  buildings  and  structures "257 

21.  Fences     12] 

22.  Telegraph     211 

23.  Shop    tools    and    machinery 23!) 

24.  Locomotive  and  car  service 189 

25.  General    expense    . . 748 

26.  Insurance     1U 

Grand   total    ' $22,565 

The  following  were  the  grading  quantities  per  mile  and  con- 
tract prices  on  the  Fairhaven  Southern  : 

9,200  cu.  yds.  earth,  at  $0.21. 

2,000  cu.  yds.  cement    gravel,    at    ?0.35. 

400  cu.  yds.  loose   rock,    at    $0.40. 

1,300  cu.  yds.  solid  rock,  at  $1.02. 



12,900  cu.  yds.  total  per  mile. 

4,800  cu.  yds.  overhauled  100  ft.,  at  $0.01. 

This  is  fairly  typical  of  the  yardage  per  mile  of  branch  line  built 
through  "easy  country." 

Item  14,  tracklaying,  does  not  include  train  service,  which  is  given 
in  Item  24  for  the  entire  construction  of  the  road  and  is  not  pro- 
rated to  the  other  items. 

No  interest  was  charged  on  the  books. 

The  Spokane  Falls  and  Northern  Ry.  was  also  built  in  the  early 
90's,  by  an  independent  company,  whose  cost  records  could  not 
be  secured.  A  field  survey  was  accordingly  made,  and  its  cost  was 
estimated,  using  prices  that  were  common  at  the  time  of  the  con- 
struction of  the  line.  This  line  is  130.5  miles  long,  and  its  original 
construction  cost  was  estimated  to  have  been  as  given  in  Table  IX 


RAILWAYS.  1307 

TABLE  IX. — ESTIMATED  ORIGINAL  COST  OF  THE  SPOKANE  FALLS  AND 
NORTHERN  RY.    (130.5  MILES  OF  LINE  OR  ROADBED). 

Per  mile 
Item.  of  line. 

1.  Engineering   $  524 

2.  Grading 5,132 

3.  Bridges  and    culverts 1,164 

4.  Cattle  guards  and  signs 24 

5.  Ties    1,612 

6.  Rails     4,031 

7.  Rail    fastenings    791 

8.  Frogs,    switches,    etc 70 

9.  Tracklaying  and  surfacing  ($700  per  mile  of  track)  ....  835 

10.  Ballasting 600 

11.  Transportation    department    buildings 396 

12.  Road    department    buildings 107 

13.  Fuel  and  water  stations 147 

14.  Other  buildings  and  structures 14 

15.  Fences    63 

16.  General    expense 150 

17.  Bond  interest  during  contruction. . . . . .'. . . .'_.' 785 

Grand  total $16,445 

In  addition  to  the  130.5  miles  of  line  there  were  20.79  miles  of 
sidetracks,  etc. 

It  will  be  noted  that  no  land  is  included  in  this  estimate,  but 
$1,000  per  mile  of  line  was  the  estimated  value  of  the  land  In  1906. 
It  was  certainly  much  less  originally.  This  line  was  probably  built 
for  $17,000  per  mile,  including  all  land. 

The  Great  Northern  Ry.  had  just  completed  in  1906  a  stretch 
of  branch  line  in  northern  Washington,  known  as  the  Washington  & 
Great  Northern  Ry.  The  completed  portion  was  83.9  miles  long, 
through  a  mountainous  country.  The  grading  yardage  per  mile 
of  line,  and  contract  prices,  were  as  follows: 

9,200  cu.  yds.  earth  excav.   under   300   ft,  at   $0.18 
5,600  cu.  yds.  earth   excav.    under    1,000    ft.,   at    $0.22 
9,000  cu.  yds.  cement  gravej,  under  1,000  ft.,  at  $0.35 
1,800  cu.  yds.  loose   rock  under   1,000    ft.,    at   $0.40 
6,900  cu.  yds.  solid   rock   under   1,000    ft.,    at   $0.93 

32,500  cu.  yds.  total  per  mile 

19,000  cu.  yds.  overhauled   100   ft,  at   ?0.01 

The  actual  cost  of  this  line  was  as  given  in  Table  X. 


1308  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

TABLE  X. — ORIGINAL  COST  OF  THE  WASHINGTON  AND  GREAT  NORTH- 
ERN RT.   (83.9  MILES  OF  LINE  OR  ROADBED). 

Per  milo 
Item.  of  line. 

1.  Engineering     $   1,489 

2.  Right   of  way 1,064 

3.  Real   estate    3 

4.  Clearing    and    grubbing 656 

5.  Grading     14,558 

6.  Tunnels     75 

7.  Masonry     928 

8.  Bridges    and    culverts 3,623 

9.  Cattle  guards,   road  crossings  and  signs 17 

10.  Ties 1,035 

11.  Rails    5,261 

12.  Rail    fastenings    700 

13.  Frogs,    switches,    etc 161 

14.  Tracklaying    and    surfacing 866 

15.  Ballasting     v 1,024 

16.  Surfacing,   filling   and   lining  track 34 

17.  Transportation     department     buildings 139 

18.  Road    department    buildings 122 

19.  Roundhouses  and  shops 22 

20.  Fuel  and  water  stations 389 

21.  Other  buildings  and   structures.  . 5 

22.  Fences     50 

23.  Telegraph     127 

24.  Locomotive  and  car  service 575 

25.  General    expense    25 

26.  Transportation  of  men  and  materials 2,378 

27.  Insurance    2 

28.  Operating    expense    19 

29.  Interest   on   advances 1,09!) 

30.  Taxes     56 

31.  Wagon    roads    17 

Grand  total    $36,519 

In  addition  to  the  83.9  miles  of  line  there  were  7.89  miles  of 
sidetracks,  etc.,  whose  cost  is  included  above. 

It  will  be  noted  that  Item  1,  Engineering,  cost  about  4%  of  the 
total;  and  that  Item  29,  Interest  During  Construction,  was  about 
3%  of  the  total. 

In  addition  to  the  foregoing  lines  belonging  to  the  Great  North- 
ern there  was  a  short  line,  The  Columbia  &  Red  Mountain,  7.5  miles 
long,  whose  original  cost  could  not  be  ascertained,  but  was  esti- 
mated to  have  been  $258,327,  or  $34,450  per  mile. 

The  preceding  costs  total  as  follows: 

Main    line    (487.6    miles) $21,673,780 

Fairhaven  &  Southern    (32.3  miles) 728,976 

Washington  &  G.  N.    (83.9  miles) 3,054,042 

Spokane  Falls  &  N.    (130.5  miles) 2,145,682 

Columbia  &  Red   Mt.    (7.5   miles) 258,327 


Total     original     cost $27,860,807 

If  we  allow  $140,000  for  the  probable  cost  of  the  right  of  way  of 
the  S.  F.  &  N.,  we  have  $28,000,000,  in  round  numbers,  for  742  miles 


RAILWAYS.  1309 

of  line,  or  $37,730  per  mile,  not  including  rolling  stock.     This  is  very 
close  to  the  actual  original  cost. 

We   come    now   to    the    additions   and    improvements   made    since 
the  original  lines  were  built.     They  total  as  follows : 

Fairhaven  cut-off  line    (18.4  miles) $  962,102 

New   side   tracks    747,209 

Right  of  way 745,370 

Real     estate     2,519,513 

Grading   (mostly  bank  widening) 1,142,369 

Tunnels     1,250,145 

Masonry     729,409 

Cribbing    and    bulkheading 19,457 

Bridges    and    culverts 465,520 

Rails     52,207 

Transportation  department  buildings 503,968 

Road    department    buildings 50,541 

Roundhouses    and    shops 90,333 

Fuel  and  water   stations 49,334 

Grain  elevators,  coal  bunkers,  et.? 104,933 

Docks   and    wharves 546,926 

Other  buildings  and   structures 177,480 

Fences     39,523 

Telegraph    6,884 

Shop   tools   and   machinery 96,136 

Protection  against  snow  and  ice 111,501 


Total  additions  and  improvements $10,410,859 

This  brings  the  cost  up  to  June  30,  1906. 

Unfortunately  the  account  of  New  Sidetracks  does  not  distribute 
the  cost  between  the  various  items,  as  it  should ;  consequently  Mr. 
Gillette  adopted  the  following  distribution : 

Per  cent. 

Grading    25 

Ties     10 

Rails     40 

Rail    fastenings    10 

Frogs  and  switches. 10 

Laying   and    surfacing 5 



Total     100 

In  this  manner  the  total  itemized  cost  (original  plus  additions 
and  improvements)  was  arrived  at  very  closely,  as  shown  in 
Table  XI. 

Table  XI  includes  no  allowance  for  the  right  of  way  of  the  S.  F. 
&  N.  and  of  the  Columbia  &  Red  Mountain  ;  but,  as  the  present 
value  of  that  right  of  way  is  only  $139,678,  it  will  be  seen  that  the 
grand  total  cost  was  about  $3'8,400,000. 

In  using  Table  XI  the  reader  should  be  cautioned  that  the  Addi- 
tions and  Improvements  were  not  recorded  in  the  accounting  de- 
partment exactly  under  the  same  headings  as  were  the  original 
construction  costs.  It  was  an  error  not  to  have  done  so,  but  it  is 
the  common  practice  of  railway  companies  to  make  this  mistake. 
Engineering,  for  example,  is  not  recorded  as  a  separate  item  in  the 
Additions  and  Improvements  (except  on  the  "Fairhaven  Cut-Off 


1310  1IAXDROOK   OP   COST   DATA. 

Line,"  where  it  was  3%  of  the  total)  ;  hence  one  cannot  estimate 
the  total  cost  of  engineering  on  any  part  of  the  Great  Northern 
work  other  than  the  original  <-<>ntitr  nation. 

The  same  holds  true  of  Locomotive  and  Car  Service,  Transporta- 
tion of  Man  and  Materials,  and  Interest  during  the  time  that  work 
is  in  progress. 

TABLE  XT. — ORIGINAL  COST  OF  GREAT  NORTHERN  RY.,  PLUS  ADDI- 
DITIONS  AND  IMPROVEMENTS  UP  TO  JUNE  30,  190G  (767.75  MlLES 
OF  RAILWAY  LINE  AND  187.06  MILES  OF  SIDE  TRACK  AND  OTHER 
TRACK). 

Per  mile 

Item.                                                                        Total.  of  line. 

1.  Engineering     ?       897,523.10  ?   1,169* 

2.  Right  of  way 2,885,290.66  3,75'J 

3.  Real    estate    2,634,533.12  3,432 

4.  Clearing  and   grubbing 657,585.67  856 

5.  Grading     9,561,212.68  12,454 

6.  Tunnels     4,166,137.81  5,426 

7.  Masonry    1,280,582.94  1,668 

8.  Cribbing   and    bulkheading 375,779.13  489 

9.  Bridges    and    culverts 3,275,652.60  4,266 

10.  Cattle    guards,    road     crossings     and 

signs     119,026.15  155 

11.  Ties     1,004,558.13  1,309 

12.  Rails     4,425,000.32  5,763 

13.  Rail  fastenings    642,684.77  837 

14.  Frogs,    switches,    etc 186,760.15  243 

15.  Tracklaying   and    surfacing 505,533.96  658 

16.  Ballasting     760,517.22  990 

17.  Surfacing,  filling  and  lining  track...            34,095.90  44 

18.  Transportation   department   buildings        885,130.96  1,153 

19.  Road    department    buildings .  .         122,739.99  160 

20.  Roundhouses   and    shops 256,933.72  334 

21.  Fuel  and  water  stations 235,045.35  ::06 

22.  Grain    elevators,    coal    bunkers    and 

stockyards    104,932.89  136 

23.  Docks,  wharves  and  inclines 627,888.57  817 

24.  Other  buildings  and  structures 200,984.65  261 

25.  Fences     66,975.8.7  87 

26.  Telegraph     47,185.27  61 

27.  Shop  tools  and  machinery 151,066.94  196 

28.  Protection    against   snow   and   ice...         188,688.99  245 

29.  Locomotive  and  car  service 96,536.47  126* 

30.  General   expense    ' 101,109.98  132* 

31.  Transportation  men  and  materials..         243,860.20  318* 

32.  Insurance     1,117.43  1* 

33.  Operating    expense    252,948.48  329t 

34.  Interest  on  advances 336,342.11  437* 

35.  Bond     expenses .       36,065.80  47* 

36.  Bond   interest  during  construction..  .         880,835.66  1,146* 

37.  Taxes 4,696.89  6 

38.  Wagon    roads 17,198.97  22 


Total     $38,270,760.50          ?49,848 

39.     Equipment  (rolling  stock) 3,973,586.18  5,176 

Grand    total $42,244,346.68          ?5~5,024 

*These  items  relate  only  to  original  construction,  and  not  to  any 
of  the  work  done  under  additions  and  improvements. 

t  Operating  expense  covers  the  cost  of  operating  passenger  and 
freight  trains  during  construction  (before  the  road  was  turned  over 
to  the  operating  department).  This  expense  should  really  not  be 
regarded  as  part  of  the  cost  of  construction. 


RAILWAYS.  1311 

Since  there  were  0.244  miles  of  sidetrack  and  other  tracks  per 
mile  of  line,  the  costs  in  the  last  column  of  Table  XI  must  be 
divided  by  1.244  to  arrive  at  the  cost  per  mile  of  track.  Multi- 
plying by  0.8  will  give  almost  the  same  result  as  dividing  by  1.244. 

Item  15  does  not  include  all  the  surfacing,  as  will  be  seen  by 
noting  Item  17  ;  but  Item  15  includes  locomotive  and  car  service. 
The  locomotive  and  car  service  of  Item  29  relates  to  other  work. 

From  the  records  of  quantities  in  the  engineering  department  of 
the  Great  Northern,  supplemented  by  data  in  the  accounting  depart- 
ment, and  by  field  surveys  where  necessary,  Mr.  Gillette  prepared 
the  estimated  cost  of  reproducing  (new)  the  Great  Northern  lines 
in  the  state  of  Washington,  as  detailed  in  Table  XII.  Item  2 
(lands)  in  Table  XII  is  based  upon  the  final  "findings"  of  the 
Washington  Railroad  Commission. 

TABLE   XII — ESTIMATE   OF   THE    COST  OF   REPRODUCING   THE   GREAT 
NORTHERN  RY.   IN  WASHINGTON,  UP  TO  JUNE  30,  1906. 
(767.75  MILES  OF  LINE  AND  187.06  MILES  OF 
SIDE  TRACKS  AND  YARD  TRACKS.) 

1.  Engineering,  3y2%  of  items  3  to  2.6  inclusive ?   1,077,601.47 

2.  Right  of  way,  etc. 

Terminal  land,   Seattle $10,937,543.6!) 

Terminal  land,  Spokane 1,562,228.33 

Terminal   land,    Everett 1,077,750.00 

Terminal  land,   Bellingham 552,610.00 

Right  of  way,  and  other  station  grounds 2,975,560.02 


Total  right  of  way,  etc $17,105,692.04 

Clearing  and  Grubbing. 

Clearing,  4,968  acres  at  $100.00 $       496,800.00 

Grubbing,    9,521   stations  at   $20.00 190,420.00 

Cutting  dangerous  trees,  6,596  at  $2.00 13,192.00 


Total  clearing  and  grubbing $       700,412.00 


4.     Grading. 


Earth  excavation    (300   ft.   haul),   2,802,453   cu. 

yds.  at  $0.20 , $  560,490.60 

Earth  excavation  (1,000  ft.  haul),  3,911,918  cu. 

yds.  at  $0.25 977,979.50 

Cement  gravel,  3,998,152  cu.  yds.  at  $0.40 1,599,260.80 

Loose  rock,  1,186,985  cu.  yds.  at  $0.50.  . 593,492.50 

Solid  rock,  3,246,964  cu.  yds.  at  $1.10 3,571,660.40 

Unclassified  excavation,  299,866  cu.  yds.  at  $0.50  149,933.00 

Embankment,  3,771,056  cu.  yds.  at  $0.20 754,211.20 

Overhaul,  cu.  yds.  hauled  100  ft,  8,361,186, 

at  $0.01 83,611.86 

Widening  roadbed  (acctg.  records) 1,142,368.85 

Grading  new  side  tracks  (acctg.  records) 186,802.19 


Total  grading  (except  trestles  filled,  item  8).$   9,619,810.90 


1312 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


5.     Tunnels. 


Cascade  tunnel   (masonry  lined),   13,813  lin.  ft. 

at  $180.00 $  2,486,340.00 

Everett  tunnel  (in  earth,  timber  lined),  2,259 

lin.  ft.  at  $60.00 135,540.00 

Seattle  tunnel  (double  track,  in  earth,  masonry 

lined,    %    owned  by  G.   N.),    5,141    lin.   ft.   at 

%  of  $360.00 1,233,840.00 

Other  tunnels,  5,316  lin.  ft.  at  $75.00 398,700.00 

W.  &  G.  N.  tunnel,  113  lin.  ft.  at  $60.00 6,780.00 


Total    tunnels ?  4,261,200.00 

6.  Masonry. 

Riprap,  slope  wall  and  retaining  wall  (as  per 
acctg.  records,  after  deducting  bridge  and 
culvert  masonry) $  865,718.94 

7.  Cribbing  and  Bulkheading. 

As  per  accounting  records $       375,779.13 

8.  Bridges  and  Culverts. 

Trestles  (av.  18  ft.  high,  30,390,311  ft.  B.  M.  at 
$30.00,  and  1,234,583  lin.  ft.  piles  at  $0.25), 

128,400    lin.    ft.   at  $10.00 $  1,284,000.00 

Trestles  filled,  2,048,038  cu.  yds.  at  $0.20 409,607.60 

Howe  Truss  and  Combination  Bridges  (8,046  ft.). 

Spans  under  60  ft,  966  lin.  ft.  at  $30.00 28,980.00 

Spans  60  to  100  ft,  825  lin.  ft  at  $35.00 28,875.00 

Spans  100  to  150  ft,  3,909  lin.  ft.  at  $45.00 175,905.00 

Spans  over  150  ft,  2,346  lin.  ft  at  $60.00 140,760.00 

Steel  Bridges   (11,722  lin.  ft). 

Steel   in  place,    24,004,260  Ibs.   at  $0.0475 $  1,140,202.35 

Foundation  masonry,    30,267   cu.   yds.   at  $12.00  363,204.00 

Log  Culverts  (31,606  lin.  ft.  culvert). 

Logs  in  place,  538,741  lin.  ft.  at  $0.16 86,198.56 

Timber  Culverts   (12,922  lin.  ft.  culvert). 

Timbtr,    2,180,232   ft    B.   M.,   at    $26.00 56,686.03 

Box  Drains    (3,709   lin.   ft   drains). 

Timber,  62,080  ft  B.  M.,  at  $26.00 1,614.08 

Concrete  Culverts   (2,377  lin.  ft.  culverts). 

Concrete,   4,740   cu.  yds.,   at  $9.00 51,660.00 

Stone  Box  Culverts   (3,206   lin.  ft.  culverts). 

Masonry,    4,074   cu.   yds.,  at   $5.00 20.370.00 

Vitrified  Pipe  Culverts  (11,870  lin.  ft.  culverts). 

12-in.   pipe,       694   lin.   ft,   at   $0.50 347.00 

18-in.  pipe,   2,848   lin.  ft.,  at   $1.30 3,702.40 

24-in.   pipe,    4,058   lin.   ft,   at   $2.60 10,550.80 

27-in.   pipe,    3,583   lin.   ft,   at   $3.00 10,749.00 

30-in.   pipe,       687   lin.   ft,   at   $3.50 2,404.5V 

Cast  Iron  Pipe  Culverts  (6,159  lin.  ft  culverts). 

8-in.   pipe,         48  lin.  ft,  at  $1.50 72.00 

12-in.   pipe,       606   lin.   ft,   at   $3.00 1,818.00 

18-in.   pipe,       852   lin.    ft,   at   $4.00 ;.  3,408.00 

24-in.   pipe,    3,119   lin.   ft,   at   $6.00 18,714.00 

30-in.   pipe,    1,324   lin.   ft,   at   $7.00 9,268.00 

36-in.  pipe,        210  lin.  ft,  at  $9.00 1,890.00 

Total  bridges  and  culverts $  3,850,986.32 

9.  Ties. 

(954.8  miles,  at  3,000),  2,864,400  ties,  at  $0.50.$   1,432,200.00 
10.     Rails. 

(954.8  miles),  98,237  tons,  at  $40.00 $   3,929,480.00 


RAILWAYS. 


1313 


11.  Track  Fastenings. 

Spikes,    6,111,960   Ibs.,   at   $0.028 $  171,134.88 

Angle    bars,    16,549,280    Ibs.,    at    $0.025 413,732.00 

Bolts,    1,692,540  Ibs.,  at   $0.032 54,161.28 

Rail    braces,    382,500,    at    $0.10 38,250.00 

Tie  plates  (25%  of  line),  1,125,000,  at  $0.08.  .  .  .  90,000.00 

Total  track  fastenings *  767.278.16 

12.  Frogs  and  Switches. 

Turnouts    (frogs),   1,033,  at   $80.00 $  82,640.00 

13.  Ballast. 

Main  line,   767.7  miles,  at  $1,000.00 $  767,700.00 

Side   track,    187.1   miles,   at   $600.00 112,260.00 

Total  ballast   $  879,960.00 

14.  Tracklaying  and  Surfacing. 

Main  line  and  side  track,  954.8  mi.,  at  $700.00..$  668,360.00 

15.  Fencing  Right  of  Way. 

As  per  accounting  records  plus  20% $  80,371.04 

16.  Crossings,  Cattle  Guards  and  Signs. 

Signs,    3,020,    at    $2.00 $  6,040.00 

Road  crossings    (grade),   1,044,   at  $6.00 6,264.00 

Cattle   guards,    295,    at    $20.00 5,900.00 

Tell  tales,  18,  at. $25. 00 450.00 

Steel  highway  bridges,  1,743  lin.  ft.,  at  $80.00..  139,440.00 

Wood  highway  bridges,  1,384  lin.  ft.,  at  $20.00.  .  27,680.00 

Total  crossings,   etc $  185,774.00 

17.  Telegraph  Lines. 

As  per  accounting  records  plus   20% $  56,622.00 

18.  Transportation  Department  Buildings. 

Passenger  depots,  frame,  95,<573  sq.  ft.,  at  $1.25.$  119,466.25 

Passenger  depots,  brick,  at  Bellingham 18,000.00 

Passenger  depot,  brick,  at  Spokane.... 130,000.00 

Passenger  depot,  brick  and  stone,  at  Seattle 

( i/2  interest)  280,000.00 

Freight  depot,  brick,  Spokane,  30,000  sq.  ft., 

at  $1.00  . 30,000.00 

Freight  depot,  brick,  Everett,  9,350  sq.  ft., 

at  $1.00  9, 350. 00 

Freight  depot,  brick,  Seattle,  16,245  sq.  ft, 

at  $1.00  16,245.00 

Freight  depot,  brick,  Seattle  (stores),  27,440 

sq.  ft.,  at  $3.50 96,040.00 

Freight  depot,  brick,  Seattle,  50,000  sq.  ft, 

at  $1.50  75,000.00 

Freight  depot,  frame,  Seattle,  64,000  sq.  ft, 

at  $1.00  64,000.00 

Freight  depot,  frame,  Seattle,  56,000  sq.  ft., 

at  $1.00  56,000.00 

Freight  depot,  frame,  elsewhere,  21,822  sq.  ft, 

at  $1.00  21,822.00 

Warehouses,  18,648  sq.  ft.,  at  $1.00 18,648.00 

Stock  yards,  277,662  sq.  ft,  at  $0.04 11,106.48 

Track  scales,  9,  at  $2,000.00 18,000.00 

Platforms,  wood  (other  than  depots),  38,422 

sq.  ft.,  at  $0.10 3,842.20 

Platforms,  cinder,  25,575  sq.  ft,  at  $0.06 1,534.50 

Platforms,  brick,  600  sq.  ft,  at  $0.25 150.00 

Water  closets,  3,638  sq.  ft,  at  $1.00 3,638.00 

Station  furniture  (other  than  Seattle) 10,692.08 


Total    transportation    department   buildings.. $       983.534.51 


1314 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


19. 


20. 


21. 


24. 


Road  Department  Buildings. 

Section    houses    (white    men),    56,538    sq.    ft., 

at    $L25     ?         70,672.50 

Section     houses      (Japanese),     22,826     sq.     ft., 

at   $0.80 18,260.80 

Tool  houses,   14,050  sq.  ft,  at  $0.50 7,025.00 


Total   road   department   buildings %  95,958.30 

Round  Houses  and  Shops. 

Round  houses,  brick,  55  stalls,  at  $1,500.00 $  82,500.00 

Round  houses,   frame,   19   stalls,  at  $900.00 17,100.00 

Cinder  pits,  290  lin.  ft.,  a.t  $50.00 14,500.00 

Turntables,   9,   at  $3,000.00 27,000.00 

Machine   and    repair    shops,    brick,    117,315    sq. 

ft.,    at    $1.25 146,643.75 

Machine  and  repair  shops,  frame,   8,123   sq.  ft., 

at    $0.50 4,061.50 

Transfer  tables,    2,   at   $1,500.00 3,000.00 

Repair  sheds,  24,000  sq.  ft.,  at  $0.25 6,000.00 

Total  round  houses  and  shops ?  300,805.25 

Fuel  and  Water  Stations. 

Water   stations,    51,  at  $2.700.00 $  137,700.00 

Coal  chutes  (5),  67  pockets,  at  $1,500.00 100,500.00 

Total  fuel  and  water  stations $  238,200.00 

Shop  Tools  and  Machinery. 

As  per  accounting  records  plus  20% ?  181,280.40 

Grain  Elevators. 

Sack  house,  Seattle,  50,400  sq.  ft,  at  $0.50 $  25,200.00 

Elevator,  Seattle 100,000.00 


Total   grain  elevators $       125,200.00 

Docks  and  Wharves. 

Docks,   Seattle    .> $       626,368.60 


Wharves  elsewhere,  30,000  sq.  ft.,  at  $0.75.... 


22,500.00 


Total  docks  and  wharves $       648,868.60 

Other  Buildings  and  Structures. 

As  per   accounting   records  plus   20%    (106,905 

sq.  ft  of  miscellaneous  buildings,  etc.) $      241,181.58 

Snow  Protection. 

As  per  accounting  records  plus  15%,    (consist- 
ing mainly  of  4,558  lin.  ft.  snow  sheds) $      216,992.35 

Legal  and  General  Expense. 

1%    of  items  3   to  26,   inclusive 5       307,866.13 

Interest  During  Construction. 

5%   of  items  1   to  27    (except   2),   inclusive $   1,608,705.06 

Stores  on  Hand. 

Necessary  for  maintenance  and  operation $      360,904.26 

Total   of  items   1   to   29,   inclusive $51,249,402.44 

Equipment. 

Locomotives $    1,334,740.70 

Passenger  cars   715,395.92 

Freight   cars    2,320,036.29 

Work    and    miscellaneous 199, 451. 19 


Total    equipment    $   4,569,624.10 

Grand  total  of  items  1  to  30 $55,819,026.54 


RAILWAYS.  1315 

Regarding  Item  2  of  Table  XII,  it  should  be  said  that  the  Rail- 
mad  Commission  did  not  include  any  land  not  needed  in  the  im- 
mediate future  for  railway  purposes.  In  the  city  of  Seattle  there 
was  land,  owned  by  the  Great  Northern,  of  the  estimated  value  of 
$9,097,490,  which  is  not  included  in  Item  2.  In  Spokane  there  was 
similar  land  of  the  value  of  $221,750,  and  other  leased  lands  (bring- 
ing $16,000  yearly  income),  whose  value  was  not  determined. 

The  chief  engineer  of  the  Great  Northern  presented  an  estimate 
of  the  cost  of  reproduction  far  in  excess  of  that  of  Mr.  Gillette 
above  given.  The  Railroad  Commission  finally  determined  that 
$58,671,559  would  be  a  fair  cost  of  reproducing  (new)  the  Great 
Northern  lines  in  Washington,  and  that  $53,887,080  would  be  a 
fair  "present  value,"  or  second-hand  value,  of  all  this  property, 
including  equipment. 

The  accounting  and  engineering  records  of  the  Great  Northern 
had  been  so  kept  that  the  yardage  of  earth  in  widening  roadbed 
(subsequent  to  original  construction)  and  in  building  new  side- 
tracks, could  not  be  ascertained  without  an  amount  of  labor  that 
did  not  seem  to  be  warranted. 

Referring  to  the  last  two  entries  in  Item  4  of  Table  XII,  it  will 
be  seen  that  they  total  $1,329,170,  or  about  14%  of  the  total  of 
Item  4.  At  an  assumed  cost  of  20  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  this  bank 
widening,  etc.,  there  were  about  664,600  cu.  yds.,  which  is  equiva- 
lent to  865  cu.  yds.  per  mile  of  line.  Dividing  the  items  of  yard- 
age in  Item  4  by  768,  the  miles  of  line,  we  have  the  following: 

Cu.  yds.  per 
mile  of  line. 

Earth  excav.   (300  ft.  or  less  haul) 3,640 

Earth  excav.    (300  to  1,000  ft.  haul) 5,090 

Cement    gravel    5,200 

Loose  rock    1,540 

Solid    rock 4,230 

TTnclassified    excavation     390 

Embankment    from    borrow 4,910 

• 



Total 25,000 

Widening    roadbed    (earth) 870 

Total     25,870 

Filling  trestles   (see  Item  8,  Table  IV) 270 

Grand    total    ; 26,140 

In  Item  8  it  will  be  seen  that  the  trestles  averaged  18  ft.  high. 
This  was  ascertained  by  dividing  the  total  sum  of  the  profile  areas 
of  the  trestles  by  their  total  length.  Trestle  filling  was  kept  in 
Item  8,  in  order  to  correspond  with  the  accounting  records. 

i'he  prices  assigned  to  all  classes  of  construction  include  all  labor, 
materials  and  costs  of  transporting  men  and  materials,  train  serv- 
ice, etc. 


1316 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Item  12,  Progs  and  Switches,  does  not  include  cross-ties,  which 
are  included  in  Item  9. 

Item  17,  Telegraph  Lines,  was  taken  from  the  accounting  records 
and  20%  added  to  cover  increase  in  prices,  transportation  of  men, 
etc.  The  Great  Northern  does  not  own  the  telegraph  lines  entirely. 

Table  XIII  summarizes  the  cost  of  reproduction,  and  gives  also 
present  value. 

TABLB  XIII. — COST  OF  REPRODUCTION  AND  PRESENT  VALUE  OF  GREAT 
NORTHERN  AS  ESTIMATED  BY  H.  P.  GILLETTE. 


Reproduction.  Condition. 

New.  Per  cent. 

1.  Engineering    $1,077,601  100.0 

2.  Right  of  way 17,105,692  100.0 

3.  Clearing  and  grubbing 700,412  100.0 

4.  Grading     9,619,811  110.0 

5.  Tunnels    4,261,200  100.0 

6.  Masonry  (except  in  Item  8)  865,719  100.0 

7.  Cribbing  and  bulkheading.  .  375,779  22.0 

8.  Bridges  and  culverts 3,850,986  78.2 

9.  Ties    1,432,200  46.3 

10.  Rails    3,929,480  80.0 

11.  Track  fastenings    767,279  80.0 

12.  Frogs    and    switches 82,640  80.0 

13.  Ballast    879,960  100.0 

14.  Tracklaying  and  surfacing.  668,360  100.0 

15.  Fencing  right   of  way 80,371  54.5 

16.  Crossings,  cattle  guards,  etc.  185,774  90.0 

17.  Telegraph    lines    56,622  80.0 

18.  Transp.    dept.   bldgs 983,535  89.5 

19.  Road   dept.   bldgs 95,958  76.0 

20.  Roundhouses  and   shops 300,805  83.5 

21.  Fuel  and  water  stations.  .  .  .  238,200  80.0 

22.  Shop  tools  and  machinery..  181,280  65.0 

23.  Grain    elevators    125,200  79.0 

24.  Docks  and   wharves 648869  79.0 

25.  Other  bldgs.  and  structures.  241,182  85.0 

26.  Snow  protection    216,992  '  72.4 

27.  Legal  and  general  expense.  307,886  100.0 

28.  Interest  during  constr 1,608,705  100.0 

29.  Stores    on    hand 360,904  100.0 


Present 

Value. 

$  1,077,601 

17,105,692 

700,412 

10,581,792 

4,261,200 

865,719 

82,672 

3,011,471 

663,109 

3,143,584 

613,823 

66,112 

879,960 

668,360 

43,802 

167,197 

45,298 

880,265 

72,928 

251,173 

190,560 

117,832 

98,908 

512,606 

205.004 

157,103 

307,886 

1,608,705 

360,904 


Total  of  items  1  to  29 ...  $51,219,402 
30.     Equipment    4,569,624 


Grand  total   $55,819,026 


70.33 


$48,741,678 
3,213,747 


$51,955,425 


In  arriving  at  an  estimate  of  the  Present  Value,  or  second-hand 
value,  of  the  property,  Mr.  Gillette  determined  the  average  age  of 
each  class  of  structures,  as  explained  in  his  report  to  the  Railroad 
Commission  (see  Engineering-Contracting,  April  7,  1909).  Then 
an  annual  depreciation  was  determined  from  a  study  of  the  records. 
For  example,  the  average  age  of  existing  trestles  was  4.2  years, 
and  the  annual  depreciation  was  taken  at  10%;  hence  the  present 
condition  was  100%  — 4.2  X  10%=  58%. 


RAILWAYS. 


1317 


Table  XIV  gives  average  ages  and  annual  depreciations. 
TABLE  XIV. 


Age 
years. 

Cribbing    and    bulkheading 4.2 

Howe   truss  bridges 5.0 

Log  culverts 9.4 

Timber    culverts    13.0 

Box  drains    13.0 


Ties     

Rails,    track   fastenings,    etc. 

Fences    

Transportation  dept.   bldgs. . 

Road  dept.   bldgs 

Roundhouses  and  shops 

Fuel  and  water  stations.  .  .  . 
Shop  tools  and  machinery.. 

Grain  elevators   

Docks  and  wharves   

Other    buildings    

Snow    sheds    


4.3 
8.0 
6.5 
3.5 
8.0 
5.5 


3.5 
7.0 
7.0 
5.0 


Annual 

Present 

deprec. 

condition 

per  cent. 

per  cent. 

10.0 

58.0 

10.0 

50.0 

6.0 

41.6 

6.0 

12.0 

6.0 

12.0 

12.5 

46.3 

2.5 

80.0 

7.0 

54.5 

3.0 

89.5 

3.0 

76.0 

3.0 

83.5 

80.0 

10.6 

65.0 

3.0 

79.0 

3.0 

79.0 

3.0 

85.0 

4.0 

72.4 

The  rate  of  depreciation  of  Fuel  Stations  was  assumed  at  3% ; 
Water  Stations  at  2V6%,  the  latter  being  lower  because  so  much  of 
the  value  exists  in  piping,  reservoirs,  etc. 

Equipment  depreciation  was  put  at  3.6%  per  annum. 

All  other  items  were  regarded  as  having  suffered  no  depreciation. 
Grading  was  regarded  as  having  actually  appreciated  10%  in  value, 
due  to  the  "seasoning"  of  the  roadbed.  This  is  equivalent  to  $1,280 
per  mile,  which  was  regarded  as  a  liberal  allowance  for  expenditures 
in  track  maintenance  during  the  first  few  years  after  construc- 
tion, which  might  properly  be  charged  to  construction,  although, 
In  fact,-  they  never  are  so  charged  in  the  company  books.  It  also 
provides  for  the  increased  value  of  the  roadbed  due  to  natural 
settlement. 

The  actual  cost  of  the  equipment  of  the  entire  Great  Northern  Ry. 
system,  as  determined  from  the  accounting  records,  was  as  follows, 
up  to  June  30,  1906  : 

Locomotives    $10,020,193.14 

Passenger  cars 4,070,424.68 

Freight    cars     20,356,142.73 

Work    and    miscellaneous 1,487,062.67 


Total $35,933,823.22 

Spokane  Falls  and  Northern 190,742.00 


Grand  total    $36,124,565.22 

The  actual  original  cost  of  the  Spokane  Falls  &  Northern  equip- 
ment, as  purchased  by  the  Great  Northern  Ry.,  was  not  available, 
but  was  estimated  to  be  $190,742,  composed  of  the  following  items; 

Locomotives     $  71,500.00 

Passenger  cars   33,500.00 

Freight  cars    69,340.00 

Work  and  miscellaneous 16,402.00 


Total $190,742.00 


1318  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

To  arrive  at  the  cost  of  reproducing  the  equipment  new,  present 
(1906)  prices,  were  assumed  and  applied  to  all  the  locomotives  and 
cars.  This  showed  an  increase  of  cost  of  about  15%,  hence  it  was 
decided  to  add  15%  to  the  original  cost  (as  shown  by  the  account- 
ing records)  to  obtain  the  cost  of  reproduction  new. 

With  the  exception  of  the  locomotives,  the  entire  equipment  was 
then  prorated  to  the  state  of  Washington  on  the  ratio  of  the  car 
mileage  of  the  entire  system  to  the  car  mileage  of  Washington.  The 
work  equipment  was  prorated  on  the  basis  of  the  miles  of  road 
operated. 

The  cost  of  reproduction  and  the  present  value  of  the  equip- 
ment for  the  state  of  Washington  were  estimated  to  be  as  follows : 

Cost  of  Present 

Reproduction  Value. 

Locomotives     $1,334,740.70  $     876,779.33 

Passenger    cars    715,395.92  494,404.42 

Freight  cars    2,320,036.29  1,695,410.98 

Work    and    miscellaneous 199,451.19  147,152.36 


Total      $4,569,624.10          $3,213,747.09 

The  present  value  (second-hand  value)  was  not  ascertained  by  a 
field  inspection,  which  is  practically  impossible  of  satisfactory  ac- 
complishment anyway,  but  by  determining  the  average  age  of  each 
kind  of  equipment  and  multiplying  that  age  in  years  by  3.6%,  to 
arrive  at  the  percentage  of  depreciation  suffered. 

Mr.  Gillette's  studies  of  the  equipment  records  indicated  to  him 
that  the  average  locomotive  or  car  could  not  be  expected  to  have  a 
life  exceeding  28  years,  and  that  it  would  therefore  be  liberal  to 
the  railway  to  allow  an  annual  depreciation  of  only  3.6%  in  arriving 
at  the  present  value.  He  selected  the  straight  line  formula,  rather 
than  the  sinking  fund  formula,  for  estimating  depreciation. 

In  determining  the  average  age  of  locomotives  the  standard  price 
of  each  locomotive  was  multiplied  by  its  age.  The  sum  of  these 
products  was  divided  by  the  total  cost  of  the  locomotives  to  secure 
the  average  age.  It  would  be  manifestly  incorrect  to  use  the  actual 
average  age  obtained  by  dividing  the  sum  of  the  ages  by  the  total 
number  of  locomotives,  for  locomotives  differ  so  in  value  that  the 
"weighted  average"  must  be  obtained.  In  like  manner  the  age  of 
all  rolling  stock  was  determined.  It  will  be  noted  that  there  was  an 
average  depreciation  of  29.67%  (since  the  condition  was  70.33%). 
Hence  the  average  weighted  age  of  all  equipment  was  29.67  -f-  3.6  = 
8.24  years.  The  rolling  stock  on  the  Spokane  Falls  &  Northern 
was  all  10  years  old,  and  on  the  rest  it  was  as  follows: 

Locomotives .  9.5  years 

Passenger  cars    8.5 

Freight   cars 7.4 

Work    and    miscellaneous 7.0 

The  cost  of  reproduction  of  the  Great  Northern,  per  "mile  of 
line,"  is  given  in  Table  XV. 


RAILWAYS.  1319 

TABLE  XV. — COST   OF   REPRODUCTION   OF   GREAT   NORTHERN   RY.    IN 

WASHINGTON,  AS  ESTIMATED  BY  H.  P.  GILLETTE. 

Per  mile 
of  line.* 

1.  Engineering     $   1,406 

2.  Right  of   way 22,317 

3.  Clearing    and    grubbing 914 

4.  Grading 12.550 

5.  Tunnels     5,559 

6.  Masonry     1,030 

7.  Cribbing  and  bulkheading   489 

8.  Bridges   and   culverts 5,024 

9.  Ties 1,870 

10.  Rails    5,126 

11.  Track  fastenings    1,001 

12.  Frogs   and    switches 107 

13.  Ballast    1,148 

14.  Tracklaying  and  surfacing 872 

15.  Fencing  right   of   way 105 

16.  Crossings,   cattle  guard  and   signs 242 

17.  Telegraph   lines    74 

18.  Transportation    department    buildings • 1,284 

19.  Road   department   buildings 125 

20.  Roundhouses  and  shops. 391 

21.  Fuel  and  water  stations 310 

22.  Shop  tools  and  machinery 236 

23.  Grain    elevators 163 

24.  Docks  and  wharves 845 

25.  Other  buildings  and  structures .*. 314 

26.  Snow  protection    -. 282 

27.  Legal   and   general   expense 401 

28.  Interest  during  construction 2,098 

29.  Stores   on   hand 470 

Total  of  Items  1  to  29 $66,753 

SO.     Equipment     5,950 

Grand   total    $72,703 

*There  are  1.244  miles  of  track  per  mile  of  line  ;  hence  multiply 
by  0.8  to  get  cost  per  mile  of  track. 

During  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1906,  there  were  479,- 
847,387  ton-miles  of  freight  carried  over  the  Great  Northern  within 
the  state  of  Washington.  The  freight  car  mileage  was  33,428,695 
car-miles  in  Washington,  or  9.681%  of  the  car-mileage  of  the  entire 
Great  Northern  system. 

Cost  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Railway  (1,645  Miles)  In  the  State 
of  Washington.* — This  issue  contains  data  relating  to  the  Northern 
Pacific  Ry.,  data  that  were  submitted  as  exhibits  by  Mr.  H.  P. 
Gillette  in  his  testimony  at  the  hearings  before  the  Railroad  Com- 
mission, but  not  printed  in  the  "findings,"  which  contain  only  the 
conclusions  as  to  costs  reached  by  the  commission  after  hearing  all 
the  evidence. 

Work  was  begun  on  the  Northern  Pacific  in  Washington  in  1879, 
and  the  major  part  of  the  construction  of  the  main  line  was  done 
in  the  early  80's.  The  task  of  ascertaining  the  original  cost  of  the 
Northern  Pacific  was  complicated  not  only  by  the  age  of  the  rec- 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  12,  1910. 


1320  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

ords  but  by  the  purchase  of  a  number  of  important  branch  lines 
The  purchase  prices  were  available,  but  it  was  exceedingly  desirable 
to  arrive  at  the  actual  cost  to  the  builders  of  those  branches.  This 
was  determined  with  considerable  accuracy  by  securing  construction 
quantities  from  old  engineering  records  and  applying  prices  current 
at  the  time  of  construction.  The  total  original  cost  of  main  line  and 
branches  in  Washington  was  found  to  be  about  $64,000,000,  including 
improvements  and  betterments.  Of  this  total  80%  was  ascertained 
with  great  accuracy  from  the  accounting  records.  Of  the  remain- 
ing 20%  fully  half  was  determined  with  almost  as  great  accuracy 
from  old  engineering  records,  leaving  only  about  10%  to  be  estimated 
by  field  inspection. 

It  has  been  repeatedly  stated  that  the  original  cost  plus  im- 
provements can  be  ascertained  for  very  few  railways  in  America. 
Doubtless  this  assertion  has  deterred  other  railway  commissions 
from  even  attempting  to  secure  the  original  cost.  The  facts  are, 
however,  that  of  the  entire  railway  values  in  Washington,  not 
much  more  than  5%  were  such  that  the  original  cost  plus  improve- 
ments could  not  be  found.  Mere  age  of  construction  has  less  to  do 
with  the  difficulty  of  arriving  at  original  costs  than  is  commonly 
supposed.  The  greatest  difficulty  exists  where  purchases  of  lines 
have  been  made  without  transfer  of  tho  construction  ledgers  from 
the  original  owners  to  the  purchasers.  In  many  instances  such 
transfers  of  ledgers  are  made,  and  in  nearly  all  cases  transfers  of 
cross  section  books  and  other  engineering  records  are  made.  The 
importance  of  securing  the  original  itemized  costs  plus  itemized  costs 
of  improvements  cannot  be  overestimated.  The  conflicting  testimony 
of  experts  in  court  is  the  bane  of  a  judge's  life,  but  with  actual 
original  costs  as  a  basis  there  is  not  great  difficulty  in  determining 
costs  of  reproduction,  for  wages  and  prices  are  a  matter  of  record 
and  the  increase  or  decrease  in  the  value  of  any  item  of  railroad 
construction  is  readily  ascertained. 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  the  mileage  of  the  Northern  Pa- 
cific railway  in  Washington  UP  to  June  30,  1906  : 

Miles. 

Main  line 658.73 

Branch  lines   (incl.  Wash,  and  Col.   Rivers)...     986.53 

Total  lines 1,615.26 

Second   track,    main   line 41.65 

Spurs 117.59 

Yard  tracks  and  sidings 400.75 

Total    track 2,205.25 

In  the  findings  of  the  Railroad  Commission  the  following  mileage 
was  assigned  to  the  Northern  Pacific : 

Miles. 

Main  line 087.68 

Branches  and   spurs 911.71 

Total  lines..  ..1,629.42 


RAILWAYS.  1321 

However,  we  shall  use  the  mileage  determined  by  Mr.  Gillette — 
namely:  1,645  miles  of  line — since  the  following  costs  are  based 
upon  that  mileage. 

The  original  cost  of  the  Northern  Pacific  in  Washington  plus  im- 
provements and  betterments  up  to  June  30,  1906,  as  determined  by 
Mr.  Gillette,  was  as  given  in  Table  XVI.  In  using  the  last  column 
of  this  table  it  should  be  remembered  that  there  were  1.34  miles  of 
all  tracks  to  each  "mile  of  line"  ;  hence  to  arrive  at  the  cost  per 
mile  of  track,  divide  the  items  in  the  last  column  by  1.34. 

TABLE  XVI. — ORIGINAL  COST  OF  THE  NORTHERN  PACIFIC  RAILWAY  IN 
WASHINGTON,  PLUS  IMPROVEMENTS. 
(1,645  miles  of  line.) 

Per 

Total.  mile. 

1.  Engineering    $  2,907,344.26  $  1,768 

2.  Right  of  way 1,796,272.00  1,092 

3.  Real  estate 1,360,895.38  827 

4.  Clearing  and   grubbing 1,213,770.19  738 

5.  Grading 15,589,712.88  9,479 

6.  Tunnels    974,519.99  590 

7.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts .      7,879,328.94  4,790 

8.  Masonry 156,823.46  95 

9.  Ties 2,278,007.25  1,385 

10.  Rails 8,520,625.03  5,182 

11.  Track  fastenings   1,063,620.96  647 

12.  Frogs  and   switches 255,243.07  155 

13.  Tracklaying   and    surfacing 1,669,691.18  1,015 

14.  Ballast 1,524,759.29  929 

15.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 1,477,207.49  897 

16.  Engine  houses  and  turntables 246,663.97  150 

17.  Engine  and  car  shops 849,340.77  516 

18.  Shop  machinery  and  tools 294,507.95  179 

19.  Water  stations 325,042.66  198 

20.  Fuel  stations 79,544.48  47 

21.  Fencing  right  of  way 273,067.50  166 

22.  Snow   fences,    etc 130,494.72  79 

23.  Stock    yards 31,064.11  19 

24.  Crossings,   cattle  guards  and  signs 101,860.54  62 

25.  Interlocking   and   signal   apparatus 44,706.61  27 

26.  frocks,  wharves  and  coal  bunkers 1,015,566.29  617 

27.  Transfer  boats  and  barges 31,662.70  19 

28.  Section   and  tool  houses 122,352.50  74 

29.  Miscellaneous  structures    1,179,108.09  717 

30.  Telegraph  lines    207,361.48  126 

31.  Transportation  charges  and  rent  of  equip- 

ment     1,756,796.39  1,068 

32.  Operating  expenses 261,910.26  159 

33.  Construction  equipment 63,743.75  39 

34.  General   expense    640,744.02  390 

35.  Interest  and  discount 7,173,190.53  4,360 

36.  Legal   expense    3,009.24 

37.  Undistributed  expense   480,212.62 

Total  $63,979,772.61      $38,895 

38.  Equipment    (rolling  stock) 11,478,121.38          6,978 

Grand  total    .  $75,457,893.99     $45,873 


1322  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Of  this  $63,979,772  cost  of  construction,  $5,896,735  was  spent  for 
"improvements  and  betterments"  between  the  years  1896  and  1906. 
The  corresponding  improvement  expenditures  prior  to  that  time 
(charged  to  "Construction  B")  were  $2,951,972,  making  a  total  of 
$8,848,707  spent  for  improvements. 

It  will  be  noted  that  Item  1,  Engineering,  amounts  to  nearly  5% 
of  the  total  cost  exclusive  of  equipment.  This  very  high  percentage 
was  due  to  several  factors.  The  explorations  for  a  pass  through 
the  Cascade  Mountains  were  made  at  an  early  date  when  little  was 
definitely  known  about  their  topography  and  that  exploration  alone 
cost  $300,000.  The  engineering  on  the  early  branch  lines  cost  6%  oC 
the  $11,400,000  spent  in  building  them,  due  in  part  to  slow  progress 
of  work  in  those  early  days.  A  very  considerable  part  of  the  early 
Northern  Pacific  work  was  done  by  company  labor,  which  added 
not  only  to  the  expenditures  for  engineering  and  supervision,  but  also 
made  the  entire  cost  of  the  work  greater  than  it  would  have  been 
had  it  been  done  by  contract. 

Items  2  and  3  are  small,  because  nearly  all  the  right  of  way  was 
given  by  the  government.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  should  be  a 
trifle  higher  than  given  in  Table  XVI,  to  provide  for  the  unascer- 
tainable  original  cost  of  right  of  way  of  about  350  miles  of  branch 
lines. 

Item  31,  Transportation  Charges  and  Rent  of  Equipment,  relates 
to  the  book  charges  for  hauling  construction  materials  over  the  N.  P. 
lines.  Under  a  proper  system  of  accounting  this  item  would  have 
been  distributed  to  the  materials  themselves. 

Item  32,  Operating  Expense,  relates  to  the  cost  of  operating 
freight  and  passenger  trains  over  the  lines  before  they  were  formally 
transferred  to  the  operating  department. 

Item  34,  General  Expense,  was  practically  1%  of  the  total  con- 
struction cost. 

On  the  early  construction  work,  involving  some  $30,000,000,  this 
item  of  general  expense  was  nearly  1%%. 

Item  35,  Interest  and  Discount,  is  inordinately  high.  It  consists 
mostly  of  discount  on  the  bonds.  In  fact  the  first  $22,400,000  ex- 
pended, more  than  $5,900,000  was  charged  to  interest  and  discount, 
or  nearly  27%  of  the  total.  Hence  no  general  conclusions  can  be 
drawn  from  this  item. 

Item  36,  Legal  Expanse,  does  not  appear  in  any  of  the  accounts 
except  for  a  small  branch  line,  where  it  amounted  to  nearly  1 
per  cent  of  the  cost  of  that  branch. 

Item  37,  Undistributed  Expense,  relates  to  certain  items  which 
were  so  entered  that  they  could  not  be  prorated  to  Washington  under 
any  definite  item,  and  were  consequently  grouped  here. 

The  cost  of  reproducing  (new)  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  in  Wash- 
ington, as  estimated  by  Mr.  Gillette,  is  given. in  Table  XVII,  the 
values  of  right  of  way  and  land  being  those  finally  determined  by 
the  Railroad  Commission. 


RAILWAYS. 


1323 


TABLE  XVII. — COST  OF  REPRODUCING  THE  NORTHERN  PACIFIC  RAIL- 
WAY IN  WASHINGTON,  AS  ESTIMATED  BY  H.   P.  GILLETTE. 
(1,645  miles  of  line.) 

1.  Engineering,  5%   of  Items  3  to  27 $  2,510,580.23 

2.  Right  of  Way,  etc. : 

Terminal  land,  Seattle 13,038  176  50 

Terminal  land,    Tacoma    .  .  .• 7,638,006.00 

Terminal  land,    Spokane    5,306,465.00 

Terminal  land,   Everett   366,530  00 

Terminal  land,  Bellingham 215,330  00 

Right  of  way  and  other  station  grounds 6,298*364.50 

Total  right  of  way,  etc $  32,862,872.00 

3.  Clearing  and  Grubbing: 

Clearing,  9,445  acres,  at  $100.00 $  944  500  00 

Grubbing,    16,542   stations,  at   $22.00 33084000 

Extra  trees  cut,    4,942,   at  $2.00 9,964.00 

Six  branch  lines  (from  acctg.  records) 117,811.04 

Improvements  (from  acctg.  records) 24,069*48 

Total  clearing  and  grubbing „ $  1,427,184.52 

4.  Grading: 

Earth  excavation,  18,566,958  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.22 $  4,084,730  76 

Earth  embank,  (barrow),  3,265,120  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.22.  718,32620 

Unclassified,  318,512  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.50 159  256  00 

Cement  gravel,  3,483,838  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.40 1,393,535  20 

Loose  rock,  1,321,720  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.50 660  860  00 

Solid  rock,  1,735,503  cu.  yds.,  at  $1.10 1,909'053'30 

Overhaul,  13,767,359  cu.  yds.   100  ft,  at  $0.01 137,673*59 

Riprap,   186,064   cu.  yds.,  at   $1.10 20467040 

Slope  wall,  3,350  cu.  yds.  at  $2.50 8  375*00 

Log  cribs,   882,632   lin.  ft.  logs,  at  $0.16 141  22l'l2 

Timber  cribs,   127,774  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $26.00 3, 322*12 

Six  branch  lines  (cost  from  acctg.  records) 1,113'697  75 

S.   L.   S.   &  E.    (estimated  from  field   inspection) 88000*00 

Improvements  and  betterments  (from  acctg.  records).  1,988,673*81 

Total   grading-    $  12,543,395.25 

5.  Tunnels: 

Stampede,  9,844  lin.  ft.   (masonry  lined),  at  $180.00..$  1,771,920.00 
Seattle,  one-half  interest,  5,141    (dbl.  track  in  earth), 

at    %    of    $360.00 925,380.00 

Other  tunnels  lined  with  concrete,  2,570  ft,  at  $110.00  282,700.00 

Other  tunnels  lined  with  timber,  2,329  ft.,  at  $70.00.  .  163,030.00 

Total  tunnels   $  3,143,030.00 

6.  Bridges,  Trestles  and  Culverts : 

Howe  Tusses  and  Combination. 

30-ft  spans,      1   at  $1,200.00 $  1,200.00 

50-ft  spans,     4  at  $1,600.00 6,400.00 

60-ft   spans,      8  at  $1,800.00 .  14,400.00 

70-ft   spans,      1  at  $2,000.00 2,000.00 

80-ft   spans,     3  at  $2,300.00 6,900.00 

90-ft.   spans,      1   at   $3,000.00 3,000  00 

100-ft   spans,   15  at  $4,000.00 60,000.00 

110-ft   spans,      1   at   $4,500.00 4,500.00 

120-ft  spans,     3   at  $5,500.00 16,500.00 

130-ft  spans,      1  at   $6,200.00 6,200.00 

140-ft   spans,     5   at   $7,000.00 35,000  00 

150-ft   spans,   19  at  $7,500.00 142,500.00 

13  miscellaneous  spans   (2,390  lin.  ft  at  $60.00) 143,400.00 

8  draw  spans,  1,625  lin.  ft  at  $60.00 97,500.00 


Total  Howe  trusses  and  combination  spans. . .  .$        539,500.00 


1324 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Pile  and  frame  trestles  (44130  M  at  $30,  and 
1,304,533  lin.  ft.  piles  at  0.25  ;  av.  height  trestle 

19  ft.),  168,978  lin.  ft.  at  $10.50 1,774,269  00 

Trestles  filled  with  earth  (139,862  lin.  ft.),  5,988,784 

cu.  yds.  at  $0.20 1,197,756.80 

Steel  Bridges: 

Spokane  River  at  Trent $  40,000.00 

Snake  River,  Ainsworth 1,100,000.00 

Columbia  River,   Kennewick 500,000.00 

Tacoma  Channel    105,000.00 

Chehalis  River 100,000.00 

Walla  Walla  River,  W.  &  C.  R 43,190.00 

Three  plate  girders    (260   ft.)    and  concrete  ret.   wall 

(350  ft.),  N.  &  C.  R 30,200.00 

Steel  in  other  bridges,   19,516,343  Ibs.  at  0.0475 927,026.44 

Masonry  abutments  and  piers  for  215  spans 537,500.00 

Total  steel  bridges $  3,382,916.44 

Culverts : 

Log  culverts,    264,943  lin.   ft.  logs,  at   $0.16 f  42,390.88 

Timber  culverts,  5,015,024  ft.  B.  M.  at  $26.00 130,390.62 

Box  drains,  336,720  ft.  B.  M.  at  $26.00 8,754.72 

Total  log  and  timber   culverts $  181,536.25 

Concrete  arch,  11,510  cu.  yds.  at  $!).00 103,590.00 

Stone  drains,  6,731  cu.  yds.  at  $8.00 53,848.00 

Total  masonry  culverts $  157,438.00 

Vitrified  Pipe: 

4-in.            62  lin.  ft  .at   $0.25..                                        ..$  15.50 

10-in.            50   lin.   ft.   at      0.45 22.50 

12-in.       1,229   lin.    ft.   at     0.50 < 614.50 

15-in.          226  lin.   ft.   at      0.75 169.50 

16-in.          137   lin.   ft.   at      0.80 109.60 

18-in.       3,929   lin.   ft.   at     1.30 5,107.70 

20-in.          168   lin.   ft.   at     1.70 285.60 

22-in.          109   lin.   ft.   at     2.00 218.00 

24-in.     24,895   lin.  ft.   at      2.60 664,727.00 

30-in.       2,845   lin.   ft.   at      3.50 9,957.50 

36-in.          276  lin.   ft.  at     4.50 1,242.00 

Total   vitrified  pipe    culverts $  682,469.40 

Cast-Iron   Pipe: 

6-in.          300  lin.   ft.   at   $1.00 $  300.00 

8-in.            24   lin.   ft.  at     1.50 36.00 

12-in.          892   lin.  ft.   at      3.00 2,676.00 

14-in.             27   lin.  ft.  at     3.50 94.50 

16-in.          732  lin.  ft.   at     3.75 2,745.00 

18-in.       5,095  lin.  ft.   at     4.00 20,380.00 

20-in.          889   lin.   ft.   at     4.75 4,222.75 

24-in.     28,411   lin.   ft.   at     6.00 170,466.00 

30-in.       2,432   lin.   ft.  at     7.00 17,024.00 

36-in,       4,453   lin.   ft.   at      9.00 40,122.00 

42-in.          663  lin.  ft.   at   13.00 8,619.00 

48-in.       1,026   lin.  ft.  at   18.00 18,468.00 

54-in.          516  lin.   ft.   at   21.00 10,836.00 

60-in.          198  lin.   ft.  at  25.00 

36-in.  corrugated  iron,  900  ft.  at  $3.00 4,950.00 

Total    iron    pipe    culverts 2,700.00 

Masonry    walls,    etc 303,639.25 

Total  bridges,  trestles  and  culverts $  7,776,348.11 


RAILWAYS. 


1325 


7.  Ties: 
(2,205.24  miles  at  3,000), 


5,615,750,  at  $0.50 $      3,307,875.00 


8.  Rails: 

221,367  tons  at  $40.00 $  8,854,680.00 

9.  Track  Fastenings : 

Spikes  (6,500  Ibs.  per  mi.),  14,334,125  Ibs.  at  $0.028.  .$  401,355.50 
Angle    bars    (17,600    Ibs.    per    mi.),    ;',S,812,400    Ibs., 

at     $0.025 970,310.00 

Bolts   (1,800  Ibs.  per  mi.),   3,969,450  Ibs.  at  $0.032...  127,022.00 

Rail   braces,    838,950   at   $0.10 83,895.00 

Tie  plates,   1,525,000   at  $0.08 122,000.00 

Total  track  fastenings $  1,704,582.90 

10.  Frogs  and  Switches: 

Switches,   2,850  at  $80.00 $  228,000.00 

11.  Ballast: 

1,645   miles  at    $1,000.00 $  1,645,000.00 

560  miles  at  $600.00 336,000.00 

Total   ballast    $  1,981,000.00 

12.  Tracklaying  and  Surfacing: 

2,205.25   miles  at   $700.00 $  1,543,675.00 

13.  Fencing  Right  of  Way: 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% $  227,682.00 

14.  Snow  Fences  and  Sheds: 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% $  156,595.00 

15.  Crossings,  Cattle  Guards  and  Signs : 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% $  122,232.00 

16.  Telegraph  Lines: 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% $  248,835.00 

17.  Station  Buildings  and  Fixtures: 

Seattle  terminal  station  (  %  interest) $  280,000.00 

110   combination    depots    (frame),    167,062    sq.    ft.    at 

$1.50   250,593.00 

100  passenger  depots  (frame),  121,684  sq.  ft.  at  $1.25  152,105.00 

Spokane  passenger  depot  (brick),  8,050  sq.  ft.  at  $4.00  32,200.00 

31  freight  depots  (frame),  591,050  sq.  ft.  at  $1.00...  591,050.00 

3  freight  depots  (brick),  81,320  sq.  ft.  at  $1.50 121,980.00 

Warehouses  (frame),  376,741  sq.  ft.  at  $1.40 527,437.40 

720  wood  platforms,  1,006,790  sq.  ft.  at  $0.10 100,679.00 

15  cinder  platforms,  26,492  sq.  ft.  at  $0.06 1,589.52 

2  cement  platforms,  34,631  sq.  ft.  at  $0.15 -.  5,194.65 

198  water  closets,   10,666   sq.   ft.  at  $1.00 10,666.00 

Track  scales,  28  at  $1,300.00 36,400.00 

Total  station   buildings $  2,109,894.57 

18.  Engine  Houses  and  Turntables: 

8  engine  houses   (frame),  27,686  sq.  yds.  at  $0.75 $  20,764.50 

Engine  houses    (frame),   20   stalls  $900.00 18,000.00 

Engine  houses    (brick),    71   stalls  at   $1,500.00 106,500.00 

Turntables,    28   at   $2,800.00 78,400.00 

6  ash  pits,  277  lin.  ft.  at  $15.00 4,155.00 


Total  engine  houses  and  turntables $        227,819.50 


1326 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


19.  Engine  and  Car  Shops: 

43  machine  shops  and  car  houses  (frame),  114,523 
sq.  ft.  at  $0.50 $ 

39  machine  shops  and  car  houses  (brick),  299,685 
sq.  ft.  at  $2.90 

Transfer,  tables,  2  at  $1,500.00 

83  sand,  coal,  wood,  oil  and  store  houses,  20  245  sq 
ft.  at  $0.50 .' 

3  bins,   2,053   sq.   ft.  at   $0.25 

Total  engine  and  car  shops $ 

20.  Shop  Machinery : 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% $ 

21.  Water  Stations: 

91  tanks,  41  pump  houses,  etc.  (from  accounting  rec- 
ords plus  20%).... $ 

22.  Fuel  Stations: 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% $ 

23.  Stock  Yards: 

63  yards,  603,397  sq.  ft.  at  $0.05 $ 

24.  Interlocking  and  Signal  Apparatus: 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% 

25.  Docks,  Wharves  and  Coal  Bunkers: 

From  accounting  records  plus  20% $ 

26.  Section  and  Tool  Houses : 

124  section  houses,  89,866  sq.  ft.  at  $1.25 $ 

80  bunk  houses,  29,430  sq.  ft.  at  $0.70. .... 
147  tool  houses,  27,839  sq.  ft.  at  $0.50.  . 

Total  section  and  tool  houses $~ 

27.-  Miscellaneous  Structures: 
From  accounting  records  plus  20  % $ 

28.  Legal  and  General  Expense: 

1%  of  Items  3  to. 27  inclusive $ 

29.  Interest  During  Construction: 

5 %  of  Items  1  to  28  (except  Item  2) $ 

30.  Stores  on  Hand $ 

Total  of  Items  1  to  30  inclusive $   89,279,064.' 

31.  Equipment: 

Locomotives $ 

Passenger    

Freight     

Work  and  miscellaneous 

Total  equipment $   14,334,377.21 

Grand  total  of  Items  1  to  31  inclusive $103,613,441.97 

It  will  be  noted  that  Item  1,  Engineering,  was  estimated  at  5%, 
instead  of  the  3^%  which  was  used  for  the  Great  Northern.  Since 
engineering  had  actually  cost  the  Northern  Pacific  5%,  Mr.  Gillette 
considered  it  fair  to  allow  that  amount,  particularly  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  there  was  a  large  mileage  of  cheap  branch  lines  where  the 
item  of  engineering  would  form  a  larger  percentage  than  on  main 
line  construction.  The  Railroad  Commission,  however,  adopted  a 


RAILWAYS.  1327 

uniform  3%%   for  all  the  railways  in  the  state  as  a  fair  allowance 
for  engineering. 

Item  2.  Land,  does  not  include  any  land  not  actually  used  or 
needed  for  railway  purposes  in  the  immediate  future.  The  North- 
ern Pacific  Ry.  has  a  right  of  way  400  ft.  wide  on  much  of  its  line, 
given  to  it  by  the  government.  The  Railroad  Commission  allowed 
a  100  ft.  strip  as  being  all  that  is  actually  needed  for  railway 
purposes,  except  in  towns  and  cities.  In  addition  to  the  lands  owned 
and  used  for  terminals,  there  was  land  of  the  following  value,  which 
was  not  included  in  Item  2  because  it  is  not  needed  for  railway  pur- 
poses at  present : 

Spokane '. $  1,194,156 

Tacoma 4,980,417 

Seattle. 9,250,000 


Total $15,424,573 

The  value  of  the  right  of  way  land  not  needed  for  railway  pur- 
poses was  determined  to  be  $913,184,  and  is  not  included  in  Item  2. 
Item  4,  Grading,  is  equivalent  to  the  following  yardage  per  mile 
of  line: 

Cu.  yds.  per  mile. 

Earth  excavation    11,325 

Earth  embankment   (borrow) 1,990 

Unclassified 195 

Cement  gravel 2,125 

Loose  rock    805 

Solid  rock 1,055 

Total    '...'..  17,495 

6  branch  lines  (unclassified) 1,700 

S.  L.  S.  &  E.    (unclassified) 130 

Improvements   ('unclassified)    4,545 

Trestles  filled   (Item  6) 3,650 

Grand  total 26,520 

The  items  of  yardage  in  the  "6  branch  lines"  and  of  yardage  *n 
"improvements"  are  estimated  by  assuming  that  the  unclassified 
yardage  on  these  branch  lines  cost  40  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  and  that  the 
yardage  in  improvements  cost  30  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Since  most  of  the 
improvement  yardage  was  bank  widening,  the  lower  unit  price  for 
this  unclassified  work  is  justified.  By  referring  to  our  issue  of 
Dec.  8  it  will  be  seen  that  the  yardage  per  mile  on  the  Great 
Northern  was  28,570  cu.  yds.  per  mile. 

Table  XVIII  gives  a  summary  of  Mr.  Gillette's  estimate  of  the 
cost  of  reproduction  (new)  and  the  present  value  (second  hand)  of 
the  Northern  Pacific  in  Washington.  The  annual  rates  of  depreci- 
ation of  the  different  classes  of  structures  and  of  equipment  were 
the  same  as  those  used  in  calculating  the  present  value  of  the  Great 
Northern. 


1328 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


TABLE  XVIII. — COST  OF  REPRODUCTION  AND  PRESENT  VALUE  OF  THE 
NORTHERN  PACIFIC   RY.  IN  WASHINGTON. 


(1,645   Miles.) 
Cost 


Condition 


o: 

£  reproduc- 

per 

tion  new. 

cent. 

1.  Enginering  $ 

2,510,580 

100.0 

2.  Right  of  way,  etc  

32,862,872 

100.0 

3.  Clearing  and  grubbing  

1,427,185 

100.0 

4.  Grading   

12,543,39*5 

110.0 

5.  Tunnels  

3,143,030 

100.0 

6.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts 

7,776,348 

84.7 

7.  Ties    

3,307,875 

50.0 

8.  Rails  

8,854,680 

80.0 

9.  Track  fastenings    

1,704,583 

80.0 

10.  Frogs  and  switches  

228,000 

80.0 

11.  Ballast   

1,981,000 

100.0 

12.  Tracklaying  and  surfacing.  . 

1,543,675 

100.0 

13.  Fencing  right  of  way  

227.682 

55.0 

14.  Snow  fences  and   sheds.  .  .  . 

156,595 

72.0 

15.  Crossings,  cattle  guards  and 

122,232 

55.0 

16.  Telegraph  lines  

248,835 

75.0 

17.  Station     building     and     fix- 

tures     

2,109,895 

81.5 

18.  Engine  houses  and  turntables 

227,819 

68.2 

19.  Engine  and  car  shops  

939,084 

66.4 

20.  Shop  machinery    

353,408    ' 

65.0 

21.  Water  stations   

390,050 

65.5 

22.  Fuel  stations   

95,453 

77.5 

23.  Stock  yards  

30,170 

45.5 

24.  Interlocking  and   signal  ap- 

paratus     

53,648 

85.0 

25.  Docks,     wharves     and     coal 

bunkers  

1,216,680 

75.0 

26.  Section  and  tool  houses.  .  .  . 

146,853 

61.0 

27.  Miscellaneous    structures... 

1,382,530 

61.0 

2  8.  Legal  and  general  expense  .  . 

502.  116 

100.0 

29.  Interest  during  construction 

2,661,215 

100.0 

30.  Stores  on  hand  

530,677 

100.0 

Total  of  Items  1  to  30. .  ..$   89,279,065 
31.  Equipment    14,334,377 

Grand  total..  ..$103,613,442 


67. Si- 


Present 
value. 


RAILWAYS.  1329 

TABLE  XIX. — COST  OF  REPRODUCTION  OF  THE  NORTHERN  PACIFIC  IN 
WASHINGTON. 

Per  mile 
of  line.* 

1.  Engineering $  1,526 

2.  Right  of  way,  etc 19,980 

3.  Clearing  and  grubbing 867 

4.  Grading    7,626 

5.  Tunnels 1,911 

6.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts 4,728 

7.  Ties   2,011 

8.  Rails     5,384 

9.  Track  fastenings 1,036 

10.  Frogs  and  switches 139 

11.  Ballast 1,206 

12.  Tracklaying  and  surfacing 938 

13.  Fencing  right  of  way 138 

14.  Snow  fences  and  sheds 95 

15.  Crossings,  cattle  guards  and  signs .    74 

16.  Telegraph  lines 151 

17.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 1,283 

18.  Engine  houses  and  turntables 138 

19.  Engine  and  car  shops 571 

20.  Shop  machinery 215 

21.  Water  stations 237 

22.  Fuel  stations 58 

23.  Stock  yards 18 

24.  Interlocking  and  signal  apparatus 33 

25.  Docks,   wharves  and  coal  bunkers 740 

26.  Section  and  tool  houses , 89 

27.  Miscellaneous  structures   840 

28.  Legal  and  general  expense 305 

29.  Interest  during  construction 1,618 

30.  Stores  on  hand 322 

Total  of  Items  1  to  30 $54,277 

31.  Equipment 8,715 

Grand  total ' $62,992 

*There  are  1.34  miles  of  track  per  mile  of  line. 

The  actual  cost  of  the  equipment  on  tho  entire  Northern  Pacific 
system,  up  to  June  30,  1906,  was  as  follows: 

Locomotives    $12,977,823.23 

Passenger 5,074,739.99 

Freight    '.  .  .    21,436,740.43 

Work  and  miscellaneous 1,904,185.11 

Trust  equipment    3,032,526.48 

Discount  and  commission 939,858.42 


Total   equipment $45,365,882.66 

The  above  does  not  include  the  equipment  of  the  Washington  and 
Columbia  River  Ry.,  which  was  estimated  by  Mr.  Gillette  to  have 
cost  as  follows : 

Locomotives    $   60,000 

Passenger 24,000 

Freight    62,000 

Work 1,200 

Total    .  ..$147,200 


1330  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  the  locomotives  in  Washington  was  based  upon  the 
cost  of  those  actually  used  in  that  state.  The  cost  of  passenger 
and  freight  cars  was  apportioned  to  Washington  according  to  car 
mileage.  The  cost  of  work  equipment  was  apportioned  according 
to  mileage  of  railway  line  operated.  On  this  basis  the  following 
costs  were  arrived  at  for  the  state  of  Washington : 

Original  Cost  Present 

cost.  reproduction.  value. 

Locomotives    3,689,522  4,242,950  2,715,488 

Passenger    1,598,184  1,447,593  868,556 

Freight    5,665,564  8,040,255  5,668,380 

Work  and  miscellaneous 524,851  603,579  425,523 

Total    $11,478,121     $14,334,377     $9,677,947 

The  "cost  of  reproduction"  was  determined  by  adding  15%  to  the 
original  cost  to  provide  for  increased  prices.  The  "present  value" 
was  determined  by  deducting  from  the  "cost  of  reproduction"  a  de- 
preciation of  3.6%  per  annum. 

In  this  connection  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  report  of  the 
Northern  Pacific  Ry.  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  for 
the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1906,  gave  the  value  of  the  equipment 
at  $32,044,260,  or  about  70%  of  its  original  cost.  Mr.  Gillette's  esti- 
mate of  the  "present"  value  was  67.6%  of  the  original  cost,  which 
shows  that  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  had  charged  off  for  depreciation 
only  slightly  less  than  Mr.  Gillette  has  estimated. 

It  is  also  worthy  of  comment  that  many  railway  engineers  have 
erred  in  their  estimates  of  the  cost  of  equipping  railways,  largely  be- 
cause they  have  taken  the  total  cost  of  equipment  given  in  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Reports  and  have  divided  it  by  the  total 
mileage  of  railway  lines.  It  has  not  been  generally  known  that 
the  costs  given  in  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  reports  are 
depreciated,  or  second  hand,  values. 

In  roughly  estimating  the  probable  cost  of  equipment  of  a  steam 
railway  line  the  proper  method  is  obviously  to  base  the  estimate 
upon  the  ton-miles  (or  car-miles)  of  freight  per  year  per  mile  of  line. 
In  Engineering-Contracting,  June  19,  1907,  the  freight  carried  per 
mile  of  railway  in  America  was  shown  to  have  been  830,000  ton- 
miles  in  1904.  Since  the  Northern  Pacific  carried  845,000  ton-miles 
in  1906  per  mile  of  line  in  Washington,  it  may  be  regarded  as  nearly 
typical  of  the  average  American  road,  so  far  as  freight  is  concerned. 
On  the  other  hand,  its  passenger  traffic  is  considerably  less  dense 
than  that  of  the  average  American  road.  It  is  safe  to  say,  there- 
fore, that  the  cost  of  the  equipment  of  the  Northern  Pacific  is  fairly 
typical  of  the  average  railway  in  America.  Roughly  speaking,  then, 
the  cost  of  equipment  of  an  American  railway  is  $10  per  1,000  ton- 
miles  carried  per  annum  per  mile  of  line. 

During  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1906,  there  were  1,390,064,- 
467  ton-miles  of  freight  carried  over  the  Northern  Pacific  within  the 
state  of  Washington,  or  845,000  ton-miles  per  mile  of  line.  This 
was  almost  50%  more  per  mile  of  line  than  was  carried  by  the  Great 
Northern,  which  accounts  for  the  higher  cost  of  the  Northern  Pacific 
equipment  per  mile  of  line. 


RAILWAYS.  1331 

In  drawing  conclusions  relative  to  the  probable  average  cost  of 
railway  lines  throughout  the  country,  serious  errors  have  been  made 
by  considering  only  the  costs  in  one  or  two  states.  It  will  be  noted 
that  the  cost  of  terminal  lands  in  Washington  is  enormous  when 
charged  entirely  to  the  road  mileage  within  that  state.  In  the  find- 
ings of  the  Washington  Railroad  Commission  it  was  determined 
that  56.8%  of  the  entire  value  of  lands  used  by  the  whole  Northern 
Pacific  Ry.  system  exists  in  the  state  of  Washington. 

The  Railroad  Commission  also  determined  that  62.3%  of  the  entire 
cost  of  tunnels  and  31.6%  of  the  entire  cost  of  bridges  on  the  N.  P. 
system  is  found  in  Washington. 

These  figures  show  clearly  the  rugged  character  of  much  of  the 
country  traversed  by  the  N.  P.  in  Washington.  Unquestionably  the 
cost  of  its  lines  in  that  state  far  exceeds  the  cost  in  any  other  state 
through  which  it  passes.  The  same  also  is  true  of  the  Great 
Northern. 

Cost  of  500  Miles  of  the  O.  R.  &  N. — My  appraisal  of  the  Oregon 
Railroad  and  Navigation  Co.  lines  in  the  state  of  Washington  gave, 
briefly,  the  following  results  : 

On  June  30,  1907,  there  were  501  miles  of  single  track  main  line 
and  branches,  and  68  miles  of  sidings  and  yard  track.  The  con- 
struction period  was  from  1875  to  1899,  but  most  of  the  mileage 
was  built  in  the  80's. 

The  following  was  the  original  cost  of  construction  per  mile  of 
single  track  main  line  and  branches  (501  miles)  : 

Per  mile. 

1.  Engineering ; $      623 

2.  Superintendence  and  inspection 78 

3.  Right  of  way 400 

4.  Lands    and   depot    grounds 1,884 

5.  Grading   6,603 

6.  Clearing  and  grubbing 65 

7.  Tunnels 260 

8.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts 2,518 

9.  Ties    1,397 

10.  Rails    5,589 

11.  Track  fastenings 684 

12.  Frogs  and  switches 68 

13.  Ballast   526 

14.  Tracklaying  and   surfacing 798 

15.  Fencing,  crossings,  cattle  guards  and  signs 118 

16.  Telegraph  lines 4 

17.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 345 

18.  Section   houses    141 

19.  Engine  houses  and  shops 190 

20.  Turntables    •        50 

21.  Shop   machinery  and   tools. 10 

22.  Water  stations 265 

23.  Miscellaneous   structures    39 

24.  Legal  expensed   6 

25.  Interest  and  discount 575 

26.  General  expense   106 

27.  Taxes 8 

28.  Miscellaneous,   undistributed 581 


Total  original  construction $23,931 

Betterments,    undistributed    2,388 


Grand  total $26,319 


1332  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

My  estimate  of  the  cost  of  reproduction  new  was  as  follows  per 

mile  of  single  track  main  line  and  branches    (501  miles)  : 

Per  mile. 

1.  Engineering  (3%%  of  Items  2  to  21) $  706 

2.  Grading    6,886 

3.  Tunnels    260 

4.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts 2,782 

5.  Ties    1,666 

6.  Rails    4,515 

7.  Track  fastenings    919 

*  8.  Frogs  and  switches 76 

9.  Ballast ... 721 

10.  Tracklaying  and  surfacing 828 

11.  Fencing  right  of  way 255 

12.  Crossings,  cattle  guards  and  signs 44 

13.  Interlocking  and  signal  apparatus 48 

14.  Telegraph  lines 30 

15.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 283 

16.  Shops,   roundhouses  and   turntables 165 

17.  Shop  machinery   and   tools 46 

18.  Water  stations    166 

19.  Fuel  stations 52 

20.  Storage  warehouses 112 

21.  Miscellaneous  structures 307 

22.  Taxes   8 

23.  Section  equipment 22 

24.  Legal    and    general    expense    (1%    of    Items    to 

to  22)    202 

25.  Interest  (5%  of  Items  1  to  24) 1,055 

26.  Stores  on  hand 481 


Total    $22,635 

27.  Right  of  way  and  terminal  grounds. ." 4,487 


Total    $27,122 

28.  Equipment    (rolling  stock) 2,994 

Grand  total $30,116 

For  a  more  detailed  statement  of  the  foregoing  items,  consult  the 
files  of  Engineering-Contracting,  year  1910. 

Note  that  there  were  68  miles  of  sidetracks  in  addition  to  the 
501  miles  of  main  line.  Hence  the  above  costs  per  mile  of  main  line 
should  be  divided  by  1.136  to  ascertain  the  cost  per  mile  of  track. 

Appraised  Value  of  the  Steam  Railways  of  Wisconsin.* — In  our 
issue  of  June  26,  1907,  was  published  the  appraised  value  of  the 
railways  of  Wisconsin,  as  of  June  30.  1903*  The  following  is  a 
brief  summary  of  the  last  valuation,  as  of  June  30,  1907,  which  wa.s 
completed  in  December,  1908,  under  the  direction  of  Prof.  W.  I>. 
Pence,  Engineer  of  the  Wisconsin  Tax  Commission  and  of  the 
Railroad  Commission.  Table  I  is  a  summary  of  the  first  and  the 
last  valuations. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  19,  1910. 


RAILWAYS.  1333 

TABLE   XX. — COMPARISON    BETWEEN    FIRST    AND   FIFTH    WISCONSIN 
STEAM  ROAD  VALUATIONS. 

— Valuation  as  of  date. — 
June  30,  1903.  June  30,  1907. 

Number  of  railroad  properties  included.  ..  47  52 

Total  length,  road  mileage... 6,656.88  7,090.39 

Cost  of  reproduction : 
Property,    new    total $205,760,519     $244,128,868 

Cost  of  reproduction : 
Existing  condition,    total 169,758,518       196,239,314 

Reproduction  cost  per  mile  of  line : 

Property  new 30,900  34,400 

Present  value  per  mile  of  line 25,500  27,700 

Per  cent  condition 82.5  80.3 

The  mileage  on  June  30,  1907,  was  as  follows: 

Main  line 6,519.69 

Main  line,  joint,    %   interest 9.80 

Branch  line   551.83 

Branch  line,  joint,  %  interest 9.07 

Total  main  and  branch  line 7,090.39 

Second  track   431.57 

Third  track    40.62 

Fourth  track 35.54 

Total  "trackway" 7,598.12 

Spurs  and  sidings 2,523.33 

Spurs  and  siding  joint,   %  interest 52.83 

Spurs  and  sidings  joint,  %  interest 4.32 

Spurs  and  siding  joint,  %  interest 0.29 

Crossovers    0.04 

Grand  total  track -10,178.93 

The  total  appraised  values,  new  and  in  present  (depreciated)   con- 
dition, as  of  June  30,  1907,  are  as  in  Table  XXI. 

TABLE  XXI. — VALUATION  NEW  AND  IN  DEPRECIATED  CONDITION  OF 
WISCONSIN   RAILWAYS. 

Cost  of  reproduction. 
Present 
New.  condition. 

1.  Right  of  way  and  station  grounds $   26,339,419     $  26,339,41D 

2.  Real  estate   

3.  Grading    39,391,307          39,391,307 

4.  Tunnels    797,412  776,972 

5.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts IS, 616,486          14,688,887 

6.  Cross  ties  and  switch  ties 11  181,399  5,826,021 

7.  Rails 30,111,358          24,605,740 

8.  Track  fastenings 5,254,013  3,367,649 

9.  Frogs,  switches  and  crossings 1,179,056  743,079 

10.  Ballast    5,768,084  3,969,476 

11.  Track  laying  and  surfacing 3,345,555  2,770,572 

12.  Fencing    1,611,775  826,512 

13.  Crossings,  cattle  guards  and  signs 440,896  269,880 

14.  Interlocking  and  signal  apparatus.  .  .  .  613,354  538,801 

15.  Telegraph   lines 167,840  99,587 

16.  Telephone  lines  and  distribution  system  89,639  81,439 

17.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 3,918,995  2,902,418 

18.  Shops  and  round  houses,  power  houses 

and  car  barns 3,892,882  3,048,497 

19.  Tools     144,419  86,384 

20.  Water  stations 1,345,218  986,357 

21.  Fuel    stations 466,745  351,432 

22.  Grain   elevators 826,706  612,171 

23.  Warehouses 262,539  200,278 

24.  Docks  and  wharves 3,645,907  2,956,821 

25.  Miscellaneous   structures 2,106,101  1,409,949 

26.  Sub-stations    45,130  44,119 

Totals  of  all  the  above  Items $161,562,23*5     $136,893,767 


1334 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


27.  Engineering,       superintendence,       and 

legal  expenses,  4.5%  of  all  the  above 

items     7,270,300 

28.  Locomotives    11,531,174 

29.  Passenger  equipment 5,317,465 

30.  Freight    equipment 30,944,348 

31.  Miscellaneous  equipment 901,935 

32.  Ferries  and  steamships 

33.  Electric  plants 161,476 

34.  Shop  machinery  and  tools 1,573,000 


6,160,220 

7,331,573 

3,193,301 

20,479,648 

588,260 


35. 
36. 

37. 


Totals  of  all  the  above  items $219,261,933 

Freight  on  construction  material,  0.7% 

of  items  1.34 1,523,656 

Interest  during  construction,  3  %  ;  Or- 
ganization,J,  contingencies,  5.5%;  in 

all,  2,  of  Items   1.34 20,738,225 

Stores  and   supplies  on  hand  for  use 

in    Wisconsin 2,605,054 


146,114 
1,186,369 

$175,979,252 
1,209,539 

16,463,297 

2,587,226 

Totals $244,128,868     $196,239,314 

n%  and  1.5%. 
29.5%  and  10%. 

Includes  dock  property  and  all  lines  under  construction. 
Dividing  each  of  the  items  in  the  first  column  of  Table  XXI  by 
7,090,  we  have  the  following  cost  per  mile  of  roadbed: 

Per  mile 
of  roadbed. 

1.  Right  of  way,  etc $  3,714 

2.  Real    estate 

3.  Grading    5,554 

4.  Tunnels 112 

5.  Bridges,    etc 2,625 

6.  Ties   1,577 

7.  Rails 4,246 

8.  Track    fastenings 741 

9.  Frogs,   etc 166 

10.  Ballast    813 

11.  Track  laying  and  surfacing 472 

12.  Fencing 227 

13.  Crossings,  etc 62 

14.  Interlocking  and  signal 86 

15.  Telegraph 24 

16.  Telephone 13 

17.  Station   buildings 553 

18.  Shops  and  roundhouses 548 

19.  Tools    .  . . 20 

20.  Water  stations 189 

21.  Fuel  stations , 66 

22.  Grain  elevators 121 

23.  Warehouses    37 

24.  Docks  and  wharves 514 

25.  Miscellaneous    structures. 297 

26.  Substations    6 


Total  of  above $22,783 


RAILWAYS.  1335 

27.  Engineering   1,025 

28.  Locomotives 1,625 

29.  Passenger  equipment 750 

30.  Freight  equipment 4,363 

31.  Miscellaneous    equipment 127 

32.  Ferries,  etc 

33.  Electric    plants 23 

34.  Shop  machinery  and  tools 222 

Total  of  above $30,918 

35.  Freight  on  construction  materials 215 

36.  Interest    during   construction,    contingencies, 

etc 2,924 

37.  Stores  on  hand 367 

Grand  total $34,424 

Since  there  are  1.435  miles  of  track  per  mile  of  roadbed,  each  of 
the  above  items  should  be  divided  by  1.435  (or  multiplied  by  0.7) 
to  obtain  the  cost  per  mile  of  track.  For  example,  item  11,  "Track 
laying  and  surfacing,"  is  $472  per  mile  of  roadbed,  which  is 
equivalent  to  0.7  X  $472  =  $331  per  mile  of  track,  which,  by  the 
way,  is  an  exceedingly  low  estimate  of  cost. 

Cost  per  Mile  of  Railways  in  Wisconsin  and  Michigan.*— In  the 
year  1900,  Prof.  Mortimer  E.  Cooley  made  an  appraisal  of  all  the 
steam  railways  in  Michigan  for  the  Board  of  State  Tax  Commis- 
sioners. A  field  inspection  was  made  of  every  structure  to  deter- 
mine its  "present  value"  expressed  as  a  percentage  of  its  value  now. 
About  33,000  freight  cars  were  inspected  for  the  same  purpose..  By 
examining  records  of  transfer  of  lands  it  was  decided  to  use  a  factor 
of  2  to  2^4  by  which  to  multiply  the  market  value  of  adjacent 
property  to  obtain  its  "value  for  railway  purposes."  It  is  a  well- 
known  fact  that  a  railway  usually  pays  two  to  three  times  the 
ordinary  market  value  of  land  in  securing  its  right  of  way. 

Prof.  Cooley  did  not  secure  the  "original  cost"  of  the  railways, 
that  is,  he  did  not  secure  the  cost  as  determined  by  an  inspection  of 
the  railways'  records ;  but  he  made  his  own  estimate  of  the  "cost 
of  reproduction"  under  the  then  (1900)  existing  conditions  as  to 
prices,  wages,  etc.  An  examination  of  his  estimate  leads  us  to  think 
that  it  was,  in  many  items,  much  too  low,  even  though  he  added 
10%  for  contingencies.  But  the  railways  have,  as  yet,  not  fought 
the  estimate,  because  it  was  made  for  taxation  purposes,  and  the 
lower  the  estimate  to  the  more  to  their  liking. 

The  Wisconsin  appraisal  was  made  by  Prof.  W.  D.  Taylor  for 
the  State  Board  of  Assessment.  He  began  this  work  in  June,  1903, 
and  made  his  final  report  18  months  later.  Prof.  Taylor  pursued 
much  the  same  plan  as  that  pursued  by  Prof.  Cooley,  except  that  he 
required  the  railways  themselves  to  submit  first  their  own  estimates 
of  the  cost  of  reproduction,  which  he  subsequently  checked,  adding 
13^%  to  their  appraisal.  Of  course  the  railways  tried  to  keep 
their  estimates  as  low  as  possible,  for  the  reasons  above  given,  and 
it  is  quite  apparent  that  the  estimates  were  too  low,  even  after 
Prof.  Taylor  had  added  the  5^%  for  contingencies. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  June   26,   1907. 


1336 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


10000051 


ssgis-g; 
lilf^— ' 

3$i       . 

+J  ra  ^_,  _O    .00    ;  as  oo  < 

S^o't^gg   ;gg-j 

PH  i 


•  «o  t- 1-  <£>  to 


OOOrHrHait-t-lftOOOilrtOOCrsOO 

'  06  «o  «o  e<i  d  r-5  d  co  10  T^  us  uj  d 


U5  CXI  rH  rH 


N 

I  i°^s 
tf  1 

^    s 

P 

N 
af 

§A 


P    00 

o 

sir 


.  —  CO 


»4JO^^Tt'^^^'^OOOt^OOC^COCOC<lrHOOkCOOTH$OrHl>-O        ^ 


fi§?3 


^  -2      u      <D       arj^co'oasooocQC^ascot-rH 

•2    ^          ft^  ^         -S   S  S  05  t^        O^rH  CO  S_t^S  rH 
M     T3  -U    ~  ".       rH  .^          .•          ,»,  _j~> 


00  t>  U5  <M  (M  OS  «0  00  ^H  i-lr*  <D  t-  0  CO 

oo^c^uiLOr-it-cqoeousc^co^om 

t-  •*  IM  •*  T»<  CNJ  rH        rH        <M  CO 


af.Gj  **  fl     s«o  w 

55       S      ** 
w  g 
<t-i  a 

O  O 

o 

P      6|l'tjSIS 


. 


RAILWAYS. 


1337 


|||||S|||I§  * 

.  .'.  .fe.wfe.M.OOM  & 


°l 


1338  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Now  that  the  state  of  Wisconsin  has  begun  to  use  the  appraised 
values  of  the  railways  as  a  basis  for  rate  making,  the  shoe  is  on 
the  other  foot,  and  it  is  not  unlikely  that  the  railways  will  ulti- 
mately demand  a  new  appraisal,  just  as  some  of  the  railways  in 
Texas  have  already  done. 

The  appraised  values  of  the  Wisconsin  and  Michigan  railways 
are  given  in  the  reports  of  Prof.  Taylor  and  Prof.  Cooley  in  such 
form  as  to  admit  of  ready  comparison.  Table  XXII  is  presented 
herewith  in  the  belief  that  it  may  be  of  use  to  many  of  our.  readers. 

The  column  showing  the  percentage  of  cost  of  each  item  is  par- 
ticularly interesting.  It  will  be  noted  that  grading  cost  only  16.5% 
in  Wisconsin  and  10.6%  in  Michigan.  To  the  average  engineer 
grading  seems  such  a  very  important  item  that  a  knowledge  of  its 
real  relative  importance  becomes  very  instructive.  Grading  in  the 
more  rugged  state  of  Washington  is  far  more  expensive  per  mile 
than  in  the  states  of  Wisconsin  and  Michigan.  Indeed,  there  is 
scarcely  an  item  of  cost  in  Washington  that  will  not  exceed  the 
costs  given  in  the  accompanying  tables. 

In  using  these  tables  the  reader  is  cautioned  to  bear  in  mind  the 
fact  that  the  costs  are  expressed  in  the  "mile  of  line"  as  the  unit, 
and  not  in  the  "mile  of  track."  There  are- practically  1.4  "miles  of 
track"  in  each  of  the  two  states  per-  "mile  of  line." 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  "mile  of  line"  is  here  used  as  synonymous 
with  the  "mile  of  roadbed." 

Prof.  W.  D.  Taylor  used  the  following  method  in  appraising  the 
"present  value"  of  steel  rails  in  Wisconsin  lines.  If  the  market 
value  of  new  rails  is  $28  per  ton,  and  the  scrap  value  is  $12,  then 
the  wearing  value  is  $16.  If  inspection  indicates  that  40%  of  the 
life  has  been  used  up,  the  present  condition  of  the  rail  is  60%, 
and  its  present  value  per  ton  is  $12  +  60%  of  $16  =  $21.60  per  ton. 

Mr.  Taylor  adds,  however,  that  another  point  of  view  might  be 
taken.  If  the  price  of  new  rails  at  the  mills  in  Chicago  is  $28,  and 
the  scrap  price  at  the  mills  is  $14,  and  if  the  rail  is  used  at  a  point 
200  miles  from  Chicago,  then  the  cost  of  transportation  is  $1  per 
ton.  This  would  make  the  price  of  the  new  rail  $29  delivered,  and 
would  reduce  the  value  of  the  scrap  rail  to  $13  at  the  place  of  re- 
moval. To  lay  the  new  rail  would  cost  $2.50  per  ton,  making  a 
total  of  $31.50  per  ton  in  place.  To  take  up  and  load  the  old  rail 
would  cost  $1  per  ton,  making  the  net  realization  from  its  sale  in 
Chicago  but  $12  per  ton.  In  addition  the  old  rail  has  lost  3  to  6% 
of  its  weight. 

Mr.  Taylor  states  that  the  Chicago  and  Northwestern  Ry.  ex- 
pended $11  per  mile  of  roadbed  in  preparing  the  cost  data  for  some 
1,800  miles  of  its  road.  But  he  does  not  state  what  the  state  of 
Wisconsin  spent  in  reviewing  these  data  submitted  by  the  railways. 

In  the  appraisal  of  the  Michigan  railways  the  following  unit  prices 
were  used : 

Earth  (incl.  overhaul),  per  cu.  yd $  0.30 

Rails,   new,   per  ton 28.00 

Rails,   scrap,  per   ton. 12.00 

Rails   wearing  valuo  per   ton 16.00 

Ties  (15  to  17  per  30  ft.  rail),  oak,  each 0.55 


RAILWAYS.  1339 


Life  of  trestles  was  considered  to  be  10  years. 
Life  of  telephone  poles  and  cross-arms,  12^  years. 
Copper  wire  depreciation  : 


Per  cent. 


For    2  years  and  less  than     3  years 2  ^ 

For     3  years  and  xess  than     5  years 5 

For    5  years  and  .ess  than  10  years 10 

For  10  years  and  over  (junk  value) 20 

Underground  conduit,  per  year 2 

Cable   (aerial  or  underground),  lead  covered  and 

rubber,    per   year 10 

Switchboards,    per    year 10 

It  has  been  stated  that  the  cost  of  appraising  the  Michigan  rail- 
ways was  $50,000,  or  $6.40  per  mile  of  roadbed;  but  the  railways 
themselves  spent  an  amount  which  is  unknown. 

Appraisal  of  the  Railways  of  Minnesota.* — We  had  hoped  to  be 
able  to  present  in  this  issue  of  Engineering-Contracting  abstracts  of 
the  reports  of  the  chief  engineers  of  two  railway  commissions, 
namely  the  report  of  Mr.  Dwight  C.  Morgan  to  the  Railroad  and 
Warehouse  Commission  of  Minnesota  and  the  report  of  Mr.  Halbert 
P.  Gillette  to  the  Railroad  Commission  of  Washington.  Mr.  Mor- 
gan's report  was  submitted  Nov.  30,  1908,  and  has  just  been  pub- 
lished. Mr.  Gillette's  report  was  submitted  a  year  ago  but  its  publi- 
cation has  been  delayed. 

The  two  reports  present  many  interesting  contrasts  in  methods 
used  in  attacking  the  same  problem,  and,  for  that  reason  as  well 
as  because  they  are  the  first  appraisals  ever  made  for  railroad  com- 
missions as  a  basis  for  railroad  rate  making,  it  was  desirable  to 
present  them  simultaneously.  However,  there  are  so  many  of  our 
readers  who  will  be  interested  in  the  methods  and  data  given  in  Mr. 
Morgan's  report  that  we  present  a  summary  in  this  issue,  as  follows, 
condensing  the  explanations  of  methods  into  our  own  language. 

Mr.  Morgan  began  the  appraisal  of  the  Minnesota  railways  Jan. 
15,  1906,  and  rendered  his  report  Dec.  1,  1908,  the  work  having 
occupied  almost  three  years,  during  which  time  7,596  miles  of  rail- 
ways were  appraised.  The  method  of  making  the  appraisal  was 
essentially  the  same  as  that  used  by  Mr.  William  D.  Taylor,  engi- 
neer of  the  Wisconsin  Tax  Commission,  who  made  an  appraisal  of 
Wisconsin  railways  for  taxation  purposes. 

This  method  is  what  might  be  called  the  co-operative  method 
of  appraisal,  because  the  railway  companies  are  asked  to  co-operate 
with  the  railway  commission,  and,  indeed,  are  required  to  submit 
their  own  detailed  estimate  of  costs  to  the  commission.  The  theory 
is  that  the  commission  is  thus  saved  much  unnecessary  labor,  and 
has  merely  to  check  over  the  estimates  of  the  railways.  In  prac- 
tice, however,  it  is  our  opinion  that  the  engineers  of  the  railway 
commission  must  either  accept  the  returns  of  the  railways  without 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  March  3,  1909. 


1340  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

question  or  else  spend  almost  as  much  time  and  labor  in  checking 
the  estimate  as  was  originally  made  by  the  railways  in  preparing  it. 

Blank  forms  were  furnished  to  all  the  railways,  upon  which  they 
were  required  to  enter  their  detailed  estimates.  Two  estimates  were 
required,  one  giving  the  "cost  of  reproducing  the  property  new.  The 
other  giving  the  "present  value  of  the  physical  properties."  The 
"cost  of  reproduction"  means  the  cost  of  reproducing  the  property 
new.  The  "present  value"  is  the  depreciated  or  second-hand  value, 
ascertained  by  deducting  depreciation  from  the  "cost  of  repro- 
duction." 

The  unit  prices  used  by  Mr.  Morgan  were  the  average  prices  for 
the  year  1905.  which,  he  states,  were  about  an  average  of  the 
prices  for  the  five-year  period  ending  June  30,  1907. 

In  estimating  the  various  railway  lines,  sections  of  about  100 
miles  were  taken,  but  the  "teiminal  properties"  in  St.  Paul,  Minne- 
apolis and  Duluth  were  treated  as  separate  sections. 

In  valuing  the  lands,  Mr.  Morgan  did  not  wait  for  a  report  from 
the  railways,  but  started  an  independent  investigation  at  once. 
Special  agents  were  appointed  to  ascertain  the  value  of  lands  adja- 
cent to  all  railway  lines.  These  agents  examined  and  noted  more 
than  55,000  bona  fide  sales  of  property,  involving  considerations  of 
$100,000,000,  and  representing  1,300,000  acres  of  land.  To  do  so 
they  examined  the  records  of  the  transfer  of  property  for  several 
years  prior  to  Jan.  1,  1900,  for  a  distance  of  1%  miles  on  each  side 
of  each  railway  line,  using  the  official  county  records  for  infor- 
mation. 

The  figures  thus  ascertained  were  plotted  on  maps,  which  facili- 
tated arriving  at  values  per  acre  in  any  given  section.  This,  in  our 
judgment,  was  an  excellent  procedure,  but  it  has  a  serious  defect. 
No  such  records  can  be  introduced  in  court,  for  the  reason  that  rec- 
ords of  property  transfers  are  often  falsified  as  to  values  by  the 
parties  engaged  in  the  transfer.  However,  such  data  form  an  ex- 
cellent guide  to  the  judgment  of  the  experts  engaged  in  determining 
land  values,  particularly  where  the  opinions  of  people  differ  widely 
as  to  such  values. 

Having  ascertained  the  value  of  lands  adjacent  to  the  railways, 
the  next  step  is  to  multiply  these  values  by  some  factor  to  arrive 
at  the  value  of  land  for  "railway  purposes."  Mr.  Morgan  says,  in 
his  report: 

"The  purchase  of  lands  for  a  railroad  right-of-way  requires  the 
consideration  of  two  elements:  First,  the  fair  value  of  the  land 
taken,  and,  second,  the  damage  to  the  residue  in  consequence  of  a 
part  of  the  tract  having  been  taken  for  railroad  purposes.  The 
element  of  damage  is  dependent  upon  a  variety  of  conditions,  several 
of  which  may  be  mentioned  as,  the  location  and  direction  of  the 
proposed  railroad  with  respect  to  the  boundaries  of  the  property  ; 
the  inconveniences  and  dangers  likely  to  be  suffered  and  attributable 
to  the  construction  and  operation  of  the  line,  such  as  the  separation 
of  the  owner's  house  from  his  barn,  or  of  his  barn  from  his  well. 


RAILWAYS.  1341 

The  influence  of  public  opinion  for  or  against  the  construction  of  a 
line  of  railway  is  a  most  potent  factor  in  respect  of  cost.  LIf  one 
railway  already  exists,  a  projected  second  railway  nearby  will  have 
to  pay  much  higher  prices  for  land,  due  to  the  fact  that  land  owners 
do  not  feel  the  necessity  of  a  second  road  and  will  "hold  up"  the  new 
railway  for  the  highest  possible  prices. — Editor.]  In  varying  de- 
grees, these  and  other  considerations  make  the  lands  purchased  for 
a  railway  right-of-way  usually  more  costly  than  the  true  or  normal 
value  of  lands  for  other  purposes." 

Mr.  Morgan  goes  on  to  say  that  his  agents  had  examined  the 
bona  fide  sales  of  lands  to  railway  companies,  covering  the  more 
recently  constructed  lines,  involving  7,000  acres  and  an  expenditure 
of  $4,200,000  in  acquiring  them  in  various  parts  of  the  state.  As  a 
result  of  this  investigation  and  of  a  study  of  the  whole  subject,  the 
conclusion  was  reached  that  a  multiple  of  3  should  be  used  in  con- 
verting the  normal  value  of  right-of-way  lands  to  the  "value  for 
railway  purposes."  This  multiple  of  3  was  not  applicable  to  lands  in 
the  large  terminals.  St.  Paul,  Minneapolis  and  Duluth. 

Mr.  Morgan  calls  attention  to  an  illuminating  instance  of  the  high 
cost  of  land  acquired  by  condemnation  as  compared  with  the  cost  of 
land  purchased  by  agreement.  On  the  Illinois  Central,  in  the  coun- 
ties of  Mower  and  Freeborn,  about  35%  of  the  right-of-way  was 
secured  by  condemnation  proceedings  and  the  company  paid  4^ 
times  the  normal  value  of  the  land.  The  remaining  65%  purchased 
by  agreement  cost  only  1.7  times  the  normal  value  of  the  land. 

The  multiples  used  in  arriving  at  the  values  of  terminal  property 
for  railway  purposes  were  as  follows:  For  St.  Paul,  1.75;  for 
Minneapolis,  1.60 ;  for  Duluth,  1.25.  In  other  words,  the  normal 
value  of  the  bare  land  (not  including  buildings)  in  St.  Paul  was 
multiplied  by  1.75  to  obtain  the  "value  for  railway  purposes." 
These  multiples  were  arrived  at  as  follows:  Investigations 
made  (in  1906)  by  a  special  tax  committee  of  the  city  coun- 
cil of  St.  Paul  had  shown  that  property  was  assessed  at  about 
60%  of  its  selling  price.  Hence  the  assessed  value  of  property  ad- 
jacent to  the  terminals  in  St.  Paul  was  divided  by  0.6  (or  multiplied 
by  1.66)  to  arrive  at  its  normal  value.  This  normal  value  was  then 
multiplied  by  1.75  to  arrive  at  its  "value  for  railway  purposes." 

The  multiples  of  1.75  for  St.  Paul,  1.60  for  Minneapolis  and  1.25 
for  Duluth  were  based  upon  the  purchases  of  real  estate  by  rail- 
ways in  those  cities  during  the  preceding  six  years.  During  that 
period  more  than  320  acres  of  property  had  been  purchased  by  rail- 
ways for  about  $3,000,000,  Comparing  the  prices  thus  paid  by  rail- 
ways with  the  prices  paid  by  other  corporations  and  individuals 
during  the  same  period,  the  multiples  above  given  were  arrived  at. 
Fortunately  two  railway  companies  had  purchased  land  for  ter- 
minals in  St.  Paul  and  one  in  Duluth  during  this  six-year  period,  so 
that  sufficient  data  were  available  to  enable  Mr.  Morgan  to  arrive 
at  a  fair  decision  as  to  the  multiples  to  be  used. 

An  inspection  of  the  physical  property  of  the  railway  was  made, 
practically  all  this  inspection  being  done  in  a  manner  that  will  be 


1342  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

regarded  as  rather  superficial  by  many  of  our  readers.  Each  rail- 
way company  provided  a  special  train  which  carried  the  inspectors. 
"The  train  was  moved  at  a  low  rate  of  speed  so  that  observation 
could  be  had  of  the  character  and  standards  of  construction  and 
maintenance.  Stops  were  made  every  mile  in  places,  but  usually 
every  two  miles,  and  sometimes  every  five  miles,  to  enable  measure- 
ments of  the  roadbed  and  ballast,  to  observe  the  brand,  weight  and 
age  of  the  rails  and  fastenings,  to  ascertain  the  average  number  of 
ties  per  mile  by  test  measurements  and  counts ;  in  fact,  to  make 
complete  record  of  all  the  physical  elements  at  these  given  points. 
Additional  stops  were  frequently  made  at  bridges  and  culverts  for 
the  purpose  of  measurement  and  inspection,  and  at  all  stations 
measurements  of  buildings  were  made,- the  inventories  checked  and 
notes  made  of  any  important  changes. 

"The  detailed  reports  of  the  railway  companies  having  been  com- 
piled on  the  forms  prepared  for  that  purpose,  were  in  such  sys- 
tematic order  by  subjects  as  enabled  the  ready  checking  of  the 
various  items  enumerated.  The  profiles  were  continually  made  use 
of  to  determine  their  accuracy.  *  *  *  Also  as  to  whether  sand, 
gravel,  loose  or  solid  rock  cuttings,  which  would  later  serve  as  a 
guide  in  the  classification  of  material  in  making  the  compilations 
and  estimates  of  quantities  in  the  office." 

That  this  inspection  was  cursory  is  shown  from  the  fact  that 
about  100  miles  of  line  were  inspected  each  day  of  10  hours  from 
each  train. 

No  inspection  of  rolling  stock  was  made,  as  in  the  Wisconsin 
appraisal  above  referred  te ;  but  the  "equipment  reports  were 
checked  by  the  serial  numbers  of  locomotives  and  cars." 

The  inspection  was  begun  early  in  May,  1907,  and  continued 
almost  without  interruption  until  the  middle  of  December,  1907, 
completing  this  feature  of  the  work,  "except  the  range  roads,  which 
were  examined  in  the  early  part  of  1908." 

The  unit  prices  assumed  for  estimating  costs  "are  the  results  of 
much  research."  The  unit  prices  submitted  by  the  railways  in  their 
reports  differed  widely,  and  often  in  a  manner  not  susceptible  of  ex- 
planation. For  example,  the  price  of  steel  rails  varied  from  $20 
to  $31.50  per  ton  f.  o.  b.  St.  Paul;  bridge  steel  of  the  same  class 
ranged  from  2  ^  to  4  Vz  cts.  per  Ib. ;  locomotives  of  the  same  type 
and  weight  varied  from  6%  to  12%  cts.  per  Ib. ;  engineering,  super- 
intendence and  legal  expense,  between  1%  and  15%;  interest  during 
construction,  1  to  12%  ;  contingencies,  5  to  50%. 

Mr.  Morgan  selected  unit  prices  to  fit  the  local  conditions  and  did 
not  assume  invariable  unit  prices  for  all  roads,  as  was  done  in  the 
Wisconsin  appraisal. 

"Adaptation  and  solidification  of  roadbed,"  or  "seasoning  of  the 
roadbed,"  was  regarded  by  Mr.  Morgan  "as  a  labor  account  cover- 
ing a  period  of  years,"  and  treated  as  a  separate  item  of  cost, 
although  it  never  appears  in  the  records  of  any  railroad  company  as 
a  part  of  the  cost  of  construction.  According  to  the  allowance  made 
by  Mr.  Morgan,  this  item  of  "adaptation  and  solidification  of  road- 


RAILWAYS.  1343 

bed"  amounted  to  $11,743,000  for  the  7,596  miles  of  railways  in  Min- 
nesota, or  $1,545  per  mile,  or  nearly  3%  of  the  grand  total  cost  of 
construction  and  equipment. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  the  roadbed  of  a  newly  built  railway  re- 
quires more  labor  to  maintain  and  that  the  cost  of  running  trains  of 
the  roadbed  is  more  expensive  than  after  the  embankments  have 
settled  and  land  slides  and  slips  have  become  less  frequent ;  but 
no  two  engineers  will  agree  as  to  what  allowance,  if  any,  should  be 
made  for  the  cost  of  "seasoning."  The  fact  is  that  much  of  this 
"seasoning"  is  due  the  action  of  rain,  and  costs  nothing.  Practically 
all  the  rest  of  it  is  done  by  the  trackmen  who  are  maintaining  the 
track,  as  a  part  of  operating  expenses.  The  7,600  miles  of  railways 
in  Minnesota  averaged  23,140  cu.  yds.  of  earth,  loose  rock  and  solid 
rock.  Hence,  according  to  Mr.  Morgan's  estimate  of  $1,545  per 
mile  for  "seasoning,"  it  would  have  cost  nearly  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
for  "seasoning"  alone.  Since  earth  can  be  spread  and  rolled  for  only 
a  fraction  of  this  7  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  it  is  evident  that  most  of  this 
$1,545  item  of  "seasoning"  must  be  due  to  some  other  class  of  work 
than  grading.  In  giving  his  reasons  for  his  seemingly  large  allow- 
ance for  "adaptation  and  solidification  of  roadbed,"  Mr.  Morgan 
says: 

"The  newly  made  excavations  wash  and  slipf  the  ditches  fill  from 
the  action  of  the  elements,  the  embankments  settle  and  the  track 
superstructure  is  in  almost  constant  need  of  attention ;  resurfacing, 
lining  and  dressing  of  ballasted  and  unballasted  track  is  necessary, 
waterways  become  clogged  up,  bridges  settle  or  go  out  of  line, 
station  grounds  are  to  be  improved  and  finished,  scattered  and  un- 
used material  must  be  picked  up  and  stored ;  in  fact,  all  the  loose 
ends  which  are  the  immediate  sequence  of  construction  must  be 
gathered  in  and  the  property  brought  to  an  orderly  condition." 

While  engineers  will  never  agree  as  to  the  exact  amount  that 
should  be  allowed  for  "seasoning"  of  roadbed,  still  the  majority 
would  probably  favor  some  allowance  in  estimating  the  cost  of  re- 
production of  an  existing  railway. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  will  not  be  so  many  engineers  who  will 
favor  any  allowance  for  "contingencies"  in  estimating  the  cost  of 
an  existing  railroad  line.  Mr.  Morgan  favors  a  small  allowance  for 
contingencies,  and,  as  will  be  seen  below,  selected  5%  as  a  fair 
estimate  for  this  item,  instead  of  the  customary  10%  used  on  esti- 
mates of  projected  lines.  He  says: 

"Considering  the  detail  with  which  the  estimates  have  been  pre- 
pared and  the  inclusion  in  them  of  many  items  of  a  contingent 
nature,  it  does  not  appear  justifiable  to  consider  an  estimate  of  the 
cost  of  reproducing  a  railway  as  synonymous  with  an  estimate 
for  constructing  a  projected  line.  The  essential  difference  rests  in 
the  fact  that  in  reproduction  cost  the  estimate  is  prepared  in  the 
light  of  known  conditions,  whereas  for  a  projected  line  the  con- 
tingencies are  wholly  unknown.  These  facts  have  been  instrumental 
in  reaching  a  determination  that  5%  for  contingencies  is  fair  under 
the  circumstances  attaching  to  the  work  of  this  appraisal." 


1344  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  estimating  the  item  of  "interest  during  construction,"  Mr. 
Morgan  assumed  a  rate  of  interest  of  4%  per  annum  on  the  money 
tied  up  during  construction.  "This  rate  of  interest  was  applied  to 
the  total  estimated  cost  of  reproduction,  assuming  that  the  neces- 
sary funds  would  be  fully  employed  one-half  of  the  estimated  time 
required  to  build  the  respective  lines,  which  according  to  their 
mileage  varied  from  1  to  8  years."  It  will  be  seen  from  the  data 
given  below  that  this-  interest  item  amounted  to  about  8.8%  of  the 
total  cost  of  reproduction  as  estimated  for  all  the  railways  of  the 
state. 

The  "present  value"  of  each  item  was  arrived  at  by  deducting 
an  estimated  percentage  of  depreciation  from  the  estimated  "cost  of 
reproduction."  This  estimated  percentage  of  depreciation  was 
furnished  by  hardly  any  of  the  railway  companies,  for  they  held 
that  no  real  depreciation  had  occurred,  and  that  a  road  is  more 
valuable  as  a  working  tool  years  after  its  construction  than  when 
new.  Mr.  Morgan  made  his  own  estimates  of  depreciation,  based 
upon  the  inspection  above  referred  to,  and  thus  arrived  at  the 
"present  value"  given  below.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  total 
"present  value"  is  about  13%  less  than  the  "cost  of  reproduction." 

Mr.  Morgan  did  not  secure  the  original  cost  of  construction  and 
betterments,  and  he  "states  that  such  data  were  so  incomplete  as 
to  render  the  task  hopeless.  He  says  that  "for  the  older  and  more 
important  railways,  representing  the  greater  part  of  the  mileage 
of  the  state,  the  data  for  some  of  them  is  not  available  at  all,  and 
for  others  it  is  so  incomplete  as  to  render  its  development  for 
practical  use  an  impossibility." 

We  believe  that  Mr.  Morgan  is  wrong  in  this  conclusion,  for  in 
making  the  appraisal  of  the  railways  of  Washington  these  same 
arguments  were  used  by  the  railways,  and  it  was  only  after  a  bitter 
struggle  in  some  cases  that  access  to  all  their  records  was  secured 
which  developed  that  practically  all  the  costs  of  construction  and 
betterments  could  be  found,  even  for  the  lines  built  forty  years  ago. 
Among  these  Washington  lines  was  the  Great  Northern,  which 
has  nearly  30%  of  the  mileage  in  Minnesota.  Its  original  records 
of  cost  (in  the  St.  Paul  office)  are  exceptionally  well  kept  and 
complete,  as  well  as  its  records  of  betterment  costs.  If  only  used 
as  a  guide  in  estimating  the  cost  of  reproduction,  these  original 
records  (both  in  the  accounting  department  and  in  the  engineering 
department)  are  practically  invaluable.  Furthermore,  they  are  of 
great  value  in  cases  of  litigation  between  the  railway  commission 
and  the  railway  company  where  the  accuracy  of  estimates  of  cost 
of  reproduction  are  brought  into  question. 

Another  point  of  great  importance  is  the  percentages  allowed  for 
contingencies,  for  interest  during  construction  and  for  engineering. 
Mr.  Morgan  has  allowed  5%  for  contingencies,  nearly  9%  for 
interest  during  construction,  and.  4^%  for  engineering,  superin- 
tendence and  legal  expense.  Each  of  these  percentages  alone  sounds 
small,  but  they  aggregate  more  than  $61,000,000  in  Mr.  Morgan's 
estimate.  So  enormous  is  this  sum  that  the  correctness  of  these 


RAILWAYS.  1345 

percentage  allowances  becomes  a  very  important  matter  to  the 
railway  companies  and  to  the  state.  We  know  of  no  satisfactory 
way  of  determining  the  correctness  of  these  percentages  except  by 
ascertaining  from  the  accounting  records  of  the  railways  what  their 
expenditures  for  such  items  actually  have  been.  A  thorough 
analysis  of  the  accounting  records  would  probably  eliminate  all  of 
the  item  of  "contingencies,"  amounting  to  $17,869,000  in  the  estimate 
for  Minnesota,  for  any  allowance  for  "contingencies"  is  always  a 
confession  of  ignorance  as  to  what  the  exact  expenditure  will  be  or 
has  been.  On  the  other  hand,  an  analysis  of  accounting  records 
might  disclose  that  the  percentages  allowed  for  interest  during 
construction  and  for  engineering  are  too  low,  as  claimed  by  many 
of  the  railways.  We  do  not  say  that  such  would  be  the  result,  but 
so  long  as  the  claim  is  made  and  so  long  as  such  enormous  sums 
of  money  are  at  stake,  an  analysis  of  the  accounting  records  of 
every  railroad  should  be  made,  even  though  the  records  may  be 
incomplete  for  some  of  the  older  lines.  It  does  not  cost  more 
than  $6  or  $7  per  mile  of  road  to  make  such  an  investigation  and 
analysis  of  costs  of  original  construction  and  betterments.  Mr. 
Morgan  informs  us  that  his  appraisal  cost  the  state  of  Minnesota 
$8.50  per  mile  of  main  track,  but  of  course,  this  does  not  include 
what  it  cost  the  railways  to  make  the  estimates  which  Mr.  Mor- 
gan's forces  checked,  nor,  as  we  have  stated,  did  Mr.  Morgan  make 
an  investigation  and  analysis  of  the  original  cost  and  betterments. 
The  state  of  Minnesota  has  secured  an  exceedingly  valuable  esti- 
mate at  a  very  low  cost,  but  we  can  not  urge  too  strongly  the 
desirability  of  a  thorough  investigation  of  the  accounting  records 
qf  the  railways  and  the  subsequent  use  of  accounting  records  in 
keeping  cost  estimates  up  to  date. 

We  pass  now  to  a  summary  of  the  data  collected  by  Mr.  Morgan : 

MILEAGE  IN  MINNESOTA. 
(June  30,  1907) 

Miles. 

Roadway,  or  1st  main  track 7,596 

Other  main   tracks 428 

Side    tracks    2-414 

All   tracks,^  total 10,438 

From  this  it  will  be  seen  that  there  are  1.38  miles  of  tracks  to 
each  mile  of  roadway.  Hencei  the  subsequent  items  of  cost  per 
mile  of  roadway  must  be  divided  by  1.38  to  get  the  cost  per  mile 
of  track. 


1346 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


TABLE  XXIII. — COST  OF  REPRODUCTION  AND  PRESENT  VALUE   (7,596 
MILES  OF  ROADWAY.) 

Cost  of 


1.  Land    for    right    of    way,    yards 
and  terminals   

Reproductioi 

New. 
i 
$   73,201,757.70 

i              Present 
Value. 

$   73,201,757.70 

2.  Grading,  clearing  and  grubbing. 
3.  Protect,  work,  rip  rap,  ret.  walls. 
4.  Tunnels    

56,006,782.11 
2,419,292.42 
253,250.00 

56,006,782.11 
2,419,292.42 
253,250.00 

5.  Crossties  and  switch  ties  

17,491,500.06 

9,627,539.85 

6    Ballast 

9  413  351  34 

9  413  351  34 

7.  Rails    

33  010  087  72 

25  199  668.20 

8.  Track    fastenings    

5,936,740.60 

4,543,054.70 

9.  Switches,  frogs,  r.  r.  crossings.  . 
10    Track  laying  and  surfacing 

1,389,363.52 
5  340  689  05 

962,741.45 
5  340  689  05 

11.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts... 
12    Track  and  bridge  tools 

•  19,567,524.80 
201  918  21 

14,518,834.30 
151  438  71 

13.  Fences,   cattle  guards,   signs.... 
14.  Stockyards  and  appurtenances.. 

2,768,394.93 
559,896.21 
1,606,164.62 

1,403,082.54 
349,759.71 
1,144,535.43 

16    Coal  stations                                    . 

717  519  88 

507  703  49 

17.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures... 
18.  Miscellaneous    buildings    

5,855,258.56 
4,344,684.37 

.4,097,249.08 
3,403,171.52 

19.  Steam  and  electric  power  plants, 
gas  plants                         .            . 

797  484  52 

656  069  99 

20.  General   repair   shops  

4,123,119.91 

2,959,019.07 

21.   Shop  machinery  and  tools  

1,831,671.22 

1,484,756.11 

22.  Engine    houses,     turntables    and 
cinder   pits    ,  

2,837,988.58 

1,874,436.40 

23.  Track    scales    

184,130.00 

1*9,474.45 

24.  Docks    and    wharves    (inci.    coal 
and   ore   docks)  

6  065,496.69 

5,392,960.85 

25.  Interlocking  plants   

403,071.57 

293,197.56 

26.  Signal    apparatus 

155  766  71 

126  217.89 

27.  Telegraph  lines,  appurtenances.  . 
28.  Telephone  lines,  appurtenances.. 
29.  Adapt,  and  solid,  of  road  bed... 

1,316,048.16 
94,526.17 
11,743,007.15 

994,227.19 
70,926.17 
11,743,007.15 

Total  of  items  1  to  29  inclusive.  .  . 

30.  Engineering,  superintendence,  le- 
gal expense    4V2%      • 

$269,636,486.78 
12  133  641  89 

$238,230,206.93 
12  133  641  89 

Total  of  items  1  to  30  inclusive.  .  . 
31.  Locomotives    

$281,770,128.67 
17,090  953  40 

$250,363,848.82 
12  608  422  67 

32.  Passenger  equipment   

6,616,170.78 

4,554,442.63 

33.  Freight   car   equipment   

46  911  106  58 

34  068  095  26 

34.  Miscellaneous  equipment    

1,326,666.16 

876,057.17 

35.  Marine  equipment 

43  500  00 

32  625  00 

Total  of  items  1  to  35  inclusive.  .  . 

36.  Freight  on  crossties,   rails,   fast- 
enings, switches  and  frogs  .  .  . 

$353,758,525.59 
3,635,535.03 

$302,503,491.55 
3,635,535.03 

Total  of  items  1  to  36  inclusive.  .  . 
37.  Contingencies,     5%    on    total    of 
items  1   to   36 

$357,394,060.62 
17  869  703  02 

$306,139,026.58 
17  869  703  02 

38.   Stores  and   supplies  

5  ''lO  010  98 

5  210  010  98 

39.  Interest  during  construction  

31.261,419.93 

31,261,419.93 

Grand  total    $411,735,194.55      $360,480,160.51 


RAILWAYS.  1347 

In  Table  XXIII  it  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  reproduction  and 
the  present  value  of  item  36  (freight  on  track  materials)  are 
identical ;  but  since  freight  is  a  part  of  the  cost  of  these  materials 
delivered,  and  since  the  materials  depreciate,  the  present  value  of 
item  36  should  bo  less  than  the  cost  of  reproduction.  The  error  in 
this  case  arises  from  the  segregation  of  freight  as  a  separate  item, 
which  should  not  be  done. 

Item  37  (contingencies)  is  a  percentage  of  all  the  previous  items. 
It  is  not  clear  why  contingencies  should  be  figured  on  lands,  nor  on 
equipment. 

By  dividing  each  of  the  above  items  of  cost  of  reproduction  by 
7,596,  we  have  calculated  the  itemized  cost  of  reproduction  per 
mile  of  railway,  tabulated  below.  To  convert  any  of  these  items 
into  cost  per  mile  of  track,  divide  it  by  1.38,  as  above  explained: 

COST  OF  REPRODUCTION  PER  MILE  OF  ROADWAY.      (7,596  MILES.) 

1.  Land  for  right  of  way,  yards  &  terminals..?   9,637.00 

2.  Grading,  clearing  and  grubbing 7,373.00 

3".  Protection  work,   rip  rap,  retaining  walls.         318.00 

4.  Tunnels    33.00 

5.  Cross  ties  and  switch  ties 2,302.00 

6.  Ballast     1,240.00 

7.  Rails    4,345.00 

8.  Track  fastenings 782.00 

9.  Switches,  frogs  and  railroad  crossings.  ...  183.00 

10.  Track  laying  and  surfacing 703.00 

11.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts 2,576.00 

12.  Track  and  bridge  tools 27.00 

13.  Fences,  cattle  guards  and  signs .  364.00 

14.  Stock  yards  and  appurtenances 74.00 

15.  Water   stations 211 

16.  Coal  stations 95 

17.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 772 

18.  Miscellaneous    buildings 572 

19.  Steam  and  electric  power  plants,  gas  plants. .  105 

20.  General  repair   shops 543 

21.  Shop  machinery  and  tools 241 

22.  Engine  houses,  turntables  and  cinder  pits. ...  373 

23.  Track   scales 24 

24.  Docks  and  Wharves  (inc.  coal  and  ore  docks)  779 

25.  Interlocking   plants 53 

26.  Signal     apparatus 20 

27.  Telegraph  lines  and  appurtenances 173 

28.  Telephone   lines  and  appurtenances 13 

29.  Adaptation  and  solidification  of  roadbed....  1,546 

30.  Engineering,    superintendence  and   legal   exp.  1,598 


Total  of  items  1  to  30  inclusive $37,095 

31.  Locomotives     2,250 

32.  Passenger    equipment 872 

33.  Freight  car  equipment 6,175 

34.  Miscellaneous    equipment 175 

35.  Marine   equipment 6 

36.  Freight    on    cross    ties,    rails,    switches    and 

frogs,    track    fastenings 478 

37.  Contingencies    2,352 

38.  Stores  and  supplies  in  Minnesota 686 

39.  Interest  during  construction 4,115 

Grand    total 154,204 


1348  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  details  of  item  1   (land)  are  as  follows  per  mile  of  roadbed: 

Per  mile. 

12.636  acres  right  of  way .$1,217.90 

0.620  acres  gravel  pits,  etc 33.32 

2.973  acres  station   grounds 1,538.28 

0.638  acres    terminals     (St.     Paul,    Minneap- 
olis and  Duluth) 6,846.84 


16.866  acres,     total $9,636.34 

These  values  are  not  the  "normal  values"  of  the  land  for  ordinary 
purposes,  but  the  "values  for  railway  purposes"  as  ascertained  by 
applying  the  multiples  above  given. 

The  most  significant  fact  in  this  land  appraisal  is  the  very  high 
percentage  that  the  land  for  terminals  forms.  Station  grounds  also 
form  a  large  percentage  of  the  total  cost  for  lands.  There  are 
many  states  in  which  such  expensive  terminals  do  not  exist,  and 
there  are  others,  like  Illinois,  Pennsylvania  and  New  York,  where 
the  cost  of  terminals  is  probably  greater  per  mile  of  railway. 

The  details  of  item  2  (grading,  etc.)  are  as  follows  per  mile  of 
roadway : 

22,230  cu.  yds.  earth  at  28.7  cts $6,380.01 

565  cu.  yds.,  loose  rock  at  51.62  cts 291.65 

345  cu.  yds.  solid  rock  at  $1.077 '      371.57 

4.56  acres  clearing  and  grubbing  at  $69.85. . . .       318.52 


Total     $7,371.75 

Grade  revision  at  Owatonna    ($27,625) 3.63 


Total $7,375.38 

Mr.  Morgan's  report  contains  no  further  data  as  to  unit  costs. 

The  itemized  costs  of  each  of  the  different  railways  in  Minnesota 
are  given  in  the  report,  and  it  was  from  a  summary  of  those  items 
that  the  above  given  totals  and  averages  were  prepared. 

We  append  Table  XXIV  prepared  by  the  Railway  Age  Gazette 
from  the  data  contained  in  Mr.  Morgan's  report. 

Appraising  the  Land  Value  of  the  Michigan  Railways.* — The  two 
letters   that   follow   speak   for   themselves,    and    contain    matter    of 
interest  not  only  to  engineers  who  are  likely  to  be  engaged  in  rail- 
way appraisals  but  to  engineers  who  may  be  called  upon  to  appraise 
real  estate  and  other  property  for  taxation  purposes. 
H.  P.  Gillette, 
Dear  Sir: 

In  connection  with  some  of  your  statements  relative  to  the 
appraisal  of  the  Michigan  State  Railroads  made  some  years  ago, 
you  discuss  admirably  the  element  of  real  estate  values  and  the 
methods  which  you  think  best  to  follow. 

I  gather  that  you  are  not  quite  as  familiar  with  the  methods 
finally  employed  in  this  work,  because  they  were  so  in  keeping  with 
your  own  ideas  and  even  went  them  one  better  that  it  is  a  pleasure 
for  me  to  call  it  to  your  attention,  knowing  that  you  are  highly 
appreciative  of  original  work  of  this  kind,  and  will  be  pleased  te 
see  that  this  particular  expert's  ideas  and  methods  follow  your 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May   5,    1909. 


RAILWAYS. 


1349 


13.S.2-9 

a0!* 


aP 

ii 


I  g  3  8  SS  S  3 I S  £  S  S§  §5  §8  S3  8  g  3  £  ||  1 1  g  | 


GL 


Mil, 


«a=«  . 

ill 


r-llOO'^t'CO^^O'O'" ICOCOO^C^lOOi^— <CCOO 

§31s5t»a  »RS»  s  ssasagB 

"  3"^$2v^sgi     s  «««»*** 


T-H  05  Tt<  O5  t^  C<l 

C^  CO  CO  -^  -^  CO 

GO  co  co  oo  oo^co_ 
eo     oT<M 


^Ss«5P:cor-< 
1 1-  •*  •*  t-  oo  t~  < 


>t-^CO-^<  CO  •*  lOt 


K5gB»*S**S 

^_CO_00  00  00  0_0>  I-H  «0 

IM  to  ^     ^cq 


" 


SNffR 
111  111 

ifll« 


'to  w  S     -£       w"  cS 

111 

«  ExfS-r-* 

§  °JS£^ 


•3  :*  °  •  ••  •• 

*:|°,;i; 


W'Stjj*mpiJ 

>  2    •  Q    •    •<£    -°o  c    "  F  S    • 

\C.|_^»'.r5.  j  *lHCi(W( 


cpti  a    •%M«e;*»    *EI  u  «s  c^  f  R 

i^fl  :°a*s  g=a  gowP^  §  2 

^>,c   :--P^°  fi  c  c'^^^'c^1 


llg^lll 
'jsr^gg- 


X^  v  ufl 

W    W3    W    <U  +» 

" 


|||||g|l| 

l|5ll|j^| 

•ilfs'^i'if 


1350  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

own  so  v>.iry  closely  and  yet  are  carried  out  with  a  little  different 
method  as  to  details ;  for  precision  of  detail  and  speed  of  accomplish- 
ment was  only  possible  to  a  very  well  defined  and  carefully  consid- 
ered method  entirely  and  exclusively  evolved  by  Mr.  Edward  A. 
Dunbar,  a  former  West  Pointer  and  expert  engineer,  and  well 
acquainted  with  real  estate  matters  himself  in  large  enterprises. 

For  economy  of  costs  and  in  the  completeness  of  the  returns  I 
think  it  is  unexcelled,  and  has  never  been  approached  by  any  other 
equally  reliable  method,  except  your  own ;  but  all  of  them  are 
much  the  same  and  splendid  in  their  discussion  of  a  very  difficult 
and  what  has  heretofore  been  a  vexatious  problem  to  solve. 

I  hope  sometime  in  the  near  future  to  have  the  great  pleasure 
of  meeting  you  personally,  for  we  highly  appreciate  your  method 
of  thinking  about  a  good  many  things. 

There  has  been  in  all  this  property  so  much  theoretical  stuff 
injected  into  it  that  it  is  very  wearisome  to  practical  men,  and 
it  is  a  relief  to  find  some  one  like  yourself  who  has  the  courage 
and  the  earnestness  of  purpose  and  honesty  of  intention  to  say  so. 

Yours  truly, 

F.  T.  BARCROFT, 
Director  of  Appraisal. 
Detroit,  Mich.,  April  26,  1909. 

My    Dear    Mr.    Barcroft. — In    compliance    with    your    request    I 
submit   herewith   a   statement    of    the   method    by   which    the    land 
values  of  the  Michigan  Railroad  Appraisal  were  deduced. 
LAND  VALUATION. 

The  limited  time  in  which  full  results  had  to  be  made  known 
precluded  the  general  adoption  of  any  of  the  usual  methods  of  land 
valuation  and  for  that  reason  the  following  method  was  adopted : 

Determining  the  Quantity. — The  office  inspectors,  as  they  were 
called,  took  direct  from  the  maps  and  other  data  of  the  railroad 
company,  and  of  the  registers  of  deeds  offices,  all  the  information 
necessary  to  determine  the  area  of  the  railroad  land  throughout 
the  state.  They  subdivided  the  land,  in  taking  it  off  by  counties  and 
also  subdivided  it  so  the  right-of-way  between  stations  showed 
separately  from  the  right-of-way  and  additional  land  at  stations,  or 
at  points  where  the  density  of  population  would  enhance  the  values 
of  land  beyond  that  of  farm  land. 

In  the  cities  the  land  was  all  divided  into  small  blocks,  so  that 
it  might  be  estimated  either  by  square  feet  or  by  the  front  foot,  as 
might  seem  most  expedient. 

Determining  the  Quality. — As  the  land  throughout  the  state  is 
not  uniform  quality  the  railroads'  lands  were  subdivided  into  83 
subdivisions — following  county  lines.  And  on  the  basis  of  its 
physical  characteristics,  it  was  also  subdivided  into  six  separata 
classes,  viz. : 

1st.     Farm  land. 

2d.     Barren  land. 

3d.     Towns  under  500  population. 

4th.     Towns  under  3,000  population. 


RAILWAYS.  1351 

5th.     Towns  under  10,000  population. 

6th.     Towns  over  10,000  population. 

To  determine  the  percentage  on  each  railroad  in  each  county  of 
farm  and  waste  land  a  representative  was  sent  to  each  of  the 
railway  centers  of  the  state.  He  interviewed  roadmasters,  assistant 
roadmasters,  locomotive  engineers  and  freight  train  conductors,  as 
being  men  who  knew  every  foot  of  the  land  over  which  the  railroad 
passed  and  from  them  secured  the  information  which  enabled  him  to 
report  on  the  percentage  of  waste  land  on  each  railroad  by  counties. 

In  the  smaller  cities  and  a  few  of  the  larger  villages  the  quality 
of  land  was  determined  by  our  representative  going  over  the  land 
within  the  city,  dividing  it  up  according  to  the  use  to  which  the 
various  sections  were  put,  viz. : 

Laborers'  residence  property. 

Mechanics'  residence  property.  v 

High  class  residence  property. 

Manufacturing  property. 

Second-class  store  property. 

First-class  store  property. 

He  also  got  local  experts  to  value  each  division,  but  this  really 
falls  under  the  next  head  which  is: 

Determining  the  Price. — The  price  of  the  land  in  the  first  five 
classes,  except  as  next  before  noted,  was  determined  by  sending  a 
letter  of  inquiry,  enclosing  a  card  for  reply,  to  some  five  hundred 
representative  citizens  of  the  state,  taking  about  six  from  each 
county  and  choosing  these  citizens  from  among  land  dealers, 
bankers,  county  surveyors  and  county  treasurers.  Each  man 
selected  was  supposed  to  be  peculiarly  adapted  as  a  judge  of  land 
values  within  his  county  and  on  the  card  enclosed  was  requested  to 
give  his  estimate  of  the  present  value  of  an  average  acre  of  land 
in  his  county  in  each  of  the  five  classes. 

This  method  it  will  be  observed  assumes  that  every  acre  of  land 
of  the  same  class,  in  a  county,  is  equally  valuable  arid  that  that 
value  may  fairly  be  taken  to  be  the  average  price  of  the  land  of 
that  class  in  that  county.  An  average  of  the  prices  by  classes  a.» 
given  on  the  cards  for  each  county  was  therefore  taken  as  the 
present  valuation  for  the  first  four  classes  and  partly  for  the  fifth. 
For  part  of  the  fifth  and  all  of  the  sixth,  the  price  was  determined 
in  the  usual  manner  by  a  board  of  experts ;  going  over  every  foot 
of  the  property  in  question  and  valuing  each  piece  separately; 
taking  into  consideration  surrounding  values,  both  from  selling 
prices  of  adjoining  land  and  assessment  rolls. 

Our  method  of  accumulating  this  information  was  by  mean*  of  a 
card  index  file,  of  which  I  enclose  a  sample  card.  One  card  was 
made  for  each  county  through  which  each  railroad  passed.  It  Is 
evident  therefore  that  by  applying  the  average  prices  to  the  class 
quantities,  determining  as  hereinbefore  described,  that  each  card 
would  represent  the  total  present  market  value  of  all  the  land 
belonging  to  the  railroad  in  question  in  that  particular  county, 
and  the  sum  of  the  values  given  on  all  the  cards,  for  any  given  rail- 
road (that  is  one  card  for  each  county)  would  equal  the  actual 


1352  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

present  market  value  of  all  the  land  owned  by  that  railroad  in  the 
State  of  Michigan  and  that  the  total  of  all  the  cards  would  equal 
the  total  present  value  of  all  the  railroad  lands  in  the  State  of 
Michigan. 

The  question  arose  in  our  minds  at  the  outset  whether  in  ad- 
dressing five  hundred  strangers,  nearly  all  of  whom  were  busy 
men,  we  should  get  any  considerable  number  of  replies  to  our 
inquiry  and  if  we  did,  whether  they  would  not  be  mere  off-hand 
guesses  rather  than  thoughtful  estimates.  It  is  extremely  gratify- 
ing to  be  able  to  say  that  out  of  five  hundred  cards  sent  out  less 
than  fifty  have  failed  to  respond.  In  only  one  case  was  the  failure 
to  comply  with  the  request  based  upon  the  plea  of  no  compensa- 
tion, and  of  all  the  answers  received  there  is  scarcely  one  that  does 
not  bear  either  in  itself,  or  in  an  accompanying  letter,  evidence  of 
the, most  painstaking  care.  It  was  noticed  in  many  instances  that 
before  making  out  his  card  the  writer  would  correspond  with  from 
five  to  twelve  different  persons  in  his  county,  getting  their  views 
and  then  summarizing  them  on  his  card. 

I  do  not  believe  that  had  we  gone  over  every  acre  of  the  land  in 
this  state,  with  a  board  of  inspection  and  valuation,  at  enormous 
expense,  we  would  have  arrived  at  any  better  result  than  we  did  by 
the  inexpensive  and  expeditious  method  detailed  above. 

Yours  very  truly, 

E.  C.  DUNBAR. 

Cost  of  1,100  Miles  of  the  C.,  M  &  St.  P.  R.  R.  in  South  Dakota.* 
— In  the  "Spokane  Rate  Case"  before  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission,  Mr.  A.  H.  Hogeland,  chief  engineer  of  the  Great 
Northern  Railway,  and  Mr.  W.  L.  Darling,  chief  engineer  of  the 
Northern  Pacific  Railway,  presented  itemized  estimates  of  the  cost 
of  reproducing  those  two  railway  systems.  Acting  for  the  city  of 
Spokane,  Mr.  Halbert  P.  Gillette  offered  testimony  showing  that 
the  estimates  of  Mr.  Hogeland  and  Mr.  Darling  were  too  high. 
Among  the  facts  most  strongly  in  dispute  was  the  allowance  to  be 
made  for  transporting  the  contractors'  men  and  supplies  over  the 
railway  to  and  from  the  site  of  the  work.  Mr.  Hogeland  testified 
that  4^»  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  shotild  be  added  to  the  contract  price  of 
each  yard  of  earth  excavation  to  cover  the  added  cost  to  the 
railway  company  for  transportation.  Mr.  Darling  testified  that  3 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.  would  cover  this  item  and  Mr.  Gillette  testified  that 
1  ct.  would  be  an  excessive  allowance.  In  substantiation  of  his 
estimate  Mr.  Gillette  presented  data  of  his  own  and  estimates  made 
by  other  engineers.  Among  the  latter  was  an  estimate  of  Mr.  D.  J. 
Whittemore,  made  while  he  was  chief  engineer  of  the  Chicago, 
Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul.  Mr.  Whittemore  presented  his  testimony  in 
1898  in  the  "South  Dakota  Rate  Case"  under  conditions  that  made  it 
desirable  for  him  to  claim  all  he  reasonably  could  claim  on  the 
cost  of  construction  of  his  road.  His  estimate  covered  the  original 
cost  of  1,101  miles  of  main  line  and  86  miles  of  sidetracks  in 
South  Dakota,  which  is  equivalent  to  1.08  miles  of  main  line  and 

• Engineering-Contracting,  July  24,  1907. 


RAILWAYS.  1353 

sidings  to  each  mile  of  main  line.  The  unit  prices  used  by  Mr. 
Whittemore  were  based  upon  those  prevailing  in  1879  to  1887,  'the 
years  during  which  the  road  was  built.  He  testified  that  there  was 
practically  no  rock  excavation,  which  accounts  in  part  for  the  low 
unit  price  in  the  earthwork. 

Believing  that  Mr.  Whittemore's  estimate  is  worthy  of  being 
placed  permanently  on  record,  we  reproduce  it  herewith.  In  a 
subsequent  issue  we  shall  give  Mr.  Hogeland's  and  Mr.  Darling's 
itemized  estimates  of  the  cost  of  the  two  great  railroad  systems  of 
which  they  are  chief  engineers: 

Per  mile  of 

main  line 

(1,101  miles). 

11,300  cu.   yds.   embankment  at   15.16  cts $     1,713.10 

4.55  cu.  yds.  riprap  at  $1.50 6.80 

10,000  ft.  B.  M.  timber  in  bridges  and  culverts  at 

$30   per    M 300.00 

425  lin.  ft.  piles  in  bridges  at  35  cts 148.75 

Truss  bridges  at   $4,437   each 31.05 

y±    iron    pipe    culvert    in    place    of    wooden    one 

(betterment)   at  $50 12.50 

96.63  tons  (gross)  rails  at  $46.76 4,518.40 

7,555  Ibs.  track  spikes  at  2%  cts 188.90 

380  pairs  rail  joint  splices  at  $1 380.00 

3,238  cross  ties  at  30  cts 971.40 

0.63  switches  at  $100 63.00 

0.01  railroad  crossings  at  $200 2.00 

1.08  miles  main  and  side  track  laid  and  surfaced 

at     $450 486.00 

0.24  miles  track  ballasted  at  $500 120.00 

Moving   track   material   from   store   depot   to   the 

front    140.00 

0.92  miles  fence  at  $1.40 128.80 

29  panels  (0.1  miles)   snow  fence  at  $2.10 60.90 

260   ft.    B.   M.    crossing  plant    (1.1    crossings   per 

mile)   at  $20 5.20 

1  cattle   guard 10.00 

Freight  on  track  materials,   %  ct.  per  ton  mile.  . .      2,130.00 

Freight  on  contractor's  tools  and  supplies 7.50 

Freight  on  contractor's  teams 6.00 

Freight  on  bridge  and  culvert  material 99.00 

Transportation  of  laborers,  6  men  transported  500 

miles  to  work  at  2  cents  per  mile 60.00 

0.23  station  sign  board,  at  $6.00 1.40 

1.1  highway  sign  board,  at  $5.0 5.50 

0.04  R.  R.  crossing  sign  board,  at  $6.00 .25 

0.04  R.  R.  crossing  stop  board,  at  $6.00 .25 

2  whistle  posts,  at  $1.00 2.00 

0.45  mile  posts,  at  $1.00 .45 

1  rail  rest,  at  $1.00 1.00 

Buildings     855.00 

1  mile  right-of-way  and  station  grounds 128.00 

Telegraph    lines 64.80 

Engineering,    superintendence,    legal    and   general 

office  expense 300.00 

Interest  on  the  above  items  for  %  of  two  years 

at  6% 777.00 

Track  tools,  V8  section  at  $138  per  section 17.25 

Station  furniture,  1/12  station,  at  $78 6.50 

Betterment  to  roadbed  and  bridges,  estimated  at 

5%  of  above 687.00 

Stores  and  supplies 300.00 

Total   (exclusive  of  equipment) .$14,725.70 


1354  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Mr.  Whittemore  testified  that  the  $140  per  mile  for  distributing 
tr£tck  material  from  the  store  yard  was  estimated  thus : 

2  engines  and  crews  at  $25  per  day $50.00 

36  cars  at  50  cents  per  day 18.00 

1     caboose 2.00 

Total $70.00 

He  stated  that  one-half  mile  of  track  was  laid  per  day,  hence  it 
cost  two  times  $70,  or  $140  per  mile,  to  distribute  track  materials 
from  the  material  yard. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  transporting  men  and  supplies, 
as  given  by  Mr.  Whittemore,  consisted  of  three  items,  namely : 

Freight   on   contractor's  tools  and   supplies $  7.50 

Freight  on  contractor's  teams 6.00 

Transportation   of   laborers 60.00 

Total  per  mile $73.50 

This  is  equivalent  to  0.66  ct  per  cu.  yd.  of  earthwork,  if  charged 
entirely  to  the  earthwork. 

Prices  Used  in  Estimating  Cost  of  Railways  In  Texas.* — The 
Railroad  Commission  of  Texas  has  appraised  the  value  of  roads 
recently  constructed,  using  a  schedule  of  unit  prices  which  we 
reproduce  herewith.  • 

The  railways  were  paying  $1.50  to  $1.75  per  day  of  10  hrs.  for  com- 
mon laborers  in  1906,  and  found  labor  very  scarce  at  these  wages. 

The  following  unit  prices  were  used  in  valuing  the  Trinity  & 
Brazos  Valley  Ry.,  from  Mexia  to  Houston,  a  distance  of  165  miles: 

Price. 

Right  of  way,  per  acre , $  50.00 

Depot  grounds,  per  acre  (minimum) 100.00 

Reservoir  grounds,  per  acre. 25.00 

Clearing  and  grubbing,  per  acre, 25.00 

Clearing  and  grubbing,  per  acre 50.00 

Earth  excavation,  per  cu.  yd. 0.15 

Loose  rock  excavation,  per  cu.  yd. 0.40 

Solid  rock  excavation,  per  cu.  yd. 0.75 

Trestle  timber,  in  place,  per  M 40.00 

Trestle  piling,  in  place,  per  lin.  ft 0.40 

Wood  drain  boxes,  per  M 35.00 

Tile  drains,  24  in.,  per  lin.  ft. 3.00 

Cattle  guards,  wooden  surface 40.00 

Fences,    4 -wire,   cedar  posts    (16   ft.   apart)    per 

mile  of  fence 160.00 

Road  crossings,  per  .M 35.00 

Ties,  L.  L.  Y.  pine  (6"  x  8"  x  8') 0.70 

Rails,  75  lb.,  per  ton 35.00 

Joints,   including  bolts,   each 1.20 

Spikes,  34  kegs  per  mile,  per  keg 5.25 

Track  laying  and  surfacing  per  mile 500.00 

Car  and  engine  hire  during  construction,  per  mi.  250.00 
Sidings    (60-lb.    rail,    2,640   ties   per  mile),    per 

lin     ft. " ...:..        1.15 

Switch  furniture,  per  set 135.00 

Ballast,   sand    (about  2,500   cu.   yds.   per  mile), 

per    mile 750.00 

Telegraph   line    (for   1   wire,    construction    only, 
materials  furnished  by  Western  Union),  per 

mile    , 50.00 

Passenger  depots,  small  frame,  per  sq.  ft 1.00 

Platforms  for  ditto,  per  sq.  ft 0.16 

Cotton  platforms,  per  sq.  ft 0.18 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  July  24,  1907. 


RAILWAYS.  1355 

Engineering  and  legal  expense,  5  per  cent  of  total  cost  of  con- 
struction. 

Interest  during  construction,  5  per  cent  of  total  cost  of  con- 
struction. 

For  comparative  figures  the  reader  is  referred  to  Lavis'  "Railroad 
Location,  Surveys  and  Estimates^"  page  193  et.  seq. 

Itemized  Cost  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Railway  System  as  Esti- 
mated by  Its  Chief  Engineer.*— In  this  article  we  give  an  estimate 
prepared  by  Mr.  W.  L.  Darling,  chief  engineer  of  the  N.  P.  Ry., 
and  introduced  as  part  of  his  testimony  in  the  "Spokane  Rate 
Case"  before  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  a  few  months 
ago.  . 

While  many  of  the  quantities  were  guessed  ~  at  by  Mr.  Darling, 
and  while  no  quantities  at  all  are  given  for  many  items,  but  simply 
lump  sum  estimates,  still  these  data  are  worthy  of  being  recorded, 
if  only  to  indicate  the  relative  cost  of  different  items.  Engineering,  for 
example,  is  estimated  at  3  per  cent  of  the  total,  and  this  percentage 
is  undoubtedly  not  far  from  correct,  although  the  actual  amount 
estimated  for  engineering  is  unquestionably  very  liberal. 

The  reader  should  bear  in  mind  that  this  estimate  was  prepared 
for  the  purpose  of  proving  that  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  is  not 
earning  an  unreasonable  amount  of  money,  considering  what  the 
physical  value  of  the  property  is  today.  The  city  of  Spokane 
contends  not  only  that  it  is  discriminated  against  in  the  matter  of 
transcontinental  freight  rates,  but  that  the  rates  are  in  themselves 
too  high,  and  yield  an  unreasonable  profit  to  the  railways.  The 
Northern  Pacific  and  Great  Northern  Rys.  contend  that  their  rates 
are  reasonable  and  yield  only  a  fair  profit ;  and,  in  proof,  they 
have  submitted  estimates  of  the  cost  of  reproducing  their  entire 
systems  as  they  stand  today,  using  what  they  claim  to  be  current 
unit  prices.  Regarding  these  unit  prices,  it  is  only  fair  to  say,  that 
the  City  of  Spokane  contends  that  they  are,  in  nearly  every  instance, 
unreasonably  high.  Mr.  Halbert  P.  Gillette,  in  behalf  of  the  City 
of  Spokane,  testified  that  much  lower  unit  prices  are  commonly  paid 
by  railways  in  the  northwest.  He  also  criticised  the  quantities  in 
many  instances,  claiming  that  they  were  mere  guesses,  and  not 
trustworthy.  We  shall  not  go  into  all  the  testimony  that  was 
offered  by  both  sides  in  the  controversy,  further  than  to  put  on 
record  an  abstract  of  the  testimony  of  Mr.  W.  L.  Darling,  chief 
engineer  of  the  N.  P.,  and  Mr.  Hogeland,  chief  engineer  of  the  G.  N. 

The  mileage  of  the  N.  P.  is  as  follows: 

Miles. 

Main  line,  single  and  second  track 2,860.67 

Branch  lines,  main  and  second  track 3,014.24 

Spurs,  sidings  and  yard  tracks 1,819.88 

All    tracks,    total 7,694.79 

Of  this  track  only  112  miles  is  second  track. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Apr.  15,  1908. 


1356 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Mr.  Darling's  estimate  of  the  cost  was  presented  in  the  following 
form : 

Grading  and   track 1138,745.971 

Grade  revisions,   1897   to   1901 2,350,600 

Turnouts     1,838,750 

Permanent    bridges 9,950,248 

Temporary    bridges • 4,284,580 

Culverts     3,091,000 

Wooden    bridges   filled 4,518,600 

Tunnels     3,921,421 

Fencing     707,290 

Snow    fences 537,600 

Telegraph     1,443,000 

Water    supply 1,971,200 

Coaling     stations 635,900 

Wharfs    and    docks 1,725,000 

Stock    yards 152,857 

Track   scales 107,671 

Cattle   guards 57,195 

Round    houses,    turntables,    power    houses, 

etc. 1,680,448 

Shop    buildings 2,091,650 

Miscellaneous    buildings 1,578,528 

Warehouses    2,886,016 

Headquarters   building 756,600 

Furniture     440,000 

Passenger    stations 1,102,304 

Combination    stations 1,408,960 

Duluth  Union   depot 343,300 

St.  Paul  Union  depot 159,200 

Interlocking     123,555 

Block    system 44,307 

Mile  posts  and  signs 129,584 

Ash     pits 79,067 

Oil   and    sand   houses 120,960 

Shop  tools  and  machinery 1,100,000 

Kalama   ferry   and   steamer 617,400 

Lines  in  Manitoba 7,000,000 

Joint  work,  Seattle 2,457,000 

Total     $200,155,762 

Engineering,    3 % 6,004,673 

Total $206,160,435 

Contingencies,     10% 20,616,043 

Total     $226,776,478 

Interest   during   construction — 4  %    for    2  % 

yra,   10% 22,677,648 

Total     $249,454,126 

Freight  •  equipment : 30,486^000 

Passenger    equipment 5,898,600 

Power     16,480,200 

Floating     equipment 497,000 


Grand     total $302,815,326 


RAILWAYS.  135? 

This  does  not  include  lands  which  were  estimated  to  be  worth  as 
follows : 

Right  of  way,  not  including  large  terminals$  31,889,587 

Large     terminals. '75,000,501 

N.  P.  interest  in  terminal  companies 882,655 

Coal     properties 50,720,120 


Total      $158,492,913 

Grand     total 461,308,239 

This  estimate  of  the  value  of  lands  was  not  made  by  Mr.  Darling. 
In   estimating   the   cost   of   grading,   Mr.    Darling   stated   that   an 
estimate  of  quantities  was  made  in  1898,  and  was  as  follows: 

Per  mile 
Total.      (4,4 19  mi.). 

Clearing,    acres 15.089  3.4 

Grubbing,     stations 21,124  4.8 

Earth,  cu.  yds 88,334,218     20,000 

Loose  rock,   cu.  yds 7,258,532        1,640 

Solid  rock,  cu.  yds 5,164,479        1,170 

Riprap,  cu.  yds 1,548,911  350 

At  that  time  there  were  4,419  miles  of  main  track  and  branches, 
plus  850  miles  of  siding  and  yard  tracks,  or  a  total  of  5,269  miles 
of  track.  In  the  year  1907,  however,  there  were  1.4605  times  as 
many  miles  of  track.  Hence,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  each 
of  the  above  quantities  is  1.46  times  larger  now  than  in  1898.  But, 
in  addition  to  this,  Mr.  Darling  claimed  that  all  embankments  had 
been  widened  from  an  original  14  ft.  to  a  present  18  ft.,  and  he 
estimated  that  all  the  above  quantities  (except  the  clearing  and 
grubbing)  should  be  multiplied  by  1.20  to  allow  for  this  increase 
in  bank  widening.  This  would  make  a  total  increase  of  1.20  X 
1.4605  =  1.7526.  Accordingly,  Mr.  Darling  increased  the  grading 
quantities  by  75.26%  and  secured  the  following  quantities,  to  which 
he  affixed  the  following  unit  prices : 

22,036  acres  clearing  at  $80.00 $   1,762,880 

30,851  stations  grubbing  at  $16.50 590,042 

116,110,913  cu.  yds.  earth  at  $0.28 32,511,055 

38,703,637  cu.  yds.  hardpan  at  $0.42 16,255,528 

12,721,303  cu.  yds.  loose  rock  at  $0.50 6,360,651 

9,051,266  cu.  yds.  solid  rock  at  $1.10 9,956,39s 

2,714,621  cu.  yds.  riprap  at  $2.00 5,429,242 

Total   grading,    etc $72,865,791 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  1898  estimate  of  quantities  showed  the 
following  classification : 

Per  cent. 

Earth    88 

Loose    rock 7 

Solid    rock 5 

But  Mr.  Darling  claimed  that  fully  one-quarter  of  this  earth  (or 
22%  of  the  total  excavation)  must  have  been  hardpan,  hence  his 
estimate  of  38,703,637  cu.  yds.  of  hardpan  above  given. 

Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  this  22%  allowance  for  hardpan  was 
fully  three  times  too  high.  He  also  testified  that  it  was  not  at 
all  probable  that  branch  lines  built  and  acquired  since  1898  had 
required  as  heavy  grading  as  the  work  done  before  that  time,  and 


1358  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

that,  in  any  event,  an  estimate  of  increase  in  yardage  would  more 
properly  be  based  upon  the  increase  in  the  miles  of  railway  "line" 
rather  than  in  the  increase  in  the  miles  of  "track."  The  miles  of 
"line"  had  only  increased  33%,  as  compared  with  an  increase  of 
46%  in  the  track  mileage..  Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  while  it  was. 
possible  that  bank  widening  had  increased  the  original  yardage 
20%,  he  knew  that  no  such  increase  had  occurred  in  the  1,500  miles 
of  line  owned  by  the  Northern  Pacific  in  the  state  of  Washington  ; 
but,  even  conceding  that  an  increase  in  the  widths  of  embankments 
had  been  made  throughout  the  system,  certainly  no  rock  cuts  had 
been  widened,  no  hardpan  dug,  no  loose  rock  excavated,  and  very 
little  riprap  widened.  Practically  all  bank  widening  had  been  made 
by  steam  shovels  working  in  gravel  pits,  and  that  it  was  not 
right,  therefore  to  increase  the  original  yardage  of  solid  rock,  loose 
rock  and  hardpan  by  20%  when  practically  no  such  work  had  been 
done. 

Mr.    Darling's    unit    prices   of    reproduction    were   arrived   at   as 
follows : 

Clearing : 

Contract  price  per  acre $75.00 

Transportation  of  men  and  tools 5.00 


Total     $80.00 

Grubbing : 

Contract  price  per  station $15.00 

Transportation  of  men,  etc 1.50 

Total    $16.50 

Earth.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract  price,  average  haul  400  ft $0.22 

Overhaul     0.03 

Transportation   of   men,   etc 0.03 



Total $0.28 

Hardpan  and  cement  gravel : 

Contract    price $0.35 

Overhaul     0.04 

Transportation  of  men,  etc 0.03 

Total     $0.42 

Loose  rock : 

Contract    price $0.42 

Overhaul     0.04 

Transportation  of  men,  etc 0.04 

Total    , $0.50 

Solid  rock : 

Contract    price $1.60 

Overhaul 0.05 

Transportation  of  men,  etc 0.05 

Total     $1.10 

Riprap : 

Contract  price,   per  cu.   yd $1.75 

Extra  haul  and  work 0.15 

Transportation  of  men,  etc 0.10 

Total     .  $2.00 


RAILWAYS,  1359 

As  to  the  unit  prices  for  grading,  Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  all 
the  contract  prices  were  very  liberal,  and  that  the  allowances  for 
overhaul  and  transportation  were  fully  three  times  too  high.  The 
unit  prices  for  clearing  were  too  high,  because  most  of  the  clearing 
was  light  clearing,  a  great  deal  of  it  being  sage  brush.  The  unit 
price  for  riprap  was  excessive,  except  for  hand  placed  riprap,  and 
that  ordinary  riprap  could  be  contracted  for  at  $1.25  or  less. 

The  cost  of  the  track  was  estimated  as  follows  by  Mr.  Darling: 

Cost  per  mile  of  main  track: 

117  tons  steel  at  St.  Paul  at  $31 $3,627.00 

7.3  tons  angle  bars  at  $34 249.66 

0.75  tons  bolts  and  nuts  at  $55 41.25 

3.4  tons  spikes  at  $42 143.48 

7.5  tons  tie  plates  at  $44 330.00 

135.95  tons  handled  in  material,  yard,  at$l...  135.95 

1  extra  switch,  per  mile 27.50 

Contract  price  for  laying  track 357.50 

Train   service  and  rent  of  equipment  used  in 

hauling  to  the  front / 375.00 

3,000  ties  at  $0.55 1,650.00 

Transportation  of  ties,  rails,  etc.    (steel  hauled 
1,000  miles  and  ties  hauled  400  miles  at  0.4 

ct.  per  ton  mile) 1,023.80 

3,000  cu.  yds.  gravel  ballast  at  $0.66 1,980.00 

Total,  per  mile $9,941.14 

Cost  per  mile  of  branch  lines : 

97  tons  steel  at  St.  Paul  at  $31 $3,007.00 

6.46  tons  angle  bars  at  $34.20 220.93 

0.75  tons  bolts  at  $55 41.25 

3.4  tons  spikes  at  $42.20 143.48 

107.61  tons  handled  in  material  yard,  at  $1. . .  107.61 

1   extra   switch 27.50 

Contract  price  for  track  laying 375.50 

Train  service,  hauling  to  the  front 375.00 

2,880  ties  at  $0.55 1,584.00 

Transportation  of  steel  and  ties 891.24 

1,500  cu.  yds.  ballast  at  $0.66 990.00 

Total,  per  mile $7,763.51 

The  ballast  was  estimated  thus: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract  price $0.27 

Repairs  to  steam   shovels,   etc 0.03 

Transportation   1%    tons,    60   miles  at  0.4   ct.    per 
ton    mile 0.36 

Total $0.66 

In  testifying  regarding  these  quantities  and  prices,  Mr.  Gillette 
•states  that  the  Northern  Pacific  was  not  fully  tie  plated  even  on 
its  main  line ;  that  the  contract  price  for  track  laying  was  ex- 
cessive ;  that  the  allowance  for  train  service  was  nearly  three  times 
what  such  service  actually  costs ;  that  the  price  of  ties  was 
excessive ;  that  the  estimated  price  of  the  gravel  ballast  was  at 
least  50%  too  high,  and  that  the 'quantity  of  ballast  per  mile  was 
fully  50%  in  excess  of  the  actual  quantity. 


1360  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Mr.  Darling  estimated  the  cost  of  each  turnout  as  follows : 

Set  of  switch  ties $  54.00 

Switch    stand 13.30 

Connecting    rod 1.65 

Frog     33.00 

Split    switch 31.00 

Rail    braces 1.60 

Switch    lamp 5.00 

Guard    rails 8.80 

Freight    charges 14.40 


Total     $162.75 

For  the  weight  of  rail  used,  and  considering  the  character  of 
the  average  turnout,  this  estimate  is  high. 

Mr.  Darling  estimated  the  cost  of  the  tunnels  on  the  system  as 
follows : 

3,390  lin.  ft.  tunnels  under  700  ft.  in  length. 
1,090  lin.  ft.  tunnels  of  700  to  1,200  ft.  each. 
7,548  lin.  ft.  tunnels  of  1,200  to  4,000  ft.  each. 
9,833  lin.  ft.  tunnels,  very  long  tunnel. 

The  above  are  single  track  tunnels  lined  with  concrete.  Beside 
these  there  were  4,919  lin.  ft.  of  single  track  tunnels  lined  with 
wood,  and  1,656  lin.  ft.  of  double  track  tunnel  lined  with  concrete. 

The  cost  of  single  tunnels  per  lineal  foot  was  estimated  as 
follows : 

Concrete    lining :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract    price $  9.00 

1%  bbls.  cement 2.50 

Freight    1.00 

Total     $12.50 

With  concrete  averaging  2  ft.  in  thickness,  there  would  be  4.1 
cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft. ;  hence  the  cost  of  lining  would  be  4.1  X  $12.50 
=  $51.25  per  lin.  ft  of  tunnel. 

The  cost  of  short  tunnels  (up  to  800  ft.)  was  estimated  as  follows 
per  lin.  ft. : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Contract  price $   50.00 

Add    10%    for    extra    excavation    to   make    room 

for    lining 5.00 

Concrete    lining '.      51.25 

False    work 13.00 


Total $119.25 

For  similar  tunnels  lined  with  wood  instead  of  concrete,  the 
estimate  was  $24^75  per  lin.  ft.  for  wood  lining  plus  $55  for  ex- 
cavation, making  a  total  of  practically  $80. 

For  longer  tunnels  the  item  of  lining  remained  the  same,  but 
the  item  of  excavation  was  estimated  as  follows: 

Length  of  tunnel:  Price  per  ft. 

Up  to  700  ft.  $50  plus  10%  =  $55.00 

700  to  1,200  ft 55  plus  10%  =    60.50 

1,200   to    4,000   ft 75  plus  10%  =    82.50 

4,000   to    10,000    ft 90  plus  10%=     99.00 


RAILWAYS.  1361 

The  10%  Is  added  to  cover  the  cost  of  the  extra  excavation  to 
make  room  for  the  lining,  and  to  these  prices  must  be  added  the 
cost  of  the  lining  itself. 

Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  the  unit  prices  for  tunnel  excavation 
were  very  liberal,  and  that  the  allowance  for '  lining  was  excessive. 
The  allowance  for  "falsework,"  he  said,  seemed  to  be  in  error  by  a 
misplaced  decimal  point,  and  would  be  nearer  correct  if  it  were 
$1.30,  since  it  could  refer  to  nothing  but  the  materials  used  in  the 
forms,  centers,  etc. 

Mr.  Darling's  estimate  of  the  cost  of  short  double  track  tunnels 
was  as  follows  per  lin.  ft. : 

Contract  price  $50  plus  10% $  55.00 

11.5  cu.  yds.  extra  excavation  at  $3 34.50 

5.2  cu.  yds.  concrete  at  $12.50 65.00 

Falsework     13.00 


Total    $167.50 

Mr.  Darling's  estimate  of  bridges  was  not  given  in  much  detail, 
but  was  as  follows: 

Howe  truss  bridges , $  694,580 

Steel  and  combination  bridges 9,950,248 

359,000  lin.  ft.  trestles  at  $10 3,590,000 

Trestles  filled  with  earth 3,012,415 


Total    bridging $17,247,243 

Other  items  were  estimated  as  follows : 

4,575  miles  fencing  at  $154.55 $  707,290 

Water   supply 1,971,200 

1,750,000  sq.  ft.  wharfs  and  docks  at  $0.70. .  1,725,000 

Coaling     stations 635,936 

3,412,000  sq.  ft.  stock  yards  at  4.48  cts 152,857 

74   track  scales  at  $1,456 107,671 

3,464  cattle  guards  at  $16.80 57,195 

Roundhouses,  turntables,  power  houses,   etc.  1,680,448 

Shop   buildings 2,091,650 

Warehouses     2,886,016 

Headquarters   building 756,600 

Passenger    stations 1,102,304 

Combination    stations 1,408,960 

Interlocking    plant 123,555 

Mile  posts  and  signs  (5,785  miles  at  $22.40)  129,584 

Ash    pits 79,067 

Oil  and  sand  houses  at  $1.68  per  sq.  ft 120,960 

Block    system 44,307 

Miscellaneous  buildings  and  piping 1,578,528 

320  miles  snow  fences  at  $1,680 537,600 

The  above  costs  include  freight  on  the  materials,  and,  in  nearly 
every  instance,  this  freight  was  estimated  at  12%  of  the  unit  price 
assumed;  thus,  oil  and  sand  houses  were  estimated  at  $1.50  per 
sq.  ft.  plus  12%  for  freight,  making  a  total  of  $1.68  per  sq.  ft 


1362  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  following  unit  prices  for  building  were  used  by  Mr.  Darling, 
and  do  not  include  freight: 

Frame  roundhouses,  per  stall $1,300.00 

Brick  roundhouses,  per  stall 2,100.60 

Turntables,  each 5,000.00 

Brick  shops  (3 -story)  per  sq.  ft 1.50 

Brick  shops  (2-story)  per  sq.  ft 2.50 

Frame  shops  (1-story)  per  sq.  ft 1.00 

FrameT warehouses,  per  sq.  ft 1.20 

Brick  warehouses,  per  sq.  ft 1.60 

Frame  passenger  stations,  per  sq.  ft 1.50 

Brick  passenger  stations,  per  sq.  ft 2.50 

Frame  combination  stations  (1-story)  per 

sq.  ft 1.50 

Frame  combination  stations  (2-story)  per 

sq.  ft 2.50 

Oil  and  sand  houses,  per  sq.  ft 1.50 

Mr.  Darling  failed  to  give  the  number  of  square  feet  of  each 
of  these  different  kinds  of  buildings. 

For  purposes  of  comparison,  Mr.  Gillette  rearranged  the  foregoing 
figures  of  cost,  following  the  classification  used  by  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission,  and  divided  each  item  by  5,875  miles,  which 
is  the  mileage  of  main  line  and  branches  on  the  Northern  Pacific 
system.  The  following  table  gives  the  results  of  this  calculation, 
showing  the  cost  per  mile  of  main  line  and  branches,  and  the 
percentages  : 

Per  mile.     Per  cent. 

1.  Engineering     $  1,027          2.04 

2.  Grading    12,814       25.44 

3.  Tunnels     670          1.33 

4.  Bridges,   trestles  and  culverts.....  .3,722          7.38 

5.  Ties 2,719          5.40 

6.  Rails 4,850          9.63 

7.  Frogs    and    switches 342          0.68 

8.  Track   fastenings 705          1.40 

9.  Track    laying 1,128         2.24 

10.  Ballasting    1,776  3.53 

11.  Fencing     116  0.23 

12.  Crossings,    cattle  guards  and   signs  30  0.06 

13.  Interlocking    and    signal 25  0.05 

14.  Telegraph    lines 247  0.49 

15.  Station    buildings.. 1,138  2.26 

16.  Shops  and  roundhouses 675  1.34 

17.  Machinery    and    tools 186  0.37 

18.  Water  stations. 337  0.67 

19.  Fuel     stations Ill  0.22 

20.  Warehouses     488  0.97 

21.  Docks   and   wharves 292  0.50 

22.  Miscellaneous    structures 403  0.80 

23.  Interest     3,860  7.66 

24.  Marine   equipment 106  0.21 

25.  Contingencies    3,509  6.97 

26.  Freight     equipment 5,202  10.32 

27.  Passenger    equipment 1,002  1.97 

28.  Locomotives     2,804  5.57 

29.  Floating     equipment 86  1.17 

Total     ...  $  50,370    ToO.OO 

Total     295,916,693 

Right  of  way  and  station  grounds 107,772,743 

Grand    total..  ...$403,689,436 


RAILWAYS.  1363 

The  above  does  not  include  lines  in  Manitoba,  estimated  to  cost 
$7,000,000  to  reproduce,  nor  the  coal  properties  valued  at  $50,720,120. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  $50,370  per  mile  multiplied  by  the 
5,874.91  miles  does  not  give  exactly  the  total  of  $295,916,693.  This 
is  due  to  the  fact  that  a  slide  rule  was  used  in  computing  the  cost 
of  each  item  per  mile,  and  absolute  precision  was  not  obtained. 
However,  the  error  is  only  $4  per  mile. 

The  reader  should  also  note  that  the  above  costs  per  mile  are 
not  costs  per  mile  of  track,  but  per  mile  of  all  main  and  branch 
lines.  Since  there  are  7,694.79  miles  of  all  track,  and  only  5,874.91 
miles  of  main  and  branches,  there  are  0.77  mile  of  main  and 
branches  for  each  1.00  mile  of  "all  tracks."  Hence  if  we  multiply 
any  of  the  above  29  items  by  0.77  we  shall  have  the  cost  per  mile 
of  all  tracks,  Thus,  item  9,  Track  Laying,  is  $1,128,  which  is  the 
cost  per  mile  of  main  line  and  branches,  sidings  and  yards  being 
lumped  in.  But  the  estimated  cost  of  laying  each  mile  of  every 
kind  of  track  is  0.77  X  $1,128  =  $868. 

In  our  issue  of  June  22,  1907,  are  given  estimates  of  the  cost 
of  all  the  railways  in  Wisconsin  and  Michigan.  In  a  subsequent 
issue  we  shall  give  the  estimated  cost  of  the  Great  Northern  Ry. 
system.  A  comparison  of  these  various  estimates  should  prove 
instructive  to  every  engineer  interested  in  railway  construction. 

Itemized  Cost  of  the  Great  Northern  Railway  System  as  Esti- 
mated by  Its  Chief  Engineer.* — In  our  issue  of  April  15  we  gave  an 
estimate  of  the  cost  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Railway  similar  to  the 
one  that  will  be  given  here.  Both  these  estimates  were  presented 
as  testimony  before  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  in  their 
hearing  of  the  "Spokane  Rate  Case."  Since  the  object  of  the  hearing 
was  to  ascertain  the  reasonableness  of  railway  rates  on  the  N.  P. 
and  on  the  G.  N.  railways,  the  railways  naturally  claimed  a  high 
physical  value  for  their  property.  As  stated  in  our  April  15  issue, 
Mr.  Halbert  P.  Gillette,  testifying  in  behalf  of  the  city  of  Spokane, 
claimed  that  the  estimates  presented  by  the  railways  were  much  too 
high,  frequently  being  high  not  only  as  to  unit  prices  but  as  to 
quantities. 

Mr.  A.  H.  Hogeland,  Chief  Engineer  of  the  Great  Northern  Rail- 
way, presented  the  following  as  his  estimate  of  the  cost  of  reproduc- 
ing the  railway  new  at  present  prices. 

The  mileage  of  the  Great  Northern  under  operation  April  1,  1907, 
was: 

Miles. 

Main    track 6,523.09 

Second,  3d,  4th,  5th  and  6th  track 112.25 

Side   track , 1,480.24 

Grand  total  of  all  tracks. 8,115.58 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,  1908. 


1364  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Mr.  Hogeland's  estimate  of  the  cost  was  presented  in  the  following 
summarized  form : 

1.  Engineering    $  6,870,187 

2.  Right  of  way  and  station  grounds.  .  .  .  87,067,532 

3.  Grading     93,098,889 

4.  Tunnels    7,447,620 

5.  Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts 17,953,028 

6.  Ties     18,690,731 

7.  Rails 31,054,392 

8.  Track    fastenings 7,375,495 

9.  Frogs  and  switches 904,450 

10.  Ballast     10,509,000 

11.  Track   laying   and    surfacing 6,998,409 

12.  Fencing  right  of  way 760,815 

13.  Crossings,   cattle  guards  and  signs....  1,922,160 

14.  Interlocking  or  signal  apparatus 386,190 

15.  Telegraph   lines 2,198,283 

16.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 3,276,300 

17.  Shops,  roundhouses  and  turntables.  .  .  .  3,667,900 

18.  Shop  machinery  and  tools 1,779,692 

19.  Water    stations 1,983,325 

20.  Fuel    stations 575,700 

21.  Grain  elevators 2,708,100 

22.  Storage  warehouses 276,500 

23.  Docks  and   wharves 1,222,900 

24.  Gas   making   plants 15,000 

25.  Miscellaneous     structures 3,194,850 

26.  Track  and  bridge  tools 142,877 

27.  Stores  and   supplies   on   hand   Feb.    28, 

1907    5,395,463 

28.  Contingencies     15,291,252 

29.  Equipment: 

Locomotives    $10,756,324 

Passenger    cars 4,915,764 

Frt.  cars  and  other  equip.  25,249,096 

— 40,921,184 


Total    $373,688,224 

30.  General  and  legal  expenses  (1% ) 3,736,882 

Total     $377,425,106 

31.  Interest  during  constr.    (10%  ) 37,742,510 


Grand    total $415,167,616 

Engineering  was  estimated  at  3%  of  all  items  requiring  engineer- 
ing supervision,  being  all  items  except  items  2,  26,  27,  29,  30  and  31. 

Right  of  way  and  station  grounds  were  estimated  by  the  Right  of 
Way  Department. 

The  grading  was  estimated  as  follows : 

27,018  acres  clearing  at  $82.50 $  2,228,985 

340,000  sq.  rods  grubbing  at  $1.65 561,000 

165,438,650  cubic  yards  earth  at  $0.31 51,285,982 

33,973,350  cubic  yards  hardpan  at  $0.45 15,288,008 

8,441,860  cubic  yards  loose  rock  at  $0.55 4,643,023 

12,771,060  cubic  yards  solid  rock  at  $1.10 14,048,166 

1,765,675  cubic  yards  riprap  at  $2.00 3,531,350 

92,500  cubic  yards  retaining  wall  at  $9.00 832,500 

194,250  cubic  yards  slope  wall  at  $3.50 679,875 

Total     grading $93,098,889 


RAILWAYS.  1365 

Mr.  Hogeland  testified  that  the  quantities  of  grading  were  arrived 
at  as  follows:  "For  82%  of  the  mileage  of  the  system  the  actual 
quantities  moved  in  construction  were  obtained  from  Engineering 
Department  records.  For  the  balance  of  the  system  the  quantities 
could  not  be  obtained  in  that  way,  because  no  records  were  avail- 
able, and  they  were  estimated  from,  profiles  and  by  comparison  with 
adjacent  portions  of  the  system  where  the  quantities  were  known. 
To  these  quantities  were  added  the  quantities  moved  since  con- 
struction, in  widening  banks,  reducing  grades,  taking  out  sags,  filling 
bridges  and  widening  and  deepening  cuts.  The  result  being  the 
actual  quantities  as  nearly  as  possible  to  arrive  at  same,  required  to 
make  the  roadbed  as  it  exists  to-day." 

It  will  be  noted  that  Mr.  Hogeland' s  estimate  gives  an  average  of 
33,250  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  per  mile  of  main  track,  distributed 
thus: 

Per  cent. 

Earth     75.0 

Hardpan     15.4 

Loose     rock 3.8 

Solid     rock 5.8 

Total     100.0 

Mr.  Hogeland  testified  that  the  part  of  the  G.  N.  east  of  Havre 
(4,553  miles  of  main  line)  averaged  27,760  cu.  yds.  per  mile, 
whereas  the  line  west  of  Havre  (2,082  miles  of  main  line)  averaged 
45,250. 

Mr.  Hogeland  gave  the  percentages  as  follows : 

East  of  West  of 

Havre.         Havre. 

Per  cent.  Per  cent. 

Earth     88.4  57.0 

Hardpan     10.2  22.4 

Loose    rock 1.1  7.4 

Solid    rock 0.3  13.2 

Total     100.0  100.0 

Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  Mr.  Hogeland' s  estimate  of  yardage 
per  mile  was  much  too  high,  and  cited  actual  records  of  the  G.  N. 
In  the  state  of  Washington  where  much  of  the  heaviest  grading  on 
the  G.  N.  is  found.  But,  as  we  shall  publish  in  detail  Mr.  Gillette's 
quantities  and  estimates  of  cost  of  each  of  the  railway  systems 
in  the  state  of  Washington,  the  reader  may  make  comparisons  for 
himself. 

Mr.  Hogeland  arrived  at  his  unit  prices  as  follows: 

Clearing :  Per  acre. 

Contract     price ?7^95 

Transporting  men,  tools  and  supplies 7.50 

Total    .  $82.50 


1366  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Grubbing:  Per  sq.  rod. 

Contract  price $1.50 

Transporting  men,  etc 0.15 

Total    $1.65 

Earth :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract  price  up  to  1,000  ft.  haul $0.23 

Overhaul 0.035 

Transporting  men,   etc 0.045 

Total    $0.31 

Hardpan :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract  price  up  to  1,000  ft. $0.35 

Overhaul     0.045 

Transporting  men,   etc .    0.055 


Total $0.45 

Loose  rock :  .  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract  price  up  to  1,000  ft $0.45 

Overhaul    0.045 

Transporting  men,   etc 0.055 

Total    .$0.55~~ 

Solid   rock :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract  price  up  to  1,000  ft $1.00 

Overhaul    0.045 

Transporting  men,  etc 0.055 


Total    $1.10 

Riprap :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract    price $1.50 

Overhaul   or   train   service 0.35 

Transporting,     etc 0.15 

Total     $2.00 

Retaining  wall :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract  price    (concrete  or   rubble).. $7.50 

Train     service 0.80 

Transporting  men,  etc 0.70 

Total    $9.00 

Slope  wall :  Per  cu.  yd. 

Contract     price $2.50 

Train     service 0.75 

Transporting  men,   etc 0.25 

Total    $3.50 

It  is  interesting  to  note  in  this  connection  that  the  actual  yardage 
of  excavation  on  about  700  miles  of  the  G.  N.  in  the  state  of 
Washington  was  26,000  cu.  yds.  per  mile  for  the  original  con- 
struction in  the  early  '90's,  and  that  the  item  of  "overhaul"  actually 
averaged  less  than  %  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  for  every  yard  of  material 
excavated,  as  compared  with  the  4^  cts.  estimated  by  Mr.  Hoge- 
land.  The  free  haul  limit  was  1,000  ft.  Much  the  same  criticism 
also  applies  to  Mr.  Hogeland's  estimate  of  the  cost  of  transporting 
men  and  supplies  to  and  from  the  site  of  the  work. 


RAILWAYS.  1367 

Mr.  Hogeland's  estimate  of  tunnels  was  as  follows : 

5,232  lin.  ft.  unlined  single  track  tunnel  at  $70... $  366,240 

17,346  lin.  ft.  timber  lined  single  track  tunnel  at  $120 2,081,520 

6,139  lin.  ft.  concrete  lined  single  track  tunnel  (Boulder) 

at  $175 i 1,074,325 

13,813  lin.  ft.  concrete  lined  single  track  tunnel  (Casca.de) 

at  $195 2,693,535 

5,141  lin.  ft.  concrete  lined  double  track  tunnel  at  Seattle, 

$1,848,000,   two-thirds  to  G.  N 1,232,000 


Total     $7,447,620 

The  unit  prices  were  arrived  at  as  follows : 

Unlined   tunnel :  Per  lin.  ft. 

Contract  price  for  standard  unlined  section $55.00 

Extra    excavation 8.00 

Transporting  men,  tools,  supplies,  etc..  . 7.00 

Total $70.00 

Timber  lined  tunnel :  Per  lin.  ft. 

Contract  price  for  standard  unlined  section $   55.00 

Enlargement  for  timber  lining 30.00 

Timber  and  iron  in  place 25.00 

Transporting  men,   etc 10.00 


Total $120.00 

Concrete  lined  tunnels :  Per  lin.  ft. 

(BOULDER  TUNNEL.) 

Excavation     $  90.00 

Temporary   timber  lining 20.00 

Permanent   masonry    lining 45.00 

Transporting  men,  etc 20.00 

Total $175.00 

(CASCADE  TUNNEL.) 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Excavation    ' $  95.00 

Temporary  timber  lining. 25.00 

Permanent  concrete  lining 50.00 

Transporting  men,   etc ' . .' 25.00 

Total    $195.00 

Bridges,  trestles  and  culverts: 

1   stone  arch   (Minneapolis),   1,770  lin.  ft...$  867,000 
260  steel  bridges  with  masonry  piers,  63,557 

lin.     ft 6,941,645 

3,934  timber  trestles,  429,851  lin.  ft 5,216,480 

189  Howe  truss  spans,  19,996  lin.  ft 905,478 

4,940    permanent    culverts 3,021,685 

4,021   timber  culverts 1,000,740 

Total     $17,953,028 

Mr.  Hogeland  did  not  give  the  number  of  pounds  of  steel,  yardage 
of  masonry,  etc.  He  stated,  however,  that  he  used  the  following 
unit  prices,  to  which  he  subsequently  added  %  ct.  per  ton  per  mile 
for  transporting  the  materials,  so  that  these  unit  prices  do  not  in- 
clude the  cost  of  transporting  the  materials : 


1368  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Steel  in  bridges :  Per  ton. 

Contract  price  ready  to  erect,  f.  o.  b.  St.  Paul. .  .$65.00 

Mill  and  shop   inspection 75 

Erection     12.00 

Painting ^  .  .      2.25 

Total    .$80.00 

This  is  equivalent  to  4  cts.  per  Ib.  erected,  exclusive  of  the  cost 
of  transportation  from  St.  Paul. 

Masonry :  Per  cu.  yd. 

First    class $12.00 

Second    class 8.00 

Concrete    6.00 

Excavation,  coffer  dams,  pumping,  etc.,  variable. 

Timber  trestles: 

Timber  in  place,  per  M $31.50 

Piling  in  place,  per  ft 0.35 

Wrought  iron,  per  Ib 0.05 

Freight  to  be  added. 

Howe  truss  spans :  Per  lin.  ft. 

44    ft $18.50 

60   ft 27.00 

75   ft 34.00 

87%    ft 35.50 

100    ft .    37.50 

125    ft 42.00 

150    ft 45.00 

Freight  to  be  added. 

Howe  truss  timber,  per  M $25.00 

Rods,   plates,   etc 0.03 

Bolts     ,     0.025 

Freight  to  be  added. 

Vitrified  pipe  culverts :  .  Per  lin.  ft. 

12-in.    pipe $0.25 

18-in.    pipe 0.50 

24-in.    pipe 1.15 

27-in.    pipe .  v 1.52 

Freight  to  be  added. 

Cast   iron   pipe  culverts,    $30   per  net   ton,   plus  freight. 
Mr.   Hogeland   estimated    2,S"50    ties  per   mile  of  main   track  and 
2,750  per  mile  of  side  track,  at  the  following  cost: 

Delivered  on  right  of  way $0.48 

Train   service  and  loading  and  handling 0.09 

Burnettizing  %   of  all  ties  at  16  cts 0.04 

Transporting  500  mi.  at   %   ct.  ton  mile 0.21 

Total    $0.82 

He  estimated  8,880  sets  of  switch  ties  as  follows  per  set: 

F.  o.  b.  mill,  per  M $60.00 

Transporting  500  miles,  per  M 15.00 

Total     .  $75.00 


RAILWAYS.  1369 

The  rails  for  the  main  track  averaged  68.1  Ibs.  per  yd.  and  for 
the  side  track  60  Ibs.  Five  rails  per  mile  were  added  for  "repair 
rails."  The  cost  of  rails  was  estimated  to  be : 

Per  gross  ton. 

F.  o.  b.  St.  Paul,  including  handling .$32  00 

Transp.  800  miles  at  y2  ct.  ton  mile 4.00 


Total     $36.00 

Angle  bars  were  estimated  at  17,600  Ibs.  per  mile  of  side  track 
at  a  cost  of: 

Per  net  ton. 

F.  o.  b.  St.  Paul. . $40.00 

Transporting  800  miles 4.00 

Total     $44.00 

Bolts   and   nuts   were   estimated  at   1,800   Ibs.    per  mile   of  main 
track  and  1,500  Ibs.  per  mile  of  side  track,  at  a  cost  of: 

/ 
Per  net  ton. 

F.  o.  b.  St.  Paul. $54.00 

Transporting  800  miles 4.00 


Total    $68.00 

Spikes   were    estimated    at    6,500    Ibs.    per   mile    of   track,    at   a 
cost  of : 

Per  net  ton. 

.      F.  o.  b.  St.  Paul $42.00 

Transporting  800  miles 4.00 


Total     $46.00 

Tie  plates  were  estimated  at  29,000  Ibs.  per  mile  of  track  where 
fully  tie  plated  (or  5  Ibs.  per  tie  plate),  and  it  was  assumed 
that  2,451  miles  were  fully  tie  plated  and  1,950  miles  half  tie 
plated,  as  a  cost  of: 

Per  net  ton. 

F.  o.  b.  St.  Paul.... $45.00 

Transporting  800  miles 4.00 

Total $49.00 

It  was  assumed  that  750  miles  of  track  were  provided  with  rail 
braces  at  2,000  braces  per  mile,  at  a  cost  of  10  cts.  per  brace. 
Summary  of  track  fastenings : 

Angle    bars $3,090,736 

Bolts  and  nuts 431,288 

Spikes     1,304,284 

Tie    plates 2,399,187 

Rail   braces.  .  150,000 


Total  $7,375,495 


1370  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  these  items  were  substantially  correct 
except  as  to  the  number  of  tie  plates,  which  was  very  much  over- 
estimated. 

Frogs  and  switches: 

Complete  turnout,  f.  o.  b.  St.  Paul  (3,750  Ibs.)  .  .  .$85.00 
Transp.  800  mi.  at  y%  ct.  ton  mile 7.50 


Total    $92.50 

8,880  turnouts   (except  ties)   at  $92.50 $821,400 

302  crossing  frogs  at  $275 83,050 

Total    $904,450 

The  "complete  turnout"  includes  switch  stand  and  bolts,  lamp, 
»witch  points,  connecting  and  tie  rods,  plates,  rail  braces,  clips, 
frog  and  guard  rail,  but  does  not  include  cross  ties. 

Mr.  Hogeland  estimated  that  3,750  miles  of  the  main  track 
averaged  3,000  cu.  yds.  of  gravel  ballast  per  mile,  and  that  1,900 
miles  averaged  2,250  cu.  yds.  per  mile.  Of  the  1,480  miles  of  side 
track,  he  estimated  that  950  miles  were  ballasted  with  1,500  cu. 
yds.  per  mile.  This  made  a  grand  total  of  16,950,000  cu.  yds.  of 
ballast  on  the  system,  the  cost  of  which  was  estimated  as  follows: 

tf 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Loading,    unloading,    putting    under    track    and 

dressing    track $0.27 

Maintenance  and  repairs  of  steam  shovels 0.05 

Train  service,  hauling,  repairs  and  rental  of  equip- 
ment, transp.  of  men,  tools  and  supplies 0.30 

Total     $0.62 

Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  this  estimate  of  unit  cost  was  fully  50 
per  cent  more  than  the  actual  cost  as  shown  by  the  records  of  the 
G.  N.  and  that  gravel  ballast  could  be  placed  for  less  than  40  cts. 
per  cu.  yd.  under  existing  conditions. 

Mr.  Hogeland  estimated  the  cost  of  track  laying  and  surfacing  as 
follows : 

Per  mile. 

Curving  rails,  laying  and  surfacing $350.00 

Labor  of  tie  plating  (average) 45.00 

Train  service  and  rental  of  equipment  and  haul- 
ing to  front. 390.00 

Transporting  men,  supplies,  etc 50.00 


Total $835.00 

8,115.58  miles  at  $835 $6,776,409 

8,880  switches  placed  at  $25 220,000 


Total $6,998,409 

Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  the  item  of  train  service  was  about 
three  times  higher  than  the  actual  cost,  and  that  the  transportation 
of  men, '  etc.,  was  even  more  excessive. 


RAILWAYS.  1371 

Mr.  Hogeland  estimated  4,611  miles  of  right  of  way  fences  at  the 
following  cost  per  mile  : 

Per  mile. 

Standard    fence $150.00 

Train  service  distributing  materials 10.00 

Transporting  men,   etc 5.00 


Total    $165.00 

He  estimated  the  cost  of  crossings,   cattle   guards  and   signs  as 
follows : 

6.635.34  miles  of  $75  for  cattle  guards,  signs,  etc.$    497,650 

58  steel  highway  bridges  (overhead) 1,344,000 

Timber   bridges    (overhead) 80,510 


Total     $1,922,160 

Interlocking  and  signal  apparatus: 

Interlocking    $327,750 

Block   signaling 58,440 


Total     % $386,190 

Telegraph  lines : 

Labor     $    650,614.48 

Material     1,295,207.46 

Train     service 16,638.00 

Transp.   men,   tools,   material,   etc 219,598.22 

Quadruplex    instruments,    batteries,    furni- 
ture, etc.,  in  8  main  offices 16,225.00 


Total $2,198,283.16 

This  is  equivalent  to  the  following  cost  per  mile  of  telegraph  line : 

Per  mile. 

Labor     $   98.00 

Material     200.00 

Train   service : 2.50 

Transporting  men,   etc 33.00 

Quadruplex    instruments,    etc 2.50 


Total     $336.00 

Mr.  Gillette  testified  that  this  was  an  excessive  estimate,  and 
that,  so  far  as  the  state  of  Washington  was  concerned,  the  G.  N. 
did  not  own  a  large  part  of  the  telegraph  lines  and  that,  in  fact, 
it  was  the  common  practice  for  railways  to  share  the  ownership  of 
the  lines  with  telegraph  companies,  as  shown  by  the  accounting 
records  of  tho  railways : 

Passenger  depots : 

Seattle     (one-half    interest) $    295,000 

Spokane    137,500 

Grand     Forks 37,500 

Fargo     41,800 

Sioux     City 180,000 

Minneapolis  union   depot 342,500 

29  other  passenger  depots  of  brick  or  stone.  .       419,600 
705   frame  passenger  and  freight  depots.  ...    1,226,700 

14  freight  depots  of  brick  or  stone 422,900 

Frame  freight  houses 172,800 


Total     $3,276,300 


1372  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  St.  Paul  union  det>ot  (of  which  the  G.  N.  owns  one-ninth 
interest)  and  the  Superior  depot  (of  which  the  G.  N.  owns  one- 
third  interest)  are  not  included  above,  but  are  included  under 
"right  of  way  and  station  grounds."  Mr.  Hogeland  did  not  give 
any  dimensions  of  buildings,  so  that  it  is  impracticable  to  check 
his  estimates. 

Shops,  roundhouses  and  turntables : 

Shop,    St.    Paul $    854,400 

Shop,    St.    Cloud 75,400 

Shop,    Superior 91,000 

Shop,     Barnesville 17,500 

Shop,  Sioux  City 12,500 

Shop,    Devils    Lake 60,000 

Shop,    Havre 91,000 

Shop,   Great  Falls 42,000 

Shop,    Spokane 124,800 

Shop,   Everett 70,200 

Roundhouses,  frame,   88   stalls,  at  $1,400 123,200 

Roundhouses,   masonry,   554    stalls,   at   $2.,100  1,163,400 
Boiler  houses,  power  houses  and  small  shops      216,000 

Turntables,   frame,    10,   at    $1,800 18,000 

Turntables,    steel,    57,    at    $6,500 370,500 

Cinder    pits 140,000 

Store  houses,  oil  and  sand  houses  and  scrap 

bins    198,000 


Total $3,667,900 

Water   stations : 

420   water   stations    (at    $4,722) $1,983,325 

This  includes  tanks,   pump  houses,   pumps,   engines,   wells,    reser- 
voirs  and   all   appurtenances   of   water    stations.      It  will    be   noted 
that  this  supplies  one  station  every  16  miles  of  road. 
Fuel   stations : 

52  standard  coaling  stations  at  $9,500 $    544,500 

52    platforms   coaling    stations,    portion    with 

cranes  and  buckets,    $600 31,200 


Total   $    575,700 

Grain  elevators : 

Minneapolis    $    240,000 

Superior,   A  and  X 823,100 

Superior    S    (steel) 1,536,400 

Seattle,   Smith's  Cove 108,600 

Total     $2,708,100 

Storage  warehouses: 

Superior,    flour   shed $    142,800 

Five   wool    houses 19,800 

Seattle,  warehouse,   Smith's  Cove 113,900 

Total     $  276,500 

Docks  and  wharves  (including  dredging)  : 

Superior  No.    1 $  175,000 

Superior  No.   2 80,800 

Superior  Nos.  5  and  6  and  machinery 449,500 

Seattle,  Smith's  Cove  dock 517,600 

Total    .  $1,222,900 


RAILWAYS.  1373 

- 
Miscellaneous  structures : 

General  office  building,   St.   Paul $  590,000 

Division    office    buildings 18,000 

Boarding    houses 87,500 

Section  houses,  bunk  houses,  hand  car  houses  853,500 

Ice  houses 107,500 

Stock    yards 157,600 

Track   scales 92,250 

Snow    sheds 295,000 

Snow    fences 450,000 

Loading    platforms 71,000 

Quarry   and   crusher   plants 45,000 

Tie  treating  plant 85,000 

Commissary    buildings 15,000 

Miscellaneous    buildings 327,500 

Total     $3,194,850 

Mr.  Hogeland  allowed  10  per  cent  of  items  3,  4,  5,  10,  11,  16,  17, 
19,  20,  21,  22,  23  and  25  for  "contingencies,"  to  cover  the  increased 
cost  of  the  work  due  to  unforseen  causes,  such  as  fires,  floods, 
tornadoes,  accidents,  etc.  Mr.  Gillette  testified  that,  while  an  allow- 
ance for  "contingencies"  is  certainly  permissible  in  estimating  the 
cost  of  projected  work,  it  is  not  permissible  in  estimating  the 
cost  of  completed  work,  particularly  where  the  actual  costs  are  on 
record  for  nearly  all  the  work,  as  is  the  case  of  the  G.  N. 

In  estimating  the  interest  charges  during  construction,  Mr. 
Hogeland  assumed  that  the  system,  including  equipment,  would  be 
unproductive  for  a  period  of  two  years.  He  assumed  that  it  would 
take  eight  years  to  reproduce  the  system,  1,000  miles  of  track  (main 
and  side)  being  built  per  year,  and  that  it  would  be  two  years 
after  the  "beginning  of  the  work  before  the  first  1,000  miles  would 
produce  sufficient  revenue  to  pay  interest  on  the  investment,  and 
so  on  with  the  rest.  Hence,  two  years  at  5%  is  10%  of  the  total 
cost  to  be  charged  for  interest. 

It  will  be  interesting  to  compare  this  estimate  with  the  actual 
interest  charges  as  taken  from  the  ledgers  of  the  different  railway 
companies  operating  in  the  state  of  Washington.  These  data  will 
be  published  in  this  journal  in  the  near  future,  along  with  the 
other  items  of  actual  cost  as  ascertained  by  Mr.  Gillette  for  the 
Railroad  Commission  of  Washington. 

For  purposes  of  comparison  with  the  estimated  cost  of  the  N.  P. 
(published  in  our  April  15  issue)  we  append  the  estimated  cost  cf 
the  G.  N.,  by  items  per  mile  of  main  and  second  track,  as  deter- 
mined by  dividing  Mr.  Hogeland's  items  by  6,635.34. 

The  mileage  of  the  Great  Northern  under  operation  April  1,  1907, 
was: 

6,635.34  miles  main  and  second  tracks. 
1,480.24  miles  side   tracks. 


8,115.58  miles  total  tracks. 

There  are  only  112.25  miles  of  second  track  included  in  the 
above,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  there  is  0.22  mile  of  side  track 
per  mile  of  main  and  second  track. 


1374  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  repro- 
duction per  mile 
of  main  and 
second  track. 
(6,635.24  miles.) 

1.  Engineering $  1,035 

2.  Right  of  way  and  station  grounds 13,160 

3.  Grading    14,030 

4.  Tunnels     1,070 

5.  Bridges,   trestles  and  culverts 2,705 

6.  Ties     2,820 

7.  Rails    4,680 

8.  Track    fastenings 1,110 

9.  Frogs   and    switches 135 

10.  Ballast    1,585 

11.  Track  laying  and  surfacing 1,055 

12.  Fencing  right  of  way 115 

13.  Crossings,  cattle  guards  and  signs 290 

14.  Interlocking  and  signal  apparatus 60 

15.  Telegraph    lines 330 

16.  Station  buildings  and  fixtures 495 

17.  Shops,  roundhouses  and  turntables 550 

18.  Shop  machinery  and  tools 270 

19.  Water     stations 300 

20.  Fuel    stations 90 

21.  Grain    elevators 420 

22.  Storage    warehouses 40 

23.  Docks   and   wharves 185 

24.  Gas  making  plants 

25.  Miscellaneous    structures 480 

26.  Track  and  bridge  tools 20 

27.  Stores  and  supplies  on  hand 815 

28.  Contingencies    2,300 

29.  Equipment     6,170 

30.  General  and  legal  expense 563 

31.  Interest     5,690 


Grand    total $62,570 

Deduct  right  of  way  and  station  grounds 13,160 

Cost,  exclu.  of  right  of  way  and  sta.  grounds.  .$49,410 
Deduct    equipment 6,170 

Cost,   exclusive  of  lands  and  equipment $43,240 

Contract  Prices  for  Railway  Work  in  the  State  of  Washington.*— 
In  building  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul  line  through  the 
state  of  Washington,  the  contract  prices  for  work  let  in  1906  were 
as  follows : 

Average 

price 
per  cu.  yd. 

Earth  excavation,  haul  300  ft.  or  less,  $0.17  to  $0.22 $0.19 

Earth  excavation,  haul  300  to  1,000  ft,  $0.21  to  $0.27 0.23 

Hard  pan,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less,   $0.30  to  $0.43 0.37 

Cement  gravel,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less,   $0.36  to   $0.40 0.38 

Loose  rock,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less,  $0.33  to  $0.45 0.42 

Solid  rock,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less,   $0.80  to  $1.00 0.90 

Riprap,  loose,  haul  1,000  ft.   or  less 0.75 

Riprap,   hand  placed,  haul  1,000   ft.  or  less 1.25 

Overhaul,  for  each  100  ft  beyond  1,000  ft 0.01 

*Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  15,  1909. 


RAILWAYS.  1375 

Other  prices  were  as  follows  for  different  units : 

Clearing,  per  acre,   $40.00  to  $300.00 $120.00 

Grubbing,  per  station,  $10.00  to  $20.00 15.00 

Ties  made  on  right-of-way,  each 0.18 

Tunneling  ( 800  ft.  long  or  less) ,  per  lin.  ft 45.00 

Tunnel  enlargement,  per  cu.  yd 3.00 

Tunnel  timber  in  place,  per  M 28.00 

Log  culverts,  per  lin.  ft.  of  logs 0.14 

The  contract   prices   on   the   Portland   and   Seattle   Ry.,    built    in 
Washington  at  the  same  time  as  the  C.,  M.  &  St.  P.,  were  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Earth  excavation,  haul  300  ft.  or  less. $0.17 

Earth  excavation,  haul  300  to  1,000  ft 0.21 

Hardpan,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less 0.35 

Loose  rock,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less. 0.40 

Shell  rock,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less 0.30 

Solid  rock,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less 0.90 

Riprap,  loose,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less 0.90 

Riprap,  hand  placed,  haul  1,000  ft.  or  less 1.25 

Overhaul  for  each  100  ft.  beyond  1,^00  ft 0.01 

Other  prices  were  as  follows  on  different  units :  , 

Clearing,  per  acre $   25.00 

Grubbing,  per  sq.  rod 1.50 

Wrought  iron,  spikes,  etc.,  in  structures,  per  Ib 0.05 

Cast  iron  in  structures,  per  Ib 0.05 

Square  timber  in  culverts,  per  M 20.00 

Flatted  timber  in  culverts,  per  lin.  ft 0.12 

Tunnel  in  rock  (16  x  24  ft.),  per  lin.  ft 45.00 

Tunnel,  extra  excavation,  per  cu.  yd 3.00 

Tunnel  timber  lining,  including  iron,  per  M 20.00 

Piling,  per  lin.  ft.,  cut  off 0.10 

Piling  per  lin.  ft,  driven 0.20 

44-ft.  Howe  truss  bridge,  per  lin.  ft. 9.25 

60-ft.  Howe  truss  bridge,  per  lin.  ft 13.50 

75  to  88-ft.  Howe  truss  bridge,  per  lin.  ft 19.00 

100-ft.  Howe  truss  bridge,  per  lin.  ft 20.00 

120  to  125-ft.  Howe  truss  bridge,  per  lin.  ft 21.00 

150-ft.  Howe  truss  bridge,  per  lin.  ft 22.00 

Concrete  (cement  furnished  by  the  company),  per  cu.  yd 6.00 

Concrete  in  tunnels  (cement  furnished  by  the  company),  per 

cu.  yd 7.00 

Track  laying,  including  loading  all  material,  per  mile 300.00 

Switches  placed,  each 25.00 

Placing  tie  plates,  per  mile,  fully  tie  plated 75.00 

Ballast  (gravel),  including  track  surfacing,  per  cu.  yd 0.27 

The  price  for  ballast  does  not  include  hauling  it,  which  was  done 
by  the  railway  company.  The  prices  for  Howe  truss  bridges  in- 
clude all  materials  except  the  iron,  and  all  framing  and  erecting. 

Record  of  Rapid  Construction  on  the  C.  P.  Ry. — In  the  Jour. 
Assoc.,  1884,  p.  150,  Mr.  E.  T.  Abbott  gives  a  brief  account  of  the 
rapid  construction  of  500  miles  of  single  track  road  across  the 
prairies  from  Brandon  (132  miles  west  of  Winnipeg).  Ground  was 
broken  May  28,  1882,  and  continued  to  Dec.  31.  In  182  working 
days,  including  stormy  ones,  with  a  force  of  about  5,000  men  and 
1,700  teams,  the  contractors  did  the  following: 

6,104,000  cu.  yds.  earth  excavation  (or  14,000  cu.  yds.  per  mile), 
2,394  M.  timber  in  bridges  and  culverts,  85,700  lin.  ft.  piling,  and 
435  miles  of  track-laying.  The  track  was  all  laid  from  one  end, 
and  in  no  case  were  the  rails  hauled  ahead  by  team.  Two  iron 


1376  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

cars  were  used,  the  empty  one  on  its  return  being  turned  up 
beside  the  track  to  let  the  loaded  one  by.  The  tracklaying  crew 
was  equal  to  4  miles  a  day.  In  the  month  of  August,  32  miles  of 
track  were  laid.  The  grading  forces  were  scattered  along  150 
miles  ahead  of  the  track.  Sidings  1,500  ft.  long  were  graded  7 
miles  apart. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  grading  force  averaged  34,000  cu.  yds. 
excavation,  13  M.  timber,  and  500  ft.  piling,  per  day.  Hence  each 
horse,  plus  1%  men,  averaged  10  cu.  yds.  per  day. 

Weight  and  Cost  of  Steel  in  Brooklyn  Elevated  Railways.*— In 
1806  there  were  about  20  miles  of  double  track  elevated  railways 
in  Brooklyn,  and  the  average  weight  of  steel  was  6,780,000  Ibs.  per 
mile,  or  nearly  1,300  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  This  weight  was  about  20% 
in  excess  of  what  would  have  been  necessary  if  the  columns  could 
have  been  placed  in  the  roadway ;  but,  due  to  the  narrow  streets, 
fully  4%  of  the  columns  were  placed  at  the  edge  of  the  sidewalks, 
necessitating  transverse  girders  35  to  45  ft.  long.  The  average 
length  of  the  longitudinal  girders  was  5.0.  ft.  The  following  is 
typical  of  the  distribution  of  the  steel  in  more  modern  sections 
(built  in  1893),  which  averaged  7,840,000  Ibs.  per  mile,  or  nearly 
1,500  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.,  the  transverse  girders  being  45  ft.  long: 

Per  cent. 

Columns     1 1.5 

Transverse  "girders 20.5 

Longitudinal   girders    (two   tracks) 57.0 

Station   platforms 5.0 

Bracing 6.0 

Total 100.0 

This  work  cost  nearly  3  cts.  per  Ib.  erected,  at  which  rate  the 
steel  work  cost  nearly  $45  per  lin.  ft.,  or  less  than  $240,000  per  mile. 
Ties  7x8  ins.,  spaced  15  ins.  c.  to  c.,  were  used;  guard  rails,  6x8 
ins.  The  earlier  lines  were  built  with  60-lb.  rails,  but  in  1893  rails 
weighing  85  Ibs.  were  adopted.  Stations  average  1,800  ft.  apart. 
The  locomotives  weighed  45,000  to  56,000  Ibs.,  the  wheel  base 
being  16  ft. 

Cost  of  the  Early  Elevated  Railways  In  New  York  City.*— The 
cost  of  a  mile  of  double  track  elevated  railway  on  Manhattan 
Island,  New  York  City,  up  to  1880,  when  there  were  35  miles,  is 
given  by  Mr.  R.  E.  Johnston  as  follows : 

Foundations,    columns,    superstr.    and    track.  ..  $288,400 

Stations 60,000 

5    locomotives   at    $4,000 20,000 

12   cars  at   $3,300 39,600 


Total    $408,000 

The  foundation  pit  is  7   ft.   square  and  7   ft.   deep. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  7,  1908. 


RAILWAYS.  1377 


The  foundation  of  each  column  is  of  brick  4x4  ft.  on  top  and 
6x6  ft.  at  the  base,  4  ft.  high,  resting  on  two  6-in.  flagstones, 
3x7  ft.  each,  which  in  turn  rest  on  4  ins.  of  concrete. 

The  cast-iron  base  of  the  column  weighs  3,000  Ibs.  and  is  secured 
by  four  2-in.  bolts  that  pass  through  the  foundation. 

The  longitudinal  girders  are  44  ft.  long. 

Nothing  was  paid  for  damage  to  property. 

Labor  Cost  of  Track  Laying  on  Elevated  Railways  in  New  York 
City,  Also  Some  Costs  of  Erecting  Steel.* — The  following  costs  relate 
to  track-laying  on  elevated  roads  on  Manhattan  Island,  and,  although 
the  work  was  done  28  years  ago,  the  records  are  given  by  Mr.  G. 
Thomas  Hall  in  such  detail  as  to  be  applicable  to-day,  provided 
proper  substitutions  are  made  for  wages. 

The  Second  Avenue  line  was  double  track,  and  about  7.4  miles 
long,  of  which  about  2%  was  curved. 

The  contractors  found  the  following  organization  the  most 
effective  for  track-laying : 

15  carpenters. 

10  skilled  laborers  assisting  carpenters  on   the  guard  timbers. 

10  men  laying  steel  rails. 

10  men  clipping  cross-ties. 

10  men  spacing,  marking  and  edging  cross-ties. 

10  unskilled  laborers  for  derrick,  distributing  materials,  etc. 

2  horses  with  drivers. 

3  foremen. 

The  clippers  were  kept  500  ft.  ahead  of  the  spikers,  and  the 
spikers  750  ft.  ahead  of  the  carpenters  on  the  guard  timbers. 
Horsepower  was  found  to  be  cheaper  than  steam  in  hoisting  track 
material  from  the  street.  The  cross-ties  were  first  hoisted,  dis- 
tributed and  spaced ;  then  marked  for  camber  by  means  of  T 
sights,  adzed  and  clipped.  Then  the  steel  rails  were  in  turn  dis- 
tributed, lined  up  and  spiked ;  then  the  guard  timbers  were  dis- 
tributed, ends  jointed,  gaged  and  bolted  down ;  the  inside  guard 
being  put  in  place  and'  finished  with  strap  iron  before  the  outside 
one  was  laid.  A  space  of  about  250  ft.  intervened  between  the  gangs 
employed  on  the  two  ranges  of  guard  timbers.  Everything  work- 
ing smoothly,  the  above  force  laid  about  260  ft.  of  double  track  per 
10-hr,  day  on  tangent  work. 

The  following  was  the  cost  to  the  contractor  of  laying  complete 
1,000  lin.  ft.  of  straight  single  track : 

Hoisting  and   distributing  materials $   40.00 

Laying    cross-ties 65.00 

Laying    steel    rails 30.00 

Laying   guard    timbers 100.00 

Strap  ironing  guard  timbers 20.00 

Incidentals,  loss  of  time,  repairing,  tools,  etc....  25.00 

Superintendence 20.00 


Total  for  1,000  ft $300.00 

The  contract  prices  were  35  cts.  to  43  cts.  per  lin.   ft.   of  single, 
straight  track. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  June  2,  1909. 


1378  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Wages  of  common  laborers  \vere  15  cts.  per  hr.  The  above  crew 
of  70  men  and  2  horses  received  about  $145  a  day,  or  practically 
20  cts.  per  hr.  per  man. 

The  amount  of  materials  in  1,000  ft.  of  single  track  was  as 
follows : 

250  cross-ties,  6"x6"xl2',  9,000  ft.  B.  M. 

500  cross-ties.  6"  x  6"  x  8',  12,000  ft.  B.  M. 
3,000  wrought-iron  clips,  y2"  x  2y2"  x  5y2". 
1,500  log  screws,   %"x6". 

67  steel  rails  (30'),  63  Ibs.  per  yd. 
67  fish  plates,   %"x  2y2"  x  20". 

268  fish  plates  bolts,   %"  X  4". 
3,000  spikes. 

7,000  lin.  ft.  guard  timber,   6' x  8",   28,000  ft.  B.  M. 
1,500  guard  rail  bolts,    %"x!4y2". 

150  log  screws,  %"x  12". 
2,000  lin.  ft.  strap  iron,   V2"  X  2V2". 

300  strap  iron  bolts,   %"  X  6V2". 

300  blunt  bolts  for  strap  iron,   ^"  x  5". 
%   bbl.  Portland  cement. 

It  will  be  noted  that  laying  the  cross- ties  cost  about  $3  per  1,000 
ft.  B.  M.,  and  that  laying  the  guard  rail  cost  about  $3.60  per 
1,000  ft.  B.  M. 

The  cost  of  30  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  single  track  is  equivalent  to 
$1,584  per  mile  for  tracklaying. 

To  lay  one  "typical  crossing"  consisting  of  two  cross-over  tracks 
(one  from  each  main  track  to  a  center  track),  comprising  218  lin. 
ft.  of  single  track,  with  5  frogs,  from  switches  and  Outside  guard 
timbers,  with  inside  steel  guard  rails,  cost  as  follows : 

Hoisting,  adzing  and  clipping  cross-ties $18.25 

Laying  rails,  frogs  and  switches 40.00 

Laying    guard'  timbers 12.50 

Laying  steel  guard  rails 4.25 

Total   . ...$75.00 

This  is  equivalent  to  35  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  the  single  track. 
The  iron  superstructure  of  this  elevated  road  consisted  of  Warren 
longitudinal    girders,    whose    upper    chords    rest    upon    the    top    of 
Warren     transverse    girders,     supported    by     six-segment     Phoenix 
columns.     The  weights  were  as  follows: 

Lbs.  per  lin.  ft. 

Transverse  girders 200 

Longitudinal  girders   130 

Bracing    8 

"A"    caliber    columns 117 

"B"    caliber    columns. 140 

The  columns  were  erected  by  a  gang  of  7  men  and  a  team  of 
horses,  using  a  derrick  wagon.  This  gang  averaged  39  columns,  of 
20  ft.  each,  erected  per  day,  or  about  4y2  tons. 

The  same  gang  averaged  10  columns  of  50  ft.  each,  or  3^  tons 
per  day. 

The  columns  were  held  temporarily  in  place  by  inserting  iron 
wedges  inside  the  rim  of  the  base  casting. 


.     RAILWAYS.  1379 

The  cost  of  placing  a  3,200-lb.  base  casting,  on  which  the  column 
rests,  was  as  follows : 

Per  casting. 

Uncovering  pier  (15  cts.  per  hr.) $0.35 

Moving  casting  fronf  sidewalk  to  pier  (15  cts.  per  hr.)  .  . .  .    0.40 

Erecting  derrick  and  setting  casting  (15  cts.  per  hr. ) 0.60 

Repaving,   25   sq.   ft.    (25  cts.  per  hr.) 0.50 

Washing,  tarring  and  bricking  (25  cts.  per  hr.) 0.35 

Refilling  (15  cts.  per  hr.) 0.15 

Preparing  cement  mortar   (20  cts.  per  hr. ) 0.10 

Foreman    and    night    watchman 0.50 

Total  labor $2.95 

%  bbl.  cement,   at  $1 0.25 

1,4   bbl.  sand,  at  $1.25  per  cu.  yd. 0.05 

32  brick,   at   $10 * 0.32 

%   cu.  yd.  refuse  carted  away 0.38 

2%  cu.  ft.  sand  for  paving 0.11 

Coal   tar,   cement  work,    etc 0.11 

Oil  for  lamps,  etc 0.05 

Grand   total $4.21 

The  above  is  for  company  work.  Later  on  contracts  were  let  for 
$3.75  per  3,200-lb.  base  casting,  and  the  contractor  put  in  15  cast- 
Ings  a  day,  as  compared  with  10  placed  by  the  company's  forces. 

The  girders  were  erected  by  a  traveler  on  the  structure,  with  a 
crew  of  12  men  and  one  engineman  for  the  15-hp.  engine,  which 
consumed  %  ton  coal  per  day.  This  crew  raised  66  girders  per 
10-hr,  day,  or  200  tons. 

The  iron  girders  all  being  in  place,  the  lateral  bracing  was  then 
adjusted  and  riveted,  and  the  columns  very  carefully  plumbed  with 
heavy  iron  plumb-bobs.  Long  columns  were  plumbed  with  a  transit. 

Two  coats  of  paint  were  applied,  the  first  being  an  iron  ore  paint 
and  second  being  white  lead.  The  painting  cost  $1.50  per  lin.  ft.  of 
double  track  road  (not  including  station  buildings),  of  which  36.8% 
was  for  labor. 

First  Cost  and  Cost  of  Operation  of  Elevated  Railways  in  Brook- 
lyn and  New  York.* — The  following  table  gives  costs  of  building 
double  track  elevated  railways  in  Brooklyn  during  three  different 
periods : 

1885  to  1888  to  1892  to 

Year.  1888.  1891.  1903. 

Miles  of  structure  built 5.6  5.4  3.22 

Number   of   stations 14  19  9 

Total  net  tons  iron 19,488  16,203  10,980 

Average  net  tons  per   mile 3,473  3,001  3,055 

Maximum  net  tons  per  mile 3,578  3,566  3,287 

Minimum  net  tons  per  mile 2,907  2,842  2,824 

Cost  of  iron  per  ton $    79.00  $68.68  $61.00 

Cost  of  each  foundation 187.70  140.00  93.50 

Total   cost  per  mile 542,441  332,352  297,599 

In  explanation  of  the  high  cost  of  foundations  it  should  be  stated 
that,  from  1885  to  1888,  a  brick  foundation  pier  with  a  bluestone  cap 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  5,   1909. 


1380  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

and  cast-iron  base  was  used  under  each  post  or  column.  During 
1888  to  1891  concrete  was  substituted  for  the  brick,  but  the  cast- 
iron  base  (below  the  street  level)  was  retained.  In  1892  and  1893, 
the  cast-iron  base  was  abandoned,  and  the  columns  were  designed 
to  rest  directly  on  the  concrete  at  the  street  level. 

The  3.22  miles  of  structure  built  in  1892-1893  included  2,800  ft. 
of  third  and  cross-over  tracks,  and  the  following  were  the  average 
unit  prices: 

Excavation    (per  cu.   yd.) %  0.50 

Concrete   (per  cu.  yd. ) 7.00 

Steel  in  structure  (per  net  ton) 61.00 

Timber    (per    M) 21.00 

Steel  rails  per  gross  ton   (85  Ibs.  per  yd.) 31.00 

Labor,  laying  single  track  (per  ft.) 0.35 

The  following  gives  the  detailed  costs  per  mile  of  structure : 

Per  mile  of 
double  track. 

200   foundations    (1,900   cu.   yds.   concrete)    in- 
cluding bolts    %  18,649 

3,055  net  tons  iron  in  place 184,423 

Double  track,  materials  and  labor 43,248 

Stations 38,819 

Engineering 9,934 

Miscellaneous   2,526 

Total   $297,599 

There  are  683,670  ft.  B.  M.  timber  per  mile,  in  ties,  guard  rails, 
etc.,  which,  at  $21  per  M,  is  equivalent  to  $14,357  per  mile  for 
timber. 

It  will  be  noted  that  engineering  cost  3.35%  of  the  total,  and  that 
the  average  weight  of  steel  in  the  structure  is  1,157  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft, 
and  that  the  average  span  length  of  the  plate  girders  is  about  53  ft. 
Considering  merely  the  cost  of  materials  and  labor,  a  span  of  30  ft. 
would  have  been  the  most  economical,  and  would  have  resulted  in  a 
saving  of  5%,  considering  only  the  foundations  and  superstructure, 
but  the  longer  span  (53  ft.)  was  adopted  to  reduce  damage  to 
abutting  property. 

The  maximum  work  of  erection  in  10  hrs.  was  12  spans  of  52  ft. 
each,  weighing  315  tons;  an  average  of  8  spans  per  day  was  easily 
maintained. 

In  the  track  laid  prior  to  1888,  the  ties  were  6x8  ins.,  spaced  22 
ins.  c.  to  c.,  and  the  rails  were  60-lb.  A  6  x  8-in.  guard  timber  was 
bolted  each  side  of  each  rail.  In  1888,  the  ties  were  made  7x8  ins., 
spaced  16  ins.  c.  to  c.,  and  the  rails  were  still  60-lb.  In  1892  an 
85-lb.  rail  was  adopted,  to  secure  a  longer  life  of  the  rail  and  to 
reduce  the  cutting  of  the  rails  into  the  ties,  and  the  ties  were 
spaced  15  ins.  c.  to  c. 


RAILWAYS.  1381 

The  contract  prices  for  stations  were  about  as  follows  in  1893  : 

One  stair-  Two  stair- 
way, ways. 

Carpenter  work    $3,095  $3,578 

Sheet  metal   work....- 1,432  926 

Painting    and    decorating 409  540 

Plumbing   work    225  296 

Heating  apparatus 225  295 

Architectural  work    2,100  2,200 

Total    $7,467  $7,835 

These  were  ordinary  inter-track  stations.  It  is  a  serious  economic 
mistake  to  build  two  stations  outside  of  the  tracks,  instead  of  one 
between,  as  it  doubles  not  only  the  first  cost  but  the  cost  of  station 
service  and  maintenance.  Station  service  and  maintenance  cost 
$2,400  a  year  per  station. 

Terminal  stations,  containing  trainmen's  rooms,  etc.,  cost  about 
double  the  above. 

The  cost  of  operating  16.9  miles  of  double  track  road,  by  steam 
locomotives,  in  Brooklyn  in  1893  was  as  follows: 

Maintenance  of  Way  and  Structures: 

Repairs  of  track  and  structures $  38,316.59 

Repairs  of  stations,    shops,   etc 13,032.29. 

Other  expenses    425.30 


Total $  51,774.18 

Maintenance  of  Equipment: 

Repairs    of    locomotives $  40,317.29 

Repairs  of  cars 53,039.53 

Repairs  of  machinery  and  tools 1,730.76 

Other  expenses    11,847.72 


Total     $  106,935.30 

Conducting  Transportation: 

Wages  of  conductors  and   guards $  99,343.85 

Wages  of  engineers  and  firemen 205,180.83 

Fuel  for   locomotives 246,131.53 

Oil    and    waste 6,085.92 

Water    supply    12,661.38 

Other  train  expenses  and  supplies. 16,585.73 

Wages  of  station  agents,  gatemen,  etc....  158,331.71 

Station    supplies 7,893.11 

Wages   of   flagmen,    switchmen,    etc 25,600.48 

Other   expenses    67,225.84 


Total     $  845,040.38 

General  Expenses: 

Salaries  of  officers  and  clerks $  32,247.55 

General  office  expenses  and  supplies '809.30 

Stationery   and   printing 6,746.94 

Advertising 444.80 

Legal   expenses 16,574.05 

Damage  to  property 915.08 

Damage   to   persons 14,434.74 

Telegraph  maintenance  and  operation....  1,195.69 

Other  expenses    14,595.55 

Total     .1  87,963.70 

Grand  total  operating  expenses $1,091,713.56 


1382  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  operating  expenses  were  56.82%  of  the  gross  receipts. 

There  were  38,110,376  passengers  carried. 

There  were  50  stations  in  the  16.91  miles. 

There  were  76  locomotives  and  230  cars  to  operate  the  16.91 
miles  of  elevated  road.  This  is  equivalent  to  about  4.5  locomotives 
and  13.6  cars  per  mile  of  road,  there  being  about  3  cars  to  each 
locomotive. 

In  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  7,  1908,  the  cost  of  35  miles  of 
double  track  elevated  railway  built  on  Manhattan  Island  prior  to 
1880,  was  given  as  follows  per  mile: 

Foundations,      columns,      superstructure      and 

track     $288,400 

Stations 60,000 

5  locomotives,   at   $4,000 20,000 

12  cars,   at    $3,300    39,600 

•     Total    $408,000 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  equipment  cost  nearly  $60,000  per  mile. 
If  the  locomotives  and  cars  cost  the  same  for  the  Brooklyn  lines, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  cost  of  locomotive  repairs  was  13%  of  the 
first  cost,  for  that  item  amounted  to  $530  per  locomotive  during 
the  year  1893.  The  cost  of  car  repairs  amounted  to  $230  per  car 
for  1893,  which  is  about  7%  of  the  first  cost. 

Our  Oct.  7,  1908,  issue  gives  the  distribution  of  steel  in  the  vari- 
ous parts  of  the  Brooklyn  elevated  railways  built  in  1893,  as 
follows : 

.  Per  cent. 

Columns .      11.5 

Transverse    girders    20.5 

Longitudinal  girders    (two  tracks) 57.0 

Station    platforms     5.0 

Bracing    6.0 

Total 100.0 

It  is  also  stated  that  the  locomotives  weighed  45,000  to  56,000  Ibs., 
the  wheel  base  being  16  fk 

Cost  of  Foundations  of  the  Boston  Elevated  Railway. — Mr.  George 
A.  Kimball  gives  the  following  relative  to  foundations  for  the  Bos- 
ton Elevated  Ry.,  built  in  1899.  In  general  the  foundations  extend 
10  to  12  ft.  below  the  ground  surface,  to  provide  against  being 
undermined  by  subsequent  excavations  for  sewers,  building  founda- 
tions, etc.  They  are  built  of  concrete  in  courses  2  ft.  thick,  stepped 
up  with  6-in.  offsets.  The  top  course  is  4  x  4  ft.,  and  supports  a 
cast-iron  pedestal  12  ins.  high  to  receive  the  steel  post.  Most  of  the 
foundations  were  built  on  the  "cost  plus  a  percentage  plan."  There 
were  1,133  foundations  built,  half  at  a  cost  of  $260  each,  and  half 
at  a  cost  of  $700  each  due  to  soft  ground  and  interference  with 
underground  structures.  This  includes  cost  of  pedestal  castings, 
anchor  castings  and  anchor  bolts,  which  cost  $22  per  foundation  ; 
it  also  includes  cost  of  moving  underground  structures  which  aver- 
aged $18  per  foundation  pier.  The  average  foundation  cost  $480, 


RAILWAYS.  1383 

which  is  equivalent  to  $17.50  per  lin.  ft.  of  double  traek  structure, 
or  $91,000  per  mile. 

It  will  be  noted  that  these  foundations  cost  five  times  as  much 
per  mile  of  double  ti-ack  road  as  those  in  Brooklyn  and  New  York, 
indicating  extravagant  design. 

Cost  of  Elevated  Railway  and  Subway,  Berlin,  Germany. — In  1901 
an  electric,  double  track  elevated  and  subway  railway  was  com- 
pleted in  Berlin,  Germany.  The  motor  cars  each  have  two  4 -wheel 
trucks,  with  axle  loads  of  6%  tons,  axles  being  spaced  5.9,  15.0, 
5.9  and  11.2  ft.,  in  sequence.  The  weights  of  steel  in  different  por- 
tions of  the  double  track  elevated  road  were : 

Span,    ft.  Lbs.  per  lin.  ft. 

39.4      < 810 

49.2    (at  stations,  but  »,;ot  incl.  stations) 1,145 

54.1     940 

68.9     —  •• 1,210 

There  are  5.1o  miles  of  double  track  elevated  line  and  1.22  miles 
of  subway.  There  are  10  stations  on  the  elevated  portion  and  3 
in  the  subway. 

The  main  power  plant  building  is  73  x  132  ft.,  and  houses  3  com- 
pound engines,  each  developing  900  hp.  normally,  or  1,200  hp.  maxi- 
mum. Trains  are  run  on  2*£  to  5  min.  headway,  at  a  maximum 
speed  of  30  miles  per  hour.  Each  train  consists  of  3  cars  (each 
40  ft  long),  two  of  which  are  motor  cars. 

The  cost  was : 

Construction     $4,400,000 

Power  house,  rolling  stock,  equipment 950,000 

Extras 800,000 

Interest   during   construction 500,000 

Total $6,650,000 

The  construction  cost  of  $4,400,000  was  distributed  thus: 

1.221  miles  double  track  subway,  at  $860,000 $1,050,000 

5,154  miles  double  track  elevated,  at  $650,000...    3,350,000 


6,375  miles    total.. $4,400,000 

There  were  about  18,000  tons  of  steel  used  in  the  elevated  (in- 
cluding stations),  which  is  equivalent  to  about  1,320  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 
of  double  track  elevated.  The  contract  price  on  this  work  ranged 
from  3  to  4*4  cts.  per  Ib.  erected. 

There  were  2,200  tons  of  steel  used  in  the  subway. 
Some  of  the  other  contract  prices  were : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Concrete    in    subway $4.60 

Brick  foundation  masonry 5.25 

Arch  masonry 7.85 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  power  house  and  equipment  cost  about 
15%  of  the  total  cost,  and  amount  to  about  $150,000  per  mile  of 
double  track  railway. 


1384  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  New  York  Subway  Rock  Work.*— By  observation  and 
through  the  aid  of  an  assistant  I  have  secured  reliable  data  relat- 
ing to  every  item  of  cost  on  several  typical  sections  of  the  New 
York  Rapid  Transit  Ry.,  including  excavation,  concrete,  steel  con- 
struction, etc. ;  and  it  is  astonishing  to  find  how  high  the  labor  cost 
of  the  work  has  been.  The  high  cost  may  be  attributed  to  several 
causes.  In  the  first  place,  the  contractors  were  compelled  to  employ 
union  labor,  much  of  which  was  inefficient.  In  the  second  place  the 
foremen  on  this  work  were,  as  a  rule,  paid  such  small  salaries  that 
the  best  class  of  foremen  were  not  kept.  In  the  third  place  excava- 
tion and  other  work  in  crowded  city  streets  is  obviously  made  diffi- 
cult ;  the  supporting  of  pipes,  tracks,  etc.,  adding  greatly  to  the 
cost  in  certain  parts  of  the  city.  In  fact,  in  the  lower  part  of  New 
York,  where  the  material  is  all  sand,  I  have  found  that  50  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  has  been  expended  in  shoring,  bracing,  etc.  In  the  fourth 
place  the  light  blasts  required  by  city  rules  leave  the  tough  mica 
schist  in  large  chunks  upon  which  much  labor  must  be  expended  in 
gadding  and  sledging ;  for  practically  all  the  rock  was  broken  to 
one  or  two-man  size  so  that  it  could  be  hauled  away  in  dump 
wagons. 

The  work  that  I  am  about  to  describe  involved  the  excavation  of 
about  125,000  cu.  yds.  of  tough  mica  schist  in  the  upper  part  of  the 
city,  where  the  streets  are  not  crowded  and  where  there  were  very 
few  pipes  to  be  supported.  The  width  of  the  excavation  was  41  ft., 
and  the  depth  averaged  about  30  ft.  One  trolley  track  ran  along  the 
center  of  the  street  and  had  to  be  supported  the  entire  distance. 
This  track  supporting  was  accomplished  at  comparatively  slight  ex- 
oense  by  using  some  ten  second-hand  railroad  bridge  trusses  of 
66  ft.  span,  which  were  moved  forward  as  the  work  progressed. 
Five  cableways,  each  having  an  average  span  of  400  ft.,  were  used 
for  hoisting  the  rock  in  self-righting  buckets,  which  were  dumped 
into  patent  dump  wagons. 

The  average  daily  force  employed  was  as  follows: 

Rate  per  day.  Total. 

4  foremen    $3.50  $  14.00 

80  laborers    1.50  120.00 

10  drill   runners    2.75  27.50 

10  drill    helpers    1.50  15.00 

2  blacksmiths     2.75  5.50 

2  blacksmiths'   helpers    1.50  3.00 

5  hoisters     3.00  15.00 

1  compressor    man    4.00  4.00 

1  fireman     2.00  2.00 

2  timbermen    2.00  4.00 

3  Waterboys     . 75  2.25 

20  teams     4.50  90.00 

Total  per   8-hr,   day 1302.25 

*Gillette's  "Rock  Excavation,"  p.   273. 


RAILWAYS.  1385 

The  average  output  of  this  force  was  only  150  cu.  yds.   of  rock 
per  day. 

— Cost  per  cu.  yd. — 

Wages  per  Average  of  Best 

8-hr,  shift.  30  months.  month. 

Drill    runners $2.75  $0.174  $0.150 

Drill  helpers 1.50  .100  .082 

Blacksmiths    2.75  .032  .025 

Blacksmiths'     helpers     1.50  .018  .012 

Compressor    man     4.00  .016  .014 

Firemen    2.00  .012  .014 

Hoist  enginemen    3.00  .100  .051 

Carpenters     3.50  .008  .000 

Timbermen    2.00  .024  .000 

Waterboys     0.75  .012  .010 

Laborers     1.50  .785  .745 

Foremen    3.50  .102  .095 

Teams    (with    drivers) 4.50  .620  .581 

Total   wages    $2.002  $1.779 

Cu.   yds.   excavated 125,000  7,600 

To  the  foregoing  must  be  added  the  cost  of  fuel,  explosives,  main- 
tenance, interest  and  depreciation  of  plant,  etc.,  as  follows: 

Cost  per  cu.  yd. 

1/30   ton  coke,   at   $4.50 $0.150 

0.6  Ib.  40%  dynamite,  at  12%  cts 0.075 

1/2    exploder,    at    4    cts 0.020 

Drill  repairs  (est'd  at  50  cts.  a  day  per  drill)  ...      .034 

Installing  boiler  and  compressor 014 

Interest     and    depreciation      (50%)      of      $7,000 

boiler  and  compressor  plant 028 

Ditto  for  $3,500   drilling  plant 014 

Total    supplies,    etc $0.335 

Add    total    wages 2.002 

Total $2.337 

To  this  sum  should  be  added  3  or  4%  to  cover  general  expenses, 
such  as  office  rent,  bookkeeping,  night  watchmen,  insurance  on  la- 
borers, etc.,  which  would  bring  the  grand  total  to  nearly  $2.40  per 
cu.  yd.  of  rock  excavated.  It  will  be  seen  by  the  description  of  the 
work  and  by  the  comparatively  low  cost  of  timberwork  that  the 
expense  of  supporting  pipes  and  tracks  was  unusually  low  for  such 
a  city  as  New  York.  On  the  other  hand,  the  cost  of  drilling  was 
exceedingly  high,  being  28  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  wages  alone,  if  we 
include  the  blacksmiths'  wages  and  half  the  wages  of  the  com- 
pressor man  and  his  fireman.  The  drills  should  be  charged  with 
about  half  the  cost  of  the  fuel,  which  adds  7%  cts.  more  per  cu.  yd., 
making  35y2  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  drilling,  not  including  some  3%  cts. 
for  drill  repairs  (estimated)  and  1%  cts.  for  interest  and  depre- 
ciation. Adding  these  two  items  we  have  a  total  of  40  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  chargeable  to  drilling  alone,  which  is  exceedingly  high  for  an 
open  cut  of  this  width  and  depth.  It  is  a  striking  fact  that  each 
drill  broke  less  than  15  cu.  yds.  of  rock  per  8-hr.  day.  The  ineffi- 
ciency of  the  laborers  is  also  well  shown  by  their  output  of  less 
than  2  cu.  yds.  per  man  per  8-hr.  day.  It  is  true  that  they  had  to 


1386  HANDBOOK   OF   fO.97   DATA. 

do  a  great  deal  of  gadding,  sledging  and  hand  drilling  to  break  the 
rook  ready  to  load  into  buckets  ;  but  anyone  who  saw  the  men  at 
work  must  have  been  impressed  with  their  slowness.  The  output 
of  only  30  cu.  yds.  per  day  per  cableway  shows  how  the  cableway 
output  was  limited  by  the  drilling.  The  high  cost  of  hauling  is  also 
noteworthy,  for  the  average  haul  was  but  little  more  than  one  mile. 

While  it  was  difficult  to  get  union  laborers  to  do  a  fair  day's 
work,  I  think  that  if  the  contractors  along  the  subway  had  in  all 
cases  employed  civil  or  mining  engineers  of  known  experience  in 
rook  excavation,  a  great  deal  of  money  would  have  been  saved. 

Cost  of  New  York  Subway  Earthwork.* — This  is  a  class  of  work 
exceedingly  expensive,  not  only  on  account  of  the  work  of  sup- 
porting of  pipes,  buildings  and  car  tracks,  but  because  of  the  com- 
paratively small  gangs  that  must  be  worked.  This  not  only  runs  up 
the  cost  of  superintendence,  but  due  to  the  great  number  of  fore- 
men employed,  many  bosses  are  exceedingly  inefficient.  While  the 
laborers  receive  high  wages  (1.50  for  8  hrs.),  it  will  be  noted  that 
the  foremen  are  paid  altogether  too  low  salaries  to  secure  the  best 
of  their  class.  A  good  superintendent  of  railway  excavation  fre- 
quently receives  $250  a  month,  and  if  he  is  worth  anything,  he  is 
worth  that.  On  extensive  excavation,  cheap  foremen  mean  dear 
work,  as  the  following  illustrates  quite  clearly  : 

Case  I.  Uptown,  where  the  streets  were  not  congested.  Soft 
earth,  ploughed,  loaded  with  shovels  into  patent  dump  wagons, 
hauled  half  a  mile  and  dumped ;  1.9  cu.  yds.  place  measure  per 
wagon  load.  Excavation  55  ft.  wide,  in  the  street,  and  ultimately 
20  ft.  deep.  Snatch  teams  and  hoisting  engine  used  to  pull  loaded 
wagons  out  of  the  pit.  Delays  in  hauling  due  to  street  blockades. 
Numerous  pipes  and  conduits  to  be  supported,  necessitating  car- 
penters, plumbers,  etc.  The  following  gives  the  cost  for  one  month's 
work,  including  tearing  up  pavement: 

Laborers    .1,130  days  at  $1.50  $1,695.00 

Teams,    hauling    and    plowing 520  days  at    4.50  2,340.00 

Snatch  teams 30  days  at    5.00  150.00 

Carpenters     180  days  at    2.50  450.00 

Engineman     22  days  at    2.75  60.00 

Fireman     22  days  at    2.00  44.00 

Engineman    (night)     22  days  at    2.00  44.00 

Superintendent    100.00 

Foremen     59  days  at    3.00  177.00 

Two  timekeepers  and  load  checkers 135.00 

Three  watchmen    78  days  at    1.50  117.00 

Plumbers,    caulkers,    etc 300.00 

Total  for  6,400  cu.  yds.  at  88  cts $b,612.00 

The  foregoing  cost  was  at  the  beginning  of  the  work,  and  under 
what  might  be  regarded  as  favorable  conditions.  The  following 
gives  the  general  average  of  several  jobs  at  a  later  period,  and  may 
be  taken  as  being  under,  rather  than  over  the  actual  cost,  because 
all  timber  work  and  incidentals  are  probably  not  included : 


"Gillette's  "Earthwork  and  Its  Cost,"  p.   176. 


RAILWAYS.  138? 

Case  II.     Conditions  same  as  in  Case  I,   except  that  excavation, 

ir  tracks,  etc.,  required  more  support. 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor   excavating   and   superintendence $0.50 

Teaming 0.40 

Materials  and   supplies 0.09 

Labor  on  bracing  and  sheeting 0.06 

Materials  for  bracing   and   sheeting 0.07 

'   Labor  on  bridges  and  barricades 0.01 

Materials  for  bridges  and  barricades 0.01 

Taking  up  pavement    0.01 

Labor  for  pumping  and  draining 0.02 

Materials  for  pumping  and  draining 0.01 

Labor  on  engines 0.04 


Fuel  for  erigines 


.....  .      v.v-r 

„.,  _„ 


Total     $1.23 

Hauling  away  in  scows 0.32 

Grand  total $1.55 

A  charge  of  60  cts.  per  wagon  load,  which  was  equivalent  to 
32  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  (as  above  recorded),  was  made  for  removing  the 
earth  from  the  water  front  on  scows. 

The  subcontractor's  prices  for  this  earthwork  averaged  about  $2 
per  cu.  yd.  On  some  sections  as  high  as  $2.50  per  cu.  yd,  was  paid, 
and  in  those  sections  the  contractors  found  that  it  cost  them  $25 
per  lin.  ft.  of  street  to  keep  the  car  tracks  in  shape,  due  largely, 
however,  to  poor  methods  of  management. 

On  downtown  work,  where  the  streets  were  not  entirely  torn  up, 
but  were  kept  planked  over  so  as  not  to  interfere  with  traffic,  the 
cost  of  earth  excavation  was  $3.65  per  cu.  yd.  (See  the  following 
paragraphs. ) 

Itemized  Cost  to  the  Contractors  of  the  New  York  Subway  for 
Earth  and  Rock  Excavation,  Bracing,  Concrete,  Waterproofing  and 
Steel  Work.*— In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  City  of  New  York  will 
doubtless  construct  scores  of  miles  of  subways  for  rapid  transit,  any 
data  of  actual  cost  of  construction  will  be  of  great  value  to  con- 
tractors and  subcontractors  who  may  bid  upon  subway  work  in  the 
future.  Then,  too,  other  large  cities  will  surely  be  forced  to  build 
subways  similar  to  those  in  New  York  and  Boston. 

We  have  secured  complete  itemized  records  of  the  actual  cost  of 
labor  and  materials  required  to  build  several  sections  of  the  subway 
in  New  York  City,  and  these  records  are  now  published  for  the 
first  time. 

We  shall  first  give  the  methods  and  costs  of  building  a  half-mile 
section  from  the  Post  Office  to  the  Battery.  The  excavation 
#ork  was  not  done  by  the  "cut  and  cover  method" ;  that  is 
to  say,  a  trench  was  not  dug  in  the  street  and  left  entirely  open,  as 
was  the  practice  on  nearly  all  subway  work  between  the  years  1902 
and  1904.  So  much  of  a  hue  and  cry  had  been  raised  against  the 
open-cut  method  that  when  the  contract  for  the  Brooklyn  Extension 
was  drawn,  the  contractors-  were  required  to  keep  the  streets  con- 
tinuously open  for  traffic,  except  at  night  time. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.,  1906. 


1388 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


To  meet  this  requirement  the  contractors  devised  the  following 
method  of  operation :  In  the  night  time  a  short  section  of  the 
street  pavement  was  removed,  stringers  were  laid  down,  and  a  plank 
roadway  was  laid  upon  the  stringers.  Then  the  excavation  was 
proceeded  with,  underneath  this  plank  roadway.  In  order  to  make 
the  excavation,  small  shafts  were  sunk  through  the  sidewalk  at  in- 
tervals of  about  a  quarter  of  a  mile.  Through  these  shafts  all 
excavated  materials  were  removed  and  all  construction  materials 
were  taken  in. 


Fig.    10. — Excavation,    New    York    Subway. 


At  each  shaft  a  temporary  bridge  was  built  (Fig.  10)  spanning 
the  street,  and  .upon  this  bridge  were  mounted  the  derricks  and 
hoisting  engines.  Each  overhead  bridge  consisted  of  a  52  X  60  ft. 
wooden  platform  carried  by  I  beams,  the  whole  supported  by  well- 
braced  timber  trestles  set  upon  each  curb  line,  as  shown  below. 
Each  platform  carried  two  stiff-leg  derricks  set  opposite  each  other, 
also  a  hoisting  engine  and  a  spoil-bin  with  chutes.  The  derricks 
were  operated  during  the  daytime  by  compressed  air,  but  at  night 
the  necessary  power  was  supplied  by  a  vertical  boiler  on  one  plat- 
form and  an  electric  motor  on  the  other. 

The  work  of  substituting  timber  platforms  for  street  pavement 
was  begun  at  the  overhead  bridges.  Small  strips  of  pavement 


RAILWAYS.  1389 

were  removed  at  each  end  of  the  platform  and  shallow  excavations 
made  in  which  trenches  were  dug.  Longitudinal  24-in.  I  beams 
were  placed  in  each  trench  and  blocked  up  on  the  trench  bottom. 
The  paving  between  the  trenches  was  then  taken  up  and  a  layer  of 
earth  removed  to  make  room  for  the  timber  platform.  This  was 
composed  of  8-in.  I  beams,  spread  7*£  ft.  apart,  with  their  ends 
resting  on  the  girders.  On  this  was  placed  6-in.  roadway  planking. 
All  this  work  was  done  at  night  and  in  such  short  sections  that 
the  street  could  be  restored  before  daylight. 

After  the  first  section  of  platform  had  been  built,  a  shaft  8  ft. 
square  was  sunk  through  the  west  sidewalk  to  a  depth  of  10  ft. 
From  this  shaft  the  upper  part  of  the  excavation  was  tunneled 
under  the  platform,  the  longitudinal  girders  being  supported  by 
posting  down  as  the  work  progressed  Similar  posts  and  blocking 
were  placed  under  the  street  railway.  When  sufficient  headway 
had  been  secured,  shafts  5  ft.  square  were  sunk  to  the  subgrade 
of  the  subway.  A  portion  of  the  concrete  floor  of  the  subway  was 
built  in  the  bottoms  of  these  shafts  and  a  post  erected  to  carry  the 
girders.  The  temporary  blocking  under  the  railway  conduits  was 
then  removed  and  replaced  by  saddle  beams  strung  from  the 
girders. 

An  alternative  method  for  carrying  the  tracks  and  street  surface 
was  used  where  the  excavation  was  obstructed  by  pipes  and  con- 
duits. Surface  platforms  were  built  on  each  side  of  the  street  be- 
tween the  curb  and  the  nearest  street  railway  conduit.  A  lateral 
drift  was  then  carried  under  the  conduit  and  a  needle  beam  in- 
serted. These  beams,  which  were  blocked  up  against  the  conduit, 
carried  on  their  outer  ends  longitudinal  I  beams  which  supported 
the  inner  edges  of  the  surface  platforms.  The  other  edge  of  these 
platforms  rested  on  the  I  beam  girders  supported  by  the  blocking  in 
the  trenches  at  the  curbs.  After  the  earth  between  the  drifts  was 
removed,  the  needle  beam  shores  were  reinforced  by  jacks  resting 
on  continuous  longitudinal  sills.  The  posts  were  then  set  in  shafts 
and  replaced  the  jackscrews  and  blocking. 

All  of  the  excavated  material  was  taken  to  the  shafts  and  hoisted 
by  the  derricks  to  the  overhead  platform,  where  it  remained  until 
discharged  through  the  chutes  into  wagons  on  the  street  below.  The 
excavation  was  done  by  pick  and  shovel,  cars  being  used  to  trans- 
port the  material  to  the  nearest  shaft.  These  cars  were  either 
pushed  by  the  laborers  or  drawn  by  a  mule.  The  excavated  ma- 
terial was  sand,  for  the  most  part,  very  easy  to  dig.  Indeed,  much 
of  the  sand  was  used  for  concrete. 

In  the  following  tabulation  is  given  the  actual  unit  cost  to  the 
contractor  of  the  construction  of  a  section  about  one-half  mile  long 
of  the  Brooklyn  Extension  of  the  Rapid  Transit  subway  of  New 
York  City.  The  period  covered  by  these  costs  extends  over  sixteen 
months : 


1390  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

EARTH    EXCAVATION. 
(112,288   cu.    yds.) 

Per  cu.  yd.     Total. 

Labor    $1.60  $179,998 

Materials  and   plant 0.32  35,590 

Power    • 0.02  2,676 

Dump  charges  (60  cts.  per  load) 0.25  27,934 

Total  unit  cost $2.19 

Grand  total   cost $246,198 

Bracing  and  Sheeting: 

Labor $0.78     $87,466 

Materials  and   plant 0.37          41,216 

Total    unit    cost $1.15 

Grand   total   cost $128,682 

• 
Pumping  and  Drainage: 

Labor     $0.01     $     8,878 

Materials  and   plant 6.01  1,271 

Power 0.01  1,059 

Total    unit    cost $0.03 

Grand   total   cost $     3,208 

Bridges  and  Barricades: 

Labor    $0.10     $   11.588 

Materials  and  plant 0.14         15,423 

Total    unit    cost $t).24 

Grand   total  cost $  27,011 

Backfilling: 

Labor    $0.01     $     1,279 



Grand   total,   earth   excavation $3.62     $406,379 

ROCK  EXCAVATION. 
(760    cu.    yds.) 

Labor     $2.35      $      1,783 

Materials   and   plant 2.96  2,254 

Power     0.40  301 

Total  unit   cost 1^71 

Grand   total   cost $  40,741 

CONCRETE. 
(Foundation   Concrete,    8,827   cu.   yds.) 

Labor,    mixing    $0.53  $      4.669 

Labor,    placing    0.58  5,142 

Materials  and   plant 0.02  211 

Cement,  sand,   stone,  etc 3.48  30,719 

Total   unit   cost $4.61 

Grand   total   cost $   40,741 


RAILWAYS.  1301 

Roof  Arches,  Side  Arches,  and  Protection  Concrete: 
(6,664    yds.) 

Labor,    mixing $0.82  $     5,444 

Labor,   placing    0.84  5,623  • 

Labor,    setting   forms 2.21  14,746 

Labor,   plastering  arches 0.06  431 

Materials  and   plant 0.18  1,176 

Cement,   aand,   stone,   etc .J5.58  23,888 

Total  unit  cost $7.69 

Grand  total  cost $  51,308 

Grand   total   unit  cost   concrete    (15,491 
cu.    yds.)     $5.94 

STEEL  WORK. 

(Steel,    1,533   tons;    cast-Iron,    171   tons.) 

Labor,   trucking    $0.80  $     1,364 

Labor,   placing    8.14  13,872 

Labor,    riveting    2.76  4,697 

Labor,   painting    0.70  1,197 

Materials    and    plant 2.32  3,958 

Materials,   painting    0.24  415 

Power J).19  317 

Grand  total  unit  cost $15.Is 

Grand  total   cost ;. {'I  !-          $  25,823 

. 

BRICK   BACKING. 

enJ  i<  /  ji 

(1,014  cu.  yds.) 

•moil  Labor    $8.56     $     8,687 

Materials  and  plant.. ^.03  2,063 

Grand  total  unit  cost $10.59 

Grand   total   cost $   10,750 

LAYING  DUCTS. 

(123,483   lin.   ft.    single  duct.) 

Labor     $0.01      $     1.435 

Materials  and   plant 0.05  6,321 

Grand  total  unit  cost $0.06 

Grand   total    cost $     7,756 

WATERPROOFING. 

(98,074  sq.  yds.  single  ply.) 

Labor    $0.05     $     5,563 

Materials  and   plant .  .    0.10  9,702 

Grand  total  unit  cost $0.15 

Grand  total $   15,265 

WATERPROOFING. 
(Brick  in  asphalt  1,337  cu.  yds.) 

Labor     $   6.32      $      8,457 

Materials  and   plant 11.48          15,351 

Grand  total  unit  cost $17.80 

Grand   total    cost $  23,808 


1392  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  following  table  gives  a  summary  of  the  total  costs  from 
August,  1903,  to  January  1,  1905,  of  constructing  this  section.  Ir 
the  preceding  table  no  unit  costs  are  given  on  the  work  of  under- 
pinning buildings,  blocking,  moving  and  relaying  mains,  supporting 
tracks,  paving,  station  work,  track  work  in  tunnel  and  construction 
of  a  cross  passage  in  Dey  street.  The  net  totals  of  these,  however, 
are  figured  in  wiih  the  other  totals  in  the  summary: 

SUMMARY. 

Labor    $443,268.13 

Materials    and    plants 232,723.30 

Dump  charges  (46,556  loads  at  60  cts.) 27,933.60 

Power   (coal  and  electricity) 4,373.95 

Labor  charged  to  sewers 2,803.60 

Total  cost  (not  incl.  cost  of  steel  and  iron)  .$711,102.58 

This  is  for  half  a  mile  of  double  track  line. 

During  the  excavation  the  contractor  sold  12,924  cu.  yds.  of  sand 
at  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  1,620  cu.  yds.  rubble  stone  at  $1.00  per 
cu.  yd.  Deducting  this  total  of  $8,082  from  the  total  cost  of  the 
work  we  have  $703,020.58  as  the  net  cost  of  the  work,  exclusive  of 
the  cost  of  the  steel  in  posts  and  beams.  The  cost  of  track  and 
ballast  is  not  included,  but  that  is  readily  estimated. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  in  the  tables  giving  the  unit  costs  of  the 
subway  construction  one  of  the  main  items  is  for  materials  and 
plant.  In  the  following  tabulation  are  shown  the  principal  items 
and  their  cost  which  composed  materials  and  plants : 

MATERIALS  AND  PLANTS. 

Earth  Excavation: 

Total. 

Small    tools,    etc $  529 

Illumination,    etc 3,119 

Boilers,   total  210  hp 2,600 

37   1  cu.   yd.   buckets 2,200 

11    stiff   leg   derricks 2,750 

20   flat   cars 400 

4,600  lin.   ft.   rail  tram 306 

2    Rand    drills 600 

2  Dake  engines 700 

3  Lidgerwood  engines .  1,680 

3  electric   hoists,    "Maine" 3,750 

1    electric  hoist,    "Lidgerwood" 1,500 

166  M.  ft.  yellow  pine  lumber  at  $25 4,155 

209  tons  steel  beams,  in  working  platforms....  10,470 

Miscellaneous    550 

Total    $35,590 

Rock   Excavation: 

4  Rand  rock  drills $  1,200 

1   Lidgerwood  engine 560 

1    stiff-leg   derrick 250 

760    Ibs.    dynamite 114 

Small   tools,   etc 

Total    .  "$   2,254 


RAILWAYS.  1393 


Bracing  and  Sheeting: 
2  Rand  drills  (without  at.)  for  driving  sheeting. $      500 

24   hydraulic  jacks,    1,264    tons   capacity 4,049 

1,436  M.  ft.  yellow  pine  lumber  at  $25 35,900 

Small   tools,    etc 767 


Total    $41,216 

Pumping  and  Drainage: 

5   Worthington   pumps $  770 

1  Lawrence   pump 350 

2  Edison  draphragm  No.  3  pumps 45 

5  pumps,  steam  syphons . .  100 

Small   tools    6 


Total    $  1,271 

Bridges  and  Barricades. 

607  M.   ft.  yellow  pine  lumber $15,187 

Small   tools,   etc 236 

Total  ' $15,423 

Underpinning  Buildings  and  Vaults: 

1,323  cu.  yds.  rubble  stone $  1,323 

225  cu.  yds.  sand 112 

872  bbls.  Portland  cement 1,378 

165  gallons  asphalt  19 

442  sq.  yds.  asphalt  felt 19 

16  M.  brick  115 

124  gallons  paint 124 

Small   tools,   etc 

Total    $   3,132 

Roof  and  Side  Arch  and  Protection  Concrete: 

3,248   cu.   yds.    sand $   1,624 

4,296    cu.    yds.    gravel 6,874 

8,095   bbls.   Portland   cement 12,790 

36  M.  ft.  yellow  pine  lumber  at  $25 900 

371    M.    brick 2,599 

Small    tools,    etc 276 

Total $25,064 

Brick  Backing: 

34  cu.  yds.  sand   $        17 

130  bbls.   Portland  cement 205 

81  M.  hollow  tile  brick 1,785 

Small    tools,    etc 56 

Total    ,.iTSI 

Duct  Laying: 

6,000  sq.    yds.    burlap... $      270 

123,483  lin.   ft.    single   ducts 5,556 

275  bbls.    Portland   cement 435 

68  cu.   yds.    sand    

13  sets  mandrels    26 

Total    ?  6,321 

Waterproofing,  Brick  Laid  in  Asphalt: 

869    M.    brick : $  6,083 

401   tons  mastic  asphaltum 9,025 

Small    tools,    etc 243 

Total    .  $15,351 


1394  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Waterproofing: 

112,785  sq.    yds.    asphalt    felt $  5,075 

36,582    gallons    asphalt 4,389 

Small  tools,  etc 237 


Total    |  9,702 

Placing  and  Riveting  Steel  Work: 

2  "Lidgerwood"   engines    $  1,120 

2  air   compressors  and   receivers 1,400 

1  hand  power  derrick .  ; 50 

1  pneumatic  drill 125 

4  riveting   guns    500 

Small    tools,    etc 763 


Total    $  3,958 

Painting  Steel: 

370  gallons  cerion  paint $  376 

Brushes "  and    scrapers 39 

Total $  415 

Supporting  Tracks: 

Sand,   stone  and  cement $  301 

68   M.    brick 474 

20  hydraulic  jacks,   1,050  tons  capacity 3,412 

Total $  4,184 

Block,  Moving  and  Relaying  Mains: 

199  M.  ft.  yellow  pine  lumber  at  $25 $  4,985 

2  hand  derricks   100 

1  portable  derrick,  with  boiler  and  engine 1,000 

Pipe     26,186 

Gates,  valves  and  lead 1,871 

Small   tools,   etc 1,699 


Total     $35,841 

Grand  total  for  plant  and  materials $232,723 

We  note  that  the  cost  of  placing  and  riveting  steel  is  given, 
but  nothing  is  said  as  to  the  cost  of  the  steel  itself.  The  price 
of  steel  delivered  in  New  York,  ready  for  erection,  may  be 
estimated  at  2%  cts.  per  lb.,  or  $50  per  ton.  As  there  were  1,533 
tons  of  steel,  the  total  cost  of  the  steel  was  $76,650.  In  addition, 
there  were  171  tons  of  castings,  which,  at  $40  per  ton  would  amount 
to  $6,840 ;  and  there  were  1,014  cu.  yds.  of  brick  backing,  the 
bricks  for  which  would  cost  about  $14  per  cu.  yd.,  or  $14,200.  The 
sum  of  these  three  items  is  $97,690  to  be  added  to  the  $711,102 
above  given,  making  a  total  of  nearly  $810,000  for  the  section 
under  consideration — half  a  mile  of  double  track  subway. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  full  first-cost  of  the  plant  has  been 
charged  up  against  the  various  items.  The  cost  of  renewals  of 
wornout  parts  was  .  not  obtainable,  so  that  the  only  satisfactory 
method  of  estimating  plant  charges  consisted  in  including  the  full 
cost  of  the  plant. 

In  some  items,  as  in  Rock  Excavation,  the  cost  of  plant  is 
altogether  too  high,  due  to  the  fact  that  an  expensive  plant  is 
charged  up  against  a  small  amount  of  work. 


RAILWAYS.  .  i39o 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  pumping  item  was  very  small ;  so  also 
is  "backfilling,"  because  most  of  the  excavated  material  was  hauled* 
away.  The  backfill  was  6  ft.  deep  over  the  subway  roof.  All  the 
excavated  material  not  used  for  concrete  or  masonry,  was  hauled 
away  in  wagons  to  the  docks,  the  haul  being  very  short  (about 
Va  mile)  to  the  docks  where  the  material  was  dumped  into  scows 
and  hauled  to  sea.  The  charge  made  for  hauling  to  sea  in  scows 
("dump  charges")  was  60  cts.  per  wagon  load,  and  about  1%  cu. 
yds.  of  earth  constituted  a  load. 

The  total  cost  of  earth  excavation  was  $3.62  per  cu.  yd.,  which 
seems  very  high.  However,  the  conditions  must  be  considered,  and 
among  other  things  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  cost  of  sup- 
porting numerous  water  pipes  and  gas  pipes  is  included.  The 
excavation  was  26  ft.  deep,  and  34  ft.  wide  along  the  line  between 
stations. 

The  cost  of  power  charged  to  the  various  items  includes  only 
the  fuel  and  electricity  consumed.  Electricity  was  paid  for  at  4 
cts.  per  kw.-hour. 

All  steel  was  painted  with  one  coat  of  carbon  paint ;  and  all 
steel  not  imbedded  in  concrete  received,  in  addition,  a  coat  of  white 
lead  paint. 

The  cost  of  waterproofing  is  reduced  to  cents  per  square  foot 
of  single  ply  ;  but  the  waterproofing  was  actually  laid  2  to  3  ply 
thick. 

For  the  sake  of  comparison,  we  shall  next  give  a  summary  of 
the  costs  of  earth  excavation  on  two  sections  in  the  lower  part  of 
New  York  City,  where  the  open  cut  method  of  excavation  was 
used.  The  rates  of  wages  were  practically  the  same  as  in  the 
.table  on  page  33;  but  the  work  was  done  between  the  years  1902 
and  1904.  The  excavation  was  wider,  being  for  a  four  track  road, 
and  cableways  were  largely  used  for  delivering  the  materials  from 
the  trench  into  wagons.  Some  derricks  were  also  used  for  this 
purpose.  The  streets  were  not  always  opened  their  full  width, 
which  necessitated  a  good  deal  of  mining  under  the  pavements  and 
car  tracks.  The  costs  of  excavation  by  this  open-cut  method  were 
as  follows  on  two  sections  which  are  designated  as  Contract  A  and 
Contract  B. 

Contract  Contract 

A.  B. 

Cu.  yds.  excavation 105,070  252,870 

Labor  and  teaming $1.15  $1.20 

Plant   (all  of  first  cost) 0.17  0.14 

Power    0.12  0.09 

Dump   charges,   at   60   cts.   per   load   of 

1%   cu.   yds 0.19  0.18 

Labor  and  bracing  and  sheeting 0.34  0.18 

Lumber  for  bracing  and   sheeting 0.21  0.11 

Pumping  and  draining 0.00  0.06 

Labor  on  bridges  and  barricades 0.03  0.02 

Lumber  for  bridges  and  barricades.  .  .  .         0.03  0.04 

Labor,     backfilling 0.06  0.04 



Total   per  on.    y<l $2. 30  $2.06 


1396  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  contractor,  in  each  case,  sold  enough  sand  from  the  ex- 
cavation to  reduce  the  cost  of  excavation  about  18  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
leaving  a  net  cost  of  $2.12  for  Contract  A,  and  $1.88  for  Con- 
tract B.  The  sale  of  this  sand  also  reduced  the  dump  charges,  which 
would  otherwise  have  been  36  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  instead  of  18  to  19 
cts.  Had  all  the  material  been  hauled  to  sea,  the  dump  charges 
would  have  added  about  18  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  making  a  cost  of  $2.48 
for  Contract  A,  and  $2.24  for  Contract  B.  It  should  be  noted,  how- 
ever, that  the  full  amount  of  the  first-cost  of  the  plant  was  charged 
against  the  excavation.  The  item  of  backfilling  is  not  large  because 
so  small  an  amount  of  excavated  material  was  replaced. 

The  lumber  for  bracing  and  sheeting  was  about  half  spruce, 
at  $20  per  M.,  and  half  yellow  pine,  at  $25  per  M. 

The  labor  and  teaming  includes  all  wages  and  salaries. 
The  cost   of   erecting,   riveting  and  painting  the   steel   work   was 
$16  per  ton  on  Contract  A,  and  $16.75  on  Contract  B. 

The  cost  of  labor  in  making  the  concrete  was  as  follows : 
Concrete  foundations: 

Contract  Contract 
A.  B. 

Labor,    mixing $0.97         $0.94 

Labor,    placing 0.96  0.95 

Power    .  0.14  0.16 


Total $2.07  $2.05 

Concrete,  Roof  and  Sides : 

Labor,    mixing $0.79  $0.91 

Labor,    placing 0.85  0.94 

Labor,    setting   forms 2.01  1.20 

Labor,   plastering  arches 0.16  0.23 

Power    0.28  0.15 


Total     $4.09          $3.43 

It  will  be  noted  that  these  concrete  labor  costs  are  very  high, 
and  indicate  poor  management. 

As  to  the  cost  of  rock  excavation,  we  may  say  that  it  should  not 
exceed  the  cost  of  earth  excavation  by  more  than  $1  per  cu.  yd. 
at  the  outside.  Indeed,  on  one  section  of  the  subway  involving 
the  excavation  of  125,000  cu.  yds.,  the  rock  excavation  cost  $2.40 
per  cu.  yd.,  but  this  did  not  include  the  first  cost  of  the  plant. 
In  Gillette's  "Rock  Excavation,"  page  273  et  seq.,  the  actual  cost 
of  this  rock  work  is  given  in  great  detail.  (See  page  1384.) 

With  the  unit  costs  now  available,  any  contractor  can  make  a 
safe  estimate  of  the  cost  of  any  future  subway  work  in  New  York 
City.  If  the  subway  is  built  wider  or  narrower,  the  yardage  will  be 
altered,  but  the  cost  per  cubic  yard  will  not  vary  much.  We  are 
confident  that  few  contractors  or  engineers  would  have  looked  for 
such  high  unit  costs  as  are  above  given,  and  we  are  equally  confident 
that  with  better  management  the  costs  could  have  been  materially 
reduced.  However,  it  is  a  fact  and  not  a  theory  that  confronts 
us,  and  we  have  given  the  facts  to  the  best  of  our  ability. 

In  the  summary  given  above,  the  total  cost  of  the  labor  from 
August,  1903,  to  January  1,  1905,  is  given  as  $446,071.73.  It  will, 


RAILWAYS. 


1397 


be  of  interest  to  show  how  this  cost  was  distributed,  and  accord- 
ingly a  table  giving  the  rate  of  wages  per  eight-hour  day,  the  time 
in  days,  and  the  total  amount  of  wages  is  appended  in  Table  XXV. 

TABLE  XXV. — RATE  OF  WAGES  AND  TIME. 


Rate. 

Time. 

Amount. 

Civil   engineers  

.  .$12.00 

359 

$     4,308.00 

Assistant  civil   eiigineo.  . 

.  .      6.40 

526 

3,366.40 

Superintendents    

.  .      5.28 

780 

4,118.40 

Draughtsmen     

.  .      4.00 

354 

1,416.00 

Timekeepers    

.  .      3.85 

447 

1,720.95 

Clerks     

.  .      2.88 

1,080 

3  110  40 

Machinists    

.  .      3.50 

241 

843  50 

Engineers     

..      3.50 

291 

1,018.50 

Firemen    

..      2.00 

560 

1,120.00 

Watchmen    

.  .      1.50 

2,247 

3,370.50 

Night  Watchmen  

..      1.50 

2,316 

3,474.00 

Laborer    foremen  

.  .      3.00 

8,130 

24,390.00 

Laborers     

..      1.50 

106,023 

159,034.50 

Engine    hoistmen  

.  .      2.50 

3,199 

7,997.50 

Steam    drillers  

..      3.00 

278 

834.00 

Steam  drillers'  helpers.  . 

.  .      2.00 

277 

554.00 

Nippers     

.75 

126 

94.50 

Blacksmiths     

.  .      3.00 

322 

966.00 

Blacksmiths'     helpers.  .  . 

..      2.00 

322 

644.00 

Rigger    foremen  

..      3.00 

11 

33.00 

Riggers     

.  .      2.00 

702 

1,404.00 

Carpenter    foremen  

.  .      3.50 

643 

2,250.50 

Carpenters   

.  .      3.00 

3,733 

11,199.00 

Bracers     

.  .      2.00 

32,918 

65,836.00 

Pipe    foremen  

..      4.00 

1,495 

5,980.00 

Pipemen    

..      2.00 

10,433 

20,866.00 

Caulkers     

..      3.00 

3,139 

9,417  00 

Iron    foremen  

.  .      5.00 

331 

1,655.00 

Ironworkers     

.  .      4.50 

3,725 

16,762.50 

Bricklayers    

..      5.20 

2,047 

10,644.40 

Mason     foremen  

.  .      4.50 

225 

1,012.50 

Masons    

.  .      4.00 

1,077 

4,308  00 

Waterproof  er    foremen.  . 

.  .      3.00 

245 

735.00 

Waterproofers     

.  .      1.50 

852 

1,278.00 

Paver   foremen  

.  .      5.00 

13 

65.00 

Pavers     

4.50 

87 

391  50 

Rammers    

3.00 

36 

108.00 

Carts    

3.00 

12 

36.00 

Trucks  and  teams  

4.50 

11,900 

53,550.00 

Pipe    superintendents.  . 

7.69 

234 

2,491.56 

Tow  horses  and  mules. 

1.00 

2,441 

2,441.00 

Plumbers    

4.00 

100 

396.12 

Plumbers'    helpers  

..      2.50 

30 

67.50 

Electricians    

..      4.00 

1,252 

5,008.00 

Splicers     

..      3.00 

463 

1,389.00 

Splicers'     helpers  

.  .      2.00 

441 

882.00 

Painters    

.  .      2.00 

6 

12.00 

Track   foremen  

.  .      3.00 

136 

408.00 

Trackmen     

2.00 

1,532 

3,064.00 

Total    labor  

.$446,071.73 

The  prices  of  tools,  machines  and  supplies  will  be  found  in  the 
next  paragraph. 

Prices  of  Contractors'  Tools,  Machines  and  Supplies,  New  York.* 
— In  estimating  the  cost  of  contractors'  plants  on  the  New  York 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  July  18,   1906. 


!:;!)«  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

subway  construction,  the  engineers  carefully  obtained  quotations 
on  every  kind  of  tool,  machine,  etc.,  in  vise.  Although  these  quota- 
tions were  secured  in  1902,  they  are  tolerably  close  to  present  prices 
in  New  York  City,  and  may  prove  useful  to  contractors  and 
engineers. 

Rate. 

Adze $         1.10 

Air  compressor  and  receiver 700.00 

Air  hose,    lin.   ft 0.80 

Anvil,   200  Ibs.   at   8%    cts 17.00 

Asphalt,     gallon 0.12 

Asphalt    felt,    sq.    yd 0.04 % 

Asphalt  heating  kettle 30.00 

Asphaltum,     ton 22.50 

Auger    0.90 

Ax    1.10 

Bar,     claw 0.75 

Bar,    crow,    16    Ibs 1.30 

Bar,   pinch. 0.75 

Bar,    tamping 1.00 

Blasting    battery .  .  25.00 

Block  and  fall  outfit 16.00 

Block,  double  wooden 4.00 

Boiler,   60  hp ' 750.00 

Boiler,    50   hp. 575.00 

Boiler,   25   hp. 350.00 

Box,    tool 12.00 

Brick,   M 7.00 

Brick  buckets 0.50 

Brick    hammers 0.75 

Brick,  hollow  tile,  M 22.00 

Brick     tongs 0.50 

Brush,    paint 0.75 

Brush,     wire 0.50 

Bucket,  1  yard,  dumping 60.00 

Bullpoint    0.50 

Burlap,   sq.  yd 0.04  % 

Canthook 2.25 

Cap,    sheeting 2.50 

Car,  flat 20.00 

Car,    steel    dump 40.00 

Cement,    Portland,    bbl 1.60 

Chain,     Ib 0.08% 

Chisel    ; 0.40 

Derrick,    hand   power 50.00 

Derrick,  portable,  with  boiler  and  engine 1,000.00 

Derrick,    stiff-leg 250.00 

Dipper 0.75 

Drift    pin 0.50 

Drill,    hand ,  .  .  .  0.50 

Drill,     pneumatic 125.00 

Drill,    Rand   rock 300.00 

Drill,    Rand,    without    attachments 250.00 

Drill,     twist 1.25 

Duct,  single,  lin.  ft 0.04  % 

Dynamite,  Ib.,  40  per  cent 0.15 

Electric   hoist,    "Maine"    double   drum  and    20 

hp.  motor  and  controller 1,250.00 

Electric  hoist,  Lidgerwood  double  drum  and  20 

hp.  motor  and  controller 1,500.00 

Engine,     "Duke" 350.00 

Engine,   Lidgerwood,   double  drum 560.00 

Forge,     blacksmith's 25.00 


R.MIJVAYS.  1399 

Forge,     rivet 25.00 

Furnace,  with  pots  and  ladles 35.00 

Felt,  asphalt,  sq.  yd 0.04  V2 

Gouge    0.50 

Grindstone     20.00 

Hacksaw   frame 0.85 

Hammer,   hand 0.50 

Hammer,     sledge 1.30 

Hammer,    striking 0.65 

Hod,    mortar 0.75 

Hose,    air,    lin.    ft 0.80 

Hose,  rubber,  1  in.,  lin.  ft 0.15 

Hooks,    center. 0.05 

Jack,  hydraulic,   7   ton 58.50 

Jack,  hydraulic,   45   ton 162.50 

Jack,   hydraulic,   60   ton 178.75 

Jack,  hydraulic,   100   ton x .  .  260.00 

Lantern     . 0.50 

Lead,    Ib 0.05 

Level,  hand  spirit 

Mandrels,    set 2.00 

Mop 0.60 

Oiled  suits 2.50 

Pails,    galvanized    iron 0.50 

Paint,  cerion,   gal 1.00 

Pick     0.75 

Pump,   Lawrence   4-in.,   with   Crocker-Wheeler 

7 1/2  hp.  motor  and  starter. 350.00 

Pump,  Worthington,  6  in.  x  8%  in.  x  6  in 170.00 

Pump,  Worthington,  6  in.  x  5%  in.  x  6  in 150.00 

Pump,   No.    3   Edison   diaphragm 22.50 

Pump,    steam    syphon ;.  .  .  20.00 

Rail,  tram,  ton 15.33 

Rammer,     concrete 1.00 

Ratchet 10.00 

Reamer     1.00 

Riveting    dollies 5.00 

Riveting    "guns,"    pneumatic '.  .  .  125.00 

Rope,  Manila,  Ib 0.09 

Rope,  steel,  1  %  in.,  lin.  ft 0.24 

Rope,    with    hooks 0.50 

Rubber    boots 2.50 

Sand     screen 8.50 

Saw,   cross  cut 3.00 

Scraper     (waterproofing) 0.50 

Shovel     0.60 

Smoothing     iron 1.50 

Steel   beams,    ton 50.00 

Stocks  and  dies,   set 8.00 

Timber   carrier 2.25 

Timber    dollies 2.50 

Timber    truck 25.00 

Torches,    banjo 2.00 

Turnbuckles 1.25 

Vise,     pipe 7.20 

Wheelbarrows,    steel 7.00 

Wrench 1.00 

.  Wrench,    chain 24.00 

Wrench,    monkey .  1.00 

Wrench,     Stillson .  .  . 3.00 

Yarn,    Ib 0.05 

Cost  of  Excavating    and    Bracing   a  Subway,   Long  Island    R.    R., 
Brooklyn.* — The  work  covered  by  our  cost  records  was  a  section  on 

*Engmeer'mg-Contracting,  July  11,   1906. 


1400 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Division  1,  Atlantic  avenue,  about  2,500  ft.  long,  and  occupied  the 
year  1903,  January  to  December  inclusive.  The  work  was  an 
open  cut,  and  the  material  encountered  was  sand  and  gravel  con- 
taining a  considerable  number  of  small  boulders.  The  digging  was 
not  difficult  and  was  all  done  with  picks  and  shovels. 

Two  tracks  of  the  Long  Island  R.  R.  occupied  the  center  of 
Atlantic  avenue.  One  of  these  tracks  was  shifted  to  the  side  of 
the  street,  but  the  other  was  left  in  place  as  a  service  track  for 
the  dirt  trains.  Trains  of  flat  cars  were  run  onto  the  service  track, 
and  the  earth  was  shoveled  from  both  sides  into  the  cars  until  a 
level  about  3  ft.  below  the  rails  was  reached.  The  service  track 
was  then  shifted  into  one  of  the  side  cuts,  and  the  center  core  was 
shoveled  in.  The  excavation  was  then  carried  down  on  the  other 
side  of  the  track  to  3  ft.  below  the  rails,  as  before.  The  track  was 
next  shifted  to  the  opposite  side  of  the  cut,  and  a  third  cut  of  3 
ft.  was  taken  out.  This  method  was  pursued  until  the  track  had 


Fig.  11. 

reached  a  depth  of  16%  ft.,  as  shown  in  Fig.  11,  the  shape  of  the 
cut  then  being  ABCD  (Fig.  11). 

The  next  step  was  to  drive  2-in.  sheeting  to  depths  F  and  G 
(Fig.  11).  The  two  braces  X  and  Y  were  then  set,  leaving  a 
clearance  of  9  ft,  which  was  not  sufficient  to  pass  locomotives. 
A  cable  was  therefore  used  to  haul  the  cars  ahead  to  the  locomotive. 

The  next  step  was  to  excavate  the  two  side  cuts,  ABEF  and 
CDGH,  by  shoveling  into  the  cars.  After  these  side  cuts  were 
made,  the  track  was  shifted,  first  to  one  side,  then  to  the  other, 
and  the  section  FKJH  was  excavated.  The  sheeting  was  then 
driven  by  pile  drivers  to  the  points  M  and  N,  and  the  brace  Z 
was  placed.  In  like  manner  the  excavation  proceeded  until  the 
full  section  of  the  subway  was  obtained,  about  35  ft  wide  and  27  ft. 
deep. 

The  8  x  10  braces  shown  in  Fig.  12  were  spaced  15  ft.  apart 
longitudinally,  and,  in  view  of  the  great  length  of  the  braces,  angle 
sway  bracing  was  used,  consisting  of  short  timbers  laid  horizontally 


RAILWAYS. 


1401 


and  diagonally  from  the  side  of  each  cross  brace  to  the  middle  of 
the  ranger.  These  angle  braces  were  about  14  ft.  long. 

The  railroad  company  provided  the  cars  and  hauled  the  earth 
about  12  miles  away,  furnishing  train  crews.  The  contractor  main- 
tained and  shifted  the  tracks,  loaded  the  earth  onto  the  cars,  and 
did  all  the  bracing.  The  following  costs  were  the  costs  to  the 
contractor,  and  do  not  include  the  cost  of  hauling  the  material  away. 
The  contractor  complained  of  the  poor  train  service  furnished  by 
the*  company,  and  the  high  cost  of  excavating  bears  out  his  claim 
of  poor  service.  On  the  other  hand,  the  railroad  company  is 
credited  by  outsiders  with  having  given  a  "fair  service."  In  any 
case,  work  done  in  this  manner  is  nearly  always  subject  to  more  or 
less  delay  in  getting  empty  cars  fast  enough. 

As  above  stated,  the  length  of  subway  covered  by  our  cost 
records  was  about  2,500  ft.,  averaging  about  30  cu.  yds.  per  lineal 
foot  A  total  of  75,000  cu.  yds.  were  excavated  in  the  year  1903, 


H 


"6>! >H I7'6° -> 


w 

^1      ^^^^/t^ 

w/q&A 
i 

^ 

v$i 

8x10"                6*10-** 

^ 

i 

&p\            Base  of  fail          r$H 

^^^^      "  J^jg$2si 

f! 
It 

' 


Fig.  12. 

requiring  20,900  days'  labor,  or  3.6  cu.  yds.  per  man  per  10-hour  day. 
Wages  averaged  $1.50  per  day,  making  the  average  cost  42  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  for  loading  the  cars.  This  does  not  include  the  cost  of 
sheeting  and  bracing,  which  will  be  given  later.  The  cost  of  the 
excavation  by  months  was  as  follows: 


EXCA1 

Amount 
cu.  yd. 
,  ..    4,818 

NATION. 

Labor  in 
days. 
1,637 
1,433 
2..S54 
1,508 
1,321 
1,127 
990 
1,664 
2,450 
2,392 
1,930 
1,898 

Pay-roll. 
$   2,278 
1,992 
3,552 
2,132 
1,844 
1,573 
1,379 
2,617 
4,307 
3,658 
3,023 
3,083 

Cost  per 
cu.  yd. 
$0.47 
0.49 
0.33 
0.40 
0.44 
0.52 
0.35 
0.49 
0.54 
0.35 
0.35 
0.52 

February    .  .  .  .  , 

.    4,089 

March    
April    

...11,005 
.  ..    5,381 

May     , 

,  ..    4,230 

3  035 

July 

.  .    4,002 

August    

.  .  .    5,383 

September 

.    8  118 

October 

.  .  .10,327 

8  550 

December   , 

.    5,953 

Total     74,891 


20,905 


?31,438          ?0.42 


1402                   11AXDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  labor  sheeting  and  bracing  was  as  follows : 
SHEETING   AND    BRACING. 

Labor  Goct  per 

days.  Pay-rolk  cu.  yd. 

January                             507  $   1,093  $0.23 

February     482  1,091  0.27 

March     827  1,766  0.16 

April     874  1,859  0.35 

May     782  1,859  0.42 

June    860  1,999  0.66 

July    1,005  2,363  0.59 

August     812  1,894  0.35 

September     700  1,613  0.20 

October    800  1,831  0.18 

November    644  1,510  0.18 

December     1,316  1,742  0.29 


Total     ...9,609          $20,548          $0.27% 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  average  wages  paid  for  sheeting  and 
bracing  were  $2.13  per  day.  As  above  given,  the  labor  cost  of 
excavating  was  42  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  to  which  must  be  added  the 
27%  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  spent  for  labor  on  sheeting  and  bracing,  making 
a  total  of  69%  cts. 

The  amount  of  timber  used  in  sheeting  and  bracing  the  work  done 
in  1902  and  1903  was  as  follows: 


Rangers, 
braces, 

Ft.  B.  M.     angles  and 
Between   stations.  sheeting.       uprights. 

143    and    115...' 248,320          498,440 

115    and    112 14,740  24,030 

101    and      92 57,320          115,520 

87    and      91 17,820  9,620  • 


Total    338,200          647,610 

This  makes  a  grand  total  of  985.810  ft.  B.  M.,  or  7.94  ft.  B.  M. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation,  or  263  ft.  B.  M.  per  lin.  ft.  of  finished 
subway,  3,700  ft.  long. 

From  these  data  it  is  apparent  that  practically  all  the  timber  was 
left  in  place  until  the  completion  of  this  section  of  the  subway. 
It  is  also  apparent  that  the  yardage  of  earth  excavated  in  1902  and 
1903  was  about  124,300  cu.  yds.  It  should  be  borne  in  mind, 
however,  that  the  labor  costs  above  given  for  excavation  and 
bracing  include  only  the  work  done  in  1903.  The  labor  of  sheeting 
and  bracing  for  the  two  years  was  as  follows : 

Year.                                                        Lafoor  days.   Pay-roll. 
1903..  9,609  $20,548 

1902 4,290  9,870 


Total 13,899          $30,418 

From  this  it  appears  that  the  labor  costs  of  framing  and  placing 
the  985,810  ft.  B.  M.  was  $30.80  per  M.,  and  that  each  man  averaged 
only  71  ft.  B.  M.  per  day.  This  is  a  very  high  cost  for  such  work. 


RAILWAYS.  1403 

Since  the  timber  itself  must  have  cost  approximately  $30  per  M. 
delivered  on  the  work,  we  have  the  following  estimate  of  the  total 
cost  of  excavating: 

PPer  cu.  yd. 
Labor   loading   cars $0.42 
Labor  sheeting  and  bracing 0.27  % 
7.94  ft.  B.  M.  timber  at  3  cts 0.24 
. 
Total    $0.93 1/2 

Of  course,  much  of  the  timber  would  possess  some  salvage  value 
after  completing  the  work. 

The  cost  of  hauling  the  material  away  in  cars  and  dumping  is 
not  available. 

The  cost  of  the  concrete  work  was  as  follows : 
'  Bbls.  cement 

Proportions  by  parts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Cement.         Sand.  Gravel.  Broken  stone.        concrete. 

1  3  2i/2  2%  0.75 

1305  1.07   to   1.14 

i  4  iy2  2%  1.12 

1  4  22  1.16 

1404  0.98 

413  1.07 


2%  0  3V2  1.2$ 

303  1.20 

21/2  IVi  2%  1-46 

312  1.30 

3  1%  11/2  1.04 


It  is  interesting  to  note  that  in  mixing  many  thousand  yards 
of  1  :3 :5  concrete,  it  took  1.07  bbls.  cement  when  mixed  in  the 
gravity  mixer,  as  compared  with  1.14  bbls.  for  the  batch  mixer, 
indicating  a  less  perfect  mixture  in  the  gravity  mixer. 

Of  the  "1  to  8"  concrete,  about  13,880  cu.  yds.  were  placed  during 
the  year  of  1903,  months  of  January  to  November  inclusive,  and  90 
per  cent  of  this  was  mixed  with  gravity  mixers. 

Of  the  "1  to  6"  concrete,  5,320  cu.  yds.  were  placed,  of  which 
85  per  cent  was  mixed  with  gravity  mixers.  The  remainder,  in 
both  cases,  was  mixed  in  a  "batch  mixer." 

The  average  size  of  a  batch  in  a  gravity  mixer  was  0.46  cu.  yd., 
and  the  size  of  batch  in  the  "batch  mixer"  averaged  about  0.57 
cu.  yd. 

There  were  "»6,940  cu.  yds.  mixed  in  gravity  mixers,  requiring 
2,860  days'  labor  mixing  and  4,000  days  placing  the  concrete. 
Wages  were  $1.50  a  day  and  the  cost  was  26  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
mixing  and  33  cts.  for  placing,  making  a  total  of  59  cts.  per 
cu.  yd. 

During  the  month  or'  August  when  2,800  cu.  yds.  were  mixed, 
the  cost  was  as  low  as  24  cts.  £cr  mixing  plus  22  cts.  for  placing, 
making  a  total  of  46  cts.  per  cu  yd.  for  mixing  and  placing.  The 
gravity  mixer  averaged  abtf'it.  115  ?u.  yds.  per  day,  with  a  gang  of 
19  men  mixmg*and  26  men  placing  concrete. 

With  the  "batch  mixer,"  wftieh  averaged  about  0.57  ru.  yd.  of 
concrete  per  batch,  there  were  mixed  2.360  cu.  yds.  This  required 


1404  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

970  days  of  laborers  mixing  and  740  days  placing,  at  a  cost  of  59 
cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  mixing  plus  45  cts.  for  placing,  making  a  total 
of  $1.04  per  cu.  yd.  for  mixing  and  placing. 

During  the  month  of  June  the  cost  was  as  low  as  40  cts.  for 
mixing  and  30  cts.  for  placing,  or  a  total  of  70  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
wages  being  $1.50  per  day.  The  average  gang  was  14  men  mixing 
and  11  men  placing  the  concrete,  and  the  average  output  was  only 
35  cu.  yds.  per  day  actually  worked. 

Even  during  the  month  of  June,  when  the  best  record  was  made, 
the  output  was  only  52  cu.  yds.  per  day  actually  worked.  This 
indicates  very  poor  management.  We  refrain,  therefore,  from  giving 
the  name  of  the  "batch  mixer,"  to  which  an  injustice  would  be  done 
if  its  efficiency  were  rated  according  to  this  particularly  poor 
record. 

Of  course,  in  the  preceding  discussion  of  the  itemized  labor  cost 
of  mixing  and  placing,  the  item  of  "mixing"  includes  all  the 
work  involved  in  delivering  the  materials  to  the  mixer;  while 
"placing"  includes  hauling  the  concrete  away  from  the  mixer. 

In  delivering  the  materials  to  the  gravity  mixer  a  Robins  belt 
conveyor  was  used,  which  accounts  in  large  measure  for  the  lower 
cost  of  mixing  with  the  gravity  mixer. 

The  concrete  was  hauled  away  from  the  mixers  in  dump  cars 
pushed  along  a  track  by  men.  The  track  was  laid  on  top  of  the 
braces  that  supported  the  sides  of  the  excavation.  We  are  unable 
to  find  out  why  the  conveying  of  the  concrete  from  the  batch  mixer 
cost  so  much  more  than  from  the  gravity  mixer. 

The  foregoing  costs  relate  to  work  done  in  1903.  During  Tne 
year  1904,  20,000  cu.  yds.  were  mixed  in  the  190  days  worked  by 
the  gravity  mixer  gangs;  the  average  number  of  men  mixing  being 
15,  and  the  number  of  men  placing  being  25. 

The  cost  was  as  follows: 

Cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

2,950  days  labor  mixing,   $4,870 24 

4,760  days  labor  placing,   $7,300 36 

Total     60 

During  the  best  month,  the  labor  cost  was  16  cts.  for  mixing 
and  29  cts.  for  placing,  or  a  total  of  45  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

During  the  same  year  of  1904,  the  batch  mixer  worked  153  days, 
averaging  46  cu.  yds.  per  day.  The  average  size  ol  each  batch 
was  0.44  cu.  yd.  The  labor  cost  of  7,000  cu.  yds  was  as  follows: 

Cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

1,910  days  mixing,  $3,175 45 

1,740   days  placing,    $2,660..., 38 

Total .,.....«,« . . . .    83 

It  will  be  noted  that  in  1904  the  cost  of  placing  was  practically 
the  same  as  with  the  gravity  mixer,  and  that  the  average  gang  on 
the  batch  mixer  was  13  men  mixing  and  11  men  placing. 

Thus  far  we  have  not  considered  the  cost  of  the  labor  on  the 
forms,  which  was  a  large  item.  For  the  total  19,30C  cu.  yds.  of 


RAILWAYS.  1405 

concrete  placed  in  1903  there  were  expended  $16,800  for  labor  on 
the  forms,  which  is  equivalent  to  87  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete. 
The  total  number  of  days'  labor  on  the  forms  was  6,341),  at  ari 
average  of  $2.70  per  day.  If  we  add  this  87  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for 
labor  on  forms  to  the  59  cts.  for  mixing  and  placing,  we 
have  a  total  of  $1.46  per  cu.  yd.  charge'able  to  labor  on  the  con- 
crete in  this  subway,  where  a  gravity  mixer  was  used.  This  is 
considerably  below  the  cost  of  'similar  work  on  the  New  York 
subway. 

As  to  the  amount  of  lumber  in  the  forms  and  the  interest  and 
depreciation  of  the  plant,  we  have  no  record.  Nor  have  we  a  record 
of  the  fuel  consumed. 

Cost  of  Cable  Railways  in  Cities.— In  Fairchild's  "Street  Rail- 
ways" (1892),  the  following  is  given  as  an  estimate  of  the  cost  of  a 
double  track  cable  line,  based  upon  actual  cost  of  some  six  lines. 
The  line  is  3  miles  long. 

Per  mile 
of  double 

Power  House  and  Plant:  Total.        track. 

Real  estate.., $10,000     $     3,333 

House,   100  x  175 25,000  8,333 

Two  engines  and  foundation 23,000  7,667 

Boilers  and  settings 14,000  4,667 

Brick  smokestack  (5  ft.  diam.  x  100  ft.) 5,000  1,667 

Tension  cars  and  tracks 2,500  833 

Heaters,  pumps,  fittings,  etc 3,000  1,000 

Total  power  house  and  plant $  82,500     $  27,500 

General  Street  Construction: 

19,800  cu.  yds.  trench  excavation  at  $0.75 $  14,850     $     4,950 

2,755,000  Ibs.  cast  yokes  (350  Ibs.  ea.)  at  $0.015..  41,580  13,860 

880  carrying  sheaves  at   $3.75 3,300  1,100 

1,056,000  Ibs.   slot  rails    (50-lb.)    at   $0.025 26,400  8,800 

1,185,000  Ibs.  track  rails   (60-lb.)   at  $0.0225 28,512  9,504 

154,000  Ibs.  cast  iron  manhole  covers  and  frames 

at    $0.0175 2,695  898 

10,000  cu.  yds.  concrete  at  $8.50 85,000  28,333 

15,840  lin.  ft.  of  double  track  laying  at  $1.00 15,840  5,280 

22,200  sq.  yds.  granite  block  paving  at  $3.00 66,600  22,200 

Sewer  connections 9,000  3,000 

32,180  ft.  wire  cable  at  $0.33 10,619  3,540 

Total  general   street  construction $304,396  $101,465 

Special  Street  Construction: 

Main  vault  at  engine  house  and  fixtures $  8,000  $     2,667 

Two  end  vaults  with  fixtures 5,000  1,667 

Special  street  sheaves  for  summits  of  grades 1,500  500 

Two    grip    switches 2,500  833 

Two   coach   switches 1,000  333 

One  crossing 1,500  500 

180  degs.  of  double  tracked  curve 9,000  3,000 


Total  special  street  construction $   28,500  $     9,500 

Rolling  Stock: 

15   grip  cars  and  grip  at  $1,000 $   15,000  $     5,000 

15   coaches  at   $1,200 18,000  6,000 

Total   rolling   stock..                                                 ..$   33.000  $   11,000 

Grand  total 448,396  149,465 


Uoti  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

With  a  cable  speed  of  8  miles  per  hr.  for  19  y?  hrs.,  and  trains 
011  4  mins.  headway,  each  train  would  make  110  miles  per  day  ;  and 
15  trains  would  make  1,650  train  miles,  or  3,300  car  miles  per  day. 

The  daily  operating  expense  would  be : 

Total  per  day. 

Depreciation   of   cable . .  $  35.00 

Repairs,  track  and  buildings 6.00 

Repairs,  engines  and  line  machinery 2.00 

Repairs,  grip  and  cars 7.00 

House,  track  and  cable  expenses 6.00 

Track    service 8.00 

Power  and  car  house  service 28.00 

66  grip  men  and  conductors  at  $2.00 132.00 

5%  tons  (2,240  Ibs.)  coal  at  $2.50 13.75 

Water,  oil  and  grease 3.25 

Injury  to  persons  and  property 7.00 

Licenses  and  taxes 7.00 

General  and  miscellaneous  expense 23.00 


Total    ' $275.00 

It  is  clear  that  Mr.  Fairchild's  data  on  repairs  of  track,  buildings, 
and  engines  are  founded  on  too  brief  a  term  of  years  to  be  of  any 
value,  for  they  total  only  $8  per  day  on.  an  investment  of  $82,000 
for  power  plant  and  $55,000  of  rails  alone.  This  expense  of  $2,920 
per  year  ($8  per  day)  is  not  2%%  on  the  buildings,  power  plant 
and  rails — a  manifest  absurdity. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  $35  daily  depreciation  of  the  cable  is 
$12,775  per  year  on  .a  cable  whose  first  cost  is  $10,619.  This  is 
equivalent  to  a  life  of  about  10  months.  Mr.  Fairchild  states  that 
the  usual  diameter  of  cables  is  1%  to  1%  ins.  A  1*4 -in.  rope 
has  a  tensile  strength  of  80  tons,  and  weighs  2%  Ibs.  per  ft.  The 
average  life  of  ropes  of  the  best  design,  he  says,  has  been  12% 
mos.,  with  an  average  service  of  88,400  miles.  The  general  average 
for  the  country  has  been  about  8  mos.,  with  mileage  ranging  from 
40,000  to  150,000. 

Cost  of  Constructing  and  Operating  Cable  Rys.,  Kansas  City — 
Mr.  D.  Bontecou  gives  the  following  relative  to  the  cost  of  con- 
struction and  operation  of  a  cable  railway  in  Kansas  City.  The 
road  was  finished  in  1889.  It  comprises  8.54  miles  of  double  track 
line,  which  is  equivalent  to  17.08  miles  of  single  track.  It  was 
operated  as  four  distinct  lines,  with  cables  14,200,  29,500  and 
31,000  ft.  long  respectively,  driven  from  one  power  house,  and  a 
fourth  cable  18,900  ft.  long  driven  from  a  second  power  house. 
The  cable  speeds  were  7.8,  9.9,  9.9  and  10.3  miles  per  hr.  No 
grades  exceeded  10%.  The  rope  was  1%-in.  diam.,  carried  on 
12-in.  pulleys,  in  a  conduit  36  ins.  deep. 


RAILWAYS. 

The  cost  of  construction  was  as  follows :  per  mjie 

of  double 

Total.  track. 

1.  Real    estate $  116,736  $13,664 

2.  Underground    obstructions 20,285  2,377 

3.  Substructure    542,820  63,562 

4.  Track  and  line  machinery 276,075  32,331 

5    Paving 159,092  18,631 

6.  Buildings    184,392  21,593 

7.  Machinery    130,003  15,223 

8.  Equipment 202,926  23,760 

9.  Ropes  and  splicing  tools 30,760  3,607 

•10.  Patents     12,951  1,522 

11.  Engineering   and   miscellaneous   exp.         83,017  9,719 

12.  Discount    and    interest 146,931  17,201 


Total    $1,905,989     $223,190 

The  equipment  comprised  99  combination  cars,  of  which  61 
were  in  constant  service.  The  combination  car  contained  the  grip, 
seats  for  40  people,  and  weighed  11,000  Ibs.  It  ran  on  two  4 -wheel 
trucks,  with  22-in.  wheels. 

The  machinery  in  the  main  power  house  consisted  of  three  200 
hp.  boilers  and  simple  non-condensing  engines.  The  machinery  in 
the  branch  power  house  consisted  of  two  175  hp.  boilers  and 
engines.  The  total  engine  friction  was  64  hp.,  the  total  resistance 
of  all  cables  when  no  cars  were  on  the  line  was  345  hp.,  and  car 
resistance  166  hp.  due  to  61  loaded  cars,  or  2.72  hp.  per  car. 
About  30  hp.  was  used  to  supply  electric  light,  etc.  Total  541  hp., 
to  which  add,  say  34  hp.  for  banking  fires,  etc.,  giving  a  grand  total 
average  of  575  hp.  developed  by  two  engines  (one  38  x  48-in.  and 
one  32  x  48-in.  simple  non-condensing)  at  the  main  power  house. 
The  coal  (soft)  contained  18%  ash,  and  its  cost  was  $2  per  ton 
(2,000  Ibs.).  The  consumption  was  11.86  Ibs.  per  car  mile  (com- 
bination car),  or  2.1  per  ton-mile. 

For  the  fiscal  year  of  1892,  the  operating  expense  was  as  follows: 

Total. 

1.  Car  service  and  expense $  73,315 

2.  Injuries  to  persons  and  property 5,087 

3.  Secret  service 529 

4.  Repairs,    cars « 4,862 

5.  Car  house  service  and  expense 9,62-0 

6.  Maintenance,  track  and  building 8,429 

7.  Motive  power : 

Fuel    $17,407 

Water     1,157 

Oil    and   grease 1,041 

Engine    house    service 7,786 

Repairs,    machinery 268 

Engine  house  expense 299 

Ropes     -. 29,381 

Rope    service 3,066 

Repairs  of  grips 1.789 

Total   motive   power $  62,194 

8.  Taxes 4,596 

9.  General  and  miscellaneous 26.610 

Grand  total  (13.8  cts.  per  car  mile) $195,242 

Total  car    ("combination")    mileage 1,415,366 

Passengers    carried .    5,318,410 

Average  number  cars  run  daily 61 


1408  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  ropes  lasted  from  6  mos.  on  the  short  main  line  to  24  mos. 
on  the  branch  line ;  the  life  of  the  four  ropes  averaging  as  follows : 
20,000;  55,000;  68,000,  and  130,000  miles  respectively. 

Since  the  line  had  been  in  operation  only  4  years,  the  cost  of 
car  repairs,  machinery  repairs  and  track  maintenance  was  ob- 
viously far  below  what  a  normal  long  period  cost  would  ba 

The  operating  cost  was  13.8  cts.  per  car  mile. 

Cost  of  a  Cable  Railway  in  an  Eastern  City. — Mr.  D.  Bontecou 
gives  the  cost  of  a  double  track  cable  line  in  an  Eastern  city,  as 
follows:  The  line  was  3.05  miles  long,  almost  straight,  with  33.&00 
ft.  of  cable,  and  driven  by  a  300-hp.  compound,  condensing  engine. 

Per  mile 
of  double 
Total.        track. 

1.  Real    estate $  67,065     $  22,027 

2.  Underground    obstructions 46,500          15,264 

3.  Substructure  and  track 222,386          73,010 

4.  Paving     83,000          26,946 

5.  Power  house  and  vault 103,032          33,811 

6.  Machinery    and    plant 65,563          21,533 

7.  Equipment    (88    cars) 85,950         28,231 

8.  Rope     10,394  3,413 

9.  Patents    8,000  2,626 

10.  Interest   during  construction 22,136  7,254 

11.  Engineering,    legal   and    miscellaneous     16,846  5,515 


Total    $730,872     ?239,630 

Life  of  Cables  and  Cost  of  Operating  Cable  Railways,  Chicago. — 
During  the  year  1898,  the  average  life  of  9  different  cables,  used  on 
Chicago  street  cable  railways,  was  76,000  miles;  but  the  life  ranged 
from  44,000  miles  to  120,000  miles  per  cable.  The  roads  were  level 
and  with  few  curves,  which  accounts  for  the  long  life.  Cables  aver- 
aged 22,000  ft.  long. 

The  cost  of  operation  of  cable  and  of  electric  lines  in  Chicago 
in  1898  was  as  follows: 

Cts.  Per  Car  Mile. 
Cable.         Electric. 

Transportation    *...  4.537  5.731 

Maintenance  of  way  and  bldgs. ..         1.563  1.889 

Power     1.092  1.005 

General   expenses    2.508  2.493 

Maintenance    equipment    1.115  1.811 

Total,  cts.  per  car  mile..  10.815  12.929 

Car  miles 11,678,020     12,563,380 

Use  of  trail  cars  on  the  cable  accounts  for  lower  transportation 
cost. 

Labor  Cost  of  Brickwork  in  Vaults  of  a  Cable  Railway.*— This 
work  was  done  in  1892  in  connection  with  the  Third  Avenue  cable 
construction  in  New  York  City.  The  work  was  done  by  a  sub- 
contractor, who  furnished  the  masons  only,  all  the  other  labor  and 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   5,   1906. 


RAILWAYS.  1409 

materials  being  furnished  by  the  general  contractor  for  the  Third 
Avenue  cable  construction.  The  laborers  assigned  to  the  sub- 
contractor were  directly  under  the  charge  of  the  masons,  although 
the  general  contractor's  foremen  on  adjacent  work  gave  some  at- 
tention to  them. 

The  sub-contractor  was  paid  at  the  rate  of  $5  per  1,000  brick  laid 
on  all  work  except  pulley  vaults.  For  these  he  received  $8  per 
1,000  brick  laid  for  single  vaults  and  $10  for  1,000  brick  laid  for 
double  vaults,  these  prices  including  cost  of  setting  iron  covers  on 
!  the  vaults.  Twenty-one  bricks  were  figured  as  making  one  cubic 
foot. 

The  masons  were  paid  at  the  rate  of  50  cts.  per  hour  and  they 
worked  8  hours  per  day.  The  foreman  received  62^  cts.  per  hour 
and  worked  the  same  length  of  time  as  the  masons.  Laborers  were 
paid  $1.65  per  10-hour  day,  the  extra  2  hours  being  spent  In  getting 
the  materials  ready,  screening  sand,  mixing  mortar,  etc.  During 
July  and  August  there  was  no  regular  foreman,  the  work  being 
looked  after  by  the  sub-contractor.  The  latter,  however,  did  not 
perform  the  usual  duties  of  a  foreman,  aw  the  work  was  spread 
over  a  stretch  of  two  miles,  with  additional  work  at  65th  street  and 
Harlem.  In  the  summaries,  where  the  sub-contractor  really  acted 
as  foreman  on  the  different  works,  these  works  are  charged  fore- 
man hours  for  the  time  actually  spent  upon  them  by  the  sub- 
contractor. 

Several  causes  tended  somewhat  to  increase  the  cost  of  the  brick- 
laying, the  main  causes  being  as  follows :  An  unnecessarily  exacting 
inspection  ;  a  frequent  scarcity  of  brick,  or  such  as  the  inspector 
would  allow  to  be  used,  this  scarcity  of  brick  being  primarily  due 
to  a  brickmakers'  strike ;  the  fluctuating  quantities  of  work  on 
hand,  due  mainly  to  the  slow  arrival  of  iron  for  the  cable  railway, 
and  to  interferences  by  the  surface  cars.  Then,  too,  the  cost  of 
common  labor  was  high  for  that  time  (1892),  due  partly  to  the  fact 
that  the  work  was  located  in  the  most  crowded  part  of  New  York 
City.  The  extra  labor  was  required  for  rehandling  materials. 

The  force  account  was  carefully  kept  and  the  amount  done  each 
day  was  carefully  measured  by  one  of  the  engineers  in  the  employ 
of  the  general  contractor.  The  masons'  time  in  the  force  account 
is  the  actual  time  paid  for  by  the-  sub-contractor  and  includes  the 
time  spent  in  moving  from  one  piece  of  work  to  another,  but  does  not 
include  time  spent  in  waiting  for  brick  or  lost  during  showers.  The 
laborer  time  includes  all  labor  connected  with  bricklaying  after  the 
brick  were  dumped  by  the  brick  companies  and  the  cement  (in 
barrels)  delivered  by  the  general  contractor  near  the  mixing  box 
There  were,  however,  occasional  transfers  by  the  laborers  of  brick, 
cement  and  sand  from  one  part  of  the  work  to  another,  this  transfer 
being  caused  by  a  local  scarcity  of  materials. 

The  bricks  used  were  mostly  "Up  River"  bricks,  measuring  8  in.  x 
3%  in.  x  2%  in.;  the  sand  was  Cow  Bay  sand  from  Long  Island, 
and  the  eement  was  White's  English  Portland.  An  average  of  447 
bricks  were  used  per  barrel  of  cement. 


1410  HAXDBOOK    <)/•    COST   DATA. 

PULLEY  VAULTS. 

Pulley  vaults  were,  placed  for  every  35  ft.  of  track.  These  vaults 
were  to  permit  the  biling  and  repairing  of  the  pulleys  of  the  cable 
road.  The  single  pulley  vaults  were  placed  outside  of  the  track,  but 
the  double  pulley  vaults  were  placed  between  tracks  wherever  the 
tracks  were  the  standard  distance  (10  ft.  %  in.),  center  to  center. 
The  single  pulley  vaults  were  constructed  principally  in  the  upper 
part  of  the  Bowery,  where  a  double  vault  could  not  be  put  in.  The 
average  height  of  both  types  of  vaults  was  4V&  ft.  The  single 
vaults  each  contained  about  40.1  cu.  ft.  of  brick  work,  or  841  bricks, 
and  the  double  vaults  each  contained  about  47.7  cu.  ft.  of  brick  work, 
or  1,002  bricks.  About  %  of  the  vaults  had  extra  brick  work  for 
sewer  connections.  In  building  the  vaults  the  cost  of  the  mason 
work  was  necessarily  large  owing  to  cramped  space  in  which  to 
work,  and  owing  to  the  fact  that  considerable  time  was  lost  in  mov- 
ing from  one  vault  to  another.  There  were  generally  three  laborers 
to  one  mason.  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  contract  price  for 
single  pulley  vaults  was  $8  for  the  mason  work  and  $10  for  the 
mason  work  for  the  double  pulley  vaults,  the  general  contractor 
furnishing  the  materials.  These  prices  include  setting  the  iron 
cover.  To  do  this  last  piece  of  work  took  one  mason  and  three  labor- 
ers one  hour  each,  making  the  cost  $1  per  cover.  The  average 
labor  cost  of  the  brick  work  was  $7.77  per  cu.  yd.,  divided  up  as 
follows.  Masons,  $4.02 ;  laborers,  $3.75. 

During  July  to  December,  96  days  were  worked,  and  6,343  cu.  ft. 
of  brick  work  laid,  at  the  following  cost  for  labor : 

Per  cu.  ft.     Per  M  brick. 

Mason    $0.15  $7.08 

Laborers    (mixers,   helpers,    tenders)        0.14  6.63 


Total     $0.29  $12.71 

The  average  number  of  bricks  laid  per  mason  per  hour  was  88, 
but  during  the  best  month  the  average  was  96,  and  on  the  best  day 
it  was  106.  The  average  number  of  brick  per  laborer  hour  was  25. 

SPECIAL   PULLEY  VAULTS. 

These  vaults  were  constructed  near  the  lower  terminus  of  the  line 
and  were  designed  for  the  special  iron  work  and  pulleys  required  to 
operate  the  change  from  fast  to  slow  cables.  The  average  height 
of  the  vaults  was  5  ft.,  their  length  was  10  ft.,  and  all  walls  were 
1%  ft.  thick. 

The  work  was  done  in  December,  10  days  being  required  for  its 
completion.  In  that  time  1,070  cu.  ft.  of  brick  work  were  built, 
taking  22,485  brick.  The  wages  of  the  masons  amounted  to  $112.31 
and  the  laborers'  cost  was  $82.42.  The  average  number  of  brick 
laid  per  mason  hour  was  122  ;  the  average  number  per  laborer 
hour  was  45. 


RAILWAY®,  1411 

The  cost  per  cubic  foot  of  brick  and  per  M  of  brick  was  as 
follows : 

Per  cu.  ft.  Per  M. 

Masons $0.105  $5.01 

Laborers    0.077  3.67 

Total     $0.182  $8.68 

The  labor  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  brick  work  was  $4.91. 

THIRD  CABLE  VAULTS. 

These  vaults  were  for  manholes  to  give  access  to  the  pulley  scar- 
rying  the  third  cable  around  the  special  iron  work  on  Park  Row. 
The  vaults  had  an  inside  length  of  4%  ft,  and  a  width  of  2%  ft. 
All  of  the  walls  were  1  ft.  thick. 

The  work  on  these  vaults  was  done  in  December,  7  days  being 
required  to  complete  the  brick  work.  In  that  time  418  cu.  ft.  of 
brick  work  was  built,  requiring  the  placing  of  8,776  bricks.  The 
total  cost  of  the  masons  was  $43.25,  and  the  laborers  cost  $42.65. 
The  average  number  of  brick  laid  per  mason  hour  was  128  ;  the 
average  per  laborer  hour  was  34. 

The  cost  per  cubic  foot  of  brick  work  and  per  M  brick  was  as 
follows : 

Per  cu.  ft.       Per  M. 

Masons     $0.103  $4.93 

Laborers     0.102  4.89 

Total     $0.205  $9.82 

The  labor  cost  of  the  brick  work  per  cubic  yard  was  $5.53. 
POST-OFFICE  WHEEL  VAULT. 

This  vault  was  constructed  at  the  lower  terminus  of  the  line  and 
was  designed  for  the  sheaves  around  which  the  cables  pass.  The 
work  on  the  vault  was  done  entirely  under  ground,  the  top  being 
covered  with  6-in.  x  12-in.  yellow  pine  timber  to  accommodate  the 
street  traffic.  Kerosene  lamps  furnished  the  light  to  work  by,  extra 
labor  being  required  to  attend  to  the  lamps.  Two  blowers,  operated 
by  two  laborers,  were  used  to  keep  the  air  fresh.  However,  exces- 
sively hot  weather  with  insufficient  ventilation  had  a  serious  effect 
upon  the  cost  of  the  work.  As  there  was  no  regular  foreman  in 
charge  of  the  masons  considerable  loafing  resulted,  and  the  cost  was 
consequently  increased.  In  the  construction  of  the  arches  of  the 
vaults,  the  space  between  them  and  the  roofing  was  so  small  that 
the  masons  were  almost  compelled  to  assume  a  prostrate  position. 

The  height  of  the  vault  was  8  ft. ;  the  inside  dimensions  were  19  ft. 
x  46  ft.  The  walls  of  the  main  vault  were  1%  ft.  thick.  In  addition, 
another  vault  29  ft.  long  by  4%  ft.  wide  was  built  against  the  wall 
of  the  main  vault.  This  vault  had  walls  1  ft.  thick.  The  arches 
across  the  main  vault  were  19%  ft.  long,  were  1  ft.  thick,  and  had 
a  3-ft.  span  and  a  3-in.  rise. 


1412  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

There  were  2,812  cu.  ft.  of  main  walls  built  in  27  days  (July  and 
August),  and  the  cost  was: 

Per  cu.  ft.       Per  M. 

Mason    $0.136  $6.48 

Laborer     0.180  8.56 

Total    $0.316  $15.04 

The  masons  averaged  86  bricks  per  hr.,  but  the  maximum  was  146 
bricks. 

There  were   745   cu.   ft.   of  arches  built  in   7   days,  and  the  cost 
was: 

Per  cu.  ft.  Per  M. 

Mason     $0.109  $5.18 

Laborer     0.182  8.66 


Total    $0.291  $13.84 

The  masons  averaged  112  bricks  per  hr.,  but  the  maximum  was 
147.  Laborers  averaged  19  bricks  per  hr. 

Cost  of  a  Cable  Railway  for  Freight  Cars. — Mr.  Edward  Flad 
gives  the  following  cost  of  a  short  inclined  cable  railway  built  in 
1891  in  St.  Louis,  for  the  purpose  of  taking  freight  cars  (2  at  a 
time)  up  a  6%  grade  to  a  brewery,  2,000  ft.  distant  from  the  main 
steam  railway  track.  The  rise  is  95  ft.  Switch  tracks  at  both  ends 
were  of  63-lb.  rails,  but  the  cable  railway  track  had  85-lb.  rails. 
The  rails  rested  on  cast-iron  yokes,  500  Ibs.  each,  3%  ft.  c.  to  c. 
The  slot  rail  was  a  Z-rail,  weighing  53  Ibs.  per  yd.  The  conduit  was 
made  of  1 :  2  %  :  5  Portland  cement  concrete. 

COST  OF  CONDUIT  CABLE  TRACK. 

(1,872  lin.  ft.) 
Grading  and  Track:  Total.       Per  lin.  ft 

3,850  cu.  yds.  excav.,  at  $0.58 $  2,219             $  1.19 

942  cu.  yds.  concrete  mtls.  and  labor,  at  $5.55..  5,231  2.80 

51  tons  T  rails   (85-lb.),  at  $36.00 1,840  0.98 

Freight   on    rails    179  0.09 

32i/2   tons  slot  rail   (53-lb.),  at  $50.00.. 1,627  0.85 

Bolts,     shims,     etc 497  0.27 

Labor,    tracklaying    (except   on    concrete,   which 

was   $896)    947  0.51 

Castings  for  street  crossing 1,100  0.59 

273,174  Ibs.  cast  yokes,  at  $0.0155 4,234  2.26 

53,338  Ibs.  manholes  and  covers,  at  $0.0175.  .  .  .  933  0.50 

16,276  Ibs.  sheaves  and  frames,  at  $0.067 1,085  0.58 

29,053  Ibs.  rack  castings,  at   $0.035 1,017  0.55 

Extra  castings,  depression  sheaves,  etc 661  0.35 

Total  grading  and  track $21,570  $11.52 

Paving  for  Conduit  Track: 

80  squares  granite  blocks,  at  $18.75 $   1,500 

Sand    250 

Labor    408 

Total  paving  for  conduit  track $   2,158  $   1.16 


RAILWAYS.  1413 


Repairs  to  Pavement: 


300  squares    macadam,    at    $3.75 $  1,127 

50  squares  gravel    212 


Total   repairs  to  pavement $   1,339  $  0.72 

Cable     $    704  $0.38 


Total  track,  paving  and  cable $25,771  $13.78 

Grip    Car    $   2,470  $   1.32 

Hoisting  Engine  (not  incl.  foundation) $   7,100  $   3.80 


Total  track,  paving,  equipment,  etc $35,341  $18.90 

SWITCH  TRACKS  IN  UPPER  AND  LOWER  YARDS. 

(7,700  lin.  ft.) 

Track:  Total. 

J5  tons  T  rails  (63-lb.),  at  $33.00 .  .  .$  2,805 

Freight    on    same 298 

Track  fastenings 816 

Switches,  frogs,  etc 2,518 

Stringers,   ties,   etc 2,139 

Plank   746 

Total   track  materials $  9,323 

Laying  track,   7,700  ft 6,474 


Total  track  in  place $15,797 

Paving: 

563  Viz   squares  macadam,  at  $3.50 $  1,972 

8.5  squares  spalls 22 

227    squares   macadam,    at    $3.75 851 

15,000  granite  blocks,  at  $0.05 750 

Granite  pavers'  wages 188 

2,675  cu.  yds.   excav.,  at  $0.30 803 

Total   paving    $  4,586 

Sewerage    $      909 

Tools $      830 

Total  track,  paving,  etc $22,120 

Crossing  gate,   house,   etc 397 

Miscellaneous   481 


Grand  total,  7,700  lin.  ft,  at  $3.00 $22,978 

The  foregoing  does  not  include  engineering. 

The  work  was  done  by  a  contractor,  who  received  15%  on  the  cost 
of  all-  labor,  which  15%  is  included. 

The  engine  hoists  at  the  rate  of  5  ft.  per  sec.  when  the  grip  car, 
pushing  two  loaded  freight  cars,  is  ascending.  The  grip  car  is 
permanently  fastened  to  the  lower  end  of  the  cable.  The  cable  track 
is  straight,  except  for  a  curve  at  the  lower  end.  Sixty  to  80  freight 
cars  handled  daily. 

The  entire  cost  of  this  plant,  cable  road  and  side  tracks,  was 
$58,319. 

Cost  of  a  Rack  Railway,  Pike's  Peak.— Mr.  Thomas  F.  Richardson 
gives  the  following  relative  to  the  Manitou  and  Pike's  Peak  Rail- 
way, built  in  1890.  It  is  a  rack  railway  (Abt  rack),  8.9  miles  long, 


1414  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

writh  maximum  grades  of  25%,  total  rise  7,517  ft.,  16°  max.  curve, 
total  curvature  210°  per  mile.  The  gage  is  4  ft.  8%  ins.;  40-lb. 
T-ralls  on  hewn  red  spruce  ties  7x8  ins.  x  9  ft.  The  grading  was 
done  by  contract,  at  15  cts.  for  earth,  32  cts.  for  loose  rock  and 
90  cts.  for  solid  rock.  These  prices  were  much  too  low,  and  should 
have  been  30%  higher  to  yield  a  fair  proHt,  although  the  grading 
was  "paid  for  both  ways"  ;  i.  e.,  if  the  contractor  succeeded  in 
moving  a  cubic  yard  of  loose  rock  from  cut  to  fill,  he  got  32  cts. 
for  excavation  and  32  cts.  again  in  embankment. 

The  total  cost  of  grading  was  $150,900,  or  $16,950  per  mile,  in- 
cluding log  culverts  and  masonry  abutments  for  4  small  bridges  (20 
to  30  ft.  span).  Laborers  received  $2  per  day. 

The  following  was  the  weight  of  iron  and  steel  per  mile  of 
track : 

L.bs.  per  mile. 

1,584  rack  bars,  at  87.8  Ibs 139,080 

1,584  chairs,   at   23.25    Ibs 36,830 

3,168  rack-rail  bolts,  at  1.97  Ibs 6,240 

3,168  wood  screws,  at  1.64  Ibs 5,200 

1,584  cover  plates,  at  1.89  Ibs 2,990 

3,168  spring  washers,  at  0.146  Ibs 460 

352  T  rails,  at  400  Ibs 140,800 

352  pairs  angle  bars  (38-in.),  at  32.75  Ibs 11,530 

2,112  bolts    (%x3-in.),    at    0.48    Ibs 1,010 

12,672  spikes   (5%-in.),  at  0.55   Ibs 6,970 

Total  iron  and  steel  per  mile 351,110 

3,168  spruce  cross-ties. 

The  tracklaying  cost  $4,275  per  mile,  including  the  cost  of  planing 
the  ties  (9  cts.  each),  engine  service  and  everything  except  engi- 
neering. Had  the  material  been  more  simply  designed,  this  cost 
would  have  been  much  less. 

There  were  7  switches  costing  $450  each  complete  with  ties. 

There  were  4  locomotives,  each  weighing  26  tons  when  loaded  with 
fuel  and  water.  The  round  trip  is  made  in  2  tirs.  with  a  coal  con- 
sumption of  less  than  a  ton. 

The  cars  weigh  14,000  Ibs.,  are  41  ft.  long,  seat  50  passengers. 
The  train  crew  is  one  conductor  and  one  brakeman  ;  only  one  car 
in  a  train. 

Cost  of  Conduit  Electric  Street  Railways.* — Mr.  A.  N.  Connett 
gives  the  following  costs  of  a  conduit  electric  street  railway  in- 
stalled by  him  in  1895  at  Washington,  D.  C.  There  were  21  miles 
of  single  track  built.  The  following  prices  were  paid  for  rails  and 
splice  bars : 

Per  ton. 

Wheel   rails    $28.05 

Slot   rails 31.28 

Guard  rails  for  curves 46.25 

Conductor    rails    40.88 

Joints  complete,   each  $1.20 

*  Engineering-Contracting,,  July  14,  1909. 


RAILWAYS.  1413 

The  cost  per  mile  of  single  track  was : 

Rails  of  all  kinds,  at  above  prices $  9,031.54 

215.5  tons  cast  iron  (yokes,  incubator  frames,  covers,  etc.), 

at    $28.19 6..054.75 

Bolts,  tie  bars,  clips,  etc 1,518.82 

Bonds  for  conductor  rails 476.00 

Tracklaying   (all  labor  and  hauling) 2,864.97 

Temporary    track     162.04 

2,507  cu.  yds.  all  excavation  (except  cable  ducts),  at  $0.95  2,373.34 

Sewer  pipes  and  brick  work  for  duct  manholes 483.01 

Cable  ducts   1,032.65 

Excavation  for  cable  ducts 355.14 

765  cu.  yds.  concrete  for  conduit,  at  $7.09 5,422.02 

514  cu.  yds.  concrete  for  paving  base,  etc.,  at  $4.52 2,258.74 

6,375  sq.  yds.  paving  (not  including  base) 7,996.20 

Special  track  work  and  curves 3,805.04 

Extra  bills  of  street  contractor 1,163.20 

Removal    of    sub-surface   obstructions 3,240.09 

Total  per  mile  of  single  track $48,336.47 

The  item  of  "cable  ducts"  covered  the  following  totals  for  the 
21  miles  of  track: 

10,616  ft.  of  12  way  duct  at $1.20 

41  ft.  of     8-way  duct  at * 0.88 

21,354  ft.  of     4-way  duct  at 0.55 

133  ft.  of     2-way  duct  at 0.35 

There  were  9,207  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  for  these  ducts  at  83  cts. 
per  cu.  yd. 

The  concrete  for  the  conduit  was  1  bbl.  Portland  cement,  12  cu.  ft. 
•and  and  22%  cu.  ft.  stone.  The  concrete  for  the  paving  base  was 
1  bbl.  Cumberland  cement,  10  cu.  ft.  sand  and  20  cu.  ft.  stone. 

The  paving  on  the  21  miles  of  track  was: 

42,126  sq.  yds.  old  stone  block  at $0.80 

91,716  sq.   yds.   asphalt  at 1.50 

The  temporary  track  is  a  very  low  item,  the  authorities  having 
permitted  a  flat  strap-rail  to  be  laid  on  the  pavement  by  means  of 
flat  tie  bars  with  special  seats  at  their  extremities.  The  streets  of 
Washington  are  exceptionally  favorable  for  the  construction  of  con- 
duit roads,  being  wide  and  having  little  traffic. 

For  comparison  study  the  following  New  York  City  figures  by 
Mr.  William  C.  Gottschall,  engineer  in  charge  of  construction  of  the 
Second  Avenue  Railroad  Co.  of  New  York: 

Per  mile  of 
Single  track. 

Labor,  at  $7.59  per  lin.   ft $39,720.90 

Insulators,    at   $1.40    each 696.53 

Iron  work,  excluding  yokes,  at  $1.83  per  lin.  ft 6,684.25 

224.7  tons  cast-iron  yokes,  at  $25.30 5,678.68 

Concrete     3,929.38 

mling  yokes  and  iron  work 569.03 

Total,  without  paving $57,551.53 

This  does  not  include  paving,  special  track  work,  feeder  ducts, 
ds,  sewer  connections  nor  temporary  track.  The  item  of  labor, 
which  is  exceedingly  high,  includes  digging  trough,  removing  old 
track,  repairing  concrete,  removing  excess  of  earth,  hauling  all 
ck  material,  and  track  laying. 


1416  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Mr.  Connett  estimates  the  excess  in  cost  of  a  conduit  line  over  a 
trolley  line  as  follows  per  mile  of  single  track : 

105   tons  sheet  rails,  at  $31.30 $  3,287 

40  tons  conductor  rails,  at  $41.00 1,640 

210  tons  cast  iron,  at  $28.20 5,922 

Bolts    600 

Porcelain  insulators   175 

1,400  cu.  yds.  excess  excavation,  at  $1.00 1,400 

1,200  cu.  yds.  excess  concrete,  at  $7.00 8,400 

Sewer   connections    2,000 

Excess  labor  track  laying 3,000 

Special  track  work,   excess 2,500 


Total     " $28,924 

Removing  sub-surface  obstructions,  say 8,476 


Total    excess   cost   conduit $37,500 

Deduct  overhead  trolley  construction 2,500 


Total   difference   in   cost $35,000 

The  removing  of  sub-surface  obstructions  is  merely  a  rough  esti- 
mate. 

The  data  on  cable  railways,  on  the  preceding  pages,  may  be  con- 
sulted with  advantage. 

Cost  of  Electric  Railway,  Denver,  Colo. — Mr.  John  P.  Brooks  gives 
the  following  as  the  cost  of  a  single  track  line  built  (1899)  in 
Denver,  Colo. : 

Per  mile. 
94^   long  tons  of  60-lb.  T-rails,  at  $23.50 $2,220.75 

360  pairs  of  60-lb.  angles,  at  40  cts.    (too  l^w; 144.00 

1,080  Ibs.  track  bolts,  at  2  %  cts 29.70 

32  kegs  railway  spikes,   at  $4.50 144.00 

360  copper  or  plate  bonds,  at  25  cts 90.00 

2,000  ft.  B.  M.  plank  for  culverts 42.00 

2,640  Texas  ties,  at  50  cts 1,320.00 

180  ft.  of  curve  and  guard  rails,  at  $1 180.00 

Hauling  ties  and  rails 130.00 

Laying  1  mile  of  track 550.00 

1  mile  No.   0  trolley  wire 325.00 

88  cedar  poles  in  place  and  painted,  at  $4.25 374.00 

Overhead    work    incidentals,    including    hangers;    insulators 

and  ratchets  ($60),  span  wire  ($40),  and  labor  ($50)..  150.00 
2,000  cu.  yds.  excavation  for  track  trench,  at  25  cts 500.00 

$6,199.45 
Add  5%   for  engineering 300.55 

$6,500.00 
Add  2   switches,   at  $250 500.00 

Total  per  mile $7,000.00 

It  is  apparent  that  this  line  was  not  laid  in  a  paved  street.  It 
will  be  noticed  also  that  the  price  of  rails,  etc.,  was  lower  then 
than  now.  The  cost  of  power  plant  and  buildings  is  not  included, 
but  may  be  estimated  at  $15,000  for  a  suburban  line  5  miles  long. 

Where  paving  of  streets  must  be  done,  use  the  data  given  in  the 
section  on  Roads  and  Pavements. 

Cost  of  Electric  Railway,  Third  Rail  Line — Mr.  Ernest  Gozen- 
bach  gives  the  following  relative  to  a  first-class,  third-rail  suburban 


RAILWAYS.  141? 

line,  621/2  miles  long.  Including  switches  and  sidings,  the  number 
of  miles  of  single  track  is  actually  66.  Of  the  62 14  miles,  6%  miles 
are  laid  in  city  streets. 

Per  mile 

Total.  of  line. 

1.  Excavation  and  embankment .  ..$  96,000  $   1,536 

2.  Bridges,    abutments    and    culverts. 91,050  1,457 

3.  Two    overhead   railway   crossings 64,000  1,024 

4.  Ties,  2,640  per  mile,  at  55  cts 96,250  1,540 

5.  Ballast,  2,200  cu.  yds.,  per  mile,  at  SO  cts.  .  116,000  1,856 

6.  Rails,  70-lb.  per  yd.,  at  $31  per  ton  delivered  225,000  3,600 

7.  Joints,  spikes  and  bolts  for  60-ft.  rails 29,500  472 

8.  Labor  on  track,  56  miles,  at  $600 33,600  538 

9.  Labor  in  street  track,  6V2  miles,  at  $1,800.  .  11,700  187 

10.  Farm   and   highway   crossings 9,500  152 

11.  Wire  fences,  24,000  rods,  at  73  cts 17,500  280 

12.  Switches,     special    work,     etc 21,000  336 

13.  Bonds,  24,000,  at  61  cts.  in  place 14,650  234 

14.  Cross     bonds     and     special     bonding,      at 

switches 2,000  32 

15.  Third  rail,  70-lb.  per  yd.,  56  miles,  at  $36 

ton    131,000  2,096 

16.  Insulators,    spikes  and  bolts,   at   62   cts.   in 

place 18,000  288 

17.  Joint  plates,  bolts  and  labor  laying  rail...  9,800  157 

18.  Bonds,  15,000,  at  73  cts.  in  place 10,950  175 

19.  Crossings  and  crossing  cables 13,500  216 

20.  Trolley    in    streets,    single-track   span    con- 

struction       24,000  384 

21.  Power  station,  150  kw.,  at  $120  per  kw 180,000  2,880 

22.  Power  station  building,  at  $11  per  kw 16,500  264 

23.  Transmission  line,  55  miles,  at  $1,400 77,000  1,232 

24.  Sub-station,   freight  and  depot   buildings..  24,500  392 

25.  Sub-station,   railway  apparatus 65,000  1,040 

26.  Batteries     80,000  1,280 

27.  Telephone   line    9,000  144 

28.  Block-signal   system 35,000  560 

29.  Stations   and   platforms 4,250  84 

30.  Switch  and  platform-lighting  circuit 4,000  64 

31.  General    office    building 8,000  128 

32.  Car  shops,  shop  tools,  etc 24,000  384 

3*3.  Car   bodies   and    locomotive    body 49,000  784 

34.  Trucks   and   air   brakes 27,500  440 

35.  Electric  car  equipment 76,000  1,216 

36.  Lighting    and    power    apparatus    and    sup- 

ply systems   70,000  1,120 

37.  Accidents,  contingencies  and  insurance,  5%  89,000  1,424 

38.  Administration,    superintendence,    office   ex- 

penses, engineering,  etc.,   5% 89,000  1,424 

Total     $1,963,750  $31,420 

This  estimate  does  not  include  allowance  for  right  of  way,  station 
ground  and  legal  expense. 

To  reduce  above  costs  per  "mile  of  line"  (62%  miles)  to  cost  per 
"mile*  of  track"  (66  miles),  deduct  5.3%. 

Items  33,  34  and  35  must  be  added  together  to  get  the  total  cost 
of  rolling  stock,  making  $2,440  per  mile  of  line. 


1418  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Cost  of  an  Electric  Street  Railway,  Chicago.— The  following  wa.- 
the  cost  of  a  mile  of  double-track  street  railway  in  Chicago  in 
1895: 

Per  mile 
dbl.  tr. 

283  tons   (90-lb.)   rails,  at  $33.00 $   9,839 

4,224  oak  ties  (5  x  8-in.  x  7-ft),  at  $0.38 1,605 

352  cast  welded  joints,  at  $3.50 1,232 

1,760  tie   rods,   at    $0.15 264 

33,792  spikes    (y2xy2x4y2),    at   $0.01 338 

42,240  ft.  wood  filler    2,112 

Labor  at  $1  per  lin.  ft.  of  double  track 5,280 


Total,  exclusive  of  pavement  materials. ..  .$20,170 

10,560  sq.  yds.  cedar  blocks,  at  $0.30 3,168 

146  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $1.25 183 

435  cu.  yds.  broken  stone,  at  $1.50 668 

10,560  sq.  yds.  gravel  and  dressing,  at  $0.08 845 

10,560  sq.  yds.  2-in.  hemlock  boards,  at  $0.08..         845 

Total $25,879 

The  above  does  not  include  electric  construction  nor  overhead  costs. 
Cost  of  an  Interurban  Trolley  Line.— Mr.  Gilbert  Hodges  gives  the 
following  estimate  of  cost  of  an  interurban  electric  trolley  railway, 
based  upon  experience  in  New  England  in  1?02  : 

Per  mile 

Roadbed,  Land,  Etc.:  single  track. 

14,300  cu.  yds.  earthwork,  at  $0.45..  ..$   6,435.00 

325  cu.  yds.  rock,  at  $1.75 568.75 

3  acres  clearing  and  grubbing,  at  $75.00.         225.00 

3,000  cu.  yds.  gravel  ballast,  at  $0.50 1,500.00 

640  rods  wire  fence,  at  $1.00 640.00 

Pipe  culverts 50.00 

Masonry  for  bridges  and  culverts 1,000.00 

Wooden  and   steel   bridges 1,300.00 

Land  lor  private  right  of  way 1,000.00 

Total  roadbed,  land,  etc $12,718.75 

Track: 

110  tons  T -rails  (70-lb.),  at  $31.50 $  3,465.00 

360  continuous  rail  joints,  at  $1.54 554.40 

2,640  chestnut  ties  (6x6  ins.  x  8  ft),  at  $0.54  1,425.60 

5,870  IDS.  spikes,  at  $0.0225 132.07 

720  bonds  in  place,  at  $0.615 442.80 

17  cross  bonds,  at  $0.50 8.50 

Teaming  material  270.00 

Labor  laying  track 1,056.00 

Total  track    $~7,354.37 

Overhead  System: 
Poles    (35  ft),  brackets,  cross-arms,  etc.,   in 

place     "    650.00 

Trolley  wire  and  overhead  material  in  place.      1,100.00 
Direct    and    alternating    current    feeders    in 

place    1,750.00 

Block  signal  and  telephone  systems 2,000.00  • 

Total  overhead  system $  5,500.00 

Engineering  and  Superintendence $      600.00 

Grand  total    .  ..$26,173.21 


RAILWAYS.  1419 

This  does  not  include  buildings,  power,  equipment,  interest  during 
construction,  etc. 

Cost  of  Third  Rail  and  Trolley  Lines  Compared.— "Electric  Rail- 
ways" (1907),  by  Sydney  W  Ashe,  contains  the  following  costs 
of  third-rail  and  of  trolley  lines,  as  estimated  by  Thomas  Con- 
way,  Jr. 

The  estimated  cost  of  a  third-rail  line  is  as  follows  per  mile  of 
single  track : 

Item.  Per  mile. 

1.  2,640  ties,    at    $0.75,    delivered $   1,980.00 

2.  2,200   cu.  yds.  ballast,  at   $0.80 ..  .      1,760.00 

3.  123.2   tons  rails,  at  $31.00 3,819.20 

4.  Joints,   spikes  and  bolts 500.00 

5.  Labor  on  track 600.00 

6.  Farm  and  highway  crossings 150.00 

7.  640  rods  wire  fence,  at  $0.75 467.20 

8.  Switches,    special   work,    etc 300.00 

9.  Bonding 400.00 

10.  61.1   tons  third-rail,  at  $36.00 2,199.60 

11.  Insulators,  spikes  and  bolts,  at  $0.62 109.12 

12.  Joint  plates,   bolts  and  labor  laying  rail 175.00 

13.  Power   station    . 3,000.00 

14.  Power   station  building 275.00 

15.  7,000    Ibs.    transmission    line    copper    (500    pr.    triple- 

strand),    at    $0.2005 1,403.50 

16.  Pole  brackets  and  insulators  for  transmission  line.  .  .  .  450.00 

17.  Sub-station,  freight  and  depot  buildings 2,000.00 

18.  Sub-station   railway  apparatus 1,000.00 

19.  Telephone  line    150.00 

20.  Block  signal  systems 500.00 

21.  Platforms    100.00 

22.  Switch  and  platform  lighting  circuit 70.00 

23.  General  office  building 125.00 

24.  Cars 5,500.00 

25.  Accidents,  contingencies,   etc.,   5% 1,500.00 

26.  Administration,  engineering,  etc.,  5% 1,500.00 


Total   $30,033.62 

The  estimate  for  a  trolley  line  is  essentially  the  same,  except  for 
the  following  items : 
Item. 

4    Joints,  spikes  and. bolts $1,000.00 

9    Bonding,  35.2  bonds,  at  $0.75  in  place 264.00 

10.  Trolley  wire   (4/0),   3,382   Ibs.,   at  $0.198 669.63 

11.  Brackets  for  trolley  poles,   52,  at  $1.50 78.00 

12    Constructing  overhead  work 600.00 

16.   Trolley  poles,  52,  at  $7.50 .  .       390.00 

Total     $3,001.63 

The  total  of  the  corresponding  items  (4,  9,  10,  11,  12  and  16)   for 

third  rail  is  $3,659,  an  excess  of  only  $657  over  the  trolley  line. 
Mr.  W.  C.  Gottschall  gives  the  following  estimates  made  by  Mr. 

Maurice  Hoopes  of  the  difference  in  cost  between  a  third  rail  and  a 

trolley  line : 


1420  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

THIRD  RAIL  LINE. 

Per  mile 

Extra  length  (15  ins.)  of  500  ties,  at  $0.075 %      37.50 

500  insulators  and  fastenings,  at  $0.50 250.00 

62.86  tons  (80-lb.)   low  carbon  rail,  at  $35  +  $2  fit 2,325.82 

176  rail  joints,  at  $0.60 105.00 

352  bonds  (425,000  cir.  mil.)  in  place,  at  $1.00 352.00 

200  ft.  cable  for  crossings  (1,000,000  cir.  mil),  etc.,  at  $1.20      240.00 
Laying  rail JIOO.OO 

Total $3,410.92 

TROLLEY  LINE. 

(Span  construction,  and  assuming  one  line  of  poles  chargeable  to 
transmission  line.) 

22,774  Ibs.  copper  (equiv.  to  80-lb.  rail),  at  $0.17 $3,871.58 

50  chestnut  poles    (8-in.  x  30-ft),   at   $5.00 250.00 

Labor  and  materials  for  erecting 300.00 


Total      $4,421.58 

Mr.  W.  B.  Potter's  estimate  of  the  cost  of  a  protected  third  rail 
is  as  follows : 

Per  mile. 

66  tons  (75-lb.)  third  rail,  at  $43.00.. $2,840.00 

528  reconstructed  granite  insulators,  etc.,  at  $0.40 211.00 

352   bonds   (No.  0000  G.  E.  9"  Form  B),  at  $0.38 134.00 

21.71  tons  channel  iron   (6-in.,  31V2-lb.)   guard,  at  $45.00..    1,248.00 

792  milleable  iron  supports  for  channel,  at  $0.36 286.00 

176  malleable  iron   fish  plates  and   bolts  for  channel,   at 

$0.25     44.00 

Labor  of  installation,  including  drilling  rails  and  channel..       900.00 


Total $5,663.00 

Cost  of  Labor  and  Materials  in  Building  Two  Electric  Railways.*— 
Mr.  Daniel  J.  Hauer  gives  the  following : 

It  is  difficult  to  keep  accurate  records  of  costs  of  all  details,  owing 
to  the  methods  generally  pursued  in  carrying  on  the  construction 
of  electric  roads.  The  majority  of  lines  are  built  within  city  limits, 
thus  allowing  only  a  short  section  of  the  street  to  be  torn  up  at  a 
time,  and  this  necessitates  one  gang  doing  several  different  kinds 
of  work  in  a  single  day.  Consequently  we  find  the  "common  labor" 
item  covering  a  number  of  details ;  instead  of  the  cost  of  each 
being  listed  by  itself. 

This  reason  still  holds  good  and  the  writer  regrets  that  this  is  the 
case  in  the  data  he  will  give  in  this  article.  Even  though  this  is 
so,  several  valuable  lessons  can  be  learned  from  the  records  and 
they  may  serve  to  guide  some  engineers  and  contractors  on  future 
work. 

The  two  examples  given  are  descriptive  of  construction  done  in  a 
Southern  city,  during  a  year  when  labor  was  being  paid  a  com- 
paratively high  wage,  out-of-door  work  being  plentiful,  and  a  job 
obtained  easily.  This,  of  course,  added  to  the  cost  of  the  work. 


^Engineering-Contracting,  February,  1906. 


RAILWAYS.  1421 

Example  I. — Example  I  was  done  under  a  contractor  on  "force  ac- 
count," that  is,  at  cost  for  labor  plus  a  percentage.  The  work  con- 
sisted of  tearing  up  and  partially  destroying  an  old  cable  track  and 
relaying  the  new  electric  roadbed.  The  old  cable  track  rails  and  slot 
rails  were  taken  out,  and  part  of  the  concrete  conduit  and  cast-iron 
yokes  destroyed  and  filled  in,  then  new  ties  and  rails  were  laid  and 
the  street  paved.  The  overhead  work  was  not  disturbed,  so  we 
present  only  the  cost  of  track  work.  Unfortunately  the  cost  of  the 
various  details  was  not  kept  separate,  so  we  cannot  give  the  cost 
of  tearing  up  track,  but  .can  only  show  the  total  cost  of  common 
labor. 

The  working  day  was  10  hours  and  the  following  rates  of  wages 
were  paid  per  day : 

Superintendent $12.00 

Paymaster    and    assistant    superintendent 5.00 

Material    man    ,"..'  4.00 

Assistant   material    man 2.00 

Timekeeper 3.00 

Foremen     4.50 

Assistant    foremen 2.50 

Laborer 1.50 

Water    boy 1.00 

Laborers  in  the  iron  gang 1.65 

Watchmen     1-50 

Bonders  and  blacksmith    3.00 

Helpers    1.75 

Block  pavers    5.30 

Rammers     3.90 

Stonecutter     6.00 

Cart   and   driver 2.75 

2-horse  team    5.00 

4-horse  team    10.00 

The  pavers,  stonecutter  and  rammers  were  union  men,  hence  the 
two  first  named  worked  but  8  hours  and  the  rammers  9  hours. 

About  a  mile  and  one-half  of  track  was  laid,  the  total  costs  of 
labor  and  materials  being: 

Labor     $20,518.64 

Paving     817.44 

Paving  materials   762.07 

Gutters      341.26 

Hauling     452.47 

Permits    from    city 199.88 

Engineering    department    201.34 

Rails,  ties,  angles,  plates,   bolts,   etc 12,532.97 

Miscellaneous   supplies .  95.32 

Total $35,921.39 

The  rail  laid  was  of  the  girder  type  weighing  107  Ibs.  to  the 
yard,  or  168.14  gross  tons  per  mile.  The  height  of  the  rail  was  9 
ins.,  while  the  base  was  5%  ins.  ;  the  length  of  the  rail  section  was 
60  ft.  The  angle  plates  were  32  ins.  long  with  12  holes;  the  tie 
rods  were  1%  ins.  by  %  in.,  spaced  every  6  ft.  The  two  were 
spaced  2-ft.  centers,  while  the  spikes  were  5 1/2 -in.  by  9/16-in.  The 
bonds  were  10  ins.  concealed. 


1422  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

Thr  cost  of  the  material  was: 

Per  lin.  ft. 
Rail,   tie  rods,   spikes,  plates,   nut  locks,   bolts.  .$1.3894 

Bonds    0244 

Tie     .2425 

Handling    from    cars 0020 

fl.6583 

The  cost  of  labor  for  tearing  up  the  old  track,  excavating,  laying 
and  bonding  for  new  and  filling  in  ready  for  the  pavers  was  $2.581 
per  lin.  ft.  of  track. 

The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  track  for  paving  materials  was  $0.10 
and  for  labor  was  f  0.108,  making  a  total  cost  of  $0.208. 

The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  track  for  the  miscellaneous  items, 
enumerated  above,  was  $0.17  ;  this  makes  a  total  cost  per  lineal 
foot  as  follows : 

Material $1.658 

Labor     (common)     2.581 

Paving,    including    labor 208 

Miscellaneous     170 

Total $4.617 

The  paving  was  granite  block  paving  with  large  flag  stone  laid  at 
street  crossing  for  foot  pavement.  The  majority  of  the  blocks 
taken  up  from  the  old  track  were  used,  only  about  10%  of  new 
blocks  being  substituted.  The  blocks  were  laid  in  sand,  and  cinders 
in  wet  places.  The  cost  per  square  yard  of  paving  was  $0.19,  being 
10  cts.  for  labor  and  9  cts.  for  materials. 

Example  II. — This  work  was  identically  the  same,  replacing  a 
cable  roadbed  with  girder  rails  for  electric  track.  The  cable  road 
was  of  similar  construction,  but  the  work  was  done  by  the  railroad 
company's  own  forces,  except  the  paving,  which  was  let  to  contract, 
the  company  furnishing  materials.  The  amount  of  work  done  was 
a  little  more  than  a  mile  of  single  track,  yet  in  both  cases  the  work 
was  for  double  track  in  the  heart  of  the  city,  where  street  traffic 
was  heavy. 

The  prices  paid  labor  in  this  case  were  as  follows  : 

Superintendent    $3.33 

Foremen    2.50 

Assistant  foremen    2.25 

Sub-foremen    2.00 

Pavers     4.75 

Rammers     3.50 

Blacksmiths     1.90 

Bonders 1.70 

Surfacers  and  leaders 1.75 

Laborers  in   iron   gang 1.60 

Laborers,  including  helpers,  watchmen,  etc 1.40 

Water   boys    75 

Cart  and   driver    2.50 

One-horse  team  and  driver 3.00 

Two-horse  team  and  driver 5.00 

Team  and  driver  for  dragging  rails 3.75 

Four-horse  team  and  driver 8.00 

Team   for   hauling   rails 9.00 


RAILWAYS.  1423 

The  total  cost  for  labor  and  all  materials  was  as  follows: 

Labor     $  8,235.77 

Paving     2,652.47 

Paving   materials    1,791.58 

Gutters 106.21 

Hauling 796.16 

Permits    from    city 120.75 

Engineering    department 133.53 

Rails,  ties,  angle  plates,  bolts,  etc 9,946.80 

Miscellaneous   supplies    105.79 


123,889.06 

The  paving  was  done  by  contract,  the  railroad  company  furnish- 
ing all  the  materials,  the  contractor  simply  doing  the  labor  of  laying 
the  Belgian  blocks.  There  was  5,894.3  sq.  yds.  of  paving,  the  con- 
tract price  beiilg  45  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  The  cost  of  new  materials  per 
square  yard  was  31.4  cts.,  making  a  total  cost  per  square  yard  of 
76.4  cts.  The  paving  in  all  cases  ran  2  ft.  outside  of  rail.  This 
makes  a  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  track  for  paving  of  74  cts.,  being 
divided  as  follows:  44.2  cts.  for  the  labor  of  laying  and  29.8  cts.  for 
materials.  All  the  blocks  were  laid  in  sand^  there  being  no  other 
foundation. 

The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  track  for  track  materials  was  the  same 
as  in  Example  I,  namely  $1.658. 

The  miscellaneous  cost,  such  as  hauling,  permits,  gutters,  etc., 
per  lineal  foot  of  track  was  21  cts. 

In  this  case  the  labor  cost  of  the  work  can  be  divided  under  sev- 
eral heads,  but  still  such  division  as  should  be  made,  cannot  be 
given,  as  the  records  were  not  kept  with  such  an  idea.  The  labor 
costs  per  lineal  foot  of  track  were  : 

Superintendence    ...............  '  ...........  -.  .  .  .$0.005 

Foremen     ............  .................  ,  .......  095    • 

Laying  and  surfacing  rails  .....................  195 

Labor  of  tearing  up  cable  track,  excavation,   re- 

filling,   spacing    ties,    etc  ......  ,  ..............    1.030 

Watchmen     ...................................  010 

Water  boys    ...................................  016 

Blacksmith   work    .............................  012 

Bonding    ......................................  009 

$  1*372 

This  makes  a  total  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  single  track  as  follows, 
and  allows  of  comparison  with  similar  cost  in  Example  I: 

Material     ...............................  .....  $1.65*. 

Labor     (common)      ....  .......................  1.S72 

Paving,    including    labor  ......  .................       740 

Miscellaneous    ................................  21C 


It  would  seem  from  these  figures  that  tlie  company  forces  ^ore  up 
the  old  cable  road  bed  and  laid  the  electric  road  for  63.7  cts.  less 
per  lineal  foot  of  single  track,  or  a  difference  of  $3,3oo.36  per  rniie. 
This,  at  a,  glance,  seems  like  an  extraordinary  difference,  and  for 
that  reason  it  would  be.  well  to  analyze  these  records. 


1424  HANDBOOK   OF  COST   DATA. 

The  first  thing  to  be  noted  is  the  great  difference  in  the  wages 
of  various  men,  the  contractors  paying  the  larger  wage.  The  dif- 
ference in  the  compensation  of  laborers  was  10  cts.  This  was  made 
up  by  the  railroad  company  giving  each  man  two  car  tickets  daily, 
one  for  use  in  the  morning  and  the  other  for  evening  use.  The  cost 
of  these  tickets  was  not  included  in  the  company's  records.  It  was 
considered  that  there  was  no  direct  cost  to  the  company,  but  such 
an  idea  is  certainly  erroneous.  It  would  seem  that  at  least  5  cts. 
should  be  charged  for  these  two  rides,  making  a  total  charge  of 
about  $300.  The  other  differences  in  wages  are  very  hard  to  esti- 
mate, as  the  details  of  time  on  the  two  jobs  could  not  be  obtained. 

The  contractor  has,  in  some  cases,  charged  very  high  prices  for 
some  of  his  men,  such  as  superintendent,  foremen  and  some  others. 
Some  of  these  high  rates  were  made  necessary,  as  the  men  were  paid 
full  time,  whether  the  weather  permitted  work  or  not,  and  as 
wages  could  only  be  charged  the  company  when  work  was  actually 
done,  a  higher  rate  than  was  paid  was  billed.  Then,  too,  some  of 
the  wages  paid  by  the  company  were  very  low,  as  foremen,  black- 
smith, bonders  and  a  few  others.  The  company  failed  to  make  a 
charge  against  their  work  for  a  pay  master,  material  man  and  time- 
keeper. The  roadmaster  of  the  railroad  and  one  or  two  other  offi- 
cials spent  the  greater  part  of  their  time  in  supervision  of  this 
work,  yet  no  charge  was  made  for  this.  All  of  these  things  would 
add  materially  to  the  cost. 

Another  matter,  worthy  of  note,  is  that  the  contractors  were  only 
doing  one  stretch  of  work  at  a  time,  while  the  railroad  company  had 
as  many  as  six  jobs  going  on  simultaneously.  This  reduced  the  cost 
of  superintendence,  blacksmithing  and  a  few  other  items  for  the 
company,  while  the  contractors  were  compelled  to  charge  full  time. 

Another  consideration  was  the  class  of  work  done.  The  con- 
tractor had  no  object  but  to  give  the  best  of  work,  the  more  it  cost 
the  greater  his  profits ;  but  this  was  not  so  with  the  company's 
forces.  Specifications  were  not  lived  up  to,  but  rather  ignored,  and 
when  difficulties  were  encountered,  specifications  were  changed  to 
suit  the  conditions.  One  foreman  expressed  the  situation  tersely 
when  he  said :  "Anything  goes  with  the  company."  Repairs  to  the 
work  were  necessary  within  a  few  months.  As  is  always  the  case, 
cheap  foremen  do  indifferent  work,  and  foremen's  salaries  were 
small. 

The  percentage  paid  the  contractor  in  Example  I  was  10%,  hence 
his  profit  per  lineal -foot  of  track  was  45.6  cts.  Deducting  this  from 
his  cos'  co  th)  company  we  have  $4-161. 

Taking  iiito  consideration  all  of  these  facts,  and  it  is  more  than 
doubtful  if  :he  cost  of  the  work  by  the  company's  forces  was  less 
than  tha*  o:  tha  contractor.  It  will  also  be  noticed  that  there  was 
no  charges  for  plant,  ana  also  for  clerica>  hire,  although  clerks 
from  several  departments  did  extra  work  on  account  of  the  recon- 
struct1' :>r. 

The  write*-  ^ Sieves  that  this  is  another  lesson  against  such  work 
being  done  by  company's  forces  instead  of  by  contract.  He  would 
r.ot  be  understood  as  advocating  having  the  work  done  by  a  con- 


RAILWAYS.  1425 

tract  on  the  percentage  basis,  as  both  the  costs,  of  these  examples 
are  high,  but  it  would  be  much  more  economical  to  let  the  work 
at  contract.  There  would  no  doubt  have  been  a  number  of  re- 
sponsible contracting  firms  only  too  glad  to  do  these  jobs  for  less 
money  than  they  cost  the  railroad  company.  If  the  work  was  too 
irregular  to  let  it  upon  a  unit  basis,  or  too  uncertain  to  make  it  a 
lump  sum  job,  it  could  have  been  contracted  for,  at  cost  plus  a  fixed 
sum.  Then  there  would  be  no  object  for  the  contractor  to  "salt" 
the  job,  or  even  prolong  the  time  or  skimp  the  work.  There  is  cer- 
tainly much  food  for  thought  in  the  above  figures. 

The  bonding  of  the  rails  on  electric  track  is  an  important  detail  of 
the  work.  The  labor  necessary  consists  of  reaming  the  hole  out  in 
order  to  make  the  contact  good  and  in  placing  and  tightening  up  the 
bond.  The  cost  of  labor  and  material  per  lineal  foot  of  track  for 
bonding  has  been  given,  but  it  may  be  of  interest  to  consider  the  cost 
per  joint  or  bond.  The  bond  used,  was  a  10-in.  concealed  bond,  that 
is  a  bond  entirely  covered  up  by  the  angle  plate.  The  cost  of  the 
bonds,  apiece,  was  73.2  cts.  In  Example  I,  with  bonders' 'wages  at 
30  cts.  per  hour,  the  cost  of  labor  per  bond  was  41.7  cts.,  making  a 
total  cost  of  $1.149.  In  Example  II,  with  wages  at  17  cts.  per  hour, 
the  labor  cost  per  bond  was  24.5  cts.  giving  a  total  cost  of  97.7  cts. 
This  does  not  include  the  expense -of  putting  on  the  angle  plate 
and  tightening  up  the  bolts,  as  that  is  listed  in  the  records  of  laying 
iron. 

Both  jobs  were  done  in  good  summer  weather.  Traffic  was  main- 
tained over  one  track  while  tha  other  track  was  being  rebuilt.  No 
record  was  kept  of  the  cost  of  laying  these  cross  overs,  consequently 
they  were  not  charged  against  the  work. 

The  management  and  organization  of  the  forces  was  not  up  to  the 
standard  of  our  best  contracting  firms.  A  large  per  cent  of  the 
laborers  were  foreigners  and  they  worked  under  sub-foremen  or 
assistant  foremen  of  their  own  nationality.  This  made  it  possible 
for  the  men  to  lose  and  waste  time.  Frequently  instructions  were 
misunderstood,  so  work  was  done  wrong  only  to  be  changed. 
Some  foremen  were  kept  at  work,  not  from  their  ability  to  handle 
men  and  obtain  good  results,  but  because  they  could  furnish  new 
laborers  when  they  were  needed.  It  was  also  possible  for  dis- 
charged men  to  go  from  the  job  at  which  they  were  laid  off  to 
another  piece  of  work  being  done  by  the  company  and  obtain  em- 
ployment. Any  contractor  knows  the  cost  of  such  proceedings. 
They  cannot  be  calculated  but  they  show  up  on  the  wrong  side  of 
the  ledger  at  the  end  of  a  season's  work. 

Cost  of  Street  Railway  Track  with  Rubble  Concrete  Base,  Ft. 
Wayne,  Ind.* — The  track  was  single  track  in  paved  street,  with 
sidings  and  turnouts,  and  the  work  consisted  in  excavating  some  8  ft. 
wide  and  from  1  to  3 1/2  ft.  deep,  placing  the  concrete,  laying  track, 
and  repaving.  The  construction  is  shown  by  Fig.  13.  The  costs  as 
given  by  Mr.  H.  L.  Weber,  chief  engineer,  Ft.  Wayne  &  Wabash 
Valley  Traction  Co.,  were  as  follows : 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  March  11,  1908. 


1426 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 


There  were  5,022  lin.  ft.  of  single  track  made  up  as  follows: 

Main  line,  lin.   ft 4,481 

Sidings,    lin.    ft 476 

Two  left-hand  turnouts,   lin.   ft 65 

Total    track,    lin   ft r>.0-2 

There  were  3,970  sq.  yds.  of  repaying  made  up  as  follows: 

In  gage  of  main  track,  sq.  yds 3,399.1 

On   sidings,    sq.   yds 453.9 

1-ft.  strip  outside  of  rails,   sq.   yds 1,117.0 

Total  paving,    sq.   yds 3,970.0 

The  excavation  consisted  of  a  trench  some  8  ft.  wide  and  from 
1  to  3%  ft.  deep.  All  excavated  material  was  hauled  away,  teams 
costing  40  cts.  per  hour  and  common  labor  16^  cts.  per  hour.  The 
cost  of  excavation  was  as  follows : 

Excavating  and  hauling  away $3,378.03 

1  new  road  plow 

Total   cost    .  $3,403.03 


};5Mortor      Special  Nose  BlecK      J:3Grrpuf          _"5P""'' 

I      I      I       I  '     \       l^fTT 

\  v-'kLx/^  Wo°*  Tl'e*>  &"**>"*  r'o"-3o''ctoc 


. 
i  OM  ft  a/I  Cross  tie  tv  replace  Wood  fie 


Carneq/e  Steel  Tie  Under 


\     0)d5WRailf?elaic<-Firs1-foti/d92      Li 


EncjrConir 


Plan 

Vis.   13.  —  Street  Railway  Track. 


This  gives  a  cost  for  excavation  of  67.7  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  track. 
The  track  was  laid   with   old   5%-in.    rails,    which   were   revrrs- •<! 
v  rid  for  end.     The  ties  were   spaced   30   ins.   on   centers.     Altogether 
*,957  ft.  of  track  were  laid,  costing  as  follows: 

Total.        Per  lin.  ft. 
i     TSI.Sl  ?0.15S 

1. 204. 80  0.242 

90.00  0.018 

46.85  o.oos> 

210.00  0.041 


Item. 

Labor     

Ties     

1  8  kegs  spilu-s  at    $."> 

8  kegs  bolts  at  $5.85 

350    bonds  at   60   ots 


Totals 


,$2,336.46 


RAILWAYS.  1427 

The  concrete  work  comprised  the  making  and  laying  of  1,2«0 
cu.  yds.  of  concrete  at  the  following  cost : 

Item.                                                           Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Stone  at  $1.25  per  cu.  yd $    973.55  $0.772 

688  cu.  yds.  gravel  and  sand  at   $1       688.00  0.546 

759%  bbls.  cement  at  $2 1,519.00  1.205 

Labor 527.68  0418 

Totals     $3,708.23          $2.941 

This  low  cost  of  concrete  per  cubic  yard  was  made  possible  by  the 
use  of  cobble  stones  from  the  old  cobble  pavement  in  the  concrete. 
It  was  estimated  by  the  engineer  that  had  broken  stone  concrete 
been  used  throughout  the  cost  would  have  been  $5.50  per  cu.  yd., 
so  that  a  saving  of  nearly  one-half  was  affected  by  using  the 
rubble  concrete.  The  cost  of  the  concrete  per  lineal  foot  of  track 
was  $3,708.23  +  4,957  ft.  =  74.8  cts. 

There  were  3,970  sq.  yds.  of  repaying  which  cost  as  follows: 
Item.  Total.       Per  sq.  yd. 

Gravel  and  sand $     344.20          $0.086 

90y2   bbls.   cement  at   $2 181.00  0.046 

33,145  new  brick  at  $22.50  per  M. .  .       746.86  0.188 

123,618  blocks  at  $18.25  per  M 2,256.86  0.568 

Unloading  and  hauling  brick 250.00  0.063 

1    road  roller 200.00  0.050 

Labor  425.70  0.107 


Totals     ( $4,404.62          $1.108 

The  cost  of  paving  per  lineal  foot  of  track  was  88.8  cts.  and  the 
total  cost  of  the  work  per  lineal  foot  of  track  was : 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Excavation $0.677 

Track     laying 0.468 

Concrete 0.748 

Paving     0.888 


Total     I $2.781 

This  does  not  include  the  cost  of  the  rails. 

Comparative  Cost  of  Street  Railway  Track  Built  with  Steel  and 
with  Wood  Ties.* — A  steel  tie  laid  in  concrete  is  cheaper  than  a 
wood  tie  laid  in  concrete  or  broken  stone  in  street  railway  track 
construction,  according  to  figures  by  Mr.  C.  H.  Clark,  Cleveland 
Electric  Ry.,  Cleveland,  O.  Comparison  is  made  between  the 
standard  construction  with  Carnegie  steel  ties  on  the  Cleveland 
Electric  Ry.,  and  various  standard  forms  of  construction  with  wood 
ties. 

The  Carnegie  tie  is  a  steel  I-beam  5%  ins.  deep  with  a  top 
flange  4%  ins.  wide  and  a  bottom  flange  8  ins.  wide.  The  ties  are 
spaced  6  ft.  apart  on  centers.  A  strip  of  1:3:6  concrete  about 
2  ft.  wide  and  5%  ins.  thick  is  placed  under  each  tie  and  the 
space  between  ties  is  filled  with  a  5%-in.  layer  of  concrete.  The 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   7,    1906. 


1428  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

rods  connecting  the  rails  come  over  each  tie.     The  actual  cost  of 

this  construction  per  100  ft.  is  given  as  follows: 

Per  100  ft. 

16%    ties   at    $2.50 $   41.66 

17  cu.  yds.  concrete  at  $5 85.00 


Total $126.66 

Total  per  foot  of  track 1.27 

Using  oak  ties  costing  80  cts.  each  and  spaced  2  ft.  on  centers 
the  cost  of  the  several  standard  constructions  per  foot  are  given 
as  follows : 

.     No.   1. — Tamping  with  material  taken  out ;  no  extra  excavation : 

Per  ft. 

Tamping    $0.04 

Tie    40 

Total   per   ft £0.44 

No.  2. — Seven  inches  broken  stone  under  ties  and  concrete  be- 
tween the  ties : 

0.18  cu.  yds.  crushed  stone,   at  $1.50 $0.27 

1   cu.  yd.   concrete,  at  $5 50 

Tamping   crushed    stone 08 

Extra  excavation  and  removing  the   same 07 

Tie    40 

Total   per    ft $1.32 

No.  3. — Seven  inches  broken  stone  under  ties  and  broken  stone 
between  the  ties: 

0.28  cu.  yd.   of  stone,  at  $1.50 $0.42 

Tamping    the    same 08 

Extra  excavation   and  removing  the  same 08 

Tie 40 

Total   per   ft $0.98 

No.  4. — All  concrete  ;  5  in.  below  and  filled  to  the  top  of  the  tie : 

0.218  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  at  $5 $1.19 

Extra  excavation  and  removing  the  same 07 

Tie    40 

Total   per   ft $1.56 

No.  5. — Four  inches  concrete ;  1  in.  sand  under  tie  and  concrete 
between  the  ties : 

0.208  cu.  yd.  concrete,  at  $5 $1.04 

Extra  excavation  and  removing  the  same 07 

Tie    .  40 


Total   per    ft $1.51 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  steel  tie  construction  is  cheaper  in  first 
cost  than  any  of  the  concrete  constructions  with  wood  ties.  Re- 
ferring to  this  comparison  Mr.  Clark  says : 

"This  is  on  the  assumption  that  white  oak  ties  cost  80  cts.  apiece. 
This  price,  of  course,  varies  in  different  localities,  and  the  difference 
jn  price  can  readily  be  applied  for  comparison.  The  life  of  the 
steel  tie  can  readily  be  placed  at  20  years,  and  the  white  oak  at 
about  12  years. 


RAILWAYS.  142D 

Cost  of  Welding  Rails  by  the  Thermit  Process.*— The  following 
account  of  the  methods  and  cost  of  welding  a  large  number  of 
rail  joints  by  the  thermit  process  has  been  obtained  from  Mr.  M.  J. 
French,  Engineer  Maintenance  of  Way  of  the  Utica  &  Mohawk 
Valley  Electric  Railway.  A  part  of  this  information  appeared 
originally  in  a  paper  by  Mr.  French,  read  before  the  Street  Railway 
Association  of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  the  remainder,  covering 
practically  all  of  the  matter  on  costs,  was  obtained  from  the  author 
by  the  editors  of  Engineering-Contracting.  Both  the  methods 
described  and  the  costs  given  refer  to  work  on  the  railway  named 
above  during  1905-6. 

Thermit  Process. — The  process  of  welding  consists  in  pouring 
molten  mild  steel  from  a  melting  crucible  into  sand  and  flour  molds 
placed  around  the  rails  at  the  joint.  It  is  in  detail  as  follows : 

The  rails  having  first  been  lined  and  surfaced,  the  joint  is 
thoroughly  cleaned  with  a  sand  blast  or  wire  brush.  Then  the 
rails  are  heated  by  a  gasoline  or  oil  blow-torch  to  expel  all 
moisture,  and  by  heating  the  rails  to  a  dull  red  better  results  are 
secured  as  the  temperature  of  the  molten  steel  is  not  reduced  as 
much  when  coming  into  contact  with  the  rails.  After  the  joint  is 
cleaned  and  heated  a  pair  of  molds  made  of  an  equal  mixture  of 
common  clay  and  sand,  or,  preferably,  of  sand  and  10  per  cent  of 
cheap  rye  flour,  is  clamped  firmly  to  the  rails.  The  molds  are 
held  by  a  wrought  iron  frame-work  provided  with  handles  to 
facilitate  carrying.  The  molds  being  in  place,  the  rail  head  is 
painted  with  a  watery  solution  of  red  clay  which  the  heated  metal 
immediately  dries  up  to  a  thin  coating,  the  purpose  of  which  is  to 
prevent  the  molten  slag  or  steel  from  uniting  with  or  burning  the 
rail  head.  After  thoroughly  luting  all  joints  of  the  molds  with 
clay  of  the  consistency  of  putty,  earth  is  packed  around  the  outside 
of  the  molds.  The  molds  and  the  rails  are  then  given  a  final 
warming  with  the  blow-torch,  the  flame  being  directed  inside  the 
molds  to  expel  any  remaining  moisture.  The  crucible  on  its  tripod 
is  then  set  over  the  mold  with  its  pouring  hole  directly  over  and 
about  2  ins.  above  the  gate  in  the  mold.  After  placing  the  tapping 
pin,  iron  disc,  asbestos  disc  and  refractory  sand  in  the  bottom  of 
the  crucible  to  act  as  a  plug  for  the  opening  the  thermit  compound 
is  poured  in  and  in  the  center  of  the  top  is  placed  about  one-third 
teaspoonful  of  ignition  powder.  A  storm  match  starts  the  chemical 
process. 

The  thermit  compound  is  composed  of  aluminum  and  iron  oxide 
both  in  granular  or  flake  form  ;  the  ignition  powder  is  composed  of 
aluminum  and  barium  peroxide  in  much  finer  form.  When  the 
match  is  applied  the  barium  peroxide  ignites  and  releases  its 
oxygen  to  the  aluminum  very  quickly.  The  heat  produced  is  so 
intense  that  it  causes  the  iron  oxide  to  release  its  oxygen,  which 
in  turn  is  seized  by  the  aluminum  and  almost  instantly  the  entire 
contents  of  the  crucible  are  a  boiling  and  seething  mass.  By  this 
reaction  the  pure  steel  is  liberated  and  settles  immediately  to  the 

*Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.   13,   1907. 


1430  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

bottom  of  the  mold.  The  crucible  is  then  tapped  by  striking  the 
tapping  pin  with  a  special  iron  spade  and  the  molten  steel  runs  into 
the  mold  followed  by  the  aluminum  oxide  and  corundum,  slag.  The 
chemical  reaction  described  is  completed  fn  about  30  seconds,  an<l 
in  five  minutes  the  molds  can  be  removed. 

Molds. — The  molds  are  made  by  baking  a  mixture  of  sand  and 
rye  flour  shaped  on  models.  At  first  a  mixture  of  one  part  clay  and 
one  part  sand  was  used,  but  it  resulted  unsatisfactorily.  The 
molds  shrunk  and  checked  badly  in  baking  and  required  a  great 
amount  of  careful  luting  to  close  the  joints.  Also  the  clay  was 
"baked  like  a  brick  by  the  great  heat  of  the  welded  joint  and  was 
quite  difficult  to  remove,  adding  somewhat  to  the  expense.  At  the 
suggestion  of  an  old  foundryman  trial  was  made  of  a  mixture  of 
clean,  sharp  sand,  with  10  per  cent  of  coarse  rye  flonr ;  the  mixture 
was  moistened  just  enough  to  retain  its  form  when  pressed  in 
the  hand.  This  mixture  proved  satisfactory.  It  came  away  from 
the  model  without  adhering,  baked  without  shrinking  and  was  hard 
enough  to  stand  ordinary  handling.  By  adding  a  teaspoonful  of 
linseed  oil  to  the  mixture  for  a  pair  of  molds  it  baked  as  hard  aa 
concrete — unnecessarily  hard  for  ordinary  purposes,  but  most 
desirable  for  special  molds  for  broken  or  combination  joints. 

The  molds  are  baked  in  a  brick  oven  having  a  flat  iron  plate 
above  the  firebox  to  baffle  the  heat  and  above  this  two  racks 
capable  of  holding  twelve  sets  of  molds.  For  baking  a  moderate 
heat,  about  the  temperature  required  for  making  bread — has  proved 
the  most  satisfactory ;  a  higher  temperature  burned  the  rye  flour 
and  destroyed  its  cementing  properties.  One  man  receiving  15 
cts.  per  hour  makes  and  takes  the  molds  and  he  can  turn  out  12 
sets  every  five  hours,  or  24  sets  per  day.  This  gives  a  cost  for  labor 
of  about  6}4  cts.  per  set.  The  molds  actually  cost  about  10  cts. 
a  set,  counting  in  materials  and  lost  time  due  to  the  full  output  of 
the  oven  not  being  required  each  day. 

Crucibles. — The  crucibles  furnished  by  the  Goldschmidt  Thermit 
Co.  cost  |7.25  each,  but  since  using  up  the  first  six  bought  the 
railway  company  has  made  its  own,  buying  magnesia  tar  from  the 
Goldschmidt  Thermit  Co.  at  2%  cts.  per  pound.  The  tar  is 
mixed  with  25  per  cent  of  old  crucible  material  finely  powdered. 
These  crucibles  last  on  an  average  for  about  30  joints.  They  are 
baked  in  the  oven  previously  described  with  a  higher  temperature 
than  that  required  for  the  molds.  The  cost  of  the  crucibles  is 
$2.40  each,  made  up  of  the  following  items: 

48  Ibs.  magnesia  tin  at  2%  cts $1.20 

12   Ibs.   old  crucible  powder,  labor 0.15 

6  hrs.'  labor  at  15  cts.,  molding  and  baking 0.90 

Fuel    .  .    0.15 


Total    $2.40 

•  Cost  of  Welding. — The  welding  was  done  by  a  gang  of  1  foreman 
and  3  laborers.  This  gang  has  never  exceeded  20  welds  per 
10-hour  day.  The  wages  paid  were:  Foreman,  $2.50  per  day.  and 
laborers,  $1.50  per  day.  The  welding  portion  consists  of  16  Ibs. 


RAILWAYS.  1431 

thermit  and  2  Ibs.  iron  punchinge,  or  15  Ibs.  thermit  and  3  lb«. 
iron  punchings,  if  a  lower  temperature  seems  desirable.  The 
total  cost  of  the  welding1  portion,  including  igniting  powder,  tapping 
pin,  and  plugging  materials  for  crucible,  consisting  of  asbestos 
washer,  iron  disc  and  refractory  sand,  is  $4.25.  The  cost  of 
welding  100  joints  on  T-rail  7  ins.  high,  6  ins.  base  and  3  ins. 
head  during  1906  was  per  joint  as  follows: 

Cost    of    mold $0.10 

Cost   of   crucible 0.10 

Cost   of   casting   materials 0.20 

Foreman    0.25 

Laborers     0.91 

Thermit    portion .  .  . -4.25 

Total $5.81 

To  this  is  to  be  added  $1.63,  which  is  about  the  average  cost 
of  removing  and  replacing  brick  pavement  at  each  joint  for  labor 
and  materials,  using  old  broken  stone  for  concrete  and  cleaning 
old  paving  blocks.  This  addition  brings  the  total  up  to  $7.44  per 
Joint  welded.  The  cost  of  welding  600  joints  in  1905  on  9-in. 
tram  head  rail,  including  all  labor,  materials,  tools  and  patterns 
incident  to  the  work,  experimenting  with  mold  materials  and  cost 
of  oven,  was  $5.86.  The  cost  of  the  original  outfit  for  welding  was: 

1  automatic    crucible $   7.25 

1  set  mold  models 12.00 

1  set  mold  clamps 6.00 

1  tapping    spade 1.00 

1  tripod  for  crucible 4.00 

1  set   mold  boxes 2.50 


Total $32.75 

Precautions. — Certain  precautions  are  necessary  to  get  the  best 
results  by  the  thermit  process,  and  some  of  these  we  quote  from 
Mr.  French's  paper  as  follows: 

"When  we  began  welding  this  7-in.  rail  we  found  that  we  could 
sledge  off  the  welds  and  that  the  iron  from  the  thermit  compound 
had  not  united  with  the  rail ;  also  that  the  iron  came  up  to  the 
top  of  the  rail  head.  We  subsequently  found  that  the  mold  models 
had  become  mixed,  and  we  had  used  one  of  too  small  horizontal 
cross-section,  and  consequently  the  rail  chilled  the  small  volume  of 
molten  iron  coming  in  contact  with  it.  Upon  enlarging  the  mold 
model  so  that  the  thermit  portion  furnished  only  enough  iron  to 
come  up  under  the  rail  head,  we  obtained  welds  that  resisted  the 
most  vigorous  sledging  that  could  be  given  with  a  10-pound  hammer. 
We  were  able  to  batter  the  weld  out  of  shape,  but  could  not  sepa- 
rate it  from  the  rail.  This  sledging  test  is  now  applied  to  all 
welds. 

"We  found  when  welding  in  the  morning  with  rising  temperature 
that  tightly-closed  joints  often  humped  up  when  welded.  This 
proved  to  be  due  to  the  latent  compression  in  the  rails  that  did 
not  manifest  itself  until  the  fail  ends  became  soft.  These  humped 
joints  were  ground  down  with  an  emery  wheel  grinder.  We  had 


1432  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

only  a  few  of  these  joints  when  we  realized  the  cause,  and  readily 
prevented  such  action  by  welding  on  cooler  days  or  when  the 
temperature  was  falling.  We  obtained  the  best  results  with  joints 
open  about  1/16  to  1/32  in.,  the  expansion  in  welding  closing 
tightly  such  an  opening.  We  have  made  excellent  combination 
welds  between  80-lb.  T-rail,  7-in.  70-lb.  and  95-lb.  T-rails  and 
9-in.  girder  rails.  In  making  combination  welds  we  found  that  it 
was  essential  to  get  a  good  body  of  metal  between  the  upper  side 
of  the  base  of  the  deeper  rail  and  the  under  side  of  the  shallower 
section  in  order  to  secure  the  strongest  type  of  weld. 

"Thus  far  there  has  been  no  appreciable  excess  wear  in  the 
head  of  the  rails  at  the  welds  and  the  heated  portion  seems  to 
take  the  original  temper,  »as  it  cools  down  slowly  in  about  the 
same  way  as  when  coming  from  the  rolls. 

"A  few  portions  of  thermit,  not  over  six,  have  been  lost  through 
failure  of  the  workman  to  tap  the  crucible  properly,  or  lack  of 
luting  around  the  joints  of  the  molds.  We  have  had  but  one 
explosion  during  our  entire  experience.  That  occurred  after  using 
the  process  18  months,  and  was  caused  through  carelessness  in 
welding  on  a  rainy  day  and  in  not  thoroughly  luting  the  molds 
near  the  top.  The  slag  came  in  contact  with  the  wet  earth  around 
the  mold,  but  aside  from  the  scare  occasioned  by  the  report  and  a 
slight  burn  on  the  foreman's  arm  from  flying  slag  no  harm  was 
done,  and  the  weld  turned  out  to  be  a  good  one." 

Cost  of  Electrically  Welding  3,087  Rail  Joints.*— Mr.  P.  Ney  Wil- 
son gives  the  following: 

There  are  many  miles  of  perfectly  welded  track  in  existence, 
and  this  fact  seems  sufficient  to  prove  that  the  process  is  not  a 
failure ;  for  the  successfully  welded  track,  aside  from  the  question 
of  theoretical  points  in  the  process,  furnishes  abundant  proof  that 
with  proper  attention  the  weld  is  efficient  and  the  nearest  approach 
to  the  perfect  joint  that  track  engineers  have  yet  seen. 

The  one  important  and  serious  drawback  to  the  use  of  the  weld 
was  the  inclination  towards  undue  crystallization,  caused  by  the 
sudden  application  of  severe  heat.  This  condition  developed  during 
the  experimental  stage  and  seems  to  have  been  obviated  by  the 
more  scientific  application  of  the  process. 

In  the  case  of  old  track  with  more  or  less  battered  joints,  prices 
should  be  obtained  upon  a  step  joint  for  raising  the  receiving  rail 
sufficiently  to  surface  the  lowest  spot  on  the  dish  with  the  abutting 
rail.  To  this  figure  should  be  added  the  cost  of  the  bonds  (loose  and 
battered  joints  are  usually  accompanied  with  inefficient  bonding)  ; 
then  add  labor  cost  and  incidental  material  and  make  a  total.  This 
total  should  be  compared  with  the  cost  of  welding,  and,  after 
considering  the  increased  life  due  to  welding,  a  decision  based  upon 
facts  can  be  made. 

To  illustrate  the  point  just  made  an  example  is  chosen  from 
work  done  at  Camden,  N.  J.,  in  the  fall  of  1905  on  the  lines  of  the 
South  Jersey  Division  of  the  Public  Service  Corporation. 

"Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.  20.  1907. 


RAILWAYS.  14iJ3 

ORGANIZATION  OF  THE  WORK. 

The  organization  of  the  gang  doing  the  work,  as  shown  in  the 
detailed  statement,  consisted  of  about  100  men,  75  of  whom  worked 
on  the  day  shift  and  the  balance  of  25  on  the  night  shift.  It  was 
found  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  have  more  than  25  men  working 
at  night,  as  the  day  gang  could  keep  ahead  of  the  welding  machine 
with  very  satisfactory  results.  The  figures  showing  the  average 
number  of  men  in  gang  per  day  are  based  upon  a  ten-hour  day  at 
15  cts.  per  hour,  assuming  that  all  the  men  received  the  same  rate. 
This  figure  is  shown  in  this  way  so  that  it  can  be  applied  in  any 
locality  where  a  higher  or  lower  rate  of  wages  is  paid  ;  for  instance, 
the  average  number  of  men  per  day  required  on  the  entire  operation 
was  97.6.  This  figure  being  arrived  at,  assuming  that  all  of  the 
men  and  teams  worked  at  the  same  rate  per  hour,  would  effect,  of 
course,  the  cost  per  joint  labor  for  opening,  closing,  shimming  and 
aligning,  etc.,  in  other  localities ;  this  latter  cost  being  increased 
or  decreased  in  proportion  to  the  increase  or  decrease  in  the  rate 
per  hour,  as  the  case  may  be. 

The  operation  in  Camden  was  handled  by  four  foremen,  two 
sub-foremen  and  on  an  average  of  three  teams  per  day.  The  rate 
paid  the  foremen  was  25  cts.  per  hour  ;  rate  for  teams,  45  cts.  per 
hour,  and  rate  of  men  in  the  gang,  15  cts.  per  hour.  It  might  be 
added  that  in  the  gang  doing  the  work  there  was  about  50  per  cent 
of  first-class  track  laborers  at  the  15-ct.  rate.  These  men  were 
experienced  trackmen  and  the  low  cost  per  joint  bears  evidence 
of  their  capability. 

.  The  actual  welding  of  the  joints  was  done  by  the  Lorain  Steel 
Co.  on  contract  at  $5.25  per  joint.  This  price  is  governed,  of  course, 
by  the  number  of  joints  covered  by  contract.  They  agree  to  pay 
to  the  railway  company  $10  to  $12  per  joint  for  every  joint  that 
breaks  within  one  year  from  date  of  welding.  The  breakage  for 
the  first  year  was  1  per  cent,  the  cost  of  cutting  in  new  rails  being 
covered  by  the  rebate  from  the  contractor.  The  track  having  been 
already  subjected  to  all  seasons  of  the  year,  we  now  assume  that 
the  breakage  will  be  materially  decreased  until  the  rail  is  worn  to 
a  point  where  it  should  be  relaid.  Very  little  new  material  waa 
used  by  the  railway  company,  it  consisting  of  iron  shims,  sand, 
oil  for  red  lights,  hacksaw  blades  and  other  inexpensive  miscel- 
laneous track  material.  It  was  not  necessary  to  mix  concrete  for 
filling  in  holes  for  paving  foundation,  for  in  the  above  case  the  city 
was  under  contract  with  a  paving  company,  who  followed  up  the 
welding  machines  and  replaced  asphalt  on  Broadway  and  on  Kaighn 
Ave.  The  paving  on  all  other  streets  was  placed  by  the  railway 
company,  using  the  men  in  the  gang  at  the  rate  mentioned.  The 
aligning,  surfacing  and  shimming  of  the  joints  was  done  by  six 
skilled  trackmen  under  a  foreman.  These  men  were  trained 
especially  for  joint  repairs  with  the  idea  in  view  that  too  much 
care  cannot  be  taken  in  bringing  the  joint  to  proper  alignment  and 
surface. 


1434  HANDBOOK    Ol'    COST  DATA. 

An  important  feature  in  the  maintenance  of  way  man  is  the 
obtaining  of  proper  credit  for  old  material,  which  has  been  re- 
turned to  scrap  or  to  stores,  it  being  manifest  that  in  case  of 
welding  rails  that  the  bonds  and  the  joints  taken  off  should  be 
credited  to  the  operation. 

COST  OF  WORK. 

Haddonfield  Pike. — The  work  on  this  street  comprised  the  welding 
of  the  joints  in  both  tracks  of  a  double  track  line.  Altogether  989 
joints  were  welded  in  7-in.  girder  rail  of  Pennsylvania  Steel  Co.'s 
section  No.  238  and  Cambria  section  No.  824.  The  rails  were  60  ft. 
long.  The  pavement  was  Belgian  blocks  on  sand.  The  work  was 
started  on  Sept.  23,  1905,  and  was  finished  on  Oct.  6,  1905,  making 
14  days'  work.  The  average  number  of  men  in  the  gang  per  day, 
based  upon  a  10-hour  day  at  15  cts.  per  hour,  inclusive  of  Sundays 
and  rainy  days,  was  103.7.  The  price  received  for  scrap  fish  plates 
was  $15.60  per  gross  ton  and  for  copper  bonds  was  15  %  cts.  per  Ib. 
The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Cost  of  Fitting  Joints  for  Welding:    Total.        Per  joint. 

103.7  men  14  days  at  $1.50 $2,177.55          $2.201 

Cost  of  material 140.85  0.142 


Total     $2,318.40          $2.343 

Credit   for   scrap 900.00  0.910 

Cost  after  deducting  credit $1,418.40          $1.433 

We  have,  then,  the  cost  of  welding  per  joint  as  follows : 

Cost  of  fitting  joint  for  welding $1.433 

Contract  price  for  welding 5.25 


Total $6.683 

This  figure  gives  a  cost  per  mile  as  follows: 

For   30-ft.    lengths .'... $2,352.76 

For   60-ft.   lengths 1,176.38 

State  Street. — The  work  on  this  street  comprised  the  welding  of 
191  joints  on  7-in.  girder  rail  Cambria  section  No.  834.  For  115 
joints  the  rails  were  30  ft.  long,  and  for  76  joints  they  were  60  ft. 
long.  The  pavement  was  Belgian  blocks  on  sand.  For  the  scrapped 
fish  plates  the  company  received  $15.60  per  gross  ton,  and  for  the 
copper  bonds  15%  cts.  per  Ib.  The  average  number  of  men  in  the 
gang  per  day,  based  upon  a  10-hour  day  and  15  cts.  per  hour, 
was  84.6.  Work  was  started  on  Oct.  13,  and  finished  on  Oct.  16. 
1895,  and  occupied  three  working  days,  making  the  average  number 
of  joints  finished  per  day  63.6.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Cost  of  Fitting  Joints  for  Welding:     Total.        Per  joint. 

84.6  men   3   days  at  $1.50 $280.56          $1.993 

Cost   of   material 57.61  0.201 

Total $458.17  $2.294 

Credit    for    scrap 174.26  0.91  2 

Cost  after  deducting  credit $283.91          $1.382 


RAILWAYS.  1435 

We  have,  then,  the  cost  of  welding  per  joint  as  follows : 

Cost  of  fitting  joint  for  welding $1.382 

Contract  price  for   welding 5.25 

Total     $6.632 

These  figures  give  a  cost  per  mile  as  follows : 

For    30-ft.    lengths $2,334.46 

For   60-ft.   lengths 1,167.23 

Broadway  and  Kaign  Avenue.— This  job  comprised  the  welding 
of  715  joints  on  double-track  line  on  Broadway,  and  of  64  joints 
on  one-track  on  Kaign  Ave.,  making  a  total  of  779  joints.  The  rail 
in  both  cases  was  7-in.  girder  Pennsylvania  Steel  Co.,  section  No. 
238.  The  pavement  on  Broadway  was  asphalt  between  rails,  and 
part  of  shoulder  and  Belgian  blocks  along  rails,  on  6  ins.  of  con- 
crete. On  Kaign  Ave.  the  pavement  was  bricks  between  rails  and  on 
shoulder  and  asphalt,  both  on  6  ins.  of  concrete.  The  rails  in  both 
cases  were  30  ft.  long.  For  the  scrapped  fish  plates  the  company 
got  $15.60  per  gross  ton,  and  for  the  old  copper  rail  bonds  15 % 
cts.  per  Ib.  The  average  number  of  men  worked  per  day,  based 
upon  a  10-hour  day  at  15  cts.  per  hour,  inclusive  of  Sundays  and 
rainy  days,  was  99.7.  The  work  was  done  in  September  and  October, 
1905,  and  lasted  13  days,  so  that  the  average  number  of  joints 
finished  per  day  was  60.  The  cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows: 

Cost  of  Fitting  Joints  for  Welding:     Total. 

99.7  men  13  days  at  $1.50 $1,944.94 

Cost  of  materials 239.78 


Total $2,184.72 

Credit   for   scrap 712.14 


Cost  after  deducting   credit $1,472.58          $1.889 

The  work  required  replacing  1016.6  sq.  yds.  of  asphalt  at  a  total 
c-ost  of  $2,569.65,  or  $2.527  per  sq.  yd.  As  there  were  779  joints  the 
repairs  amounted  to  1.305  sq.  yds.  per  joint,  and  cost  $3,298  per 
joint.  We  then  have  the  total  cost  of  welding  per  joint  as  follows : 

Fitting  joint  for  welding $1.889 

Contract  price  for  welding 5.25 

Repairs  to  pavement 3.298 

Total     $10.437 

These  figures  give  a  cost  per  mile  as  follows : 

For    30-ft.    lengths $8,131.97 

For    60-ft.    lengths 1,837.08 

Moorestown  Pike. — The  work  on  this  job  comprised  the  welding 
of  1,128  joints  on  double  track  laid  with  60-ft.  9-in.  and  7-in.  girder 
rail  Pennsylvania  Steel  Co.'s  sections  No.  238  and  No.  200.  The 
pavement  was  Belgian  blocks  on  sand.  Scrap  fish  plates  fetched 
$13.60  per  gross  ton,  and  scrap  bands  15  Ms  cts.  per  Ib.  Work  was 
started  Oct.  16  and  was  finished  Nov.  5,  1905,  thus  lasting  18  days. 
The  average  number  of  men  worked  per  day,  based  on  a  10-hour 


1436  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

day  at  15  cts.  per  hour,  inclusive  of  Sundays,  and  rainy  days,  was 
93.6.  The  average  number  of  joints  welded  per  day  was  62.6.  The 
cost  of  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Cost  of  Fitting  Joints  for  Welding:     Total.        Per  joint. 

93.6  men  18  days  at  $1.50 $2,528.19          $2.241 

Cost  of  material 142.85  0.127 


Total     $2,671.04          $2.368 

Credit  for  scrap 1,030.19  0.913 

Cost  after  deducting  credit $1,640.85          $1.455 

We  then  have  the  total  cost  of  welding  per  joint  as  follows : 

Fitting  joints  for  welding $1.455 

Contract  price   for  welding 5.25 

Total • '.  . $6.705 

These  figures  give  a  cost  per  mile  as  follows: 

For   30-ft.    lengths .  .$2,359.80 

For   60-ft.    lengths 1,179.90 

Total  Work. — Summarizing  the  above  figures  we  have  a  record  of 
which   gives  us   the  following: 

Number  of  days  worked 48 

Number    of    joints    welded 8,087 

Number   of   joints  welded   per    <1  ::i.v 64.3 

Average   number    men    worked. 97.6 

Cost  of  Work:  Total.          Per  joint. 

Labor  preparing  joints $   7,031.24          $2.277 

Materials  preparing  joints 581.09  0.188 

Total     $   7,612.33          $2.465 

Credit  for  scrap 2,816.59  0.912 

Cost  after  deducting  credit $   4,795.74          $1.533 

Cost  replac.  1,016.6  sq.  yds.  asphalt     2,589.65  0.832 

Contract  price  for  welding.  . 16,206.75  5.25 


Totals     $23,572.14          $7.635 

These  figures  give  us  a  cost  per  mile  as  follows : 


For    30-ft.    rails $2,687.52 

For    60-ft.    rails l,343.-75 

DISCUSSION  OF  RESULTS. 

The  first  cost  per  joint,  represents  cost  in  labor  and  material 
to  the  railway  company  exclusive  of  the  contract  price  for  doing 
the  welding.  The  average  number  of  finished  joints  per  day  on  the 
above  operation  was  64.  It  should  be  understood  that  this  figure  is 
arrived  at  by  dividing  the  total  number  of  joints  by  the  total 
days,  inclusive  of  Sundays  and  rainy  days  and  loss  of  time,  due  to 
the  moving  of  the  machine  from  one  street  to  the  other.  Under 
favorable  conditions  80  joints  per  day  of  24  hours  can  be  opened, 
welded,  repaved  and  left  in  finished  condition. 

In  paved  streets  the  question  of  expansion  and  contraction  need 
not  be  the  cause  of  any  worry  on  the  part  of  the  engineer,  as, 


RAILWAYS.  1437 

there  being  little  change  in  the  temperature  of  the  earth,  there  is 
correspondingly  very  slight  expansion  and  contraction.  Slip  joints 
in  closed  streets  are  not  satisfactory,  and  after  practical  experience 
are  not  being  advocated,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  practically  im- 
possible to  calculate  where  the  contraction  strain  will  take  place. 

It  was  assumed  that  the  rail  welded  would  have  to  be  relaid  in 
four  years,  owing  to  battered  joints,  and  from  the  fact  that  Broad- 
way and  Kaign  Ave.  was  laid  in  concrete  with  asphalt  paving  and 
would  cost  for  relaying  $5  per  foot  for  paving  alone,  figures  showed 
conclusively  that  a  saving  could  be  effected  and  the  life  of  the 
rail  increased  from  75  to  100  per  cent.  On  Haddonfield  and  Moors- 
town  Pike  the  cost  per  joint  per  year  for  keeping  them  in  a  fair 
condition  was  90  cts.  This  included  opening  and  closing  joint, 
placing  new  plates  and  shimming. 

Taking  into  consideration  tha  above  figures  and  excessive  cost  of 
re-construction  on  Kaign  Ave.  and  Broadway,  it  was  evident  that 
saving  could  be  made  by  welding  joints.  One  per  cent  of  breakage 
was  a  small  matter  in  comparison  to  the  increasing  bad  condition 
of  all  of  the  joints.  On  Broadway  and  on  Kaign  Ave.  with  a  total 
of  779  welded  joints  there  were  none  broken.  These  two  streets 
were  paved  with  asphalt  on  concrete.  The  entire  number  of  broken 
joints  occurred  on  Haddonfield  Pike  and  Moorstown  Pike,  where 
the  track  was  laid  on  sand  and  paved  roughly  with  rubblestone.  To 
the  condition  of  the  paving  was  attributed  the  breakage,  as  in  the 
winter  months  the  snow  and  ice  had  an  opportunity  to  get  around 
the  rail,  reducing  the  temperature  of  the  rail  to  such  an  extent 
that  breakage  followed. 

The  Lorain  Steel  Co.  has  recently  successfully  applied  the  process 
to  T-rail  track  on  interurban  lines,  having  welded  a  stretch  of  about 
six  miles  from  Providence,  R.  I.,  to  River  Point.  In  this  track  they 
used  expansion  joints  every  1,000  ft. 

Cost  of  Erecting  Trolley  Poles. — A  gang  of  4  men  digging  holes 
and  6  men  raising  poles  averaged  36  poles  set  per  10-hr,  day,  or 
50  cts.  per  pole  at  this  rate,  and  with  wages  at  $1.80  per  day,  a  man 
digs  9  holes  per  day  at  a  cost  of  20  cts.  per  hole,  and  a  man  raises 
6  poles  per  day  at  a  cost  of  30  cts.  per  pole. 

In  digging  holes  24  ins.  diam.  and  5  ft.  deep  for  telegraph  poles, 
using  a  ci'owbar  and  "spoon"  shovel,  a  man  will  dig  only  3  holes  a 
day  in  stiff  clay,  and  7  holes  Jn  average  earth. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Trolley  and  Transmission  Line 
Poles.*— The  Fort  Wayne  and  Wabash  Valley  Traction  Co.  has 
made  reinforced  concrete  trolley  poles  and  transmission  line  poles, 
the  cost  of  which  was  as  follows  in  1906  : 

The  trolley  poles  are  32  ft.  long,  8  ft.  of  which  is  below  the 
ground  level.  The  pole  is  .10  ins.  square  at  the  ground  level  and  6 
ins.  at  the  top,  and  is  reinforced  with  8  twisted  steel  rods,  %  in. 
It  contains  22^  cu.  ft.  of  1  -f-  3  -f-  3  gravel  concrete,  and  122  Ibs. 
of  steel,  weighs  3,300  Ibs.,  and  costs  $7.50  at  the  gravel  pit.  The 
transmission  pole  is  42  ft.  long,  8  ft.  being  underground.  It  is  12 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  July  14,  1909. 


1438  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Ins.  square  at  the  ground  level,  and  6  ins.  at  the  top,  and  is  rein- 
forced with  8  twisted  steel  bars  (%  in.),  4  of  which  are  32  ft. 
long  and  4  are  42  ft.  long.  It  contains  29  cu.  ft.  concrete,  242  lbs>. 
reinforcing  bars  and  21  Ibs.  of  steps,  weighs  4,400  Ibs.  and  costs  J13. 

First  Cost  and  Cost  of  Operating  a  Trolley  Line— "Street  Rail- 
ways," by  C.  B.  Fairchild,  contains  the  following  estimate,  made  in 
1892,  of  the  cost  of  constructing,  equipping  and  operating  3  miles 
of  double  track  electric  trolley  line,  with  power  station  near  the 
center  of  the  line. 

Per  mile 
of  single 

Road  Bed:  Total.        track. 

15,840  lin.  ft.  stone  ballast   (6  ins.  below  ties  and 

between  ties),  including  excavation  for  same,  at 

$0.90  $  14,256  $  2,376 

15,136  ties  (5  x  7-in.)  at  $0.45 6,811  1,135 

1,056  double  joint  ties  at  $0.75 792  132 

31,680  ft.  rails  (78-lb.),  including  all  other  iron 

and  steel  at  $1.42 44,986  7,498 

6  miles  electrical  construction,  including  copper 

return  wire,  at  $500.00 3,000  500 

31,680  ft.  track  laying  (labor,  teaming  and  supt.) 

at  $0.30 9,504  1,584 

28,158  sq.  yds.  granite  pavement  at  $3.00 84,474  14,07!) 

Total    road    bed $163,823      $27,304 

Special  Street  Construction: 

2  cross-over  switches  at  $525.00 .  ..$     1,050     $      175 

1  double  track  crossing 270  45 

180  degs.  double  track  curve 492  82 

Total  special  street  construction $     1,812     $      302 

Overhead  Street  Construction: 

270  iron  pipe  poles   (6x5x4   ins.  x  28  ft.)   and 

fittings  at  $26.00 $  7,020  $  1,170 

8  iron  terminal  and  curve  poles  at  $50.00 400  67 

278  poles  set  with  concrete  foundations  at  $7.00.  .  .  1,946  324 

278  poles  painted  at  $1.00 '. 278  46 

10,224  Ibs.  (No,  0)  trolley  wire  at  $0.15 1,534  256 

2,200  Ibs.  (5/16,  7  strand)  galvanized  steel  wire 

(50  ft.  street)  at  $0.055 121  20 

15.600  Ibs.  feed  wire  (4  miles)  at  $0.17 2.652  442 

270  Ibs.  strain  and  anchor  wire  at  $0.04 11  2 

3  miles    line    and    insulating    appliances,    lighting 

arresters,  etc.,   at   $300.00 900  150 

3  miles  labor  stretching  trolley  and  feed  wire  and 

attaching  insulating  appliances,   at  $500.00 1,500  250 

Total  overhead  construction $   16,361     $  2,727 

Special  Overhead  Construction: 

6  trolley  switches  at  $3.00 $  18  $           3 

2  double  track  curves  (90  deg.)   at  $75.00 150  25 

Guard   wire   and   guard    span    half    the   line,    with 

connections    .             250  42 


Total    special    overhead    construction $         418      $         10 


RAILWAYS. 


1439 


Power  House  and  Plant: 

Real    estate $   10,000  $   1,667 

House,   100  x  175  ft -.  .      25,000  4,166 

Steam  plant,  1,050  hp.  (35  hp.  per  car)  (2  slow 

speed  engines,  boilers,  etc.),  at  $65.00 68,250  11,375 

Electrical  equipment  (including  generators,  switch- 
board, etc.),  900  hp.  (30  hp.  per  car)  at  $35.00..  31,500  5,250 

Total  power  house  and  plant $134,750  $22,458 

Rolling  Stock  and  Equipment: 

15  motor  car  bodies  (16-ft.)   at  $1,000.00 $   15,000  $   2,500 

15   motor   trucks  at   $275.00 4,125  687 

30    motors    (20   hp.)    and   electrical   appliances,   at 

$1,250.00     37,500  6,250 

15   coaches    (trailers)    with  trucks  at   $1,200.00...      18,000  3,000 

'      Total   rolling   stock .$  74,625  $12.437 

Car  Barn  and  Repair  Shop: 

Real    estate.... $     2,500  $      416 

Car   house,   fireproof 25,000  4,167 

Pits,   tracks  and   switches 4,000  667 

Repair   shop   equipment 8,500  1,417 

Total  car  barn  and  repair  shop $  40,009  $   6,667 

Auxiliary  Appliances:. 

1  electric  snow  plow  and  sweeper $     5,000  $       833 

Other    snow    appliances '      1,000  167 

1  wrecking  wagon,  tools  and  team 800  133 

1  high  wagon,  tools  and  horse 600  100 

1  express  wagon  and  horse 350  58 

1  heavy  wagon  and  team 500  83 

2  carts    .'...".           100  17 

Track    tools,    etc « 300  50 

Total  auxiliary  appliance $     8,650  $   1,442 

Grand     total 455,439  75,906 


Mr.  Fairchild  gives  the  following  estimate  of  cost  of  operating  15 
trains  (motor  and  trail  car),  running  on  4  mins.  headway,  including 
an  allowance  for  "depreciation."  He  figures  the  life  of  the 
destructible  part  of  the  plant  at  20  years,  and  provides  a  sinking 
fund  that  at  3%  compound  interest  will  redeem  the  plant  in  20 
years.  This  amounts  to  $13,870  per  year,  or  $38  per  day,  which 
shows  that  he  figured  this  depreciation  on  a  plant  of  about  $365,000, 


1440  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Per  day. 

Depreciation  of  plant  and  rolling  stock $   38.00 

Repairs,  engines,  boilers,  generators,  etc 13.00 

Repairs,    cars    (including   motors) 78.00 

Repairs,  track,  overhead  construction  and  bldgs.     47.00 

Track  cleaning,  train  and  shop  expense 14.00 

Track     service 8.00 

Power  and  car  house  expenses 6.00 

Car  house  service,  inclusive  of  cleaning,   inspec- 
tion,   etc 20.00 

Engineers,  fireman  and  dynamo  tenders 25.00 

.66  motormen  and  conductors  at  $2.00 132.00 

12  tons  (2,240  Ibs. )  coal  at  $2.50 30.00 

Water,  oil  and  grease 10.00 

Injury  to  persons  and  property 10.00 

Legal,  secret  service  and  insurance 8.00 

Licenses   and    taxes. 7.00 

General  and  miscellaneous  expense 32.50 

Total   operating  expense $478.50 

Each  of  the  15  trains  will  make  110  miles  per  day,  or  1,650  train 
miles,  or  3,300  car  miles  per  day  for  the  line.  Hence,  dividing 
$478.50  by  3,300  gives  14%  cts.  per  car  mile. 

The  repairs  to  the  power  plant  machinery,  $13  daily,  amount  to1 
$4,745  per  year,  or  less  than  5%  on  the  first  cost 

The  repairs  to  cars,  $78  daily,  amount  to  V" 2 8,4 70  per  year,  or 
more,  than  38%  of  the  first  cost,  which  is  ridiculously  high. 

The  repairs  to  track,  overhead  construction  and  buildings,  $47 
daily,  amount  to  $17,155  per  year.  Excluding  the  ballast  and  pave- 
ment, the  track  materials  and  labor  cost  about  $65,000,  the  over- 
head construction  cost  $16,000;  the  buildings  cost  $50,000;  total 
$131,000.  Hence,  the  $17,155  repairs  is  more  than  13 %  ;  but  iron 
poles,  fireproof  buildings  and  durable  construction  are  provided 
throughout  (except  the  ties).  Hence,  this  item  is  inordinately  high. 
In  brief,  not  a  single  item  of  repairs  is  correctly  figured,  and  the 
most  important  items  are  wide  of  the  truth.  Errors  of  the  kind 
made  by  Mr.  Fairchild  are  best  detected  by  expressing  the  annual 
costs  of  repairs  as  a  percentage  of  the  first  cost. 

Estimated  First  Cost  and  Cost  of  Operating  a  4-Track  Electric 
Railway. — "Electric  Railway  Economics"  (1903),  by  W.  C.  Gott- 
schall,  contains  the  following  estimate  of  the  maximum  cost  of 
suburban  electric  railway. 

Per  mile 
single  track. 
Rails  (80-lb.),  $33  per  ton  deliv.,  and  fastenings$   5,100 

Labor    laying    track 900 

Track     bonding <  50 

2,640  white  oak  ties  (6x8  ins.  x  8  ft.)   at  $0.70      1,848 

2,750  cu.  yds.  rock  ballast  at  $1.50 4,125 

20,000  cu.  yds.  grading  at  $0.30 6,000 

Third    rail 7,000 

Copper  and  installation   thereof 2,50 

Bridges  and  culverts 12.00C 

Labor  and  incidentals 

Power  stations  at  $100  per  kw.  ;  sub-stations  at 

$40    per    kw 18,000 

Rolling  stock    (5  min.  headway) 8,00 

Real  estate  and  right  of  way 20,000 

Incidentals,    including   block-signals,    telephones, 

fencing,    etc 4,000 

Total     $90,623 


RAILWAYS.  1441 

Mr.  Gottschall  gives  an  estimate  of  the  probable  cost  of  operating 
«i  4-track  interurban  road,  24  miles  long  (New  York  &  Port 
Chester),  as  follows: 

96  miles  of  main  single  track. 
124  daily  local  trains  each  way,  trains  of  1  car. 
74  daily  express  trains  each  way,  trains  of  2  cars. 
4,500,000  car  miles  per  annum. 
248  daily  local  trains  both  ways,  49  mins.  each. 
148  daily  express  trains  both  ways,   31  mins.   each. 
Hence : 

248  X  49  -r-  60  =  202.5  car  hours  per  day  of  local  train  service. 

Per  car  hr. 

1  motorman    at $0.30 

1'  conductor    at 0.25 

Total    .  . $0.55 

202.5  car  hrs.  X  $0.55  X  365  days  =  $40,752  per  year. 

In  like  manner  for  express  trains : 

2  X  148  X  31  -f-  60  =  152.8  car  hrs.  per  day.'        per  train  hr. 

1  motorman   at $0.30 

1  conductor    at 0.25 

Total     $0.80 

This  is  equivalent  to  $0.40  per  car  hr.  152.8  car  hrs.  X  $0.40  X 
365  =  $22-,309  per  year. 

Train  Crews:  Per  year. 

Train  crews,   local  trains $40,752 

Train  crews,  express  trains 22,309 


Total     $63,061 

Add  %  for  extra  man 21,020 


Grand  total  train  crews $84,081 

Station  Crews: 

22  stations  using  5  men  =  110  men. 
110  men  X  $2.00  X  365  days  =  $80,300  yearly. 

Maintenance  of  Equipment: 

4,169,760  car  miles  plus  allowance  for  extra  occasions  =  4,500,008 
car  miles. 

4,500,000  at  $0.02  =  $90,000  yearly.. 

Maintenance  of  Roadway  and  Structures:  Per  mile 


peryr. 


5%  of  $5,092,  first  cost  of  rails  and  fastenings $      254 

6%  of  $1,848,  first  cost  of  oak  ties  (at  $0.70  ea. )  .  .  .         108 

5%  of  $2,700,  first  cost  of  rock  ballast 135 

Labor  of  section  and  line  men  : 

5  trackmen  at  $1.80 $   9.00 

2  linemen   at    $2.50 5.00 


Total  per  day  for  12  miles $14.00 

$14  H-  12   X   312  days  = 364 

Repairs  and  renewals  of  fences 25 


Total    $       886 

Add  for  contingencies,  etc 114 


Grand  total   maintenance  roadway $  1,000 

96  miles  at  $1,000  yearly 96,000 


1442  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Electric.  Power:* 
Weight  of  loaded  motor  car  is  estimated  to  be : 

Tons. 

Car    and    trucks 25 

Electric    equipment 17 



Total     42 

Passengers     10 

Total    when    loaded 52 

With  5,208  local  car  miles  daily,  at  52  tons  per  car,  we  have 
270,816  ton  miles.  At  160  watt  hours  per  ton  mile  (see  Table  XXVu.> 
we  have:  160  X  270,816  =  43,330,560  watt  hours  per  day  for  local 
service.  In  similar  manner  we  get  42,020,160  watt  hours  per  day  for 
express  service;  total  85,350,720  watt  hours  per  24  hr.  day,  or 
85,351  kw.  hours. 

Add :  Per  cent. 

Transmission  loss  from  main  station  to  3d  rail.  ...    18 

Heating     cars 5 

Lighting    cars,    etc 2 


Total  to  be  added 


We  have   85,351   +   21,338  =   106,689  kw.   hrs.   per   24-hr,   day,  or 
a  plant  of  4,445  kw. 

The  cost  per  kw.  hr.  was  estimated  thus: 

Power  Station  Labor:                             .  Per  day. 

1  chief    engineer  ..................  .  ......  $  10.00 

3  assistant  engineers  at   $5.00  .............  15.00 

30  oilers   at    $2.50  .............  ......  .  .....  75.00 

3  switchboard  men  at  $3.50  ...............  10.50 

3  electric  helpers  at   $2.50  ................  7.50 

6  cleaners  at  $1.50  .......................  9.00 

6  condenser  men  at  $2.50  .................  15.00 

1  machinist  and   2   helpers  ................  9.00 

24  boiler   men   at   $2.50.  .  ..................  60.00 

1  boiler  cleaner  and  2  helpers  .............  6.00 

4  laborers  at   $1.50  .......................  6.00 

Total  labor  per  day  ....................  $  223.00 

Total  labor  per  year  ....................  $  81,395.00 


Fuel: 

6,684 

therefore,   146.69  tons  coal  at  $2.40  .....  .  $         352.06 


106,684  kw.  at  2%   Ibs.   coal  =  293,381  Ibs.  ; 
,   146.69 


Total  labor  and  fuel  per  day  ............  $         575.06 

Total  labor  and  fuel  per  year  ...........    209,897.00 

Hence  :  Per  kw.  hr. 

$575  ^-  106,684  =  ...........................  $0.00538 

Add  for   repairs,   etc  .........................    0.00112 

Total     ...................................  $0.00650 

This  allowance  of  $0.00112  per  kw.  for  repairs  of  power  station  is 
equivalent  to  $119.50  per  day,  or  $42,718  per  year.  Since  a  power 
station  and  sub-station  would  not  cost  more  than  $140  per  kw.,  the 


R.-ULir.-lYS.  1443 

total  cost  of  power  plant  would  be  $633,300  for  a  4,445  kw.  plant. 
Hence  the  $42,718  repairs  per  year  is  about  7%  of  the  first  cost. 

The  allowance  of  2  cts.  per  car  mile  for  maintenance  of  equip- 
ment is  far  too  low  for  large  high  speed  electric  cars  (42-ton).  He 
should  have  taken  fully  10%  of  the  first  cost  of  each  car,  for 
annual  repairs,  and  that  divided  by  the  annual  car  miles  would 
have  given  the  cost  of  repairs  per  car  mile. 

The  allowance  of  5%  per  year  for  renewals  of  rails  is  excessive. 
Mr.  Gottschall  errs  seriously  in  this.  He  reasons  as  follows : 

The  life  rails  for  main  line  service  of  steam  railway  trunk  lines 
is  15  years;  but  such  a  service  is  equivalent  to  20  years  on  a  high 
speed  electric  line  where  heavy  locomotives  are '  not  used.  Hence, 
a  life  of  20  years,  or  5%  depreciation,  for  rails  in  an  electric  line 
is  assumed.  Mr.  Gottschall  fails  to  consider  that  when  a  rail  is 
removed  from  a  main  line  it  has  a  scrap  value  of  about  half  its 
first  cost.  This  being  so,  it  has  depreciated  only  2  %  %  per  year, 
instead  of  the  5%  assumed  by  Mr.  Gottschall. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  6%  depreciation  that  he  assumes  for 
white  oak  ties  is  too  low.  Such  ties  will  not  last  more  than  about 
10  years. 

But  then,  on  the  other  hand  again,  his-  assumed  5%  annual 
depreciation  of  rock  ballast  Is  ridiculously  high. 

TABLE    XXVa.— WATT  HOURS  PER  TON  MILE. 
Distance  "Watt  hrs.  per  ton  mile  for  schedule  speed  of 


between 
stops,  miles. 
3  

40  mi. 
"per  hr. 
110 

35  mi. 

per  hr. 

80 

30  mi. 
per  hr. 

78 

25  mi. 
per  hr. 
65 

20  mi. 
per  hr. 
53 

15  mi- 
per  hr. 
40 

2  14 

121 

90 

83 

74 

54 

40 

2  :..:..:. 

....   142 

99 

86 

80 

60 

41 

95 

85 

68 

43 

i 

128 

90 

74 

50 

Vo   . 

145 

119 

56 

y±  ...         ...         ...         ...        120 


Train      friction      in 

Ibs.    per    ton 35  30  27%          25  20  15 

Note:     1.     The  breaking  effort  or  retardation  is  taken  at  150  Ibs. 
per  ton. 

2.  The  stops  are  taken  at   15   sees,   each,   except  for   the   15-mi. 
schedule,  where  10  sees,  are  taken. 

3.  A  schedule  speed  of  25  mi.  will  require  actual  speeds  of  40  to 
50  mi.  per  hr.,  etc. 

4.  The  rate  of  acceleration  for  the  long  runs  varies  from  75  to 
110   Ibs.   per  ton,   going  as  high  as   210   Ibs.   per  ton-  for   the   short 
runs. 

5.  The  table  applies  only  to  single  car  trains.     If  more  than  one 
car  is  used,   the  train  friction  in  Ibs.   per  ton   decreases,   hence  the 
electric  energy  required  decreases. 

6.  The  figures  are  for  the  electric  energy  required  at  the  motors. 


1444  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Power  Plants  for  Electric  Railways.— "Electric  Railways" 
(1907),  by  Sydney  W.  Ashe,  contains  the  following  power  plant  costs 
estimated  by  Mr.  H.  G.  Stott: 

Per  kw. 

Min. 

1.  Real   estate    $     3.00 

2.  Excavation     0.75 

3.  Foundations,   recipr.   engines 2.00 

4.  Foundations,    turbines    0.50 

5.  Iron   and   steel   structure 8.00 

6.  Building    8.00 

7.  Floors,   galleries  and  platforms 1.50 

8.  Tunnels,   intake  and  discharge 1.40 

9.  Ash-storage    pocket,    etc 0.70 

10.  Coal  hoisting  tower 1.20 

11.  Cranes     0.40 

12.  Coal  and  ash  conveyors 2.00 

13.  Ash  cars,  locomotives  and  track 0.15 

14.  Coal   and  ash  chutes,   etc 0.40 

15.  Water,  meters,  storage  tanks  and  mains 0.50 

16.  Stacks 1.25 

17.  Boilers     9.50 

18.  Boiler    setting    1.25 

19.  Stokers     1.80 

20.  Economizers    1.30 

21.  Flues,  dampers  and  regulators 6.60 

22.  Forced-draught   blowers  and   air 1.25 

23.  Boiler,  hand  and  other  pumps 0.40 

24.  Feed  water  heaters,  etc 0.20 

25.  Steam    and    water    piping,    traps,    separators, 

high  and  low  pressure 3.00 

26.  Pipe   covering    0.60 

27.  Valves    0.60 

28.  Main   engines,    reciprocating 22.00 

29.  Exciter    engines,    reciprocating 0.40 

30.  Condensers,  barometric  or  jet 1.00 

31.  Condensers,   surface 6.00 

32.  Electric    generators    16.00 

33.  Exciters     , 0.60 

34.  Steam    turbine    units   complete 22.00 

35.  Rotaries,   transformers,    blowers,    e'.:- 0.60 

36.  Switchboards,    complete    ' 3.00 

37.  Wiring  for   lights,    motors,    etc 0.20 

38.  Oiling   system,    complete 0.15 

39.  Compressed  air  system,    etc 0.20 

40.  Painting,  labor,  etc 1-25 

41.  Extras     2,00 

42.  Engineering   and    inspection    4.00 

Total,  excluding  Items  4,  22,  31  and  34 ?102.00         $148.00 

Mr.  W.  C.  Gottschall  gives  a  similar  estimate,  as  follows: 


RAILWAYS.  1445 

RECIPROCATING  STEAM  ENGINE  POWER-STATION  COSTS  PER  KILOWATT. 

Per  kw. 

Max.  Min.. 

1.  Buildings    $   15.09  $   8.00 

2.  Foundations .        3.50  1.50 

3.  Boilers  and   settings 17.00  9.00 

4.  Steam  piping  and   co  vexing: 12.00  4.00 

5.  Engines     32.00  20.00 

6.  Generators    21.00  18.00 

7.  Pumps,    etc 1.00  1.00 

8.  Switchboards,    etc 4.00  1.50 

9.  Feed  water  heaters,   etc 2.00  1.00 

10.  Wiring    conduits,    etc 6.00  3.00 

11.  Coal    storage  and   conveyors 6.00  2.00 

12.  Smokestack  and  flues    

13.  Fuel  economizers   

14.  Stokers 

15.  Ash    conveyors 


2.00  1.00 

4.50  2.50 

3.00  2.50 

1.50  1.00 

16.  Incidentals 2.00  2.00 


Total     §132.50  $78.00 

A  fair  average  is  $100  to  $110  per  kw.  The  cost  of  sub-stations 
using  rotary  converters  will  range  from  $38  to  $45  per  kw.  including 
the  building.  Land  is  not  included  in  the  above  costs. 


Cost  of  Power  Plant  and  Equipment  of  an  Electric  Rai 
W.  A.   Blanck  gives  the  following  estimated  cost    (in   19 
electrical   equipment   of   a    60-mile,    single-track,    interurt 
railway  : 
Direct          JL 
Power  House:                                                       current. 
Building    $    1  0.000 

Iway  —  Mr. 

04)    of  the 
>an    trolley 

Alternating 
current. 
$   10,000 
2,500 
12,000 
7,500 
22,000 
23,000 
1,000 
7,500 
•3,000 
2,500 
800 
800 
1,000 
2,000 
3,000 
3,500 
4,400 

Foundations     ... 

2  500 

Boilers  and   settings  

12  000 

Steampipe   and    covering 

7  500 

Engines     

22  000 

Generators,  two  400  kw  

18  000 

Exciters 

1  000 

Step-up   transformers     800   kw 

8  000 

Switchboard 

3  500 

Wiring 

3  000 

Feed   water    heater 

800 

Pumps     ... 

800 

Coal   storage    

1,000 

Smokestack  and  flues 

2  000 

Fuel    economizers    

3  000 

Stokers 

3  500 

Incidentals     

4  400 

Total    power   house $103,000  $106,500 

Sub-station  in  Power  House: 

Building   extension    $  1,000  $         600 

Synchronous  converter,    300   kw 4,800                    

Transformer,    300    kw.  ;    200    kw.    alternating 

current    3,200  2,000 

Switchboard     2,000  1,300 

Wiring 1,000  500 

Incidentals     -. 600  200 


Total    sub-station     $   12,600  $     4,600 


1440 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Transmission  Line  ($  Miles): 
Poles   (see  Trolley  Line  below). 

Copper    $  10,000              %  11,500 

Insulators,   pins  and   cross-arms 7,500                    5,000 

Erection    4,000                    3,000 

Incidentals    1,000                    1,000 

Total   transmission   line $  22,500             ?  20,500 

Sub-stations  Along  Road: 

Buildings,    four $  8,000              $      4,000 

Synchronous     converters,     four 19,200 

Step-down    transformers 12,800                    8,000 

Switchboards,   four 8,000                    5  200 

Wiring    4,000                     2,000 

Incidentals 2,000                       800 

Total   4   sub-stations. $  54,000              $  20,000 

Trolley  Line  and  Feeders: 

Poles,    3,500,   at   $5 $  17,500 

Poles  distributed  and   set 4,000 

Guys  and  anchors 2,000 

Brackets    with   hangers 18,000 

Copper,  direct  current : 

Feeder,   12  miles,  500,000  circ.  mils. 

Feeder,   48  miles,  No.   0000. 

Trolley,  120  miles,  No.  000 95,000 

Alternating  current : 

Trolley,    60  miles,   No.    00 

Feed    insulators    , 2,000 

Erection    10,000 

Incidentals    7,500 


Total    trolley    line .$156,000 


Bonding  of  Rails: 
Both  rails  bonded .  .  . 

One  rail  bonded 

Cross    bonds    


Total    bonding    of    rails 

Rolling  Stock: 
10    vestibuled    passenger    cars,    each    with    4 

motors,  wt.   30  tons 

2  express  passenger  cars,  each  with  4  motors, 

wt.    35   tons 

2    baggage    cars,    each    with    4    motors,    wt. 

30  tons   

Snow  plow  and  construction  car 


$   75,000 
18,000 

10,000 
7,000 


Total    rolling    stock f  110,000 


Summary: 

Power  house   

Sub-station   in  power  house. 

Transmission    line    

Sub-stations     

Trolley  line  and  feeders. . .  . 

Bonding   of   rails. 

Rolling   stock    


$103, OOd 
12,600 
22,500 
54,000 

156,000 
32,000 

110,000 


Grand  total    

Cost  per  mile    (60  miles) 


$490,100 
$      8,168 


$   78,000 


$   16,000 


$126,000 


$106,500 

4,600 

20,500 

20,000 

78,000 

16,000 

126,000 

$371.600 
I      6,193 


RAILWAYS.  1447 

The  running  schedule  upon  which  the  above  is  based  is-  as 
follows :  5  local  cars  having  1-hr,  headway  ;  1  express  car,  making 
round  trip  in  3  hrs.  ;  1  freight  and  baggage  car,  making  trip  be- 
tween the  two  terminals  in  8  hrs. 

Cost  of  a  Street  Railway  Power  Plant  and  of  Its  Operation Mr. 

R.  W.  Conant  gives  the  following  estimated  cost  of  a  street  railway 
power  plant  and  its  cost  of  operation : 

The  plant  has  a  capacity  of  3,600  kw.  There  are  three  cross- 
compound  condensing  engines,  three  1,200-kw.  generators,  and  six 
water-tube  boilers  of  500-hp.  each.  The  estimated  cost  of  this  plant 
in  1898  was: 

Engines,   condensers,  heaters,   separators  and  piping $   91,800 

Feed  pumps  and  fuel  economizers 18,000 

Boilers    and    flue    connections    complete 61,000 

Generators    and    switchboard    complete 73,800 

Building,  chimney,  engine  and  boiler  foundations,  coal  hand- 
ling   apparatus,     etc 120,000 

Land 17,000 

Engineering   and    sundries 5,000 

Total    $386,600 

This  is  equivalent  to  $107  per  kw. 

Mr.  Conant  estimates  fixed  charges  at  11%,  or  $42,526,  distributed 
thus: 

Per  cent. 

Interest     6 

Insurance    and    taxes 3 

Depreciation    2 

_>;  -iff  3B 
Total 11       id 

The  item  of  "depreciation"  is  badly  underestimated,  for  it  includes 
current  repairs. 

It  is  assumed  that  this  station  is  operated  with  3  shifts  of  men, 
8  hrs.  per  shift,  for  8,760  shift  hours  per  year.  The  crew  of  ona 
shift  would  be : 

2  enginemen.. 
2  firemen. 
1  oiler. 

J.    IlGipGr. 

1  coal  passer. 

— 
7  men  at  27  cts.  per  hr.  =  $1.89. 

The  plant  is  assumed  to  work  with  a  load  factor  of  33%%,  so  that 
it  actually  averages  1,200  kw.  for  8,760  hrs.,  or  10,500,000  kw.  hours 
per  annum. 

Therefore,  we  have : 

Per  kw.  hour. 

Fixed   charges,   $42,526-^10,500,000 0.40  cts. 

Wages,    $1.89 -=-1,200    0.16  cts. 

Coal,  2.2  Ibs.,  at  $3  ton 0.33  cts. 

General  expense,  super.,  supplies  and  repairs.      0.09  cts.     . 

Total,  including  fixed  charges 0.98  cts. 

Mr.  Conant  states  that  the  fuel  cost  would  be  practically  doubled 
were  non-condensing  engines  used,  for  he  has  assumed  a  steam  con- 
sumption of  only  14%  Ibs.  of  steam  per  i.  hp.,  a  transformer  effi- 


1448  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

ciency  of  90%,  and  a  boiler  efficiency  of  9.4  Ibs.  of  steam  per  lb.  of 
coal. 

He  calls  the  above  a  "standard  plant,"  an  ideal  capable  of  realiza- 
tion, which  is  exceedingly  doubtful,  however,  as  the  actual  records  of 
some  28  street  railway  power  stations  show. 

A  summary  of  these  28  plants  gives  the  following  average: 

Average  capacity,  2,140  kw. 

Average     load  factor,  30%. 

Average  number  men  per  shift,  10. 

Average  number  shifts,  2  of  12  hrs. 

Average  wage,  20  cts.  per  hr. 

The  average  cost  of  generating  power  was: 

Per  kw.  hr. 

Labor,  1.5  hrs.,  at  20  cts 0.30  cts. 

Coal,  5  Ibs.,  at  $2.10  per  ton 0.53  cts. 

General    expense    0.15  cts. 

Total,  not  including  fixed  charges 0.98  cts. 

The  "load  factor"  of  30%  means  that  the  average  output  of  elec- 
tricity during  the  entire  year  was  30%  the  capacity  of  the  plant; 
hence  it  was  30%  of  2,140  =  642  kw. 

There  was  not  a  single  one  of  these  28  plants  that  operated  with 
as  little  fuel  as  Mr.  Conant's  "ideal  plant,"  for  the  most  efficient 
plant  required  3  Ibs.  of  coal  per  kw.  hr. 

The  cost  of  labor  per  kw.  hr.  obviously  varies  greatly  as  the 
"load  factor"  varies.  In  one  of  these  plants  the  load  factor  was 
as  high  as  57%,  giving  a  very  low  unit  cost  (0.18  ct.  per  kw.  hr.) 
for  labor;  while  in  another  plant  the  load  factor  was  only  11%, 
giving  an  extraordinarily  high  unit  cost  (1.1  ct.  per  kw.  hr.)  for 
labor. 

As  above  pointed  out,  Mr.  Conant's  estimate  of  his  so-called  "fixed 
charges"  on  the  plant,  is  entirely  too  low. 

Cost  of  Operating  Street  Railways. — The  most  satisfactory  records 
of  this  sort  .are  to  be  found  in  the  annual  reports  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts Railway  Commission.  The  reports  of  other  railway  com- 
missions are  either  less  detailed  or  relate  to  street  railways  that  are 
comparatively  new. 

Following  is  a  brief  summary  showing  the  growth  of  street  rail- 
Ways  in  Massachusetts. 

Miles 
Miles  of    operated 

single  by         Car  miles,  Passengers, 

Year.  track,    electricity,  millions.  Cars,     millions. 

1887..  470  20.6          2,633          125 

1888 533          23.2          2,588          134 

1889 574  51  24.3          2,942          148 

1890 612  160  26.5          3,247          165 

1891..  672  289  27.7          3,494          176 

1892 755  496  29.7          3,679          194 

1893..  874  711  34.5          4,040          214 

1894 929  825  36.7          4,058          220 

1895..  .    1,088          1,016  43.7          4,426          260 

1896 1,277          1,241  53.6          4,913          292 

1902 2,444  100.3          7,144          465 

1908 2,675  137.0          7,618          60? 


RAILWAYS.  1449 

It  will  be  noted  that  not  till  1889  did  electricity  come  into  use, 
and  not  till  1893  had  it  practically  displaced  horse  power. 

Note  that  thei  mileage  per  car  has  hardly  increased,  nor  the 
passengers  per  car  mile. 

According  to  the  report  for  1908.  the  assets  of  Massachusetts 
street  railways  were: 

Construction    .                                                   ..$  82,934,355 

Equipment  (rolling  stock) 29,699,294 

Land  and  buildings 39,663,442 

Other  permanent  property 1,807,999 

Cash    , 8,170,683 

Miscellaneous   assets 7,705,688 


Total  assets $170,154,909 

The  mileage  was: 

Miles. 

Railway  line  owned  (1st  track) 2,233.85 

Railway  line  owned  (2d  track) 441.04 


Total  main  track  owned 2,674.89 

Sidings,  switches,  etc.,  owned 166.70 

Total  track  owned 2,841.59 

Main  track  leased 577.10 

Total  main  track  operated 2,741.00 

The  equipment  was  as  follows: 

Box  passenger  cars 3,876 

Open  passenger  cars 3,742 

Total  passenger  cars 7,618 

Other  service  cars 461 

Snow    plows 779 

Other  vehicles   (wagons,  etc. ) 1,650 

Electric  motors  on  cars 16,649 

We  see  from  the  above  that  the  reported  cost  per  mile  of  main 
single  track  operated  was: 

Construction   $31,005 

Equipment 11,103 

Buildings  and  land 15,569 

Total $57,677 

It  Is  evident  that  no  reliance  can  be  placed  in  the  so-called  cost 
of  construction*  for  it  really  represents  purchase  price  and  not 
actual  cost  of  construction. 

The  cost  of  equipment,  however,  appears  to  be  reliable,  for  it 
Indicates  a  cost  of  about  $4,000  per  car. 

There  were  17,267  employes ;  602,400,874  passengers  were  carried, 
and  the  gross  earnings  from  operation  were  $30,780,762.  The 
number  of  car  miles  was  116,982,089,  or  42,700  car  miles  per  mile 
of  track. 

Table  XXVI  gives  the  operating  expense,  which  I  have  calculated 
both  in  terms  of  the  car  mile  and  of  the  mile  or  single  track 
operated. 

The  repairs  of  cars  and  electric  car  equipment  (Items  9  and  10) 
amounted  to  $2,429,253.  Since  the  first  cost  of  the  equipment  was 
(29,699,294,  it  appears  that  repairs  amounted  to  a  little  more  than 


1450  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

8%  of  the  first  cost.  However,  sight  should  not  be  lost  of  the 
fact  that  half  the  equipment  consisted  of  open  cars,  which  are 
used  only  in  the  summer  and  at  a  time  when  the  closed  (box)  cars 
are  mostly  idle.  Therefore,  the  cost  of  repairs  would  be  nearly- 
double  the  8%  if  all  equipment  were  kept  constantly  busy,  making 
the  annual  cost  of  repairs  about  16%  of  the  first  cost  of  the  active 
equipment. 

These  repairs  doubtless  include  renewals. 

Unfortunately  the  cost  of  rail  renewals  is  not  given  as  a  separate 
item.  The  number  of  car  miles  per  mile  of  track  was  less  than 
half  as  many  as  on  the  average  steam  railway  of  America. 

Item  14,  Wages  of  Employes,  evidently  refers  to  conductors  and 
motormen,  but  does  not  include  employes  in  the  power  plant. 

TABLE  XXVI. — OPERATING  EXPENSE,  MASSACHUSETTS   STREET  RYS., 

1908. 

Per  mi.  Per  car 

single    "mile. 
General  Expense:  Total.       track,     cents. 

1.  Salaries  of  officers . .  $      690,082     $    252       0.59 

2.  Office  expenses  and  supplies 151,174  55       0.13 

3.  Legal    expenses 421,611          154       0.36 

4.  Insurance .  , 248,972  91       0.21 

5.  Other  general  expenses 407,304          148       0.35 


Total  general  expense $  1,919,143  $    700  1.64 

Maintenance  of  Way: 

6.  Repairs  of  roadbed  and  track .$1,273,992  $    465  1.09 

7.  Repairs  of  electric  line  construction.  ..         393,047.  143  0.33 

8.  Repairs   of   buildings 184,747  68  0.16 

Total  maintenance  of  way $1,851,786  $    676  1.58 

Maintenance  of  Equipment: 

9.  Repairs  of  cars $  1,157,680  $    423  0.99 

10.  Repairs  of  electric  car  equipment 1,271,573  464  1.09 

11.  Repairs  of  miscellaneous  equipment.  .           75,124  27  0.06 

12.  Provender  and  stabling 56,021  20  0.05 

Total  maintenance  of  equipment $  2,560,398  $    934  2.19 

Transportation  Expense: 

13.  Electric  motive  power $3,928,820  $1,434  3.36 

14.  Wages   of   employes 7,948,277  2,901  6.80 

15.  Removing  snow  and  ice 136,002  50  0.12 

16.  Damages    for     injuries 1,218,242  445  1.04 

17.  Tolls  for  trackage  rights 97,033  35  0.08 

18.  Rents  of  buildings,  etc 171,182 

19.  Other  transportation  expense 710,695  260  0.60 

Total  transportation  expense $14,210,251  $5,187  12.15 

Grand  total  operating  expense 20,541,578  7,497  17.56 


RAILWAYS.  1451 

Power  to  Operate  Street  Cars. — The  following  data  relate  to  small 
motor  cars. 

The  record  of  power  consumed  on  an  electric  street  railway,  for 
the  year  1895,  is  as  follows: 

Tons   (2,240  Ibs.)    coal . . .' 19,172 

Car-miles,    motdr    car 5,677,581 

Car-miles,    trailer    car 654,557 

Car-miles,   total    6,421,638 

Car-miles,  motor  car  per  day 120 

Coal  per  motor  car-mile,  Ibs 7.6 

Coal  per  car-mile,  Ibs 6.9 

Passengers  per   car-mile 4.1 

Ton-miles    (2,000  Ibs.),  passengers  at  140  Ibs 1,810,033 

Ton-miles  (2,000  Ibs.),  motor  car  at  6%  tons 36,900,873 

Ton-miles   (2,000  Ibs.),  trailer  at  2ya   tons 1,645,140 

Ton-miles    (2,000  Ibs.),   total 40,356,046 

Coal  per  ton  mile,   Ibs 1.08 

Engine   hours 25,183 

Elec.  horsepower  hours,  total 15,305,254 

Watt  hours,  per  motor  car-mile 2,032 

Watt  hours,   per  ton-mile 286 

Watt  hours,  per  pound  of  coal 266 

Coal  per  electric  horsepower,  Ibs 2.81 

Watts  per   motor   car-mile 16,562 

Effort  per  ton-mile,  foot-pounds 103,420 

Average    pull     per    ton 19.5 

Schedule  speed,  miles  per  hour 7.37 

The  "average  pull  per  ton"  is  calculated  from  the  consumption  of 
electricity,  and  not  by  dynamometer  test. 

Cost  of  Operating  an  Elevated  Electric  Railway. — "Electric  Rail- 
way Economics"  (1903),  by  W.  C.  Gottschall,  contains  the  following 
actual  cost  of  operating  an  elevated  railway  in  a  large  city,  operat- 
ing electric  cars  at  a  scheduled  speed  of  16  miles  per  hour.  The 
age  of  the  cars  is  not  given,  hence  no  sound  conclusions  can  be 
drawn  from  these  data  as  to  equipment  maintenance : 

Per  car  mile. 

1.  Train  crews,  telegraphers,  couplers  and  yard  men $0.0237 

2.  Station  men,  agents,  porters  and  laborers 0.0072 

3.  Maintenance    and    upkeep    of    cars,    trucks    and    motive 

power 0.0125 

4.  Repairs  of  elevated  structure  and  roadway 0.0065 

5.  Electric  power    0.0123 

6.  Miscellaneous  expenses,   supplies,   etc 0.0021 

7.  General  expenses,  salaries,  etc. 0.0084 

Total     $0.0727 

8.  Legal  expenses  and  injuries 0.0053 

9.  Taxes    0.0065 


Grand  total $0.0845 

The  power  was  2  kw.  hrs.  per  car-mile  at  the  central  station. 


1452  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Power  to  Operate  New  York  Elevated  and  Surface  Cars. — In  Man- 
hattan elevated  railways  it  is  estimated  that  the  electric  power  con- 
sumed per  loaded  car  is  as  follows: 

Kw.  per  car. 

Operating  (current  measured  at  the  car) 21.0 

Heating  (current  measured  at  the  car) 4.8 

Lighting   (current  measured  at  the  car) 1.5 

Air  pumps  (current  measured  at  the  car) 0.6 

Total    (current  measured  at  the  car) 27.9 

Line  loss  7.8 

Grand   total  at   the   switchboard 35.7 

On  the  surface  lines  in  Manhattan  about  16  kw.  per  car  in  sum- 
mer, and  25  kw.  in  winter,  is  required. 

The  power  required  at  the  switchboard  to  drive  224  elevated 
motor  cars  and  1,247  surface  cars  in  Brooklyn  was  determined  to  be 
as  follows: 

— Kw.  per  car. — 

Surface       Elevated 

car.  car. 

Operation     15.95  36.85 

Heating     3.30  8.25 

Lighting    1.10  1.10 

Total    20.35  46.20 

Weight  and  Power  of  Motor  Cars. — In  the  early  days  of  electric 
railways  small  motor  cars  with  bodies  only  16  or  18  ft.  long  and 
With  two  15-hp.  motors  were  common.  Such  cars  are  still  com- 
mon in  the  smaller  towns  and  cities,  and  are  not  entirely  out  of 
use  even  in  the  larger  cities. 

A  large  city  car,  30  tons,  with  double  trucks,  equipped  with  four 
40-hp.  motors  (160-hp.  total),  and  seating  44  people,  is  now  the 
standard  for  heavy  city  traffic. 

Interurban  cars  vary  considerably,  but  the  following  is  fairly 
typical:  Car  50  ft.  long,  seating  42  people,  double  trucks,  weighs 
34  tons,  is  equipped  with  four  75-hp.  motors  (300-hp.  total),  and 
maintains  a  schedule  speed  of  30  miles  per  hour. 

Cost  of  Maintenance  of  Motor  Cars. — Although  considerable  has 
been  published  on  this  subject,  very  little  of  value  has  thus  far 
appeared.  The  reasons  why  the  data  are  unsatisfactory  are  these : 
(1)  The  age  of  the  cars  is  not  given.  Obviously  new  cars  entail 
much  less  expense  for  repairs  than  old  cars.  (2)  The  first  cost  of 
the  cars,  the  size  of  the  motors  and  the  size  of  the  cars  are  not 
stated. 

Pending  further  information,  I  recommend  estimating  the  annual 
cost  of  repairs  of  motor  cars  (incl.  motors)  at  12%  of  the  first  cost. 

If  a  large  motor  car  costs  $7,500,  the  average  annual  maintenance 
over  a  long  period  of  years  (20)  would  then  be  $900.  If  the  car 
travels  30,000  miles  per  year,  its  maintenance  will  then  be  3  etc.  per 
car-mile. 

If  the  life  of  a  car  is  25  years,  and  no  sinking  fund  is 
renewals  being  paid  for  annually  as  they   become  necessary, 


RAILWAYS.  1453 

4%  of  the  first  cost  will  be  the  average  annual  expenditure  for  re- 
newals when  distributed  over  a  long  term  of  years.  Renewals  ( 4  %  ) 
being  %  as  much  as  current  repairs  (12%),  we  have  1  ct.  per 
car-mile  for  renewals  of  a  $7,500  motor  car,  making  a  total  of  4  cts. 
per  car  mile  for  repairs  and  renewals  of  a  $7,500  car,  when  dis- 
tribiited  over  a  long  term  of  years. 

In  1902  the  repairs  and  renewals  of  street  cars  in  Massachusetts 
were  1.65  cts.  per  car-mile,  and  the  first  cost  of  the  average  car 
was  $3,000.  If  the  cost  had  been  $7,500,  as  above  assumed  for 
large  cars,  we  should  have  2%  X  1.65  =  4.12  cts.  per  car-mile  for 
repairs  and  renewals.  This  makes  an  excellent  check  upon  my  esti- 
mate of  16%  of  the  first  cost  for  repairs  and  renewals  of  equip- 
ment. It  was  about  1883  that  electric  lines  began  to  be  built  in 
Massachusetts,  so  that  repairs  and  renewals  of  equipment  14  years 
later  (1902)  are  a  fair  index  of  what  may  be  expected  in  the 
future.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  equipment  per  car-mile  may  rise 
still  higher  in  Massachusetts,  even  with  cars  of  the  present  cost, 
for  the  mileage  of  street  railways  doubled  about  every  six  years 
between  1890  and  1902. 

The  cost  of  maintenance  of  the  power  plant  should  be  estimated 
in  a  manner  analogous  to  the  foregoing. 

Railway  Operating  Expenses,  Etc. — The  annual  reports  of  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  and  the  reports  of  the  various 
state  railway  commissions  contain  valuable  data  on  operating 
expenses. 

The  miles  of  trackway  include  all  1st,  2d,  3d  and  4th  tracks,  and 
amounted  to  243,322. 

The  miles  of  roadbed  (or  "line")  include  only  1st  track,  and 
amounted  to  222,340. 

The  miles  of  track  include  all  tracks,  main,  branch,  side  and  yard, 
and  amounted  to  317,083. 

There  are  nearly  1.43  miles  of  track  per  mile  of  roadbed  in 
America. 

According  to  the  report  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
for  the  year  1906,  the  following  was  the  operating  expense,  given 
for  each  item  as  a  percentage  of  the  total : 

Maintenance  of  Way  and  Structures :         Per  cent 

1.  Repairs   of   roadway 10.726 

2.  Renewal    of   rails 1.432 

3.  Renewal   of  ties 2.509 

4.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  bridges  and  culverts     2.207 

5.  Repairs    and    renewals   of    fences   and    road  / 

crossings,   signs  and  cattle  guards 0.413 

6.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  bldgs.  and  fixtures  2.304 

7.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  docks  and  wharves  0.241 

8.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  telegraph 0.177 

9.  Stationery  and  printing 0.030 

10.  Other  expenses 0.257 

Total    .  .    20.296 


1454  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Maintenance  of  Equipment: 

11.  Superintendence    0.561 

12.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  locomotives 8.080 

13.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  passenger  cars 1.968 

14.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  freight  cars 9.009 

15.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  work  cars 0.268 

16.  Repairs  and  renewals  of  marine  equipment. .  0.232 

17.  Repairs    and    renewals    of    shop    machinery 

and    tools 0.668 

18.  Stationery  and  printing 0.047 

19.  Other  expenses 0.563 

Total    21.396 

Conducting  Transportation : 

20.  Superintendence    1.776 

21.  Engine  and  roundhouse  men 9.275 

22.  Fuel  for  locomotives 11.119 

23.  Water  supply  for  locomotives 0.650 

24.  Oil,  tallow  and  waste  for  locomotives 0.385 

25.  Other  supplies  for  locomotives 0.250 

26.  Train  service 6.375 

27.  Train  supplies  and  expenses" 1.557 

28.  Switch,  flag  and  watchmen 4.357 

29.  Telegraph  expenses 1.751 

30.  Station    service 6.307 

31.  Station    supplies 0.611 

32.  Switching    charges — balance 0.293 

33.  Car  per  diem  and  mileage — balance 1,231 

34.  Hire  of  equipment 0.201 

35.  Loss  and  damage 1.375 

36.  Injuries  to  persons 1.139 

37.  Clearing  wrecks 0.200 

38.  Operating  marine  equipment 0.685 

39.  Advertising    0.422 

40.  Outside    agencies 1.352 

41.  Commissions    0.017 

42.  Stock  yards  and  elevators "0.055 

43.  Rents  for  tracks  and  yards 1.751 

44.  Rents  of  other  buildings  and  other  property  0.324 

45.  Stationery  and  printing 0.629 

46.  Other  expenses 0.245 

Total 54.432 

General  Expenses: 

47.  Salaries  of  general  offices 0.826 

48.  Salaries  of  clerks  and  attendants 1.372 

49.  General  office  expenses  and  supplies 0.263 

50.  Insurance 0.481 

51.  Law  expenses 0.452 

52.  Stationery  and  printing  (g.  o.) 0.182 

53.  Other  expenses 0.300 

Total    3.876 

Grand  total  (per  cent) 100.000 

Grand  total $1,588,404,385 

The  operating  expense,  expressed  in  various  units,  was  as  follows : 

Per  train  mile   $1.3706 

Per  car  mile    (approximately) 0.0833 

Per  mile  of  roadbed  (line) 6,896 

Per  mile  of  trackway 6,308 

Per  mile  of  track 4.8f? 


RAILWAYS.  1455 

By  multiplying  the  percentage  given  for  any  item  in  the  table  of 
operating  expense  by  any  of  the  above  unit  costs  of  operation,  the 
corresponding  item  unit  cost  is  obtained.  .  . 

Thus,  Item  22,  Fuel,  is  11.119%.  The  total  operating  expense 
per  train  mile  is  $1.37.  Hence  $1.37  X  11.119%  =  $0.1523  per  train 
mile  for  fuel. 

Thus,  Item  2,  Renewal  of  Rails,  is  1.432%.  The  total  operating 
expense  per  mile  of  trackway  is  $6,303.  Hence  $6,303  X  1.432%  = 
$90.21  per  mile  of  trackway  for  rail  renewals. 

In  1906,  the  total  equipment  of  American  railways  was: 
Locomotives : 

Passenger 12,249 

Freight    29,848 

Switching   8,485 

Unclassified    1,090 

Total  locomotives  in  service 51,672 

Cars : 

Passenger 42,262 

Freight    1,837,914 

Company    service 78,736 

Total  cars  in  service 1,958,912 

It  will  be  noted  that  there  were  3.45  passenger  cars  per  passenger 
Jw^omotive,  and  61.6  freight  cars  per  freight  locomotive. 

The  above  does  not  include  freight  cars  owned  by  private  com- 
panies, on  which  the  railways  pay  a  mileage,  the  value  of  whicl; 
is  estimated  to  be  $72,000,000.  Nor  does  it  include  cars  owned" 
by  the  Pullman  Co.,  estimated  at  $51,000,000.  If  the  average 
freight  car  owned  by  private  individuals  is  worth  $1,000,  there 
would  be  about  72,000  of  them.  If  the  average  Pullman  is  valued 
at  $10,000,  there  would  be  5,000  of  them.  These  numbers  would 
increase  the  number  of  freight  cars  above  given  by  about  4%,  and 
would  increase  the  number  of  passenger  cars  by  about  12%. 

The  average  weight  of  the  locomotives  (exclusive  of  tender)  was 
66  tons,  of  which  54  tons  was  on  the  drivers.  The  average  tractive 
power  was  24,300  Ibs. 

The  classification  of  freight  cars  was  as  follows: 

Box    cars... 843,118 

.  Flat   cars . . .  146,908 

Stock  cars 64,202 

Coal   cars .....' 686,717 

Tank.  cars..... ... 5,324 

Refrigerator  cars 31,782 

Other  cars 55,584 

Total   1,833,635 


1456  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  average  capacity  of  these  cars  was  32  tons. 
The  following  were  the  employes: 

Total 

Per  day.  per  year. 

6,090  general    officers $11.81  $  15,911,369 

6,705   other    officers 5.82  12,870,203 

57,210  general  office  clerks 2.24  41,227,916 

34,940  station    agents 1.94  22,571,595 

138,778  other  station  men 1.69  70,702,517 

59,855  engine  men 4.12  74,581,454 

62,678  firemen 2.42  44,247,306 

43,936   conductors 3.51  47,417,403 

119,087  other  trainmen 2.35  81,884,828 

51,253  machinists 2.69  40,326,031 

63,830  carpenters   2.28  40,961,083 

199,940  other  shopmen 1.92  111,524,564 

40,463  section  foremen 1.80  23,519,671 

343,791  other   trackmen 1.36  112,196,214 

49,659  switch    tenders,    crossing    tenders   and 

watchmen    1.80  27,939,001 

36,090  telegraph  operators  and  dispatchers. ..      2.13  24,729,669 

8,314  employes — acctg.  floating  equipment..      2.10  4,776,654 

198,736  all  other  employes 1.83  103,414,175 


1,521,355        Total     $900,801,653 

By  multiplying  the  average  daily  wage  by  the  total  number  of 
men  in  each  class  and  dividing  this  product  in  the  total  annual 
payment,  the  average  number  of  days  worked  can  be  ascertained. 
For  all  except  "general  officers"  (240  days),  and  for  "other 
trackmen"  (270  days),  the  average  is  close  to  315  days.  The 
average  employe  received  nearly  $600  per  year. 

In  the  case  of  trainmen,  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  wage 
shown  is  not  the  true  average  daily  income,  for  they  are  usually 
paid  on  an  arbitrary  basis,  say  100  miles  of  run  constituting  a 
day's  work. 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  the  service  performed  by  the 
railways  according  to  the  1906  report. 

1.  Passengers    carried 797,946,116 

2.  Passenger  miles 25,167,240,831 

3.  Passenger  train  miles 479,037,553 

4.  Passengers  per  train,  average 49 

5.  Passenger's  journey,  miles 31.54 

6.  Freight,  tons,  excluding  those  received  from  con-  <> 

necting    roads 896,159,485 

7.  Freight,  ton  miles 215,877,551,241 

8.  Freight,  ton  miles  per  mile  of  roadbed 982,401 

9.  Freight,    train   miles 594,005,825 

10.  Freight,  car  miles 16,589,958,024 

11.  Freight,   tons  per   train 344.4 

12.  Freight,  average  haul,   regarding  all  railways  as 

one  system,  miles 240.9 

13.  Total  revenue  passenger  and  freight  train  miles. .     1,105,877,091 

Item  13  would  be  the  sum  of  items  3  and  9,  were  it  not  that 
there  were  also  mixed  trains  (passenger  and  freight  combined). 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  number  of  passenger  car  miles  is 
not  given,  but  it  can  be  closely  approximated,  as  follows: 


RAILWAYS.  1457 

Dividing  the  42,262  passenger  cars  by  the  12,249  passenger 
locomotives,  we  find  there  were  3.45  passenger  cars  per  passenger 
locomotives. 

Hence  multiplying  the  479,037,553  passenger  train  miles  by  3.45, 
we  have  1,612,678,558  passenger  car  miles.  This  assumption  implies 
that  there  would  be  as  many  passenger  cars  as  locomotives  in  the 
shops,  or  otherwise  idle.  The  Pullman  sleeping  cars  are  not  in- 
cluded in  the  above,  and  as  we  have  seen,  they  would  add  about 
12%  to  the  total  number  of  passenger  cars.  On  this  assumption,  the 
total  number  of  passenger  car  miles  would  be  about  1,806,200,000. 

If  we  regard  a  locomotive  and  its  tender  as  equivalent  to  two 
cars,  multiplying  the  total  train  miles  by  2  gives  us  the  locomotive 
and  tender  car  miles. 

Hence  we  have : 

Freight  car  miles 16,589,958,024 

Passenger   car  miles 1,806,200,000 

Total  car  miles 18,396,158,024 

Locomotive  and  tender  miles 2,211,754,182 

Total  car  and  engine  miles 20,607,912,206 

Since  there  were  243,322  miles  of  trackway,  we  have  20,607,912,209 
-j-  243,322  =  84,700  cars  per  year  passing  over  each  mile  of  track- 
way. 

The  importance  of  this  deduction  will  be  seen  when  we  come  to 
consider  the  wear  of  rails. 

If  we  divide  Item  13  (the  total  train  miles),  by  the  243,322  miles 
of  trackway,  we  have  4,540,  which  is  the  number  of  trains  per 
year  per  mile  of  trackway.  If  we  divide  this  4,540  by  365  (the 
number  of  days  in  a  year),  we  have  a  little  more  than  12,  which 
is  the  number  of  trains  per  day  both  ways,  or  6  trains  per  day 
each  way  on  each  trackway. 

If  we  divide  16,589,958,024  (the  number  of  freight  car  miles) 
by  594,005,825  (the  number  of  freight  train  miles),  we  get  nearly 
28,  which  is  the  average  number  of  freight  cars  per  freight  train. 

We  have  seen  that  there  were  about  3.5  passenger  cars  per 
passenger  train,  plus  nearly  0.5  Pullman  car,  or  a  total  of  4  cars 
per  passenger  train.  * 

Since  about  45%  of  the  trains  were  passenger  trains  and  55% 
freight,  the  average  of  both  passenger  and  freight  trains  was  about 
17  cars. 

Dividing  594,005,825  (the  freight  train  miles)  by  29,849  (the 
number  of  freight  locomotives),  we  get  nearly  20,000  miles  per 
freight  locomotive  per  year.  This  is  not  quite  55  miles  per  day. 

Dividing  479,037,553  (the  passenger  train  miles)  by  12,249  (the 
number  of  passenger  locomotives),  we  get  nearly  40,000  miles  per 
year,  or  not  quite  110  miles  per  day.  The  average  of  bpth  freight 
and  pasenger  locomotives  was  about  25,500  miles  per  locomotive 
per  year. 

We  have  seen  that  there  were  62  freight  cars  per  freight 
locomotive,  and  that  there  were  28  cars  per  freight  train.  Hence 


1458  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

there  were  about  62'—  28  =  34  freight  cars  not  moving  in  trains, 
or   about   34   -^   62   =   55%    of   the   car   time  was  spent   on  sidings 

and  in  yards  not  attached  to  a  locomotive. 
• 

If  45%  of  the  time  was  spent  moving  with  a  freight  locomotive, 
and  if  (as  we  have  seen)  a  freight  locomotive  averages  55  miles 
per  day,  then  55  X  45%  24.75  miles  were  averaged  per  freight  car 
per  day.  This  may  be  arrived  at  with  greater  accuracy  thus : 
16,589,958,000  (freight  car  miles)  divided  by  1,958,912  (freight 
cars),  gives  nearly  8,460,  which  is  the  car  miles  per  car  per  year, 
which  is  equivalent  to  23.2  car  miles  oer  day.  This  checks  very 
well  with  the  approximate  method  first  given.  That  method  involved 
the  assumption  that  time  lost  during  shop  repairs  is  the  same  for 
freight  cars  as  for  locomotives,  which  is  not  quite  true,  since  about 
5%  of  the  total  freight  cars  and  8%  of  the  total  locomotives  are 
constantly  in  the  shops.  It  also  involved  the  assumption  that  there 
are  not  more  locomotive  crews  than  locomotives,  which  is  not  far 
from  correct,  since  there  were  59,855  enginemen  to  operate  the 
51,672  locomotives. 

The  average  haul  of  a  ton  of  freight  was  241  miles,  which  would 
take  nearly  10  *£  days  at  23.2  miles  per  day,  including  time  spent 
in  yards  and  sidings,  loading  and  unloading;  but,  since  45%  of  the 
time  (as  we  have  seen)  was  spent  on  the  road,  4%  days  of  car 
time  were  spent  on  the  road  traveling  and  6  days  on  the  side 
tracks,  etc. 

The  empty  freight  car  mileage  was  31.2%  of  the  total  freight  car 
mileage. 

Since  the  average  number  of  tons  per  freight  train  was  344,  and 
since  there  were  28  cars  per  freight  train,  the  average  carried  by 
all  cars  (loaded  and  empty)  was  344  -=-  28  =  12.3  tons  nearly.  Since 
68.8%  were  loaded  cars,  the  average  loaded  car  carried  12.3  -~  68.8 
=  17.9  tons. 

The  income  was: 

Passenger  revenue   I    510,032,583 

Mail 47,371,453 

Express 51,010,930 

Other  earnings,  passenger  service 11,314,237 

Freight   revenue    1,640,386,655 

Other  earnings,  freight  service 5,645,222 

Other  earnings  from  operation 59,741,198 

Unclassified    262,889 


Total  earnings  from  operation $2,325,765,167 

Income  from  other  sources 256,639,591 


Total  earnings  and  income $2,582,404,758 


RAILWAYS.  1459 

Considering  all  the  railways  as  one  system,  we  have  the  following 
income  account: 

Earnings   from   operation $2,325,765,167 

Clear  income  from  investments 60,520,306 


Gross  earnings  and  income $2,386,285,473 

Operating  expense  (incl.  leased  lines)  ....    1,537,448,702 


Net  earnings  and  income $  848,836,771 

Net  interest  on  funded  debt $  305,337,754 

Interest  on  current  liabilities 11,653,076 

Taxes   74,785,615 

Total  fixed  charges  and  taxes $  391,776,445 

Balance    available    for   dividends $  457,060,326 

Net  dividends $  213,555,081 

Balance    available    adjustments    and    im- 
provements  $  243,505,245 

The  revenue  per  train  mile  was : 

All  trains $2.075 

Passenger  trains    1.203 

Freight  trains 2.608 

The  average  freight  revenue  was  0.748  ct.  per  ton  mile.  The 
average  passenger  revenue  was  2.003  cts.  per  passenger  mile.  The 
operating  revenue  per  mile  of  roadbed  was  $10,460.  The  operating 
expenses  were  66.08%  of  the  operating  income. 

Average  Life  of  Rails  and  Cost  of  Rail  Renewals. — In  determin- 
ing the  annual  depreciation  of  rails  subject  to  a  given  traffic  I  made 
the  following  analysis  for  the  Railroad  Commission  of  Washington. 

The  average  cost  rail  renewals  in  the  United  States  was  $75  per 
miles  of  trackway,  or  $82  per  mile  of  roadbed,  or  $58  per  mile  of 
track,  as  deduced  from  the  1904  report  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission.  The  mile  of  trackway  is  the  preferable  unit,  for  it 
represents  the  mile  of  1st,  2d,  3d  and  4th  track.  Naturally,  the 
wear  on  rails  in  side  tracks  is  almost  insignificant. 

If  the  annual  rail  wear  is  $75   per  mile  of  trackway,  it  remains- 
only  to  know  the  average  cost  of  a  mile  of  rails  to  arrive  at  the 
percentage  of  annual  renewals.     The  weight  of  rails  in  the  average 
track  is  about  as  many  pounds  per  yard  of  rail  as  the  weight  in 
tons  of  the  average  locomotive. 

In  1904  the  average  locomotive  weight  was  60  tons,  and  it  is 
reasonable  to  suppose  that  the  average  weight  of  rail  was  not 
much  in  excess  of  100  tons  of  rails  wer  mile  of  track. 

Now,  if  we  can  ascertain  the  average  cost  of  a  ton  of  rails 
delivered  to  the  distributing  point  of  the  average  railway,  we 
shall  be  able  to  estimate  the  value  of  a  mile  of  rails  in  the 
average  track.  To  determine  the  "center  of  gravity"  of  the  railway 
mileage  of  America,  I  assumed  that  the  center  of  each  state  would 
represent,  with  sufficient  accuracy,  the  "center  of  gravity"  of  the 
railway  mileage  of  that  state.  To  ascertain  the  "center  of  gravity" 
of  the  total  mileage,  co-ordinate  axes  were  drawn  and  the  distances 
from  these  axes  to  the  center  of  each  state  were  measured. 

The  abscissas  and  ordinates  thus  obtained  were  multiplied  by 
their  respective  mileages  of  railway  line.  The  sums  of  these  prod- 


1460  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

ucts  were  divided  by  the  total  mileage  of  all  lines,  and  the  quotients 
were,  of  course,  the  abscissa  and  ordinate  of  the  "center  of  gravity" 
of  the  entire  railway  mileage.  This  was  found  to  be  at  a  poin* 
not  far  north  of  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

The  practice  of  railways  has  been  to  charge  %  ct.  per  ton 
mile  for  freight  on  rails,  so  that,  In  the  year  1904,  freight  to  the 
"center  of  gravity"  of  railway  mileage  could  not  have  cost  much 
to  exceed  $3  per  ton  from  Pittsburg,  or  $1.50  from  Chicago.  The 
standard  price  of  rails  was  $28,  so  the  total  cost  delivered  was 
not  to  exceed  $31  per  ton,  and  doubtless  averaged  less  than  $30. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  rails  cost  the  Northern  Pacific  and  the  Great 
Northern  less  than  $29.50  per  ton  delivered  at  St.  Paul,  at  that  time, 
so  that  we  are  safe  in  saying  that  the  average  cost  of  rails 
delivered  to  the  average  railway  distributing  point  wa*  not  far 
from  $30  per  ton.  Hence  enough  new  rails  for  an  average  mile  of 
track  (100  tons)  cost  about  $3,000.  Since  rail  renewals  actually 
cost  $75  per  mile  of  trackway,  we  see  that  rail  renewals  cost 
2  %  %  of  the  value  of  the  rails  in  a  mile  of  trackway.  This  is  on 
the  assumption  that  renewals  of  rails  in  side  tracks  was  a  com- 
paratively insignificant  item,  which  is  practically  so. 

It  must  not  be  hastily  assumed,  however,  that  the  life  of  the 
average  rail  is  40  years,  for  the  fact  is  that  it  is  less  than  half 
that.  The  $75  per  mile  of  trackway  represents  cost  of  new  rails 
minus  the  scrap  value,  or  relaying  value,  of  the  old  rails.  There  is, 
at  present,  no  means  of  knowing  exactly  what  the  practice  of  all 
railway  companies  is  as  to  the  credit  given  on  their  books  for  the 
rails  that  are  replaced,  but  it  is  certain  that  an  old  rail  is  worth  at 
least  its  scrap  value  at  the  mills  less  the  freight  to  the  mills,  or 
about  $12  per  ton.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  relaying  rails  are  worth 
considerably  more,  and  since  many  old  main  line  rails  are  used  for 
branch  lines  and  particularly  for  side  tracks,  it  is  evident  that  the 
credit  given  to  old  rails  will  somewhat  exceed  $12.  From  study 
of  the  accounting  practice  of  several  large  railways,  I  concluded 
that  $15  per  ton  would  be  not  far  from  the  average  credit.  Hence 
the  net  cost  of  the  new  rails  (after  deducting  the  credit  for  the 
old  rails  replaced)  would  be  $15  per  ton ;  and,  since  the  annual 
rail  renewals  averaged  $75  per  mile  of  trackway,  there  would  be 
5  tons  of  new  rails  laid  per  mile  per  annum.  Hence  in  a  track 
averaging  100  tons  of  rails  per  mile,  this  would  mean  5%  renewals 
every  year,  or  a  rail  life  of  20  years  in  the  main  and  branch  line 
tracks. 

It  is  obvious  that  rail  wear  depends  upon  the  density  of  traffic. 
In  1904,  there  were  829,500  tons  of  freight  carried  over  each  mile 
of  roadbed,  or  746,500  tons  per  mile  of  trackway.  There  were  4,370 
trains  that  passed  over  each  mile  of  trackway,  or  nearly  12  trains 
per  day,  of  which  53%  were  freight,  44%  passenger  and  3%  mixed 
trains.  If  we  count  an  engine  and  its  tender  as  equivalent  to  two 
cars,  thei*e  were  78,540  cars  passed  over  each  mile  of  trackway 
during  the  year. 

Wellington,  in  his  "Economic  Theory  of  Railway  Location,"  has 
erred  badly  in  his  estimate  of  rail  wear.  He  states  that  a  rail 


RAILWAYS.  1461 

should  carry  300,000  to  500,000  trains  (of  500  tons  each)  before 
replacement.  With  4,370  trains  per  year  (the  average  of  the 
U.  S.  in  1904),  Wellington's  rule  would  indicate  a  rail  life  of 
100  years!  This  is  at  least  five  times  the  actual  life  of  20  years 
above  shown.  As  I  have  shown  on  page  1462,  about  22%  of  the 
average  railway  line  is  curved.  Even  assuming  that  the  average 
curve  is  as  sharp  as  6°,  which  is,  of  course,  far  sharper  than  the 
average,  and  that  a  6%  curve  increases  the  wear  100%,  we  see 
that  the  increased  wear  due  to  curves  would  be  only  22%  of  100% 
=  22%  greater  than  if  the  entire  mileage  of  track  were  tangent. 

Part  of  Wellington's  error  arises  from  the  assumption  that  a 
rail  head  can  lose  half  its  weight  before  renewal  of  the  rail  is 
necessary.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Northern  Pacific  tests  have  shown 
that  not  more  than  one-quarter  of  the  weight  of  the  head  is  lost 
before  renewals  are  made.  On  an  80-lb.  rail,  this  would  mean 
that  when  about  10%  of  its  entire  weight  is  lost  by  abrasion, 
the  rail  is  unfit  for  further  economic  service,  except  in  sidings 
and  the  like.  Wellington  was  also  misled  by  a  belief  that  pre- 
vailed in  the  early  80's  that  a  steel  rail  would  last  many  times  as 
long  as  an  iron  rail,  a  belief  which  was  much  too  optimistic,  as 
subsequent  events  have  proved. 

In  selecting  a  proper  unit  in  which  to  measure  rail  wear  there 
has  been  much  dispute.  Wear  may  be  measured  in  three  ways  : 
(1)  In  terms  of  the  number  of  tons  of  gross  weight  that  pass  over 
the  rail  before  it  is  worn  out;  (2)  in  terms  of  the  number  of  trains; 
or  (3)  in  terms  of  the  number  of  cars.  Wellington  favored  the  train 
as  the  unit,  for  he  says:  "The  locomotive  alone  causes  by  far  the 
greater  portion  of  this  wear."  He  cites  the  opinion  of  Launhardt, 
a  German  writer,  to  the  effect  that  the  engine  causes  fully  half  the 
wear — a  conclusion  apparently  based  upon  nothing  but  theory. 
He  also  cites  some  theoretical  deductions  of  Mr.  O.  Chanute.  In 
brief,  there  was  even  then  no  real  evidence  to  prove  the  contention 
that  a  locomotive  causes  as  much  wear  as  the  rest  of  the  train.  At 
present,  when  wheel  loads  on  the  largest  freight  cars  equal  those 
on  the  average  locomotive,  the  argument  that  a  locomotive  causes 
half  the  wear  on  a  rail  is  manifestly  absurd. 

I  am  satisfied  that  rail  wear  is  not  a  function  of  the  number  of 
gross  tons  carried,  nor  of  the  number  of  trains,  but  of  the  number 
of  cars  that  pass  over  the  rail.  Nor  do  I  think  that  the  weight  on 
the  wheels  is  a  very  material  factor  in  the  cause  of  wear.  Rail 
wear  on  tangents  is  due  mainly  to  the  grinding  of  particles  of  grit 
and  steel  between  the  wheel  and  the  rail.  The  abrasion  due  to 
any  grinding  action  is  by  no  means  proportionate  to  the  pressure. 
In  sawing  wood  the  weight  of  a  cross-cut  saw  is  sufficient  to 
produce  rapid  abrasion  of  the  wood,  and  nothing  whatever  is 
gained  by  bearing  down  on  the  saw.  So,  too,  in  cutting  stone  with 
grit  or  chilled  shot,  a  comparatively  light  pressure  Is  quite  as 
effective  in  abrading  the  stone  as  is  a  heavy  pressure :  It  should  be 
remembered  that  it  does  not  take  a  great  weight  applied  to  a 
grain  of  saricl  to  produce  a  very  large  unit  pressure  between  the 
grain  of  sand  and.  the  weight.  It  is  this  unit  pressure  that  counts. 


1462  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

and  it  needs  be  only  sufficient  to  cause  slight  penetration  of  the 
sand  into  the  steel  to  result  in  abrasion.  What  is  true  of  sand 
grains  is  true  of  all  other  particles  between,  or  minute  protuberances 
and  irregularities  upon  the  two  abrading  surfaces  —  the  rail  and 
the  wheel. 

As  we  have  seen,  the  average  rail  in  an  American  trackway 
has  a  life  of  about  20  years,  when  it  carries  78,500  cars  per  year. 
Hence  it  carries  20  X  78,500  =  1,570,000  cars  during  its  active  life. 

I  think  it  is  more  than  mere  coincidence  that  the  life  of  a  steel 
rail  in  a  street  "tramway"  in  England  has  averaged  1,500,000  cars, 
as  shown  below.  At  any  rate,  it  is  evident  that  rail  wear  is 
far  more  nearly  a  function  of  the  number  of  cars  that  pass  over  the 
rail  than  of  any  other  unit  yet  suggested.  It  will  probably  be  found, 
however,  that  the  most  exact  unit  in  which  to  measure  wear  is  the 
number  of  wheels  that  pass  over  a  rail. 

Curvature  of  Railways.—  Since  curvature  affects  the  wear  of 
rails,  and  thus  affects  the  cost  of  track  maintenance,  it  is  of 
interest  to  know  what  per  cent  of  the  average  railway  track  is 
curved.  The  following  statistics,  gathered  in  1901,  throw  light  on 
this  matter. 


Miles  of 

Per  cent 

Road. 

roadbed. 

curved. 

Bur.  Ced.  R  &  N  

1,234 

21 

Chicago  &  AIJton  

900 

12 

C.  &  E.  I  

725 

12 

C.  &  N.  W  

5,562 

19 

C.  M.  &  St.  P  

6,423 

20 

8.  G.  W  
.  O.  &  G  

.      946 
659 

20 
17 

C.  R.  I.  &  P  

3,630 

21 

Del.  &  H  

723 

35 

Del.    &   Lack  

908 

35 

Denver  &  R.  G  

1,675 

30 

111.   Centr  

3,996 

16 

Lehigh   Valley    

461- 

36 

Long  Island    

379 

16 

Mich.    Centr  v  .  . 

1,642 

14 

M.,  St.  P.  &  Ste.  Marie  

1,039 

14 

Mo.  K.  &  T  

1,988 

20 

Mo.   Pacific    

5,329 

21 

Nash.    C.    &    St.    L  

1,195 

25 

N.   Y.   C.   &  H.   R  

2,828 

38 

N.  Y.  C.   &  St.   L  

512 

6 

Pere  Marquette   

1,743 

15 

Penn.    (West  of  Pittsburg)  

2,762 

21 

Penn.   (East  of  Pittsburg)  

4,287 

34 

St.   L.   &  S.    F  

1,640 

29 

Seaboard  Air  Line  

...         1,049 

25 

So.    Pacific    (Pacific   System)  

5,155 

24 

Tex.    &    Pacific  

1,582 

5 

Union  Pacific   

3,000 

20 

Wisconsin    Central    

961 

20 

Total     ..........................      64,933  22.15 

Life  of  Rails  on  an  English  ^"Tramway."-—  Mr.  T.  Arnall  gave  the 
following  data  in  a  paper  read  in  1892  before  the  Tramway's 
Institute  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland.  • 


RAILWAYS.  1463 

At  Birmingham,  a  steam  motor  car  weighing  10  tons  hauls  a 
large  car  holding  60  passengers  over  girder  rails  weighing  98  Ibs. 
per  yd.  After  8  years  experience  witn  a  very  heavy  traffic,  Mr. 
Arnall  concluded  that  such  a  rail  will  carry  less  than  750,000  steam 
cars  before  needing  replacement.  The  life  of  the  driving  wheel 
tires  is  only  25,000  miles,  due  to  steep  grades  (5%),  and  frequent 
use  of  sand.  If  we  include  the  passenger  car,  we  see  that  a  rail 
carried  1,500,000  cars  before  It  was  worn  out. 

Average  Cost  of  Maintenance  of  Equipment  in  America.— Individ- 
ual railways  are  apt  to  show  quite  wide  fluctuations  from  year  to 
year  in  the  cost  of  repairs  and  renewals  of  rolling  stock.  This 
is  due  largely  to  the  financial  condition  of  the  company,  and  often 
to  the  desire  to  make  an  unusually  good  showing  as  to  net  earnings. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  average  of  all  roads  in  America  would  be 
the  best  possible  criterion  of  maintenance  costs  were  the  actual  first 
cost  of  the  equipment  known.  Unfortunately  it  is  not  known,  but 
we  can  estimate  the  approximate  first  cost  with  considerable 
accuracy,  using  the  annual  reports  of  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission  and  applying  unit  prices  to  various  classes  of  equipment 
there  described. 

The  report  for  1906  shows  that  there  were  51,672  locomotives  of 
all  kinds  in  the  United  States,  and  that  the  "repairs  and  renewals 
of  locomotives"  cost  $123,893,482,  which  is  nearly  $2,400  per 
locomotive  for  the  year.  The  average  weight  of  each  locomotive  was 
66  tons,  not  including  the  tender,  with  a  weight  of  54  tons  on  the 
drivers. 

A.  66-ton  locomotive  costs  about  $12,000  new,  hence  the  repairs 
and  renewals  for  1906  averaged  20%  of  the  first  cost. 

While  the  rules  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  require 
the  railways  to  charge  to  "renewals"  the  full  cost  of  a  new  loco- 
motive bought  to  replace  an  old  one,  the  railways  ignore  this  order, 
and  properly  charge  to  capital  account  the  excess  value  of  the  new 
locomotive  over  the  value  of  the  old  one.  Hence  the  railway 
maintenance  accounts  show  true  repairs  and  renewals  cost.  It 
should  be  noted,  however,  that  the  amount  charged  to  repairs  and 
renewals  of  locomotives  should  be  increased  by  nearly  10%  of  the, 
20%,  distributed  as  follows: 

Per  cent. 

Superintendence  of  maintenance 2.9 

Repairs  and  renewals  of  shop  machinery 3.4 

Stationery  and  printing 0.2 

Other  expenses  2.9 

Total   9.4 

This  does  not  include  repairs  and  renewals  of- shop  buildings  nor 
interest  on  the  shop  plant,  nor  "general  expenses"  of  the  entire 
railway  systems,  the  latter  being  nearly  3.9%  of  the  total  operating 
expense. 

However,  if  we  add  only  10%  to  the  cost  of  "repairs  and  re- 
newals" of  each  locomotive  to  cover  the  above  named  items  of 
direct  costs  of  shop  machinery,  repairs,  etc.,  we  have  a  total  of 
$2,640  per  locomotive,  or  22%  of  the  first  cost. 


1464  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  1904  report  shows  that  locomotives  averaged  60  tons  weight 
and  that  "repairs  and  renewals  of  locomotives"  averaged  $2,250 
per  locomotive.  Since  the  average  weight  was  nearly  10%  less 
than  for  1906,  the  "repairs  and  renewals"  should  be  about  10% 
less,  and  such,  in  fact,  is  the  case. 

In.  1906,  the  average  locomotive  traveled  27,400  revenue  train 
miles.  The  actual  locomotive  mileage  was  somewhat  in  excess  of 
this,  but  no  data  are  given  from  which  it  can  be  computed. 

Since  the  "repairs  and  renewals,"  which  we  shall  now  call  22% 
of  the  first  cost  of  locomotives,  includes  true  depreciation  (re- 
newals of  entire  locomotive),  we  must  deduct  depreciation  to  arrive 
at  true  repairs.  There  is  no  available  record  of  exactly  what  this 
has  averaged  in  America,  but  my  study  of  the  equipment  records  of 
the  Great  Northern,  Northern  Pacific  and  other  lines,  has  led 
me  to  conclude  that  about  3.6%  is  the  least  percentage  of  locomo- 
tives that  have  been  retired  from  service  annaally.  This  is  equiva- 
lent to  a  life  of  27.8  years.  Due  to  the  rapid  increase  in  train  loads 
in  past  years  it  is  probable  that  from  1  to  5%  of  the  locomotives 
have  been  retired  annually.  If  we  assume  that  4%  were  retired  in 
1906,  we  have  22% — 4%  =  18%  of  the  first  cost  spent  for  true 
repairs. 

Of  the  51,672  locomotives,  58%  were  freight,  16%  switching,  24% 
passenger,  and  2%  unclassified. 

In  1906  there  were  1,833,635  freight  cars  whose  rated  capacity 
was  32  tons.  The  "repairs  and  renewals  of  freight  cars"  amounted 
to  $138,141,295,  or  nearly  $76  per  car  for  the  year.  The  first  cost  of 
a  32-ton  car  probably  was  about  $600,  so  that  "repairs  and  renewals 
of  freight  cars"  were  about  12.7%  of  the  first  cost,  to  which  should 
be  added  fully  10%  (for  reasons  given)  of  this  12.7%,  making  a 
total  of  14%  as  the  annual  cost  of  repairs  and  renewals.  If  4%  of 
the  freight  cars  were  "retired"  in  1906,  this  would  leave  10%  as 
the  cost  of  true  repairs. 

In  1906  there  were  42,262  passenger  cars,  and  their  "repairs  and 
renewals"  totaled  $30,177,532,  or  §715  per  car.  The  probable 
average  first  cost  of  passenger  cars  is  about  $6,000.  Hence  about 
12%  was  spent  for  "repairs  and  renewals"  to  which  should  be 
added  (for  reasons  above  given)  fully  10%  of  the  12%,  making  a 
total  of  about  13.2%. 

If  4%  were  retired  in  1906,  the  cost  of  true  repairs  was  9.2%. 
However,  the  percentage  of  passengei  cars  retired  is  somewhat 
less  than  freight  cars.  Hence  true  repairs  of  passenger  cars 
doubtless  were  nearly  10%  of  the  first  cost. 

Summing  up  we  see  .that  true  repairs  of  equipment  were  about  the 
foflowing  percentages  of  their  first  cost : 

Per  cent. 

Locomotives 

.Freight  cars   

Passenger  cars 10 


RAILWAYS.  1465 

Repairs  and  renewals  (=  repairs  and  depreciation),  were: 

Per  cent. 

Locomotives    . 22 

Freight  cars 14 

Passenger  cars   13,2 

Cost  of  Maintenance  of  Equipment,  N.  P.  Ry — In  making  my 
appraisal  of  the  equipment  on  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.,  as  of 
June  30,  1906,  I*  found  the  company's  books  skewed  the  following 
original  cost: 

1,005  locomotives    $12,977,823 

478  passenger  and  accommodation  cars. .      2,805,197 

127  sleeping  and   dining  cars 1,583,792 

195  baggage,  express  and  postal  cars....         685,750 

37,584  freight    cars 22,843,823 

Floating  equipment   497,102 


Total    $41,353,487 

This  gives  an  average  unit  cost  of: 

Locomotive    $12,970 

Passenger  car   5,890 

Sleeping   car,   etc t 12,480 

Baggage  car    3,530 

Freight  car    610 

The  average  first  cost  of  each  of  three  classes  of  equipment, 
and  the  average  amount  spent  In  repairs  and  renewals  for  the  fiscal 
year  1906,  were  as  follows: 

Per  cent 

First  Annual  of 

cost.  maintenance.       first  cost. 

1,005  locomotives    $12,970  $2,540  19.5 

800  passenger    cars 6,340  630  10.0 

37,584  freight  cars 610  69  11.3 

This  annual  maintenance  (for  the  year  1906)  includes  repairs 
and  renewals,  but  the  "superintendence"  and  "other  expenses"  are 
not  included,  and  they  amounted  to  about  3.6%  additional. 

The  locomotives  average  78  tons  weight,  not  including  the  weight 
of  the  tender ;  their  average  actual  ages  was  10.7  years,  but  their 
average  "weighted  age"  was  8.6  years. 

The  average  "weighted  age"  of  the  passenger  cars  was  11.1  years, 
and  of  the  freight  cars,  8.2  years. 

At  the  prices  now  prevailing,  this  equipment  would  cost  10  to 
15%  more  if  bought  new. 

There  were  137  switching  engines  in  the  above  number  and  there 
were  229  passenger  engines  and  639  freight  engines,  and  the  868 
engines  averaged  28,600  miles  each,  including  all  train  and  engine 
tnileage,  which  was  as  follows: 

Passenger  train  miles 8,057,721 

Locomotives  helping  passenger  trains 393,974 

Mixed   train   miles 849,035 

.    Freight  train  miles 12,248,582 

Locomotives  helping  freight  trains 2,097,913 

Non-revenue    train    miles 1,229,736 

Total    24,876,961 


1466  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Since  the  revenue  train  mileage  was  21,155,338,   the   868  locomo- 
tives each  averaged  24,300  revenue  train  miles. 
The  car  mileage  was : 

Passenger  cars 59,298,843 

Freight  cars 415,358,345 

The  avei'age  was  6.66  passenger  cars  per  passenger  train,  and 
31.71  freight  cars  per  freight  train,  of  which  23.15  were  loaded 
With  17.30  tons  each  =  400.47  tons  load  per  train. 

The  total  spent  for  maintenance  of  all  equipment  (excepting 
marine)  was  $6,000,000,  including  superintendence  and  repairs  of 
shop  machinery.  Since  the  first  cost  of  all  this  equipment  was 
$41,000,000,  we  see  that  the  average  cost  of  repairs  and  renewals 
was  nearly  15%  for  the  year  1906. 

•  Taking  all  locomotives  and  cars  of  all  kinds  (freight  and  pas- 
senger), the  average  first  cost  of  each  unit  was  $1,000  and  the 
average  cost  of  repairs  and  renewals  was  $150  or  15%.  The  value 
of  this  deduction  will  be  apparent  when  we  come  to  consider  the 
percentage  that  should  be  allowed  for  annual  repairs  and  renewals 
of  electric  motor  cars.  Many  absurdly  low  estimates  have  been 
made  as  to  the  latter,  based  upon  'short  experience  with  compara- 
tively new  equipment,  and  also  without  any  regard  as  to  the  actual 
first  cost  of  the  equipment. 

Life  of  Railway  Cars  and  Locomotives,  and  Cost  of  Repairs,  S.  P. 
Ry.* — Mr.  William  Mahl,  comptroller  of  the  Union  Pacific  and 
Southern  Pacific  railways,  gives  some  valuable  data  as  to  the  life 
of  equipment  on  the  Southern  Pacific  I-lailway. 

The  following  are  averages  for  the  period  of  six  years,  1902  to 
1907,  the  costs  being  the  average  cost  per  year: 

Expenditure  on 
Number  each  per  annum. 

Class.  Serviceable.     Repairs.       Vacated. 

Locomotives 1,540  $3,165        .      $183 

Passenger   cars    1,504  759  104 

Freight  cars 42,983  70  17 

In  "repairs"  are  included  the  annual  expenditure  for  repairs  and 
renewals  of  each  locomotive  or  car,  other  than  the  expenditure  for 
equipment  "vacated,"  or  retired.  In  "vacated"  is  included  the  cost 
of  equipment  destroyed,  condemned  and  dismantled,  sold  or  changed 
to  another  class.  In  1903  there  was  a  fire  which  destroyed  $225,000 
worth  of  passenger  cars,  bringing  up  the  cost  per  car  "vacated"  to 
$234  for  that  year,  as  against  an  average  of  $82  per  car  per  year 
for  the  other  five  years  of  the  period.  Hence  the  $104  for  passenger 
cars  "vacated,"  as  above  given,  is  probably  too  high  for  a  fair 
average. 

From  1891  to  1907,  a  period  of  17  years,  the  average  number  of 
freight  cars  "vacated"  each  year  was  3.63%  of  the  total  number  in 
service.  Dividing  100  by  this  3.63,  we  get  271/&,  which  is,  therefore, 
the  average  life  in  years  of  each  freight  car.  These  cars  were 
nearly  all  wooden  cars,  of  which  the  cost  of  a  box  car  did-  not 
exceed  $450,  excluding  air  brakes. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   23.   19.07. 


RAILWAYS,  1467 

In    the    six-year    period    (1902    to    1907)    the  following  was   the 

record  of  equipment  vacated  :  . Cars.- 

Loco-  Pas-  Road 

motives.       senger.  Freight,  service. 

Total  number    294  299  11,797  468 

Av.  price  per  locomotive  or  car : 

Credited  to  replacement  fund.  $9,298  $4,228  $553  $567 

Charged  to  operating  exp 5,742  3,140  372  380 

Proceeds  from  sale  or  salvage.    3,556  1,087  180  188 

Since  there  were  294  locomotives  "vacated"  in  six  years,  the 
average  was  49  per  year  out  of  the  1,540  in  service,  or  3.2%,  which 
is  equivalent  to  a  life  of  31  years.  The  life  of  passenger  cars  was 
practically  the  same. 

There  were  nearly  2,000  freight  cars  "vacated"  per  year  out  of 
an  average  of  42,983  in  service,  or  nearly  4.7%,  which  is  equivalent 
to  a  life  of  but  little  more  than  21  years.  But  in  the  years  1906  and 
1907  6,338  cars  were  vacated,  which  is  more  than  half  of  all  vacated 
in  the  six-year  period,  indicating  an  unusual  amount  of  replacement. 
This  is  also  borne  out  by  the  fact  that  for  the  17-year  period  the 
life  of  freight  cars  averaged  27%  years,  .vis  above  stated. 

Percentage  of  Engines  Laid  Off  for  Repairs.— In  estimating  the 
number  of  pits  required  in  shops  for  repairing  1,000  locomotives  on 
the  St.  Louis  and  San  Francisco  Ry.,  in  1907,  various  data  were 
used,  from  which  it  was  concluded  that  70  pits  would  be  needed. 
This  is  equivalent  to  7%  of  the  total  number  of  locomotives  con- 
stantly in  the  repair  shops.  However,  many  large  railways  count 
on  8%  of  the  locomotives  constantly  in  the  shops.  The  records  of 
the  St.  L.  &  S.  F.  showed  that  there  had  been  288  days  worked  each 
year  by  the  men  in  the  shops.  Each  engine  was  estimated  to 
spend  20  days  in  the  shop  once  a  year,  and  to  travel  30,000  miles 
between  these  periods  of  general  repairs. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  how  greatly  the  percentage  of  engines 
laid  off  for  repairs  has  been  reduced  within  recent  years.  On  the 
Pennsylvania  Ry.,  from  1851  to  1881,  the  average  was  nearly  18% 
constantly  in  the  shops;  for  the  years  1881  to  1884,  the  average  was 
nearly  15%. 

Percentage  of  Freight  Cars  Laid  Off  for  Repairs.— This  percent- 
age is  ascertainable  with  great  accuracy,  for  it  is  shown  in  the 
weekly  statistical  bulletins  issued  by  the  American  Railway  Associa- 
tion of  Car  Efficiency  (Chicago).  The  average  number  of  freight 
cars  constantly  in  the  shops  is  about  5  to  5%%  of  the  total  cars  in 
service. 

Price  of  Locomotives.— Mr.  Wm.  P.  Evans,  of  the  Baldwin  Loco- 
motive Works,  gives  the  following: 

1885. 1905. 

Price  Price 

Type  of                      Weight,                 per  Ib.  Weight,               per  Ib. 

Locomotive.                         Ibs.       Price,      cts.  Ibs.        Price,     cts. 

American    80,857      $6,695      8.28  102,200      $9,410      9.20 

Atlantic     ... 187,200     15,750      8.30 

Mogul     72,800        6,662      9.12     

Pacific 227,000     15,830     7.00 

Ten  wheeler    .      .....:.  .85,000       7,583     8.92  156,000     15,690     8.80 

Consolidation     92,400       7,888     8.54  192,460     14,500     7.50 


1468  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  price  per  pound  is  figured  from  the  total  weight  of  the  engine 

with  three  gages  of  water  in  the  boiler,  but  excluding  the  tender. 
Cost  of  Shop  Machinery.— Mr.  M.  K.  Barnum  gives  the  following 

as  the  actual  cost  of  shop  machinery  and  tools  for  several  different 

locomotive  repair  shops : 

Locomotives.  Area  Cost 

Number     At  one    During          of  shops  of 

Shop.  of  tools.       time.         ysar.  sq.  ft.  tools. 

A     96  9  120  47,300  $76,600 

B     254  16  216  62,000  188,100 

C    226  22  300  131,300  147,400 

D     237  22  300  96,000  174,300 

E     282  50  600  238,000  264,300 

He  estimates  the  average  useful  life  of  shop  machinery  and  tools 
at  20  years. 

Cost  of  Stopping  Trains.*— Mr.  J.  A.  Peabody  states  that  an 
official  of  a  Western  railway  gave  him  the  following  as  the  cost 
of  stopping  trains,  determined  by  experiment. 

An  8-car  passenger  train,  weighing  530  tons,  including  engine 
and  tender  half  loaded,  from  and  to  a  speed  of  50  miles  per  hr., 
costs  as  follows  per  stop : 

Lbs. 

Coal  to  stop  train  (air  pump) 30 

Coal  to  accelerate  train    (estimated) 275 

Total   coal 305 

Per  stop. 

305  Ibs.  coal,  at  $2.15  per  ton $0.33 

Brake  shoe  wear  and  tire  wear   (from  laboratory 

tests) 0.03 

Wear    of    brake    and    draft    riggings,    etc.     (esti- 
mated)          0.06 

Total     -. $0.42 

The  lost  time  in  starting  and  stopping  on  a  straight,  level  track, 
averaged  145  sees.,  or  nearly  2%  mins.  This  is  the  actual  loss  from 
the  time  that  would  have  been  required  to  make  the  trip  had  no 
stop  been  made. 

The  corresponding  items  of  cost  of  starting  and  stopping  a  2,000- 
ton  freight  train  (80  cars)  from  and  to  a  speed  of  35  miles  per 
hr.  were: 

Lbs. 

Coal  to  stop  train   (air  pump) 50 

Coal    to   accelerate   train 500 

Total  coal    550 

Per  stop, 

550  Ibs.   coal,  at  $2.15 .$0.56 

Brake    shoe   wear 0.15 

Other  items,  as  classified  above 0.29 

Total     $1.00 

"Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.,  1900.  p.   49. 


RAILWAYS.  1469 

Cost  of  Handling  Locomotives  at  Terminals — Mr.  Charles  H. 
Frye  gives  the  following  costs  of  handling  locomotives  at  terminals 
in  1903. 

On  the  St.  Louis  &  San  Francisco  line,  the  average  cost  per 
engine  per  time  handled  was  $1.57  for  wages  of  hostlers  and 
assistants,  fire  cleaners  and  asphalt  men,  front  end  cleaners,  wipers, 
boiler  washers  and  assistants,  sand  dryers,  laborers  or  sweepers 
and  callers. 

On  the  Norfolk  and  Western,  the  cost  was  $1.30  for  repairs  plus 
$0.52  for  watching  and  hostlering,  total  $1.82  per  engine  per  time. 

On  the  Motile  and  Ohio,  4,832  locomotives  were  handled  at  the 
following  labor  cost  per  time : 

Hostlers $0.30 

Boiler    washers    0.10 

Callers    (calling   engine   crew) 0.08 

Sand   dryers 0.03 

Coalers     0.80 

Wipers     1.13 

Machinists 0.36 

Boiler    makers 0.12 

Truck  repairers   0.13 

Total     $3.05 

On  the  Texas  &  Pacific  the  cost  of  despatching,  in  and  out  of 
terminals,  was  2  cts.  per  engine  mile,  or  $2.21  per  engine  per  time. 

On  the  Wabash  Ry.,  17,060  engines  were  despatched  by  636  men, 
during  1903,  at  the  following  labor  cost  per  engine  per  time: 

Repairs $0.98 

Handling    0.84 

Total    $1.82 

On  the  Lake  Shore  &  Michigan  Southern,  the  cost  of  all  round- 
house expenses,  including  skilled  mechanics  on  ordinary  running 
repairs,  was : 

Skilled    mechanics     .  $1.87 

Other    labor    1.73 

Total     $3.60 

On  the  Seaboard  Line,  7,615  engines  were  despatched  at  the 
following  unit  cost : 

Repairs    $1.13 

Supplies,  labor   0.03 

Roundhouse   men     0.64 

Total     $1.80 

An  Eastern  road  having  476  locomotives,  handled  at  31  round- 
houses by  231  men,  gives  the  following  unit  cost  for  13,388 
despatches  monthly : 

Handling   $0.79 

Running  repairs    2.83 

Coal    8.32 

Supplies .    0.43 

Water  and  water  station 0.70 

Total     ,  ..$13?07 


1470  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

A  Western  line  with  312  locomotives  on  1,300  miles  of  line  gives 
the  following  unit  cost: 

General     $0.70 

Washout    0.27 

Wiping     0.10 

Cinders     0.13 

Hostling 0.80 

Coaling     0.35 

Total     $2.35 

Roundhouse    repairs    (heavy   engines) 2.50 

Total $4.85 

These  engines  average   125  miles  per  engine  handled. 


CHAPTER  XII. 
BRIDGES. 

The  Weight  of  Steel  Bridges.—  To  compute  the  approximate  cost 
of  a  steel  bridge,  it  is  first  essential  to  estimate  Its  weight.  Formu- 
las for  estimating  weights  are  given  in  this  section,  together  with 
many  examples  of  weights  of  bridges  actually  built,  both  for  high- 
way and  for  electric  and  steam  railway  purposes. 

The  following  formulas,  taken  from  Johnson's  "Modern  Framed 
Structures,"  give  the  weight  of  steel  in  trusses  and  floor-beams  of 
highway  and  railway  bridges. 

For  a  highway  bridge  with  a  roadway  16  ft.  wide,  designed  to 
carry  100  Ibs.  live  load  per  sq.  ft,  use  the  following  formula: 

W  =  2L  4-  50. 

• 

W  =  weight  in  Ibs.   per   linear  foot  of  bridge. 

L  =  span  in  feet. 

For  bridges  of  less  or  greater  width  of  roadway  than  16  ft.,  sub- 
tract or  add  15  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  for  each  2  ft.  change  in  width. 

For  railroad   bridges  designed  according  to  Cooper's  E-50   load- 
ing, the  weight  of  steel  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge  is  as  follows  : 
For  deck  plate  girders, 

W=12  J/+150. 
For  through  plate  girders  with  beams  and   stringers, 

W=  12  L  +500. 
For  truss  bridges, 


The  Weights  of  Steel  Bridges  for  Highway,  Railway  and  Electric 
Railway,  Spans  of  10-ft.  to  300-ft.*.  —  In  this  issue  we  shall  confine 
ourselves  to  the  weights  of  standard  bridges  on  the  Northern  Pa- 
cific Ry.  and  on  the  Santa  Fe  Ry.,  followed  by  Tyrrell's  formulas 
for  calculating  the  weights  of  bridges  of  moderate  size. 

Weights  of  Standard  Bridges,  A.  T.  &  S.  F.  Ry.—  These  single 
track  bridges  are  designed  to  carry  a  moving  load  of  two  139-ton 
consolidation  engines,  followed  by  a  train  weighing  3,200  Ibs.  per 
lin.  ft.,  according  to  specifications  drawn  in  1902. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   23,   1908. 

1471 


1472 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Estimated   Weights  of   Single   Track  Through   Pin   Truss  Bridges; 
Atchison,  Topeka  &  Santa  Fe  Ry. 

Span  c.  to  Weight 

c.  of  pins.  per  span. 

Ft.  Lbs.  Class. 

100 193, 7001  D 

103 183,300  D 

110 195,300  D 

124 236,800 

126.  .  .  : 283,900s  D 

128 244,300' 

130 251,500 

130. 258,200* 

134 263,200  C 

149 295,500  C 

149 347, 5005  D 

160 341,900  D 

164 346,100  C 

172 371,700         .  C 

200* 499,500«  C 

i^::::: ::::::::::::::::::::!»  8 

300 914,500s  C 

Note — All  truss  spans  of  140  ft.  and  less  have  stiff  bottom  cords. 
*Soft  steel.     jMedium  steel. 

!,  2  and  5  stiff  bottom  chord  carries  floor;  3  130-ft.  span  shortened; 
4  span  for  5°  curve;  "parallel  chords;  T,  8,  9  chords  not  parallel. 

C — Deep  floors.      D — Shallow  floors. 

Estimated  Weight  of  Single  Track  Plate  Girder  Bridges;  Atchison, 
Topeka  &  Santa  Fe  Ry. 

Deck  Girders.  Through  Girders. 





Class  A. 
Lbs. 
12,800 
16,000 
17,500 
20,000 
21,600 
24,300 
24,600 
26,000 
28,300 
35,500 


Span. 

26  ft 

30  ft 

32  ft 

34  ft 

36  ft 

40  ft 

40  ft.  10°   curve. 

42  ft 

44  ft. ... 

48  ft..., 

48  ft.   5°   curve.  .  , 

48  ft.   10°   curve. 

50  ft 

52  ft 

54   ft 

58  ft. 

60  ft. 

60  ft. 

60  ft. 

62   ft 

64  ft 56,100 

64  ft.   5°   curve 

64  ft.   10°  curve 

66  ft 58,600 

70  ft 68,800 

70  ft.   5°   curve 

70  ft.   10°   curve 

75   ft 78,500 

75  ft.   5°   ourve 

75  ft.   10°  curve 

80  ft* 88,500 

90  ft* 110,600 

100  ft 133,600 

105%  ft 


5°  curve. . 
10°  curve. 


36,900 
40,900 
42,500 

si.Voo 


Class  B. 
Lbs. 
17  900 

Class  C. 
Lbs. 

Class  D. 
Lbs. 

23,900 

34,300 

25,800 
28,600 
32,100 
36,600 

39  200 






37,100 

'44,700 
49,600 

36  000 

45,000 




63,400 
64  100 

49,800 
50  000 




64,400 
68,600 
73  000 

53,500 
58  500 



76,800 

62J400 

80,200 
80  600 

90,400 
91  600 

81,100 

92  600 

93,600 

66,800 

82,200 
89  100 

97,700 

89  700 

83,300 

105,000 
105,800 
106,300 

112,000 
113,100 
113,900 

94,800 

113,200 
113  700 

129,200 



114  000 

124,100 
159,900 

136,400 
172,200 

218,500 


"Weights  given  for  girders  Class  C  and  D  are  for  round  ended  girders. 


BRIDGES,  1473 

Classes  A  and  C  are  designed  in  the  most  economic  manner  and 
are  used  wherever  possible.  Class  B  is  for  spans  of  the  least  depth 
consistent  with  good  service.  Class  D  is  for  spans  with  shallow 
floors. 

Classes  B  and  D  are  used  only  where  it  is  less  expensive  to  use 
these  shallow  bridges  than  to  change  the  grade  line.  The  tabular 
weight  is  the  calculated  weight  plus  2y2%.  If  the  shipped  weight  is 
in  excess  of  the  tabular  weight  the  excess  is  not  paid  for. 

Weights  of  Standard  Bridges,  N.  P.  Ry.—  In  1899  standard  plans 
were  made  for  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  bridges.  The  assumed  live  load 
was  two  146-ton  locomotives,  followed  by  4,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  of 
track.  The  following  table  gives  the  approximate  weights  of  sin- 
gle track  steel  bridges,  the  weights  being  given  closely  enough  for 
purposes  of  preliminary  cost  estimates. 
I  Beam  : 

"• 


30  ................................    20000 

Deck  Plate  Girders: 

25  ................................    13,000 

35  .............................  .  .  .    20,000 

40  ................................    25,060 

50  ................................    37,000 

60  ................................    50,000 

70  ...........................  63,000-73,000 

80  ................................    96,000 

90  ................................  113,000 

100  ................................  133,000 

Through  Plate  Girders  : 

40  .............  ...................    40,000 

50  ...............................  ..    53,000 

60  .......................  ......  ...    70,000 

70  ..........................    83,000-98,000 

80  ................................  118,000 

90  .............................  .  .  .142,000 

100  ................................  170,000 

Deck  Lattice: 

110  ................................  150,000 

120  ................................  165,000 

'Vi»-/-.iirrV.      To+ti/m- 


Through  Lattice : 


110 174,000 

120 215,000 

Deck  Pin  Spans: 

130 202,000 

140 220,000 

150 244,000 

160 264,000 

170 297,000 

180 330,000 

190 360,000 

200 392,000 

Through  Pin  Spans: 

130 210,000 

140 230,000 

150 252,000 

160 280,000 

170 303,000 

180 340,000 

190 374,000 

200 410,000 


1474  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

Formulas  for  Weights  of  Railway  Bridges. — Mr.  H.  G.  Tyrrell 
gives  the  following  formulas:  All  weights  (W)  are  per  lineal  foot 
of  single  track  bridge  for  steel  only  ;  units  10,000  to  12,000  Ibs.  per 
sq.  in.  The  live  loads  assumed  are  two  engines  weighing  100  tons 
each,  and  4,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  of  track. 

Deck  plate  girder  bridge W  =  100  +  9  L 

Deck  lattice  girder  bridge  W  -  100  +  8  L 

Half  through  plate  girder  bridge  with  floor W  —  100  -j-  12  L 

Same  with  ties  on  shelf  angle W  =  200  +  8^  L 

Same  with  trough  floor W  =  600  +  10  L 

Riveted  through  truss  bridge W  =  400  +  6  L 

Riveted  deck  truss  bridge,  ties  on  top  chord W  —  200  -j-  7  L 

Pin  through  truss  bridge W  =  400  +  5  Ms  L 

Pin  deck  truss  bridge  with  stringers W  =  400  +  6  L 

Pin  deck  truss  bridge,  ties  on  top  chord W=300+  6  L 

W  =  weight  of  steel,  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 

L  =  span  in  feet. 

Railway  Trestles. — Assumed  loads  same  as  above ;  weight  of 
spans  as  above.  Weight  of  bents  and  bracing  is  9  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft. 
of  side  profile  from  ground  to  base  of  rail. 

Mr.  Tyrrell  also  gives  the  following  formulas  for  the  weights  of 
single  track  railway  bridges,  for  spans  of  30  to  230  ft.,  designed  ac- 
cording to  Cooper's  E  50  loading: 

Deck  plate  girders,   W=100  +  12L. 

Through  plate  girders,   TT=500  +  12L. 

Through   truss   spans,    W=600  +  7I/. 

W  =  weight  in  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 

L  =  span   in   feet. 

Add  90%  for  double  track  bridges. 

Johnson's  "Modern  Framed  Structures"  gives  the  following  formu- 
las for  the  same  loading: 

Deck   plate   girders,    W=150-fl2Z/. 

Through  plate  girders,  W=500  +  12Z/. 

Through  truss   spans,    W=650  +  7I/. 

Cooper's  E  50  loading  provides  for  a  train  of  two  "consolidation 
engines"  (177%  tons  each,  including  tender),  followed  by  a  uni- 
form live  load  of  5,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 

Formulas  for  Weigh*  of  Electric  Railway  Bridges.— Mr.  H.  G. 
Tyrrell  gives  the  following  formulas-  for  weight  of  single  track  elec- 
tric railway  bridges  of  5  ft.  to  200  ft.  span.  The  weights  include 
steel  only,  without  safety  stringers.  The  live  load  is  assumed  to 
cover  the  span  from  end  to  end.  The  details  are  figured  for  riveted 
joints. 

I-beam  spans  of  5  to  20  ft,  W=  50  +  5  L. 

For  truss  spans  of  40  to  200  ft.,  loaded  with  15-ton  cars,  or  1,000 
Ibs.  per  ft.,  W  =  200  +  0.8  L. 

For  truss  spans  of  20  to  180  ft.,  loaded  with  30-ton  cars,  or  2,000 
Ibs.  per  lin.  ft,  W  =  250  +  1.5  L. 

For  deck  plate  girder  spans,  loaded  with  2,000  Ibs.  i>er  lin.  ft. 
W=  30  +  5  L. 

W  =  weight  of  steel  per  lin.  ft. 

L  =  span   in  feet. 


BRIDGES.  1475 

Electric  railway  trestles :  Weights  of  spans  same  as  above ; 
weights  of  bents  and  bracing  is  6  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  of  side  profile  from 
ground  to  base  of  rail. 

Weights  of  Bridges,  III.  Central  R.  R.*— The  Department  of 
Bridges  and  Buildings  of  the  Illinois  Central  Railroad  has  made 
standard  designs  of  steel  'bridges  of  all  ordinary  spans,  and  has 
plotted  the  weights  of  steel  in  each  type  of  bridge.  From  the  curves 
thus  plotted  certain  formulas  have  been  derived  for  ascertaining  the 
weight  (W)  of  the  steel  in  a  bridge  of  any  given  span.  It  will  be 
noted  that  these  formulas  are  not  like  those  found  in  text  books. 

Among  the/  valuable  diagrams  of  weights  of  standard  bridges 
on  the  Illinois  Central  is  one  that  gives  the  weight  of  draw  (swing) 
bridges,  from  75  to  450  ft.  span.  We  do  not  recall  ever  having  seen 
similar  data  for  swing  bridges.  From  the  diagrams,  we  have  pre- 
pared the  tables  that  follow. 

The  formulas  and  tables  are  for  class  "R"  loading,  which  is  as 
follows : 

"For  all  single  track  spans  use  equivalent  uniform  loads  due  to 
two  161.5-ton  engines  with  a  total  wheel  base  of  104  ft.,  followed  by 
a  uniform  train  load  of  4,600  Ibs.  per  lineal  foot  of  track. 

"For  double  track  spans,  of  either  two  or  three  trusses,  and  up 
to  150  ft.  span,  use  equivalent  uniform  loads  due  to  full  engine  and 
train  loading  as  above  on  each  track. 

"For  double  track  spans,  of  either  two  or  three  trusses,  and  over 
150  ft.  span,  use  equivalent  uniform  loads  due  to  full  engine  and 
train  loading  on  one  track  and  uniform  train  load  on  the  other. 

"The  weight  of  track  will  be  assumed  at  420  Ibs.  per  ft.  The 
weight  of  steel  will  be  taken  from  the  diagrams." 

The  weights  of  spans  of  intermediate  length  can  be  interpolated 
from  the  data  given  in  the  following  tables : 

WEIGHTS   OF  STEEL  IN  SINGLE  TRACK  DRAW   BRIDGES. 

,                                     Without  With 

provision  for         provision  for 
Span,  ballast  floors,         ballast  floors, 

ft.                                                       Ibs.  Ibs. 

75 80,000  100,000 

100 •  120,000  150.000 

125 170,000  215,000 

150 230,000  280,000 

175 295,000  360,000 

200 365,000  450,000 

225 '    450,000  550,000 

250... 545,000  660,000 

275 655,000  800,000 

300 785,000  970,000 

350 1,100,000  2,320,000 

400 1,440.000  1,690,000 

450 1,800,000  2,090,000 

Note. — Weights     of     intermediate     spans  of     swing 

bridges  may   be   interpolated.      For   weights  of   double 

track  spans  with  three  trusses  add   85%   to  the  above 

weights.      The    spans    given    in    the    above  table    are 
from  c.  to  c.  of  end  bearings. 

*Engineering-Contracting,  June  1.   1909. 


1476  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

WEIGHT    OF    STEEL    IN    SINGLE    TRACK    I-BEAM    SPANSJ 

WITHOUT  BALLAST  FLOOR. 

(  W  =  3.5  Lz  +  352  L  +  1215.) 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

5    : 3,000 

10     5,000 

15    7,200 

20     9,700 

25    12,200 

30     14,900 

35    17,700 

WEIGHTS    OF    STEEL    IN    SINGLE    TRACK    DECK    PLATE 

GIRDER  SPANS,  WITHOUT  BALLAST  FLOOR. 
(W=  9. 5  £2+  200  L  +  450  for  spans  less  than  70  ft.) 

(W=2BLS — 2, 280  L  -f  83,400    for    spans    more    than 
70  ft.) 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

30    -. 15,000 

40    23,500 

50     34,000 

60    46.500 

70     61,000 

80    80,000 

90     105,000 

100    136,000 

WEIGHTS    OF    STEEL    IN    SINGLE    TRACK  DECK    PLATE 

GIRDER  SPANS. 
(Designed  for  future  ballast  floors.) 

Without  I-Beams  With  I-Beams 

Span,                                            for  future  for  future 

ft.                                              ballast  floor.  ballast  floor. 

30 18,100  25,200 

40 28,400  t       37,400 

50 40.100  50,700 

60 54,500  67,200 

70 69,000  84,400 

80 90,800  108,400 

90 114,600  134,300 

100 .-        150,100  172,300 

WEIGHT  OF  STEEL  IN  SINGLE  TRACK   THROUGH  PLATE 

GIRDER  SPANS,  WITHOUT  BALLAST  FLOOR. 
(W  =  1824  L  —  26,160  for  spans  less  than  76  ft.) 

(W=75I/2 — 9,927I/  +  433,740    for    spans    more    than 
76    ft.) 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

30    28,500 

40    46,600 

50     64,600 

60    82,700 

70     100,700 

80    120,000 

85     131,800 

90 147,300 

100     190,500 


BRIDGES.  147; 


WEIGHT  OF   STEEL  IN  SINGLE  TRACK   THROUGH  PLATE 
GIRDER  SPANS,  DESIGNED  FOR  FUTURE  BALLAST  FLOOR. 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

40    64,400 

50    .  81,200 

60     103,800 

70    .  128,000 

80     154,100 

90    189,600 

100     224,800 

WEIGHT    OF    STEEL    IN    SINGLE    TRACK    THROUGH    PIN 
SPANS,  WITHOUT  BALLAST  FLOOR. 

(  W  =  7.9  I/2  +  870  L  +  11,500.) 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

110   203,000 

120 230,000 

140    288,000 

160 353,000 

180    424,000 

200    500,000 

220    585,000 

240 675,000 

260    772,000 

280 874,000 

300 984,000 

320    1,100,000 

340    1,221,000 

360 1,349,000 

380    .    '. 1,481,000 

400 1,621,000 

WEIGHTS    OF    STEEL   IN    SINGLE   TRACK   THROUGH   PIN 
SPAN   BRIDGES,   DESIGNED  FOR  FUTURE 

BALLAST  FLOORS. 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

100 220,000 

120     290,000 

140    370,000 

160     455,000 

180    550,000 

200     650,000 

220    770,000 

240     900,000 

250    972,000 

WEIGHT  OF  STEEL  IN  DOUBLE  TRACK  THROUGH  PLATE 
GIRDER  SPANS  (2  LIGHT  AND  1  HEAVY  GIRDER), 

WITHOUT  BALLAST  FLOOR. 

(W=  4  L2+  2,980  L  —  44,000    for    spans    30    to    80    ft.) 

(W=  68  I/2—  7, 100  L  +352, 800  for  spans  80  to  100  ft.) 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

30    49,000 

40     82,000 

50    115,000 

60     149,000 

70    184,000 

80 220,000 

90    264,000 

100 324,500 


1478  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

WEIGHT    OF    STEEL.   IN    DOUBLE    TRACK   THROUGH    PIN 
SPANS  (2  LIGHT  AND  1  HEAVY  TRUSS),  WITH- 
OUT  BALLAST   FLOOR. 
(TF=  14.38  L2  +  1,583  L  +  20,900.) 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

110   370,000 

120   .. 418,000 

140    524,000 

160    '. 640,000 

180    771,000 

200 911,000 

220    1,065,000 

240    ' 1,230,000 

260 1,404,000 

280    1,593,000 

300    1,790,000 

320    2,000,000 

340    2,222,000 

360    2,455,000 

380    2,700,000 

400 2,955,000 

Note. — If  the  bridge  is  designed  with  only  two 
trusses,  instead  of  three,  add  82%  to  the  weights  given 
in  the  above  table. 

WEIGHT  OF  STEEL  IN  DOUBLE  TRACK  THROUGH  PLATE 

GIRDER  SPANS  (2  LIGHT  AND  1  HEAVY  GIRDER), 

DESIGNED  FOR  FUTURE  BALLAST  FLOORS. 

Span,  Weight, 

ft.  Ibs. 

40     117,300 

50    148,900 

60     187,700 

70    230,700 

80    282,100 

90     340,300 

100     402,100 

Formulas  for  Weight  of  Highway  Bridges.— Mr.  H.  G.  Tyrrell 
gives  the  following  formulas  for  the  weight  of  steel  in  highway 
truss  bridges: 

L 

With  sidewalks,  W  =  2.8  H 

11.3 
L 

Without  sidewalks,    W  =  5  H 

9.5 

L  =  length  of  span  in  feet. 

W  =  weight  of  steel  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor,  including  both  carriage- 
way and  walk.  The  weight  includes  bracing  and  shoe  plates,  but 
not  joists  or  floor.  These  formulas  were  based  upon  designs  of 
through  truss  spans  from  50  to  150  ft.,  for  roadways  ranging  from 
14  to  20  ft,  wide.  The  trusses  are  riveted.  The  live  load  assumed 
was  80  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  for  trusses  and  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  floor  beams, 
or  a  6-ton  wagon.  These  bridges  have  timber  joists  and  a  floor 
composed  of  two  layers  of  plank. 


BRIDGES.  1479 

The  following  formulas  are  for  plate  girder  highway  bridges  hav- 
ing 16  to  24  ft.  roadway  and  20  to  80  ft.  span,  loading  same  as 
above. 

L 

Through   plate   girder     W  —  3  -\ 

4.25 
L 

Deck  plate  girder,  W  =  2.1  H 

5 

W  =  weight  of  steel  per  sq.  ft.  and  does  not  include  the  timber 
stringers  and  plank  floor. 

For  highway  bridges  with  solid  floors  (assumed  dead  weight  of 
floor,  150  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.),  Mr.  Tyrrell  gives  the  following  formulas: 

L 
Deck  plate  girder  bridges,       W  =  3  -{ 

2.6 

L 
Half  through  girder  bridges,  W  =  3  -] 

2.4 

L  •  •»-• 

Truss  bridges,  W  =  3  -j — 

Weight  of  a  465-ft.  Span  Highway  Bridge.*— The  longest  high- 
way truss  span  in  America  was  built  in  1901  across  the  Miami 
River  at  New  Baltimore,  Ohio.  It  has  a  span  of  465  ft.  c.  to  c.  of 
end  pins,  and  a  depth  of  66  ft.  at  the  middle.  The  pin  connected 
trusses  are  25  ft.  apart  in  the  clear.  The  bridge  is  designed  for  a 
live  load  of  2,600  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.,  with  a  live  load  of  100  Ibs.  sq.  ft. 
on  the  floor  system  and  a  6-ton  road  roller  as  a  concentrated  load. 
The  floor  system  consists  of  plate  girder  floor  beams,  I-beam  string- 
ers, and  2% -in.  plank  floor.  There  is  no  sidewalk  and  no  street 
railway  track.  The  weight  of  the  bridge  is  1,000,000  Ibs.,  or  2,150 
Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  or  86  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft. 

Weight  of  a  406-ft.  Span  Highway  Bridge.* — A  very  long  highway 
truss  span  was  built  in  1899  across  the  Miami  River  at  Hamilton, 
Ohio.  The  span  is  406  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  end  pins.  The  trusses  are  50 
ft.  deep  at  the  middle  and  spaced  26%  ft.  c.  to  c.  The  roadway 
is  22  ft.  wide,  and  the  two  cantilever  sidewalks  are  6  ft.  wide  each, 
making  a  total  floor  width  of  34  ft.  The  trusses  are  calculated  for 
a  dead  load  of  5,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  of  span  and  a  live  load  of  2,720 
Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  of  span,  or  80  Ibs.  per  sp.  ft.  of  floor.  The  floor 
system  is  calculated  for  a  20-ton  roller  on  two  axles  12  ft.  apart, 
or  a  16-ton  electric  car.  The  floor  of  the  roadway  is  asphalt  blocks 
on  concrete  laid  on  buckle  plates,  supported  by  I-beam  stringers. 
The  sidewalks  are  concrete  slabs.  The  total  weight  of  steel  in  the 
bridge  is  1,300,000  Ibs. 

Weight  and  Cost  of  a  Highway  Bridge,  120-ft.  Spans.*— A  steel 
highway  bridge  was  built  in  1905  across  the  Wabash  River  at 
Terre  Haute,  Ind.  It  is  812  ft.  long  between  abutments,  and  con- 
sists of  6  spans  of  120  ft.  each  and  one  75-ft.  span  in  the  center. 
The  roadway  is  50  ft.  wide,  and  there  is  an  8-ft.  cantilever  sidewalk 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   7,   1908. 


1480  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

on  each  side,  making  a  total  floor  width  of  66  ft.  It  is  a  deck 
bridge,  and  each  span  has  two  riveted  trusses  53  ft.  c.  to  c.,  with 
three  intermediate  plate  girders.  The  roadway  is  paved  with  brick. 
The  total  weight  of  steel  in  the  bridge  is  4,144,000  Ibs.  including 
88,000  Ibs.  of  street  car  rails.  There  are  2,330  cu.  yds.  of  concrete 
in  the  two  abutments  and  3,900  cu.  yds.  in  the  six  piers;  there  are 
718  piles.  The  piers  average  50  ft.  high.  The  substructure  cost 
178,700,  and  the  superstructure  cost  $192,500,  a  total  of  $271,200, 
by  contract,  including  the  removal  of  an  old  bridge  and  the  build- 
ing of  a  temporary  bridge,  which  is  equivalent  to  $334  per  lin.  ft., 
or  $5  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor  area. 

Weight  of  a  450-ft.  Span  Highway  Swing  Bridge.*— A  highway 
swing  span  of  unusual  length  was  built  across  the  Connecticut  River 
in  1896.  The  bridge  is  450  ft.  long.  The  trusses  are  26  ft.  c.  to  c., 
providing  for  one  line  of  electric  cars  and  two  lines  of  carriages. 
The  floor  is  designed  to  carry  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  14  ton  electric 
cars  or  a  10  ton  wagon.  The  trusses  are  designed  to  carry  a  live 
load  of  1,500  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  for  chords  and  2,000  Ibs.  for  web.  The 
floor  consists  of  4xl4-in.  yellow  pine  stringers  spaced  2y2  ft.  apart, 
supporting  two  layers  of  plank,  3  in.  and  2  in.,  respectively.  The 
stringers  for  the  car  track  are  15-in.  steel  beams  weighing  42  Ibs. 
per  ft.  There  are  22  panels,  depth  21  to  55  ft.  The  turntable  is 
rim  bearing.  The  drum  is  4  ft.  deep  and  31  ft.  diameter.  Three  25- 
HP.  motors  are  used,  one  for  turning  and  two  for  blocking  up 
the  ends..  An  extra  motor  is  provided.  To  open  takes 
the  motor  30  seconds.  Working  on  10-ft.  levers  the  bridge 
is  turned  by  four  men  in  8  minutes.  The  total  weight  of  draw- 
bridge superstructure,  including  drum  and  flooring,  is  1,380,000  Ibs. 

Weight  of  a  520-ft.  Double  Track  Swing  Bridge.*— The  longest 
swing  span  in  the  world  is  the  Interstate  bridge.  It  is  a  double 
track  railway  draw  bridge,  built  in  1903,  across  the  Missouri  River 
at  East  Omaha,  Neb.  The  trusses  were  destgned  to  carry  a  live 
load  of  11,180  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge.  This  heavy  load  was  al- 
lowed in  case  it  should  be  desired  to  provide  a  cantilevered  road- 
way and  sidewalk  16  ft.  wide  on  the  outside  of  each  truss.  The 
weight  of  this  520-ft.  draw  span  is  3,900,000  Ibs.  There  were  also 
9  plate  girder  60-ft.  spans  in  the  approach,  having  a  total  length  of 
575  ft,  and  a  total  weight  of  1,773,000  Ibs.  The  pivot  pier  was 
sunk  to  bed  rock,  a  depth  of  120  ft.  below  low  water,  by  open  dredg- 
ing inside  a  steel  cylinder. 

The  following  are  the  quantities  in  the  substructure: 

Cu.  Yds. 
Mass  in  cribs  and  pneumatic  caissons  of  2  piers  80  ft.  deep. .      4,180 

Mass  in  base  of  pivot  pier ; 5,390 

Mass  in  bases  of  8-pile  piers  and  2  abutments 2,330 

Masonry   in   shafts  of   4    large  piers 2,135 

Concrete  in  shafts  of  8  shore  piers  and  2  abutments 1,550 


Lin.  Ft. 
.  .19,900 

Lbs. 
Steel    in   pivot   pier   "well"    or   open   caisson 580,000 


Piling  below  bases  of  8  shore  piers  and  abutments 19,900 

Lbs. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  7,  1908. 


BRIDGES.  1481 

The  "4  large  piers"  above  mentioned  are  the  pivot  pier  of  the 
draw  span  and  its  two  rest  piers,  and  a  third  rest  pier  for  an  old 
existing  draw  span. 

The  contract  price  for  this  520-ft.  swing  bridge  and  approaches 
was  $600,000. 

Weight  of  a  450-ft.  Double  Track  Swing  Bridge.*— A  double  track 
draw  bridge,  with  5  approach  (single  track)  spans,  was  built  in 
1905  across  the  Tennessee  River  for  the  Illinois  Central  Ry.,  to  re- 
place a  lighter  steel  bridge  built  17  years  previously.  The  draw 
bridge  is  450  ft.  long,  and  about  25  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  trusses.  Three 
of  the  Approach  spans  are  300  ft.  each,  and  two  are  150  ft.  each, 
and  are  all  single  track,  the  trusses  being  17%  ft.  c.  to  c.  The 
weights  of  steel  in  these  spans  are  as  follows: 

Lbs. 

1  double  track  draw  span   (450  ft.)  and  turntable 2,576,000 

3  single  track  spans,   300  ft.   each .4,074,000 

2  single  track  spans,   150  ft.   each 764,000 

Total   7,414,000 

The  price  for  the  draw  span  was  4.45  cents  per  Ib.  ready  to  as- 
semble; and  the  price  for  the  pin  connected  truss  spans  was  3.64 
cents  per  Ib.  The  cost  by  contract  for  erection  was  $90,000,  which 
is  about  1%  cents  per  Ib.  The  pivot  pier  is  62  ft.  high,  and  47  ft. 
diameter.  It  contains  873  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  footing  and  1,356  cu. 
yds.  of  concrete  above  the  footing,  or  a  total  of  2,229  cu.  yds.,  and 
16,200  Ibs.  of  reinforcing  rods.  It  rests  on  305  piles. 

Weight  of  a  438-ft.  Single  Track  Swing  Bridge.*— As  a  part  of 
the  single  track  bridge,  built  in  1899  over  the  Mississippi  River,  for 
the  Davenport,  Rock  Island  and  Northwestern  Ry.,  there  are  one 
361-ft.,  three  296-ft.,  and  three  200-ft.  pin-connected  truss  spans, 
beside  a  438-swing  span  which  is  described  subsequently.  The 
trusses  are  designed  for  Cooper's  Class  E  35-train  load,  and  the 
floor  system  for  Class  E  40.  The  trusses  are  18%  ft.  c.  to  c.  The 
weights  of  each  span  is  as  follows : 

Lbs. 

438-ft.  swing  span   (including  machinery) 1,400,600 

361-ft.  span  (c.  to  c.  end  pins) 1,039,100 

296-ft.  span  (c.  to  c.  of  end  pins) 742,400 

200-ft.  span  (c.  to  c.  of  end  pins) 410,000 

Weight  and  Cost  of  a  334-ft.  Four  Track  Swing  Bridge.*— A  four 

track  swing  bridge  was  built  in  1900  across  the  Chicago  Drainage 
canal  at  West  46th  street,  Chicago,  for  the  Chicago  &  Western  In- 
diana R.  R.  It  is  unique  among  four  track  swing  bridges  in  that 
it  has  two  trusses  instead  of  three.  By  this  arrangement  the  cen- 
ter pier  is  only  43  ft.  diameter,  thus  saving  about  20  ft.  of  length 
over  a  three-truss  bridge  that  gives  the  same  clear  waterway.  The 
bridge  is  334  ft.  long  c.  to  c.  of  end  bearings.  It  is  29%  ft.  c.  to  c. 
of  trusses,  two  of  the  tracks  being  supported  on  cantilever  floor 
beams  outside  the  trusses.  The  total  width  is  57  ft.  The  live 
load,  continuous  girder  of  four  supports,  is  4,980  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,   Oct.   7,   1908. 


1482  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

on  the  adjacent  inside  track,  4,200  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  on  the  adjacent 
outside  track,  with  no  load  on  the  distant  outside  track. 

The  weight  of  steel  and  iron  is  2,692,000  Ibs.,  exclusive  of  the 
operating  machinery. 

The  pier  is  octagonal,  44  ft.  diameter,  over  coping,  masonry  shell 
7  ft.  thick,  filled  with  earth  inside,  is  30  ft.  high  and  rests  on  clay. 
The  substructure  cost  $51,353,  the  contract  prices  being:  Excava- 
tion, 51  cts.  ;  concrete,  $7.30 ;  stone  masonry,  $13.35  per  cu.  yd. 
The  superstructure  cost  $131,393,  or  nearly  4.9  cts.  per  Ib.  includ- 
ing the  floor.  The  total  cost  was  $182,746,  or  $547  per  lin.  ft.  of 
bridge,  or  $137  per  lin.  ft.  of  track. 

Weight  of  a  231ft.  Single  Track  Swing  Bridge.*— A  single  track 
swing  bridge  was  built  across  the  St.  Joseph  River,  for  the  Pere 
Marquette  Ry.,  to  replace  an  older  span  having  become  too  light  for 
modern  locomotives.  The  bridge  is  231  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  end  floor 
beams,  and  17  ft.  8  ins.  c.  to  c.  of  trusses.  It  was  designed  for 
Cooper's  Class  E  loading,  and  its  weight  is  600,000  Ibs.  It  is  ope- 
rated by  a  30-HP.  gasoline  engine  which  opens  or  closes  it  in  one 
minute. 

Weight  of  a  216-ft.  Double  Track  Swing  Bridge.— A  double  track 
•Winer  bridge  was  built  in  1899  across  Kinnickinnic  River,  near 
Milwaukee,  for  the  Chicago  &  Northwestern  Ry.,  to  replace  a  single 
track  pin-connected  bridge  built  19  years  previously.  It  is  a  rivet- 
ed lattice  truss  draw  bridge,  216  ft.  long,  trusses  27  ft.  apart  in  the 
clear,  and  designed  for  a  load  of  two  131% -ton  engines  followed  by 
a  train  weighing  4,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  on  each  track.  Its  weight 
is  1,200,000  Ibs.  including  track,  machinery,  etc. 

Weight  and  Cost  of  a  1,504-ft.  (3  Spans)  Cantilever  Double  Track 
Bridge.* — The  longest  cantilever  railway  bridge  in  America  is  a 
bridge  finished  in  1903  across  the  Monongahela  River  at  Pittsburg, 
for  the  Wabash  R.  R.  It  is  1,504  ft.  long  exclusive  of  approaches. 
The  channel  span  is  812  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  piers,  and  each  of  the  shore 
spans  is  346  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  piers.  The  steel  towers,  are  126  ft.  high, 
and  the  depth  of  the  suspended  span  is  60  ft.  The  live  load  con- 
sists of  two  consolidation  engines  (on  each  track)  followed  by  a 
train  load  of  4,500  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The  weight  of  the  superstructure 
is  14,000,000  Ibs.,  or  9,300  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The  cost  of  substructure 
and  superstructure  was  $800,000,  or  $533  per  lin.  ft. 

The  four  piers  were  sunk  to  rock  by  the  pneumatic  caisson 
process.  The  height  of  the  four  piers  averaged  110  ft.,  of  which 
35  ft.  is  below  low  water. 

Weight  and  Cost  of  a  1,296-ft.  (3  Spans)  Cantilever  Double  Track 
Bridge.* — A  double  track  cantilever  bridge  was  finished  in  1903 
across  the  Ohio  River,  at  Mingo  Junction,  Ohio,  for  the  Wabash 
R.  R.  It  is  1,296  ft.  long  exclusive  of  approaches.  The  channel 
span  is  700  ft.  and  each  of  the  two  shore  spans  is  298  ft.  c.  to  c.  of 
piers.  The  steel  towers  are  109  ft.  high,  and  the  depth  of  the  sus- 
pended span  is  51%  ft.  Two  of  the  piers  have  caisson  founda- 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   7,   1908. 


BRIDGES.  1483 

tions  and  are  115  ft.  high,  25  ft.  of  which  is  below  low  water  level. 
One  pier  is  100  ft.  high,  of  which  only  10  ft.  is  below  low  water. 
There  is  an  abutment  (instead  of  a  fourth  pier)  40  ft.  high.  The 
weight  of  the  superstructure  is  12,000,000  Ibs.  exclusive  -  of  ap- 
proaches. The  cost  of  the  substructure  and  superstructure  was 
$750,000,  or  $577  per  lin.  ft. 

Weight  and  Cost  of  a  2,750-ft.  (5  Spans)  Cantilever  Double  Track 
Bridge.* — A  double  track  cantilever  bridge  was  finished  in  1905 
across  the  Mississippi  River  at  Thebes,  111.,  for  the  Illinois  Central 
and  other  railways.  It  has  a  length  of  2,750  ft.  (exclusive  of  con- 
crete approaches)  and  consists  of  5  spans:  one  671  ft.,  two  521  ft., 
and  two  518  ft.,  measured  center  to  center  of  piers.  The  steel 
superstructure  weighs  24,000,000  Ibs.,  and  cost  $1,400,000,  and  the 
substructure  cost  $600,000,  a  total  of  $2,000,000,  which  is  $800  per 
lin.  ft.  The  piers  have  an  average  height  of  about  115  ft.  from  the 
cutting  edge  of  the  caisson  to  the  top  of  the  pier,  and  the  water 
averages  20  ft.  deep  when  low.  One  pier  was  sunk  to  a  depth  of  40 
ft.  below  low  water.  There  is  a  double  track  concrete  viaduct  ap- 
proach on  each  side,  having  a  total  length  of  about  1,200  ft,  con- 
sisting of  65-ft.  arches.  The  height  of  this  viaduct  is  about  100  ft., 
and  its  cost  was  $300,000,  or  about  $250  per  lin.  ft. 

Weight  of  a  1,380-ft.  (3  Spans)  Cantilever  Highway  Bridge.*— A 
cantilever  highway  bridge  was  finished  in  1903  across  the  Ohio 
River  at  Marietta,  Ohio,  for  the  Ohio  River  Bridge  and  Ferry  Co. 
Its  length  is  1,380  ft.  exclusive  of  two  approach  spans  of  220  ft. 
each  and  a  plate  girder  viaduct  640  ft.  long,  but  with  these  the 
total  length  is  2,460  ft.  The  width  is  28  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  trusses,  or  25 
ft.  clear  width  of  roadway  including  a  4^  -ft.  sidewalk.  The  live 
load  for  the  trusses  was  assumed  at  60  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  ;  and  for 
the  floor  system  it  was  assumed  at  80  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  or  a  steam 
roller  of  15  tons.  The  cantilever  is  of  peculiar  design,  due  to  neces- 
sity of  providing  two  channels  and  of  placing  one  of  the  piers  in  a 
shallow  part  of  the  river.  The  length  of  the  main  channel  span  is 
650  f t.  ;  the  south  anchorage  span  is  600  ft.  ;  the  north  anchorage 
span  is  130  ft.  ;  all  c.  to  c.  of  piers.  The  trusses  are  pin  connect- 
ed. The  floor  system  consists  of  plate  girder  floor  beams,  timber 
stringers,  and  plank  floor.  The  weight  is  4,800,000  Ibs.,  including 
the  approach  spans  and  the  viaduct. 

Weight  and  Cost  of  a  Scherzer  Highway  Lift  Bridge. f — A  Scherz- 
er  rolling  lift  highway  bridge  was  built  in  1897  across  the  Chicago 
River  at  Halsted  street.  Length  of  movable  part,  176  ft.,  divided 
into  two  leaves  38  ft.  long,  giving  a  clear  span  of  121  ft.  between 
faces  of  abutments  and  109  ft.  between  protection  piles  ;  length  of 
each  of  the  two  anchor  spans,  50  f  t.  ;  total  length  276  f  t.  ;  width  of 
carriageway,  34  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  trusses-,  width  of  each  sidewalk,  7*4 
ft.  center  of  truss  to  center  of  hand  rail ;  total  width,  5  0  ft.  The 
bridge  was  designed  to  carry  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  or  an  18-ton  motor 
car  followed  by  trailers  weighing  15  tons,  each  on  an  8  ft.  wheel 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   7,   1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  2.  1908. 


1484  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

base  and  having  37  ft.  length.  The  weight  of  superstructure,  in- 
cluding the  50  ft.  approach  spans,  is  820  tons,  of  which  300  tons  is 
counterweights.  The  weight  of  the  machinery  is  70  tons.  Each 
leaf  is  operated  by  a  50  HP.  motor.  It  requires  an  average  of  40 
HP.  to  open  each  leaf,  and  about  the  same  for  closing,  the  time 
required  being  %  min.  to  open  and  the  same  to  close.  The  cost  of 
the  bridge  to  the  city  was: 

Substructure    $  34,500 

Superstructure 55,400 

Machinery     13,560 

Electrical   equipment    5,400 

Engineering,    inspection,    temporary    foot    bridge    and    inci- 
dentals      14,740 


Total    $123,600 

Cost  of  a  Scherzer  Highway  Lift  Bridge.* — In  1894  a  Scherzer 
rolling  lift  highway  bridge  was  built  across  the  Chicago  River,  on 
Van  Buren  street,  Chicago.  The  span  is  115  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  bearings, 
giving  a  clear  channel  of  109  ft.  It  has  2  roadways  of  21  ft.  c.  to 
c.  of  trusses,  and  2  sidewalks  of  8%  ft.  each.  The  piers  are  of  con- 
crete and  sandstone  masonry  resting  on  piles.  Each  leaf  of  the 
bridge  has  3  trusses,  and  is  counterweighted  with  129  tons  of  cast 
iron.  The  floor  is  plank,  resting  on  steel  I-beams.  Two  50  HP. 
motors  operate  each  leaf.  Tests  have  shown  that  it  requires  an 
average  of  60  HP.  to  raise  one  leaf  at  a  time,  and  96  HP.  to  raise 
both  sides  simultaneously. 

Exclusive  of  engineering  and   inspection,   the  bridge  cost : 

Superstructure    $   73,100 

Substructure    79,600 

Electric  equipment  and  machinery 11,150 

Total . .  .$163,850 

Weight  of  a  Scherzer  Railway  Lift  Bridge.* — A  double  track  bas- 
cule bridge  of  the  Scherzer  type  was  built  in  1904  to  replace  a  draw 
bridge  built  17  years  previously,  the  draw  bridge  having  become  too 
light  for  the  traffic  on  the  Central  R.  R.  of  New  Jersey.  The  bridge 
is  part  of  the  Newark  Bay  crossing.  The  bridge  consists  of  two 
lift  spans,  back  to  back,  across  two  separate  channels.  Each  of 
these  spans  is  120  ft.  c.  to  c.  to  center  of  piers,  or  110  ft.  between 
piers ;  but,  due  to  the  skew,  the  clear  channel  width  is  only  85  ft. 
Each  span  weighs  2,000,000  Ibs.,  about  half  of  which  is  in  the  cast 
Iron  counterweight,  leaving  1,000,000  in  the  span  alone. 

Weight  of  a  Scherzer  Railway  Lift  Bridge.*— A  rolling  lift  bridge 
of  the  Scherzer  type  was  built  in  1899,  at  the  Fort  Point  Channel, 
Boston,  for  the  New  York,  New  Haven  and  Hartford  Railroad.  It 
is  a  skew  bridge,  the  skew  bejng  42°.  One  truss  is  113  ft.  long,  the 
other  being  84  ft,  and  the  distance  from  center  to  center  of  chords  is 
27  ft.  The  weight  of  this  double  track  bascule  bridge  is  381,200  Ibs. 
The  counterweights  weigh  3,100  Ibs.  The  time  to  operate  the  bridge 
one  way  is  35  sees,  with  a  60  HP.  motor. 


^Engineering-Contracting,    Dec.    2,    1908. 


BRIDGES.  1485 


Cost  of  a  Page  Highway  Lift  Bridge.* — A  trunnion  bascule  high- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1901  across  the  Chicago  River  at  Ash- 
land avenue.  The  bridge  is  of  the  Page  type  and  consists  of  two 
leaves,  168  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  trunnions.  The  bridge  is  258  ft.  long,  and 
has  a  clear  waterway  of  140  ft.  between  fender  piles.  The  trusses 
are  40  ft.  c.  to  c.  carrying  a  36-ft.  clear  roadway  with  two  8-ft. 
cantilever  sidewalks,  making  a  total  of  52  ft.  of  floor  width.  The 
bridge  is  designed  for  a  live  load  of  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  for  the  road- 
way and  80  Ibs.  for  the  sidewalks;  concentrated  load  20  tons  on 
two  axles  12  ft.  c.  to  c.  The  weight  of  steel  in  each  leaf  is  340,- 
000  Ibs.  There  are  about  620,000  Ibs.  of  cast  iron  for  counter- 
weights of  each  leaf.  The  substructure  required  the  following  quan- 
tities : 

Excavation 6,500  cu.  yds. 

Concrete 2,820  cu.  yds. 

Sheet  piling  and  bracing 250,000  ft.  B.  M. 

Timber    in   protection   work   and   dock 23,500  ft.  B.  M. 

Piles  in  protection  work  and  dock 7,300  lin.  ft. 

Piles    in    coffer    dam     2,100  lin.  ft. 

The  contract  price  was : 

Substructure    $   35,540 

Superstructure 91,200 

Total     $126,740 

Cost  of  a  Page  Railway  Lift  Bridge.* — A  double  track  single- 
leaf  bascule  bridge  of  the  Page  type  was  built  in  1907  over  the 
Chicago  River  by  the  Chicago  &  Alton  Ry.  It  has  a  span  of  150  ft., 
and  there  is  an  approach  span  of  64  ft.  The  superstructure,  in- 
cluding electrical  equipment  for  operation,  cost  $115,000.  The  sub- 
structure, including  the  removal  of  an  old  pivot  pier  and  some 
dredging  of  the  channel,  cost  $50,000,  making  a  total  cost  of  $165,- 
000.  The  substructure  contained  3,200  cu.  yds.  of  concrete. 

Cost  of  a  Trunnion  Bascule  (Lift)  Bridge.* — A  trunnion  bascule 
highway  bridge  was  built  at  Clybourn  Place,  Chicago,  in  1902,  ac- 
cording to  designs  of  John  Ericson,  City  Engineer.  The  bridge  is  a 
fixed  center,  double  leaf,  counterbalanced  bascule,  128  ft.  c.  to  c. 
of  pivot  bearings,  and  120  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  piers,  with  a  clear  channel 
of  100  ft.  between  the  guard  piles  that  protect  the  piers.  The 
length  over  all  is  180  ft.  Each  leaf  has  three  through  trusses,  21  ft. 
c.  to  c.,  and  the  total  width  of  the  bridge  is  60  ft,  the  sidewalks 
being  carried  on  9-ft.  cantilever  brackets.  The  motive  power  is  two 
38  HP.  motors.  The  bed  of  the  river  is  about  40  ft.  below  the 
lower  chord  of  the  bridge,  and  the  water  is  23  ft.  deep.  The  sub- 
structure is  of  concrete  resting  on  piles.  The  contract  price  was 
$69,000  for  substructure  and  $86,000  for  superstructure,  or  a  total 
of  $155,000.  The  weight  of  each  leaf  is  640,000  Ibs.  including  struc- 
tural steel,  cast  iron  rack,  timber  and  counterweights.  This  is 
equivalent  to  nearly  $1,300  per  lin.  ft.  of  span  between  piers,  or 
$860  per  lin.  ft.  of  total  length. 

Cost  of  a  Trunnion  Bascule  (Lift)  Bridge.* — A  trunnion  bascule 
highway  bridge  was  built  in  1903  at  Northwestern  avenue,  Chi- 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  2.  1908. 


1486  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

cago.  It  consists  of  two  leaves,  and  the  span  between  centers  of 
trunnions  is  205  ft.,  while  the  span  between  abutments  is  190  ft.,  and 
the  clear  width  of  the  channel  is  165  ft.  between  the  timber  pro- 
tection works.  There  are  three  lines  of  trusses  21  ft.  c.  to  c.,  and 
9  ft.  cantilever  sidewalks,  making  a  total  width  of  60  ft.  There  are 
two  approach  spans,  one  of  75  ft.  and  one  of  17  ft.  The  total  length 
of  the  bridge  is  361  ft,  and  it  contains  2,180,000  Ibs.  of  structural 
steel,  1,400,000  Ibs.  of  counterweight  pig  and  cast  iron,  and  200,000 
Ibs.  of  machinery.  The  substructure  consists  of  4,500  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  and  300  cu.  yds.  of  rubble  curb  walls  for  the  approaches. 
The  contract  price  for  the  substructure  was  $88,200,  and  $208,500 
for  the  superstructure,  a  total  of  $296,700. 

Weight  of  an  840  ft.  Span  Arch  Bridge."— The  Niagara  Falls  and 
Clifton  steel  arch  bridge  was  built  in  1895-1898.  It  consists  of  a 
main  span  of  840  ft.  and  two  end  spans,  one  of  190  ft.  and  the  other 
of  210  ft,  giving  a  total  length  of  1,240  ft.  The  main  arch  springs 
from  the  solid  rock.  The  arch  is  two-hinged,  parabolic,  and  has  a 
rise  of  137  ft.  The  end  spans  are  pin-connected,  inverted  bow  string 
trusses.  The  bridge  carries  on  one  level  two  lines  of  trolley  car 
tracks,  two  carriageways  and  two  sidewalks,  having  a  total  width  of 
46  ft  There  are  1,637  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  in  the  substructure.  The 
materials  used  in  the  main  span  were  as  follows : 

Lbs. 

Two-arch  trusses,   not  including  laterals 1,673,356 

Laterals   of  arch    383,522 

Bents,   including  lateral  bracing 450,577 

Longitudinal   bracing 150,705 

Skewbacks   and   shoes    . 226,634 

Floor  system 766,287 

Total    3,651,081 

In  addition  there  were  : 

New  York  end  span 344,862 

Canadian  end  span 371,733 

Hand  rail  and  floor  fastenings 83,048 

Miscellaneous    (field  rivets,    etc.) 81,323 

Grand  total 4,532,047 

There  were  246,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  timber  in  the  permanent  flooring. 
Weight  and  Cost  of  a  195  ft.  Span  Arch  Bridge.*— A  steel  arch 
highway  bridge  was  built  in  1900  across  Nine-Mile  Run,  at  Pitts- 
burg.  The  total  length  is  444  ft.  The  carriageway  is  36  ft  wide,  on 
each  side  of  which  is  6  %  -ft.  cantilever  sidewalk,  making  a  total 
width  of  49  ft.  of  floor.  It  consists  of  a  steel  arch  span,  195  ft.  c. 
to  c.  of  pins,  and  a  steel  viaduct  approach  of  five  24-ft  plate  girder 
spans  on  each  side  of  the  arch  span.  The  arch  span  is  a  pair  of 
three-hinge  plate  girders.  The  sidewalks  and  carriageway  are  made 
of  buckle  plates  and  concrete,  the  carriageway  being  paved  with 
asphalt.  The  arch  has  a  rise  of  59  ft. ;  and,  as  the  ground  rises 
rapidly  from  the  skewbacks  toward  each  end  of  the  bridge,  the 
average  height  of  the  viaduct  approaches  is  about  half  this  rise,  or 
30  ft 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  2,  1908. 


BRIDGES.  1487 

The  materials  were  as  follows : 

Structural   steel    ('ibs.) .  .  l',457,000 

Railing,    889   lin.    ft.    (Ibs.) 60,000 

Stone  Masonry   (cu.  yds. ) 1,410 

Concrete   (cu.   yds.) 287 

Paving  on  roadway    (sq.  yds.) 1,800 

Paving  on  sidewalk   (sq.  ft.) 5,500 

Curb    (lin.   ft.) 890 

The  total  contract  cost  was  $86,534,  including  $535  for  mill,  shop 
and  field  inspection  of  the  steel,  or  70  cts.  per  ton  for  inspection. 

This  is  equivalent  to  $195  per  lin.  ft,  or  $4  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

Weight  of  a  207  ft.  Span  Arch  Bridge.* — A  single  track,  three- 
hinged  steel  arch  bridge  was  finished  in  1903  across  the  Menominee 
River,  Michigan,  for  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul  Ry.,  replac- 
ing a  steel  bridge  built  17  years  previously,  which  had  grown  too 
light  for  the  traffic.  The  bridge  is  355  ft.  long,  consisting  of  a 
three-hinged  arch  of  207  ft,  span  and  four  plate  girder  approach 
spans  of  39.y2  ft.  each.  The  trusses  are  22  ft.  c.  to  c.  The  arch 
h^s  a  rise  of  52  ft.  The  bridge  is  designed  according  to  Cooper's 
specifications  for  a  live  load  of  two  consolidation  Class  E-50  loco- 
motives and  7,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  behind  the  engines.  The  weight 
of  steel  in  the  arch  span  is  480,000  Ibs.,  and  in  the  approach  spans  it 
is  150,000  Ibs. ' 

Weight  and  Cost  of  a  440  ft.  Span  Arch  Bridge.*— A  steel  high- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1906  in  Pittsburg.  It  is  known  as  the  Oak- 
land Bridge.  It  is  800  ft.  long  and  has  a  roadway  20  ft.  wide,  with 
a  7  ft.  cantilever  sidewalk  on  each  side.  It  consists  of  an  arch  hav- 
ing a  span  440  ft,  and  a  rise  of  70  ft,  and  a  steel  viaduct  approach 
at  each  end  of  the  arch,  the  spans  of  the  approach  girders  being 
30  to  40  ft.  each.  The  arch  span  consists  of  two  lattice  girder  arch 
ribs,  abutting  on  concrete  abutments  built  on  the  solid  rock.  The 
arch  is  not  hinged.  The  cost  of  this  bridge  was  $138,000,  which  is 
equivalent  to  $172  per  lin.  ft,  or  $4.50  per  sq.  ft  of  floor  area. 

Cost  of  Steel  Arch  Bridge.*— A  steel  highway  bridge  was  built 
in  1906  across  the  Potomac  River,  at  Washington,  D.  C.  The  bridge 
is  1,000  ft.  long  between  abutments,  and  consists  of  6  three-hinged 
arch  spans  of  129  ft.  each,  and  one  two-leaf  bascule  span  of  103  ft. 
Each  of  the  arch  spans  has  six  plate  girder  ribs.  The  bridge  is  48 
ft.  wide  between  handrails,  having  two  6%  ft.  sidewalks  and  a  35 
ft.  roadway.  The  rise  of  the  arches  is  14  ft.,  and  the  height  of  the 
piers  averages  about  65  ft.  to  the  spring  line.  The  concrete  piers 
rest  on  pile  foundations.  The  site  of  each  pier  had  to  be  dredged 
before  driving  the  piles.  The  low  water  surface  is  about  10  ft. 
below  the  spring  line  of  the  arches.  The  bridge  cost  $375,000,  or 
$375  per  lin.  ft,  or  $7.80  per  sq.  ft. 

Weight  of  the  Burlington  Bridge  of  the  C.,  B.  &  Q.t— In  1890  a 
double  track  steel  railway  bridge  was  built  across  the  Mississippi 
River,  at  Burlington,  for  the  C.,  B.  &  Q.  R.  R.,  to  replace  a  single 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  2.  1908.      a.  )Q  taaO-  jjni.J6mi*a3 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  4,  1908. 


1488  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

track  iron  bridge  built  22  years  before.  The  6  spans  of  250  ft.  each, 
weighed  3,340  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The  draw  span  of  363  ft.  weighed 
3,980  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The  bridge  was  designed  to  carry  a  moving 
load  of  6,000  Ibs.  per  ft.  of  double  track  structure  (3,000  Ibs.  per 
ft.  of  single  track),  this  load  being  increased  50%  in  estimating 
the  variable  effect  of  a  moving  load. 

The  cost  of  engineering  was  5%  of  the  total  cost  of  piers  and 
superstructure. 

Weight  of  a  Double  Track  Draw  Bridge,  195  ft.  Span.— A  double 
track  swing  bridge  (through  riveted  truss)  was  built  in  1901  across 
the  Hackensack  River,  N.  J.,  for  the  D.,  L.  &  W.  Ry.  Its  weight 
is  1,206,000  Ibs.  and  its  length  is  195  ft. 

Weight  of  a  533  ft.  Span  Railway  Bridge  and  of  a  323  ft.  Draw 
Span  Across  the  Delaware. — A  double  track  railway  bridge  was 
built  in  1896  across  the  Delaware  River,  at  Bridesburg,  for  the 
Pennsylvania  and  N.  J.  R.  R.  Co.  There  are  three  spans  of  533 
ft.  each,  and  a  draw  span  of  323  ft.  The  weight  of  steel  in  each 
of  the  three  533  ft.  spans  is  4,182,000  Ibs. 

The  weight  of  the  steel  in  the  draw  span  with  riveted  work  is  1,- 
505,000  Ibs.,  and  the  weight  of  the  machinery  is  356,000  Ibs.,  total 
1,861,000  Ibs. 

A  steel  traveler  was  used  to  erect  the  bridge.  The  traveler  was 
110  ft.  high,  46  ft.  wide  at  the  bottom  and  81  ft.  wide  on  top.  Its 
weight  was  292,000  Ibs.  without  trucks. 

Weight  of  a  Highway  Cantilever  Bridge,  1,024  ft.  Long.— Mr. 
Gustave  Kaufman  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  the  weight  of 
a  highway  bridge  at  Cincinnati,  built  in  1890. 

The  cantilever  bridge  has  a  span  of  520  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  piers,  and 
the  shore  arms  of  the  cantilever  are  each  252  ft.  long,  making  a 
total  length  of  1,024  ft.  This  does  not  include  several  approach 
spans  on  each  side. 

The  weight  of  metal  is  as  follows : 

Lbs. 

Shore  arms  of  cantilever 1,376,978 

River  arms  of  cantilever .' 691,360 

Suspended   span    (208    ft.).- • 335,185 

Total    , 2,403,523 

It  required  %  gal.'  of  paint  per  ton  of  metal  for  two  coats. 

The  bridge  trusses  were  designed  for  a  live  load  of  80  Ibs.  per  sq. 
ft.  The  stringers  and  floor  beams  were  designed  for  a  live  load  of 
100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  or  a  15-ton  steam  roller.  The  roadway  con- 
sists of  6  lines  of  iron  stringers  riveted  to  iron  floor  beams,  and 
covered  with  cross  timbers,  spaced  30  ins.  c.  to  c.,  to  which  are 
spiked  two  layers  of  oak  flooring  having  *a  total  thickness  of  5V2  ins. 
The  roadway  is  2  ft.  wide  in  the  clear,  and  the  sidewalks  (which 
are  on  brackets  outside  oi;  the  trusses)  are  each  1%  ft.  wide  in 
the  clear. 

Estimating  Cost  of  a  Steel  Bridae  Erection.— The  cost  of  erect- 
ing steel  bridges  should  be  separated  into  two  main  items:  (1) 


BRIDGES.  1489 

cost  of  falsework,  and  (2)  cost  of  erecting  the  steel.  Usually,  how- 
ever, engineers  who  have  published  cost  data  have  unfortunately 
lumped  these  two  items  together. 

The  cost  of  falsework  for  any  given  bridge,  and  of  a  traveler  of 
given  design,  can  be  estimated  from  the  data  given  in  the  section 
on  Timberwork,  and  from  data  in  the  following  pages. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  railway  plate  girder  bridges  are 
usually  erected  with  little  or  no  falsework.  Railway  plate  girders 
up  to  80-ft.  span,  and  occasionally  up  to  120-ft.  span,  are  shipped 
as  single  pieces.  Short  girders  are  skidded  flat  into  position  from 
the  car  and  then  turned  on  edge.  Long  girders  may  be  lifted  from 
the  cars  by  gallows  frames  and  lowered  to  position. 

Swing  bridges  are  erected  on  the  pile  fender  or  guard  pier,  which 
serves  as  the  falsework.  This  makes  the  cost  of  erection  much  less 
than  for  truss  bridges  for  which  falsework  must  be  built. 

Steel  viaducts  are  erected  with  travelers,  so  that  no  falsework  is 
required. 

The  cost  of  materials  and  of  labor  on  steel  bridges  should  be 
recorded  in  terms  of  the  pound  of  steel  as  the  unit,  or  in  terms  of 
the  ton  of  2,000  Ibs. 

Cost  Per  Lin.  Ft.  and  Per  Sq.  Ft. — It  is  customary  to  state  the 
cost  of  railway  bridges  in  terms  of  the  lineal  foot  of  span,  while  the 
cost  of  highway  bridges  is  preferably  reduced  to  the  square  foot  of 
floor  area  as  the  unit.  However,  it  should  be  remembered  that,  in 
either  case,  the  unit  cost  increases  rapidly  as  the  span  increases. 

The  cost  of  viaducts  is  often  given  in  terms  of  the  square  foot  of 
profile  area ;  but  care  should  be  taken  to  state  whether  the  total 
profile  area  is  estimated  below  the  base  of  the  railway  rail,  or  below 
the  top  of  the  towers.  ' 

Most  Economical  Span. — Mr.  J.  A.  L.  Waddell,  M.  Am.  Soc. 
C.  E.,  was,  I  believe,  the  first  to  enunciate  the  following  theory  (in 
1890)  :  "For  any  crossing,  the  greatest  economy  will  be  attained 
when  the  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  the  substructure  is  equal  to  the 
cost  per  lineal  foot  of  the  trusses  and  lateral  systems."  Note  that 
the  cost  of  the  floor  system,  being  practically  independent  of  the 
length  of  the  span,  does  not  enter  into  this  generalization. 

The  following  is  the  demonstration  of  this  theory :  Assume  a 
bridge  crossing  of  indefinite  length,  with  the  depth  to  bedrock  con- 
stant. Let 

8  —  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  substructure. 

T  =  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  trusses  and  laterals. 

F=  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  floor  system. 

Y  =  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  entire  bridge. 

L  =  length  of  each  span. 

Y  =  8  +  T  +  F. 

Assuming  that  slight  changes  in  L  will  not  materially  affect  the 
size  of  the  piers,  S  will  vary  inversely  as  L,  hence 

K 

8  = ,  K  being  a  constant. 


1490  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

But,  for  slight  changes  of  L,  T  varies  nearly  directly  as  L,  hence 
T  =  C  L,  C  being  a  constant.  Since  F  is  practically  a  constant,  being 
a  function  of  panel  length  and  not  of  span  length,  we  have 

K 

Y  = i-CL+F, 

L 

m  which  Y  is  to  be  made  a  minimum.     Differentiating  we  have 

—  KdL  dY  —  S 

(I  Y  = \-CdL,  whence,   by  putting =  O,  we  have 

L2  dL  L 

T 

^ =  o,  or  8  =  T. 

L 

A  further  differentiation  shows  that  the  result  corresponds  to  a 
minimum.  Although  no  bridge  is  indefinite  in  length,  and  although 
ledge  rock  usually  is  found  at  different  depths,  still  this  same  prin- 
ciple may  be  applied  to  each  pier  and  the  two  spans  that  it  helps  to 
support,  by  making  the  cost  of  the  pier  equal  to  one-half  the  total 
cost  of  the  trusses  and  laterals  of  the  two  spans. 

The  principle  obviously  applies  to  trestles,  viaducts  and  elevated 
roads. 

In  an  ordinary  viaduct,  consisting  of  alternate  spans  and  towers, 
the  cost  of  all  the  girders  in  two  spans  (one  span  being  over  the 
tower),  plus  the  cost  of  the  longitudinal  bracing  of  one  tower, 
should  equal  the  cost  of  the  two  bents  of  the  tower  plus  the  cost 
of  their  masonry  pedestals. 

In  an  elevated  railway,  the  cost  of  the  stringers  or  girders  of  one 
span  should  equal  the  cost  of  one  bent,  including  its  pedestals. 

The  Life  of  Steet  Railway  Bridges.* — Considering  the  economic 
importance  of  the  subject,  it  is  astonishing  that  no  tabulated  sta- 
tistics as  to  the  life  of  American  steel  railway  bridges  can  be  found 
in  print. 

Bridge  engineers  are  accustomed  to  denominate  wooden  bridges 
as  "temporary,"  while  they  call  steel  bridges  "permanent."  The 
annual  reports  of  railway  managers  to  stockholders  contain  these 
expressions,  and  there  is  a  general  acquiescence  in  the  propriety 
of  their  application.  But  the  facts  are  that  steel  railway  bridges 
are  so  far  from  being  permanent  that  they,  too,  should  be  classed 
as  temporary. 

We  must  not  be  misunderstood  as  decrying  the  lasting  qualities 
of  steel  itself,  for  there  is  abundant  evidence  that  iron  and  steel 
are  exceedingly  lasting  under  certain  conditions.  Let  us  illustrate. 

The  "first  iron  railway  bridge"  was  built  in  1823,  for  the  Stock- 
ton &  Darlington  Ry.,  at  West  Auckland,  England,  and  was  not 
removed  until  1903,  after  80  years  of  service.  This  bridge  is  illus- 
trated and  described  in  the  "Railroad  Gazette,"  July  8,  1904,  p.  125. 
The  bridge  was,  in  fact,  an  iron  trestle  with  cast  iron  posts  and 
four  iron  spans  of  12  ft.  8  ins.  each.  The  spans  consisted  of  double 
members  of  wrought  iron  united  by  cast  iron  struts. 

Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  7,  1908. 


BRIDGES.  1491 


As  is  well  known,  the  life  of  an  iron  or  street  railway  bridge  is 
not  limited  by  the  durability  of  the  bridge,  but  by  its  ability  to  with- 
stand the  steadily  increasing  loads  imposed  upon  it. 

The  average  age  of  the  1,000  locomotives  in  use  on  the  Northern 
Pacific  Railway  is  10.4  years.  There  are  in  service  (or,  at  least, 
there  were  two  years  ago)  several  locomotives  34  years  old.  This 
road  has  been  in  existence  so  long  that  its  rolling  stock  may  be 
said  to  have  reached  a  condition  of  normal  renewals.  When  a  con- 
dition of  normal  renewals  is  reached  as  to  cross  ties,  the  life  of  the 
average  tie  is  just  twice  the  age  of  the  existing  average  tie.  If  the 
age  of  the  average  tie  is  found  to  be  5  years,  and  a  condition  of 
normal  renewals  of  10  per  cent  per  annum  exists.  In  like  manner, 
rolling  stock  ultimately  approximates  a  condition  of  normal  re- 
newals. It  does  not  reach  exactly  that  condition,  due  to  the  steady 
growth  of  traffic  on  the  railway.  But,  if  we  multiply  the  10.4 
years  by  2,  we  have  20.8  years,  which  is  the  approximate  average 
life  of  locomotives  on  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  Due  to  the  in- 
crease in  the  number  of  locomotives  each  year,  the  true  average 
life  is  slightly  greater  than  the  20.8  years  thus  ascertained. 

Since  there 'has  been  a  complete  renewal  of  locomotives  in  about 
20  years,  and  since  the  locomotives  have  grown  progressively  heav- 
ier, it  is  logical  to  look  for  a  renewal  of  steel  bridges  in  about  the 
same  length  of  time,  and  in  fact  that  is  what  has  occurred.  Table 

I  shows  the  life  of  10  bridges. 
. 
TABLE   I. — SHOWING   LIFE  OF  TEN   RAILWAY   BRIDGES. 

Item                                                      Location  of                     When  Life, 

No.                   Name  of  R.  R.             Bridge.                         Built.  Tears. 

1.. C.,  M.  &  St.  P. Rock    River... 1884  19 

2 Wabash     Sangamon   River.....    1885  21 

3 C.,   B.   &  Q Big  Rock  Creek 1881  22 

4 111.     Cent Big  Muddy  River 1889  13 

5 111.     Cent ....Tennessee    River    1888  17 

6 C.   &  N.    W Kinnikinnic    River...    1880  19 

7 P.     M St.    Joseph  River 1887  17 

8 Grand    Trunk Niagara     1877  19 

9 C.,  M.  &  St.   P Menominee    River 1886  17 

10 C.  R.  R.  of  N.  J..  .  .  .Newark   Bay 1887  17 

Average  of  the  above. 18.1 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  average  life  of  these  10  steel  railway 
bridges  has  been  18.1  years.  When  it  is  remembered  that  the  life 
of  an  uncovered  Howe  truss  wooden  bridge  is  rarely  less  than  10 
years  and  is  frequently  20  years  (see  committee  report  of  the  As- 
sociation of  Railway  Superintendents  of  Bridges  and  Buildings, 
October,  1899),  what  becomes  of  the  designation  "permanent"  as 
applied  to  steel  in  contrast  with  wooden  railway  bridges?  The 
consensus  of  opinion  given  in  the  report  above  cited  was  to  the 
effect  that  a  Howe  truss,  properly  housed  in,  would  last  more  than 
40  years.  A  housed  in  wooden  highway  bridge,  of  the  Howe  truss 
type,  was  taken  down  at  Zanesville,  Ohio,  after  65  years  of  service. 

With  such  statistics  before  us,  we  are  forced  to  conclude  that 
m,ost  railway  bridge  engineers  have  fallen  -into  serious  error  in 
not  giving  proper  consideration  _to  the  temporary  character  of  steel 
railway  bridges  as  heretofore  designed,  a 


1492  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

While  we  cannot  predict  with  accuracy  what  the  increase  in  rail- 
way bridge  loading  will  be  in  the  future,  there  is  nothing  more  cer- 
tain than  that  an  increase  will  occur.  Since  the  first  railway  was 
built,  there  has  been  a  steady  growth  in  the  size  of  locomotives  and 
cars.  When  will  it  cease?  No  man  can  tell.  Therefore,  if  we 
plan  for  the  future  upon  the  teachings  of  the  past  80  years,  we  must 
either  make  due  allowance  for  increased  weight  of  rolling  stock 
when  designing  steel  railway  bridges,  or  we  must  cease  calling 
them  "permanent"  and  apply  to  them,  as  to  timber  bridges,  their 
proper  designation,  "temporary." 

In  addition  to  the  important  bearing  that  such  statistics  as  are 
here  given  have  upon  bridge  design,  there  is  the  further  impor- 
tance of  such  data  in  solving  problems  of  railway  appraisal.  In 
making  his  appraisal  of  railways  of  Washington  for  the  State  Rail- 
road Commission,  Mr.  H.  P.  Gillette  had  to  make  an  estimate  of 
the  "present  value"  of  all  structures.  Nearly  all  the  steel  railway 
bridges  in  Washington  are  comparatively  new,  and,  as  the  ap- 
praisal of  the  railways  was  made  primarily  for  rate  making  pur- 
poses, Mr.  Gillette  assigned  no  depreciation  to  the  steel  bridges. 
This  gave  the  railways  more  than  "the  benefit  of  the  doubt,"  for 
there  can  be  no  doubt  that  there  is  no  real  permanency  in  steel 
railway  bridges  as  at  present  designed.  For  taxation  purposes,  it 
is  clear  that  a  depreciation  of  about  5  per  cent  per  annum  should 
be  made  from  the  first  cost  of  all  steel  railway  bridges. 

Even  a  casual  study  of  bridge  books  and  bridge  literature  must 
impress  an  engineer  with  the  lack  of  attention  that  engineers  have 
given  to-  this  all  important  subject  of  the  life  of  bridges.  The  text 
books  treat  the  problems  of  bridge  design  largely  as  problems  in 
pure  mathematics  and  mechanics,  and  ignore  many  equally  impor- 
tant principles  of  bridge  economics.  Most  of  the  de- 
signers of  reinforced  concrete  railway  bridges  are  making  the  same 
blunders  that  have  characterized  the  designers  of  steel  railway 
bridges,  namely,  designing  for  present  loadings  without  provision 
for  the  future. 

Life  of  Railway  Bridges.— Mr.  J.  E.  Greiner  states  that  the  life  of 
iron  or  steel  railway  bridges  "has  been  scarcely  25  years,"  due  to 
the  steady  increase  in  the  weight  of  locomotives.  He  gives  the 
following  table  of  weights  of  locomotives  in  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio 
Ry.,  for  60  years: 

Tear.  Weight  in  tons. 

1835 10.7 

1851 37.3 

1863 45.4 

1873 52.6 

1881 54.3 

1886 56.6 

1890 66.5 

1894 80.4 

1895 95.0    (electric) 

The  increase  between  1885  and  1895  has  been  75%,  or  7^%  per 
annum.  .  The  increase  between  1835  and  1895  has  been  788%  for  60 
years,  or  13%  per  annum. 


BRIDGES.  1493 

Amount  of  Work  Done  Per  Man  in  a  Large  Bridge  Works. — At 
the  Pencoyd  works  of  the  American  Bridge  Co.  the  following  was 
the  amount  of  work  done  in  the  first  half  of  the  year  1901 :  The 
number  of  men  employed  was  765  (of  whom  98  were  draftsmen) 
and  the  output  was  82,600,000  Ibs.  in  6  mos.,  or  nearly  13,800,000 
Ibs.  per  mo.  The  average  output  per  man  per  month  was,  there- 
fore, 18,300  Ibs.  The  output  of  each  of  the  different  classes  of 
men  was  as  follows  per  month : 

Pounds. 

Draftsmen    (98    men) 140,000 

Templaters  (30  men) 455,000 

Bridge   shop    21,300 

Forge    11,000 

Eye-bar  shop 35,400 

The  output  per  draftsman  was  found  by  dividing  the  total  out- 
put of  the  works  by  the  number  of  draftsmen  employed ;  in  like 
manner  the  output  per  templater  was  calculated  ;  but  the  output  of 
each  man  in  the  bridge  shop,  forge  and  eye-bar  shop  was  calcu- 
lated only  on  the  basis  of  the  number  of  pounds  handled  in  each 
of  those  departments. 

Cost  of  Erecting  A.,  T.  &  S.  F.  Ry.  Bridges. — The  average  cost 
per  ton  of  the  bridges  erected  on  the  Atchison,  Topeka  &  Santa  Fe 
Ry.,  in  1907,  all  of  which  were  on  the  main  line  of  this  railway, 
and  consequently  made  it  necessary  to  contend  with  all  trains  was 
as  follows : 

Per  ton. 

Trusses,  984  tons  erected $4.63 

Girders,    2,784    tons  erected .-        5.49 

I-beams,  2,837  tons  erected 2.88 

All  the  girders  and  I-beams  were  erected  with  steam  wrecker 
and  through  spans  with  the  derrick  car.  It  will  be  noticed  that  the 
girder  work  cost  more  than  the  trusses,  the  reason  for  this  being 
that  a  good  part  of  the  girder  work  was  on  second  track,  where  one 
girder  had  to  be  cut  apart  and  moved  to  the  outside  and  a  heavier 
girder  set  in  its  place.  The  bridge  gang  traveled  over  a  territory 
of  5,000  miles  and  the  cost  of  moving  was  also  charged  to  the 
bridges.  The  riveting  was  done  by  hand. 

Falsework  for  a  Railway  Bridge.* — The  new  Havre  de  Grp.ce 
bridge  for  the  Pennsylvania  R.  R.  in  Maryland  of  255  ft.  and  ane 
of  192  ft.,  is  a  double  track  deck  truss  structure  about  4,116  ft. 
long  composed  of  one  280-ft.  swing  span  and  17  fixed  spans  from 
192  ft.  to  255  ft.  long.  The  swing  span  and  the  8  fixed  spans  were 
fabricated  and  erected  by  the  American  Bridge  Co.  The  swing 
span  was  erected  up  and  down  stream  on  the  fender,  and  the  fixed 
spans  were  erected  on  pile  trestle  falsework.  The  construction  of 
the  falsework  trestle,  the  method  of  its  erection,  and  the  total  and 
unit  quantities  of  lumber  used  are  given  in  this  article  from  data 
furnished  by  Mr.  H.  F.  Lofland,  General  Manager  of  Erection, 
American  Bridge  Co.,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 


*Abstracted    from    Engineering-Contracting,    June    5,     1907,    but 
omitting  the  drawings. 


1494  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Under  the  shore  span  (192  ft.)  a  falsework  of  framed  benis 
constructed  was  employed.  In  deeper  water  pile  bents  were  used 
with  the  caps  directly  on  the  pile  tops  and  every  other  panel  braced. 
The  number  of  piles  in  a  bent  was  increased  with  the  increase  in 
the  depth  of  water  ;  for  spans  2,  3,  8  and  9  six  pile  bents  were  used, 
and  for  spans  4  and  7  eight  pile  bents,  while  spans  5  and  6  had 
double  bents  of  eight  piles  each.  The  8-pile  double  bents  were  two 
bents  of  8  piles  each,  the  bents  being  spaced  4  ft.  c.  to  c.  The 
longitudinal  bracing  was  universally  4x8-in.  stuff  for  diagonals  and 
6x8  in.  stuff  for  horizontals. 

The  method  of  construction  was  to  drive  the  piles  for  all  nine 
spans  complete,  then  to  complete  the  falseworks  for  the  first  five 
spans  and  finally  to  transfer  the  caps  and  bracing  to  spans  6,  7, 
8  and  9  from  preceding  spans  as  fast  as  these  were  erected.  The 
piles  ran  from  50  to  90  ft.  in  length  and  were  driven  to  a  pene- 
tration of  25  ft.  in  all  spans  except  5  and  6,  where  a  penetration 
of  only  20  ft.  was  permitted.  The  schedule  of  piles  for  the  several 
spans  was  as  follows : 
Spans.  ,  No.  piles.  Total  lin.  ft. 

2-3 48  2,400 

3-4 48  2,550 

4-5 64  4,320 

5-6 128  9,920 

6-7 128  11,200 

7-8 64  4,400 

8-9 48  2,760 

9-10..  48  2,880 


Total ; : 576  40,430 

There  were,  therefore,  about  18   lin.  ft.   of  piling  used  for  lineal 
^•<oot  of  span,  not  counting  the  posts  in  the  •  pier  bents. 

The  falseworks  were  proportioned  for  a  maximum  concentrated 
ilve  load  at  one  corner  of  the  traveler  of  35,000  Ibs. ;  it  was  also 
proportioned  for  the  following  panel  loads;  192-ft.  span,  dead  load 
due  to  steel  superstructure,  45,000  Ibs.,  live  load  due  to  hauling 
out  materials,  24,000  Ibs.  ;  255-ft.  spans,  dead  load,  79,000  Ibs.,  live 
load,  35,000  Ibs.  As  stated  above,  caps  and  bracing  for  spans  2, 
3,  4  and  5  were  reared  in  spans  6,  7,  8  and  9.  The  total  falsework 
in  addition  to  piling  was  then : 
Span.  Description.  Ft.  B.  M. 

1-2— Bents   and    bracing 22,720 

2-3 — Caps  and  bracing 12,147 

3-4 — Caps  and   bracing.  . 12,147 

4-5— Caps  and   bracing 20,325 

5-6 — Caps  and  bracing 31,824 

99,163 


°  a 


This  total  is  exclusive  of  the  timber  in  the  posts  of  the  pier 
bents.  These  posts  are  12x12  ins.,  and  average  about  41  ft.  in 
length;  there  are  four  posts  to  each  bent  and  17  bents.  They  con- 
tain, therefore.  492  X  4  X  17  =  33,456  ft.  B.  M.,  which,  added  to  the 
above  total,  gives  132,619  ft.  B.  M.,  or  60  ft.  B.  M.  per  lineal  foot 
of  bridge  (river  spans).  The  total  weight  of  steel  in  the  river 


BRIDGES.  1495 

spans  was  16,000  tons,  so  that  there  were  used  6.74  lin.  ft.  of  piling 
and  about  22.1  ft.  B.  M.  of  falsework  timber  per  ton  of  steel. 

Cost  of  a  Steel  Railway  Bridge  and  Foundations. — Mr.  W.  A. 
Rogers  gives  the  following  data  relative  to  erecting  a  4-span  single 
track  bridge  across  Grand  River,  Mo.,  for  the  C.,  M.  &  St.  P.  Ry.  in 
1895.  The  4  spans  were  138  ft.  long  each,  and  weighed  178,600 
Ibs.  each.  The  work  was  done  by  company  forces  at  the  follow- 
ing cost: 

Falsework — 

Materials $1,606.90 

Labor    .. 1,834.99 

Train  service    150.00 

• • 

Total $3,591.89 

Two    Pile    Piers— 

Ma^ial     ............$    420.24 

Train  service' '.'.'. Y.'.V.Y.Y.'.Y.'.Y.Y. .' .' .' '. '.  '.         40.'00 

— , 

Total     $    747.24 

Foundation   Three  Masonry  Piers— 

Material    (piles  and  timber   grillage) $    601.40 

Labor 1,773.00 



Total $2,374.40 

Stonework  Three  Masonry  Piers— 

343,080   Ibs.    stone    $2,061.93 

501    sacks   cement    176.90 

Miscellaneous    material    22.94 

Labor 3,485.53 

Total     . $5,747.30 

Iron  Superstructure— 

700,009    Ibs.    wrought    iron $17,216.91 

14,489  Ibs.   cast  iron    195.43 

Miscellaneous     21.06 

Labor  erecting    1,952.97 

Train   service    96.78 

Total .$19,483.15 

Floor — 

Materials $1,051.32 

Labor    .  292.82 


Total $  1,344.14 

Moving   the   Spans — 

Materials    $      136.62 

Labor ,         521.99 

Train   service    58.20 


Total $  716.81 

Removing  old  pile  piers,  pulling  piles, 

and  removing  falsework 593.05 

Removing  driftwood  (burning) 938.78 

Night  watchman  465.50 

Engineering 1,145.96 

Grand    total     $37,148.22 

This  is  equivalent  to  nearly  $70  per  lin.  ft.  for  the  552  lin.  ft 


1496  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  first  item  of  falsework  includes  taking  down  4  old  Howe  truss 
bridges.  The  falsework  item  amounts  to  $6.53  per  lin.  ft.,  and  is 
equivalent  to  0.5  cts.  per  Ib.  of  iron  in  the  bridge.  The  erection  of 
the  iron  cost  0.29  ct.  per  Ib..  which  added  to  the  0.5  ct.  makes  a 
total  of  about  0.8  ct.  per  Ib.  for  erection  and  falsework,  or  $16 
per  ton. 

The  stone  masonry  required  4,800  Ibs.  of  stone  in  the  rough  per 
cu.  yd.,  and  cost  $8.04  per  cu.  yd.,  of  which  $4.87  was  labor. 

The  floor,  or  deck,  cost  $22.22  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  or  $2.44  per 
lin.  ft.  for  labor  and  materials,  of  which  $0.52  per  lin.  ft.  was  for 
labor. 

The  four  spans  were  erected  on  the  old  piers  and  subsequently 
moved  30  ft.  lengthwise  on  rollers  riding  on  temporary  plate  girder 
spans;  the  cost  of  this  moving  was  $179  per  span,  or  0.1  ct.  per  Ib. 
It  took  6  Ms  days  to  move  the  spans,  although  it  took  only  15  mins. 
to  pull  a  span  from  the  old  pier  to  the  new,  using  a  locomotive. 

Engineering  was    3%    of   the  total   cost. 

Cost  of  a  Steel  Bridge  of  155-ft.  Span.—  The  following  data  ap- 
peared in  Engineering-Contracting,  Apr.  3,  1907,  and  relate  to  the 
cost  of  building  a  steel  railway  bridge  of  155  ft  span  (total  weight 
131  tons),  to  take  the  place  of  an  old  Howe  truss  bridge.  Two  con- 
crete abutments  on  pile  foundations  were  built  at  a  cost  of  $2,600 
each,  or  $5,200  for  both  abutments.  There  was  nothing  unusual 
about  this  abutment  work,  so  its  cost  will  not  be  given  in  detail. 
All  work  was  done  by  "company  -forces,"  and  the  itemized  cost  is 
given  below. 

Wages  were  $3.40  per  10-hour  day  for  foreman,  $2.50  for  bridge- 
men,  and  $2.00  for  laborers.  The  engineman  on  the  hoisting  en- 
gine received  $2.50  a  day,  and  the  fireman  received  $2.00.  In  trav- 
eling to  and  from  the  site  of  the  work,  the  time  of  the  men  amount- 
ed to  16  days. 

Time   traveling,    16    days,    at    $2.50  ..............  $      40.00 

Erecting  Traveler— 

3   days  at   $3.40    .......................  $   10.20 

30  days  at  $2.50    .......................      75.00 

»**•««   ....................  _2^!?    103.20 

Rigging   Blocks   and   Tackle   on    Traveler  — 

%  day  at  $3.40  .......................  $  1.70 

6  days  ',  at  $2.50  .......................   15.00 

1%   days  at   $2    ......................  ._.  _  3.00  ?      ^ 

Loading  Engine  on  Derrick  Car  for  Erection  — 


1%  daysat$2    .......................  .  _  3.00 

Taking  Traveler  Down  — 

1  day  at  $3.40  .........................  $  3.40 

6  days  at  $2.50  ........................   15.00 

2  days  at  $2  ........................  ..   4.00 


BRIDGES.  1497 

Picking    Up    Tools   After   Erection  — 

4    days  at   $2.50    .......................  $      10.00 

Unloading  Bridge  Steel  — 

2  V2  days  at  $3.40  .......................  $  8.70 

19  days  at  $2.50  .......................   47.50 

6  days  at  $2    .....................  .....      12.00 

-  $      68.20 
Painting  Inaccessible  Parts  with  Two  Coats  — 

8   days  at   $2.50    .......................  $  20.00 

14    days   at    $2  .........................      28.00 

-  $      48.00 
Erecting  Bridge   Trusses  — 

6    days   at    $3.40  .....  .  ..................  $   20.40  r 

96    days   at    $2.50  .............  ..  .........    240.00 

6    days    (enginemen)    at    $2.50  ...........      15.00 

6    days    (firemen)    at    $2  ................      12.00 

-  $    287.40 


Removing  Old  Deck  and  Pony  Bents  to  Erect  Floor  System  — 
1   day   at   $3.40        ...........  .  ..........  $     3.40  •  *\  e- 

9  days  at  $2.50  .........................      22.50 


$      25.90 
Putting   in   Steel  Floor  System — 

2  days  at  $3.40 $  6.80 

32  days  at  $2.50 81.25 

2  days  at  $2 4.00 

2%    days    (enginemen)    at    $2.50 6.25 

$     103.30 

Getting  tools,  etc.,  ready  for  riveting — 

4  days   at   $2.50 ,..  $      10.00 

Riveting — 

40    days    at    $3... $120.00 

40   days  at   $2.50 100.00 

9     days    (blacksmith)    at    $3.. 27.00 

$    247.00 

Putting  in  Machine  Fit  Bolts — 

2  days  at   $3.40 $     6.80 

Sdaysat   »2.50    '•      20-°%      26.80 

Timber  Deck — Handling  Ties— 

%  day  at  $3.40 « $     1.70 

3  days   at   $2.50    7.50 

i  «£  a'  »2  • ••      2-°°,     n.20 

Framing    Ties — 

1   day  at   $3.40 .*     3.40 

5  days  at  $2.50 .      12.50 

4  days  at   $2 - ._. 8.0_0  ?      ^  ^ 

Placing  and  Fitting   Ties — 

1   day   at   $3.40 $     3.40 

7  days  at  $2.50 17.50  ? 

Framing   and  Fitting   Guard  Rail — 

1  day  at  $3.40 ?  3.40 

4  days  at  $2.50  10.00 

2  days  at  $2 4.00  $ 

Boring  and  Bolting  Guard   Rail   and   Ties — 

8  days  at  $2.50  ^. $      20.00 

Total    labor    pn    superstructure    $1,125.00 


1498  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA, 

This  is  equivalent  to  practically  $7.30  per  lineal  foot  of  bridge, 
or  $8.59  per  ton.  The  labor  cost  per  ton  of  bridge  may  be  sum- 
marized as  follows: 

Per  ton. 

General    labor,    $215    $1  64 

Unloading    steel,     $68.20     52 

Painting   inaccessible   parts,    $48 

Removing  old   deck,    $25.90 .*20 

Erecting  trusses  and   floor   system,   $390.70..  298 

Riveting  and  machine  bolts,    $283.80....  217 

Timber  deck  work,  $93.40 \  \ ' .   [71 

Total    $8.59 

Strictly  speaking,  the  items  'of  labor  on  the  timber  deck  should 
not  be  charged  as  a  part  of  the  cost  of  work  on  the  steel  portion 
of  the  bridge.  .  The  labor  on  the  ties  and  guard  rails,  it  will  be 
seen,  amounted  to  60  cts.  per  lineal  foot  of  bridge.  It  will  be  noted 
that  there  is  no  charge  for  fuel  used  by  the  hoisting  engine,  nor  for 
transportation  charges  on  the  engine  and  materials  for  the  traveler. 
The  hoisting  engine  was  in  use  9  days,  so  that  the  fuel  item  could 
not  have  exceeded  $30,  and  was  doubtless  much  less. 

The  following  is  a  summary  of  the  total  cost  of  this  steel  bridge 
on  its  concrete  abutments: 

Two  concrete  abutments   $  5,200.00 

Removing  old  bridge    .  . ,  , 200.00 

Falsework 1,220.00 

Bunk    house 40.00 

Materials  in  superstructure 7,200.00 

Labor  erecting  superstructure 1,125.00 

Engineering  and  inspection 585.00 

Total    .$15,570.00 

This  is  practically  $100  per  lineal  foot  of  bridge,  including  cost 
of  abutments. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  false  work  cost  about  $8  per  lineal  foot 
of  bridge,  and  amounted  to  a  little  more  than  the  labor  cost  of 
erecting  the  bridge ;  but  this  cost  of  $1,220  for  false  work  included 
both  labor  and  materials.  The  cost  of  false  work  for  ordinary 
bridges  like  this  can  be  estimated  as  equivalent  to  the  cost  of  a 
pile  trestle,  unless  the  height  of  the  lower  chord  of  the  bridge  above 
the  bed  of  the  river  is  so  great  as  to  necessitate  building  one  or 
more  decks  of  framed  bents  on  top  of  the  pile  bents. 

Cost  of  a  Steel  Bridge  of  180-ft.  Span.* — In  our  last  issue  we  gave 
details  of  the  cost  of  erecting  a  railway  bridge  of  155  ft.  span. 
The  general  remarks  relating  to  that  bridge  also  apply  to  the  one 
discussed  in  this  article.  Both  bridges  were  through  spans,  riveted 
trusses,  on  concrete  piers,  erected  by  company  forces.  This  180-ft. 
bridge  had  a  total  weight  of  172  tons.  The  cost  of  erecting  the 
bridge  was  as  follows : 

Building  Traveler — 

1%   days,  foreman,  at  $3.40 $     5.10 

11  days,  carpenters,  at  $2.50.  . 27.50 

-, $       32.60 


*  Engineering-  Contracting,  Apr.  10,  1907. 


BRIDGES.  1499 

Erecting  Traveler — 

1%    days,  foreman,  at   $3.40 $  5.10 

12   days,   carpenters,  at  $2.50 30.00 

10  days,  laborers,  at  $2.25 22.59 

V2  day,  work  train  at  $25 12.50 

Rigging  Traveler  with  Blocks,  Tackle,  etc.— 

1%  days  at  $3.40 $  5.10 

10  days  at  $2.50  25.00 

10  days  at  $2.25  22.50 

$      52.60 

Taking  Down  Traveler — 

%    day  at  $3-.40 $     1.70 

5  days  at  $2.50 12.50 

5  days   at    $2.25 : . . .      11.25 

1  day,   stationary  engineer,  at   $3 3.00 

$      28.45 

Gathering  Up   Tools,  Engine,  etc.,  After  Erecting — 

1  day  at  $3.40 $  3.40 

5  days  at  $2.50 12.50 

3    days  at    $2.25 6.75 

1  day,  work  train,  at  $25 25.00 

$f     47.65 

Raising  Derrick  for  Unloading  Bridge  Materials — 

V2    day   at   $3.40 $     1.70 

2 V2  days  at  $2.50 6.25 

3  days   at    $2.25 6.75 

1   hour,   stationary  engineer,   at   30c .30 

1   hour,  work  train,   at   $2.50 2.50 

$       17.50 

Building  Platform  for  Bridge  Materials — 

1  day  at  $3.40 $     3.40 

8  days  at  $2.50 20.00 

10   days,  laborers,  at   $2.25 22.50 

Unloading  Bridge  Steel — 

2V2    days   at   $3.40 $     8.50 

7  days  at  $2.50 17.50 

14  days  at  $2.25 31.50 

2*/2   days,  stationary  engineer,  at  $3 7.50 

1    day,    work    train .      25.00 

$      89.00 

Painting  Inaccessible  Parts,  Two  Coats — 

6  days  at   $3.40    $   20.40 

4  dciys  at  $2.50 10.00 

21    days  at    $2.25 47.25 

$      77.65 

Unloading  and  Placing  Stationary  Engine  for  Erecting  Bridge— > 

.%  day  at  $3.40 -  .  .  .- $  1.70 

4  days  at  $2.50 10.00 

4  days  at  $2.25 9.00 

1   day,   stationary   engineer 3.00 

?      23.70 

Erecting  Steel  Trusses — 

5  days   at    $3.40 $17.20 

40  days   at   $2.50    100.00 

40  days   at    $2.25    90.00 

5  days,  stationary  engineer,  at  $3.00 15.00 

1  day,  work  train 25.00 

$   24720 


1500  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Taking  Out  Pony  Bents  to  Erect  Floor  System — 

2%    days  at   $2.50 $     6.25 

2   days   at   $2.25 4.50 

$      10.75 

Putting  in  Steel  Floor  System — 

5  days  at  $3.40 $   17  20 

30    days   at   $2.50 7500 

26  days  at  $2.25 58.50 

4  days,  stationary  engineer,  at  $3 12.00 

$       162.70 

Riveting — 

50  days  at  $3 $150.00 

60    days   at   $2.50 150.00 

32  days  at  $2.25 71.00 

15    days,    blacksmith,    at    $2.50 37.50 

$     408.50 

Putting  in  Machine  Fit  Bolts — 

1  day  at  $3 $  3.00 

4  days  at  $2.50  10.00 

9  days  at  $2.25 20.25 

$    33.25 

Timber  Deck — Framing  Ties — 

1%    days  at   $3.40 $     5.10 

8  days  'at    $2.50 20.00 

4    days  at   $2.25 9.00 

$      34.10 

Placing  and  Fitting  Ties— 

1    day  at   $3.40    .  .$     3.40 

2y2    days   at    $2.50 6.25 

9  days  at  $2.25 20.25 

$     29.90 

Framing  and  Fitting  Guard  Rail — 


1   day  at   $3.40 $   3.40 

4    days    at    $2.50 10.00 

4   days   at   $2.25 9.00 


$      22.40 


Boring  and  Bolting  Guard  Rail  and  Ties — 

7   days   at    $2.50.. $  17.50 

1  day  at  $2.25    2.25 

$      19.75 

Taking  Out  Old  Deck — 

%  day  at  $3.40   $     1.70 

1   day   at   $2.50 2.50 

1%  days  at  $2.25 3.35$        7.55' 

Total   labor $1,461.25 

This  is  equivalent  to  $8.10  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  or  $8.48  per  ton. 

It  will  be  seen  that  it  took  50  days  of  labor,  including  foreman, 
but  excluding  work  train  crew,  to  erect  the  bridge,  thus  making 
the  average  wage  about  $2.60  per  day  of  10  hours. 

In  comparing  labor  costs  per  unit  of  work  done,  it  is  always 
well  to  state  the  average  wage  paid,  for,  otherwise,  serious  errors 
may  be  made  in  comparing  unit  costs  given  only  in  dollars  and 
cents.  Wages  have  been  rising  so  rapidly  within  recent  years  that 
the  necessity  of  stating  the  average  wage  is  more  urgent  than  ever. 

The  wages  of  the  foreman  constituted  7  per  cent  of  the  total 
wages  paid. 


BRIDGES.  1501 

The  cost  per   ton   for   erecting   this  bridge   may   be   summarized 
as  follows: 

Per  ton. 

Preparing  and  dismantling  plant,  $318.50 $1.85 

Unloading   steel,    $89 .52 

Painting  inaccessible  parts,    $77.65 45 

Erecting   trusses  and  floor   system,    $420.65. 2.45 

Riveting  and  machine  bolting,    $441.75 2.55 

Timber  deck  work,   $113.70 .     .66 


Total     $8.48 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  work  on  the  timber  deck  cost  63  cents  per 
lin.  ft.  of  bridge. 

The  total  cost  of  this  bridge  on  concrete  abutments  with  pile 
foundations  was  as  follows: 

Two  concrete  abutments,  materials  and  labor $   4,700 

Materials    for    superstructure     9,500 

L,abor    erecting    superstructure ./- 1,461 

Falsework  and  removal  of  old  bridge 2,800 

Engineering  and  superintendence 370 



Total     $18,831 

This  is  practically  $105  per  lineal  foot  of  bridge,  including  abut- 
ments. 

Cost  of  Two  Steel  Truss  Bridges  of  180-ft.  Span,  and  One  Plate 
Lattice  Girder  Bridge  of  100-ft.  Span.* — In  our  issue  of  April  10,  we 
gave  the  detailed  cost  of  erecting  a  steel  bridge  of  180  ft.  span. 
The  following  data  relate  to  two  spans,  also  of  180  ft.  each,  on 
which  the  labor  of  erection  cost  was  very  much  less  per  ton  than 
the  cost  given  in  our  issue  of  April  10.  This  difference  appears  to 
have  been  due  to  better  management  and  more  efficient  workmen  on 
the  work  about  to  be  described.  These  two  180-ft.  spans  were 
erected  by  a  contractor,  and  the  costs  are  the  actual  costs  to  the 
contractor,  exclusive  of  contractor's  profits.  The  bridges  were 
single  track,  through,  riveted  trusses  erected  with  a  traveler.  The 
average  force  engaged  was  as  follows : 

1  General    foreman    at     $5.00  $   5.00 

1  Carpenter   foreman   at    4.00  4.00 

1   Sub-foreman   at    3.50  3.50 

7  Riveters,    etc.,    at    3.25  22.75 

10  Bridgemen  at    3.00  30.00 

8  Carpenters   at    .2.75  22.00 

3  Laborers  at 2.50  7.50 

1  Stationary    engineman    at 3.25  3.25 

1  Water  boy  at    1.50  1.50 

3?  Total   men $3.00          $99.50 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  average  wage  paid  was  $3  per  day  of 
10  hours,  as  compared  with  $2.60  on  the  bridge  described  in  our 
issue  of  April  10.  No  attempt  was  made  to  record  the  exact  cost 
of  each  item  of  the  work,  but  account  was  kept  of  the  number  of 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  8,  1907. 


1502  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

men  and  the  number  of  days  required  to  perform  each  item  of  the 
work,  and  the  average  wage  was  assumed  to  b^  $3  per  man  day. 

Preparatory  Work — 

50  Man  days  traveling  at  $3 $    150.00 

50  Man  days  erecting  traveler  and  derricks  at  $3  150.00 

12  Man  days  taking  down  same 36.00 

40  Man  days  removing  old  floor  at   $3 120.00 

20  Man  days  unloading  steel  and  ties \  60.00 

Steel  Work— 

70  Man  days  putting  in  new  steel  floor  system  at 

$3    210.00 

100  Man  days  erecting  steel  trusses  at  $3 300.00 

125  Man   days   riveting 375.00 

Timber  Deck— 

20  Man   days   framing   ties   at    $3 $      60.00 

30  Man  days  laying  floor  at  $3 90.00 

Pai  n  ti  ng— - 

46  Man  days,  first  coat 138.00 

42  Man   days,   second  coat. 126.00 

Total  labor $1,815.00 

Wear  of  tools,  ropes,  etc 100.00 

Coal  for  engine  and  blacksmith 70.00 


Total $1,985.00 

The  steel  in  each  of  the  two  bridges  weighed  170  tons,  or  340  tons 
in  both  bridges,  or  1,800  Ibs.  per  lin  ft.  Summarizing  the  cost  of 
erection,  we  have : 

Per  ton. 

Lost   time  traveling,    $150 '.  . . . .  $0.44 

Erecting  and   taking  down  plant,   $186 0.55 

Removing  old  floor   system,    $120 0.35 

Unloading  steel  and  ties,   $60 0.18 

Steel    work,    $885 2.60 

Timber  deck  work,   $1.50 0.44 

Painting,   $264    . .  .- 0.78 

coSr  $°7otools'  n°° /  Y.'  '.*.' '/.'/.'.'.'.'. ;:;;:'.';;  olo 

— '. — 

Total $5.84 

The  above  does  not  include  the  cost  of  erecting  the  falsework, 
but  it  includes  the  item  of  "removing  old  floor  system"  or  the  wood- 
en bridge  which  was  replaced  by  the  new  steel  bridge. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  on  the  timber  deck  of  the  new 
bridge  cost  only  $150,  which  is  equivalent  to  40  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 
This  is  about  two-thirds  the  cost  of  similar  work  given  in  our  issue 
of  April  10.  In  fact  the  whole  cost  of  erection  was  correspondingly 
less  in  this  bridge  work,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  daily  wages 
averaged  15  per  cent  higher.  A  comparative  study  of  this  sort  will 
frequently  disclose  unsuspected  inefficiency  of  men  and  foremen. 

We  shall  next  consider  the  cost  of  erecting  a  steel  plate  lattice 
girder  of  100  ft.  span.  This  girder  was  erected  by  company  forces, 
and  it  replaced  a  wooden  bridge.  The  weight  of  the  steel  was  82 
tons,  or  1,640  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  It  was  erected  by  a  force  of  18  men 
in  10  days,  including  2  days  spent  in  traveling,  and  the  average 


BRIDGES, 


1503 


wage  paid  was  $3.18  per  day,  including  the  foremen  in  the  aver- 
age. The  foremen's  wages  amounted  to  13  per  cent  of  the  total 
wages  paid,  which  was  an  unusually  high  percentage.  The  rate 
of  wages  were  as  follows: 

General    foreman    %  5.00 

Sub-foreman    3.50 

Drivers    of    rivets 3.25 

Heaters   of  rivets 3.00 

Buckerup  of  rivets • 3.00 

Bridgemen    3.00 

Carpenters    2.75 

Stationary  engineman    3.25 

Time  Traveling — 

2  days    at    .$5.00         $10.00 

2  days,  at    3.50  7.00 

12  days  at   3.25  39.00 

18  days  at    :  .  .  .    3.00  54.00 

4  days  at    2.75  11.00 

38  days  total  at $3.18         $121.00 

Rigging — 

1  day    at $5.00          $  5.00 

1  day   at 3.50  3.50 

4  days    at    3.50  13.00 

6  days    at 3.00  18.00 

12  days  total  at   .  $3.30         $  39.50 

Loading   Tools — 

2  days    at    $5.00          $  10.00 

2  days  at 3.50  7.00            » 

5  days  at 3.25  16.25 

Jldays  at    3'°°  15-00 

14  days  total   at $3.45          $  48.25 

Steel   Work — Erecting   Girders — 

1  day   at'... $5.00         $  5.00 

1  day   at    .-...- 3.50  3.50 

4  days  at    3.25  13.00 

6  days  at    3.00  18.00 

—  

12  days    at $3.30          $  39.00 

Erecting  Floor  System — 

1  day    at    $5.00          $  5.00 

1  day   at    3.50  3.50 

10  days  at   3.25  32  50 

12  days  at 3.00  36.00 

24  days   total  at $3.21         $  77.00 

Riveting — 

2  days  at $5.00          $  10  00 

2  days    at 3.50  7.00 

18  days    at 3.25  58.50 

20  days    at    3.00  60.00 

42  days  total  at   $3.23          $135.50 

Timber  Deck — 

6  days  framing  ties  at $2.75          $  16  50 

12  days  laying  floor  at 2.75  33.00 

18  days  total  at $2.75         $  49.50 


1504  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Painting— 

10  days  at '. ..$3.25          $32.50 

10  days  at    .    3.00  30.00 


20   days  total  at    $3.12          $   62.50 


Total  labor   $572.75 

Wear  of  tools    35.00 

Coal     10.25 


Total     $618.00 

Summary — 

Per  ton. 

Traveling    . . . $121.00  $1.48 

Rigging 39.50  0.48 

Loading  tools 48.25  0.50 

Steel    work    252.00  3.08 

Timber  deck    49.50  0.60 

Painting     62.50  0.76 

Tools  and  coal    45.25  0.55 


Total     : $618.00          $7.54 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  work  on  the  timber  deck  was 
49%  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 

The  cost  of  building  the  false  work  is  not  included  in  the  above 
estimate. 

Cost  of  Erecting  a  Draw  Bridge  of  236-ft.  Span.* — This  single 
track  railway  bridge  has  a  span  of  236  ft.,  and  a  length  of  239  ft. 
over  all.  Trusses  are  16  ft.  c.  to  c.,  and  the  depth  of  truss  is 
uniform  and  25  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  chord  pins.  The  center  panel  is  16  ft. 
and  the  remaining  10  panels  are  each  22  ft.  The  bridge  is  designed 
to  be  turned  by  hand  only,  and  has  a  drum  22 V2  ft.  x  4%  ft.  The 
bridge  was  designed  for  a  live  load  of  3,300  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 

The  total  weight  of  the  metal  is  433,300  Ibs.,  distributed  as 
follows : 

Lbs. 

Trusses     205,60 

Lateral  bracing   20,000 

Floor   system    107,000 

Turntable — 

Drum   (22%   ft.   diam.) 21,400 

Wheels  (46)    16,200 

Track ' 11,100 

Rack     4,900 

Tread  pis 5,200 

Gearing  and  journal  boxes 25,400 

End  lift    10,200 

End   supports 6,300 


Total    433,300 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  21,   1907. 


BRIDGES.  1505 

The  itemized  cost  (to  the  contractor)  of  erection  was  as  follows: 
General  Expense: 

7.5  days,  foreman  at  $5.00 $   37.50 

44  days,  bridgemen,  at  $3.00 132.00 

34  days,  laborers,  at  $2.00 68.00 

10  days,  watchman,  at  $2.00 20.00 

3  days,  blacksmith,  at  $3.00 9.00 

98.5     Total   labor,    at   $2.67 $266.50 

3,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  traveler,  at  $25 75.00 

Total : ••..•••  $341.50 

Thus   $341    includes  the  cost  of  erecting  a  derrick  to  unload  the 
Steel  from  cars,  the  labor  of  making  and  erecting  traveler. 

Erection  of  Steel  Work: 

19  days,  foreman,  at  $5.00 $      95.00 

110  days,   bridgemen,  at  $3.00 

80  days,  riveters,  at  $3.00 « 

73  days,  heaters  and  buckers,  at  $2.00 

84  days,  laborers,  at   $2.00 168.00 

366     Total  labor,  at  $2.65 $    969.00 

30  days'  rent  of  hoisting  engine,  at  $3.00 .         90.00 

10  tons  coal,  at  $3.00 30.00 


Total $1,089.00 

The  engineman   received   the  same  wages  as  the   bridgemen  and 
was  classed  with  them. 

3  days,  foreman,  at  $5.00".  .  .  .... $   15.00 

9  days,  bridgemen,  at  $3.00 .      27.00 

80  days,  painters,  at  $2.50 200.00 


92  days   total   labor $242.00 

Total  materials  and  labor. $337.00 

_.    ,        _     .    ..„,  ...    ,.    _     _,  . 
Timber  Deck  (17,000  ft.  B.  M.): 

3  days,  foreman,  at  $5.00 $15.00 

26  days,    carpenters,   at   $2.75 71.50 

3  days,  laborers,  at  $2.00 6.00 

32  days  total   labor,   at  $2.90 $92.50 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  labor  of  framing  and  placing  the  timber 
deck  (i.  e.,  the  ties,  guard  rails,  etc.),  cost  $5.50  per  M.,  or  38  cts. 
per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge. 

Since  the  bridge  weighed  433,000  Ibs.,  or  216.5  tons,  the  cost  per 
ton  for  erection  may  be  summarized  as  follows: 

General  Expense:  Per  ton. 

Labor    • $    266.50          $1.23 

Material  for  traveler .         75.00  0.35 

Erecting  Steel: 

Labor $    969.00         $4.49 

Rent  of  engine 90.00  0.42 

Coal  for  engine 30.00  0.14 


1506  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Painting: 

Materials     $  95.00  $0.44 

Labor    242.00  1.11 

Timber  deck 92.50  0.42 


Total $1,860.00          $8.60 

This  work  was  done  by  a  contractor  who  received  $12  per  ..^n 
for  erecting  the  bridge.  Practically  no  falsework  was  neces&^ry, 
since  the  bridge  was  erected  upon  the  "draw  protection,"  which 
served  as  a  falsework. 

The  bridge  metal  cost  4  cts.  per  Ib.  f.  o.  b.  cars,  ready  for 
erection,  and,  since  the  contract  price  was  0.6  cts.  for  erection,  the 
total  was  4.6  cts.  per  Ib.  in  place,  or  $19,931  for  the  total  super- 
structure, exclusive  of  the  timber  deck.  This  is  equivalent  to  nearly 
$85  per  lin.  ft.  There  were  nearly  70  ft.  B.  M.  per  lin,  ft.  of 
timber  deck  (ties  and  guard  rail),  which  cost  $20  per  M.,  or  $1.40 
per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge. 

Cost  of  Erecting  Pratt  Truss  Bridges. — A  Pratt  truss  steel  rail- 
way bridge,  130  ft.  long,  14  ft.  wide  and  20  ft.  high,  was  built  to  re- 
place two  Howe  pony  truss  bridges,  each  65  ft.  long.  The  cost  of 
this  work  was  as  follows: 

Falsework,  materials  and  labor $174.00 

Removing    falsework 100.00 

Taking  down  two  Howe  truss  bridges 145.00 

Wages  of  common  laborers  were  $1.50,  and  of  bridgemen  $2.50  a 
day. 

It  took  a  gang  of  20  men  45  hrs.  to  erect  a  200-ft.  span  Pratt 
truss  highway  bridge,  of  the  combination  type  (wooden  upper  chord 
and  posts  and  steel  lower  chord  and  diagonals),  after  the  pile  false- 
work was  in  place.  The  roadway  was  16  ft.  wide.  A  hoisting  en- 
gine was  used,  and  the  posts  were  up-ended  in  pairs  just  as  trestle 
bents  are  raised.  A  mast  was  used  in  raising  the  upper  chord 
pieces.  There  was  no  oupper  falsework,  nor  was  a  traveler  used. 

Cost  of  Three-Plate  Girder  Bridges  of  Ten  Spans.* — The  data  in 
this  article  relate  to  three  plate  girder  (deck)  bridges,  on  concrete 
abutments  and  piers,  having  pile  foundations,  built  to  replace  exist- 
ing timber  bridges. 

The  first  bridge  consisted  of  three  spans,  one  30-ft.  and  two  75-ft. 
girder  spans,  having  a  total  weight  of  110  tons.  The  work  was 
done  by  company  forces,  the  details  of  cost  being  as  follows : 

Moving  rigging  from  the  last  bridge — 

y2   day,   foreman,  at  $3.40 $   1.70 

2V2   days,   carpenters,  at   $2.50 6.25 

2  days,    laborers,   at   $2.25 4.50 

1  day,  stationary  engineer,  at  $3 3.00 

$15.45 
Erecting  portals  for  lowering  the  two  16-ft.  girder  spans — • 

1  %  days  at  $3.40 $  5.10 

6  days  at  $2.50 15.00 

3  days  at  $2.25 6.75 

$26.85 
*  Engineering-Contracting,  April  17,  1907. 


BRIDGES.  1507 

Erecting  portals  for  lowering  the  30-ft.  span — 

1  hour  at  34  cents %     .34 

3  hours  at  25  cents .75 

4  hours  at  $2.25 .90 

1  hour,  sta.  engr.,  at  30  cents 30 

$   2.29 
Rigging  portals  with  blocks  and  tackle — 

%   day  at   $3.40 $  1.70 

2y2   days  at  $2.50 6.25 

2 y2   days  at  $2.25 5.62 

Va  day,  sta.  engr.,  at  $3 1.50 

$15.07 
Placing  two  stationary  engines  for  erecting  girders— 

3  hours  at  34  cents $  1.02 

1%   days    at    $2.50 3.75 

3.38 
1.50 

$  9.65 
Picking  up  rigging  after  erecting — 

2  hours  at  34  cents '.-..- . .  $     .68 

1  day   at    $2.50 2.50 

1  day   at    $2.25 2.25 

2  hours,  sta.  engr.,  at  30  cents 60. 


$  3.03 

STEBL    WORK. 

Putting  down  bearing  shoes — 


1  day  at 

$  5.43 
Placing  and  lowering  the  two  75-ft.  spans — 

1    day  at   $3.40 $  3.40 

5V2   days    at    $2.50 13.75 

5y2   days  at  $2.25 12.37 

1  day,  engr.,  at  $3 3.00 

2  days,  work  train,   at   $25 50.00 

$82.52 
Taking  out  pony  bents  to  erect  floor  system — 

1  day  at  $3.40 .  .  $  3.40 

6  days  at  $2.50 15.00 

5  days  at  $2.25 11.25 

1  day,  engr.,  at  $3 3.00 


$32.65 
Painting  inaccessible  parts  with  two  coats — 

19  days  at  $2.25 .$42.75 

Putting  in  steel  floor  system — 

2.2  days  at  $3.40 $  7.48 

11  days  at  $2.50 27.50 

13  days  at  $2.25 29.25 

3  days,  engr.,  at  $3 9.00 

50-°° 

$123.23 


1508  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Riveting — 

38  days,  riveters,  at  $3 $114.00 

60  days,   at   $2.50 t 150.00 

4  days,  blacksmith,  at  $2.50 10.00 


$274.00 
Putting  in  machine  fit  bolts — 

7    days    at    $2.25 $15.75 

Placing  and  lowering  SO-ft.  span- — 

0.3  day  at  $3.40 .  .  $   1.02 

11/2   day    at    $2.50 3.75 

iy2   day   at    $2.25 .- 3.38 

0.3  day,  engr.,  at   $3 90 

y2  day,  train,  at  $25 12.50 


$21.55 

TIMBER    DECK. 

Framing  ties — 

8  days  at  $2.50 $20.00 

Placing  and  fitting  ties — 

1%  days  at  $3.40 $   5.10 

8  days    at    $2.50 20.00 

6  days   at    $2.25 13.60 

$38.60 
Framing  and  fitting  guard  rail — 

y2   day,  foreman,  at  $3.40 $  1.70 

3  days  at  $2.50 7.50 

2  y2    days   at    $2.25 5.63 

$14.83 
Boring  and  bolting  guard  rails  and  ties — 

y2   day,   foreman,  at  $3.40 $  1.70 

4%   days    at    $2.50 11.25 

3%   days   at    $2.25 ..      7.87 

$20.82 

Tearing  up  old  deck  and  lowering  track  on  new  bridge — 

1  day  at  $3.40 $  3.40 

5  days  at  $2.50 12.50 

2  days  at  $2.25 4.50 

$20.40 
Total  labor $787.87 

This  is  equivalent  to  $7.15  per  ton,  or  $4.35  per  lin.  ft.  of  span. 

The  cost  per  ton  may  be  summarized  as  follows : 

Per  ton. 

General  labor  preparatory  to  erection,  $75.34 $  68 

Painting   inaccessible   parts,    $42.75 39 

Placing    girders,     $265.38 2.41 

Riveting  and  mach.   bolts,   $289.75 .  . 2.63 

Timber   deck  work,   $114.65 1.04 

Total $7.15 

The  timber  deck  work  cost  64  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  span.  It  will  be 
noted  that  there  were  4%  days  of  work  train  service  costing  $112.50, 
or  $1.02  per  ton.  Deducting  this,  we  have  $675  left,  to  be  divided  by 
247  days'  labor,  which  gives  $2.73  as  the  average  wage  paid.  Therf 


BRIDGES.  1509 

were   13   days  of  foreman's   time,   which  amounted   to   $44,   or   less 
than  7%  of  the  675. 

The  total  cost  of  this  bridge  was : 

Four    concrete   abutments    and    piers $  7,950 

Materials     in     superstructure 5,600 

Labor  erecting  superstructure 788 

False    work 770 

Engineering   and   inspection.  . ." 500 


Total     $15.608 

This  is  practically  $85  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  including  abutments 
and  piers.  -The  falsework  cost  about  $4  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  or 
practically  as  much  as  the  labor  of  erecting  the  spans. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  substructure  cost  more  than  the  super- 
structure. 

The  second  bridge  was  three  60-ft.  plate  girder  spans,  having  total 
weight  of  69  tons,  on  concrete  abutments  and  piers.  The  cost  of 
erecting  by  company  forces  was  as  follows : 

Erecting  false  "bents  for  lowering  girders — - 

1  day,  foreman,  at   $3.40 $   3.40 

4  days,  carpenters,  at  $2.50 10.00 

10  days,  laborers,  at  $2.25* 22.50 


$35.90 
Tearing  up  old  bridge  deck  and  pony  bents — 

0.8  day    at    $3.40 $   2.72 

5.6  days    at    $2.50 . 14.00 

5.6  days  at  $2.25 12.60 

$29.32 
Placing  and  lowering  girders  from  flat  cars  to  piers — 

1.2  days    at    $3.40 $4.08 

8.4  days  at   $2.50 21.00 

8.4  days  at   $2.25 18.90 

$43.98 
Framing  ties — 

1.5  days  at  $3.40 $  5.10 

14    days   at    $2.50 .    35.00 

$40.10 
Putting  ties  in  place  and  relaying  track — 

0.3  day  at   ?3.40 $   1.02 

2.1  days  at   $2.50 , 5.25 

2.1  days  at   $2.25 4.73 

$11.00 
Framing  and  placing  guard  rail — 

1.5   days  at  $3.40 $   5.10 

8  days    at    $2.50 20.00 

6  days  at  $2.25 1350 

$38.60 
Tearing  down  false  bents — 

0.1  day    at    $3.40 $  .34 

0.7  day    at    $2.50 k 1.75 

0.7  day  at  $2.25 .  . 1-57 

$3.66 


1510  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

"Work  train  on  erection — 

3    days    at    $25 '.. $75.00 

Total    labor $277.56 

This  Is  equivalent  to  $4.02  per  ton,  which  may  be  summarized  as 
follows : 

Per  ton. 

Erecting  and  tearing  down  false  bents,  $39.56 $  .57 

Tearing  up  old  bridge  deck  and  pony  bents,  $29.32.  .  .      .42 

Placing  girders,    $43.98 .64 

Timber  deck  work,    $89.70 1.30 

Work  train  service*   $75 . 1.09 

Total $4.02 

The  labor  cost  of  $277.56  is  equivalent  to  $1.54  per  lin.  ft.  of  span. 
Tearing  up  old  bridge  deck  and  pony  bents  cost  16  cts.  per  lin.  ft. 
The  cost  of  the  timber  deck  work  was  50  cts.  per  lin.  ft 

Exclusive  of  the  train  service,  the  total  labor  cost  of  erection  was 
$202,  which,  divided  by  the  82  days,  is  $2.46  per  day.  The  fore- 
man worked  6%  days,  receiving  $22,  which  is  11%  of  the  labor  cost, 
exclusive  of  train  service,  or  8%,  including  train  service.  As  noted 
above,  it  took  1  foreman  and  14  men  12  hours  to  place  and  lower 
the  three  girder  spans,  The  first  span  took  5  hours ;  the  second 
span,  4  hours ;  and  the  third  span,  3  hours. 

After  erecting  the  new  bridge,  at  the  cost  above  given,  it  took 
the  gang  about  a  day  additional  to  tear  down  the  old  wooden 
bridge,  at  a  cost  of  $44. 

The  total  cost  of  this  three-span  girder  bridge  was : 

Four  abutments  and  piers. $  5,400 

Materials    in    superstructure 3,600 

Labor   erecting    superstructure 278 

False    work    650 

Engineering    and    inspection 340 


Total .$10,268 

This  is  $55  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge.  The  falsework  cost  $3.50  per 
lin.  ft. 

The  third  bridge  consisted  of  two  75-ft.  girder  spans  and  two  70-ft. 
girder  spans  (through  bridge)  on  concrete  abutments  having  pile 
foundations.  The  rates  of  wages  paid  were  the  same  as  on  the 
first  bridge,  given  above,  and  the  cost  per  ton  and  per  lin.  ft.  of 
bridge  were  about  the  same.  The  summary  of  the  cost  is  as  fol- 
lows, the  total  weight  of  the  four- span  bridge  being  197  tons: 

Per  ton. 

Removing  old  deck  and  placing  girders,  $295.50 $1.50 

Putting  in   floor   system,    $309.30 1.57 

Riveting,    $482.80     2.40 

Painting  inaccessible  parts,    $13.80 07 

Timber   deck  work,    $112.30 -. 57 

Train    service,     $275.80 1.40 

Total $7.51 

The  timber  deck  work  cost  40  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge.  The 
total  labor  cost  of  erection  was  $1,480,  or  $5  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge. 


BRIDGES. 


151! 


The  total  cost  of  the  bridge  was  as  follows : 

Five  piers  and  abutments $  9,10t 

Materials    in    superstructure 10,700 

Labor    erecting    superstructure 1,480 

False  work 1,320 

Removing    old    bridge 520 

Bunk  house    60 

Engineering  and   inspection 500 


This  is  nearly  $80  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge, 
per  lin.   ft.- 


$23,680 
The  falsework  cost  $4.40 


'•-<?"       Z   a"-'                               ^ 
Side    Elevation, 
End 

Elevation. 

Boxes  4x4x/'9"lb. 
made  of  J"  Pine  -to 
be  placed  where 
Anchor  BoH~~ho/e3 

Ll~& 

Y                     1                      ^^^ 

Z&'S&KZ*.     B°*°m  "«n. 

Fig.  1.—  Bridge  Pier. 

Cost  of  a  Plate  Girder  Railway  Bridge  with  Concrete  Piers.* — A 
deck  plate  girder  railway  bridge  was  constructed  in  the  late  Fall  and 
in  the  Winter  of  1905-6  to  carry  the  Kansas  City,  Mexico  &  Orient 
Railway  over  the  South  Canadian  River  about  7  miles  south  of  Oak- 
wood,  in  Dewey  County,  Oklahoma.  The  whole  structure  was  built 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  April  3,   1907. 


1512 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


by  company  forces  and  the  following  account  of  the  methods  of 
work  and  its  cost  has  been  prepared  from  information  furnished 
by  Mr.  W.  W.  Colpitts,  Assistant  Chief  Engineer,  Kansas  City,  Mo. 

Description  of  Bridge. — At  the  point  of  crossing,  the  river  at 
ordinary  high  water  is  from  2,000  ft.  to  4,000  ft.  wide  and  drains 
approximately  1,000  square  miles  of  territory  consisting  largely  of 
rolling  prairie.  At  low  water  the  stream  is  shallow  and  easily 
fordable.  The  extreme  rise  at  high  water  is  about  10  ft.,  and  at 
such  periods  the  velocity  of  the  current  exceeds  6  miles  per  hour. 
The  river  bottom  is  quicksand  and  varies  in  depth  to  the  underlying 
rock  at  the  point  of  crossing  from  12  to  60  ft. 

After  a  careful  study  of  the  conditions  respecting  the  elevations 
of  high  water,  depth  of  foundation,  nature  of  approaches  and  gen- 
eral character  of  the  stream,  a  layout  consisting  of  1,000  ft.  of  50-ft. 
deck  plate  girders  at  the  north  end  where  the  rock  is  within  12  to  18 


-?;#*                 /x^»f 

W?' 

"4x£" 

! 

!          . 

S^1 

<  -*<••-  \. 

! 

* 

| 

^  Vj 

i 

> 

^ 

j               4x6^             ^ 

* 
^ 

^ 

*'•          i 

Nh 

J 

|j 

> 

Y 

Lz-'/Xff 

4x6--.. 

{ 

14 

*X 

M 

s 

J                       ***        I 

'^'r*                                   ^  J 

r< 

A       $          3 

'  .y 

Sectional     Plan. 

'•/ 

•     *    *        \  •  '       \      \         ;     • 

Transverse    Section. 

Fig.   2. — Cofferdam. 


ft.  of  the  surface,  and  of  1,000  ft.  of  pile  trestle  at  the  south  end 
where  the  rock  shelves  off  to  a  maximum  depth  of  60  ft.,  was  de- 
cided upon  as  the  most  economical  structure  to  fulfill  the  necessary 
requirements.  The  grade  line  was  established  to  admit  of  replac- 
ing the  pile  trestle  portion  of  the  structure  with  70  and  85  ft.  deck 
plate  girders  at  a  later  period.  A  concrete  abutment  and  concrete 
piers  were  designed  to  carry  the  50-ft.  plate  girders.  Figure  1 
shows  the  dimensions  and  details  of  the  piers. 

Methods  of  Construction. — The  work  was  begun  in  the  late  fall, 
when  an  extreme  rise  in  the  river  was  unlikely  to  occur,  and  the 
very  low  cost  of  the  structure  was  partially  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  work  was  little  interfered  with  by  high  water.  Telephone  com- 
munication was  established  with  Teloga,  a  point  about  40  miles  up 
the  river,  and  a  watchman  stationed  at  that  point  observed  and  re- 
ported the  stage  of  water  at  frequent  intervals. 


BRIDGES. 


1513 


The  concrete  in  the  piers  was  of  the  following  proportions :  Tola 
Sunflower  Portland  cement,  one  part ;  Arkansas  River  sand,  fur- 
nished by  Messrs.  Luttgerding  Bros.,  of  Wichita,  Kan.,  three  parts  ; 
crushed  limestone,  passing  a  2-in.  ring,  furnished  by  the  Frazier 
Stone  Co.,  of  El  Dorado,  Kan.,  five  parts.  The  concrete  in  the 
bridge  seats  was  of  the  proportions,  1-2-4. 

The  bases  of  the  piers  and  abutment  were  put  down  in  open 
coffer  dams,  Fig.  2.  The  sheet  piling,  Fig.  3,  for  the  first  pier  was 
driven  with  a  light  hammer,  but  this  was  found  to  be  both  slow  and 
inefficient.  The  lower  strata  of  sand  proved  to  be  more  compact 
than  had  been  anticipated,  and,  by  this  method,  considerable  diffi- 
culty was  experienced  in  driving  the  sheet  piles  accurately  and  in 
preventing  leaky  joints.  The  balance  of  the  sheet  piling  was  drivQTi 
with  a  2-in.  jet  drawn  to  a  1-in.  nozzle,  and  this  method  proved 
entirely  satisfactory.  The  water  was  supplied  by  a  7  x  5  x  10-in. 
Gardner  Duplex  pump.  The  pile  with  the  jet  placed  in  the  groove 


Fig.  3.— Sheet  Pile. 


sank  rapidly  and  accurately  with  the  weight  of-  two  men  clinging 
to  a  hanger  slung  over  the  top  of  the  pile.  When  the  pile  had 
reached  the  bottom,  it  was  struck  several  blows  with  a  12-lb.  sledge 
to  broom  the  point  on  the  rock. 

The  piles  were  driven  between  6  x  8-in.  walings,  firmly  secured 
with  wrought  iron  clamps,  to  prevent  irregularities  in  the  driving. 
Built  up  angles  were  made  for  the  returns  at  the  corners  and  jetted 
to  rock  in  the  ordinary  manner.  The  actual  time  required  to  drive 
a  coffer  dam  seldom  exceeded  ten  hours. 

It  was  originally  the  intention  to  build  a  form  inside  the  coffer 
dam  and  to  gather  the  water  from  leakages  in  a  sump  at  one  cornet 
to  be  pumped  out  by  a  pulsometer,  and  to  withdraw  the  sheet  piling 
after  the  completion  of  the  base.  So  little  difficulty  was  experienced 
in  preventing  leakages  that  this  plan  was  abandoned  and  the  con- 
crete was  deposited  against  the  sheet  piling,  which  no  attempt  was 
made  to  recover.  It  was  estimated  that  the  loss  of  the  sheet  piling 
was  more  than  offset  by  the  time  and  expense  necessary  to  have 
built  an  inside  form. 

The  sand  was  pumped  from  the  coffer  dam  by  means  of  a  No.  4 
Morris  centrifugal  sand  pump,  having  a  6-inch  flexible  suction 


1514 


HANDBOOK    Or   COST  DATA. 


pipe  and  protected  foot  valve.  The  power  to  drive  this  pump  was 
furnished  by  a  traction  engine,  because  of  the  ease  with  which  it 
was  supported  on  the  river  bottom  at  the  pier  sites.  A  sufficient 
amount  of  water  was  allowed  to  flow  into  the  coffer  dam  through 
a  small  weir  to  keep  the  sand  of  the  right  consistency  to  be  handled 
by  the  pump.  As  the  excavation  proceeded,  the  necessary  shoring 
was  placed  in  position.  When  the  sand  had  been  completely  re- 
moved, the  bottom  of  the  sheet  piling  was  grouted  with  cement  mor- 
tar and  the  coffer  dam  kept  dry  by  means  of  the  pulsometer  pump, 
while  leaks  were  being  stopped  and  other  necessary  work  done,  pre- 
vious to  depositing  concrete.  Except  in  cases  where  bad  leaks  or 
accidents  occurred,  the  time  required  to  remove  the  sand  from  a 
coffer  dam  averaged  about  eight  hours.  It  was  interesting  to  note 


Elevation,  Both  Sides. 
Bill  of  Material-One  Pier. 


6    PCS..    4"x6"— 14';    3    PCS.,    4"x6"— 10';    »  ^^22222 

cs.,     2"xl2"— 12':     $0    PCS.,    2"x8"— 12';     40    I * ^'4'. 

esv  2*x4"— 12';  30  bolts.   %"xll";  60  O.  G.  J(7...-.*%J& 

ashers  for  %  bolts;  25  Ibs.  JOd  wire  nails.  Ne«u*d    F 


PCS., 

PCS.,  .  , 
washers 


Nosed    Ends. 
Fig.  4. — Forms  for  Pier. 


Frame  6' below  Top. 


the  good  state  of  preservation  of  tree  trunks  and  limbs  removed 
from  the  coffer  dams.  Leaves  and  twigs  found  in  the  compact 
sand  near  the  rock  were  quite  fresh  and  green. 

The  concrete  was  mixed  with  a  No.  1  Smith  mixer,  having  a  batch 
capacity  of  about  9  cu.  ft.  The  capacity  of  the  machine  was  found 
to  be  ample  to  fill  a  coffer  dam  before  the  next  ahead  was  com- 
pleted. The  mixer  was  placed  in  position  on  the  slope  of  the  em- 
bankment approach,  with  the  main  line  track  at  its  rear  and 
facing  a  temporary  material  track.  This  temporary  track  turned 
out  from  the  main  line  about  500  ft.  beyond  the  mixer  and  extended 
diagonally  down  the  embankment  approach  on  a  3%  grade  and 
across  the  river  bottom  alongsside  the  pier  sites.  The  portion  of  the 
track  in  the  river  bottom  was  supported  on  bents  of  spliced  ties, 
jetted*  to  the  rock,  and  wired  to  the  coffer  dam  to  avoid  the  danger 
of  loss  in  case  of  high  water.  The  sand  and  crushed  rock  were 
delivered  by  cars  from  the  main  line  track,  immediately  above  the 
mixer,  and  the  cement  was  stored  in  a  shanty  at  one  side  of  the 
mixer.  The  concrete  materials  and  machinery  were,  in  this  man- 


BRIDGES. 


1515 


ner,  very  conveniently  located  for  rapid  work  and  well  above  the 
high  water  line.  The  concrete  was  transported  to  the  pier  sites  in 
improvised  dump  boxes,  set  on  push  cars.  These  dump  boxes  were 
hinged  longitudinally  and  discharged  directly  into  the  coffer  dams. 
The  grade  of  the  temporary  track  carried  the  push  cars  by  gravity 
to  the  coffer  dams  and  they  were  returned  by  teams,  for  which 
purpose  a  straw  and  brush  road  had  been  built  paralleling  the  track. 
As  the  work  progressed  farther  into  the  stream,  more  cars  were 
added  properly  to  balance  the  work.  While  the  concrete  in  the  base 
was  still  fresh,  a  number  of  steel  reinforcing  bars,  8  ft.  in  length, 
were  set  in  place  along  each  end  to  insure  a  good  bond  between  the 
base  and  shaft. 


P/an  of  Frame  of  Bottom. 
No.  8.  Ga/vanized  Wire 


Fig.    5. 

In  general,  the  work  of  putting  in  the  bases  was  organized  so  that 
about  the  same  time  was  required  in  filling  a  coffer  dam  with  con- 
crete, in  excavating  the  sand  from  the  next,  and  in  driving  the  sheet 
piling  for  the  third.  These  three  operations  were  thus  carried  on 
simultaneously  and,  although  interruptions  in  one  part  of  the  work 
or  the  other  occurred  frequently,  the  gangs  were  interchangeable 
and  no  appreciable  loss  was  suffered,  except  in  time,  because  of  such 
delays. 

In  piers  19  and  20,  where  the  rock  was  from  17  to  19  ft.  below 
the  surface,  some  difficulty  was  encountered  due  to  the  presence  of 
fissures  in  the  rock,  from  which  it  was  necessary  to  remove  the  sand 
to  fill  with  concrete.  In  such  cases,  the  larger  leaks  were  stopped  as 
much  as  possible  by  driving  sheet  piles  against  the  outside  face 
of  the  coffer  dam  and  into  the  fissures,  and  the  smaller  leaks  by 
manure  in  canvass  bags  rammed  into  the  openings. 

Upon  the  completion  of  all  bases,  the  frames  (Figs.  4  and  5)  for 
several  shafts  were  set  in  position  and  the  work  of  filling  with 
concrete  proceeded  as  in  the  case  of  the  bases,  except  that  a  derrick 


1516  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

erected  on  a  flat  car  and  stationed  at  the  pier  was  utilized  to  raise 
the  dump  boxes  in  depositing  the  concrete  in  the  forms.  As  soon 
as  the^concrete  in  one  shaft  had  set  sufficiently  to  permit  of  it,  the 
forms  were  removed  and  placed  on  the  pier  ahead.  Four  sets  of 
forms  were  used  for  the  shafts. 

The  girders,  which  were  furnished  by  the  American  Bridge  Co., 
were  set  in  place  with  a  derrick  car  of  20  tons'  capacity. 

Cost  of  Construction, — The  following  are  the  average  prices  paid 
for  materials  and  labor: 
Material: 

Lumber  for  forms,  etc.,  $16.50  per  M.  ft.,  B.  M. 

Cement,  Kansas  Portland,  $1.50  per  bbl. 

Broken  limestone,   45c  per  cu.  yd.,  Kan. 

Sand,  Arkansas  River,  15c  per  ton. 
Labor: 

General  foreman,  $110  per  month. 

Assistant  foreman,   $75  per  month. 

Timekeeper,  $60  per  month. 

Riveters,  35c  per  hour. 

Blacksmith,  30c  per  hour. 

Blacksmith  assistant,  20c  per  hour. 

Carpenters,  22  %c  and  25c  per  hour. 

Enginemen,  25c  per  hour. 

Firemen,  20c  per  hour. 

Night  watchman,  20c  per  hour. 

Laborers,   17y2c  and  20c  per  hour. 

Team  (including  driver),  40c  per  hour. 

Note :  The  prices  quoted  for  lumber,  cement,  limestone  and  sand 
are  prices  f.  o.  b.,  Louisiana,  lola,  Kan.,  El  Dorado,  Kan.,  and 
Wichita;  Kan. 

The  total  and  unit  cost  of  constructing  the  concrete  piers  and 
abutments  and  of  erecting  the  steel  superstructure  are  given  in  the 
following  tabulation.  Altogether  there  was  about  2,300  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  in  the  substructure,  most  of  which,  as  stated  above,  was  a 
1-3-5  mixture. 

Machinery  and  Supplies — 

Concrete  mixer,   20%  of  cost $    152.10 

Supplies,   freight,   hauling,    setting  up 505.04 

Total $  657.14 

Centrifugal  sand  pump,   20%  of  cost $  27.00 

Supplies,   freight,   hauling,    setting  up 277.50 

Rent  of  traction  engine  to  operate 83.25 

Total $    387.75 

Water  pump  and  pipe,  20%  of  cost $      29.00 

Supplies,   freight,   hauling,    setting  up 177.32 

Total     $     206.32 

Pile  driver  engine,  20%  of  cost $    100.00 

Supplies,  freight,  hauling,  setting  up 243.65 

Total     .  $     343.65 

Grand  total    $1,594.86 


BRIDGES.  1517 

Coffer  Dams — 

Materials,  lumber  and  nails $1,285.26 

Freight  and   train   haul 306.33 

Labor   making   piles 696.82 

Labor    driving    piles 1,384.05 


Total     $3,672.46 

The  sheet  piling  took   63,500   ft.   B.   M.   of  lumber;    the  cost  per 
1,000  ft.  B.  M.  for  the  sheet  piling  was  then: 

Materials,    lumber    and    nails $  20.08 

Freight    and    haulage 4.82 

Labor  making  piles 10.97 

Labor  driving  piles 21.80 


Total     ?      57.67 

Forms,  Platforms  and  Runways — 

Lumber,  hardware,   etc $  224.59 

Freight  and   train  haul 40.20 

Labor  making,  removing  and  placing 556.51 

Total     I    821.30 

Concrete  Materials — 

Cement,   freight,   unloading  and   storing $4,617.48 

Sand,    freight,    unloading,    etc 1,336.05 

Broken   stone,    freight,    unloading,    etc 2,026.92 

Total $7,980.45 

This  gives  us  for  2,300  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  a  cost  of  $3.47  per  cu. 
yd.  for  materials,  including  freight,  storage,  and  unloading  charges 
of  all  kinds.  A  line  on  the  proportion  of  the  cost  contributed  by 
these  latter  items  may  be  got  by  taking  the  prices  of  the  materials 
f.  o.  b.  at  the  places  of  production  and  assuming  the  proportions 
for  a  1-3-5  concrete.  According  to  tables  in  Gillette's  "Handbook  of 
Cost  Data,"  a  1-3-5  broken  stone  concrete  requires  per  cubic  yard 
1.13  bbls.  cement,  0.48  cu.  yd.  sand  and  0.80  cu.  yd.  broken  stone. 
We  have  then : 

1.13  bbls.   cement,   at   $1.50 $1.69 

0.48  cu.   yd.  sand,  at  20c 10 

0.80  cu.  yd.  stone  at  45c 36 

Total     $2.15 

This  leaves  a  charge  of  $1.32  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  for 
freight  and  handling  materials.  The  cost  of  mixing  concrete  and 
placing  it  in  the  forms  was  $3,490.87,  or  $1.52  per  cu.  yd.  We  have 
then: 

Cost  of  concrete  materials  per  cu.  yd $3.47 

Cost   mixing  and   placing   concrete 1.52 

Total     $4.99 

The  miscellaneous  expenses  of  the  work  comprised : 

Watchman,    tools,    telephone,    etc $    722.48 

Shanties,  furnishings,  supplies,  etc 829.04 

Total    .  ..$1,551.52 


1518  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

To  this  has  to  be  added  $  1,1 3 4. 2  8,  the  cost  of  excavating  the  coffer 
dams.  The  total  and  unit  costs  of  the  different  items  of  the  con- 
crete substructure  work  can  now  be  summarized  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Machinery  and   supplies $   1,594.86  $  .69 

Coffer    dams    3,672.49  1.60 

Forms,  etc 821.30  .36 

Concrete  materials   7,980.45  3.47 

Mixing  and  placing  concrete 3,490.87  1.53 

Excavating    coffer    dams 1,134.28  .49 

Miscellaneous   1,551.52  .67 


Totals     $20,245.74  $8.80 

The  weight  of  steel   in  the  plate   girders  was  694,479   Ibs.     The 
total  and  unit  costs  were  as  follows : 

Item.  Total.  Per  Ib. 

Steel  girders $19,128.42  2.730  cts. 

Freight   on   girders 1,365.60  0.215 

Unloading  and  stacking 140.35  0.015 


Total   $20,634.37          2.96    cts. 

Erecting  girders    $   1,363.48         0.211  cts. 

Derrick  car,  20%  of  cost , 127.10         0.009 

Total $1,490.58          0.22    cts. 

Grand  total   3.18    cts. 

The  cost  of  the  deck,  material,  freight,  labor^  and  painting  was 
$2,388.42,  making  the  total  cost  of  the  superstructure  $24,513.37. 
Adding  to  this  the  cost  of  the  substructure,  as  given  above,  we  have 
$44,759.11  as  the  total  cost  of  the  bridge.  The  cost  per  lineal  foot, 
then,  was: 

For  superstructure   $24.51 

For  substructure    20.24 

Total   $44.75 

Cost  of  Erecting  Riveted  Deck  Girder  Bridge.— A  riveted  deck 
girder  bridge,  710  ft.  long  and  56  ft.  high,  consisting  of  seven  80- 
ft.,  one  60-ft.  and  three  30-ft.  sections,  was  erected  as  described 
below.  The  bridge  was  to  replace  525  ft.  of  timber  trestle  and  two 
105-ft.  overhead  Howe  truss  spans  on  a  railway  line  over  which 
22  trains  were  moved  between  7  a.  m.  and  6  p.  m.  Two  travelers 
with  tackle  were  used  in  the  work.  While  the  excavation  was  be- 
ing done  the  falsework  was  put  in,  by  trestling  the  two 
spans  and  cutting  out  a  section  1  ft.  long  of  the  posts 
of  the  trestle  part,  and  introducing  an  intermediate  cap, 
a  distance  of  12  ft.  below  the  rail  to  form  lookouts  for 
track  for  travelers.  In  this  way  the  cost  of  the  false- 
work was  reduced  and  everything  could  be  placed  from  the  top, 
using  one  traveler  for  placing  the  pedestal  stones  the  entire  length, 
and  for  placing  the  posts  on  the  return  trip.  After  the  posts  had 
been  placed  the  other  traveler  was  erected  in  order  to  carry  both 
ends  of  the  girders.  Owing  to  circumstances,  the  materials  were 
unloaded  2,000  ft.  from  the  bridge  and  were  brought  to  it  on  push 
cars ;  that  is,  all  except  the  girders,  which  were  loaded  on  trucks 


BRIDGES.  1519 


and  moved  with  a  locomotive.  The  girders  were  riveted  together 
on  the  skids,  the  ties,  tie  plates,  guard  rail  and  rail  placed  upon 
them,  and  then  loaded  on  trucks  ready  to  be  sent  out.  Jacks  were 
placed  under  each  end  of  the  girders  when  they  had  been  spotted 
over  their  place  and  they  were  raised  clear  of  the  trucks.  The 
tackle  was  then  attached,  a  strain  taken,  the  trucks  run  out,  and 
the  jacks  released,  and  they  were  swung  clear.  Owing  to  the 
height,  the  stringer-ties  and  guard  rail  had  to  be  taken  on  deck. 
The  bents  were  let  down  on  the  intermediate  caps  and  the  girders 
lowered  into  place  by  the  means  of  the  lines.  It  was  possible  to 
swing  the  girders  either  way,  so  that  when  they  were  within  6 
ins.  of  their  seat  a  small  bar,  pointed  at  each  end,  could  be  inserted 
to  guide  them  into  place.  The  first  80-ft.  girder  was  placed  in  2 
hours  and  22  minutes,  and  the  second  was  placed  in  1  hour  and  38 
minutes,  while  another  girder  was  placed  in  58  minutes.  The  fol- 
lowing costs,  incomplete  though  they  are,  may  be  of  some  value. 
The  work  was  done  some  years  ago  when  wages  were  lower  than 
they  now  are.  Cost  of  placing  the  11  girders,  together  with  the 
riveting,  unloading  steel,  loading  on  trucks,  engine  attendance,  etc., 
was  $1,255.49,  or  $1.7683  per  lin.  ft.  ;  cost  of  placing  four  rocker 
and  three  tower  bents  was  $570.04,  or  $0.8003  per  lin.  ft.  ;  total 
•cost  of  superstructure,  including  falsework  and  traveler,  was 
$2,248.85,  or  $3.1674  per  lin.  ft.  The  cost  of  riveting  was  as  fol- 
lows : 

Rivets.  Per  rivet. 

Riveting  girder 8,026  $0.0502 

Riveting  bents     480  0.1066 

Riveting  girders   to  post 264  0.1458 

Cost   of   an    Iron    Bridge,    Including    the   Cost   of   Masonry  Abut- 

ments.* — In  this  article  we  give  the  cost  of  erecting  a  130-ft.  span, 

»   supported    by    stone   abutments  *and   pier,    at    New    Buffalo,    Mich., 

for  the  Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry.,  the  work  being  done  in  1894. 

The  statement  of  the  cost  of  the  bridge  to  the  railway  company 

was   as    follows : 

False  work  material   (estimated) $        75.00 

Ties,   etc 134.86 

Iron  span 5,568.00 

1,050  cu.  yds.  excavation  at  $0.25 262.50 

425.4  cu.  yds.  stone  (Grafton)  at  $6.86 2,917.39 

445  cu.  yds.  stone  cut  and  laid  at  $6.50 2,892.50 

Filling  behind   abutment,   laborers , .  35.25 

Filling  behind  abutments,  engine  work 5.10 

Filling  behind  abutment,  10%  above  labor 4.04 

Labor  taking  down  old  truss  and  erecting   false 

work    170.75 

Labor  framing  and  placing  ties  and  tie  guard.  .  .  67.39 

Labor  taking  down  false  work 27.00 

Total   cost    $12,159.78 

The  actual  cost  of  the  stone  masonry  per  cubic  yard  was  $13.05  ; 
of  this  sum  $6.50  was  for  cutting  and  setting  and  $6.55  for  the 
stone.  The  above  cost  of  the  stone  is  the  cost  .to  the  railway 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  February,   1906. 


1520  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

company  at  La  Porte.  Delivered  at  New  Buffalo  the  stone  would 
cost  $8.10  per  cubic  yard,  making  the  actual  cost  of  the  masonry 
$14.60  per  cubic  yard.  The  stone  measured  425.4  cu.  yds.  in  the 
block  and  made  444  cu.  yds.  in  the  wall,  thus  overrunning  19.6  cu. 
yds.  A  total  of  51  cars  of  stone  was  used,  the  average  weight  per 
car  being  34,500  Ibs.  ;  the  average  number  of  cubic  feet  per  car 
was  226  ;  and  the  average  weight  per  cubic  foot  was  144  Ibs. 
These  figures  were  based  on  the  shipping  weights  of  the  cars.  The 
stone  was  scabbled  only,  which  accounts  for  the  high  weight  per 
car. 

The  total  cost  of  erecting  the  bridge  was  $265.14,  this  including 
the  labor  for  taking  down  the  old  truss,  erecting  false  work,  fram- 
ing and  placing  ties  and  tie  guard,  and  the  labor  for  taking  down 
the  false  work.  The  cost  of  erecting  the  130  ft.  span  was  there- 
fore a  trifle  over  $2  per  foot. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  weight  of  the  iron  span  is  not  given 
in  the  above  statement  of  the  cost  of  the  work,  nor  is  the  num- 
ber of  men,  the  rate  of  wages  or  the  time  employed.  The  state- 
ment would  have  been  much  more  complete  had  these  details  been 
obtainable. 

Cost  of  a  Plate  Girder  Bridfle  With  Concrete  Piers  in  Mexico.*— 
The  following  is  rearranged  from  data  originally  published  in  the 
"Railway  Age-Gazette" :  The  bridge  consists  of  17  spans  of  50 
ft.  deck  plate  girders  carried  on  concrete  piers  and  reinforced  con- 
crete piers  and  reinforced  concrete  abutments.  The  substructure  is 
founded  on  solid  rock  ranging  in  depth  below  low  water  from 
zero  on  the  west  shore  to  19  ft.  on  the  east  shore.  The  west  abut- 
ment and  succeeding  13  piers  were  carried  to  rock;  the  three 
remaining  piers  and  the  east  abutment  were  set  on  piles  driven  to 
rock  and  cut  off  at  low  water  level.  The  piers  consist  of  bases 
14  ft.  9  ins.  x  7  ft.  9  ins.  in  dimensions  and  varying  in  height  with 
the  depth  of  foundation,  and  shafts  13  ft.  9  ins.  x  6  ft.  9  ins.  at 
the  base;  12  ft.  x  6  ft.  at  the  top  over  coping  and  28  ft  high.  Each 
shaft  contains  about  84.8  cu.  yds.  of  concrete.  The  spans  between 
pier  centers  are  50  ft.  3  ins.  The  abutments  are  of  reinforced  con- 
crete. 

Two  methods  of  construction  were  employed.  The  first  method 
was  used  for  the  west  abutment  and  the  succeeding  six  piers.  Ope- 
rations were  conducted  from  the  river  bed.  The  west  abutment 
was  above  water  level  and  was  straightforward  construction.  For 
this  six  succeeding  piers  U.  S.  Steel  Sheet  Pile  cofferdams  Were 
built  and  excavated ;  the  base  forms  were  set  inside  and  concret- 
ed, and  then  the  shaft  forms  were  erected  and  concreted.  A  60  x 
120x4  ft. 'barge  in  the  river  carried  a  hoisting  engine  and  stiff 
leg  derrick.  This  derrick  handled  the  forms  and  also  a  clam 
shell  for  excavating  the  cofferdams.  A  pile  driver  supported  on 
heavy  horses  drove  the  sheeting.  The  concrete  was  mixed  on  the 
river  bed  by  a  %  cu.  yd.  Chicago  Improved  Cube  mixer  and  taken 
to  the  work  in  dump  buckets  in  push  cars  running  on  a  track 

.  *Engineer\ng-Contracting,  Feb.   3.   1909. 


BRIDGES. 


1521 


which  was  extended  from  pier  to 
pier.  At  the  piers  the  buckets  were 
raised  and  dumped  by  means  of  a 
mast  and  crosshead.  When  the  pier 
was  completed  the  girders  were  set 
by  means  of  a  15 -ton  derrick  car. 

Work  was  conducted  in  the  man- 
ner described  from  April  20,  1907,  to 
May  1,  1908.  This  slow  progress 
was  due  largely  to  the  fact  that 
the  organization  was  such  that  one 
part  of  the  work  had  to  await  the 
completion  of  another,  no  two  op- 
erations being  carried  on  at  the 
same  time.  Furthermore  the  driv- 
ing and  pulling  of  the  steel  sheet- 
ing was  a  tedious  process.  It  took 
from  a  week  to  ten  days  to  drive 
the  sheeting  for  one  cofferdam,  and 
in  penetrating  the  cemented  gravel 
the  piles  were  often  so  battered  and 
bent  that  it  took  as  long  or  longer 
to  pull  as  to  drive  them.  The  ex- 
cavation of  the  cofferdam  occupied 
about  two  days.  It  was  to  remedy 
this  slow  progress  that  the  second 
method  of  construction  was  devised 
by  Mr.  W.  W.  Colpitts,  Assistant 
Chief  Engineer,  who  assumed  per* 
sonal  charge  of  the  work. 

A  second  track  was  laid  parallel 
to  the  main  track  as  shown  by  Fig. 
6.  To  support  this  second  track 
20-ft.  guard  rail  timbers  were  in- 
serted between  each  pair  of  main 
track  ties  and  secured  with  hook 
bolts  to  the  girder  flanges.  On  the 
overhanging  ends  of  these  timbers 
two  lines  of  3  x  12-in.  planks,  on 
5-ft.  centers,  were  laid  to  carry  the 
second  track  rails.  The  concrete 
mixed  was  removed  from  the  river 
bed  and  placed  on  the  west  bank  as 
shown  by  Fig.  6  ;  the  second  track 
led  directly  to  and  from  the  mixer. 
A  siding  was  also  laid  to  the  mixer 
for  the  sand  and  gravel  cars,  which 
were  loaded  at  a  nearby  cut- 
ting. Water  was  pumped  to  the 
mixer  from  the  river  as  shown  by 
Fig.  6. 


1522 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 


The  second  track  was  extended  from  pier  to  pier  as  fast  as  the 
main  track  was  completed,  so  that  the  derrick  car  could  be  run 
out  on  the  second  track  to  a  position  alongside  the  last  completed 
pier.  The  derrick  car  boom  was  lengthened  about  25  ft.  by  splic- 
ing and  trussed  with  wire  cables  to  sustain  a  load  of  4  tons  at  its 
outer  end.  From  the  boom  a  66-ft.  extension  of  the  second  track 
was  suspended  by  cables  at  the  boom  and  at  mid-length ;  the 
inner  end  of  the  extension  track  was  supported  by  a  bent  on  the 
pier.  The  arrangement  of  the  extension  track  is  made  above  by 
Fig.  6  ;  as  will  be  seen  the  concrete  could  come  from  the  mixer  by 
car  to  directly  over  the  pier.  When  a  pier  had  been  concreted  the 
extension  track  was  set  one  side  and  detached  and  the  derrick  was 
available  for  erecting  the  plate  girders. 


Fig.    7. —  Concrete  Bucket. 


For  depositing  concrete  below  water,  a  bucket  was  deviled  to 
operate  with  a  single  line|  as  illustrated  in  Fig.  7.  It  was  built 
of  a  3-ft.  section  of  36  in.  corrugated  iron  culvert  pipe,  having  a 
capacity  of  %  cu.  yd.  In  the  bottom,  which  was  of  wood,  was  a 
clap  valve  8  ins.  square  opening  upward  A  1-in  iron  trunnion  set 
6  ins.  off  center  was  secured  to  the  bottom.  A  bale  with  chain 
hooks  at  its  extremities  was  attached  to  the  pile  line  of  the  der- 
rick car  which  was  led  through  a  block  at  the  end  of  the  boom 
directly  over  the  center  of  the  pier.  To  the  top  of  the  bale  was 
pivoted  a  counter-weighted  trip  engaging  a  lip  on  the  side  of  the 


BRIDGES. 


1523 


bucket.  The  bucket  was  carried  on  a  push  car  and  the  mixer  dis- 
charged directly  into  it.  It  was  then  run  out  to  the  end  of  the  ex- 
tension, the  hooks  of  the  bale  slipped  over  the  trunnions,  the  trip 
caught  on  the  lip,  the  bucket  raised,  and  the  car  pushed  from  un- 
der it.  The  bucket  was  then  lowered  and  upon  its  weight  being 
taken  on  the  bottom  the  trip  automatically  released.  As  the  bucket 
was  slowly  raised  from  the  bottom  and  upset,  the  valve  in  the  bot- 
tom opened  and  the  concrete  poured  out  without  disturbance ;  its 
construction  being  such  that  it  discharged  toward  the  lowest  point. 
Three  buckets  were  used,  one  being  dumped  while  two  others  were 
on  their  way  to  and  from  the  mixer ;  the  loaded  car  using  the 
second  track,  the  empty  car  returning  on  the  main  track. 

The  concrete  for  the  shafts  was  carried  in  dump  boxes  on  push 
cars,  Fig.  8.  The  forms  were  securely  wired  to  prevent  distor- 
tion from  the  falling  concrete  and  baffle  boards  were  used  to  dis- 
tribute the  concrete  uniformly. 

It  was  found  that  detachable  cast  steel  teeth  on  the  lips  of  the 
clam  shell  greatly  increased  the  daily  capacity  of  the  dredge  and 


Fig.    8. — Concrete   Car. 


this  fact  suggested  the  advisability  of  doing  away  entirely  with 
the  steel  sheet  piling  which  had  proven  both  expensive  and  slow. 
The  greatest  depth  to  rock  was  19  ft.  below  the  low  water  surface 
and  was  practically  level  over  the  area  of  a  pier.  It  was  de'cided 
to  sink  open  wooden  cofferdams,  first  dredging  as  deep  as  practic- 
able in  the  open  water  at  the  pier  site,  the  limit  of  which  proved 
to  be  about  12  ft.  In  the  meantime,  the  timber  for  the  cofferdams 
was  being  framed  on  the  bank.  They  were  built  as  follows :  The 
three  bottom  courses  were  composed  of  condemned  bridge  string- 
ers, the  lower  one  having  a  45°  cutting  edge,  unshod.  Above  the 
stringers  the  sides  were  composed  of  3xl2-in.  plank,  spiked  to  cor- 
ner posts  and  studs. 

During  construction  the  cofferdam  was  supported  on  a  raft  also 
composed  of  condemned  bridge  stringers.  The  raft  was  built  with 
an  open  bay,  about  1  ft.  larger  on  all  sides  than  the  cofferdam. 


1524  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

Across  the  center  of  the  opening  was  stretched  a  heavy  telegraph 
wire  supporting  the  ends  of  four  planks,  the  other  ends  resting  on 
the  raft.  The  lower  courses  of  timbers  of  the  cofferdam  were  then 
set  in  position  on  these  planks  and  drift-bolted  together.  The 
position  of  the  cofferdam  on  the  planks  was  such  that  only  a  small 
percentage  of  its  weight  came  upon  the  wire.  The  two  other 
courses  of  stringers  were  then  laid  and  bolted  to  these,  after  which 
the  3-in.  planks  comprising  the  balance  of  the  sides  of  cofferdam 
were  spiked  to  the  corner  posts  and  studs.  When  completed,  the 
wire  was  cut  and  the  cofferdam  launched  into  the  water  below, 
which,  as  stated  above,  had  previously  been  dredged  to  a  depth 
of  about  12  ft.  It  was  then  guyed  to  its  exact  position  and  held 
level  by  lines  from  the  boom  of  the  barge  derrick.  Four  posts  or 
legs,  with  the  lower  ends  resting  on  the  bottom  of  the  excavation, 
were  spiked  to  the  outside  corners  and  all  the  guys  removed,  al- 
lowing the  cofferdam  to  rest  entirely  upon  these  legs.  To  make 
provision  for  weighing  the  cofferdam  while  being  sunk,  stringers 
were  placed  across  its  ends  and  on  the  portions  projecting  beyond 
the  sides,  a  floor  of  other  stringers  was  laid  and  boxed  up  to  a 
height  sufficient  to  carry  a  load  of  about  75  tons  of  gravel  each. 
The  dredging  operations  were  then  begun  and  the  material  taken 
from  the  interior  of  the  cofferdam  placed  in  the  boxes  until  they 
were  filled.  When  the  dredging  had  continued  to  a  point  where 
the  bearing  was  uniform  on  the  cutting  edge  of  the  bottom,  the 
legs  detached  themselves  from  the  sides  and  floated  to  the  sur- 
face. 

By  carefully  sounding  the  bottom  and  loading  the  boxes  uni- 
formly as  the  dredging  proceeded,  the  cofferdam  sank  uniformly 
to  the  rock.  The  load  was  not  removed  from  the  boxes  until  the 
concrete  had  been  placed,  when  by  cutting  the  wires  supporting  the 
sides  the  gravel  dropped  into  the  water.  The  cofferdam  was  pre- 
vented from  bulging  when  the  concrete  was  being  deposited,  by 
means  of  a  wire  cable  strung  around  the  top  and  wedged  taut  at 
each  of  the  studs.  The  derrick  car  was  not  removed  from  its 
position  supporting  the  extension  track  until  the  concrete  in  both 
the  base  and  shaft  had  been  placed.  The  pile  line  of  the  derrick 
car  was,  therefore,  available  in  removing  the  form  on  the  shaft  of 
the  pier  behind  "and  erecting  it  on  the  recently  completed  base. 
The  operation  of  filling  it  with  concrete  was  then  begun.  While 
the  work  of  placing  the  concrete  in  the  base,  erecting  the  form  for 
the  shaft,  filling  it  and  setting  the  girders  was  going  on,  the  barge 
was  employed  in  dredging  for  and  sinking  the  next  cofferdam,  and 
in  this  manner  the  work  proceeded  until  the  13th  pier  was  com- 
pleted. 

The  piles  in  the  foundations  of  the  three  piers  on  the  east  bank 
of  the  river  were  driven  with  rafl  leads  suspended  loosely  from 
the  boom  of  the  stiff-legged  derrick,  which  had  been  removed  and 
placed  on  skids  on  the  bank.  The  forms  were  set  and  filled  in  the 
manner  described. 

The  method  of  building  the  west  abutment  was  as  follows :  Upon 
the  completion  of  the  excavation,  the  form  was  built  up  to  a  point 


BRIDGES.  1525 

3  ft.  above  the  bottom  of  the  overhang.  The  piles  were  then 
driven  and  the  back-filling  completed  up  to  the  level  to  which  the 
form  had  been  built  and  care  taken  to  tamp  the  filling  solidly  un- 
der the  form  for  the  overhang.  The  form  was  then  filled  with  con- 
crete to  the  top  and  the  overhanging  slab,  which  was  3  ft.  thick, 
reinforced  with  steel  to  enable  it  to  support  the  load  of  green  con- 
crete that  would  later  come  upon  it.  The  form  for  the  upper  por- 
tion was  then  completed  and  the  whole  filled  with  concrete  up  to 
the  bridge  seat  in  two  days'  run.  The  west  abutment  was  com- 
pleted and  the  last  span  set  on  August  27,  1908,  an  average,  after 
May  1,  of  one  pier  and  span  about  every  nine  working  days. 

The  statement  of  cost  will  be  especially  interesting  to  those  who 
are  familiar  with  conditions  in  the  Republic  of  Mexico.  Generally 
speaking,  machinery,  materials  and  supplies  of  all  kinds  are  much 
more  costly  than  in  the  United  States,  but  this  disadvantage  is 
partly  offset  by  cheap  labor.  The  scale  of  wages  (in  U.  S.  cur- 
rency) that  prevailed  on  the  work  are  given  below: 

The  cost  of  materials  delivered  at  the  work  was  as  follows: 

General   foreman    -. $150.00  per  month 

Sub-foremen     4.00  per  day 

Hoisting  engineers    4.00  per  day 

Firemen 1.50  per  day 

Carpenters     1.50  per  day 

Blacksmiths     2.00  per  day 

Laborers    (.peons)    .75  per  day 

Cement,   per   bbl $   3.73 

For  lumber,   per  M.   ft.   B.  M 23.33 

Bridge  timber,  per  M.  ft.  B.  M 36.65 

Reinforcement,    per    ton 79.20 

Steel  sheeting,   per  ton 54.15 

Bridge  steel,  per  ton 6"9.98 

In  the  statement  below  a  proportion  of  the  cost  of  all  machin- 
ery and  tools  is  charged  against  the  bridge,  depending  upon  their 
condition  and  availability  for  future  work. 

Abutments. 
(Contain  586.2  cu.  yds.   concrete.) 

Material.  Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement,  694.4  bbls.,  at  $3.73 $2,590.11  $4.42 

Sand,   263  cu.  yds.,  at  ?0.50% 132.81  0.23 

Gravel,  526  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.50y2 265.62  0.45 

Lumber,  22,232  ft,  B.  M.,  $23.33 518.66  0.88 

Piles,   240   lin.   ft.,   at   $0.22 52.80  0.09 

Reinforcement,  41,730  Ibs.,  at  $3.96 1,632.51  2.79 

Machinery,  proportionate  cost 59.21  0.10 

Wire  and  nails 101.50  0.18 

Lubricating   oil    6.50  0.01 

Fuel    109-00  0.18 

Total  material  $5,468.72  $9.33 


1526  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Labor. 

Excavation   for   foundation ?  199.66              50.34 

Building  and  removing  forms 33i'°,i 

Driving    piles   in    foundation 67.77 

Placing    steel    reinforcement 92-^>                X«2 

Mixing    concrete    220.53                0.38 

Placing  concrete    96.39                0.17 

Pumping  water    18.74 

Cleaning  and  storing  machines,  etc 61.00                0.10 

Total    labor    $1,087.65  $1.86 

Total    material   and    labor $6,556.37  $11.19 

Bases  of  Piers  1  to  16,  Inclusive. 
Bases  1  to     6  contain  373      cu.  yds. 
Bases  7  to  16  contain  887.7  cu.  yds. 


Total   1,260.7  cu.  yds. 

Material :  Total.     Cu.  yd. 

Cement,  1,233  bbls.,  at  $3.73 $4,599.09     $3.65 

Sand,  591  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.50y2 298.46       0.24 

Gravel,  1,182  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.50y2 596.92        0.47 

Cofferdams  of  piers  1  to  6  : 
Lumber,  3  M.,  B.  M.,  at  $23.33...$      69.99 

Steel    sheet    piling 924.72 

Wire  nails  and  oil   53.00 

Machinery    817.00 

Fuel 700.00 


Material  in  cofferdams  1  to  6 $2,564.71 

Per  cu.  yd.  concrete  in  bases  1  to  6.$         6.88 

Cofferdams  of  piers  7  to  16  : 
Lumber,  26  M.,  B.  M.,  at  $23.33..$    606.58 

Piles  in  foundation 198.00 

Wire  nails  and  oil 210.25 

Machinery   1,353.66 

Fuel     1,200.00 

Material  in  cofferdams  7  to  16.  $3,568.49     6,133.20       4.86 

Per  cu.  yd.  concrete  in  bases  7  to  16        $4.02 


Total  material $11,627.67     $9.22 

Labor : 

Mixing  concrete 580.33       0.46 

Placing  concrete    662.26       0.52 

Pumping    water    38.00       0.036 

Cleaning  and  storing  machines,   etc 122.01       0.10 

Cofferdams  of  piers  1  to  6  : 

Excavation    $    857.22 

Driving  sheet  piling 1,653.19 

Pulling  sheet  piling 371.60 

Building  inside  forms   214.21 


Labor  on  cofferdams  1  to  6....  $3,096.22 

Per  cu.  yd.  concrete  in  bases  1  to  6          $8.30 

Cofferdams  of  piers  7  to  16 : 

Excavation    $1,010.05 

Piles  in  foundation 313.23 

Building  and  sinking  cofferdams.       870.89 

Labor  on  cofferdams  7  to  16...  $2,194.17     5,390.39       4.20 

Per  cu.  yd.  concrete  in  bases  7  to  16        $2.47 

Total  labor $   6,692.99      $5.31 

Total  material  and  labor $18,320.66   $14.53 

Labor  and  material  of  cofferdams  1  to    6  per  cu.  yd.  concrete.    $15.18 
Labor  and  material  of  cofferdams  7  to  16  per  cu.  yd.  concrete.        6.49 


BRIDGES. 


1527 


Shafts  of  Piers.  1   to  16,  Inclusive.   • 

(  1,357.2  cu.  yds.  concrete.  The  shafts  of  the  piers  did  not  differ 
appreciably  in  cost,  and  the  statement  is  not  divided  as  in  the  case 
of  the  bases.) 

Materials :     .  Total.         Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement,   482  bbls.,  at  $3.73 $   4,617.74  $   3.41 

Sand,  257  cu.  yds.,  at  50 y2  cts 321.69  '    0.24 

Gravel,   514  cu.  yds.,  at  50%   cts 643.38  0.47 

Lumber,  3,000  ft,  B.  M.,  at  $23.33 163.31  0.12 

Machinery,  proportionate  cost 155.00  0.11 

Wire  and  nails   101.50  0.07 

Lubricating    oil     . 28.50  0.02 

Fuel 919.00  0.68 

Total  material   $  6,950.12  $   5.12 

Labor : 

Building  and   removing  forms $      582.55  $   0.43 

Mixing    concrete    602.45  0.45 

Placing    concrete    652.79  0.48 

Pumping  water   , :.......           39.00  0.03 

Cleaning  and   storing  machinery 122.01  0.09 

Total  labor $   1,998.80  $   1.48 

Total  material  and  labor    $   8,948.92  $  6.60 

Total    cost    of    substructure...- $33,825.95  $10.56 

Steel  Spans. — 11  50-ft.  Deck  Plate   Girders. 

Material :                                                                      Total.  Per  ton. 

Steel,  611,734  Ibs.,  f.  o.  b.  New  York $16,822.68  $55.00 

Freight  and  brokerage 4,582.68  14.98 

Fuel,  setting  and  riveting  girders 181.36  0.59 

Total  material   $21,586.12  $70.57 

Labor : 

Unloading  and  setting  girders $      294.45  $  0.96 

Riveting   girders 640.35  2.09 

Setting  anchor  bolts 105.00  0.34 

Machinery,  proportionate  cost 253.70  0.83 

Total  labor $   1,293.50  $  4~^2 

Total  material  and  labor $22,879.62  $74.79 

Deck. — Ties   L.   L.   P.   8-in.   x  10-in  x  10- ft.,  Spaced  13-ln.   Centers; 
Guard  Rails  L.  L.  P.,  7-w.  x  9-in.  x  20-ft. 

Per 

Material :                                                                        Total.  M.  B.  M. 

62,401  ft.,  B.  M.,  f.  o.  b.  Safton,  La.... $   1,123.22  $18.00 

Freight  and  brokerage 1,163.78  18.65 

Fuel 25.50  0.40 

Total  material   $  2,312.50  $37.05 

Labor : 

Framing  and  placing $      561.68  $   9.00 

Machinery,  proportionate  cost 60.63  0.97 

Total  labor $      6~22.31  $~9~97 

Total  material  and  labor $  2,934.81  $47.02 

Total  cost  of  superstructure $25,814.43  

Total  cost  of  bridge $59,640.38 


1530  HANDBOOK    OF    COST    DATA. 

Cost   of    Howe   Truss    Bridges,    Cross- References.— In  the   section 
on  Timberwork  will  be  found  other  data  on  Howe  truss  bridges. 

Cost  of  a  150-ft.  Howe  Truss  Through  Span  Bridge.— The  following 
data   were   published    in    Engineering-Contracting,    June    26,    1907: 
Loading  Bridge  Material — 

2  days,  foreman,    at     $3.00  $  6  00 

18  days,   carpenter,     at 2.50  45.00 

12  days,  helper,     at 2.00  24.00 

32  days.       Total $2.34  $75*00 

Loading  Hoisting  Engine — 

0.5  day,  pile    driver   engr.,    at $3.00  $   1.50 

0.15  day,  carpenter,     at 2.50  3.7o 

0.5  day,  helper,     at k    2.00  1.00 

2.5  days.      Total    $2.50  $6.25 

Loading  Pile  Driver — 

1  day,  carpenter $2.50  $   2.50 

1  day,   helper      2.00  2.00 

2  days.       Total     $2.25  $   4.50 

Fitting  Up  Pile  Driver— 

13.5   days,   carpenter      $2.50  $33.75 

3.5   days,  helper      2.00  7.00 

17     days.      Total    ..$2.40  $40.75 

Driving  Pile  Falsework — 

1   da\,   foreman     $3.00  $   3.00 

1   day,   engineer     3.00  3.00 

8  days,   carpenter     2.50  20.00 

5  days,  helper      2.00  10.00 

15   days.      Total ..$2.40  $36.00 

Framing  and  Erecting  Bridge — 

30   days,   foreman    $3.00  $       90.00 

22   days,  engineer      3.00  66.00 

236  days,   carpenter      2.50  590.00 

260  days,   helper     2.00  520.00 


548  days.      Total    $2.30  $1,266.00 

Train  Service — 

2   days,   conductor     $3.50  $   7.00 

4  days,  brakeman     .  ..; 2.50  10.00 

2  days,  locomotive    and    crew 25.00  50.00 

Total $67.00 

Miscellaneous — 

11   tons   coal  for  hoisting  engine,   at   $3 $  33.00 

Repairs   to    hoisting   engine 24.00 

Tools,    etc 135.00 

Total $192.00 

Bridge  Materials — 

88,800  ft.   B.   M.    timber,   at   $15 $1,332.00 

44,800  Ibs.   wrought  iron,   at   2  y2    cts 1,120.00 

40,000  Ibs.    cast   iron,   at   1.8   cts 720.00 

Total  $3,172.00 


BRIDGES.  1531 

Falsework  Material — 

1,120  lin.  ft.  piles   (28  piles,  40  ft.),  at  8  cts $   89.60      . 

30,000   ft.    B.    M.,    second   hand    at   |8.00 240.00 

500  Ibs.  iron,  at  2y2    cts 12.50 

Total      .  , $242.10 

file  Abutments  Material — 

1,600  lin.  ft.  piles   (40  piles,   40  ft),  at  8  cts $128.00 

1,700  Ibs.    iron,   at   2V2    cts 42.50 

7,600  ft.    B.    M.,    at    $15 114.00 

Total    $284.50 

Pile  Abutment  Labor — 

5  days,  foreman,     at $3.00         $   15.00 

5   days,  engineman,   at 3.00  15.00 

36  days,  carpenter,   at 2.50  90.00 

30  days,  helper,     at 2.00  60.00 


76  days.       Total $2.37  $180.00 

SUMMARY. 

Labor — 

32  days,  loading    material,    at... $2.34  $      75.00 

2V6   days,  loading    engine 2.50  6.25 

2  days,  loading   pile  driver 2.25  4.50 

17  days,  fitting  up  pile  driver 2.40  40.75 

15  days,  driving    falsework 2.40  36.00 

548  days,  erecting    bridge 2.30  1,266.00 

2  days,  train    service 67.00 

76  days,  building   pile    abutments 2.37  J80.00 

Miscellaneous   supplies 192.00 


Total   labor  and    supplies $1,867.50 

Materials — 

Falsework    material $    242.10  ' 

Abutment   material 284.50 

Bridge  material  — 

88,800  ft.    B.    M.,    at    $15 1,332.00 

44,800  Ibs.,   wrought   iron,    2%    cts 1,120.00 

40,000  Ibs.   cast  iron,   1.8  cts 720.00 

Total  material    $3,698.60 

Total  labor    and    material $5,566.10 

The  abutments  were  not   protected  by   cribs,   nor  is   any   riprap 
included    in    the   above    cost.      In    subsequent    issues   we    shall    give 
costs  of  abutments  protected  by  cribs  and  riprap. 
The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  bridge  was  as  follows: 
Labor —  Per  lin.  ft. 

General  labor,   loading  materials,   etc.  ..$    162.50          $   1.08 

Erecting     bridge 1,266.00  8.44 

Train     service 67.00  0.45 

Building    pile    abutments 180.00  1.20 

Miscellaneous   supplies 192.00  1.28 


Total   labor $12.45 

Material— 

Falsework    $    242.10          $1.61 

Abutment    284.50  1.90 

Bridge     3,172.00  21.15 

Total  material     $24.66 

Total  labor  and  material $37.11 


1532  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  fitting  up  the  pile  driver  ($40.75) 
was  excessive ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the  cost  of  driving  the  pile 
falsework  ($36)  was  low. 

The  cost  of  framing  and  erecting  the  bridge  ($1,266)  includes  the 
cost  of  erecting  the  upper  falsework. 

The  labor  on  the  pile  abutments  ($180)  was  high,  considering 
there  were  no  cribs. 

Cost  of  Two  Howe  Truss  Bridges  of  120-ft.  and  130-ft.  Span,  In- 
cluding Falsework  and  Pile  Abutments.* — The  following  data  relate 
to  a  through  Howe  truss  bridge  130  ft.  long  over  all,  for  which 
a  contract  was  let  for  the  labor  of  erecting  the  bridge.  The  con- 
tractor paid  bridge  carpenters  $2.75  a  day  and  helpers  $2.00 

The  bridge  was  designed  for  a  live  load  of  engine  and  tender 
weighing  112  tons,  followed  by  a  train  of  3,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The 
dead  load  was  1,650  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 

The  cost  of  the  bridge  to  the  railway  company  was  as  follows : 
Falsework — 

840  lin.  ft.  piles  (20  piles)  delivered  at  8  cts. .  .$      67.20 

840  lin.  ft.  piles  driven  at  12  cts 100.80 

24,000  ft.   B.  M.  timber  delivered  at  $15 360.00 

24,000  ft.  B.  M.  timber  framed  and  erected  at  $7.50      180.00 
400  Ibs.   iron  at  25  cts 10.00 


Total,   $5.52  per  lin.   ft.   bridge $  718.00 

Pile  Abutments — 

1,400  lin.   ft.   piles    (40   piles,    35   ft.)    delivered   at 

8    cts $  112.00 

1,400     lin.   ft.    piles,   driven,    12   cts 168.00 

1,700  Ibs.     iron,     2.5     cts 42.50 

,7,600  ft.  B.  M.  timber  delivered.  $15 114.00 

7,600  ft.  B.  M.  framed  and  erected,  $7.50 57.00 

Total  for   two  abutments $  493.50 

Howe  Truss  Bridge — 

29,000  Ibs.  cast  iron,  at  2  cts $  580.00 

34,000  Ibs.    wrought   iron,    2%    cts 850.00 

71,700  ft.  B.  M.  timber,  at  $15 1.075.00 

130  lin.  ft.  bridge  framed  and  erected,  at  $7.50.  .  .  975.00 


Total    $3,480.00 

Train    service 50.00 


Total      $3,530.00 

Summary — 

Falsework,    materials $    437.20 

Falsework,   labor    (by  contract) 280.80 

Pile     abutments,     materials 268.50 

Pile   abutments,    labor 225.00 

Howe   truss  bridge,    materials 2,515.00 

Howe   truss  bridge,    labor 975.00 

Train    service. 50.00 


Grand  total,  130  lin.  ft,  at  $36.50 $4,751.50 

It  will  be  noted  that  there  was  no  crib,  crib  filling  or  riprap  pro- 
tection for  the  abutments.  It  would  not  be  excesive  to  add  400  cu. 
yds.  of  riprap  and  rock  in  cribs,  at  $1.50  per  cu.  yd.,  and  24,000  ft. 


* Engineer ing -Contracting,  July  3,  1907, 


BRIDGES.  1533 

B.  M.  (or  2,000.  lin.  ft.)  of  hewed  timber  for  two  cribs  to  protect 
the  abutments.  A  common  contract  price  in  the  West  is  15  cts.  per 
lin.  ft.  of  crib  timber  in  place. 

The  full  cost  of  the  timber  for  the  falsework  in  this  bridge  is 
charged  against  the  bridge,  but,  since  most  of  it  possesses  a  sal- 
vage value,  not  to  exceed  half  the  cost  of  the  timber  (half  of 
$360)  should  be  so  charged. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  contract  price  of  framing  and  erecting 
the  bridge  was  $950,  which  is  equivalent  to  about  $14  per  M.  ft. 
B.  M.  in  the  bridge,  exclusive  of  the  falsework.  The  falsework 
cost  $718,  which,  if  added  to  the  $975,  gives  a  cost  of  $1,693,  or  $13 
per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge. 

The  piles  for  the  falsework  were  driven  in  bents  about  11  ft. 
apart,  two  piles  to  the  bent.  While  this  is  a  sufficient  support  fcr 
the  dead  load  of  a  Howe  truss  bridge,  it  is  evidently  insufficient 
to  support  any  trainload  during  construction.  In  rebuilding  an  old 
bridge,  without  interruption  to  traffic,  it  is  evident  that  the  false- 
work would  be  much  more  expensive  than  in  this  case,  which  is 
typical  of  new  construction  rather  than  of  reconstruction. 

The  following  costs  relate  to  a  Howe  truss  bridge  120  ft.  long, 
and  the  remarks  concerning  the  130-ft.  bridge  apply  also  to  this 
one : 

Falsework — 

540  lin.  ft.  piles   (18  piles)   delivered  at  8  cts..$  43.20 

540  lin.   ft. '  piles  driven,   12  cts 64.80 

28,000  ft.   B.  M.   at  $15 420.00 

i        28,000  ft.   B.  M.  framed  and  erected,   $7.50 . ..  210.00 

400  Ibs.    iron,    2.5    cts 10.00 

Total  at  $6.23  per  lin.  ft.  bridge $  748.00 

Pile  Abutments — 

Same  as  for  previous  bridge $  493.50 

Howe  Truss  Bridge — 

63,000  ft.   B.   M.   at   $15 $  945.00 

28,400  Ibs.   wrought   iron   at   2.5   cts 710.00 

25,400  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2  cts 508.00 

120  lin.   ft.    framed  and   erected,    $7.50 900.00 

Total .- $3,063.00 

Train    service 50.00 

Summary — 

Falsework,    materials $    463.20 

Falsework,   labor    (by  contract) 274.80 

Pile  abutment,    materials. 268.50 

Pile  abutment,   labor 225.00 

Howe   truss   bridge,   materials 2,163.00 

Howe  truss  bridge,   labor 900.00 

Train    service 50.00 

Grand  total,  at  $36.20  per  lin.  ft $4,344.50 

As  previously  stated,  no  protection  cribs,  rock  filling,  or  riprap 
are  included  in  the  cost  of  the  abutments. 

Cost  of  Constructing  Six  Crib  Piers,  Three  Howe  Truss  Spans  and 
One  Steel  Draw  Span.* — Crib  piers  for  railway  and  highway  bridges 
possess  the  great  merit  of  making  it  unnecessary  to  build  coffer 


*Engineermg-Contractin<j,   July    '24,    1!»07. 


1534  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

dams,  and,  on  this  account,  have  always  been  popular  with  West- 
ern engineers.  During  recent  years,  however,  concrete  piers,  built 
within  coffer  dams,  have  become  more  common  than  orib  piers. 
Nevertheless,  there  are  many  places  where  the  crib  pier  is  still  the 
most  economic  pier  that  can  be  designed. 

The  bridge  to  be  described  in  this  article  consists  of  three  Howe 
truss  spans  of  150-ft.  each,  and  a  steel  draw  span  almost  300-ft. 
long.  It  crosses  a  Washington  river  near  its  mouth,  where  the 
tidal  currents  cause  a  daily  rise  and  fall  of  several  feet.  The 
river  is  19  ft.  deep  at  extreme  low  tide,  and  the  top  of  the  piers 
is  40-ft  above  the  river  bed. 

With  the  exception  of  the  pivot  pier,  which  will  be  described  sep- 
arately, the  piers  were  crib  piers  resting  on  piles.  A  description 
of  the  construction  of  one  of  these  five  piers  will  serve  for  the  rest. 
Crib  Pier. — Each  pier  is  supported  by  52  piles  driven  3  ft  c.  to  c. 
to  a  depth  of  30  ft.  Piles  60  ft.  long  were  necessary,  due  to  the 
depth  of  the  water  at  high  tide,  and  were  sawed  off  7  ft.  above  the 
bottom  of  the  river,  or  12  ft.  below  extreme  low  water.  The 
driving  was  very  hard,  the  bottom  being  of  sand  in  which  the 
average  penetration  of  the  pile  was  only  2  ins.  under  the  blow  of 
a  2,200-lb.  hammer  falling  freely  20  ft.  For  sawing  off  the  piles, 
a  circular  saw  on  a  40  ft.  vertical  shaft  was  used.  The  shaft  was 
rotated  by  an  engine  mounted  on  a  carriage  movable  in  any  direc- 
tion on  two  tracks  at  right  angles  to  each  other,  one  track  being 
above  the  other. 

While  the  piles  were  being  driven  for  a  pier,  the  crib  was  con- 
structed. Each  crib  consisted  of  a  bottom,  or  floor,  made  of  three 
solid  courses  of  12  x  12 -in.  timbers  drift-bolted  together,  and  on  top 
of  this  bottom  was  built  the  crib  proper.  The  bottom  was  built 
on  shore  and  then  launched.  Then  the  crib  was  built  of  12  x  12's 
log-house  fashion,  on  top  of  the  "bottom"  until  it  reached  a  height 
of  12  ft.  The  crib  was  then  floated  over  the  rest  of  foundation 
piles,  and  arrangements  made  to  lower  it  upon  the  piles.  To  insure 
a  steady  and  even  lowering  of  the  crib,  without  risk  of  capsizing, 
it  was  necessary  to  lower  the  crib  by  means  of  blocks  and  tackle 
fastened  to  two  bents  of  guide  piles,  one  bent  on  each  side  of 
the  crib.  Rock  was  dumped  into  the  crib,  and  it  was  sunk  until  it 
rested  on  the  piles.  This  left  the  upper  course  of  timber  above  the 
level  of  low  water,  and  in  readiness  to  continue  the  building  up  o' 
the  crib  to  the  desired  height.  The  cribs  were  designed  so  that 
the  load  of  the  bridge  came  directly  upon  the  rock  filling  in  the 
crib,  the  intention  being  to  build  masonry  upon  the  rock  fill  after 
the  crib  timbers  above  the  water  level  have  rotted  out. 

In  this  connection  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  crib  timbers 
were  compressed  nearly  1-16  in.  per  ft.  of  height,  after  the  load 
came  upon  the  piers.  Part  of  this  compression  was  doubtless  due  to 
shrinkage  of  the  timber  upon  drying. 

We  would  offer  a  suggestion  as  to  a  possible  improvement  in  this 
form  of  crib  pier  construction.  Let  the  foundation  piles  and  the 
crib  be  built,  in  the  manner  above  described,  up  to  the  low  water 
level.  But  from  that  level  to  the  top  of  the  pier,  substitute  rein- 


BRIDGES.  1535 

forced  concrete  "timbers"  in  place  of  wood.  These  concrete  "tim- 
bers" could  be  cast  on  shore,  and  made  so  as  to  interlock,  forming 
a  solid  and  durable  outside  wall.  Loose  rock  filling  and  gravel 
could  then  be  deposited  inside  this  wall,  thus  giving  the  necessary 
stability  to  withstand  the  impact  of  ice  and  drift.  A  pier  of  this 
sort  would  be  far  cheaper  than  a  solid  masonry  pier,  but  would 
possess  sufficient  stability  and  a  durability  equal  to  that  of  solid 
masonry.  In  pier  building,  it  should  be  remembered,  the  engineer 
seeks  to  secure  a  mass  that  will  resist  impacts  rather  than  a  mono- 
lith of  great  strength. 

Returning  now  to  the  methods  used  in  this  crib  pier  construc- 
tion, one  feature  is  worthy  of  particular  note.  A  crib  having  a 
height  two  or  three  times  greater  than  its  width  is  very  "cranky" 
when  floating  in  the  water.  It  tends  to  turn  over,  and  this 
tendency  is  made  serious  where  the  tides  are  rising  and  falling.  It 
Was  necessary  to  have  one  man  in  constant  attendance  day  and 
night,  tightening  or  loosening  the  guy-lines  With  the  changes 
of  water  level. 

Before  placing  the  crib  pier  over  the  piles,  riprap  was  deposited 
between  them,  and  leveled  off  by  a  diver.  After  the  crib  pier  was 
in  place,  riprap  was  piled  all  around  the  pier  to  a  depth  of  6  ft. 
above  the  river  bottom. 

The  Pivot  Pier. — This  pier  differed  from  the  piers  just  described 
in  that  it  was  a  stone  masonry  pier  resting  on  a  timber  grillage  on 
top  of  piles.  There  were  121  piles,  driven  3  ft.  c.  to  c.,  forming 
a  square  32  ft.  on  a  side.  The  piles  were  sawed  off  only  18  ins. 
above  the  river  bottom. 

Sawing  them  off  so  close  to  the  bottom  was  a  mistake,  for  it  en- 
tailed a  great  deal  of  trouble  in  placing  the  grillage  upon  the 
piles.  This  was  due  to  the  fact  that  dirt  lodged  upon  the  tops  of 
the  piles  after  they  were  sawed  off,  making  it  necessary  for  a 
diver  to  clean  the  piles  off.  The  driving  of  the  piles  3  ft.  c.  to  c. 
caused  the  bottom  to  rise  6  to  12  ins.  Then  the  eddies  formed 
by  the  projecting  pile  heads  and  by  the  draw  protection  caused 
the  floating  sediment  in  the  river  to  deposit  around  and  on  top 
of  the  piles.  To  add  to  the  difficulty,  the  contractor  had  unfor- 
tunately deposited  some  of  the  riprap  immediately  after  driving  the 
piles,  and  many  of  the  stones  had  lodged  on  top  of  the  piles. 

In  this  connection  we  recall  a  similar  experience  arising  from 
the  deposition  of  sand  around  the  piles  while  they  were  being  sawed 
off,  dulling  the  teeth  of  the  saw  and  adding  greatly  to  the  ex- 
pense of  cutting  off  the  piles.  The  eddy  caused  by  the  piles  of 
the  draw  protection  was  largely  accountable  for  the  trouble. 
B  inally  a  V-shaped  wing  dam  of  boards  was  built  in  the  draw 
protection  immediately  above  the  site  of  the  pier,  and  it  served 
to  divert  the  stream  of  sand  and  gravel  that  is-  constantly  rolling 
along  the  bottom  of  a  swiftly  flowing  river. 

The  lesson  learned  by  such  experiences  is  simple :  Do  not  cut 
off  piles  less  than  2  ft.  above  the  bottom  of  a  river,  unless  there  is 
some  excellent  reason  for  so  doing. 


1536  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

The  grillage  built  for  this  pivot  pier  was  32  ft.  square  and 
15  ft.  high,  made  of  12  x  12-in.  timbers  laid  solid  and  drift-bolted 
together,  except  in  the  three  upper  courses  where  the  timbers  were 
laid  2  ft.  apart,  and  the  space  filled  with  concrete. 

At  the  bottom  of  the  grillage,  two  timbers  in  each  course  pro- 
jected beyond  the  others,  so  that  guy  lines  could  be  fastened  to 
them,  by  which  the  pier  was  kept  balanced  during  construction 
while  floating  on  the  rising  and  falling  tides.  The  guy  lines  were 
fastened  to  two  pile  bents,  one  on  each  side  of  the  pier,  which,  to- 
gether with  the  pile  bents  of  the  draw  protection,  formed  a  square 
enclosure  in  which  the  pier  was  guided  to  the  bottom. 

Of  course  the  grillage  sank  under  the  weight  of  the  masonry 
which  was  built  on  top  of  it.  This  masonry  was  laid  inside  on 
"open  caisson"  built  on  top  of  the  grillage,  the  "caisson"  being 
octagonal  in  shape,  made  of  3 -in.  plank,  and  16  ft.  high.  The 
plank  was  beveled  on  the  outer  edges  to  provide  caulking  seams. 
Two  small  gates  were  provided  in  the  "caisson,"  so  that,  when  the 
pier  had  set  properly  on  the  piles  at  low  tide,  water  could  be  let 
into  the  "caisson"  and  left  there  until  the  pier  was  finished.  Then 
the  gates  were  again  closed,  the  water  pumped  out,  and  the 
masonry  was  painted. 

Cost  of  the  Piers. — The  labor  cost  records  were  not  kept  in  as 
great  detail  as  one  might  wish,  yet  they  possess  considerable  value. 
The  quantities  of  materials  and  contract  prices,  however,  will  serve 
as  an  excellent  guide,  and  are  as  follows : 

3,120  lin.  ft.  piles   (52)    delivered  at  ...$   0.08  %    249.60 

3,120  lin.  ft.  piles  driven  at../ 0.20  624.00 

54,000ft.    B.    M.    delivered    at 15.00  810.00 

54,000  ft.  B.  M.  framed  and  placed 11.00  549.00 

4,000  Ibs.    iron    at 0.03  120.00 

8  guide   piles   delivered   at 3.00  24.00 

4,000  ft.  B.  M.  falsework  at 15.00  60.00 

190  cu.    yds.    rock    (crib    fill) 2.00  380.00 

580  cu.  yds.   riprap  at 2.00  1,060.00 

5  cu.   yds.   concrete  at 8.00  40.00 

Total      $3,961.60 

This  is  equivalent  to  $100  per  lin.  ft.  of  height  of  pier,  since  the 
piers  were  40  ft.  high  above  the  bed  of  the  river. 

Cost  of  Pivot  Pier. 

7,260  lin.  ft.  piles  (121)   delivered  at. $0.08         $      440.80 

7,200  lin.    ft.    pile   driven   at 0.20  1,452.00 

162,800  ft.   B.   M.    delivered  at 15.00  2,442.00 

162,800  ft.  B.   M.  placed  at 8.00  1,302.40 

7,200  Ibs.    iron    at 0.03  216.00 

16  guide  piles  at 3.00  48.00 

13,200  ft.    B.    M.   falsework   at 15.00  198.00 

318  cu.    yds.    masonry    at 15.00  4,770.00 

570  cu.  yds.  riprap  at 2.00  1,140.00 


Total   $12,009.20 

This  is  equivalent  to  $300  per  lin.  ft.  of  height  of  pier. 
The  contract  price  for  driving  the  piles,   20  cts.  per  lin.   ft,  was 
high,  considering  the  length  of  the  pile,  for  it  amounted  to  $12  per 


BRIDGES.  .        1537 

pile.  But  the  driving  was  very  hard,  and  the  price  for  driving 
included  cutting  off  the  piles  below  water.  It  required  26  days  to 
drive  the  121  piles  in  the  pivot  pier  and  10  days  more  to  cut  them 
off.  Had  a  water  jet  been  used  the  driving  would  have  cost  much 
less.  The  average  rate  and  wages  paid  by  the  contractor  for  the 
pile  driver  crew  was  $2.50  per  day.  If  a  crew  of  6  men,  a  pile 
driver  engineman  and  a  foreman  were  required,  the  wages  and 
fuel  amounted  to  $25  a  day.  Hence  if  5  piles  were  driven  per  day 
the  cost  was  $5  a  pile.  Since  12  piles  were  sawed  off  per  day  the 
cost  of  sawing  was  more  than  $2  per  pile.  No  detailed  records  of 
the  actual  cost  to  the  contractor  are  available  further  than  that  it 
required  3,800  days'  labor  at  $2.50,  or  $9,500,  to  drive  the  piles, 
frame  and  place  the  timber,  place  the  crib,  fill  the  riprap  for  all 
the  piers  and  lay  the  masonry.  The  stone  for  the  masonry  was  de- 
livered  cut  ready  to  lay.  The  riprap  was  delivered  on  scows  and 
measured  on  the  scows  before  placing. 

The  Howe  Truss  Spans. — Three  Howe  truss  spans,  each  150  ft. 
long,  and  one  steel  draw  span,  293  ft.  long,  were  built  as  follows: 

These  Howe  truss  bridges  were  erected  on  a  pile  falsework,  each 
span  having  six  bents  of  three  60-ft.  piles  to  a  bent.  The  out- 
side piles  of  each  bent  were  drawn  in  4  ft.  at  the  top  and  well 
braced  to  withstand  the  action  of  the  deep  swift  river. 

To  protect  the  falsework  against  drift  wood  a  temporary  log 
boom  was  placed  on  the  upstream  side  of  the  bridge  during 
erecting. 

After  the  bridge  was  erected,  the  falsework  piles  were  broken  off 
at  the  bottom  of  the  river. 

The  railway  company  furnished  all  the  material  for  the  false- 
work, as  well  as  for  the  bridge.  The  contract  price  of  $9  per  lin. 
ft.  of  bridge  covered  the  labor  cost  of  erecting  and  removing  tha 
falsework,  as  well  as  framing  and  erecting  the  bridge.  The  cost  of 
each  of  the  150-ft.  Howe  truss  bridge  spans  was  as  follows: 

88,600  ft.  B.  M.  in  bridge  at  $15 $1,329.00 

45,600  Ibs.    wrought   iron    at    3.5    cts 1,576.00 

38,800  Ibs.  cast  iron  at  2. 5' cts 970.00 

1,080  lin.  ft.  piles  (18)   in  falsework  at  8  cts 86.40 

4,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  falsework  at  $15 60.00 

Erecting    150    ft.    at    $9 1,350.00 

Total     $5,391.40 

This  is  equivalent  to  $36  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  exclusive  of  the 
piers  and  abutments. 

There  was  no  profit  to  the  contractor  at  the  $9  per  lin.  ft.  f<jr 
erection,  for  it  required  400  man-days  per  span.  The  average 
wages  paid  were  $3.30  per  day.  Hence  the  labor  cost  $1,320  to 
erect  the  falsework  and  the  Howe  truss  span.  In  our  issues  of 
June  26  and  July  3  we  have  given  in  detail  the  labor  cost  of  erect- 
ing similar  bridges  where  the  cost  of  erection  was  considerably  less 
than  in  this  instance.  (See  pages  1529  and  1532.) 

The  Steel  Draw  Span. — The  span  was  293  ft.  long,  and  weighed 
265  tons.  The  steel  was  unloaded  from  cars  into  a  material  yard 
and  conveyed  on  scows  to  the  "draw  protection,"  where  it  was 
erected  by  means  of  a  traveler. 


1538  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  draw  protection  was  built  in  the  usual  manner,  consisting 
of  pile  bents  10  ft.  apart,  three  piles  to  the  bent,  each  pile  being 
70  ft.  long.  A  log  boom  was  built  entirely  around  the  draw 
protection,  the  opposite  sides  of  the  boom  being  held  together  by 
cross  logs  between  the  2d  and  3d  bents  and  between  the  6th  and 
7th  bents.  The  boom  was  made  of  sticks  60  ft.  long,  held  together 
With  %-in.  chains  and  shackles. 

The  cost  of  the  draw  protection  was  as  follows : 

5,180  lin.  ft.  piles    (74)    at   8  cts $  414.40 

40,900  ft.    B.   M.    timber   at   $15 613.50 

2,800  Ibs.    iron   at    3   cts 76.00 

680  lin.   ft.  of  boom  sticks  at  8  cts 54.40 

3,900  ft.    B.    M.    timber    wasted    and    in    staging 

at    $15     58.50 

Driving  74  piles  at   $6.00 444.00 

Framing  and  placing  40,900  ft.  B.  M.  at  $8 327.20 


Total    $1,988.00 

After  the  erection  of  the  draw  protection  and  the  traveler  and 
falsework,  it  required  38  days  to  erect  the  steel  draw  span. 

In  order  to  make  sure  that  the  panel  sections  of  the  top  and 
bottom  chords  would  come  together  before  riveting,  both  ends  of  the 
draw  bridge  were  jacked  up  after  being  erected  and  while  tem- 
porarily held  together  with  bolts.  This  brought  all  the  joints  of 
the  top  chord  together,  and,  after  riveting  the  entire  top  chord,  the 
false  work  was  knocked  out,  and  in  a  suspended  position  the  bot- 
tom chord  was  forced  together  and  riveted.  However,  when  the 
bridge  was  swung,  it  was  found  that  the  dead  load  was  sufficient 
to  cause  the  ends  of  the  draw  to  sag  to  such  an  extent  that  they 
were  1%  iris,  below  the  proper  level.  This  made  it  necessary  to 
lower  the  pedestals  on  the  rest  piers  a  corresponding  amount. 

The  cost  of  the  draw  span  was  as  follows: 

530,000  Ibs.   steel  at  4.3   cts $22,802.90 

21,100  ft.  B.  M.  ties  and  guide  rail  $15 316.50 

Paint    380.00 

Laying  timber  deck,   100  days,  at  $3.30 330.00 

Erecting  bridge,  including  materials  and  labor  on 

falsework   (by  contract) 1,750.00 


Total $25,579.40 

This  is  equivalent  to  $87  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  not  including 
tHe  cost  of  the  piers  and  the  draw  protection. 

The  timber  deck  was  laid  as  an  "extra  work  job"  by  force  ac- 
count, and  the  labor  cost  at  least  twice  what  it  should  have  cost, 
as  can  be  seen  by  reference  to  costs  of  similar  work  in  our  issues 
of  April  17,  May  8,  and  May  29.  (See  pages  1501  and  1506.) 

The  contractor  received  only  $1,750  for  erecting  this  2fi5-ton 
bridge,  or  $6.60  per  ton.  It  actually  cost  him  nearly  $8.15  per 
ton  for  labor  alone,  for  it  took  800  man-days  at  $2.70,  or  $2,160, 
to  erect  the  traveler,  the  falsework,  and  the  bridge.  It  took  60 
man-days  to  paint  the  bridge,  at  $3.30  per  day,  or  $198,  which  is 


BRIDGES.  1539 

equivalent  to  75  cts.  per  ton,  making  a  total  of  $8.90  per  ton  for 
the  labor  of  erecting  and  painting. 

No  record  of  the  cost  of  falsework  for  this  draw  span  is  avail- 
able, but  it  was  a  comparatively  small  item,  for  no  lower  false- 
work is  necessary  where  a  draw  bridge  is  erected  on  the  draw 
protection. 

Cost  of  the  Frazer  River  Bridqe. — The  Frazer  River  bridge  at 
New  Westminster,  B.  C.,  was  built  in  1902.  It  is  a  double  deck 
bridge,  the  upper  deck  for  wagon  traffic  and  the  lower  deck  for 
stoam  and  electric  traffic.  The  spans  are  as  follows:  One  225  ft, 
one  380  ft,  and  one  swing  span  380  ft,  five  spans  159  ft  each, 
making  a  total  of  1,780  ft  On  the  north  end  there  are  three  ap- 
proaches, two  for  railway  tracks  and  one  for  highway,  the  length 
of  approach  averaging  about  300  ft.  The  clear  roadway  is  16  ft 
wide,  making  the  trusses  18  to  19  ft  c.  to  c.  The  weight  of  steel 
is  6,854,000  Ibs.,  and  there  are  765,000  ft  B.  M.,  and  15,000  lin.  ft 
piles  in  approaches.  The  contract  price  for  substructure  and  super- 
structure was  $750,000. 

Estimates  of  the  Cost  of  Combination  and  All-Steel  Highway 
Bridge  of  190-ft.  Span.— Mr.  H.  G.  Tyrrell  gives  the  following:. 

The  bridge  in  question  was  a  single  span  structure  designed  for 
the  Pacific  Coast.  The  trusses  were  to  be  pin-connected  with  10 
panels  of  19  ft.  each,  and  inclined  top  chord.  The  principal  dimen- 
sions and  specified  loads  were  as  follows: 

Span,  190  ft.  c.   to  c. 

Roadway,   24  ft 

Two  walks,  each   6   ft.  wide. 

Total  width  of  bridge,   41  ft. 

Depth  of  trusses,   27  ft  to  33  ft 

Floor,  4-in.  wood  block  paving  on  3-in.  plank,  laid  on  wood  joints. 

Uniform  live  load  on  floor,  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft 

Concentrated  load  on  floor,  15-ton  roller  or  two  electric  cars  on 
each  track. 

Live  load,  per  lin.  ft  of  bridge,  3,300  Ibs. 

Dead  load,  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  2,345  Ibs. 

For  the  "combination"  design,  hard  pine  was  used  for  top  chords, 
web  posts,  portals,  lateral  struts,  floor  beams  and  joists.  The 
remaining  parts  were  of  steel. 

The  estimated  quantities  for  this  case  were : 

Eye-bars     42,180  Ibs. 

Cast-iron  joint  blocks 19,720 

Lateral   rods 5,810 

Machined  work 5,940 

Shoe  plates 5,200 

Loops 3,160 

Hangers    1,240 

Total  ..83,250  Ibs.     Cost  $   3,130 


1540  HANDBOOK    Ol'    COST   DATA. 


Hard  pine  chords  and  posts  17,500  ft.  B.  M. 

Hard  pine  lateral  struts 3,080    " 

Floor   plank 19,740    " 

Floor    joists 22,240    " 

Floor    beams 14,800    " 


Total    77,360  ft.  B.  M.     Cost  ?  2,400 

Paving  504   sq.  yds 750 

Fence,   400   lin.   ft "  200 

Erection "         1,200 

Total  cost  of  combination  span  =  about  $1 

per  sq.  ft.  of  total  floor Cost  ?  7,680 

For  the  all-steel  design  the  quantities  were: 

Steel,  180,000  Ibs Cost  $  7,360 

Floor  plank,  19.74  M;  wood  joist,  22.24  M 1,435 

Fence,   400   lin.   ft "  200 

Paving,  504  sq.  yds 750 

Erection     1,200 

Total    cost    of    steel    span,     about    $1.43 

per  sq.  ft.  of  total  floor . Cost  $10,945 

The  above  estimates  are  for  the  entire  superstructure  in  each 
case.  If  we  compare  now  the  cost  of  the  substituted  parts  only,  we 
have'  in  the  combination  design,  the  top  chords,  web  posts,  portals, 
lateral  struts  and  floor  beams  contain : 

Hard  pine,   35.3  M,   at   $35   M $1,220 

Cast  iron  joint  blocks,   19,700  Ibs.,  at  3  cts 591 


Total $1,811 

For  the  all-steel  design  the  same  parts  contain : 

Steel,   118,200  Ibs.,  at  4  cts $4,720 

Summarizing,  we  have: 

Combination    bridge..  ..Cost  ?  7,680 

Steel    bridge 10.945 

Combination    chords,    etc 1,811 

Steel   chords,   etc 4,720 

Hence,  we  say  roughly  that  the  combination  bridge  cost  one- 
third  less  than  the  steel  one.  Also  that  the  comparative  cest  of 
wood  (including  necessary  cast-iron  blocks),  and  steel  for  top 
chords,  web  posts,  portals,  lateral  struts  and  floor  beams,  is  as 
1  to  3. 

Cost  of  a  300-ft.  Highway  Drawbridge. — A  highway  drawbridge 
across  the  Harlem  River,  3d  Ave.,  New  York  city,  was  begun  in 
1893  and  finished  in  1896.-  The  span  is  300  ft.  long;  the  width  is 
87%  ft.  over  all.  There  are  four  lattice  trusses.  The  three  car- 
riage ways  are  each  20  ft.  wide,  and  the  two  sidewalks  are  each 
9  ft.  wide  carried  on  cantilever  brackets.  The  floor  is  of  buckle 
rlates  covered  with  concrete  and  asphalt  pavement.  The  bridge 
weighs  2,500  tons,  and  is  carried  on  a  50-ft.  turntable.  The  time 
required  for  a  full  opening  is  2  mins.  and  2  mins.  more  for  closing 
and  locking.  A  50-hp.  engine  does  the  work,  but  a  duplicate  power 
plant  is  provided. 


BRIDGES.  i:,41 

The  contract  price  was  $1,111,000  for  the  bridge  complete,  which 
is  $47  per  sq.  ft.  of  roadway  and  sidewalks.  This  is  a  very  high 
cost.  The  total  cost,  including  lands,  was  more  than  $2,000,000. 

Tlie  following  are  some  of  the  important  quantities  and  bidding 
prices  : 

Unit  prices. 

107,500  ft.  B.  M.  yellow  pine  in  temporary  bridge.  .$40.00 
200,000  ft.   B.   M.  hemlock  in  temporary  bridge....  30.00 
5,000  cu.   yds.   pneumatic  caissons   including  con- 
crete filling 29.00 

Portland  cement  concrete,  cu.  yd ft.  00 

Natural   cement  concrete,   cu.   yd 5.40 

Granite  Ashlar  facing  below  low  water,  cu  :  yd 14.00 

Granite  Ashlar  facing  above  low  water,  cu.  yd 20.00 

Granite  caps,   cu.   ft 2.50 

Granite  coping,    cu.   ft 3.00 

Granite  columns,   capitols  and  bases 2.00 

Granite  dimension,  in  rough  bases 0.50 

Rough  pointing,  sq.  ft 0.40 

Fine   pointing,    sq.    ft 0.50 

Four-cut  axing,   sq.   ft 0.50 

Six-cut   axing,    sq.    ft 0.60 

Eight-cut   axing,    sq.   ft 0.70 

382-.000  Ibs.  rolled  steel  and  iron  in  turntable.  .  .  .  0.048 
1,692,000  Ibs.  rolled  steel  and  iron  in  draw  span...  0.039 
1,386,000  Ibs.  rolled  steel  and  iron  in  deck  spans..  0.037 

4,200  Ibs.  corrugated  plates,  deck  spans 0.034 

357,000  Ibs.  buckle  plates,  draw  spans 0.032 

282,000  Ibs.   steel  plate  girders 0.033 

420,000  Ibs.   steel  rolled  beams 0.026 

117,800  Ibs.  castings  in  wheels 0.07 

126,000  Ibs.  castings  hub  and  bed  plates 0.05 

2,000  Ibs.   other  iron   castings 0.025 

35,000  Ibs.  steel  plates  or  angles 0.025 

Cost  of  a  Steel  Arch  Bridge.— The  Cambridge  Bridge  across  the 
Charles  River  (Boston)  was  built  in  1901.  It  is  a  highway  bridge, 
1,768  ft.  long,  consisting  of  11  spans  of  steel  arches  (of  12  ribs 
each),  having  spans  varying  from  101  to  188  ft.  The  height  at  the 
center  is  48  ft.  above  low  water.  The  bridge  is  105  ft.  wide  be- 
tween railings.  From  the  bottom  of  the  piles  to  the  surface  of  the 
roadway  is  100  ft.  The  construction  involved  80,000  cu.  yds. 
dredging,  85,000  cu.  yds.  concrete,  20,000  cu.  yds.  granite,  25,000 
piles  and  16,000,000  Ibs.  steel.  The  estimated  cost  is  $2,500,000,  or 
$1,400  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $14  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  Red  Rock  Cantilever  Bridge.— Mr.  S.  M.  Rowe  gives  the 
following  data  relative  to  this  bridge,  which  was  built  in  1889 
across  the  Colorado  River  in  Arizona  for  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific 
R.  R.  Co.  (See  p.  1616  for  the  cost  of  the  caisson.) 

The  bridge  was  designed  for  a  live  load  of  two  engines,  each 
weighing  188,000  Ibs.  (including  74,000-lb.  tender),  concentrating 
46  tons  on  a  wheel  base  of  11  ft.  9  ins.,  followed  by  a  train  of 
3,000  Ibs.  per  ft. 

The  length  of  the  cantilever  bridge  is  990  ft. ;  the  span  between 
the  piers  being  660  ft.,  and  each  anchor  arm  being  165  ft. 


1542  .     HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  following  is  the  weight  of  metal  in  the  bridge  : 

Lbs. 

East  anchorage,  exclusive  of  floor  beams 78,435 

West  anchorage,  exclusive  of  floor  beams 92,488 

Floor  of  anchor  and  cantilever  arms 271,510 

Two  anchor  arms 969,870 

Two  cantilever   arms 969,870 

Metal  over  piers    (posts,  etc.) 178,790 

Expansive  panels   (chords  and  X  posts) 128,170 

Temporary   members    (wedges,   reinforced  bars)  .  .  76,040 

Suspended   span 701,975 

Total   3,416,618 

About  70%  of  this  was  steel  and  30%   iron. 
The  cost  of  this  superstructure  was  as  follows: 

Iron   and   steel   erected    (including  freight) $313,537.83 

Timber    1,684.68 

Tools   and    materials 625.58 

Fuel  and  water 1,340.94 

Local  and  train  service 1,202.78 

Labor  in  addition  to  contract  work 2,138.79 

Engineering 9,624.14 


Total $230,154.74 

The  cost  of  the  substructure  was  as  follows : 

Caisson   (see  page  1617  for  details) $128,263.19 

Masonry  piers  and  abutments 80,267.65 

Preparatory     23,748.10 

Total     $232,278.94 

Grand    total $462,433.66 

This  is  equivalent  to  $463  per  lin.  ft. 

The  "preparatory"  work  consisted  of  the  following  items: 

Soundings    $   7,808.79 

Trestle  and  tracks  to  caisson 6,238.17 

Track  to   quarry 7,313.58 

Freight 525.15 

Demurrage     900.00 

Engineering 962.41 

Total    : $23,748.10 

The  cost  of  this  bridge  was  unusually  high. 

Estimated  Cost  of  a  Cantilever  Bridge  and  of  a  Suspension  Bridge 
Across  the  St.  Lawrence. — In  1896  the  Montreal  Bridge  Company 
received  competitive  plans  and  estimates  for  a  proposed  bridge 
across  the  St.  Lawrence  River  at  Montreal.  The  bridge  was  speci- 
fied to  be  one  channel  span  of  1,250  ft.,  two  side  spans  of  500  ft. 
each,  15  steel  viaduct  spans  on  south  approach  of  250  ft.  each,  18 
viaduct  spans  on  north  approach  of  60  to  240  ft.  each,  the  clear 
headway  in  the  channel  span  to  be  150  ft.  The  bridge  was  to  be 
for  a  double  track  steam  railway,  two  street  railway  tracks,  a  car- 
riageway and  two  sidewalks.  The  piers  of  the  cantilever  were  to  be 
of  masonry. 

The  prize  plan  was  submitted  by  Edward  S.  Shaw  of  Boston. 
He  increased  the  side  spans  to  bOO  ft.  The  bridge  was  designed 


BRIDGES.  1543 

to  be  80  ft.  wide,  with  four  trusses.  The  stone  sub-piers  are  each 
30  x  110  ft.  in  plan  on  top,  60  ft.  above  low  water,  surmounted  by- 
steel  piers  230  ft.  high.  The  middle  roadway  is  26  ft.  wide  and  is 
for  the  double  track  railway  ;  the  two  side  roadways  are  each  2 1  % 
ft.  wide ;  flanked  by  6 -ft.  sidewalks  on  brackets.  The  estimated 
weight  of  structural  steel  was: 

Lbs. 

Main    cantilever   and    central  'span 39,460,000 

South    viaduct    approach 26,340,000 

North   viaduct   approach 8,200,000 


Total     74,000,000 

Estimated  cost  of  superstructure $3,514,000 

This  is  about  4%  cts.  per  Ib.  It  would  appear  from  one  of  the 
estimates  made  by  another  competitor  that  custom's  duty  of  1  ct. 
per  Ib.  of  steel  ready  for  erection  would  be  required. 

A  suspension  bridge  design  was  submitted  by  Mr.  C.  C.  Went- 
worth,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.  It  was  to  be  a  stiffened  suspension  bridge 
of  1,300  ft.  span,  with  two  500  ft.  side  spans  supported  from  the 
cables,  giving  a  total  length  of  2,300  ft.  There  were  to  be  4  cables, 
each  of  17  y2  ins.  diameter.  The  two  stiffening  trusses  were  to  be 
52  ft.  apart  on  the  clear,  leaving  the  roadway  for  the  railway  and 
electric  lines.  The  carriageways  and  sidewalks  were  to  be  on 
brackets  outside  the  trusses. 

The  estimated  cost  was  as  follows: 

11,000,000  Ibs.  riveted  steel  center  span,  at  4.25  cts $  467,500 

20,000,000  Ibs.   steel  in  towers,   side  spans  and  anchorage, 

at    3V2     cts 700,000 

30,000,000  Ibs.  steel  in  viaduct  spans  and  towers,  at  3  cts  900,000 

8,000,000  Ibs.   wire  in  cables  ,at   6  cts 480,000 

Copper  covering  on  cables 20,000 

Timber   floors   and   ties 81,000 

600  tons  steel  rails 18,000 

Hand     railing 25,000 

60,000  cu.  yds.  anchorage  masonry 360,000 

Total  for  superstructure  and  anchorage $3,051,500 

It  will  be  noted  that  if  the  same  unit  prices  for  steel  had  been 
assumed  in  both  styles  of  bridge,  the  cost  would  have  been  more 
nearly  equal,  although  about  7  per  cent  less  for  the  suspension 
bridge. 

Cost  of  the  Brooklyn  Suspension  Bridge. — The  Brooklyn  Bridge 
across  East  River,  New  York  City,  was  begun  in  1870  and  finished 
in  1883.  Work  was  suspended  at  times  due  to  lack  of  funds,  so 
that  the  actual  building  required  only  10  of  the  13  years. 

The  roadway  is  86  ft.  wide,  divided  into  five  sections,  two  outside 
for  vehicles  and  trolley  cars,  two  inner  for  electric  trains,  and  the 
middle  one  (12  ft.)  for  pedestrians.  Height  of  bridge  above  high 
water  in  center,  135  ft. ;  height  of  masonry  towers  above  high  water, 
272  ft.  The  Manhattan  tower  contains  46,945  cu.  yds.  of  masonry. 
The  Brooklyn  tower  contains  38,214  cu.  yds.  The  depth  of  the  Man- 
hattan tower  foundation  below  high  water  is  78  ft.  The  depth  of 
the  Brooklyn  tower  foundation  below  high  water  is  45  ft.  Di- 
mensions of  towers  at  high  water  line,  59  x  140- ft. 


1544  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

The  cost  of  the  bridge  and  approaches  was  $9,000,000,  or  about 
"?1,500  per  lin.  ft.,  or  a  little  more  than  $17  per  sq.  ft.  The  cost 
of  real  estate  and  terminals  was  about  $6,000,000  additional. 

Comparative  data  as  to  the  Brooklyn  and  Williamsburg  bridge? 
are  given  below. 

The  weight  of  the  1,545  ft.  of  main  span  of  Brooklyn  bridge  b*3- 
tween  end  suspenders  is  as  follows : 

Lbs. 

Cables     3,226,000 

Suspended  superstructure  (steel  work) 5,930,000 

Timber    flooring,    track,    etc 2,380,000 

Hauling,  electric  feeder,  cables  and  line  sleeves. .       220,000 

Pneumatic    tubes 262,000 

Suspenders  and  connections 356,000 

Over-floor    stays    (vertical    loads) 386,000 

Total    fixed    load    on    main    span 12,760,000 

Cost  of  the  Williamsburg  Suspension  Bridge.— The  Williamsburg 
bridge,  across  East  River,  at  Delancy  St.,  New  York  City,  is  the 
longest  suspension  bridge  in  the  world,  and  its  main  span  is  ex- 
ceeded only  by  the  Forth  cantilever  bridge  in  Scotland.  It  was 
begun  in  1896  and  finished  in  1903.  The  roadway  is  double  deck, 
distributed  as  follows : 

2  footwalks,  each   10y2   ft 21  ft. 

2  bicycle  paths,  each  7  ft 14  ft. 

2  elevated  railway  tracks 22  ft. 

4  trolley    tracks 40  ft. 

2  roadways    40  ft. 

Equivalent   width    single-deck    bridge 137  ft. 

The  width  of  the  main  span  is  118  ft.  over  all. 
The  comparative  dimensions  of  the  Williamsburg  bridge  and  the 
Brooklyn  bridge  are  given  in  Table  II. 

Table  II— Comparative  Dimensions  of  Villiamsburg  and  Brookly 
Bridges,   New  York  City. 

Bridges. 

Length :                                                          Brooklyn.  Williamsburg. 

Main  span  C.  to  C.  of  towers 1,595'     6"  1,600'  0" 

Land    spans,     tower — anchorage 930'     0"  596'  6" 

Brooklyn    approach 971'     0"  1,865'  0" 

Manhattan     approach     .  . 1,562'     6"  2,606'  2" 

Total  of  carriage  way   5,989'     0"  7,264'  2" 

Height : 

Clear,  above  M.  H.  W.  at  center 135'     0"  140'  4%" 

Same,    200'   each   side  of   center 135'  0" 

Above  M.   H.   W.   to  center  of  cable  at 

tower     272'     0"  332'  8%" 

Above  M.  H.   W.   to  roadway  in  center 

of    span 138'     3"  145'  5%" 

Same,  at  center  of  tower 119'     3"  125'  7%" 

Of    tower    above    roadway 159'     0" 

Width  of  bridge 85'     0"  118'  0" 

Grade  of  roadway  in  100  ft 3'     3"  0" 

Max.  grade  of  roadway  in  100  ft 3'     9"  3'  4 Ms" 

Foundation  below  M.  H.  W. : 

Brooklyn    45'     0"     S.  91.9'  N.  107.5' 

Manhattan 78'     0"     S.  66.0'  N.  5n.O' 


" 


BRIDGES.  1545 

Size  of  Caissons: 

Brooklyn     168x102'  (2)      63x79' 

Manhattan     172x102'  (2)      60x76' 

Size  of  anchorages: 

At  base — Brooklyn 129x119'  177x158' 

At  base— Manhattan 129  x  119'  173'  4V2"  x 

151'  9" 

At    top    117x104'  149'xl27'5" 

Diameter  of  cables 15  %  IS  % 

Number  wires  in  each  cable 5,296  7,70ft 

Length  of  wire  weighing  1  Ib 12'  10'     3" 

Weight  of  one  cable  per  lin.   ft 500  Ibs.  770  Ibs. 

Total  miles  of  wire  in  4  cables 14,361  17,432 

Versine  at  mean  temperature 128'  178' 

Ultimate  strength  each   cable,    tons 12,200  24,500 

Permanent  weight  suspended : 

From  main  span  cables,  tons 6,780  13,740 

From  shore  span  cables,   tons.......           7,900  0 

The  main  towers  of  Williamsburg  Bridge  are  of  steel,  310  ft.  high 
from  top  of  masonry  to  center  of  cable  over  the  tower. 

The  quantities  of  the  principal  materials  were  as  follows : 

Libs. 

2  towers 12,192,000 

2  end-  spans 12,280,000 

1  main   suspended    span 15,544,000 

Cables  and  suspenders ' 10,000,000 

Brooklyn   viaduct   approach 12,170,000 

New  York  viaduct  approach 21,100,000 

In    anchorages , 6,200,000 

Total  89,486,000 

Concrete,  cu.   yds 60,000 

Stone  masonry,  cu.  yds 130,000 

Excavation,  cu.  yds 125,000 

Timber,  ft.  B.  M 8,000,000 

. 

The  cost  of  the  bridge  was  $11,000,000  (exclusive  of  land),  and 
some  of  the  items  were  as  follows : 

Anchorages,  Brooklyn  side ?    771,778 

Anchorages,   Manhattan    side 797,770 

Tower   foundation,    Brooklyn 485,082 

Tower   foundation,    Manhattan 373,462 

Suspended    span 1,123,460 

Brooklyn   viaduct    approach 947,000 

New  York  viaduct  approach 1,464,000 

Cables     1,398,000 

Cost  of  Two  Pneumatic  Foundations  for  the  Williamsburg  Bridge. 
— The  following  data  were  given  by  Mr.  Francis  L,  Pruyn  in 
Engineering-Contracting f  Aug.  8,  Aug.  15,  and  Aug.  22,  1906  : 

The  work  here  described  consisted  of  sinking  two  large  caissons, 
63  x  79  ft.  in  size  on  the  Brooklyn  side  of  the  Williamsburg  Bridge 
to  bed  rock,  in  one  case  86  ft.  and  in  the  other  110  ft  below  mean 
high  water,  filling  same  with  concrete  and  building  masonry  piers 
upon  this  foundation  inside  of  coffer  dams  up  to  elevation  plus 
23  ft.  above  M.  H.  W.  All  work  was  done  by  contract  during  the 
years  1897  to  1899. 

The  caissons  were  constructed  of  yellow  pine  timber  at  the  site 
of  the  work,  launched,  floated  into  place  and  sunk  to  the  river 


1546  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

bottom,   which  was  about  55  ft.   below  M.   H.   W.,  by  filling   them 
with  concrete. 

Compressed  air  was  then  turned  on,  and  the  caissons  were  sunk 
to  bed  rock.  The  material  encountered,  consisting  of  river  muJ, 
sand,  clay  and  rock,  was  excavated  either  by  means  of  Moran 
patent  material  locks  or  by  wet  blow  out ;  finally  the  working 
chamber  was  filled  with  concrete.  While  the  caissons  were  being 
sunk,  the  coffer  dams,  which  were  attached  to  the  caissons,  were 
added  in  order  to  keep  their  tops  above  water,  and  inside  of  these 
coffer  dams  the  masonry  piers  were  built.  During  the  sinking 
process  the  masonry  was  built  only  in  sufficient  quantity  to  give  the 
weight  necessary  for  sinking  the  caissons.  After  the  caissons  were 
sealed  and  the  air  taken  off,  the  shafting  and  piping  were  removed, 
the  spaces  occupied  by  them  filled  with  concrete,  and  the  pier  car- 
ried up  to  its  final  elevation.  The  coffer  dams  were  then  removed. 

The  costs  recorded  were  kept  by  daily  engineer's  force  account, 
and  are  as  accurate  as  is  possible  by  that  method.  The  plant 
charges  were  obtained  by  a  careful  inventory,  to  which  pre\  ailing 
prices  were  affixed.  Depreciation  was  charged  off  at  about  40  per 
cent,  which  Is  perhaps  10  per  cent  too  low.  The  general  expense 
was  10  per  cent  of  the  total  cost  of  materials  and  labor  and  in- 
cluded bond,  interest  on  money  invested,  office  and  dock  rentals, 
superintendent  and  field  office  salaries,  watching,  etc.  No  allow- 
ance was  made  for  maintenance  of  main  office. 

Cost  of  Two  Caissons. — The  caissons  were  63x79  ft.  in  size;  the 
south  one  was  39  ft.  high  and  the  north  53  ft.  high.  They  were 
built  one  at  a  time,  directly  at  the  site  of  the  work ;  the  launching 
ways  extending  back  from  the  bulkhead  line.  A  floating  pile 
driver  fitted  with  a  70-ft.  boom  was  used  to  build  them.  This 
served  its  purpose  well,  as  the  heel  of  the  boom  could  be  raised 
as  the  caissons  were  built  up.  When  the  caisson  walls  were  20  ft. 
high  the  caissons  were  launched  and  towed  to  site,  where  they  were 
completed.  The  framing  and  building  was  done  under  the  direc- 
tion of  a  very  capable  foreman,  who  obtained  good  and  rapid  work 
from  his  carpenters.  All  framing  was  done  by  hand ;  a  steam 
auger  was  used  where  practical  for  boring  bolt  holes,  and  a  steam 
hammer  was  used  part  of  the  time  for  driving  drift  bolts.  The 
sides  and  roof  of  caisson  were  built  up  of  two  courses  of  12x12 
timber,  the  outside  was  sheathed  with  two  courses  of  3-in.  tongue 
and  groove  plank.  There  was  also  two  courses  of  3-in.  plank  in  the 
roof.  Above  the  caisson  roof  a  cribwork  of  12  x  12-in.  timbers 
divided  the  space  inside  the  walls  into  pockets  6  ft.  square.  This 
cribwork  was  trussed  by  means  of  3-in.  plank  spiked  on  ;  it  served 
to  keep  the  weight  of  concrete  and  pier  masonry  off  the  roof. 

The  working  chamber,  which  was  7  ft.  high,  was  divided  by  suit- 
able bulkheads.  In  order  to  secure  air  tightness  the  seams  were 
calked  with  two  strands  of  oakum  well  forced  in.  The  chamber 
was  then  lined  with  3-in.  plank,  the  joints  of  which,  as  well  as  the 
spikes  used  in  fastening  same,  were  also  treated  with  two  strands 
of  oakum  and  afterwards  painted  with  white  lead. 


BRIDGES.  1,54? 

The  labor  prices  paid  per  10-hour  day  were  as  follows: 

Foreman     $5.00 

Sub-foreman     3.00 

Carpenter    3.00 

2.50 

Riggers    2.00 

Hoist     Runners ,  .  2.50 

Steam    Fitters 3.00 

2.50 

Blacksmith   and   Helpers 4.00 

Laborers    1.50 

Calkers     3.25 

Tt  will  be  noted  that  these  rates  are  from  20  to  50  per  cent 
lower  than  the  present  rates,  which  are  now  based  on  an  8-hour 
day  for  municipal  work. 

The  south  caisson  was  built  first,  and  the  difference  in  cost  be- 
tween it  and  the  north  caisson  was  brought  about  by  the  better 
organization  on  the  second  caisson,  and  by  the  larger  quantity 
of  the  cheaper  kind  of  framing  in  the  cobwork  and  walls  above 
the  roof.  The  cost  of  material  and  labor  is  given  in  Table  TIT. 

Figures  1  and  2  show  the  general  construction  of  the  caissons, 
method  of  framing,  etc.  [The  figures  are  given  in  Engineering- 
Contracting,  but  omitted  here  on  account  of  their  size.]  It  is  of 
interest  to  note  the  increase  in  prices  of  yellow  pine  timber  and 
other  materials  that  had  taken  place  since  this  work  was  done. 

The  South  Caisson  was  begun  Aug.  13th,  launched  with  walls 
20  ft.  high  Oct.  10th  and  finished  to  39  ft.  high  Nov.  17th. 

The  North  Caisson  was  begun  Oct.  20th,  launched  Nov.  30th  and 
finished  to  53  ft.  high  Feb.  8th,  1898. 

Launching  Ways. — The  caisson  as  launched  20  ft.  high  weighed 
954  tons  and  drew  11%  ft.  of  water.  The  ways,  four  in  number, 
were  placed  one  under  each  outside  wall  and  one  under  each  bulk 
head.  They  consisted  of  two  12x12  timbers  bolted  side  by  side, 
sliding  on  two  similar  timbers  fastened  to  the  caisson.  Three-inch 
plank  were  bolted  to  the  outside  of  the  ways  to  serve  as  guides. 
They  were  sloped  1 14  ins.  to  the  foot,  and  extended  5  ft.  below 
M.  H.  W.  The  pressure  on  the  ways  was  255  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  and 
they  were  lubricated  with  a  mixture  of  tallow  and  graphite. 

Cost  of  Two  Coffer  Dams. — Coffer  dams  50  ft.  high  were  attached 
to  the  caissons  in  order  to  allow  sinking  to  proceed  independently 
of,  and  without  waiting  for,  the  construction  of  the  masonry,  and 
also  to  keep  the  pressure  on  the  cutting  edge  of  the  caisson  under 
perfect  control.  The  coffer  dams  were  attached  to  the  caissons 
by  removable  bolts,  and  built  up  in  three  sections  17  ft.  high.  The 
thickness  of  the  walls  diminished  from  12  ins.  on  the  bottom  sec- 
tion to  6  ins.  on  the  top  and  the  interior  horizontal  bracing  pro- 
vided for  13  ft.  pockets  for  setting  the  masonry.  The  bracing  was 
trussed  with  3 -in.  plank  in  the  same  manner  as  the  caissons,  but  so 
arranged  that  it  could  be  removed  as  the  pier  masonry  was  built  up. 

The  coffer  dams  were  built  at  night  to  avoid  interference  with 
other  work.  The  cost  of  the  material  and  labor  is  given  in 
Table  IV. 


1648 


HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 


_J    CrOOOOO 

c  oooooo 

0       OOO 
0       000 

000 

000 

0 
0 

00 
00 

o 
o 

3    0  GO  i-  <rq  o  ec 

0       t-USO 

M«C»H 

tf 

Oil— 

<x> 

fcV 

^-    ^<cw> 

co  coc-1 
««• 

•M" 

CO 

ft*  ft* 

ro 

W5- 

.    OOOO«CU5    |O       OrHO    I  i-<  M  «C 

D  ir:  o  10  o  o  <n  |  o     m  t-  *><  \  te*+<?3 
%  oo  us  M  TJ!  o  M      e-i      e-i    '       |  M  r-!  r-J 


OOU5C0005 
0005C-  OrH 
0V  O 


oooooo 
oooooo 

o 
o 

OOO 
000 

000 

ooo 

§ 

00 
00 

0  OS  I>  M  0  r-t 

C: 

(MOrH 

eoou; 

us 

ScJ^ 

®. 

o" 

eoiM-^ 

M- 

CO 
IM* 
V? 

w*» 

a  8 


go5S§S§^^|^    S^^|^SS|S|    §1£ 

"^ococi^o^ll     ^   •    -|^^|co|      ^|j 


ii   5 

O      3 
H      CO 


>000 
OlH 

o 


us      us, 
t-     t- 


us,  us  I      us 


. 

:     :    » 

) 

\ 

) 

I 

r 
i 

*  tar  

tal  materials  
r. 
ng,  framing  and  buildi 

b, 

«•£ 

^  S 
^ 

fcffl 

c§  •-  '3  o 

Of^Pntf 


'JSS'g     o 


-- 


of       O 

s  r 

^! 

|8  3 

s 

o 


BRIDGES. 


1549 


• 


g    00  00  2 

s    •» 

2 

fi  000 


i  ma 

""  w 

6        c-^ 

o  ^  S-M.Q 

^  "i  ^ 

I  %%% 

<y  ^ 

+J   000 

o3  3  o'oo'd 

S  §  oooo^ 

fl 
i»q   .ni 

I 
fc 

6 

:  y«" 


«  =«  2iS?1  IS?    ddrH 
£  «  ^M    I  ^  ^ 

o 


j  in  r-l    j  O  ITS 
<M          I  >JO 

i  ^     MR 


oo      r^rjc 
oo      oo-rr? 


oo 


•  ... 


.  - 
•    '    I        • 


• 

-noo   »! 

t)HB    .'  •    fJ^E 

rtJJw  •  •  : 

•  ;  : 

di  o 
.s® 

ft  . 
^jj 

-2^ 

Sri 

^     ^ 

«    0!^ 

-2  a) 

" 


!  •  •      I 

*       •  ;  "    • 
:       :  :  :    : 

•    •        • 

•    •        • 
•    • 

;  ! 

•      tr. 

;   ;       I 

• 

<M 

•   : 

—  • 

§ 

3 

i   ! 

•  g 

1 

building 

•  ct 
•  'C! 

||  & 

•°§      ^| 

material 
ixpenses, 

I  total  .  . 

•3^*  * 

-s  ° 


1650  HANBBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

It  was  found  after  the  south  coffer  dam  was  built  that  the 
walls  were  unnecessarily  heavy.  This  was  corrected  in  building  the 
north  coffer  dam,  which  accounts  for  its  increased  cost  per 
M.  ft.  B.  M. 

Figure  3  [not  reproduced  here]  shows  the  general  design  and 
details  of  the  coffer  dam  construction,  as  well  as  method  of  tem- 
porary attachment  to  caissons. 

Concrete  in  Caissons. — After  each  caisson  was  built  it  was  towed 
to  its  proper  site,  where  it  was  held  in  place  by  temporary  pile 
dock  built  completely  around  it.  On  these  docks  the  concrete 
was  placed ;  a  2  cu.  yd.  cubical  mixer  of  the  usual  pattern  being 
used  for  mixing.  The  concrete  materials,  consisting  of  sand,  stone 
and  cement  were  handled  direct  from  barges  alongside,  into  the 
mixer.  The  concrete  was  placed  by  a  derrick  located  in  the  center 
of  the  caisson,  which  was  a  bad  feature  as  the  caisson  was  usually 
out  of  level  and  considerable  difficulty  was  experienced  in  swing- 
ing the  derrick.  On  the  south  caisson  %  cu.  yd.  bottom  dump 
buckets  were  used  in  placing  the  concrete,  on  the  north  caisson  the 
size  of  these  was  increased  to  1%  cu.  yd.  which  reduced  the  cost  of 
placing  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  There  were  placed  in  the  south  caisson 
3,827  cu.  yds.  in  32  days  of  actual  working  time— 120  cu.  yds.  per 
day  of  10  hrs.  The  gross  time  was  2  months.  On  the  north  caisson 
5,693  cu.  yds.  were  placed  in  46  days  worked — 124  cu.  yds.  per 
day.  The  gross  time  was  4  months.  See  Table  V. 

The  rates  of  labor  were  as  follows  per  10-hour  day: 

Foreman    $5.00 

Assistant    .foreman. 2.50 

Roisters     ,  .2.50 


Fireman     1.60 

Laborer     1. 


50 


Proportions  concrete  were  1  :  2.5  :  6. 

The  low  price  of  sand  in  the  north  caisson  was  brought  about 
by  the  finding  of  good  building  sand  in  the  excavation  for  the 
anchorage,  which  work  was  done  by  the  same  contractor. 

When  the  caissons  had  been  sealed  the  iron  material  shafts 
were  removed.  This  left  holes  5  ft.  x  6  ft.  extending  from  the 
roof  of  the  caisson  up  to  M.  H.  W.  which  were  filled  with  con- 
crete. These  shaft  holes  were  80  ft.  deep  on  the  south  caisson  and 
100  ft.  deep  on  the  north  caisson.  They  were  partially  filled  with 
water  and  the  concrete  had  to  be  placed  with  considerable  care. 
Wooden  chutes  were  used  on  the  south  caisson  ;  they  rested  on  the 
caisson  roof,  were  filled  with  concrete  and  then  raised  allowing 
concrete  to  flow  out  at  the  bottom.  The  shaft  holes  were  too  deep 
on  the  north  caisson  for  chutes  and  20  cu.  ft.  bottom  dump  buckets 
were  used.  They  had  to  be  lowered  to  bottom  of  shaft  each  trip 
before  dumping,  a  slow  operation,  which  greatly  added  to  the 
cost.  Proportion  for  concrete  1  :  2.5  :  6.  See  Table  VI. 

The  proportion  for  concrete  in  working  chamber  was  the  same 
as  for  all  other  concrete.  The  specifications  called  for  6  ins.  of 
mortar,  of  1  part  of  cement  to  2%  parts  of  sand  and  between  the 
concrete  and  all  bearing  areas ;  that  is,  under  the  cutting  edge  and 


BRIDGES. 


155t 


^J   0000 
^  ti   0000 

§000 
000 

O       00       O 
0       OO       O 

to   S  ^us'drH1 

os    •  os  e<i  t-^ 

OS       t~-OO       U5 

CO       00rt<        CO 

>>    g    U5OO^ 

00       THOSUJ 

T*«        ^  ^       ^ 

g   •*$    S"       *° 

«e     ^"c<r 

eo"     cS  N*     *°* 

o       ««• 

«9-      •» 

««•««•            M- 

eo 

05        .    t-OO 

<o      eo 

T-I      oeo      eo 

»  +j     •    .    • 

OS         t- 

to      eo-«j<      t>- 

c4     o 

o   !  ^f          ^5 

^  PH  ** 

*»•       69- 

*>•»««. 

G 
O              w  to 

co      ri 

a5      rfri      ri 

W            .73  73 
.2         ,2  >>>> 

d               rQ       '       ' 

U^gg 

o     o 

"S     ^"S     "S 
•        •    .        . 

g      oS     g 

5  '^  ^ 

_•      fi    5  c~eooo 
»      o    ro  ococo 

05         OS 

os      was   1  os 

o     £H  /S  ^  I~'a5 

to      eo 

«9        <0  to        tO 

/S           ^  eo'c^-H* 

in      in 

in     win  1  in 

.1  »rfj    - 

^           -tJ  oooo 

0       OOo 
0        OOo 

0       00       0 
0        00        0 

W      /^^   ^  Tt<  co  c^i  ^o 

in      e<i  o  e<i 

C-.j         OS  CO         ^1 

<j       w    O  cot—  coco 

t~      eooo  T>< 

73    £3  o  t-'-' 

os      •*e<jt« 

o      ^  cs      eo 

g      *<}-      - 

N      eoN 

eo      os  i-i      r* 

O                       »-*                             j^r 

(&•      **• 

MK  lf»      ««• 

1     «^     .^oo 

OS        0 

OS         OO  rH         OS 

Q        ^    5    U~"°.^ 

eo  "  os 

t-      Oln      w 

«  jiid    ^ 

co      o 

o      in    '      in 

w-     *^~ 

«*     «*         M. 

^    ^ 

|      g             ring 

«     §          -o-a 

CQ         CO 

•0      7373      -0 

S    '1  bi  ^S 

>.    >» 

>>      >>>>      >• 

5r)  £"  2  j3  3 
w  £  ,a  o  o 

g  g 

g       gg       g 

fo        £      g    OOOrH 

O      3    2  oooow 

t-       b- 

t-      t-t-      t- 

<M        cocx)        N 

oo      oo 

oo      oooo      oo 

I  ^'^ 

eo"     eo" 

eo"     co'eo"     eo 

>            :    : 
9             •     : 
9            j    j 

III 

:    . 
:    . 

:    i^    : 

bg 

C 

1-1 

: 

"o 
ed 

J      S   ^ 

g    -c    ^ 

o 

P<  /n 

^       M  §       0 

c 

"o,         O   2         -M 

ri          o 

73  S?  o 

°£ 

"3        "* 

^       C  dfi 

•£ 

tf  ^  rt>S^3 

^        S^          ^ 

c?  ~ti     c 

O  O  h/i 

O      "o"c3       "-• 

"S      ^rrt    2   0) 

H1?  C-^-M 

^  ^fe  y 

1652  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

directly  under  the  roof  of  the  working  chamber.  The  concrete 
was  mixed  in  the  cubical  mixer  and  dumped  on  the  bottom  door  of 
the  material  lock,  the  top  door  of  the  lock  was  then  closed,  the 
bottom  door  opened  and  the  concrete  fell  through  the  shaft  to  the 
working  chamber.  It  was  then  shoveled  by  the  sand  hogs  into 
place.  A  6-ln.  space  was  left  below  all  bearing  surfaces  into  which 
damp  mortar  was  tightly  rammed.  Concreting  the  south  caisson 
took  10}4  working  days  of  24  hours,  the  gangs  working  night  and 
day  in  twelve  2-hour  shifts;  1,566  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  and  mortar 
were  placed,  or  at  the  rate  of  140  cu.  yds.  per  24  hours.  The  gross 
time  including  Sundays  was  14%  days.  The  sand  hogs  worked  in 
shifts  of  2  hours  each  and  received  $3.50  for  the  two  hours  work. 
The  twelve  foremen  received  $1  more;  the  average  gang  consisted 
of  12  sand  hogs. 

On  the  north  caisson  the  organization  was  much  better,  owing  to 
the  experience  gained  on  the  first  caisson  ;  and  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  the  sand  hogs,  on  account  of  the  increased  depth,  received 
$4.00  for  1%  hours  work,  or  an  increase  of  $22.00  per  man  per 
24  hrs.  over  that  on  the  south  caisson,  the  work  was  done  for  less 
money.  There  were  placed  1,566  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  7  working 
days  of  24  hrs.,  or  at  the  rate  of  224  cu.  yds.  per  day.  The  gross 
time  was  11%  days  including  Sundays.  The  average  number  of 
men  in  the  sand  hog  gangs  was  18,  with  one  foreman,  who  re- 
ceived $5  for  1%  hours  work.  See  Table  VII. 

Cost  of  Sinking  Caissons. — The  cost  of  sinking  caissons  has  been 
subdivided  according  to  the  materials  encountered  and  also  with 
reference  to  the  depth  of  cutting  edge,  as  the  price  paid  the 
pressure  men  varies  with  the  depth.  The  following  were  the 
union  rates  paid  to  "sand  dogs,"  or  workmen : 

From     0  to     50  ft  below  M.  H.  W $2.50  for  8  hours 

55  to     70  ft.  below  M.  H.  W 2.75  for  6  hours 

70  to     80  ft.  below  M.  H.  W 3.00  for  4  hours 

80  to     90  ft.  below  M.  H.  W 3.25  for  2  hours 

90  to  100  ft.  below  M.  H.  W 3.50  for  1  hour 

100  to  110  ft.  below  M.  H.  W 3.75  for  1  hour 

When  connecting  chamber,  the  price  was  increased  25  cts.  per 
shift. 

Compressor  engineers  received  $3.60  per  day,  foremen  $2.60  and 
coal  passers  $2.  The  superintendent  in  charge  of  the  pneumatic 
work  received  $6  per  day  and  his  night  assistants  $5. 

The  present  "sand  hog"  rates  have  increased  20%  over  these 
figures. 

The  air  plant  consisted  of  three  100-hp.  vertical  boilers,  3  Laid- 
law-Dunn-Gordon  Duplex  Compressors,  16-in.  steam  and  18-in.  air 
cylinders  with  18-in.  stroke,  and  two  high  pressure  force  pumps. 
One  6-in.  pipe  supplied  air  to  the  caissons,  and  one  5-in.  pipe 
supplied  the  water.  There  were  also  three  4-in.  blowout  pipes,  six 
3-ft.  material  shafts  and  one  6-ft.  man  shaft  with  elevator.  Docks 
were  built  around  the  caissons  to  hold  them  in  position  while 
sinking;  on  one  of  these  the  compressor  plant  was  located.  The 
clay  encountered  was  a  very  hard  stratified  material  and  difficult 


BRIDGES. 


-*J  ooo 

I  «°°£ 


oo 

00 
0005 


+J    0000 
^    0000 

X3  cc^Nod 

»13££S 

FwT3      »  "' 


o  ooo 

o  o  o  o 

t-  oom  c- 

O  CON 

9*  '        t-TrH1 


00         CO 


' 

'  -o-o 

:      11*IK& 


|co   i  t-co 
t-  I  coo 

liis" 


COCO 

in  in 


£   IS, 

in     in" 


0        +J   000 

W      C  °°.° 

0       00 

o     oo 

00 
00 

K 
o    O      -M  oooo 

0           ^g   0000 

0       000 
0        000 

o     ooo 
o     ooo 

0 
0 

§s 

3  e<it-d 

rH        OJCC 

eoc- 

co     y^Sino'odoJ 

IM     int-  m 

t>l     diniM' 

t- 

ect^ 

fa      C  05      m 

in      m  in 

coc^ 

05      S'P.S  <Ot2<M<M 

Ot        in  rH  (M 

^       rHrtS? 

oo 

coco 

•4           ~l                            1 

M        ^    ._ 

W 

H 

M- 

-|^- 

Wr         t» 

00             rHrH 

a* 

COrH 
««• 

s 

03 


waj 
w^'S 


o    5 


SS  | 


aj      » 


.      H 
CO  CO        QB     B 

tt   1  g§ 


to  sc 


| '5   SS^IS   S££| 
|«   ^^  -jco    ;  v;| 

I  09-      «e-  '  V9- 

t»  m 

1  S 


I 

:     :     : 

:    :    : 

bo 

. 

K* 

s 

:        si 

.     .     . 

c 

* 

M 

c 

c 

EH 

& 

ft 

|J 

C 

o 

c 

ct 

O 

1 

a 

1—1 

•        f^ 

* 

*"* 

*  T— 

c. 

« 

~ 

•    *    hi) 

f 

to 

$    ~ 

t 
J 

5 

:  1  I. 

S 

•  3       & 

1 

c   -     :S 

ii 

' 
0 

i  i 

e.    * 

M 

i                   t 
'w   t 

f| 

!•§   ^ 

0 

-*- 
s     o  c 

i    ^5 

(M  C 

jj       C         •  f 

;a  4  :| 

h  I 

Material 

i 

5-c 
;  c 

ti 

i 

7 

>  1 

I    • 
i 

Labor. 
Handling, 

TM^nt  ^ai 

:I 

| 

General  e 

Ciro-nrt 

3j 

CH    t 
i  4->  H- 

:  c 

:  S  e 
3r^  c 

t  im 

IX       ~  Oj        ^ 

iS      ^ft? 
!w        ^a 

^§    "5 

!!' 

^ 
^^ 

Kgf 
oc 

5    ^     «S 

es   -2   ^^ 

1  e  &i 
>l      § 

&,          c 

Grand 

1554  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

*o  excavate.  The  rock  was  the  ordinary  New  York  gneiss  and  was 
drilled  by  hand.  The  cost  of  plant  was  estimated  from  inventory 
taken,  as  the  prices  paid  for  it  were  not  available.  The  supplies 
also  had  to  be  estimated,  and  the  charge  for  them,  as  well  as  the 
plant  are,  probably  10  to  15%  low. 

Cost  of  Sinking  South  Caisson — 

(1)      Sand   with   boulders,    3   gangs  per   day   at   8 
hours  each.     Elevation — 53.5  ft.  to  — 56.25  ft. 

Labor    sinking    $1,583.00 

Temporary    docks 88.00 

Plant     867.00 

Supplies    489.00 


Total     $3,027.00 

General   expenses,    10%  . . 303.00 


Total,  509  cu.  yds.,  at  $6.55 $3,330.00 

(2)      Sand   with   boulders,    4   gangs   per  day  at   6 
hours  each.     Elevation — 56.25  ft.  to — 66.7  ft.  . 

Labor    sinking $   6,828.00 

Temporary    docks 236.00 

Plant    2,310.00 

Supplies      1,307.00 


Total     $10,681.00 

General    expenses,     10% 1,068.00 


Total,  1,929  cu.  yds.,  at  $6.10 $11,749.00 

(3)    Clay   and    Stratified   Clay.      Elevation   —66.7 
to  — 71.25  ft.,  4  gangs  per  day  at  6  hours  each. 

Labor     sinking $3,763.00 

Temporary    docks 11000 

Plant    1,083.00 

Supplies    613.00 


Total $5,569.00 

General   expenses,    10% 557.00 

Total,   839  cu.  yds.,  at  $7.31 $6,126.00 

(4)    Stratified   Clay,    6    gangs  per   day   at    4   hours 
each.     Elevation  — 71.25  to  — 80.19  ft. 

Labor     sinking $   9,462.00 

Temporary    docks 191.00 

Plant     1,876.00 

Supplies    1,063.00 


Total $12,592.00 

General   expenses,    10% 1,259.00 

Total,   1,648  cu.  yds.,  at  $8.42..    ..,$13,851.00 


BRIDGES. 


(a)    Sound   Gneiss   Rock,    6    gangs    per   day  at   4 
hours  each.     Elevation  — 80.19  to  — 81.25   ft. 

Labor   sinking   $  4,595.00 

Temporary   docks 96.00 

Plant     937.00 

Supplies    530.00 

Explosives    81.00 

Total    $  6,239.00 

General   expenses,    10% 624.00 

Total,  195  cu.  yds^  at  $35.20 $  6,863.00 

(6)  Stratified    Clay — Stripping    Rock.      Elevation 
— 81.25  to  — 83.3  ft.,  12  gangs  per  day  at 

7  hoars  each. 

Labor    sinking %  8,158.00 

Temporary   docks 102.00 

Plant    1.010.00 

Supplies    42.00 

Total     $  9,312.00 

General   expenses,    10<& 931.00 

Total.   380%   cu.  yds.,  at   $26.90. ..  .$10,243.00 

(7)  Work   Incidental    to    sinking    South    Caisson. 

Recaulking  chamber $    9C4.00 

Blocking  in  chamber 1,228.00 

Total     $2,132.00 

Cost  of  Sinking  North  Caisson — 

(1)   Material— Mud,   Sand  and  Gravel.     Elevation 
— 51.7  to  — 56.8  ft.,  3  gangs  per  day  at 

8  hours  each. 

Labor    sinking $2,351.00 

Temporary   docks 80.00 

Plant    854.00 

Supplies    383.00 


Total     ............................  $3,668.00 

General  expenses,  10<£  .................         367.00 


Total,    1,714   cu.   yds.,   at  $2.35  ......  $4,035.00 

(2)     Material  —  Fine    Sand.       Elevation    —  68.6    to 

—  73.3  ft.,  4  gangs  per  day  at  6  hours  each. 
Labor     sinking  .........................  $3,133.00 

Temporary     docks  ......................         88.00 

Plant     ................................       931.00 

Supplies    ..............................       413.00 

.     .............................  $4,565.00 

General   expenses,    10%  .................       456.00 

Total,  2.175  cu.  yds.,  at  $2.31  .......  $5,021.00 


1556  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


(3)      Material — Clay  and   Stratified   Clay.      Eleva- 
tion— 68.6    to — 73.3   ft.,    4   gangs   per   day 
at  6  hours  each. 

Labor    sinking $2, 230.00 

Temporary    docks    81.00 

Plant     853.00 

Supplies     378.00 


Total      13,542.00 

General   expenses,    10%    354.00 


Total,   866  cu.  yds.,  at  |4.50 $3,896.00 

(4)      Material — Stratified     Clay.       Elevation — 73.3 

to — 81.4    ft.,    6    gangs    per    day   at   4 

hours  each. 

Labor    sinking    $7,500.00 

Temporary    docks    140.00 

Plant 1,480.00 

Supplies     655.00 

Total . $9,775.00 

General    expenses,     10%      977.00 


Total,  1,493  cu.  yds.  at  $7-20 $10,752.00 

(5)      Material— Stratified     Clay.       Elevation— 81.4 

to — 89.8  ft.,    12   gangs   per  day  at 

2   hours   each. 

Labor    sinking    $11.130.00 

Temporary    docks    154.00 

Plant 1,630.00 

Supplies 724.00 


Total     $13,638.00 

General  expenses,  10% 1,364.00 


Total,   1,621   cu.   yds.   at  $9.25 $15,002.00 

(6)  Material — Sound    Gneiss     Rock     "Benching." 
Elevation — 83.5   to — 91.25  ft.,   12  gangs 

per  day  at   2   hours  each. 

Labor    $4,753.00 

Temporary  docks    74.00 

Plant     776.00 

Supplies     345.00 

Explosives    35.00 

Total $5,983.00 

General  expenses,    10%    598.00 

Total,   84  cu.  yds.  at  $78.40 $6,581.00 

(7)  Material— Stratified    Clay.      Elevation— 91.25 

to — 95.00   ft.,    14    gangs   per   day 
at  1%   hours  each. 

Labor    $9,770.00 

Temporary    docks     88.00 

Plant    932.00 

Supplies    414.00 


Total    $11.204.00 

General    expenses 1.120.00 


Total,   702   cu.  yds.   at   $17.5." $12,224.00 


BRIDGES.  15W 

(8)  Materials — Sound     Gneiss     Rock     Benching. 
Elevation — 91.25    to   — 95    ft,    14    gangs 

per  day   at   1%    hours  each. 

Labor    , $13,303.00 

Temporary    docks    101.00 

Plant     1,165.00 

Supplies     516.00 

Explosives 105.00 

Total         $15,190.00 

General    expenses     1,519.00 

Total,    2,534   cu.    yds.   at    $65.80   per 

cu.   yd $16,709.00 

(9)  Materials — Stratified    Clay,    Stripping    Rock. 

Elevation — 95  to  — 110  ft.,  14  gangs 
per  day  at  %  hours  each. 

Labor    $9,232.00 

Temporary   docks    66.00 

Plant    698.00 

Supplies 310.00 

Total     $10,306.00 

General    expenses,    10%     1,031.00 

Total.  453  cu.  yds.  at  $25.00 $11,337.00 

(10)  Recalking    chamber    cost $      715.00 

The  cost  of  stripping  and  cleaning  up  rock  is  excessively  high, 
but  this  work  is  necessarily  slow,  the  quantity  of  actual  excavation 
small  and  the  labor  rate  of  from  $1.75  to  $1.87  per  hour  is  about 
10  times  that  for  similar  work  above  ground.  The  fixed  plant  and 
overhead  charges  are  likewise  heavy. 

The  same  explanation  applies  to  the  high  rock  excavation  cost, 
besides  which  very  small  charges  of  powder  had  to  be  used  owing 
to  danger  of  injuring  the  caisson,  as  well  as  the  danger  of  blow- 
outs under  the  cutting  edge.  Therefore  holes  had  to  be  drilled 
close  together. 

All  drilling  was  done  by  hand  ;  power  drills  would  have  greatly 
reduced  the  cost.  The  delay  caused  by  blasting  is  expensive  in  this 
class  of  work ;  the  whole  gang  has  to  go  up  in  the  airlock  at 
almost  every  shot. 

Cost  of  Pier  Masonry. — The  masonry  was  begun  at  the  elevation 
of  the  top  of  the  caissons  and  carried  up  to  elevation  24  ft.  above 
M.  H.  W.  in  courses  varying  from  2  ft.  6  ins.  in  thickness  at  the 
bottom  to  2  ft.  at  the  top.  The  pier  was  built  of  limestone  .up  to 
4  ft.  below  M.  L.  W.,  above  which  the  facing  was  of  rock  faced 
granite  with  the  backing  of  limestone.  The  two  top  courses,  as  well 
as  the  pedestals,  were  built  entirely  of  granite,  all  exposed  sur- 
faces of  which  were  6-cut.  All  other  face  stones,  whether  of  lime- 
stone or  granite,  were  of  rock  faced  with  ^-in.  beds  and  joints. 
The  backing  was  built  of  roughly  squared  stones  with  %-in.  beds, 
and  3-in.  joints.  Spalls  were  used  in  filling  the  joints.  See 
Table  VIII. 

Cramps  and  dowels  were  used  in  the  two  top  courses  of  granite. 

The  plant  consisted  of  derricks  surrounding  each  pier.  The 
limestone  was  unloaded  direct  from  barges.  Two  extra  barges 
^ere  kept  continuously  at  the  site  for  storage  purposes.  The 


1558 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


0000000000 
000«>000000 

00 
00 

000 
000 

0 

0 

00 

00 

* 
0 

+J 

OOOCOOOt~U3OcO 

THCO 

oot-  01 

Tj« 

ooo 

00 

c 

OO  CO  CO  OO  LO  l/Dt-        OrJ< 

OOlft 

Tf^CO 

cc 

^  3 

CO        OS 

CO 

IrtCO 

01 

/*^   O 

fl 

C<liH        T-H 
M; 

CO 

~ 

co't-" 

V3- 

o" 

05 

. 

O  O  OS  •*  •*  t—  O             •**< 

ooo 

0 

ee 

co  t- 

CO 

3 

IO  OS  OO  CO  CO  1C  ^               O 

000 

COO 

t- 

0     <jj 

co  io  tfi  co  co  r-i 

00  rH 

M 

d 

^.'l 

oo   d 
os  £g 

00   *> 

•£* 

«*" 

* 

P* 

X 

a» 

b  02»202"W020303 


mm 


SxS'gg 


O  '^  i»      t-      co 

^     C    OJ  CO  t^  O  TH  ITS  r-(  O 

Gj    r-l  O3  ift  CO  t>- iH  ^  OO 

3    ?-t  00  CO  iH  -f  OS  OS  O 

C'   THCO"  M  TH 


02         0302        03 

•O      -o-O      -0 

>>    >.>.    >> 


gg   8 


oc  oc 
0006 


V  5 


. 

0000000000 
0000000000 

00 
00 

ooo 

000 

o 

oo 
oo 

0 
0 

^   0 

00  00  CO  OO  IO  ••*>  -<1<        OT}« 
1-1  IO  •*  t-.  r-(  CO  CO         CO 

oco 
t-o 

ocoo 

Tt<t-0 

us      ^r 

CO 

0 

o-.os 
<xt~ 

oo 

0 

•o  S 

OCOOCOrH  Tt< 
i-H  S^lr-l        r-( 

CO 

CO 

V, 

(MOO 

oo 

s 

0  3 

CO     Gj 

oo  p^ 

in  os  oo  co  co  m  -*  o      o 

OOCOlrtCOCOrH     'rH 

™*™ 

^-. 

— 

w*» 

0 

H" 

(M 

CO" 

1-1 

03  02  02  CO  02 


. 

>>  >»  >>  >>  >>  to  <w  3 

' 


O   *J  « 

r°  ISIS 

a  w3~' 


S       33 

S      oo 


o      coco 

00         0000 
O        0000 


•O      'O'O      t3 


p  3 

0  0 




' 

-       .              .      . 

* 





to  :  ;  : 

. 

•      . 

. 

bo  c  . 

!/ 

' 

'o  o  be  C  &c 
m   d  aj  C^.C 
c3            o  o  Q, 

jj      ||<M^O 

•   '.       ibc 

•  C 

•  •    "3®  . 

-t->  02^ 

t. 

c 
ffl  « 
SB  1 

1  S 

1 

, 

.  1 

3 


J 


- 


BRIDGES.  1559 

granite  was  unloaded,  cut  and  stored  on  adjacent  docks  rented  for 
the  purpose.  The  mortar  was  mixed  by  the  concrete  plant  in  pro- 
portions, 1  of  cement  to  2y2  of  sand,  and  handled  in  buckets  by  the 
derricks. 

The  interference  on  this  class  of  work  is  great,  and  the  organiza- 
tion that  can  be  attained  where  masonry  work  alone  is  carried 
on,  is  not  possible.  The  coffer-dam  braces  interfere  with  the 
progress,  as  well  as  the  fact  that  the  quantity  of  masonry  which 
can  be  set  while  the  caisson  is  being  sunk  depends  on  the  weight 
required  on  the  cutting  edge  and  not  on  the  efficiency  of  the 
masonry  gang.  The  first  pier  was  built  in  122  gang  days,  or  at  the 
rate  of  56  cu.  yds.  per  day;  the  second  one  was  completed  in  77 
gang  days,  or  at  the  rate  of  90  cu.  yds.  per  day.  This  increased 
performance  was  made  possible  by  the  more  rapid  sinking  of  the 
second  caisson  as  well  as  by  better  organization. 

In  the  total  masonry  for  both  piers  up  to  the  coping  courses 
the  voids  were — in  backing  12%,  in  face  stone  6%.  In  the  coping 
courses  the  voids  were  3%%. 

The  labor  rates  were  as  follows  per  10-hour  day: 

Per  day. 

Foreman     $5.00 

Asistant  foreman    4.50 

Masons 3.20 

Stone  cutters    3.00 

Hoister     runners     2.75 

Laborers     1.50 

Cost  of  Erecting  the  Brooklyn  Towers  and  End  Spans  of  the 
Williamsburg  Bridge,  New  York  City.— The  following  data  were 
given  by  Mr.  Francis  L.  Pruyn  in  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct. 
24,  1906: 

The  work  consisted  of  the  erection  complete  in  place,  of  a  steel 
tower  310  ft.  high  on  the  tower  foundations,  the  erection  of  truss 
596  ft.  long,  the  connecting  of  the  same  with  the  cable  anchorage, 
and  the  construction  of  an  intermediate  tower  about  100  ft.  high 
supporting  the  center  of  the  end  span. 

Main  Tower.— The  main  tower  consisted  of  eight  heavy  columns 
braced  laterally  in  all  directions.  At  the  floor  level  they  were 
provided  with  a  system  of  heavy  girders  to  support  the  end  of  the 
land  truss  as  well  as  the  end  of  the  suspended  structure,  the  main 
span  of  the  bridge.  At  the  top  of  the  tower  another  system  of 
heavy  girders  was  provided  on  which  rested  saddles  for  the  cables 
of  the  suspended  structure. 

The  actual  erection  of  falsework  for  the  main  tower  began  in 
January,  1900,  and  the  erection  and  painting  of  steel  work  was 
finished  in  November,  1901.  The  falsework  consisted  of  a  heavy 
flooring  resting  on  seven  60-ft.  trusses  extending  between 
the  masonry  piers.  On  the  floor  was  placed  the  boil- 
.ers  and  engines  which  were  used  for  raising  all  steel  work  for 
the  tower.  The  main  falsework,  consisting  of  a  heavily  braced  tim- 
ber tower,  was  put  up  in  three  sections.  The  first  section  extended 
to  the  roadway  level,  and  was  about  100  ft.  high.  On  top  of  this 


1560  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

were  erected  two  heavy  A  frame  derricks  for  hoisting  the  steel 
and  two  smaller  derricks  for  handling  the  lighter  parts.  The 
steel  work  was  then  erected  up  to  the  roadway  level.  On  top  of 
the  roadway  the  second  section  of  timber  tower  was  erected  about 
107  ft.  high,  the  derricks  were  transferred  to  its  top,  and  the  steel 
work  erected  as  far  as  possible.  The  first  section  of  falsework 
tower  below  the  roadway  was  then  wrecked  and  re-erected  on  top 
of  the  second  section,  the  derricks  again  transferred,  and  the  erec- 
tion of  tower  completed.  After  steel  tower  was  erected  a  heavy 
timber  gallows  frame  was  built  on  top  of  it  for  hoisting  the  cable 
saddles  into  place. 

In  the  erection  of  falsework,  steel  work,  etc.,  the  Bridgemen'i 
Union  was  employed.  The  rate  of  wages  for  its  members  was  $3.20 
for  eight  hours  at  the  start  of  the  work ;  later  the  rate  was  in- 
creased to  $3.76  per  day.  The  general  rate  of  wages  for  the 
erection  of  falsework  for  main  towers  for  an  eight-hour  day  was 
as  follows: 

Foremen    $5.00     .uf 

Sub-Foremen     3.50 

Carpenters  and   steel  men 3.20 

Hoisters     3.50 

Laborers     2.00 

The  cost  of  erecting  the  falsework  for  the  main  towers  is  shown 
in  Table  IX. 


TABLE  IX.  —  COST  OF  ERECTING  FALSE  WORK  FOR  MAIN  TOWERS. 

Cost  of  First  Section,  Including  Trusses  Between  Piers,  Floor,  En 

gine  House  and  A  Frame  Derricks. 

Quantity.              Rate.  Amount 

Yellow  pine  timber  ........    74.6  M.  ft.,  B.  M.          $24.45  $1.823.0 

Iron   and    steel  ............    42.4    Tons                         77.00  3,261.0 

Labor     ...................    74.6    M.  ft.,  B.  M.             53.00  3,959.0 

Total      ................................       77"       $9,043.00 

Cost  of  Second  Section  of  False  Work  and  Raising  Derricks  on  Top 

of  Same. 

Quantity.  Rate.        Amount. 

Yellow  pine  timber  ........    42       M.  ft.,  B.  M.          $26.40       $1,110.00 

Iron    and    steel..  ..........    19.6    Tons  73.00          1,427.00 

Labor     ...,  ................    42        M.  ft.,  B.  M.  61.80          2,601.00 

Total     ...............................          77"."        $5,138.00 

• 

Cost  of  Third  Section  of  False  Work,  Consisting  of  Wrecking  First 
Section  and  Re-Erecting  Same. 

Quantity.  Rate*        Amount. 

Yellow  pine  timber  ........    26.4    M.  ft.,  B.  M  ............... 

Iron    and   steel  ............  11%    Tons  .............. 

Labor     ...................    26.4    M.  ft.,  B.  M.  $77.50        $2,047.00 


Total     ........  .  ................  t.        $2,047.00 


BRIDGES.  1561 

Cost  of  Gallows  Frame  Erected  on   Top   of   Tower. 

Quantity.  Rate.  Amount. 

Yellow  pine  timber 8.1    M.  f t  B.  M.  $15.00  $122.00 

Iron   and   steel %    Ton  80.00  40.00 

Labor     8.1    M.  ft,  B.  M.  104.00  943.00 

Total     .  $1,105.00 


Cost  of  Wrecking  Second  and  Third  Sections  of  False  Work  as  Well 
as    Staging    Between    Masonry    Piers. 

Quantity.  Rate.        Amount. 

Yellow  pine  timber 

Iron    and   steel 

Labor     124.7    M.  ft,  B.  M.  $26.65        $3,325.00 

Total     $3,325.00 

. 

Total   Cost  of  Erecting  and   Wrecking  False   Work,  Complete. 

Quantity.              Rate.  Amount. 

Yellow  pine  timber 124.7    M.  ft.,  B.  M.          $24.50  $3,055.00 

Iron    and    steel 62.5    Tons                         75.80  4,728.00 

Labor    151.1    M.  ft,  B.  M.            85.25  12,875.00 

Plant    1,314.00 

Plant,     labor • 1,285.00 

General  expenses,   10% 2,326.00 

Total    "77     $25,583.00 

The  total  weight  of  the  tower  was  3,071  tons,  therefore  the 
falsework  cost  $8.32  per  ton.  It  should  be  noted  that  no  salvage 
has  been  allowed  on  timber  or  iron. 

False  Work  for  End  Span. — The  false  work  for  the  end  span 
consisted  of  a  heavy  timber  structure  about  575  ft.  long  and  aver- 
aging about  90  ft.  in  height.  The  bents  were  made  up  of  12  x  12 -in. 
yellow  pine  timber  fastened  together  with  iron  fish  plates  and  %-in. 
bolts  and  braced  with  6-in.  sway  bracing.  The  portion  from  the 
main  towers  to  the  bulkhead,  about  190  ft.,  was  built  on  a  pile 
trestle  in  50  ft.  of  water.  A  40-ft.  truss  spanned  Kent  Ave.  A 
traveler  was  built  on  top  of  the  false  work  by  means  of  which  the 
steel  work  was  erected. 

Cost  of  Pile  Dock. — The  pile  dock  was  built  in  50  ft.  of  water, 
where  the  current  ran  at  times  6  miles  an  hour.  The  river  bottom 
was  hard  and  the  piles  did  not  penetrate  over  10  ft.  For  these 
reasons  it  was  built  much  more  carefully  than  is  customary  with 
this  class  of  temporary  structures.  The  piles  were  of  Norway  pine, 
70  ft  long  with  18-in.  butts.  The  capping  was  of  12  x  12-in.  yellow 
pine  timber  carefully  framed  and  heavily  bolted.  The  whole  was 
braced  by  12  x  12-in.  and  4  x  12-in.  timber. 
The  labor  rates  for  a  1 0-hour  day  were : 

Foremen     ; $5.00 

Dock   builders    2.25 

Hoist  ers     .  .2.50 


1562 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 


The  dimensions  of  the  trestle  were  190  ft.  x  89  ft.,  making  a  total 
of  16,900  sq.   ft. 

Driving  226  Bearing   Piles. 

Per  Pile.  Total. 

Labor     $   3.25  $     735.00 

Piles,     at     $18 18.00  4,068.00 

Pile    driver 1.21  275.00 

Total,    226   piles,   at $22.46          $5,078.00 

Driving   Land    Bent. 

Per  Pile.  Total. 

Labor      ..$   7.57  $197.00 

26   to   20  ft.   piles 10.00  260.00 

Pile   driver 2.69  70.00 

Total,     26    piles,    at $20.26  $527.00 

Driving  36  (10  ft.)  Spar  Piles. 

Per  Pile.  Total. 

Labor     $   5.36  $193.00 

36   piles,    at    $18 18.00  576.00 

Pile    driver 2.22  80.00 

Total,    36    piles,    at $25.58  $849.00 

Driving  36  (60  ft.)  Fender  Piles. 

Per  Pile.  Total. 

Labor     $3.80  $137.00 

36     piles 16.00  576.00 

Pile    driver 1.11  40.00 

Total,    36   piles,   at ?20~91.  $773.00 

Total    cost    of    driving $7,227.00 

Cost   of  Framing   and  Bracing  Pile    Trestle. 

Labor     .                                                                  .  $1,912.00 

93   M.   ft,    B.   M.,   Y.   P.   capping 2,568.00 

19     tons     iron 1,081.00 

Pile    driver 220.00 

*S*J5 

Erecting. 

Total  cost  of  pile  dock..                            .."513,008.00 
Cost    of   wrecking 665.00 

Grand    total     $13,673.00 

General    expenses,    at    10% 1,367.00 


$15,040.00  :iJ   en-,'; 

There  were  16,900  sq.  ft.  of  dock,  which,  therefore,  cost  80  cts. 
per  sq.  ft. 

False  Work  Trestle  for  End  Span. — -The  false  work  for  the  canti- 
lever span,  which  extended  from  the  intermediate  tower  to  the 


BRIDGES.  1563 

anchorage,  consists  of  17  bents  20  ft.  apart,  and  from  60  ft.  to  90 
ft.  high  and  included  the  truss  across  Kent.  Ave.,'  which  was  made 
up  of  nine  trusses  48  ft.  long  and  15  ft.  deep.  After  the  cantilever 
span  was  erected,  seven  bents  were  moved  forward  to  serve  as 
false  work  for  the  connecting  span  and  the  remainder  of  the  steel 
work  erected.  The  timber  bents  were  erected  stick  by  stick  in 
place,  and  not,  as  is  customary,  by  building  on  the  ground  and 
erecting  the  bent  as  a  unit. 

The  steel  work  was  erected  by  means  of  a  traveler  running  on 
tracks  on  top  of  the  false  work.  It  was  45  ft.  square  by  47  ft. 
high,  and  was  furnished  with  four  10-ton  derricks,  which  were 
mounted  on  top  of  it.  A  20-ton  derrick  was  set  up  on  the  extreme 
end  of  the  false  work  for  raising  the  steel  from  the  ground  to  cars 
on  top  of  the  false  work.  As  in  the  case  of  the  false  work  for  the 
towers,  all  labor  had  to  be  furnished  by  the  Bridgemen's  Union. 

Total  Cost  of  Erecting  17  Bents  and  Moving  For- 
ward 7  Bents  and  Kent  Ave.   Truss. 

Labor,   building  and  wrecking  17  bents. $12,636. 00 

Labor,  moving  and  wrecking  7  bents...  2,843.00 

Materials  for   17   bents: 

Yellow  pine,   469   M.,  at   $27.50 12,910.00 

Yellow  pine,  31  M.,  at  $20 632.00 

Iron  bolts,  etc.,   39,501  Ibs 1,351.00 

Materials  for  truss : 

Yellow  pine,  10.8  M.,  at  $27.50 297.00 

Rods,   21,100   Ibs 740.00 

Plant    total 2,000.00 

Total $33,409.00 

General   expenses,    10% 3,341.00 

Grand    total $36,750.00 

Total  Cost  of  Traveler. 

Labor,  building  and  wrecking 3,895.00 

Materials : 

Yellow  pine,  46.4   M.,  at   $27.50 1,278.00 

Iron   bolts,    etc.,    14,740    Ibs 420.00 

Rods,    5,500   Ibs.,   at   3^    cts 193.00 

Tackle,    20,000    Ibs.,   at  4   cts 800.00 

Plant     340.00 

Total      $6,926.00 

General  expense,    10% 693.00 


Grand    total $7,619.00 

Total  Cost  of  20-Ton  Derrick. 

Labor,  building  and  wrecking.  .  $647.00 

Materials 600.00 

Plant     50.00 


$1,297.00 
General   expenses,    at   10% 129.00 

Total     $1,426.00 


1564  HANDBOOK    OF    COST   DATA. 

Total    Cost    of    False    Work    for    End    Span    Con- 
taining 2,636  Tons  of  Steel. 

Per  Ton  Steel 

Erected.  Total. 

Pile  trestle $5.70  $15,040.00 

Timber    false    work 13.94  36,750.00 

Traveler     2.90  7,629.00 

20-ton     derrick 54  1,426.00 

Total     $23.08          $60,845.00 

The  total  weight  of  steel  erected  in  intermediate  tower  and  end 
span  was  2,636  tons;  the  false  work,  therefore,  cost  $23.08  per  ton 
of  steel. 

It  should  be  noted  that  no  salvage  has  been  allowed  for  timber 
and  iron,  as  there  was  no  means  of  determining  what  was  the  ulti- 
mate value  of  this  material. 

Cost  of  Erection  of  Main  Towers. — Erection  of  main  towers  was 
begun  Feb.  1,  1900,  and  was  completed,  with  the  exception  of 
placing  the  saddle  on  top  of  the  tower  on  Oct.  1st  of  the  same 
year.  The  last  saddle  was  set  Dec.  14.  The  first  section  erected, 
which  extended  up  to  the  roadway  level,  or  to  elevation  125  ft. 
above  mean  high  water,  contained  the  heaviest  members,  and 
should  have  been  the  cheapest  to  erect.  The  delivery,  however, 
was  slow  and  the  organization  not  yet  perfected.  The  second 
section  erected  extended  to  elevation  232  ft.  above  mean  high 
water,  and  contained  a  great  deal  of  light  and  intricate  cross 
bracing,  which  accounts  for  its  higher  cost.  In  the  top  section  the 
steel  was  delivered  promptly,  and  the  construction  was  simple  and 
free  from  detail  work. 

The  prices  paid  to  labor,  per  day  of  8  hours,  were  as  follows : 

Foremen     $5.00 

Sub-foremen 3.75 

Hoisters     3.50 

Steelmen 3.50 

Laborers 2.00 

The  plant  consisted  of  two  40-hp.  10-in.  x  12-in.  boilers,  one 
25-hp.  8-in.  x  10-in.  double-cylinder,  4-drum  engine,  and  one  small 
donkey  engine.  Charging  these  off  at  509c,  the  total  plant  charge, 
including  steel  cable,  rope,  small  tools,  coal,  etc.,  was  $5,000. 

The  cost  given  in  Table  X  does  not  include  the  cost  of  riveting, 
which  is  treated  separately. 

The  incidental  expenses  were  as  follows : 

Preliminary     work $     637 

Fitting    steel     at     top     of    towers,     chipping 

roller    beds,    etc 1,221 

Placing    anchor    bolts 45 

Diamond-drilling    32    anchor-bolt    holes 4,000 

Rust   joints    materials 931 


Total      $6,814 


BRIDGES.  1565 

Erecting  End  Span. — This  work  consisted  of  erecting  the  inter- 
|iediate  tower  and  the  land  truss,  which  extended  from  the  main 
jowers  to  the  anchorage,  a  distance  of  600  ft.  The  truss  was  40  ft. 
jeep  by  67  ft.  wide,  with  a  roadway  25  ft.  in  width  extending 
•eyond  the  truss  on  each  side.  The  span  was  made  up  of  two 
•  eavy  trusses,  divided  into  20-ft.  panels,  and  complicated  with  a 
multitude  of  details  owing  to  the  various  kinds  of  traffic  that  had 
o  be  taken  care  of  on  this  bridge. 

The  intermediate  tower  on  which  the  cantilever  span  rested  was 
0  ft.  in  height,  and  rested  on  two  masonry  piers  67  ft.,  center  to 
enter.  Each  pier  supported  four  steel  columns,  with  diagonal 
•racing  and  connected  across  at  the  top  with  heavy  beams.  All 
naterial  was  brought  to  the  site  on  floats,  and  was  unloaded  by 
neans  of  a  derrick  situated  at  the  main  tower.  The  material  was 
>laced  on  flat  cars,  which  ran  on  a  trestle  about  6  ft.  above  mean 
ligh  water,  and  was  pushed  by  hand  to  the  foot  of  the  false  work 
extending  just  beyond  the  intermediate  towers.  Here  it  was 
loisted  to  cars  running  on  top  of  the  false  work  and  placed  under 
;he  traveler,  which  erected  it  in  position. 

The  erection  of  the  intermediate  tower  was  begun  in  April,  1900. 
The  erection  of  the  end  span  was  finished  in  March,  1901.  The 
cost  of  labor  was  the  same  as  for  the  main  tower,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  the  hoisters,  runners  and  steelmen,  whose  rate  was  in- 
creased to  $3.76  per  day  of  eight  hours. 

The  plant  consisted  of  three  second-hand  25-hp.  engines,  double- 
cylinder  8  in.  x  10  in.,  with  six  drums  and  boilers,  and  cost,  at 
50%,  $1,500.  The  cost  of  rope,  small  tools,  etc.,  was  $1,300,  making 
the  total  cost  $2,800.  The  total  cost  of  erection  is  given  by 
Table  XI. 

The  incidental  expenses  were  : 

Preliminary     work $    500 

Rust    joints ; 150 

Adjusting  errors  in  steel  work 696 

Removing  steel  for  cables 1,006 


Total $2,352 


1566 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA 


coco  o  o-*f 

M0500TH 
O5  Cvl  O  T*l  00 


rHO»l«,-ICO 


®Sss 

00  H  01 


-M    t-OiO  Tf  O 

O  co  rf  m  t-o 
f-l  ij< ,_(  o  10  oo 


g          ^HdS^ 


000  00 
—    000  00 


g    H^ 

!i  t 

TO  EH     . 

s^!5^ 


•  00000 

jj  00000 

•tf  06  oo  o  e^T-* 

O  n-owco^ 

G     .  M  t-  co  co  TJI  c^j 

O   «? 


Sg 

M  ^     . 

^J       QQ         M 


o 
o 


oo    *-< 

Si     O  COTf  t-COb- 

^H  t-- CO  CO  -^<  C<J 

^  ofi>4 r-T   'od 


O  O  C  C^ 

* 


M  O 


BRIDGES. 


156? 


ro  ocoo  oeg 
.  "t;  LOCOO  oio 

tO    r~    OO  CO  5O  -r  -JO 


1050 

l"= 


TH  eo  eg  TH  eg      TH  eg 


Zj     T"  <^>  » 

*  ^.°r 

o    +.  ^  * 


£ 

CQ     O 

OC-CO  CO  05 

.eg 

f~. 

s  -  +1 

»  t^ 

t-  o  o  10  oo 

.00 

0 

®  rH     ^ 

<U 

dioi-5 

•o 

05 

^eg  ^ 

IO  r-l  TJ< 

•eg 

eo 

€^-                                          nnr       vr 

PH 

iHOO 

•o 

00 

h 

o' 

•^ 

d 

fe 

!\ 

00000 
000  00 

°o 

O 

0 

£ 

:e^ 

a, 

d 

eg'  05'  d  10  «o 

eg'5* 

00 

W      60 

c 

JS 

lOlOO  LOOO 

«o" 

o 

000 
000 

00 
00 

O 
0 

^         "rj   (T 

2 

fi^- 

w- 

fto- 

rt 

rHUJO 

co  eg 

00 

H     uc 

•g 

eo«cco 

eg  eg 

n      § 

J2!  ° 

10  ^o  o  10  oo 

iio 

<p 

eo 

H 

5^5 

oW 

3 

§  6 

°*  fe 

dec  T-5 

',9 

M- 

C._ 

M-                   M-            M- 

1  Wii^ 

a:*:rfti 


000  00 
__.   00000 

00 

00 

0 
0 

•g  o  as  10  eg  eo 

odd 

a:  10 

00 

-^ 

:^  I  :«  I 


•o 

;d 


.000 

O  co      oo 

H    rn" 


*&  O  *J  OrHCO^OO 

S  «    •  §  H  ««-" 

^  <p  ai  H 

B  S^crj  g  rHirsoiOco 


00 

00 
100 

ooo 

oo  ,-1 


10  coio 
ooo 


kufflo     . 


§ 


^ 

o  d     p 


ojo 

k£       O 


^    t-t-r-l 


•eg   I  t- 
•  o  |  *j 

'd   I  d 


I    I 

a 


g« 

O  cS 

111  1 

hJCU        O 


1568  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

on  the  main  tower  and  end  span  required  long  heavy  rivets,  which 
were  very  difficult  to  drive.    The  plant  consisted  of  the  following: 

2  boilers,  at  50% $    300 

2  compressors,  at  50% 1,300 

9  pneumatic    rammers,    at   50% 1,800 

15   forges,   at  50% 250 

W.    I.    pipe 200 

Coal    1,120 

Steel,  tools,   scaffold,   etc 1,350 

Plant,  labor,  miscellaneous 3,290 


Total    $9,610 

Painting  Main  Tower  and  End  Span. — The  cost  of  the  first  coat 
of  paint  on  the  main  tower  and  end  span  was  about  double  what  it 
should  have  been  on  account  of  the  bad  condition  of  the  shop  coat,' 
which  had  to  be  scraped  off  in  many  places  before  the  first  coat 
could  be  applied.  A  fair  average  would  be  to  figure  painters  em- 
ployed one-half  time  in  preparing  the  surface. 

TABLE  XIII. — COST  OF  PAINTING   STRUCTURE. 

Main  Tower,  End  Span.                  Total. 

3,071  Tons.  2,636  Tons.            5,707  Tons. 

Per  Ton.  Total.  Per  Ton.  Total.  Per  Ton.  Total.' 

First    coat $1.03      $3,163  $1.99     $   5,235      $1.47      $    8,398 

Second   coat 60       1,847  .88         2,325         .73          4,172 


Total   labor $1.63  $5,010  $2.87  $  7,550  $2.20  $12,570 

Materials    52  1,600  .52  1,363  .52  2,963 

Plant    .31  960  .31  815  .31  1,775 

Total $7,570  ....  $  9,738  ....  $17,308 

General  exp.,  at  10%.  .$0.25  757  $0.37  974  .30  1,731 


Grand    total $'2.71     $8,327     $4.07     $10,712     $3.33     $19,039 

Painters  received  $2.25  per  day  of  eight  hours,  but  painted  only 
the  first  coat  on  the  main  tower.  After  that  steelmeen  were  em- 
ployed at  $3.76  per  day.  Table  XIII  shows  the  cost  of  painting.: 
The  cost  of  the  plant  was  as  follows : 

Brushes,   pots,   etc $  214 

Scaffolds,   ladders,   etc 313 

Anchorage    protection 345 

Miscellaneous   plant   labor 903 

Total $1,775 

General  Expense. — The  general  expense  on  this  work  includes  th« 
resident  engineer,  draftsman,  superintendent,  timekeepers,  offic« 
help  and  watchman;  and  figured  out  10%  to  the  cost  of  the  tota 
labor  and  materials  employed  at  the  site  of  the  work. 

As  previously  noted,  the  large  cost  for  falsework  is  brought  abou 
on  account  of  not  crediting  salvage  on  the  materials  on  this  Iterr 
Table  XIV  gives  the  total  cost  of  the  completed  work. 


BRIDGES.  1569 

TABLE  XIV. — TOTAL  COST  OP  COMPLETED  WORK. 

Main  Tower.  End  Span.  Total  Cost  Per 

3,071  Tons.   2,636  Tons.  5,707  Tons.  Ton. 

Falsework    $25,583          $60,845  $86,428  $15.19 

Erection    26,892               23,941  50,833  8.95 

Riveting.... 24,816               23,940  48,756  8.55 

^"ting     _8-327               10.712  19.039  JUl 

Total $85,618          $119,438          $205,056         

Cost  per   ton $28.05  $45.30  $36.00         $36.00 

The  materials  ueed  in  painting  main  tower  and  end  span  were 
as  follows: 

28  bbls.  No.  500  National  Paint  Works $1,640 

24  bbls.  No.  20  National  Paint  Works,  Spec.  1,103 

Turpentine 60 

Linseed  oil 160 



Total    $2,963 

Cost  of  the  Brooklyn  Anchorage  of  the  Williamsburg  Bridge.— The 
following  data  were  given  by  Mr.  Francis  L.  Pruyh,  in  Engineering- 
Contracting,  Jan.  30,  1907 : 

The  Brooklyn  anchorage  of  the  Williamsburg  Bridge  consisted 
essentially  of  a  block  of  masonry  150  ft.  long,  182  ft.  wide  and 
114  ft  high.  Its  function  was  to  furnish  sufficient  weight  to  hold 
down  the  cables  when  the  main  span  of  the  bridge  was  fully  load- 
ed. Fig.  1  [too  large  for  reproduction  here}  shows  the  main  fea- 
ture of  the  design ;  which  included  an  excavation  40  ft.  deep,  a  pile 
and  timber  grillage  foundation,  over  which  was  spread  a  14-ft. 
layer  of  concrete.  From  this  point  to  the  elevation  of  the  ground, 
a  distance  of  25  ft.,  limestone  masonry  was  placed,  and  from  this 
elevation  to  the  top  of  the  anchorage  the  masonry  consisted  of 
limestone  backing  with  granite  face-stone. 

The  interior  of  the  anchorage  contained  three  tunnels  extend- 
ing from  top  to  bottom  in  which  were  placed  the  steel  anchor 
chains.  .  These  chains  were  fastened  at  the  bottom  of  the  anchor- 
age to  a  heavy  steel  grillage  which  was  firmly  imbedded  in  the 
masonry.  The  anchorage  also  contained  two  large  wells  situated 
between  the  lines  of  anchor  chains,  which  were  necessary  in  order 
to  obtain  an  equal  load  distribution  on  the  foundation.  The  main 
items  in  this  contract  were  as  follows : 

Earth  excavation    34,000  cu.  yds. 

Yellow  pine  piles 432 

Yellow   pine   timber 120,000  cu.   ft. 

Concrete    10,885  cu.  yds. 

Stone    masonry    44,597  cu.  yds. 

Steel   anchor   chains    1,553  tons. 

Cost  of  Excavation.- — The  anchorage  was  situated  about  360  ft. 
from  the  East  River  bulkhead  line  and  a  trestle  was  constructed  to 
carry  the  excavated  material  across  the  intervening  street  to  a 
dumping-board,  where  it  was  loaded  directly  into  scows  and  car- 
ried away  to  sea.  Tracks  were  laid  on  this  trestle  and  cars  which 


1570  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

were  actuated  by  an  ingenious  form  of  cable  haul  handled  the  ex- 
cavated material.  This  trestle  and  hauling  device  also  served  to 
handle  all  the  material  for  grillages,  concrete,  stone  masonry,  steel 
work,  etc. 

The  excavation  was  done  by  pick  and  shovel  into  skips,  which 
were  elevated  and  placed  on  the  cars  by  means  of  eight  derricks 
arranged  around  a  framework,  which  was  maintained  at  the  orig- 
inal ground  level.  Long  piles  were  driven  before  the  framework 
was  erected  to  support  it  as  the  excavation  proceeded,  and  these 
piles  were  braced  and  spliced  as  the  ground  level  receded.  This 
feature  of  the  plant  was  very  expensive,  as  the  proper  support  of 
this  heavy  framework  kept  a  large  gang  of  men  continually  at  work. 
Derricks  placed  around  the  edges  of  the  excavation  would  have 
proved  much  more  economical,  not  only  on  account  of  needing  less 
maintenance,  but  also  because  they  would  have  covered  the  entire 
work  whereas  the  derrick  frame  could  not  reach  the  area  directly 
under  itself.  The  derricks  were  designed  without  bull  wheels  so 
that  tag  men  had  to  be  used  throughout.  This  feature  added  6 
per  cent  to  the  cost  of  excavation  for  labor  alone,  and  probably 
added  as  much  more  through  loss  of  time  in  swinging  derricks. 

On  two  sides  of  the  excavation  10xl2-in.  yellow  pine  sheet  pil- 
ing 30  ft.  long  was  driven  to  protect  sewers,  water  pipes,  etc.,  in 
the  adjoining  streets.  The  driving  was  exceedingly  difficult  and 
hard,  it  being  through  sand  and  gravel.  The  piles  were  often 
broken  in  driving  and  the  points  of  many  were  found  badly  broom- 
ed when  uncovered.  The  following  rates  of  wages  were  paid  per 
10-hour  day: 

a 
Per  day. 

Foreman    $4.00 

Hoister    2.50 

Fireman 2.00 

Carpenter    2.50 

Riggers    2.25 

Laborers    : 1.75 

The  average  length  of  sheet  piles  was  30  ft.  ;  8,000  lin.  ft.  were 
driven  and  9,000  lin.  ft.  used.  The  total  cost  of  the  sheet  piling 
was  as  follows,  no  salvage  being  credited : 

Total  Cost  per 

cost.  lin.  ft. 

Labor,   driving    $1,405  $0.176 

Labor,  bracing    920  0.115 

Piles,  90  M  at  $20 1,800  0.225 

Bracing,  100  M  at  $13 1,300  0.163 

Plant     234  0.029 

Steam     133  0.016 


Total $5,792     $0.724 

After  the  sheeting  was  driven  the  excavation  was  covered  down 
to  the  required  depth  of  40  ft.  below  the  elevation  of  the  ground 
About  one-half  the  material  excavated  was  sand,  and  the  remain- 


BRIDGES.  1571 


der  was  made  up  of  clay  and  hard  pan.  About  one-quarter  was 
hard  pan  and  very  hard  digging.  All  excavation  was  done  by  hand, 
the  material  being  shoveled  into  skips,  which  were  then  raided  by 
the  derricks  and  placed  on  flat  cars  which  ran  through  the  der- 
rick frame.  The  cars  were  then  run  to  the  dump  about  400  ft. 
distant  by  a  cable  device,  the  material  being  dumped  down  an  in- 
cline chute  into  scows,  to  be  dumped  at  sea.  Building  sand,  suffi- 
cient for  all  concrete  and  masonry  on  this  work,  was  secured 
from  the  excavation  and  stored  on  the  work.  The  rates  of  wages 
paid  per  10-hour  day  were  as  follows: 

Per  day. 

Roisters    . $2.75 

Signalmen 2.00 

Tagman    1.50 

Trackmen     1.75 

Laborers     1.60 

The  labor  cost  of  excavating  42,000  cu.  yds.  was  as  follows: 

Labor.  Amt.  cu.  yd. 

Loading  skips   $   8,000          $0.19 

Loading  on   cars    2,184  0.05 

Dumping     2,879  0.07 

General  foreman    875  0.02 


Total $13,938  $0.33 

The  total  cost  of  excavation  was  as  follows: 

Quantity         Total  Cost  per 

cu.  yds.           cost.  cu.  yd. 

Labor     42,000          $13,938  $0.332 

Pumping 42,000               1,176  .028 

Steam     42,000              1,763  .042 

Plant    42,000            11,140  .265 

General    expenses 42,000              5,585  .133 

Dumping  at  sea    22,000              3,300  .105 


Total    $36,900          $0.90 

The  cost  of  pumping,  steam,  plant  and  general  expenses  were 
figured  for  the  entire  work  and  distributed  through  each  item  sep- 
arately, as  is  shown  further  on.  The  best  month's  run  constituted 
16,351  cu.  yds.,  working  67  ten-hour  shifts,  which  is  equivalent  to 
246  cu.  yds.  per  10-hour  day.  The  average  output  for  the  entire 
period  of  excavation  was  184  cu.  yds.  per  10-hour  day,  which  is 
equivalent  to  218  working  days  for  this  portion  of  the  work.  It 
will  be  noted  that  the  plant  charges  are  exceedingly  high,  and  in- 
clude the  sheet  piling  given  above  as  well  as  its  proportionate 
charge  of  derrick  frame,  trestle,  etc. 

Foundation  Piles. — After  the  excavation  was  completed,  founda- 
tion piles  were  driven  in  three  clusters  under  the  steel  grillages. 
There  were  423  piles  in  all,  and  as  the  bottom  consisted  of  pure 
sand  saturated  with  water  they  could  not  be  driven  more  than  an 
average  of  9  ft.  below  cut-off.  The  cost  of  driving  these  piles  is 
excessive  owing  to  the  great  difficulty  encountered  in  driving  un- 


157L'  HANDBOOK    OP   COST  DATA. 

der  the  der/ick  frames,   which  were  directly  over  about   20  per  rent 

of    them. 

Cost 
Total  cost,  per  pile, 

Labor,    driving $     731          $1.73 

Piles,   13   ft.    long    634  1.50 

Pumping    376  0.87 

Steam fir,  0.08 

Plant     213  0.5(» 

General    :m  O.S2 

Total    $L\337  $5.50 

Timber  Grillage. — Over  the  entire  foundation  and  around  the 
heads  of  the  piles  was  deposited  a  2-ft.  layer  of  concrete  in  which 
was  imbedded  the  first  course  of  timber  that  constituted  the  gril- 
lage, covering  the  entire  area  of  foundation  and  consisting  of  four 
thicknesses  of  12  x  12-in.  yellow  pine  timber.  The  timber  was 
sized  top  and  bottom  and  drift  bolted  every  6  ft.  with  1%-in.  drift 
bolts.  The  top  course  of  timber  consisted  of  alternate  rows  of 
8x12  in.  and  10x12  in.  to  bond  with  the  concrete.  The  cost  of 
the  timber  grillages  was  as  follows,  there  being  1,394  M  ft.  B. 
M.  of  timber: 

Total         Per  M  ft. 
Labor.  Amount.        B.  M. 

Delivery    to    anchorage    $   1,660          $   1.19 

Placing    2,437  1.75 

Drift    bolting     920  0.66 

General   foreman    490  0.35 

Total .$  5,507         ?  3.95 

Total  Per  M  ft. 

Total    cost.                                  Amount.  B.  M. 

Labor     ; $   5,507  $   3.95 

Yellow    pine    25,090  18.00 

Iron    3,900  2.80 

Pumping    1,394  1.00 

Steam 83  .06 

Plant     1,990  1.43 

General    2,092  1.50 

Total    $40,056          $28.74 

Concrete. — A  layer  of  concrete  varying  in  thickness  from  6  to 
10  ft.  and  covering  the  entire  foundation  was  deposited  above  the 
timber  grillage.  About  8,200  cu.  yds.  was  required,  the  mixture 
being  about  one  part  cement  to  two  parts  of  sand  to  five  parts 
broken  stone.  The  concrete  was  mixed  in  a  2  cu.  yd.  cubical  mixer 
situated  directly  beneath  the  derrick  frame,  so  that  the  materials 
could  be  dumped  from  cars  into  the  mixer  hopper.  Broken  stone 
came  to  the  site  in  barges  and  was  shoveled  into  skips,  and  after 
the  required  amount  of  cement  was  spread  on  the  stone,  the  skip 
was  lifted  by  a  derrick  onto  cars  situated  on  the  trestle.  The  car 
was  then  hauled  by  cable  to  the  mixer  and  dumped,  with  the  re- 
quired amount  of  sand  for  a  batch.  The  mixed  concrete  was  run 
into  buckets  and  deposited  in  the  work  by  derricks,  where  it  was 


BRIDGES.  1573 

spread  and  rammed  in  12-in.  layers.  A  batch  consisted  of  2*4 
barrels  of  cement,  19  cu.  ft.  of  sand  and  47  cu.  ft.  of  broken  stone 
and  made  1.8  cu.  yd.  in  place.  The  maximum  output  for  10  hours 
was  111  batches  or  200  cu.  yds.  ;  the  average  output  for  the  entire 
time  of  concreting,  or  67  days,  was  68  batches,  or  122  cu.  yds. 

The  average  force  was  51  men  divided  as  follows:  15  hauling 
materials,  12  placing,  3  mixing;  the  rest  were  hoisters,  runners, 
signal  men,  car  men,  etc.  The  rates  of  pay  were  the  same  as  those 
previously  given.  The  cost  of  8,169  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  was  as 
follows : 

Labor.  Total.     Per  cu.  yd. 

Handling  materials $   2,660          $0.32 

Mixing    348  0.04 

Placing     3,003  0.38 

General  foreman    512  0.06 

Total ....  $   6,523          $0.80 

Total  cost.  Total.     Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor    $   6,523          $0.80 

Cement,   at   $1.50  per  bbl 15,930  1.95 

Sand,  at  $0.50  per  cu.  yd. . 1,630  0.20 

Stone,   at   $1.25   per   cu    yd 9,800  1.20 

Pumping : 1,553  0.19 

Steam    490  0.06 

Plant     4,495  0.55 

General    expenses    _2^?1      _^    - 

Total     $42,881          $5.25 

The  concrete  was  of  large  mass  and  was  easily  placed.  The 
plant  was  well  designed  and  the  job  well  managed.  The  plant 
charge  of  55  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  was  high  ;  one-half  of  it  was  charge- 
able to  the  derrick  frame.  This  part  of  the  plant,  as  before  stated, 
was  expensive  to  maintain  and  the  proportion  chargeable  to  con- 
crete was  therefore  large. 

Masonry. — The  stone  masonry,  consisting  of  a  total  of  44,000  cu. 
yds.,  was  for  the  most  part  in  large  masses ;  at  the  same  time  the 
tunnels  for  the  anchor  chains  and  the  various  wells  required  a 
good  deal  of  careful  setting.  The  masonry  from  the  concrete  up 
to  about  ground  level  consisted  of  a  face  of  rock-faced  limestone 
with  limestone  backing.  At  the  ground  level  came  several  courses 
of  six-cut  granite  facing  16  ft.  in  height,  above  this  came  rock- 
faced  granite  facing  up  to  the  coping  courses,  which  were  of  six- 
cut  granite.  All  backing  was  of  limestone,  roughly  squared,  in 
thickness  equal  to  the  face  stones  of  the  same  course  and  with  ver- 
tical joints  that  averaged  3  ins.  The  vertical  and  horizontal  joints 
of  all  rock-faced  ashlar  was  %  in. ;  for  six-cut  work  it  was  %  in. 

The  stone  was  unloaded  from  barges  at  the  dock  onto  cars, 
which  were  hauled  by  cable  to  the  site  of  the  work.  The  mortar 
was  mixed  by  machine  in  the  concrete  mixer. 

The  cost  of  labor  In  setting  masonry  was  high  and  was  due  to 
the  design  of  the  derrick  frames,  which  were  directly  over  the 
work.  They  had  to  be  jacked  up  for  each  course  above  the  ground 
level,  which  was  expensive,  and  being  located  over  the  center  of 


1574          •        HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

this  work,  setting  stone  beneath  them  was  difficult  and  costly.  Tag- 
men  were  used  to  swing  the  derricks ;  as  the  design  did  not  permit 
bull  wheels ;  they  added  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  to  the  cost  of  setting. 
Stone  masons  worked  an  8-hour  day,  all  other  labor  a  10-hour  day. 
The  labor  rates  were  as  follows : 

Per  day. 

Foreman    $5.00 

Masons     3.20 

Signal  men   2.00 

Laborers     1.50 

The  total  labor  cost  of  setting  44,053  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  was: 

Total.     Per  cu.  yd. 

Delivering   stone    $  9,935          $0.23 

Mixing   and   delivering   mortar...      8,792  0.20 

Delivering  spalls 965  0.02 

Setting    stone     41,141  0.94 

Total $60,833          $1.39 

In  the  following  cost  of  the  various  kinds  of  masonry,  the  labor 
was  taken  at  $1.39  per  cu.  yd.,  as  above  given;  there  was  no 
means  of  obtaining  the  cost  of  setting  the  various  classes  of 
masonry.  Likewise  the  percentage  of  mortar  was  taken- at  a  fixed 
percentage  of  the  total  masonry.  Actually  the  mortar  varied  from 
15  per  cent  in  backing  to  6  per  cent  in  rock  facing,  to  2  per  cent 
in  six-cut  work.  The  difference  in  cost  of  mortar,  however,  is  more 
than  balanced  by  the  extra  cost  of  setting  the  facing  and  six-cut 
masonry.  The  cost  of  mortar  per  cu.  yd.  of  masonry  was: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.4   bbl.   cement  at    $1.50 $6.60 

0.12   cxi.   yd.   sand  at   $0.50 0.06 

$0.66 

The  cost  of  limestone  backing  34,200  cu.  yds.  was: 

Total.     Per  cu.  yd. 

&•:::::::::::::::::::  :::'  11:11!     *J:S 

Stone,    $5    at    85% 145,350  4.25 

Steam    4,788  .14 

Plant     26,340  .77 

General    expenses    16,760  .49 


$263,348  $7.70 

The  cost  of  limestone  facing  3,500  cu.  yds.   was: 

Total.     Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor    $   4,860  $1.39 

Mortar .      2,310  .66 

Stone,    $7.25    at    94%... 23,805  6.80 

Steam     490  .14 

Plant    2.695  .77 

General   expenses    1,715  .49 

$35,875  $10.25 


BRIDGES. 


1575 


The  cost  of  granite  facing  3,523  cu.  yds.  was: 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor     $  4,900  $   1.39 

Mortar     2,325  .66 

Stone,    $16.66    at    95% 55,170  15.66 

Steam    494  .14 

Plant 2,715  .77 

General  expenses   1,730  .49 

Total $67,334          $19.11 

The  cost  of  granite  backing  700  cu.  yds.  was: 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor    .                                                 .  .$       973  $   1.39 

Mortar     462  .66 

Stone,    $14.47    at    88% 8,925  12.75 

Steam     98  .14 

Plant    639  .77 

General  expenses   343  .49 

Total      $11,340          $16.20 

The   granite  knuckle  stone,    300   cu.  yds.,   cost: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor    $   1.39 

Mortar    .- 

Stone    17.68 

Steam 14 

Plant    77 

General  expenses 49 

Total $20.47 

The  six-cut  granite,   1,640  cu.  yds.,   cost: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Labor    $   1.39 

Mortar     66 

Stone,  $28.67  at  98% 28.05 

Steam .14 

Plant    77 

General   expenses    49 

Total     .  ..$31.50 


Cost  of  Erecting  Steel. — The  steei  work  consisted  of  a  heavy 
grillage  made  up  of  beams  5  ft.  6  ins.  deep  by  36  ft.  and  24  ft.  long, 
riveted  together  to  form  an  anchorage  for  each  set  of  anchor 
chains,  and  of  four  chains  made  up  of  2 -in.  eye-bars  from  10  to 
14  ft.  long.  Each  chain  extended  from  the  top  to  the  bottom  of 
the  anchorage  and  was  made  up  of  two  rows  of  20  eye-bars  and 
fastened  t&gether  with  6-in.  steel  pins.  The  steel  was  delivered 
in  the  same  manner  as  the  other  materials  and  set  in  place  by 
derricks.  Each  pin  rested  on  a  heavy  casting  or  steel  girder, 
which  rested  upon  knuckle  stones,  cut  to  the  proper  angles  and  set 
in  the  masonry.  The  joints  between  the  knuckle  stone  and  the 


1576  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

bearing    girders   were   rust   joints.      The  total   weight    erected   was 
1,583  tons,  and  the  cost  of  erection  was  as  follows: 

Labor ; 

Delivery  and   erection $3.337 

Riveting   - 1,384 

Painting    962 

Drilling  for  bolts    349 

Rust  joints 282 

F6remen    .  675 


Total   labor $6,989 — $4.42  per  ton 

Steel    .  . . 65.00  per  ton 

Plant     2.06  per  ton 

Steam     .. . .06  per  ton 

General  expenses    .44  per  ton 


Total .$71. 98  per  ton 

Steam  Production. — The  cost  of  fuel  and  labor  for  steam  produc- 
tion for  the  whole  work  is  as  follows.  The  boiler  battery  consisted 
of  four  old  Manhattan  Elevated  locomotive  boilers  of  30  hp.  each. 
They  were  located  near  the  dock  and  the  steam  was  piped  to  the 
anchorage. 

Foreman,  day,   25Ms   mos.   at   $85 $2,170 

Foreman,   night,   25 %    mos.   at    $60..    1,530 
Helper,   25%   moe.  at  $40 1,020 

—- $   4,720 

2,340  long  tons  soft  coal  at  $2.25 $5,360 

1,525   long  tons  hard  coal  at   $4.00..    6,100 

—$11,360 

$16,080 

This  cost  has  been  distributed  through  the  different  classes  of 
work 

Pumping. — Pumping  was  done  during  part  of  the  time  that  ex- 
cavation, pile  driving,  concreting  and  timber  grillage  work  was 
being  done,  a  total  of  235  days.  The  cost  was  as  follows: 

Engineers,    466%    days  at   $2.85 $1,330 

Laborers,    202  %     days    at    $1.50 303 



Total $1,633 

Steam     3,964 

Plant    990 



Total  cost   $6.587 


BRIDGES.  1577 

Plant. — The  plant  cost  for  the  various  kinds  of  plant  and  ma- 
chinery described  under  the  different  classes  of  work  were  as  fol- 
lows ;  no  salvage  has  been  credited : 

Materials.  Labor.  Total. 

2    Derrick   frames,    complete....- $   8,538  $   8,052  $16,590 

2   Derrick   frames,   repairs 8,321  11,574  19,895 

Trestle  and  track 4,117  1,626  5,743 

Boiler,    battery 1,140  134  1.274 

Pumping     990  268  1,258 

Pile  driver    2,590  2,590 

Mixer   and   trestle    612  426  1,038 

2   Derricks  at  bulkhead    2,321  448  2,769 

1    Howe    truss 480  517  997 

1  Derrick  for  sand 703  52  755 

Sewer    120  158  278 

Gutter    35  28  63 

Electric  light   2,000  2,000 

Water  for  motor 500  500 

Water  for  steam 1,280  1,280 

Waterproofing    260  260 


Total   $33,817          $24,563          $58,380 

General  Expenses. — The  general  expenses  were  made  up  as 
follows : 

Office  force  and  watchman,   21  mos.,  at  $922.50 $19,395 

Making  bid,   say   500 

Money  invested,   say   $50,000,  at   5%,   for   21    mos..  4,400 

Bond,    $350,000,   at   1% 6,125 

Insurance,   $140,000,  at  3% 2,800 

Traveling    expenses,    say 500 

Office  rent   1,825 

Building  office  and  storeroom   800 

Office  fixtures   400 

Office  stationery,  telephone,   etc • 1,000 

Total   $37,745 

Labor  Cost  of  the  Foundations  of  City  Island  Bridge,  New  York.* 
Before  giving  the  figures  of  the  cost  of  labor  in  the  construction 
of  the  foundations  of  the  City  Island  Bridge,  it  will  be  well  to  give 
a  brief  description  of  the  bridge  itself.  The  City  Island  Bridge 
connects  City  Island  and  Pelham  Bay  Park  at  Rodman  Neck, 
Bronx  Borough,  New  York.  It  is  about  1,500  ft.  long,  including 
approaches,  and  50  ft.  wide  over  all.  There  are  six  masonry  piers 
and  two  abutments,  all  sunk  to  rock  or  hard  material  at  a  maxi- 
mum depth  of  40  ft.  below  high  water,  and  they  support  the  steel 
superstructure.  The  superstructure  proper  consists  of  a  180-ft. 
draw  span  and  five  80-ft.  spans.  The  pivot  pier,  which  has  a  maxi- 
mum diameter  of  35  ft.,  is  protected  by  a  longitudinal  crib,  228  ft. 
long  and  51  ft.  wide.  The  pier  has  45  degree  cutwater  ends  and  is 
sheathed  with  4-in. .yellow  pine  vertical  planks,  14  ft.  long,  which 
extend  from  1  ft.  below  mean  water  level  to  the  top  of  the  crib,  5 
ft.  above  mean  high  water.  The  pivot  pier  occupies  a  rectangular 
space,  63  ft.  long  and  37  ft.  wide.  The  bridge  was  built  for  the 
Department  of  Bridges,  New  York  City,  the  superstructure  being 

Engineering-Contracting,  May  16,   1906. 


1578  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

constructed  by  the  King  Bridge  Co.,  and  the  substructure  by  John 
F.  O'Rourke. 

Cofferdams. — A  subcontract  for  the  construction  of  the  coffer- 
dams was  let  by  John  F.  O'Rourke,  the  contractor  for  the  founda- 
tions, to  Warren  Rosevelt,  New  York.  The  material  used  was  yel- 
low pine.  The  lower  sections  of  the  cofferdams,  which  remained 
in  the  permanent  work,  were  constructed  upon  ways  and  launched. 
The  upper  section  was  then  constructed.  Several  pile  driving 
scows  were  used  on  the  work.  In  the  placing  of  the  cofferdams, 
the  plant  was  furnished  by  Mr.  Rosevelt ;  but  Mr.  O'Rourke  fur- 
nished the  laborers  for  loading  bags  of  gravel  to  sink  and  place 
them.  In  the  summary,  Table  XV,  which  gives  the  time  for  con- 
structing the  cofferdams  and  the  amount  of  material  used,  it  will 
be  noticed  that  the  dam  for  abutment  No.  1  was  constructed  in 
a  less  period  than  any  of  the  others.  This  was  due  in  a  measure 
to  better  facilities  for  handling  the  material.  The  higher  cost  for 
building  the  cofferdam  for  Pier  No.  3  (pivot  pier)  was  due  to 
the  fact  that  it  was  built  in  an  octagonal  form.  No  data  were  ob- 
tained of  the  cost  of  setting  the  cofferdam  for  pier  No.  3. 

Masonry. — According  to  the  specifications,  the  masonry  was 
classified  in  two  grades:  (1)  Foundation  masonry  and  (2)  pier 
masonry.  Blue  gray  limestone,  or  other  dark  stone  of  compact 
granular  structure  without  lamination,  was  to  be  used  in  both 
cases.  The  backing  of  the  abutment  masonry,  to  mean  high  water, 
was  to  be  concrete  in  the  proportion  of  1  :  2  :  4.  Above  mean  high 
water  the  proportion  of  concrete  was  to  be  1  :  3  :  5.  The  founda- 
tion masonry  was  to  be  laid  to  the  elevation  of  mean  low  water, 
and  was  to  consist  of  first-class  quarry-faced  ashlar  bedded  in 
Portland  cement  mortar  with  %-in.  joints,  and  well  rammed  con- 
crete backing  of  1  :  2  :  4  concrete.  Work  was  to  be  laid  in  regular 
courses,  24  in.  to  30  in.  in  depth,  with  thickness  progressively 
diminishing  upward.  All  stones  were  to  be  cut  to  line  on  their 
natural  beds,  and  the  top  surface  had  to  be  parallel  with  its  bed. 
Beds  were  to  be  dressed  the  entire  width  of  the  stone  and  vertical 
joints  cut  back  not  less  than  12  in.  Courses  were  to  break  joints 
with  each  other  at  least  12  in.,  and  headers  were  to  be  arranged  so 
as  to  come  over  underlying  stretchers.  Not  less  than  one  header 
to  every  two  stretchers  was  to  be  used.  The  concrete  backing  was 
to  be  leveled  up  with  each  course  of  stone.  The  stones  for  the 
pier  masonry  were  to  be  cut  to  dimension,  and  laid  with  joints  not 
exceeding  %  in.  The  hearting  or  backing  was  to  consist  of  1  :  2  :  4 
concrete  for  abutment  to  elevation  of  mean  high  water ;  1:3:5 
concrete  was  to  be  used  above  that  elevation.  The  coping  was  to 
consist  of  selected  limestone  or  light  colored  granite,  quarry  faced, 
laid  with  %-in.  joints. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  stone  used  for  the  masonry  was  Cobble- 
skill  limestone  facing  with  concrete  backing.  The  coping  was  gran- 
ite from  Maine.  The  masonry  work  was  done  by  John  F.  O'Rourke, 
the  contractor.  The  plant  consisted  of  two  derrick  scows  and  stiff 
leg  derrick,  the  latter  being  used  on  abutment  No.  1  and  pier 
No.  3.  One  of  the  scows  was  used  mainly  in  depositing  concrete 


BRIDGES. 


1579 


i-  »0  r-    r- 


H  8« 


n      .  oo^ 

LHtO«5' 


•y   s g rill e 3 

i  ilhsiiJ 


a  A.-  3855585898  3 

•  >  M  O  '    ^ 

pq<;  «J  «*  w 

•«-"      <«<  o  «>  e»  o  f~  o  eo  oo  <g  o 
w  J«    •  f*  ^  o  oo  t-i  I-H  ^H  us  o  e^ 

ISIS"  "a 

«H  v,^  ec  oo  30  o  o  ~H  oo  «o  r-  o 
O  «    •  '-<oou5o<N,-c»oo  oo 

• 


-g  2 


O  o'« 
H  ^ 


•ooooow 

O>^i^-^< 

esfoo'oo'oo"' 


-^<N'oi^i  10 


12      H 

l.i: 


, 


1580 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


BRIDGES.  1581 

backing.  The  foregoing  table  of  cost  for  masonry  work  is  for 
building  the  masonry  after  the  material  was  loaded  on  the  scows, 
and  does  not  include  the  handling  of  material,  placing  stone  from 
yard  on  scows  and  cement  from  the  storehouse. 

The  higher  cost  of  the  construction  of  masonry  of  pier  No.  2 
and  pier  No.  4  will  be  explained  by  an  examination  of  the  Sum- 
mary Table,  which  shows  the  proportion  of  backing  and  face 
stones. 

Granite  Cutting. — In  this  work  the  material  was  furnished  by  Mr. 
O'Rourke,  but  the  labor  was  done  by  a  sub-contractor.  The  granite 
was  brought  by  vessel  from  Maine  and  was  used  in  coping,  bridge 
seats  and  abutment  steps.  Beds  were  peenhammered  and  the  faces 
rock  faced.  A  total  of  7,052  cu.  ft.  was  cut.  Eight  hours  consti- 
tuted a  day's  work. 

In  the  table  below  is  given  the  labor  cost  of  cutting  the  granite 

TOTAL  COST  OF  CUTTING  GRANITE.—  (7, 052  Cu.  FT.) 

Number  of  Hours.  Cost  of  Labor. 

Per       Per                           Per  Per 

Workmen.            Rate.  .Total,  cu.  ft.  cu.  yd.       Total,     cu.  ft.  cu.  yd. 

Foreman    60        517     .07        1.98     $    310.20     $0.04  $   1.19 

Stonecutters     50     4,718     .67      18.10        2,359.00          .34  9.05 

Carpenters    25             8     .00          .03               2.00       .01 

Laborers     20         984     .14        3.78           196.80          .03  .76 

Blacksmith    25         286     .04        1.10             71.50          .01  .27 

Engineman    30        443     .06        1.70           132.90         .02  .51 

Total     $3,072.40      $0.44      $Tl.79 

for  coping  and  steps.  This  work  was  included  in  the  table  that 
precedes  this  paragraph,  but  as  the  details  were  obtained  from  a 
different  source  of  information,  it  has  been  thought  well  to  give  it 
here. 

LABOR  OF  STONECUTTERS  ONLY. 

Hours          Cu.  Ft.      Cost  Per  Cost  Per 

Cu.  Ft.       Worked.     Per  Hour.     Cu.  Ft.  Cu.  Yd. 

Abutment  No.  1.1, 041-10  in.             511          2.042          $0.245  $6.62 

Pier  No.   2 462-   Sin.             341          1.358              .368  9.94 

Pier  No.  3 625-  6  in.             394          1.589              .354  9.55 

Pier  No.   4 446-   2  in.             312          1.432              .349  9.42 

Pier  No.  5 454-  5  in.             286          1.592              .314  8.48 

Pier  No.   6 121-   0  in.                99          1.222              .408  11.04 

Pier  No.  7 121-  0  in.               98          1.235              .405  10.93 

Abutment  No.  8*    734-  5  in.             409          1.795              .297  7.54 


Total   4,007-  0  in.          2,450         1.636*        $0.305*        $   8.25* 

Cu.  Ft.       Cu.  Yd. 

Average  cost  Abutment  Steps  and  Bridge  Seats..      $0.262         $7.08 
Average  cost  Pier  Coping 0.366  9.89 

*  Aver  age. 

Concrete. — The  concrete  was  deposited  under  water  in  the  open 
cofferdams,  a  2  cu.  yd.  bucket,  which  dumped  as  it  struck  the 
bottom,  being  used  for  this  purpose.  The  concrete  was  mixed  in 
the  proportion  of  1:2:4,  gravel  being  used  in  place  of  broken 
stone.  Portland  cements — Victor,  Ironclad  and  Navarite  brands — 


1582 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


122 
wr 


'22S-g 
«» 

:  :8  :8 


^.gs  s  sss 

be  o  ® 


gss 

8 

"  s 


>tr:Si 

£>°  a 


3 

8  882 


o«ft 


:8 


miSU5 


S  Q.B 

S 


g  |  |S 

|oag  g|! 


cS 

B  §«1 

w    e  S  33 


•S  a  e  §^  H 
llj'll^ 

30     rt     C.S 
t/i&H  i_3  WH 


BRIDGES.  1583 

were  used.  The  mixing  was  done  by  a  rectangular  horizontal  ma- 
chine mixer.  The  concrete  was  deposited  continuously,  working 
day  and  night,  except  in  the  case  of  pier  No.  2,  where  an  accident 
to  the  cofferdam  sides  caused  an  interval  of  several  weeks. 

Table  XVII  of  costs  for  cleaning  and  repairing  is  for  the  work 
of  the  diver  in  removing  with  hoes,  shovels  and  pumps  the  silt 
which  had  been  deposited  on  the  foundation  site.  The  foundations 
had  been  cleaned  by  the  dredge  several  months  before,  the  work 
of  the  diver  being  to  remove  the  silt  which  had  afterwards  been 
deposited.  There  was  much  soft  material  in  abutment  No.  1, 
owing  to  the  proximity  of  the  embankment.  At  pier  No.  3  the 
cofferdam  rested  upon  a  rock,  which  had  to  be  drilled  and  blasted. 
Little  work  was  required  at  pier  No.  4,  as  the  site  was  compara- 
tively clean.  In  the  table  for  concreting,  the  high  cost  of  the  work 
on  pier  No.  2  was  due  to  the  fact  that  the  concrete  was  improperly 
deposited  and  had  to  be  removed.  In  the  same  table,  the  higher 
cost  for  the  work  under  abutment  No.  1,  was  probably  due  to  the 
fact  that  the  abutment  was  so  long  and  narrow  that  it  was  difficult 
to  handle  the  bucket. 

Weight  and  Cost  of  the  Washington  Bridge.  N.  Y.  City.*— In  his 
book  entitled  "The  Washington  Bridge,"  Mr.  William  R.  Hutton 
gives  the  following  data: 

The  Washington  bridge,  across  the  Harlem  River,  was  built  In 
1886-1888  by  contract.  It  consists  of  two  steel  arch  spans  of  510  ft. 
each,  and  six  masonry  arch  approach  spans  of  60  ft.  each.  The 
width  of  the  carriage  way  is  50  ft.,  and  each  of  the  two  sidewalks 
is  15  ft.  wide.  The  rise  of  the  steel  arches  is  92  ft,  the  spring 
line  being  41  ft.  above  M.  H.  W.  The  center  pier  rests  on  a 
caisson  sunk  40  ft.  below  M.  H.  W.  The  other  two  main  piers 
required  no  caisson  work.  The  masonry  of  these  three  main 
piers  was  carried  up  to  the  floor  level  of  the  bridge.  The  main 
piers  are  40  ft.  thick  at  the  spring  line  and  98  ft.  long.  They  are 
of  concrete,  faced  with  granite.  Above  the  stone  back  they  are 
cellular.  The  total  length  of  the  bridge  between  abutments  is 
1,550  ft.  In  addition  to  this  there  are  approaches,  consisting  of 
embankments  supported  by  retaining  walls,  at  each  end  of  the 
bridge. 

The  two  steel  arches  required  1,500,000  ft.  B.  M.  timber  for  the 
falsework  (one  span  rested  on  piles),  and  the  six  masonry  arches 
required  1,500,000  ft.  B.  M.,  including  timber  used  in  trestles  for 
landing  materials.  Each  of  the  steel  arches  consists  of  6  steel  ribs 
of  13  ft.  deep. 

The  superstructure  of  each  510  ft.  long  weighs  13,086  Ibs.  per 
ft.  of  span,  and  is  designed  for  a  live  load  of  8,000  Ibs.  per  ft. 
of  span.  The  cost  of  this  bridge  was: 

Paid  to  contractors $2,648,785 

Enginering,  etc 162,400 

Commissioners'    office    40,500 

Total    $2,851,685 

•Engineering-Contracting,  July   14,   1909. 


1584  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

This  is  equivalent  to  $23  per  sq.  ft.  of  roadway  between  the  abut- 
ments. Some  of  the  principal  quantities  and  cost  were  as  follows: 

8,358  cu.  yds.  granite  in  piers  (dressed) $203,101 

2,300  cu.  yds.  cornice  and  parapet 201,245 

15,491   cu.   yds.   arch  voussoirs 248,393 

16,545  cu.  yds.  facing 174,762 

29,348  cu.  yds.  granite  concrete 161,052 

31,219  cu.  yds.  earth  excavation 80,048 

26,504  cu.  yds.  rock 29,211 

12,815  cu.  yds.  embankment 7,538 

4,052  cu.  yds.  caisson 182,354 

151,078  sq.   ft.    flagging    (sidewalk) 49,577 

13,742  sq.  yds.  asphalt  roadway 62,782 

7,549,606  Ibs.  steel  in  arch  ribs  and  bracing 777,359 

5,927,816  Ibs.  iron  in  posts,  bracing  and  floor 777,359 

1,233,874  Ibs.    cast    and    wet    iron    in    cornice    and 

balustrade   132,260 

The  caisson  foundation  of  the  center  pier  contained  7,726  cu.  yds. 
of  timber  and  concrete  for  the  40  V2  ft.  below  the  highwater  line, 
which  cost  the  city  $30.64  per  cu.  yd. 

The  contractor  paid  the  following  wages:  Laborers,  $1.75  ;  masons 
and  stone  cutters,  $3.50  ;  drillers,  $2  ;  enginemen,  $2.50  ;  carpenters, 
$3  ;  painters,  $1.75. 

Portland  cement  was  substituted  for  Rosendale  for  about  40  per 
cent  of  the  amount  of  cement  used,  adding  $32,000  to  the  cost  above 
given^ 

Cost  of  a  Bridge  Foundation  Excavation  and  Cofferdam. — Mr. 
Walter  N.  Frickstad  gives  the  following  data  on  bridge  founda- 
tion work,  done  by  force  account,  by  the  Southern  Pacific  R.  R.  in 
Nevada,  year  1902-3.  In  crossing  the  Humboldt  River  the  line 
made  a  very  sharp  angle  with  the  river,  but  a  skew  bridge  was  not 
used.  There  were  two  abutments  and  one  pier.  To  build  the  east 
abutment  an  I/-shaped  cofferdam  of  sand  bags,  filled  in  between 
with  earth,  was  used.  The  long  leg  of  the  L  was  100  ft.  long,  and 
the  short  leg  40  ft.  lon'g.  This  enclosed  a  triangle  of  water, 
bounded  by  the  two  legs  of  the  I/-shaped  cofferdam  and  the  shore 
line  of  the  river.  The  sand  filled  sacks  were  wheeled  to  place  and 
deposited  by  men  provided  with  long-handled  shovels  and  sticks  to 
guide  them  to  place ;  but  it  was  not  found  practicable  to  build 
the  sacks  up  in  tiers,  for  the  air  spaces  in  the  sacks  buoyed  them 
so  that  they  were  easily  displaced  by  the  river  current.  It  was 
intended  to  leave  a  3 -ft.  space  between  two  tiers  of  sacks,  to  be 
filled  with  puddle,  but  this  space  became  choked  with  sacks.  It 
was  found  impossible  to  pump  out  this  dam  with  a  one-man  sewer 
"deluge"  pump,  so  a  bank  of  earth  was  deposited  outside  of  the 
dam  of  sacks.  Where  the  current  was  swiftest,  the  earth  was 
rushed  to  place  with  a  steady  stream  of  wheelbarrows,  the  coarsest 
gravel  being  used  as  a  riprap  on  the  loam  and  sand  ;  and,  in  spite 
of  current  of  5  ft.  per  second,  the  embankment  held  its  place.  Then 
with  4  men  on  a  shift,  two  working  while  two  rested  alternately  in 
15-minute  periods,  the  dam  was  pumped  dry  in  2  days  and  3  nights, 
at  a  cost  of  $19  per  24  hrs.  To  reduce  the  area,  to  be  kept  pumped 
out,  a  cross-wall  of  sacks,  30  ft.  long,  was  put  in.  About  2,230 
sacks  were  used,  all  told. 


BRIDGES. 


1585 


This  work  cost  as  follows : 

Building  L-shaped  dam,   53  days,  at  $1.50 $   79.50 

Filling  its  slope  with  earth,  32  days,  at  $1.50 48.00 

Building  cross-wall  of  dam,  30  days,  at  $1.50 45.00 

Excavating  mud  and  loose  rock,   24  days,  at  $1.50..      36.00 
Pumping   until   masons   were   above   water    line,    85 

days,  at   $1.50.. 127.50 

Foreman,  9  days,  at  $3 27.00 

Total $363.00 

While  the  masons  were  at  work  on  the  east  abutment  the  coffer 
dam  of  the  center  pier  was  built  in  a  manner  that  proved  to  be  the 
cheapest  and  requiring  the  least  equipment  of  all  the  methods  of 
cofferdamming  used.  To  get  to  bed  rock  there  were  2  ft.  of  silt, 
7  ft.  of  gravel  and  boulders  and  5  ft.  of  boulders.  Tests  with  long 
drills  had  led  the  engineers  to  believe  that  solid  rock  was  5  ft. 
nearer  the  surface,  the  boulders  being  mistaken  for  solid  rock. 
The  pier  was  of  masonry  with  a  sharp  nose  at  each  end,  so  the 
cofferdam  was  made  of  similar  shape  and  with  a  length  of  55  ft. 


Fig.  9. — Plan  of  Cofferdam. 


from  nose  to  nose,  and  an  outside  width  of  16  ft.  The  cofferdam 
consisted  of  sheet  piling  driven  by  hand"  as  fast  as  the  excavation 
progressed  inside,  just  as  in  ordinary  sheeting  of  a  sewer  trench. 
The  rangers,  or  waling  pieces,  to  support  the  sheet  piling  were 
made  of  8  x  17-in.  Oregon  pine,  drift-bolted  together  to  form  a 
frame,  as  shown  in  Fig.  9.  This  frame  was  laid  flat  just  above 
the  surface  of  the  water,  being  temporarily  supported  by  a  bar  of 
river  sand  at  one  end  and  by  a  pair  of  wooden  horses  (4  ft.  high) 
near  the  other  end.  These  horses  were  built  and  sunk  in  the 
stream,  and  planks  laid  out  from  the  sand  bar,  upon  which  to  push 
the- frame  to  place  on  1*4 -in.  gas  pipe  rollers  by  four  men  using 
pinch  bars.  About  one-third  of  the  frame  overhung  these  horses, 
and  the  water  was  7  ft.  deep  at  the  outer  nose  of  the  frame. 
Holes  were  dug  2  ft.  deep  under  the  three  corners  of  the  frame 
that  rested  on  the  sand  bar,  and  temporary  posts  set  in  these  holes 
to  support  that  end  of  the  frame.  Then  excavation  was  begun, 
8-ft.  lengths  of  sheet  planking  or  piling  being  driven,  starting  at 
the  nose  of  the  frame.  A  heavy  wooden  maul  was  used  to  drive  the 
sheeting.  When  12  of  these  3  x  12-in.  sheeting  planks  had  been 
driven  down  a  short  distance,  earth  and  manure  were  piled  out- 
side. Then  the  lines  of  sheeting  were  continued  out  into  the  river, 


1586 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


using  longer  plank.  Finally  several  of  the  sheeting  planks  were 
temporarily  spiked  to  the  frame,  the  horses  removed,  and  plank 
driven  to  close  the  gaps.  Earth  and  manure  were  banked  up  out- 
side the  sheeting.  It  was  found  necessary  to  deflect  the  river  cur- 
rent, which  was  washing  away  this  earth  and  manure,  and  to  do 
this  a  wing  dam  of  sacks  filled  with  sand  was  built,  and  coarse 
gravel  and  sand-filled  sacks  used  to  riprap  the  outer  end  of  the 
earth  and  manure  fill.  The  water  was  readily  pumped  out,  and  ex- 
cavation begun.  It  was  found  that  the  sheeting  was  sloping  in- 
ward, so  a  second  frame  was  built  of  6  x  12's  inside  the  excavation 
and  at  the  bottom  of  the  sheeting ;  then  the  driving  of  the  sheet- 
ing was  continued  and  this  second  frame  was  lowered  as  the  ex- 
cavation progressed.  Once  the  gravel  caved  and  two  sheet  planks 
were  forced  in,  but  quick  work  with  brush,  manure  and  earth 


Fig.  10. — Section  of  Cofferdam. 

closed  the  hole.  When  the  excavation  was  7  ft.  below  the  water 
surface,  and  rock  was  not  encountered,  it  was  decided  to  build  a 
third  frame  and  drive  a  second-  tier  of  sheet  plank  inside,  and  slop- 
ing outward,  as  in  Fig.  10.  This  was  begun  when  the  flow  of  water 
became  so  great  that  a  6-hp.  Fairbanks,  Morse  &  Co.  combined 
gasoline  engine  and  pump  was  installed,  and  no  further  difficulty 
occurred  in  getting  down  to  bed  rock.  The  cost  of  this  pier  ex- 
cavation by  force  account  was  as  follows: 

Labor  excavating,  etc.,  324  days,  at  $1.50 $    486.00  . 


Labor   pumping,    136    days,   at   $1.50, 
Engine-runners,  50  days,  at  $3... 
Four-horse    team,    6    days,    at   $6. 

Carpenter,    8   days,   at   $3 .., 

Foreman,  24  days,  at  $4 

115  gallons  gasoline,  at   15  cts... 

300   sacks,   at  15  cts 

10  M.  of  pine,  at  $30 , 


204.00 
150.00 
36.00 
24.00 
96.00 
17.25 
45.00 
300.00 

Total $1,358.25 

Salvage  value  of  5  M  of  pine  removed 150.00 


Total  for  280  cu.  yds.  excavation,  at  $4.30 ..  .$1,208.25 


BRIDGES.  1587 

I  have  assumed  the  prices  and  rates  of  wages  as  above  given, 
although  in  fact  they  may  have  varied  slightly.  The  number  of 
days'  work  and  the  amount  of  materials  is  exact.  It  will  be  noted 
that  half  the  timber  in  the  cofferdam  was  recovered  and  used 
elsewhere.  The  cost  of  excavation  was  high,  because  no  derricks 
were  used,  but  the  shoveling  was  done  in  stages ;  moreover,  there 
was  a  large  quantity  of  boulders,  and  trouble  with  pumps  caused 
considerable  delay. 

The  excavation  for  the  west  abutment,  though  much  larger  than 
for  the  pier  just  described,  was  done  in  the  same  manner.  The 
cofferdam  inclosed  an  .L-shaped  area,  about  60  ft.  long  on  each 
leg  of  the  L,  and  about  20  ft.  wide.  The  waling  frames  were  built 
in  place  after  the  site  had  been  excavated  to  the  water  level  with 
drag  scrapers,  and  the  second  and  third  frames  in  due  course.  In 
lowering  the  frames  from  time  to  time  as  the  excavation  pro- 
gressed, it  was  found  almost  impossible  to  drive  them  down  with 
a  16-lb.  sledge  or  a  wooden  maul.  Even  a  6-in.  x  12-in.  x  8-ft.  wood- 
en rammer,  operated  by  two  men,  failed  to  drive  the  frames.  It  was 
found  that  by  loading  the  shoveling  platforms,  2  ft.  wide  by  16  ft. 
long,  with  gravel,  one  platform  being  loaded  on  each  side  the  sec- 
tion to  be  lowered,  a  slight  tapping  produced  any  desired  amount  of 
settling.  The  excavation  was  not  carried  to  bed  rock,  but  the  abut- 
ment was  founded  on  the  gravel  and  boulders,  at  a  depth  of  12  ft. 
below  the  water  surface.  The  cost  of  this  work  was  as  follows: 

Team  on  drag-scraper,  18  days,  at  $3.50 $      63.00 

Laborers,    748    days,    at    $1.50 1,122.00 

Carpenter,  35  days,  at  $3.00 105.00 

Pump  engineers,  140  days,  at  $3.00 420.00 

Foreman,    35    days,    at    $4.00 140.00 

45   tons   coal,   at   $6.00 270.00 

150  gallons  gasoline,  at  15   cts 225.00 

22  M  lumber,  at  $30 660.00 

Total $3,005.00 

Salvage  value  of  11  M  lumber  removed 330.00 

Total,   700  cu.  yds.,   at   $3.82 $2,675.00 

Cost  of  Coffer  Dam.*— Maj.  Graham  D.  Fitch  gives  the  following: 
A    cofferdam   was    built    en    the    Upper   White    River,    Arkansas, 
within  which  to  build  a  lock.     Common  laborers  received  $1.50  per 
8-hr.  day.     The  work  was  done  by  Government  forces. 

The  lock  (No.  1)  was  founded  on  sandstone  bed  rock,  and  as 
the  foundation  bed  afforded  no  foothold  for  piles,  crib  cofferdams 
were  used.  These  were  built  and  sunk  in  sections  from  20  to  30 
ft.  long,  each  section  consisting  of  round  oak  logs  7  to  9  ins.  in 
diameter,  driftbolted  together  with  %-in.  round  iron.  The  walls 
were  tied  together  every  10  ft.  by  a  transverse  crib  wall.  Above 
the  water  the  cofferdam  was  a  continuous  crib.  The  inside  faces 
of  both  walls  were  sheeted  with  boards  driven  to  a  good  bearing 
with  hand  mauls,  a  single  row  of  1-in.  boards  being  used  for  the 
outer  wall  and  double  lap  1-in.  and  2-in.  boards  for  the  inner  wall, 

•Engineering-Contracting,  May  6,   1908,  p.   278. 


1588 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


The  pens  were  filled  with  clay  and  the  dam  well  banked  on  the 
outside.  The  puddle,  which  was  taken  from  a  bank  nearby,  was 
loaded  by  a  dipper  dredge  on  a  barge  and  placed  in  the  dam  with 
shovels.  The  inside  width  of  the  cofferdam  was  10  ft.  8  ins.,  and 
its  length  was  462  ft.  It  was  built  to  a  9  ft.  stage  and  had  an 
average  height  of  17  ft.  The  dam  was  built  in  6  weeks  time  and 
the  pit  was  pumped  out  in  about  11  hours  with  one  10-in.  centrifugal 
pump.  A  3% -in.  pulsometer  pump  was  used  to  keep  seep  water  out 
of  the  pit.  There  was  very  little  leakage  except  during  rises, 
after  which  the  dam  always  had  to  be  repuddled,  as  much  of  the 
backing  was  washed  away  by  the  swift  current.  The  cost  of  this 
cofferdam  was  as  follows : 


Materials: 


COFFERTXA.M  (462  LIN.  FT.). 

Unit 
Cost. 


Logs,  30,560  lin.  f t. . %     .0365 

Timber,  32.8  M  ft.  B.  M 10.90 

Iron,  8,139  Ibs 0289 

Straw,    12   loads 1.75 

Fuel 

Illumination,  oils,   etc 


Total  materials 

Labor: 

Quarrying    and    placing    break- 
water stone,   498  cu.  yds $  0.718 

Excavation,  300  cu.  yds 562 

Hauling  lumber,  20  M  ft 86 

Placing  logs,    30,560   lin.   ft 02 

Placing  timber,   32.8  M  ft 1.73 

Digging  puddle,  7,860  cu.  yds...        .062 
Placing  puddle,  7,860  cu.  yds...        .53 
Pumping  pit 


Total    

Grand  total 


Per  lin.  ft. 

Total. 

Cofferdam. 

$1,115 

$2.41 

360 

.78 

234 

.51 

21 

.04 

177 

.38 

104 

.22 

$2~o7l 

$4.34 

' 

$    388 

$   .85 

169 

.36 

17 

.04 

638 

1.38 

57 

.12 

490 

1.06 

4,179 

9.05 

539 

1.17 

$6,476 

$14.03 

$8,487 

$18.37 

Some  of  the  labor  items  may  be  still  further  summarized  as 
follows : 

Work  done 

Work             Labor  time  per  man 

done.                in  days.  per  day. 
Quarrying  and   placing 

breakwater  stone....         498  cu.  yds.             248  2  cu.  yds. 

Excavation   300  cu.  yds.               95  1/8  3.16  cu.  yds. 

Placing  logs 30,560  lin.  ft.                 3701/8  82.59  lin.  ft. 

Placing  timber 32. 8  M  ft.                     374/8  .863Mft. 

Placing  puddle 7,860  cu.  yds.         2,3926/8  3,284  cu.  yds. 

The  total  labor  time  in  constructing  the  462  lin.  ft.  of  cofferdam 
was  3,660%  days.  The  unit  cost  per  linear  foot  of  cofferdam  was 
$18.37  and  the  work  done  per  man  per  day  was  .126  lin.  ft. 
About  90  lin.  ft.  of  cofferdam  was  removed  by  dredge  and  men,  at 
a  cost  of  $161  ;  the  labor  time  being  86%  days.  The  unit  cost  was 
$1.794  per  lin.  ft. 


BRIDGES.  1589 

In  excavating  for  the  foundation  of  the  lock  a  1%  cu.  yd. 
Bucyrus  dipper  dredge  removed  from  the  pit,  before  the  cofferdam 
was  closed,  such  material  as  it  could  handle ;  but  owing  to  the 
large  boulders  encountered  most  of  the  excavating  was  done  by 
hand  after  the  cofferdam/  had  been  pumped  out,  the  material — 
clay,  boulders,  and  cemented  gravel — being  removed  by  wheel- 
barrows and  derrick  skips.  The  lockwall  foundations  averaged  6 
ft.  in  depth  below  the  lock  floor,  the  maximum  depth  being  6  ft. 
5  ins.  Both  the  chamber  and  miter  wall  were  founded  on  bed  rock. 

The  cost  of  excavation  work  was  as  follows : 

EXCAVATION   (3.635  Cu.  YDS.). 

U  ait  Per  cu.  yd. 

Material:  Cost.         Total.    Excavation. 

Dynamite,   600  Ibs $0.14          $       84          $0.023 

Fuel    9  .002 

Illuminating   oils,    etc 119  .032 

Total  materials $    212  $0.057 

Labor: 

Excavating,   3,365   cu.  yds $1.49  $5,438  $1.49 

Cleaning  lock  pit 108  .029 

Total  labor $5,546          $1.519 

Grand  total    $5,758          $1.58 

The  total  labor  time  in  days  for  excavating  was  3, 13  8%  days 
and  the  work  done  per  man  per  day  was  1.16  cu.  yds. 

Cost  of  Placing  Puddle  in  a  Coffer  Dam  by  Pumping.* — Mr.  Will- 
iam Martin  is  authority  for  the  following  data : 

In  building  Davis  Island  Dam,  several  years  ago,  a  cofferdam 
1,085  ft.  long,  containing  5,784  cu.  yds.  of  puddle  material,  was 
built  by  pumping  the  puddle  from  an  island.  The  cofferdam  con- 
sisted of  two  rows  of  piles,  the  rows  being  15%  ft.  c.  to  c.  and  the 
piles  in  each  row  being  21  ft.  c.  to  c.  The  piles  were  20  ft.  long, 
and  were  driven  8  ft.  Three  rows  •  of  wale  pieces  or  stringers 
were  bolted  to  the  piles,  12  ft.  apart.  A  single  line  of  vertical 
sheeting  plank,  driven  2  ft.  into  the  gravel  bottom,  rested  against 
the  wales.  The  joints  of  the  sheeting  were  covered  with  1x6  in. 
strips  to  prevent  leakage  of  the  puddle.  On  each  side  of  the 
sheeting,  at  the  top,  was  spiked  a  2  x  10  in.  string  piece,  to  form  a 
bearing  upon  which  a  plank  deck  was  laid. 

The  plant,  as  finally  developed,  was  as  follows: 

Tubular  boiler,   36  ins.  diam.  x  16  ft.  long. 

Engine,   10  x   10   ins. 

Piston  pump — steam  cyl.   12  x  18  ins. ;  water  cyl.   6%   x  18   ins. 

Centrifugal  pump,   3  in.   discharges. 

Pipes,  etc.,  of  the  following  sizes  were  used :    Delivery  pipe,  4-in. 
clearing  pipe,   2% -in.  ;  priming  pipe,   1%-in. ;  lubricator  pipe,   1-in. 
steam   pipe   to   engine,    2%-in. ;    steam  pipe   to  piston  pump,    2-in. 
band  wheel  on   engine  shaft,    4  %    ft. ;    pulley  on  centrifugal   pump 
shaft,  10  ins. ;  width  of  driving  belt,  10  ins. ;  agitator  hose,  1%  ins. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  6,   1909. 


1590  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  following  pressures  were  obtained:  Steam  boiler,  100  Ibs.  per 
sq.  in. ;  gage  on  piston  pump,  70  Ibs.  ;  gage  on  delivery  pipe,  35  Iba 

The  centrifugal  pump  for  pumping  the  puddle  was  located  on  an 
island  900  ft.  from  the  cofferdam.  Beneath  the  pump  was  a  tank  for 
mixing  the  puddle,  8  ft.  diameter  and  4  ft.  deep,  sunk  to  a  sufficient 
depth  to  secure  a  fall  of  water  from  a  flume  that  tapped  the  river. 

The  piston  pump  was  connected  to  the  delivery  pipe  by  a  wye 
connection,  and  was  used  for  priming  the  centrifugal  pump,  and 
keeping  the  sand  from  packing,  and  for  furnishing  water  for  the 
steam  boiler  and  for  the  agitator  hose,  as  hereafter  described. 

The  puddle,  consisting  of  loam  and  sand,  was  obtained  within  a 
radius  of  100  ft.  from  the  pump  by  loosening  with  a  plow  and 
delivering  close  to  the  tank  with  drag  scrapers.  It  was  then 
shoveled  by  hand  into  the  tank,  a  cost  that  could  have  been  avoided 
had  the  scrapers  dumped  through  a  trap  into  the  tank.  The 
material  was  mixed  with  water  in  the  tank  and  kept  agitated  by 
water  from  a  hose  in  the  hands  of  workmen,  to  prevent  the  earth 
from  settling  to  the  bottom.  This  puddle  was  taken  by  the  feed 
pipe  of  the  centrifugal  pump  and  forced  through  the  delivery  pipe 
to  the  cofferdam,  a  distance  constantly  increasing  as  the  work 
progressed.  The  delivery  pipe  was  laid  on  the  bottom  of  the  river, 
and  then  rose  by  an  easy  ascent  to  about  1  ft.  above '  the  top  of 
the  cofferdam. 

The  puddle  occasionally  became  so  thick  as  to  clog  the  delivery 
pipe.  In  order  to  meet  this  difficulty,  the  following  ingenious  plan 
was  devised.  On  the  delivery  pipe  at  the  centrifugal  pump  was 
placed  a  pressure  gage.  Any  clogging  of  the  delivery  pipe  im- 
mediately caused  the  pressure  to  rise,  whereupon  the  engineman 
slackened  the  speed  of  the  centrifugal  and  opened  the  valve  in  the 
wye  connection  to  the  piston  pump.  This  admitted  a  stream  of 
clear  water  at  high  pressure  from  the  piston  pump  and  immediately 
cleared  the  congestion  of  puddle  in  the  delivery  pipe.  The  check 
valve  in  the  delivery  pipe  between  the  wye  connection  and  the 
centrifugal  pump  prevented  a  back  flow  into  the  centrifugal  pump. 

At  the  bottom  of  the  feed  pipe  in  the  tank  was  a  screen  having 
1-in.  meshes.  Above  the  screen,  and  in  the  same  casing,  was  placed 
a  foot  valve  for  the  purpose  of  holding  the  priming. 

One  of  the  principal  difficulties  in  working  the  centrifugal  pump 
was  the  rapid  wear  of  all  its  parts  that  came  in  contact  with  the 
sand.  The  casing,  which  was  originally  %-in.  thick,  wore  through 
in  10  days,  during  which  time  not  2,500  cu.  yds.  of  puddle  were 
handled.  This  was  replaced  with  a  1-in.  casing  which  was  still 
in  service  after  the  13  days  use  which  completed  the  job. 

The  stuffing  box  wore  rapidly  until  the  following  ingenious  device 
was  applied :  A  screw  was  cut  in  the  chamber  in  the  opposite 
direction  to  the  motion  of  the  shaft.  A  pipe  was  put  in  back  of  the 
packing  and  connected  with  the  piston  pump.  Water  was  forced 
through  this  around  the  shaft,  and,  being  under  a  greater  pressure 
than  the  centrifugal  pump,  prevented  the  puddle  material  from 
getting  into  the  stuffing  box.  Water  thus  applied  performed  a 


BRIDGES.  1591 

double  duty,  for  it  acted  as  a  lubrication  and  prevented  the  shaft 
from  heating. 

At  the  discharge  end  of  the  delivery  pipe  the  puddle  material 
was  deposited  in  the  cofferdam  and  flowed  off  for  a  distance  of  a 
few  hundred  feet,  depositing  in  a  hard  and  solid  mass.  The  loam 
being  lighter,  remained  longer  in  suspension  and  settled  out  on  top 
•>f  the  sand. 

In  23  days  there  were  delivered  5,784  cu.  yds.  of  puddle  material, 
or   251   cu.   yds.   per   10-hr,    day.      Laborers   received   $1.75    to   $2   a 
day,  and  mechanics  $2.50  to  $2.75.     The  cost  was  as  follows: 
Plant: 

Pump    $    145 

Repairs,  fittings,  etc 382 

Pipe    364 

Total  cost  of  plant . . '..".%    891 

Labor: 
Installing   plant   and   pumping   puddle,    removing 

plant,    etc $2,847 

Fuel: 
23  days  fuel $      38 

Total  labor  and  fuel $2,885 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  the  cost  of  labor  and  fuel  for  puddling 
amounted  to  $265  per  lin.  ft.  of  cofferdam,  or  50  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
including  the  labor  cost  of  installing  the  plant.  It  is  unfortunate 
that  this  item  of  installation  and  removal  of  plant  was  not  kept 
separate,  as  it  was  evidently  a  large  item.  The  fuel  cost  only 
$1.65  a  day,  or  %  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  The  labor  during  the  23  days 
of  pumping  could  probably  not  have  exceeded  4  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
for  pumping  and  pipe  laying.  With  a  haul  averaging  about  50  or 
60  ft.  for  the  drag  scrapers,  the  cost  of  delivering  the  puddle  along- 
side the  tank  probably  did  not  exceed  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Shoveling 
it  into  the  tank  doubtless  cost  less  than  10  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  This 
would  make  a  total  of  not  more  than  25  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  the 
puddle  in  place,  exclusive  of  plant  charges  for  interest,  depreciation, 
repairs  and  installation.  Apparently  the  installation  and  removal 
of  the  pumping  plant  cost  at  least  $1,500.  The  plant  itself  cost 
$891,  as  above  given.  The  exceptionally  high  cost  of  installation 
appears  to  have  been  due  in  part  to  the  experimenting  incident  to 
developing  the  best  way  of  handling  the  material,  most  of  which 
cost  can  be  saved  by  studying  the  finally  adopted  methods  and 
devices  above  given. 

For  comparative  purposes  it  is  well  to  add  the  following  costs 
of  filling  another  section  of  another  cofferdam  nearby  by  another 
method.  The  other  section  was  1,165  ft.  long,  and  it  cost  $5.69 
per  lin.  ft.  for  puddle  in  place,  or  practically  $1.10  per  cu.  yd.  of 
puddle.  The  method  employed  consisted  in  loading  the  material  by 
hand  into  cars,  hauling  it  over  a  narrow  gage  track  to  the  river, 
loading  into  boats  and  transporting  to  the  cofferdam,  shoveling  by 
hand  into  place,  and  compacting  with  water.  Wages  were  only 
$1.25  a  day  for  laborers,  and  $2.25  for  mechanics. 


1502  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  Cost  of  Some  Masonry  Bridge  Piers  and  Abutments.*— Some 
fairly  complete  data  as  to  the  cost  of  constructing  bridge  masonry 
are  given  below.  The  work,  which  was  done  by  contract  for  the 
Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry.,  consisted  of  the  construction  of  a 
pier  and  abutment  at  New  Buffalo,  Ind.,  to  carry  the  tracks  of  the 
above  road  over  the  Michigan  Central  R.  R.  Work  was  com- 
menced Aug.  24,  1891,  and  was  finished  Oct.  27,  1891,  taking  in  all 
56  working  days. 

The  average  working  force  and  its  wages  per  day  were  as 
follows : 

1  Foreman    $2.50 

1  Engineman     2.00 

4   Stonecutters     ,  .    3.00 

1  Mason    2.50 

9  Laborers     1.50 

From  this  it  will  be  seen  that  the  total  labor  cost  per  day  was 
$32.50,  and  the  total  cost  for  56  days  was  $1,525. 
The  cost  of  the  labor  was  distributed  as  follows : 

Cost  per 

Cu.  yds.  Cost.  cu.  yd. 

Excavating,     abutment 868  $133  $0.153 

.Excavating    pier 232  45                0.194 

Cutting    stone,    abutment 281  514                1.93 

Cutting    stone,     pier 163  347                2.13 

Setting    stone,    abutment 281  197                0.70 

Setting    stone,    pier 163  152                0.93 

Unloading  stone  from  cars.  .444  50                0.11 

To  the  above  should  be  added  $86.50  as  the  cost  of  erecting 
and  moving  the  plant. 

The  total  cost  of  the  work  to  the  contractor  amounted  to  $1,863, 
as  is  shown  by  the  following  figures: 

Labor     $1,525.00 

78  bbls.  Louisville  and  Miller  cement 78.00 

8  bbls.    Buckeye    cement 30.00 

40  yds.     sand 30.00 

10%  of  value  of  plant 200.00 

Total     $1,863.00 

According  to  the  estimate  on  which  the  contractor  was  paid  he 
was  to  receive  $6.50  per  cu.  yd.  for  masonry  cut  and  placed,  and 
$0.25  per  cu.  yd.  for  excavation.  As  444  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  were 
constructed  and  1,100  cu.  yds.  of  earth  excavated,  the  contractor 
received  $3,148.50.  His  total  expenses,  as  shown  in  the  preceding 
paragraphs,  were  $1,863  ;  therefore  he  made  a  profit  of  $1,285.50 
on  the  job. 

The  total  cost  of  the  Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry.  was 
$5,884.65;  this  includes  the  estimate  of  $3,148.50  and  the  furnish- 
ing of  435  cu.  yds.  of  stone,  costing  $6.29  per  cu.  yd. 

The  stone  used  was  Grafton  sandstone  delivered  on  cars  at 
La  Porte,  Ind.  It  should  also  be  added  that  the  amount  given  for 

* Engineering-Contracting,  May  30,   1906. 


BRIDGES.  1593 

use  of  plant  covered  the  expense  of  repairng  stonecutters'  tools  and 
the  cost  of  fuel. 

Cost  of  a  Masonry  Bridge  Abutment.* — We  give  herewith  the  cost 
of  constructing  the  west  abutment  of  a  60-ft.  through  girder  bridge 
near  Ionia,  Mich.,  where  the  Detroit,  Lansing  &  Northern  R.  R. 
crosses  Prison  Road.  The  work  was  done  by  contract  for  the 
above-mentioned  railroad.  According  to  the  terms  of  the  contract 
the  railroad  company  furnished  the  stone  and  free  transportation 
of  men  and  materials  ;  the  contractor  furnished  all  other  material 
and  labor,  and  in  addition  was  paid  for  all  timber  left  in  the  con- 
struction. His  plant  consisted  of  a  steam  hoist  derrick  with  accom- 
panying tools,  etc.  The  stone  used  was  sandstone  from  Graf  ton,  O., 
and  was  delivered  f.  o.  b.  Detroit.  The  average  weight  of  a  car- 
load of  stone  was  33,873  Ibs.,  and  the  average  carload  contained 
203  cu.  ft.  The  average  weight  per  cubic  foot,  according  to  car 
weights  and  quarry  measurements,  was  166.8  Ibs.  Hanover  Port- 
land cement  was  used,  and  on  account  of  the  low  temperature 
when  the  work  was  done,  it  was  necessary  to  add  salt  to  the  mor- 
tar. In  the  excavation,  the  removal  of  excavated  matter  was  done 
almost  entirely  with  wheelbarrows.  The  excavated  material  was 
sand  and  was  wasted.  The  overhaul  was  only  a  short  distance,  the 
lead  being  but  75  ft.  The  work  of  excavating  was  commenced 
November  18,  1893,  the  first  stone  was  laid  December  5,  and  the 
last  stone  January  7,  1894  ;  two  days  later  the  contractor  finished 
removing  his  plant.  As  will  be  seen  from  the  above  dates,  the 
work  was  done  in  the  winter,  and  this  accounts  in  a  measure  for 
the  higher  cost  of  stonecutting,  etc.  Indeed,  it  was  necessary  to 
use  heated  sand  to  remove  the  frost  from  the  stone  before  it 
was  cut. 

The  tables  below  give  the  actual  cost  of  materials  and  labor  to 
the  contractor: 

MATERIALS. 

34 %   bbls.  Hanover  Portland  cement  at  $2.85 $  98.32 

24  wagon   loads  sand  at  $0.75 18.00 

2  bbls.   salt  at   $1.00 2.00 

Coal    for   engine 20.00 

2  cords  wood   (heating  sand) 3.59 

Total     $141.83 

LABOR. 
Erecting  and  Removing  Plant. 

Foreman    2.2  days  at  $3.00  $   6.60 

Foreman     4.2  "       "  1.75  7.35 

Laborers     29.7  1.50  44.55 

Engineman     2.2  "      "  1.75  3.85 

Derrickman 2.2  "      "  1.50  3.30 

Total  labor  cost. $65.65 


*  Engineering-Contracting,   May  30,   1906. 


1594  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Excavation. 

Foreman                                          8.9  days  at  $1.75  $15.58 

Laborers     64.8       "      "      1.50  97/20 

Engineman     0.4                      1.75  .70 

Derrickman     .                               0.4       "      "      1.50  .60 


Scabblers    11.1 

Engineman    9. 

Derrickman     9. 

Labor    heating    sand 9.4 

Blacksmith  .  15. 


Total,   772  cu.  yds.   at  $0.15 $114.08 

Unloading   Stone. 

Foreman     ,                 0.6  days  at  $3.00  $1.80 

Foreman     1.1        "      "       1.75  1.93 

Laborers     3.7       "      "      1.50  5.55 

Engineman     1.1       "      "      1.75  1.93 

Derrickman     1.1       "      "      1.50  1.65 

Stonecutter     ,                                1.3       "      "      3.00  3.90 


Total,  165.6  cu.  yds.  at  $0.10 $16.76 

Stonecutting. 
Stonecutters 141.4  days  at  $3.00  $424.20 


1.50  16.65 

1.75  15.75 

1.50  13.50 

1.50  14.10 

1.75  26.25 


Total,   181.2   cu.   yds.    at   $2.81 $510.45 

Setting  Stone  in  Abutment. 

Foreman    .                                      7.4  days  at  $3.00  $22.20 

Foreman     9.6       "      "      1.75  16.80 

Mason     2.5        "      "       3.00  7.5C 

Laborers 38.6       "      "      1.50  57.90 

Engineman     5.7       "      "      1.75  9.98 

Derrickman     5.7       "      "      1.50  8.55 

Total,  181.7  cu.  yds.  at  $0.68 $122.93 

Laying  Stone  in  Retaining  Wall. 

Foreman                    1.4  days  at  $1.75  $2.45 

Laborers 5.          "      "       1.50  7.50 

Engineman     0.5        "      "       1.75  .88 

Derrickman     0.5        "      "      1.50  .75 


Total,   16   cu.  yds.  at   $0.72 $11.58 

Old  Masonry  of  West  Abutment  Taken  Down. 

Foreman                           1      day     at  $1.75  $1.75 

Laborers      6           "      "      1.50  9.00 

Total,   30.5   cu.   yds.   at   $0.35 $10.75 

Preparing    East    Abutment    for    Bridge    Seat. 

Foreman    1.2  days  at  $1.75  $2.10 

Laborers     4.                          1.50  6.00 

Total    $8.10 

Pointing. 

Foreman    8  day     at  $3.00  $2.40 

Laborers    2.3                       1.50  3.45 

Total     .  5.85 


BRIDGES.  1595 

Backfilling. 

Foreman    2.4  days  at  $3.00  $  6.80 

Foreman     6.3  "       "       1.75  11.03 

Laborers     37.8  "       "       1.50  56.70 

Engineman     3.6  1.75  6.30 

Derrickman     3.6  1.50  5.40 

Total,    380   cu.   yds.  at  $0.23 $86.23 

The  total  labor  cost  to  the  contractor  was  $952.38,  to  this  must 
be  added  $120.00  for  depreciation  and  repairs  to  plant,  and  $141.83 
for  the  cost  of  materials,  thus  making  the  total  cost  to  the  con- 
tractor for  material  and  labor  amount  to  $1,214.21. 

The  final  estimate  of  work  done  by  the  contractor  and  the  unit 
rate  at  which  he  was  paid  for  it,  were  as  follows: 

772      cu.  yds.  excavation  at $0.26 

380      cu.   yds.  backfilling  at 0.25 

181.7  cu.  yds.  masonry,  cut  and  place  at.. 6.15 

16      cu.  yds.  masonry   (retaining  wall)   at 4.00 

30.5  cu.  yds.  old  masonry  taken  down  at 0.30 

Total  paid  to  contractor,  $1,478.73. 

As  was  shown  in  the  preceding  paragraph  the  total  actual  cost 
of  the  work  to  the  contractor  was  $1,214.21.  His  profit  accordingly 
amounted  to  $264.52  or  21.8  per  cent. 


Fig.    11. 

The  cost  to  the  Detroit,  Lansing  &  Northern  R.  R.  was  as 
follows : 

165.6  cu.  yds.  Grafton  standstone  at  $6.021,  $997.22 ;  amount 
paid  contractor,  $1,478.73  ;  total,  $2,475.95. 

The  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  masonry  to  the  railroad  company 
was  as  follows : 

181.72  cu.  yds.  of  stone  (wall  measurement),  total  cost,  $997.22; 
per  cubic  yard,  $.5.48  ;  181.72  cu.  yds.  of  stone  cut  and  placed,  cost 
$6.15  per  cu.  yd. ;  total  cost  per  cubic  yard  of  masonry  is  there- 
fore $11.637. 

Labor  Cost  of  a  Bridge  Abutment.* — The  work  was  done  by  con- 
tract during  the  fall  of  1893  for  the  Detroit,  Lansing  &  Northern 
R.  R.,  near  Redford,  Mich.  Figure  11  shows  plan  of  the  abutment. 
According  to  the  terms  of  the  contract,  the  railroad  company  fur- 
nished the  stone  and  free  transportation  of  men  and  materials,  and 
the  contractor  furnished  all  other  material  and  labor,  and  in  addi- 


*Engineering-Contracting,  June  6,  1906. 


1596  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

tion  was  paid  for  all  timber  left  in  the  construction.  The  stone 
used  was  sandstone  from  Grafton,  O.,  delivered  f.  o.  b.  Detroit, 
Mich.  The  average  weight  of  the  stone  per  carload  was  41,900  Ibs.  ; 
the  average  number  of  cubic  feet  per  carload  was  24'J.  The  average 
weight  of  a  cubic  foot  of  the  stone  as  amputated  from  the  car 
weights  and  quarry  measurements  was  174.4  Ibs.  It  should  be 
noted,  however,  that  the  true  dimensions  of  the  stone  were  con- 
siderably larger  than  the  quarry  measurements,  and  this  accounts 
for  the  apparent  large  weight  per  cubic  foot. 

Buffalo  natural  cement  was  used  in  the  greater  part  of  the  work, 
but  Dyckerhoff  Portland  cement  was  used  for  pointing  and  for  joints 
in  the  face  of  the  work  as  far  as  10  in.  back  from  the  face.  The 
sand  was  obtained  from  the  property  of  the  railroad  company,  the 
only  cost  to  the  contractor  being  for  the  loading  and  unloading. 
The  material  excavated  was  sand  and  clay,  and  was  removed  from 
the  excavation  by  wheelbarrows  and  by  boxes  holding  about  1% 
cu.  yds.,  which  were  lifted  out  by  the  derrick.  The  greater  part  of 
the  excavated  material  was  removed  by  the  latter  method. 

The  contractor's  plant  consisted  of  a  steam  hoist  derrick  and  a 
hand  derrick.  For  driving  the  sheet  piling  a  small  man-power 
driver  was  constructed.  This  was  built  with  an  oak  driver  weigh- 
ing 125  Ibs.,  and  having  a  drop  of  about  4  ft.  The  sheet  piling 
was  double  and  triple  1  in.  x  12  in.  oak,  10  ft.  long,  and  was 
driven  8  ft.  through  clay  and  coarse  gravel.  The  contractor  began 
erecting  his  plant  September  7,  1893.  On  September  11  excava- 
tion was  started,  and  October  2  the  first  stone  was  laid ;  the  last 
stone  was  laid  November  19,  and  one  week  later  the  contractor 
finished  removing  his  plant. 

LABOR. 

Erecting  and  Removing  Plant. 

Foreman     5.5  days  at  $2.50  $13.75 

Laborers     55.4        "      "       1.50  83.10 

Engineman    1.8  1.75  3.15 

Total    $100.00 

Earth  Excavation,   Wet  and   Dry. 

Foreman     12.9   days  at  $2.50  $   32.25 

Laborers    197.8       "      "  1.50  269.70 

Engineman    9.8        "       "  1.75  17.15 

Derrickman     . 8.2       "      "  1.50  12.30 

Water    boy 9.9       "      "  0.75  7.43 


Total,   1,632   cu.  yds.  at  $0.21 $338.83 

Pumping  Water. 

Laborer     6.3  days  at  $1.50  $9.45 

Making  Sheet   Pile   Driver. 

Foreman     .               0.8  days  at  $2.50  $2.00 

Laborers    3.5        "       "       1.50  5.25 

Water  boy    0.15                    0.75  .11 

Total     .  $7.36 


BRIDGES. 


1597 


Driving    Sheet   Piling. 

Foreman    4.4  days  at  $2.50  $11.00 

Laborers     165.2        "       '.'       1.50  247.80 

Water  boy    9.6                      0.75  7.20 

Total,    8,932    ft.    B.    M.    at    $2.98 $266.00 

There  were   2,227   lin.    ft.   of   sheet  piling,   so  that  the  labor  cost 
was   12   cts.   per  ft. 

Concrete. 

Foreman 5.7  days  at  $2.50  $14.25 

Laborers     42           "      "      1.50  63.00 

Engineman     : 1.25     "      "      1.75  2.19 

Derrickman     7.9        "      "      1.50  11.85 

Water   boy 2           "      "      0.75  1.50 

Total,   57  cu.  yds.   at  $1.63. $92/79 

Unloading  Stone  from  Cars. 

Foreman     3.65  days  at  $2.50  $     9.13 

Laborers     30.3        "      "      1.50  45.45 

Engineman     3.6        "      "    •  1.75  6.30 

Derrickman     3.6                       1.50  5.40 

Stonecutters     14.7                      3.00  44.10 

Total,   6571/2   cu.   yds.   at  $.0.17 $110.38 

Btonecutting. 

Engineman     23.8  days  at  $1.75  $      41.65 

Darrickman     24.7        "      "       1.50  37.05 

Stonecutters     284.9        "      "       3.00  854.70 

Scabblers     28.4       "      "      1.50  42.60 

Blacksmith    3.3       "      "      1.75  5828 

Water  boy    14.7               "      0.75  11.03 

Total,    657%   cu.   yds.   at  $1.59 $1,045.31 

Betting  Stone. 

Foreman 30.7  days  at  $2.50  $   76.75 

Mason    47.4       "      "      1.50  71.10 

Laborers     59.3        "       "       1.50  88.95 

Engineman     11.4       "      "      1.75  19.95 

Derrickman     17.4        "       "       1.50  26.1 0 

Water    boy 9                          0.75  _  6.75 

Total,   657%    cu.  yds.  at  $0.44 $289760 

Pointing. 

Mason    10  days  at  $1.50  $15.00 

Loading  Sand. 

Laborer   11.9  days  at  $1.50  $17.85 

Backfilling. 

Foreman    1      day     at  $2.50  $     2.50 

Laborers    103.7  days  at     1.50  155.55 

Engineman     6.5        "      "      1.75  11.38 

Derrickmen 14.5        "      "       1.50  21  75 

Water    boy 5.3                      0.75  3.98 

Total,  796  cu.  yds.  at  $0.245 $195.16 

Ditching. 

Laborers     2.5  days  at  $1.50  $3.75 

Total,    27.2   cu.   yds.    at   $0.14 $3.75 

Tear  Down  Old  Abutment  and  Load. 

Foreman    4.3   days  at  $2.50  $10.75 

Laborers     33.2                        1.50  49.80 

Total,   90.4  cu.  yds.  at  $0.67 $60.55 


1598  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Of  the  1,632  cu.  yds.  of  earth  excavation  there  were  1,260  cu. 
yds.  dry,  and  372  cu.  yds.  wet.  The  dry  excavation  cost  $253.08, 
or  20.8  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  'The  labor  of  the  wet  excavation  cost  $85.75, 
or  23  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  to  which  must  be  added  nearly  3  cts.  for 
pumping  and  73  cts.  for  the  labor  of  driving  the  sheet  piles,  in- 
cluding the  labor  of  making  the  pile  driver.  This  makes  a  total  of 
99  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  the  labor  of  the  wet  excavation  ;  but  in  addi- 
tion to  this  there  was  nearly  9,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  oak  sheet  piling, 
which  at  $14  per  M  (a  very  low  price),  would  add  another  $180. 
or  nearly  34  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  making  the  total  cost  nearly  $1.33  per 
cu.  yd.  for  the  372  cu.  yds.  of  wet  excavation.  Had  the  sheet 
piling  timber  cost  $20  per  M,  the  total  cost  of  the  wet  excava- 
tion would  have  been  about  $1.50  per  cu.  yd. 

The  total  labor  cost  to  the  contractor  was  $2,552.03.  To  this 
amount  must  be  added  the  following: 

10%  value  of  plant  for  depreciation  and  repairs. . .  .$140.00 

8,932   ft.    B.   M.   oak  piling  at   $14 125.00 

215    bbls.    Buffalo    cement    at    $0.85 182.75 

7y2    bbls.    Dykerhoff    cement-  at    $3.00 22.50 

Coal  for  engine     55.80 

Coal  for  blacksmith  3.40 


Total    $389.50 

Time  work    95.57 

The  total  actual  cost  to  the  contractor  for  labor  and  materials  is 
accordingly  $2,552.03  +  $389.50  +  $95.57  =  $3,177.10.  As  is  shown 
in  the  succeeding  paragraphs  the  railroad  company  paid  the  con- 
tractor $5,377.76  on  the  final  estimate  of  the  work  done,  thus  giving 
him  a  profit  of  $2,200.66. 

In  the  following  table  is  shown  the  final  estimate  of  the  amount 
of  work  done  by  the  contractor  and  the  unit  rate  at  which  he  was 
paid  by  the  railroad : 

1,260      cu.  yds.  dry  excavation  at $0.25 

372      cu.   yds.  wet  excavation  at 75 

27.2  cu.    yds.    ditching   at 25 

796      cu.  yds.  back  filling  at. 25 

57      cu.  yds.   concrete  at 3.75 

657.5   cu.   yds.    masonry   at. 6.15 

90.4   cu.  yds.  old  abutment  torn  down  at 1.00 

Total $5,273.63 

In  addition  the  contractor  was  paid  for  the  timber  left  in  the 
structlon  and  for  time  labor,  the  unit  costs  being  as  follows : 

8,932  ft.  B.  M.  oak  sheet  piling  at $14.00 

8  days'  labor  night  watchmen  at 1.25 

41  days'  labor  night  watchmen  at 1.50 

2.8  days'  labor  changing  braces  at 1.50 

13.25  days'  labor  excavating  at 1.50 

Total  ... $95.57 

The  contractor  was  paid  10  per  cent  of  this  last  total,  or  $9.56, 
for  use  of  tools,  etc.,  making  $5,377.76  as  the  total  amount  paid 


BRIDGES. 


1599 


him  on  the  final  estimate.     As  the  railroad  company  furnished  the 
stone  the  grand  total  cost  of  the  work  to  it  was  as  follows : 

600       cu.  yds.    stone  at   $5.89 ..$3,533.05 

74.5  cu.  yds.  broken  stone  at  $1.177 '.  .         87.71 

Amount    paid   contractor 5,377.76 


Total  cost  of  work $8,998.52 

The  cost  to  the  railroad  company  of  masonry  per  cubic  yard  was 
as  follows:  657.5  cu.  yds.  stone  (laid),  cost  $3,533.05,  $5.37  per  cu. 
yd.  ;  657.5  cu.  yds.  stone  cut  and  set,  $6.15  per  cu.  yd.  (contract 
price)  ;  total,  $11.52  per  cu.  yd.  of  abutment  masonry. 


p 

1 
1 

,1 

I 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

i 

i 
i 
i 
i 

*P 

i 
i 

A 

J1!  ii  ii 

ii  n" 

tf  >i 

x 

K  R! 

^-w-*-r-o"-* 

t*--*6~--&-6-  8&-+\    " 

u 

I 

Nlj 

^ 

Base  of  fbi/ 

Too  ofSte^Hbtt 


*r. 


•  Plan  and   Elevcrbon  of  Piers   2. 3  and  4.          p,an    and  Oevatloh  of  Pfere  land  6 

Fig.  12.— Bridge  Pier. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Foundations  for  a  Railway  Bridge. — Mr.  J.  Guy 
Huff  is  authority  for  the  following  data.  The  original  Calf 
Killer  River  bridge  on  the  Sparta-Bon  Air  extension  of  the  Nash- 
ville, Chattanooga,  St.  Louis  Ry.  consisted  of  two  end  piers,  one 
middle  pier,  and  a  stem  wall  at  each  end,  carrying  Phoenix  column 
deck,  trusses  of  the  Warren  type.  The  distance  from  base  of  rail  to 
bridge  seat  was  25  ft.  1%  ins.  In  1905  the  old  superstructure  was 
replaced  by  four  spans  of  75  ft.  deck  plate  girders,  two  new  co*>' 


1600 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


crete  piers  being  constructed  and  the  old  masonry  piers  built  up 
with  concrete.  Figures  12  and  13  show  arrangement,  plans  and 
elevation  of  the  piers. 

Briefly  described,  the  method  of  construction  was  as  follows: 
The  end  pieces  were  built  up,  the  end  vertical  posts  and  end  braces 
being  encased,  the  latter  being  removed  when  the  old  structure  was 
taken  down  ;  the  two  new  piers  were  finished  complete,  the  bars  of 
the  lower  chords  of  the  old  bridge  being  boxed  around,  and  after 
the  old  bridge  had  been  removed  these  slots  were  filled  with  con- 
crete ;  on  both  sides  of  the  old  middle  pier  falsework  towers  suffi- 
ciently strong  to  support  the  ends  of  the  new  girders  were  erected, 
and  after  the  old  spans  had  been  taken  down  and  the  new  super- 
structure put  in  place,  the  pier  was  built  up. 


T£T 

t__ 
| 

1 

N« 
I 

11  1? 

,1 

! 

/^  i 

'  i 

ill 

f 

Cfl/xre) 

s( 

N6» 

-* 

A 

j 

§ 

StuiMUf 

A 

^^ 

i1  n 

A 

i 
i 
i 

i 

i 

*e.~far>dati'or 
%r  Afc./. 

»/Jff       ^(75* 

Co/»c/-»/te  V 

ST 

firefy  / 
'Centre* 

?                          ^ 

fe«-                    5/4 
r                      Afr>* 

SPB 

w  ^ 

Concm 

i 

$&           ^V^^^pjM^ 
5                  Pier  No.  2 
yse              Entirety  Metv 
•eToo            of  Concrete 

Pier  No.  S 
Stone  Btrse 
Ke»  Concrete  Top 


Fig.   13.— Bridge  Piers. 

The  old  masonry  was  built  up  of  concrete  to  the  finish  for  7-ft. 
deck  plate  girders,  using  vertical  faces  and  not  exceeding  the  size 
of  the  old  piers.  The  length  of  this  top  section  on  the  old  ma- 
sonry was  14  ft.  on  each  of  the  piers,  and  the  design  of  the  new 
piers  was  similar  in  size  and  shape  to  the  old  mid-pier  with  its 
new  top  section. 

Mixing  and  Placing  Concrete. — The  sand  and  aggregate,  consist- 
Ing  of  blast  furnace  slag  obtained  from  South  Pittsburg,  Tenn., 
were  unloaded  from  cars  to  platforms  on  a  level  with  the  top.  of 
rail,  placed  about  100  ft.  south  from  the  south  end  of  the  bridge. 
A  cubical  form,  1-6  cu.  yd.  capacity,  concrete  mixer  was  used.  This 
was  operated  by  a  gasoline  engine,  and  was  located  on  a  platform 
about  50  ft.  south  of  the  south  end  pier.  A  tank  near  the  mixer 
to  supply  water  was  elevated  enough  to  get  the  desired  head,  and 
was  kept  filled  by  a  pump  run  by  another  gasoline  engine  located 


BRIDGES.  1601 

down  by  the  river  bank.  The  cement  house  was  located  between 
the  mixer  platform  and  slag  pile. 

Slag  and  sand  were  delivered  to  the  mixer  by  means  of  wheel- 
barrows. The  mixer  was  so  placed  that  it  would  dump  onto  a  plat- 
form, and  the  concrete  could  then  be  shoveled  into  a  specially  de- 
signed narrow-gage  car.  This  car  ran  on  one  rail  of  the  main 
track  and  an  extra  rail  outside.  A  turnout  for  clearing  passing 
trains  was  provided  at  both  ends  of  the  bridge.  The  track  over  the 
bridge  from  the  mixer  had  a  descending  grade  of  about  1  per  cent, 
so  that  with  a  little  start  the  concrete  car  would  roll  alone  down 
to  the  required  points  on  the  bridge.  Only  in  returning  the  empty 
cars  to  the  mixer  was  it  necessary  to  push  it  by  hand,  and  then 
only  for  a  distance  of  never  more  than  400  ft. 

Over  the  piers  on  the  bridge  in  the  center  of  the  concrete  car's 
track  openings  were  sawed  to  let  the  concrete  pass  to  the  forms 
below.  To  get  the  concrete  into  the  forms,  there  were  used  zigzag 
chutes  with  arms  about  10  ft.  long,  which  sections  were  removed 
as  the  concrete  in  the  forms  were  increased.  This  chute  was  a 
convenience  by  its  end  alternating  from  one  side  to  the  other  as 
the  arms  were  removed  in  coming  up. 

Cost  Data  on  the  Foundation  Work. — The  foundation  work  was 
built  by  the  railway's  masonry  gangs,  the  work  being  commenced 
about  June  20,  1905,  and  finished  complete  about  Dec.  1  of  the 
same  year.  The  girders  were  furnished  and  placed  by  a  bridge 
company. 

In  Table  XVIII  the  wages  per  day  are  the  average  rates.  The 
men  worked  10  hours  each  day.  The  concrete  was  mixed  in  a 
1:3:6  proportion. 

TABLE  XVllI. 
Unloading  Materials. 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Rate       Total  days  Con- 

per  day.     worked.     Total.        crete. 

Foreman     $3'.40  5          $17.00          $0.04 

11    laborers     1.368/10     52  71.14  .15 

Total    for    unloading    material $0.19 

Building  Forms,  Bins,  Etc. 

Foreman    $3.40  18          $61.20  $0.14 

9    carpenters    2.25  166          373.50  .81 

New  lumber,  23.7  M  ft.  at   $17.80  421.86  .92 

Old  lumber,    6   M   ft.   at   $8.33 49.98  .11 

Total    for    building    forms,    bins,    etc $1.98 

Cofferdam  Excavation  (^5  Cu.  Yds.) 

Foreman    $3.40  8          $27.20          $0.06 

9   laborers 1.15   6/10     74ya        8612  .19 

Total  for  cofferdam  excavation. .  $0.25 


1602  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cofferdam   Concrete   (87   Cu.  Yds.) 

Foreman     ..$3.40                8          $27.20  $0.06 

11    laborers     1.363/10     79          107.68  .     .23 

Cofferdam  lumber,   2.25  M  ft.  at 

$20.00     4500  .09 

Total  for   cofferdam  concrete    $0.38 

Concrete  Mixing  and  Placing. 

Foreman    ..$3.40                30       $102.00  $0.22 

9    laborers     1.156/10282          325.99  .74 

Cement,    452   bbls.   at    $1.55 ,                                701.50  1.52 

Slag,   437  cu.  yds.  at  $0.20 87.40  .19 

Sand,   220   cu.   yds.   at   $0.30 66.00  .14 

Total    for    mixing   and    placing $2.78 

Taking  Down  Forms  and  Clearing  Up. 

Foreman $3.40                13          $44.20  $0.09 

11  laborers  ...                                    .    1.17              143          107.31  .36 


Total    for    taking    down    forms,    etc $200.00          $0.45 

Engineering    and    supervision 43 

Grand    total,    460    cu.    yds.    concrete $6.46 

The  cofferdam  work  was  done  in  connection  with  the  construc- 
tion of  the  fourth  pier,  this  pier  being  the  only  one  coming  in  the 
bed  of  the  river  to  be  built  entirely  new.  The  work  on  this  was 
started  in  water  about  6  ft.  deep.  The  37  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  are 
included  in  the  total  of  460  cu.  yds.  in  the  above  tabulation.  By 
itself  the  cost  of  the  cofferdam  work,  not  including  cost  of  cement, 
sand  and  slag,  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 
Total.       Concrete. 

Lumber     ..$45.00          $1.21 

Labor,    excavating    113.32  3.06 

Labor,     concrete     134.88  3.64 


Total   37   cu.   yds.   concrete $7.91 

Cost   of    a    Cofferdam    and    Concrete   Pier  on    Pile    Foundation. — 

The  following  was  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  May  29, 
1907: 

This  pier  (Fig.  L4)  was  built  in  water  averaging  5  ft.  deep.  The 
cofferdam  consisted  of  triple-lap  sheet  piling,  of  the  Wakefield  pat- 
tern, the  planks  being  2  ins.  thick,  and  spiked  together  so  as  to 
give  a  cofferdam  wall  6  ins.  thick.  The  cofferdam  enclosed  an 
area  14x20  ft.,  giving  a  clearance  of  1  ft.  all  around  the  base  of 
the  concrete  pier,  and  a  clearance  of  2  ft.  between  the  cofferdam 
and  the  outer  edge  of  the  nearest  pile.  The  cofferdam  sheet  piles 
were  18  ft.  long,  driven  11  ft.  deep  into  sand,  and  projecting  2  ft. 
above  the  surface  of  the  water. 

The  concrete  base  resting  on  the  foundation  piles  was  12x18  ft. 
The  concrete  pier  resting  on  this  base  was  7x13  ft.  at  the  bottom, 


BRIDGES. 


1603 


and   5x11   ft.    at  the  top.      The   pier   supported   deck   plate   girders. 
There  were  100  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  pier  and  base. 

The   cost    of   this   pier,   which    is   typical   of   several    others   built 
at  the   same  time,  was  as  follows : 

Setting  Up  and  Taking  Down  Derrick  and  Platform — 

4  days  foreman   at   $5.00 $20.00 

%   days    engineman    at    $3.00 2.25 

%   days  blacksmith  at  $3.00 2.25 

%   days  blacksmith  helper  at  $2.00 1.50 

22  days  laborers  at   $2.00 44.00 

Total    .  ..$70.00 


Fig.  14. — Bridge  Pier  on,  Piles. 


Cofferdam — 

7  days  foreman  at  $5.00 $35.00 

4  days  engineman  at   $3.00 12.00 

38  days  laborers  at   $2.00 76.00 

1  ton  coal  at   $3.00 3.00 


Total  labor  on  7,900  ft.  B.  M.  at  $16.00.$126.00 
7,900   ft.    B.   M.    at   $20.00  ................    158.00 

Total  -for    58    cu.   yds.    excav.    at    $5..  $284.  00 
Wet  Excavation  — 

1.8   days  foreman   at    $5.00  .................  $9.00 

1.5   days  engineman  at   $3.00  ..............      4.50 

9   days  laborers  at    $2.00  ..................    18.00 

%   ton  coal  at  $3.00  ......................      1.50 


Tota1 


on  58  cu.  yds.  at  57c  ......  $33.00 


?.604  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Foundation    Piles — 

960   lin.   ft.  at  lOc |96.00 

4  days  setting  up  driver  and  driving  24  piles 

at  $20  per  day  for  labor  and  fuel 80.00 


Total     $176.00 

Concrete — 

100  cu.  yds.  stone  at  $1.00 $100.00 

40  cu.    yds.    sand   at    $0.50 20.00 

100    bbls.    cement   at    $2.00 200.00 

5  days   foreman    at    $5.00 25.00 

50  days  laborers  at   $2.00 100.00 

5  days   engineman    at    $3.00 15.00 

2  tons  coal  at   $3.00 6.00 


Total,   100   cu.   yds.  at   $4.66 $466.00 

8  days    carpenters   at    $3.00 $   24.00 

2,400    ft.    B.    M.    2-in.    plank    at    $25.00 60.00 

1,000  ft.  B.   M-    4x6-in.  studs  at  $20.00 20.00 

Nails,    wire,    etc 2.00 


Total  forms  for  100  cu.  yds.  at  $1.06.  .$106.00 
Summary — 

Setting    up     derrick,     etc $   70.00 

Cofferdam     (7,000    ft.    B.    M.) 284.00 

Wet   excavation    (58  cu.  yds.) 33.00 

Foundation   piles    (24) 176.00 

Concrete    (100    cu.    yds.) 466.00 

Forms   (3,400   ft.  B.   M.)  .  . 106.00 


Total      $1,135.00 

Transporting  plant    20.00 

20   days   rental   of  plant  at   $5.00 100.00 

Total  cost  of  pier   $1,252.00 

Regarding  the  item  of  plant  rental,  it  should  be  said  that  the 
plant  consisted  of  a  pile  driver,  a  derrick,  a  hoisting  engine,  and 
sundry  timbers  for  platforms.  There  was  no  concrete  mixer. 
Hence  an  allowance  of  $5  per  day  for  use  of  plant  is  sufficient. 

It  will  be  noted  that  no  salvage  has  been  allowed  on  the  lum- 
ber for  forms.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  all  this  lumber  was  recovered, 
and  was  used  again  in  similar  work. 

Referring  to  the  cost  of  cofferdam  work,  we  see  that,  in  order 
to  excavate  the  58  cu.  yds.  inside  the  cofferdam,  it  was  necessary 
to  spend  $284,  or  nearly  $5  per  cu.  yd.,  before  the  actual  excavation 
was  begun.  The  work  of  excavating  cost  only  57  cts.  per  cu.  yd., 
but  this  does  not  include  the  cost  of  erecting  the  derrick  which  was 
used  in  raising  the  loaded  buckets  of  earth,  as  well  as  in  subse- 
quently placing  the  concrete.  The  sheet  piles  were  not  pulled,  in 
this  instance,  but  a  contractor  who  understands  the  art  of  pile 
pulling  would  certainly  not  leave  the  piles  in  the  ground.  A  hand 
pump  served  to  keep  the  cofferdam  dry  enough  for  excavating ;  but 
in  more  open  material  a  power  pump  is  usually  required. 


BRIDGES.  1605 

The  above  costs  are  the  actual  costs,  and  do  not  include  the  con- 
tractor's profits.  His  bid  on  the  work  was  as  follows : 

Piles  delivered 12  ct  per  ft. 

Piles   driven    $5  each 

Cofferdam    $37   per  M. 

Wet  excavation   $1.00  per  cu.  yd. 

Concrete    $8.00  per  cu.  yd. 

In  order  to  ascertain  whether  or  not  these  prices  yielded  a  fair 
profit,  it  is  necessary  to  distribute  the  cost  of  the  plant  transpor- 
tation and  rental  over  the  various  items.  We  have  allowed  $120 
for  plant  transportation  and  rental,  and  $70  for  setting  up  and 
taking  down  the  plant,  or  $190  in  all.  The  working  time  of  the 
plant  was  as  follows: 

Per  cent       Prorated 
Days,     of  time,     plant  cost. 

Cofferdam    7  39  $  74 

Excavation     2  11  21 

Foundation  piles 4  22  42 

Concrete     5  28  53 

Total    18  100  $190 

As  above  given,  the  labor  on  the  7,900  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  coffer- 
dam cost  $126,  or  $16  per  M. ;  but  this  additional  $74  of  prorated 
plant  costs,  adds  another  $9  per  M.,  bringing  the  total  labor  and 
plant  to  $25  per  M.,  to  which  must  be  added  the  $20  per  M.  paid 
for  the  timber  In  the  cofferdam,  making  a  grand  total  of  $45  per  M. 
This  shows  that  the  contractor's  bid  of  $37  per  M.  was  much  too 
low. 

The  labor  on  the  excavation  cost  57  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  to  which 
must  be  added  the  prorated  plant  cost  of  $21  distributed  over  the 
58  cu.  yds.,  or  36  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  making  a  total  of  93  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  This  shows  that  the  bid  of  $1  per  cu.  yd.  was  hardly  high 
enough. 

The  labor  on  the  24  foundation  piles  cost  $80,  or  $3.33  each.  The 
prorated  plant  cost  is  $42,  or  $1.75  per  pile,  which,  added  to  $3.33, 
makes  a  total  of  $5.08.  This  shows  that  the  bid  of  $5  per  pile  for 
driving  was  too  low.  However,  there  was  a  profit  of  2  cts.  per  ft., 
or  80  cts.  per  pile,  on  the  cost  of  piles  delivered. 

The  concrete  amounted  to  100  cu.  yds.  Hence  the  prorated 
plant  cost  of  $53  is  equivalent  to  53  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  Hence  the 
total  cost  of  the  concrete  was: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement,    sand   and   stone .$3.20 

Foreman    (at    $5). :  . .    0.25 

Labor    (at   $2)    1.00 

Engineman   (at  $3) 0.15 

Coal    (at    $3)     0.06 

Carpenters    (at    $3) 0.24 

Forms     (at    $23.50,    used    once) 0.80 

Wire  nails,    etc 0.02 

Prorated  plant  cost   0.53 


Total    $6.25 


1606  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Since  the  contract  price  for  concrete  was  $8  per  cu.  yd.,  ther« 
was  a  good  profit  in  this  item. 

It  is  doubtful  whether  many  contractors  analyze  their  costs  in 
this  manner,  prorating  plant  costs  and  like,  but  no  other  method 
is  satisfactory.  Such  an  analysis  frequently  discloses  the  economy 
of  radically  changing  the  method  of  doing  the  work.  For  example, 
on  abutment  work,  and  on  some  piers,  it  is  often  wise  not  to  erect 
a  derrick  at  all,  but  to  build  inclined  runways  up  which  to  wheel 
the  concrete.  As  the  pier  or  abutment  rises  in  height,  the  run- 
ways are  raised.  The  added  cost  of  labor  is  more  than  offset  by 
the  saving  in  the  cost  of  transporting  and  erecting  a  derrick  where 
the  yardage  to  be  moved  is  small. 

In  like  manner  the  excavation  of  a  small  amount  of  earth  from 
the  cofferdam  may  be  more  economically  accomplished  by  shovel- 
ing it  out  in  "lifts,"  than  by  installing  a  derrick  for  the  purpose. 

On  the  other  hand,  few  contractors  have  given  much  study  to 
economic  methods  of  erecting  and  moving  derricks,  etc.  A  little 
brains  put  into  this  end  of  the  work,  may  abundantly  justify  the 
use  of  derricks  even  on  small  jobs. 

We  urgently  recommend  the  careful  recording  and  analysis  of 
the  cost  of  erecting  and  shifting  plants,  as  well  as  a  similar  an- 
alysis of  all  other  costs. 

The  foregoing  analysis  should  make  it  clear  to  engineers  that 
seemingly  high  bids  on  work  involving  one  or  more  small  units  of 
construction,  may,  in  fact,  prove  to  be  too  low. 

Cost  of  a  Pneumatic  Caisson  and  Masonry  Bridge  Pier.* — The  fol 
lowing  data  relate  to  the  cost  of  labor  and  materials  required  for 
three  railway  bridge  piers  built  by  the  pneumatic  caisson  process. 
The  work  was  done  for  the  railway  company  in  the  state  of  Wash- 
ington, by  a  contractor  working  on  a  percentage  basis,  but  the  costs 
are  the  actual  costs,  not  including  the  contractor's  percentage. 

Borings  were  made  along  the  line  of  the  bridge  and  the  bottom 
was  penetrated  With  a  2-in.  pipe  to  a  depth  of  34  ft.  below  extreme 
low  water.  The  material  encountered  was  a  very  uniform  bed  of 
fine  sand. 

Plant. — A  scow  30  ft.  x  80  ft.  x  4  ft.  was  built  and  was  equipped 
with  3  boilers  having  an  aggregate  capacity  of  125  hp.  There  were 
2  air  compressors ;  1  air  receiver ;  1  duplex  Knowles  pump,  with 
12xl8-in.  cylinders  and  60-in.  discharge;  1  small  pump  for  sup- 
plying water  into  the  receiver  ;  3  air  locks,  4  ft.  diameter  by  8  ft. 
high ;  8  sections  main  air  shaft,  3  ft.  diameter  by  8  ft.  high ;  2 
hoppers,  3  ft.  diameter  by  2%  ft.  high,  for  18-in.  supply  shaft; 
rubber  hose,  various  iron  pipes,  etc. 

Pneumatic  Caissons,  Pier  No.  2. — There  were  three  caissons.  Pier 
No.  2  was  a  pivot  pier,  supporting  a  single  track  draw  bridge  240 
ft.  long.  Piers  Nos.  1  and  3  supported  the  ends  of  this  draw  span 
and  the  two  70-ft.  plate  girder  spans  approaching  it. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May   8,   1907. 


BRIDGES.  1607 

The  caisson  for  this  pivot  pier  was  30x30  ft.  square  and  15  ft. 
high.  It  was  built  of  12xl2-in.  surfaced  timbers,  sheeted  both  out- 
side and  inside  with  3-in.  surfaced  plank,  nailed  vertically,  and 
calked  with  oakum.  The  cutting  edge  was  made  of  %-in.  iron,  3 
ft.  high,  with  shoulder  2  ft.  wide,  stiffened  by  brackets  at  inter- 
vals of  1  ft.  to  2y2  ft.  The  12x12  timbers  were  drift  bolted  to- 
gether with  1-in.  bolts,  and  the  whole  structure  tied  with  1%-in. 
and  2-in.  rods.  The  corners  were  protected  by  %-in.  iron  plates. 
The  cutting  edge  of  the  caisson  was  sunk  to  a  depth  of  55  ft.  be- 
low water  level  or  45  ft.  below  ground  level,  requiring  the  excava- 
tion of  1,500  cu.  yds. 

When  the  caisson  was  built  up  10  ft.  above  the  cutting  edge,  the 
inside  and  the  outside  linings  were  spiked  on  and  calked.  The 
bottom  sections  of  the  supply  shaft  and  air  lock  were  inserted  and 
tightly  fitted.  A  temporarily  false  bottom  of  3-in.  plank,  well 
calked,  was  made  for  the  purpose  of  floating  the  caisson  into 
place,  after  which  the  work  of  adding  to  its  height  was  continued. 
Meanwhile  11  guide  piles  were  driven  to  guide  the  caisson  dur- 
ing sinking. 

The  day  after  the  caisson  was  in  position  the  filling  of  the  top 
part  with  concrete  was  begun,  and  lasted  five  days.  Compressed 
air  was  introduced  into  the  caisson  the  second  day  after  it  was  in 
position,  and  on  the  third  day  three  eight-hour  shifts  began  work, 
the  first  work  being  the  chopping  out  of  the  false  bottom  referred 
to  above.  By  this  time  a  cofferdam,  16  ft.  high,  had  been  con- 
structed on  top  of  the  caisson,  so  as  to  prevent  floods  from  inter- 
fering with  the  work. 

It  required  just  29  days  of  24  hrs.  to  sink  the  caisson  45  ft.  after 
it  was  in  place,  although  the  actual  time  of  sinking  was  19  days, 
there  being  several  delays.  Then  the  working  chamber  was  filled 
with  concrete.  Sections  2  ft.  by  2  ft.  were  dug  out  under  the  shoul- 
der of  the  cutting  edge,  and  successively  filled  with  concrete.  Hav- 
ing thus  supported  the  caisson,  the  center  portion  was  excavated 
and  filled  with  concrete.  The  filling  of  the  working  chamber  and 
lower  air  locks  with  concrete  took  7  days.  The  compressed  air 
was  then  taken  off,  having  been  used  for  36  days.  The  depth  sunk 
was  45  ft.,  or  1^4  ft.  per  day. 

The  masonry  on  top  of  the  caisson  was  finished  18  days  after  the 
compressed  air  had  been  turned  off,  so  that  54  days  after  the  cais- 
son had  been  floated  to  place  the  pier  was  ready  to  receive  the 
bridge. 

The  masonry  on  top  of  the  caisson  consisted  of  an  annular  cylin- 
der of  cut  stone  masonry,  50  ft.  high,  having  a  thickness  of  4%  ft. 
at  the  base  and  3^  ft.  at  the  top.  This  cylinder  was  filled  with 
concrete.  The  outside  diameter  of  the  masonry  cylinder  was  25 
ft.  at  the  top  and  29  ft.  at  the  base.  The  height  of  this  masonry 
cylinder  was  50  ft.  The  cost  of  the  plant  was  as  follows: 


1608  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  scow  was  30x80x4  ft,  provided  with  a  boiler  house,  and  its 
cost  was : 

30,600  ft,  B.  M.,  timber  in  scow  at  $15 $459.00 

1,400    Ibs.    boat   spikes   at    4c.... 56.00 

800    Ibs.    bolts,    screws,    etc.,   at   3c 24.00 

2,000    Ibs.   oakum  at    4c 80.00 

5   bbls.    tar   at   $5 25.00 

Miscellaneous  materials    20.00 


Total  materials   in    scow $664.00 

22,000  ft,  B.  M.,  in  boiler  house  at  $15 $330.00 

1,200    Ibs.    nails,    etc 40.00 

800  Ibs.  tarred  paper  at  2%c 20.00 

1,000   brick    8.00 

1    bbl.    lime    1.50 

Miscellaneous    materials     10.00 

Total   materials   in   boiler  house $409.50 

Labor  building  scow  and  boiler   house : 

15  days,    foreman,   at    $4 $   60.00 

240  days,    carpenters,    at    $3.05 720.00 

50  days,    laborers,    at    $2 100.00 

•     Total    labor    $880.00 

This  labor  cost  is  equivalent  to  $16  per  1,000  ft,  B.  M.,  of  tim- 
ber in  the  scow  and  boiler  house.  The  cost  of  setting  up  the  boil- 
ers, compressors,  etc.,  was  as  follows: 

12  days,  foreman,  at  $4 $   48.00 

24  days,    carpenter,   at   $3 72.00 

4  days,    machinist,    at    $5 20.00 

3  days,    blacksmith,    at    $3.50 10.50 

50  days,  steam  fitter,  at  $3.50 175.00 

24  days,    engineman,    at    $3.50 84.00 

270  days,    laborer,   at   $2 540.00 


387  days.      Total $949.50 

This  cost  is  also  excessive  and  indicates  very  poor  management 
The  freight  on  this  plant  was  $150.      Summarizing,  we  have: 

Scow  and   boiler    house    $1,950 

Setting    up    boilers,    etc :       950 

Freight     150 


Total     $3,050 

Charging  this  $3,050  to  the  three  piers  according  to  their  size, 
we  may  assign  50  per  cent,  or  $1,525,  to  Pier  No.  2,  and  $762  to 
each  of  the  other  two  piers. 

The  three  boilers,  two  air  compressors,  pumps,  etc.,  were  worth 
about  $4,000,  and  a  very  liberal  allowance  for  their  use  on  this  job 
would  be  $2,000,  charging  50  per  cent,  or  $1,000,  to  Pier  No.  2,  and 
$500  to  each  of  the  other  two  piers.  This  $1,000  added  to  the 
$1,525,  makes  $2,525  charged  for  plant  The  cost  of  erecting  a 
platform  and  derrick  at  Pier  No.  2  was  $100.  About  250  ft  of 
4-in.  pipe  and  70  ft  of  1%-in.  pipe  and  fittings,  costing  $130,  were 
left  in  the  caisson  and  not  recovered. 

About  36,000  Ibs.  of  iron  were  required  for  the  air  locks,  shafts, 
»tc.,  of  the  three  piers.  About  half  of  it,  or  18,000  Ibs.,  was  left 


BRIDGES.  1609 

in  the  piers,   for  which  a  charge  of  5c  per  Ib.  was  made,  or  $900, 
or  $300  per  pier. 

The  cost  of  materials  in  the  caisson    (30x30x15  ft.)   was  as  fol- 
lows: 

71,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  caisson  at  $20 $1,420.00 

4,400  ft.  B.  M.  in  false  floor  at  $20 88:00 

3,400  ft.  B.  M.  in  inside  curbing  at  $20..  68.00 

9,000    ft.    B.    M.    in    cofferdam 180.00 

15,000   Ibs.   cutting   edge  at   4y2c 675.00 

1,400  Ibs.  corner  plates  at  4c 56.00 

5,200  Ibs.   rods  at   2i/oc 130.00 

4,000  Ibs.  drift  bolts  at  2%c 100.00 

3,000   Ibs.   boat   spikes  at   2c . 60.00 

800   Ibs.    cast   washers  at   2c 16.00 

1,000  Ibs.   lag  screws,  etc.,   at   4c 40.00 

20  bales  (2,000  Ibs.)   of  oakum  at  $4 80.00 

100  Ibs.  rubber  packing  at  70c 70.00 


Total  materials    $2,983.00 

There  were  78,800  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  caisson,  exclusive  of  the  9,000 
ft.  B.  M.  in  the  cofferdam.  The  cost  of  framing  and  erecting  the 
caisson  was  as  follows : 

45  days,    foreman,    at    $4 . $    180.00 

320  days,    carpenters,    at    $3 960.00 

90  days,   laborers,   at   $2 180.00 

14  days,   blacksmiths,   at   $3.50 49.00 

10  days,    engineman,    at    $3.50 35.00 

7  days,    machinist,    at    $5 35.00 


486  days,    total,    at    $2.96 $1,439.00 

This  is  equivalent  to  $18.25  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  which  is  a  very 
high  cost  for  this  kind  of  work. 

The  cost  of  building  the  cofferdam  on  top  of  the  caisson  was  as 
follows : 

6  days,    foreman,    at    $4.00     $  24.00 

60  days,   carpenters,   at 3.00        180.00 

10  days,    laborers,    at    2.00          20.00 

3  days,  blacksmith,  at 3.50          10.50 

79  days,    total    $2.97     $234.50 

Since  there  were  9,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  cofferdam,  the  labor  cost 
$26    per    1,000    ft.    B.    M. 

The  cost  of  sinking  the  caisson,  which  included  tamping  the  con-, 
crete  in  the  working  chamber  of  the  caisson  also,  was  as  follows: 
34  days,    foreman   machinist,    at.. $5.00     $    170.00 
16   days,    general    foreman,    at.....   6.00  96.00 

80  days,   sub  foreman,  at 5.00  400.00 

64  days,    top    lock    tender,    at....    2.25  144.00 

720  days,    pressure   men,    at 3.50  2,520.00 

72  days,     enginemen,    at     -3.50  252.20 

72  days,    firemen,    at    2.75  198.00 

32  days,  coal  passers,  at    2.50  80.00 

40  days,    wipers,    at     2.00  80.00 

.60  days,    steam    fitters,    at    3.00  150.00 

4  days,    blacksmith,    at     3.50  14.00 

58  days,  carpenters,  at 3.00  174.00 

360  days,    laborers,    at 2.00  720.00 

32   days,    signal   man,    at    2.00  64.00 

32   days,  call  boy,- at   1.00  32.00    • 

1,706  days    total     $2.99      $5,094.20 


1610  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

As  above  stated,  It  required  36  days  to  sink  the  caisson  and  fill 
the  working  chamber  with  concrete,  hence  by  dividing  each  of  the 
above  items  by  36  we  get  the  number  of  each  kind  of  men  per  day. 

In  addition  to  the  materials  and  labor  above  enumerated,  there 
were  the  suppHes,  which  cost  as  follows: 

220  tons    coal   at    $3 $660.00 

220  gals,   gasoline  and  kerosene,  at   lOc...      20.00 

40  gals,   valve  oil  at   50c 20.00 

20  gals,   engine  oil  at  35c 7.00 

70  Ibs.    waste   at    5c 3.50 

45  prs.   rubber  boots  at  $3 135.00 

Total     $845.50 

The  guide  piles  around  the  caisson  were  driven  with  a  scow 
driver,  and  cost  as  follows : 

600    lin.    ft.    piles    at    lOc $   60.00 

Labor   driving    52.00 

Coal    for    driver,    etc 20.00 


Total     : $132.00 

There  were  400  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  placed  in  the  working  cham- 
ber of  the  caisson  and  400  cu.  yds.  inside  the  stone  masonry  on 
top  of  the  caisson.  The  cost  of  this  concrete  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

1  cu.  yd.    stone  at   $1 $1.00 

0.45    cu.   yd.    sand   at    80c 36 

0.7    bbl.    cement   at    $2 1.40 

Mixing   and    placing    1.15 

Erecting    derricks,    platforms,    etc 34 


Total    $4.25 


The  $1.15  for  "mixing  and  placing"  covers  the  wages  of  the  men 
($2  a  day)  engaged  in  hand  mixing  and  handling  the  concrete,  the 
derrick  engineman,  the  foreman,  the  lock  tenders,  and  the  coal ; 
but  it  does  not  include  the  placing  and  tamping  of  the  concrete 
In  the  working  chamber  of  the  caisson,  for  that  item  is  included  in 
the  cost  of  sinking  the  caisson. 

There  were  400  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  caisson  and  400  cu. 
yds.  of  concrete  on  the  top  of  it,  but  of  this  last  400  cu.  yds.  only 
60  per  cent,  or  240  cu.  yds.,  was  below  the  ground  level.  Hence 
we  have  400  +  240  =  660  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  below  the  ground 
level.  This  660  cu.  yds.,  at  $4.25,  cost  $2,805,  which  is  equivalent 
to  $62  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $1.93  per  cu.  yd.  of  pier  below  the  ground 
level- 


BRIDGES.  1611 

We  may  now  summarize  the  cost  as  follows :  per  cu 

Perlin.  yd.  (1,500 

Total.          ft.  (45ft.)  cu.  yds.) 

Plant,    proportionate   cost $  2,525  $   56  $1.68 

Setting  up  platform  and  derrick.  .  .  100  2  0.07 

Pipe  left  in  caisson    130  3  0.09 

6,000  Ibs.   iron  left  in  caisson 300  7  0.20 

78,800   ft.    B.   M.   caisson,    $20 1,576  35  1.05 

9,000    f  t. '  B.    M.    cofferdam,    $20....  180  4  0.12 

15,000   Ibs.    cutting  edge,    4V2c    675  15  0.45 

9,200  Ibs.  rods,  drifts,  etc.,  2%c 230  5  0.16 

6,200  Ibs.  boat  spikes,  etc 172  4  0.11 

2,200   Ibs.    oakum,    4c 80  2  0.05 

100    Ibs.    rubber  packing,    70c 70  2  0.05 

486    days  bldg.    caisson,    $2.96 1,439  32  0.96 

79   days  building  cofferdam,    $2.97..  235  5  0.16 

1,076   days  sinking,    $2.99 5,094  112  3.39 

220    tons   coal,    $3.00 660  15  0.44 

Other   supplies    185  4  0.12 

600   lin.   ft.   piles   delivered,    lOc 60  1  0.04 

600  lin.  ft.  piles  driven,  12c 72  2  0.05 

Supt.  and  office   exp 700  16  0.47 

Totals     $14,483  $322  $9.66 

The  cost  of  cutting  and  handling  the  sandstone  for  the  masonry 
was  as  follows :  per  cu  y(j 

2.8    days,    stone    cutter,    at    $6 $1.G8 

3.2    days,    laborer,    at    $2 0.64 

(M)4  day,  blacksmith,   at   $3.50 0.14 

0.04   day,   blacksmith  helper,   at   $2.50 0.10 

0.06  day,  horse,  at  $1.50 0.09 

Total $2.65 

The  total  cost  of  this  stone  masonry  was  as  follows : 

Per  eu.  yd, 

1    cu.    yd.    stone    at    $6.50 $   6.50 

Cutting    stone    2.65 

Setting    stone    0.95 

0.08  cu.  yd.   sand  at   80c 0.05 

0.2   bbl.   cement   at    $2 0.40 

Total    $10.55 

There  were  600  cu.  yds.  of  this  stone  masonry,  hence  its  cost 
was  $6,330.  About  60  per  cent  of  it,  or  $3,798,  was  below  the 
ground  level. 

Summarizing  the  cost  of  the  pier  below  the  ground  level,  we 
have: 

Total. 

Brought  forward    $11,483 

Concrete    at    $4.25 2,805 

Masonry  at   $10.55    3,798 


Total     $21,086          $468          $14.12 

The  cost  of  the  20  lin  ft.  of  pier  above  the  ground  level  was; 

160   cu.   yds.    concrete   at    $4.25 $    680 

240   cu.  yds.   masonry  at  $10.55 2,532 


Total,    20   lin.   ft.,   at   $160 $3,212 

The   total    cost  of   the   pier  was   $24.298. 


1612  HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 

The  reader  will  note  that  the  tabulated  cost  of  this  caisson  is 
given  In  such  shape  that  the  cost  of  similar  work  can  be  easily 
estimated  by  allowing  for  differences  in  prevailing  prices  and 
wages.  If  timber  costs  $30  per  M,  instead  of  $20,  then,  by  adding 
50  per  cent  to  the  items  involving  timber,  the  increased  cost  per 
cubic  yard  of  caisson  is  readily  estimated.  Since  the  timber  in  the 
caisson  cost  $1.05  per  cu.  yd.  of  caisson,  when  timber  was  $20  per 
M,  it  is  evident  that,  with  timber  at  $30  per  M,  this  Herri  of  $1.05 
will  be  increased  50  per  cent,  making  it  $1.58  per  cu.  yd.  of  cais- 
son. In  like  manner  other  items  may  be  raised  or  lowered,  almost 
by  inspection,  and  a  total  secured  which  will  be  a  very  accurate 
estimate.  The  above  costs  do  not  include  "engineering,"  which, 
in  this  case,  was  about  6  per  cent  of  the  total. 

In  a  succeeding  issue  will  be  given  the  cost  of  the  two  caissons 
(piers  Nos.  1  and  3)  mentioned  in  the  first  part  of  this  ai'ticle ; 
and  in  that  issue  we  shall  compare  the  costs  of  caissons  in  piers 
Nos.  1,  2  and  3,  showing  that  the  cubic  yard  is  the  proper  unit 
to  use  in  recording  and  comparing  the  cost  of  caisson  work,  and 
not  the  lineal  foot.  The  lineal  foot,  it  is  true,  has  long  been  re- 
garded as  a  convenient  unit  of  caisson  costs,  but  it  is  wholly  unre- 
liable for  comparative  purposes,  and  should  be  abandoned. 

Cost  of  Two  Pneumatic  Caissons  and  Masonry  Bridge  Piers.* — In 
our  last  issue  we  gave  a  general  description  of  a  large  pivot  pier 
caisson  and  plant  used  in  sinking  it  to  a  depth  of  45  ft.  In  this 
issue  we  shall  give  the  itemized  cost  of  two  smaller  caissons  of  the 
same  type,  sunk  with  the  same  plant  described  in  our  last  issue, 
and  under  the  same  conditions.  Each  of  these  caissons  was  16  x  34 
ft.  in  cross-section,  and  15  ft.  high  ;  and  on  top  of  each  was  built 
the  masonry  pier  as  fast  as  the  caisson  was  sunk.  These  two  "rest 
piers"  will  be  designated  as  piers  No.  1  and  No.  3.  The  masonry 
was  built  to  a  height  of  51  ft.  above  the  top  of  the  caisson,  or  13 
ft.  above  water  level.  The  cutting  edge  of  the  caisson  of  pier 
No.  1  reached  47  ft.  below  ground  level,  or  53  ft.  below  water  level. 
The  cutting  edge  of  pier  No.  3  reached  the  same  distance  below 
water  level,  but  only  38  ft.  below  ground  level. 

The  masonry  of  each  pier  had  a  cross-section  of  11x28  ft.  at  the 
base,  and  7x24  ft.  under  the  coping.  The  masonry  was  cut  stone 
(sandstone),  excepting  a  core  or  concrete,  4  x  19  ft.,  29  ft.  high 
above  the  top  of  the  caisson.  The  working  chamber  of  the  cais- 
son was  filled  with  concrete  after  it  had  been  sunk  to  the  proper 
.depth. 

Cost  of  Pier  No,  1. — Eighteen  days  after  the  caisson  was  launched 
the  sinking  was  begun.  Eleven  days  after  the  sinking  began,  the 
sinking  was  completed,  but  the  compressed  air  was  not  taken  off 
until  17  days  after  the  sinking  began.  The  masonry  pier  was 
completed  54  days  after  the  sinking  began. 

Since  the  cross- section  of  the  caisson  was  544  sq.  ft.  and  it  was 
sunk  to  a  depth  of  47  ft.,  the  excavation  amounted  to  947  cu.  yds. 

The  proportionate  charge  for  the  use  of  the  plant  for  this  pier 
was  $1,262. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,    May    15,    1907. 


BRIDGES. 


1613 


There  were  6,000  Ibs.  of  iron  (air  shafts,  etc.)  left  in  the  pier, 
for  which  a  charge  of  5  cts.  per  lb.,  or  $300,  was  made. 

There  were  160  ft.  of  4  -in.  pipe,  and  40  ft.  of  iy2-in  pipe  and 
fittings,  worth  $100,  left  in  the  pier. 

The  cost  of  materials  in  the  caisson  was  as  follows  : 


Plant,    proportionate 


Total. 
cost......      $1,262 


Setting  up  derrick  and  platform  90 

Pipe    left    in    caisson  ..........  100 

6,000  Ibs.  iron  left  in  caisson..  300 

51,000  ft.  B.  M.  caisson,   $20...  1,020 

13,000  Ibs.  cutting  edge,  4y2  cts.  585 

8,000  Ibs.  rods  and  drifts,  2%.  200 

5,000  Ibs.   boat  spikes,  etc  .....  136 

1,500  Ibs.  oakum,   4  cts  .......  60 

100  Ibs.  rubber  packing,   70  cts.  70 

321  days  building  caisson,  $2.94  945 

943  days  sinking  caisson,  $3.10.  2,929 

100   tons    coal,     $3.00  ........  ..  300 

Other    supplies    ...............  109 

Supt.  and  office  expense  .......  440 


Per 

Lin.  Ft. 
(  4  7  f  t.  ) 
$  27 
2 
2 
6 

22 
13 
4 
3 
1 
2 

21 
62 


Per 

Cu.  Yd. 
(  9  4  7  cu.  yds.  ) 
$  1.33 
0.10 
0.10 
0.32 
1.08 
0.62 
0.21 
0.14 
0.06 
0.07 
1.00 
3.09 
0.32 
0.11 
0.47 


Total     ....................      $8,546 

280   cu.   yds.    concrete,    $4.25...        1,190 

—  .         . 
Total    ...........  .  ........      $9,736 


$207 


$9.02 
1.25 

---- 

$10.27 


46,000  ft.   B.   M.   in  caisson,   at   $20 $  920 

2,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  false  floor,  at  $20 40 

13,000  Ibs.  cutting  edge,   at  4l/2    cts 585 

1,300  Ibs.    corner  plates,  at   4   cts 52 

5,000  Ibs.    rods,    at   2  y2    cts 125 

3,000  Ibs.    drift   bolts,    at   2y2    cts 75 

2,400  Ibs.    boat   spikes,    at    2    cts 48 

800  Ibs.   cast  washers,   at .  2   cts 16 

500  Ibs.  lag  screws,   etc.,   at  4  cts 20 

15  bales    (1,500   Ibs.)    oakum,   at   $4 60 

100  Ibs.   rubber  packing,   at  70  cts 70 

Total    materials $2,071 

There  were  51,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  caisson. 

The  cost  of  framing  and  erecting  the  caisson  was : 

30  days,  foreman,  at $4.00  $120.00 

220  days,  carpenters,  at 3.00  660.00 

60  days,  laborers,  at 2.00  120.00 

7  days,  blacksmith,  at 3.50  24.50 

4  days,  machinists,  at 5.00  20.00 

321  days,    total,    at $2.94          $944.50 

This  is  equivalent  to  $18.50  per  1,000  ft.  B.  M.,  which  is  a  very 
high  cost. 


24  days,   general   foreman,    at. 
48  days,     sub-foremen,     at  
36  days,   top   lock  tender,   at   . 

.  ..    6.00 
.  .    5.00 
2.25 

380  days    pressure  men    at 

3  50 

44  days,    enginemen,    at  
44  days,    firemen,    at  
38  days    coal   passers    at 

.  .    3.50 
..    2.75 
2  50 

24  days,    steamfltters     at   . 

.    3  00 

2  days,    blacksmith,    at  

.    3.50 

30  days,    carpenter     at 

.    3  00 

250  days     laborers     at 

2  00 

5  days,  call  boy    at  

.    1  00 

943  days,   total,   at.. 

.  .$3.10 

1614  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  sinking  the  caisson,  which  includes  tamping  the  con- 
crete in  the  caisson  also,  was  as  follows : 

18  days,   foreman   machinist,   at.. $5. 00         $      90 

144 
240 
81 

1,330 
154 
121 
95 
72 

•         90 
500 
5 

$2,929 
The  coal  supplies  used  in  sinking  the  caisson  were  as  follows: 

100  tons  coal,  at  $3 $300.00 

70  gals,  gasoline  and  kerosene,  at  10  cts.  7.00 

160  Ibs.  candles,  at  12  cts 19.20 

3,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  inside  curb,  at  $20 60.00 

20  Ibs.  valve  oil,  at  50  cts 10.00 

10  Ibs.  engine  oil,  at  35  cts 3.50 

35  Ibs.  waste,  at  5  cts 1.75 

20  pairs  rubber  boots,  at  $3 60.00 

100  Ibs.  red  lead,  at  8  cts 8.00 

Total    $409.45 

There  were  200  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  placed  in  the  working  cham- 
ber of  the  caisson  and  80  cu.  yds.  in  the  pier,  the  cost  being  $4.25 
per  cu.  yd.,  as  given  in  our  last  issue. 

We  may  now  summarize  the  total  cost  as  follows: 

In  addition  to  the  above  there  were  480  cu.  yds.  of  stone 
masonry,  the  actual  cost  of  which  was  $10.55*per  cu.  yd.,  or  $5,064. 
About  330  cu.  yds.  of  this  masonry  was  below  the  ground  level, 
which  is  equivalent  to  $3,481  of  stone  masonry  below  the  ground 
level.  Dividing  this  by  47,  we  have  $74  per  lin.  ft. 

Summarizing,  we  have  the  following  cost  of  pier  No.  1  below 
the  ground  level : 

Total.          Per  lin.  ft.     Per  cu.  yd. 

Caisson,     etc $   8,546  $182  $   9.02 

280   cu.   yds.   concrete  at   $4.25....      1,190  25  1.25 

330  cu.  yds.   masonry,  at  $10.55...      3,481  74  3.66 


Total $13,217  $281  $13.93 

150  cu.  yds.  masonry  above  ground 

level,  at  $10.55 1,583 


Grand  total    $14,800 

Cost  of  Pier  No.  S. — The  design  of  this  pier  was  the  same  as  of 
Pier  No.  1.  It  differed  somewhat  in  cost,  however,  since  it  was 
sunk  to  a  depth  of  only  38  ft.  below  ground  level,  due  to  the  fact 
that  the  water  was  deeper  at  the  site  of  this  pier  than  at  the  site 
of  pier  No.  1. 

Fifteen  days  after  the  caisson  was  launched,  the  sinking  began. 
It  took  15  days  to  sink  the  caisson,  and  4  days  more  to  fill  the 


BRIDGES. 


1615 


working  chamber  with  concrete,  making  19  days  of  work  under  air 
pressure.  The  masonry  pier  was  completed  37  days  after  the  sink- 
ing was  begun.  The  cost  of  materials  in  the  caisson  was  the  same 
as  for  pier  No.  1. 

The  cost  of  framing  and  erecting  the  caisson  was : 

29  days,    foreman $4.00          $116.00 

218  days,    carpenters 3.00  654.00 

58  days,     laborers 2.00  116.00 

9  days,    blacksmith : 3.50  31.50 

4  days,    machinist .    5.00  20.00 

318  days,    total : $2.95          $937.50 

This  is  equivalent  to  $19  per  M. 

The  cost  of  sinking  the  caisson,  which  included  tamping  the  con- 
crete in  the  caisson  also,  was  as  follows : 

18  days,  foreman    machinst.. .  .  $5.00 

30  days,  general    foreman 6.00 

38  days,   sub-foreman    5.00 

33  days,  top   lock  tender 2.00 

340  days,  pressure   men 3.50 

50  days,  enginemen     3.50 

46  days,  firemen    2.75 

20  days,  coal    passers 2.50 

28  days,  steamfitters  3.00 

2  days,  blacksmith  3.50 

16  days,  carpenter  3.00 

220  days,  laborers 2.00 


90.00 
180.00 
190.00 

66.00 

1,190.00 

175.00 

126.50 

50.00 

84.00 
7.00 

48.00 
440.00 


851  days,  total    $3.11 


$2,646.50 


The    coal    and    supplies    used    in    sinking    the    caisson    were 
follows : 


120  tons  coal,  $3 $360.00 

70  gals,  gasoline,  etc.,  10  cts 7.00 

175  Ibs.  candles,  12  cts 21.00 

20  gals,  valve  oil,  50  cts 10.00 

12  gals,  engine  oil,  35  cts 4.20 

35  Ibs.  waste,  5  cts 1.75 

24  pairs  rubber  boots,  $3 72.00 

100  Ibs.  red  lead,   8  cts 8.00 


Total     •. $483.95 

The  guide  piles  cost  as  follows: 

620  lin.  ft,  delivered,  10  c'..~ $   62.00 

620  lin.  ft.  driven,   10  cts 62.00 

Total    $124.00 


1616                   HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Summarizing  we  have : 

Per  Per 

Lin.  Ft.  Cu.  Yd. 

Total.  (  3  8  f t. )  (  7  6  6  cu.  yds. ) 

Plant    $1,262  $33  $1.65 

Setting  up  derrick  and  platform..       120  3  0.16 

Pipe  left   in  caisson 150  4  0.20 

6,000  Ibs.   iron  left  in  caisson...       300  8  0.39 

50,000  ft.  B.  M.  left  in  caisson,  $30  1,000  26  1.31 

13,000  Ibs.  cutting  edge,  4 y2  cts...       585  15  0.76 

8,000  Ibs.  rods  and  drifts,  2y2  cts.      200  5  0.26 

5,000  Ibs.   boat  spikes,   etc.../..         136  4  0.18 


60  2  0.08 

70  2  0.09 

938  25  1.22 

2,646  71  3.45 


1,500  Ibs.  oakum,  4  cts. 

100  Ibs.  rubber  packing,  70  cts. 
318  days  building  caisson,  $295. 
851  days  sinking  caisson,  $3.11. 

120  tons   coal,    $3.00 360  .          9  0.47 

Other    supplies 124  3  0.16 

Supt.  and  office  exp 440  11  0.57 

Total    ?8~39l  $221  $Io~95 

280  cu.  yds.  concrete,   $4.25 1,190  31  1.55 

Total    $9~581  $252  $12.50 

In  addition  to  the  above  there  were  480  cu.  yds.  of  stone  masonry, 
the  cost  of  which  was  $10.55  per  cu.  yd.,  or  $5,064.  Adding  this  to 
the  $9,581,  we  have  a  total  cost  of  $14,645  for  pier  No.  3. 

Let  us  compare  the  costs  of  piers  Nos.  1,  2  and  3.  Referring 
to  our  issue  of  May  8,  we  find  the  cost  of  pivot  pier  No.  2.  In 
making  the  comparison  we  shall  exclude  the  cost  of  the  masonry 
and  concrete. 

No.  1.         No.  2.        No.  3. 

Cost  per  cu.  yd.,  displaced $9.02         $9.66         $10.95 

Cost  per  lin.  ft.  below  ground  level  1.82  3.22  2.21 

It  Is  perfectly  evident,  from  this  comparison,  that  the  lineal  foot 
of  distance  sunk  below  the  ground  level  is  not  a  rational  unit  to  be 
used  in  comparing  the  cost  of  pneumatic  caisson  work.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  cubic  yard  of  displaced  earth  is  a  much  more  ra- 
tional unit.  Obviously  the  cost  of  the  masonry  should  be  estimated 
separately,  excepting  possibly  the  concrete  used  in  filling  the  work- 
ing chamber  of  the  caisson. 

The  foregoing  data  relate  to  work  carried  on  at  moderate  depths 
below  the  water  level. 

Cost  of  a  Caisson  in  Arizona. — Mr.  S.  M.  Rowe  gives  the  following 
data  relative  to  a  caisson  for  the  Red  Rock  cantilever  bridge,  built 
in  1889,  across  the  Colorado  River  in  Arizona  for  the  Atlantic 
and  Pacific  R.  R.  Co. 

The  caisson  was  30x60  ft.  in  cross- section  and  17  ft.  high,  sur- 
mounted by  a  timber  crib  47  ft.  high,  the  height  from  the  cutting 
edge  to  the  top  of  the  crib  being  64  ft.  The  ordinary  low  water 
level  was  at  the  top  of  the  crib,  and  the  depth  of  water  (at  low 
water)  was  only  4  ft.  The  material  penetrated  was  mostly  sand, 
gravel  and  boulders.  So  compact  was  the  material  at  a  depth  of 
61  ft.  that  it  was  practically  impossible  to  reach  bed  rock. 


BRIDGES.  1617 

The  caisson  and  crib  were  of  Oregon  pine,  and  the  following 
was  the  bill  of  material : 

Ft.  B.  M. 

Working  chamber   (incl.   3  ins.  casing  inside) 82,560 

Roof,    8    ft.    thick 155,904 

Crib   (incl.  -3   ins.   casing  outside) 240,855 

Total   timber    (neat) .479,319 

Iron  bolts  and  spikes    58,000  Ibs, 

Concrete  in  crib   (47.7  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft).      2,290  cu.  yds. 
Concrete   in  working   chamber 580  cu.  yds. 

Total    concrete 2,870  cu.  yds. 

It  is  stated  that  the  timber  weighed  35  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  when  well 
dried,  and  that  it  absorbed  28  Ibs.  of  water  per  cu.  ft. 

There  were  1,480  cu.  yds.  of  solid  timber  and  2,870  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete,  making  a  total  of  4,350  cu.  yds.  as  the  volume  of  the 
caisson  and  crib,  the  timber  being  34%  of  the  total  volume. 

The  total  cost  was  $128,263,  or  nearly  $30  per  cu.  yd.,  of  which 
$16.50  is  labor,  which  is  an  exceedingly  high  cost.  The  following 
is  the  itemized  cost  of  the  caisson  : 

Timber    (480  M) $     7,665.02 

Iron  and  steel   (58,000  Ibs.) 2,180.13 

Tools    and    materials 8,415.65 

Fuel  and  water 7,158.30 

Cement  for  2,870  cu.  yds.  concrete 9,568.00 

Freight 13,363.20 

Local   and   train    service 2,790.96 

Labor 71,754.02 

Engineering 5,052.67 

Total '. $128,263.19 

This  did  not  include  the  building  of  a  trestle  across  the  river  to 
the  site  of  the  caisson,  which  cost  $6,238,  nor  the  tracks  to  the 
quarry,  which  cost  $7,313. 

The  following  gives  the  labor  cost  for  the  different  periods : 

Depth        Labor  Cost 
Pay  Roll.  Sunk.        Per  Lin.  Ft. 

November,    10   days $  2,612  9.9ft.  $263 

December,  31  days 10,027  23.4ft.  429 

January,  31   days 10,710  26.8ft  400 

The  last  foot  or  two  sunk  in  January  cost  $2,500  per  ft.  for  labor. 

In  February,  11  days  were  spent,  at  a  cost  of  $3,760  for  total 
labor,  filling  the  working  chamber  with  580  cu.  yds.  of  concrete. 

The  air  plant  consisted  of  3  compressors  (two  of  which  were 
double  cylinders  16  x  24  ins.,  and  one  12  x  18  ins.  Two  were  used 
while  excavating  and  one  held  in  reserve.  These  were  driven  by 
two  75-hp.  boilers  and  by  one  of  50  hp.  The  air  plant  was  on  a 
boat  24  x  60  ft.  built  for  the  purpose. 

The  stone  for  the  concrete  was  a  broken  volcanic  rock,  with 
which  the  "mesas"  were  strewn,  which  was  raked  into  windrows 
and  hauled  by  wagons  to  a  pile  where  it  was  loaded  into  a  car. 


1618  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  or  a  Caisson  In  Tennessee. — Mr.  Hunter  McDonald  gives  the 
following  data  relative  to  a  caisson  for  a  pivot  pier  of  a  railway 
swing  bridge  built  in  1893  across  the  Tennessee  River  for  the 
Nashville,  Chattanooga  &  St.  Louis  Ry.,  by  contract. 

The  caisson  was  36  ft.  square  and  16  ft.  high,  surmounted  by  a 
crib  28  ft.  high,  making  a  total  height  of  44  ft.  The  cutting  edge 
was  sunk  through  gravel  and  sand  to  a  depth  of  44  ft.  below  low 
water.  The  caisson  and  crib  were  filled  with  1:2:5  natural 
cement  concrete.  The  contract  price  of  the  pivot  pier  was  as 
follows : 

119,792  ft.  B.  M.  timber  in  caisson,  at  $38 $   4,552.11 

95,727  ft.  B.  M.  timber  in  crib,  at  $28 2,680.37 

54,975   Ibs.  iron,  at  4  cts 2,199.00 

96  lin.  ft.  shafting  left  in  place,  at  $7 672.00 

44  lin.    ft.    sinking    below    water    level,    at 

$344.81     15,172.42 

313.4  cu  yds.    material    removed    through    lock 

at    $35 10,969.00 

1,085.9  cu.    yds.    concrete    in    crib    and    pockets, 

at    $6 6,515.40 

233.5  cu.   yds.  concrete  in  air  chamber,  at  $12  2,802.00 


Total  cost  of  caisson  ......................  $45,562.00 

Since  the  displacement  of  this  44  ft.  caisson  was  2,112  cu.  yds., 
the  cost  was  $21.57  per  cu.  yd.,  or  $1,035  per  lin.  ft.  of  Vertical 
height. 

The  cost  of  the  stone  masonry  was: 

415.62  cu.  yds.  face  stone,  at  $12  ...............  $  4,987.44 

725.19  cu.  yds.  backing,  at  $7  ..................      5,076.33 

24.52  cu.  yds.  coping,  at  $16  ..................         392.32 

Total   masonry  ............................  $10,456.09 

The  masonry  was  48  ft.  high  above  the  top  of  the  crib. 


A  caisson  for  a  rest  pier  was  16%  x40%  ft.  in  cross-section,  and 
displaced  1,107  cu.  yds.,  and  cost  $19  per  cu.  yd.,  or  $476  per  lin.  ft. 
of  vertical  height.  It  contained  115,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  caisson  and 
crib  and  672  cu.  yds.  of  concrete. 

Cost  of  Four  Caissons.  —  Mr.  B.  L.  Crosby  gives  the  following  data 
relative  to  4  caissons  built  in  1892  for  the  St.  Louis,  Keokuk  & 
Northwestern  R.  R.  for  a  double-  track  bridge  across  the  Missouri 
River.  The  work  was  done  by  company  forces.  Each  caisson  was 
30x70  ft.  in  cross-section  and  16  ft.  high,  surmounted  by  a  crib. 
The  cribs  were  24,  45,  58  and  64  ft.  high  for  piers  Nos.  1,  2,  3  and 
4,  respectively.  The  caissons  anfl  cribs  were  filled  with  1:2:4 
natural  cement  concrete. 

The  'air  plant  consisted  of  two  No.  4  Clayton  duplex  compressors, 
having  steam  and  air  cylinders,  each  14  ins.  with  15  -in.  stroke;  and 
a  Worthington  duplex  pump,  18%  x  10%  x  10  ins.  This  plant  was 
set  on  a  small  steam  boat.  There  was  a  duplicate  plant  mounted 
on  a  platform  on  piles.  There  were  several  hoisting  engines,  a 
pile-driver  boat,  provided  with  a  derrick  for  handling  the  timbers, 
arid  an  arc  light  plant  for  night  work.  The  concrete  was  mixed 


BRIDGES.  1619 

in  a  Cockburn  Barrow  Co.  mixer  on  a  barge  provided  with  a  der- 
rick for  handling  concrete  blocks.  There  were  several  other 
barges  for  handling  timber,  cement  and  stone,  and  a  small  steam- 
boat for  towing  barges. 

The  caissons  were  built  on  launching  ways  constructed  of  piles 
capped  with  12  x  12-in.  timbers  parallel  with  the  river  bank.  The 
way  timbers  were  12  x  12-in.  having  a  slope  of  3  ins.  to  the  foot 
toward  the  river,  and  were  extended  far  enough  into  the  river  to 
allow  the  caisson  to  float  before  being  clear  of  the  timbers.  The 
piles  under  water  were  cut  off  with  a  circular  saw  and  caps  were 
placed  by  a  diver ;  the  drift-bolts  were  driven  by  a  ramrod  work- 
ing through  a  gas  pipe  over  the  drift-bolt. 

Several  sandbars  at  the  sites  of  the  piers  were  washed  away  by 
the  paddle  wheels  of  the  steamboat,  a  hole  7  to  10  ft.  deep  being 
dug  out  in  this  manner.  Barges  were  placed  on  each  side  of  a 
caisson,  and  heavy  timbers  bolted  the  caisson,  extending  out  over 
the  barges.  By  pumping  air  into  the  caisson  it  was  raised  till  it 
drew  only  5  ft.  of  water,  and  blocking  was  placed  under  the  tim- 
bers projecting  over  the  barges.  Then  it  was  towed  to  place. 

The  following  were  the  depths  below  "standard  low  water"  to 
which  the  different  caissons  were  sunk:  No.  1,  68  ft. ;  No.  2,  89  ft. ; 
No.  3,  101  ft. ;  No.  4,  83  ft. 

Some  blasting  of  the  rock  site  of  caisson  No.  1  was  done. 
Rackarock  was  used,  because  its  fumes  do  not  give  the  men  head- 
aches as  do  the  fumes  of  dynamite  in  a  caisson. 

The  total  combined  height  of  the  four  caissons  and  cribs  was 
255  ft,  and,  since  their  cross-section  was  30  x  70  ft,  this  is  equiva- 
lent to  combined  displacement  of  nearly  20,000  cu.  yds.,  of  which 
25%  was  the  yellow  pine  timber,  there  being  1,609,000  ft  B.  M. 
There  were  13,285  cu.  yds.  of  1:2:4  concrete  placed  in  the 
caissons  and  cribs,  requiring  20,800  bbls.  of  cement,  of  which  80% 
was  natural  and  20%  Portland.  The  cost  of  the  concrete  was  $5.36 
per  cu.  yd.,  including  all  material  and  labor.  The  cost  of  framing 
the  timber  and  building  it  into  the  caissons  was  $22  per  1,000  ft. 
B.  M.,  including  the  cost  of  the  launching  ways,  han- 
dling and  towing,  and  all  labor  and  materials,  but  not 
including  the  cost  of  the  timber  in  the  caissons  and 
cribs.  It  is  likely  that  in  1892  this  yellow  pine  cost 
about  $18  per  M.  In  which  case  the  total  cost  was  $40  per  M  in 
place.  Since  1,000  ft.  B.  M.  =  3.08  cu.  yd.,  each  cubic  yard  of  tim- 
ber would  cost  $13.  If  each  cubic  yard  displaced  by  the  caisson  and 
cribs  was  25%  timber  (at  $13  per  cu.  yd.)  and  75%  concrete  (at 
$5.36  per  cu.  yd.),  then  the  average  cost  was  $7.20  per  cu.  yd.,  to 
which  must  be  added  the  cost  of  sinking  the  caissons,  which  was 
$2.48  per  cu.  yd.,  making  a  total  of  $9.68  per  cu.  yd.  displaced. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  the  total  cost  actually  was  $9.23  per  cu.  yd., 
from  which  it  would  appear  either  that  our  assumed  price  of  $18 
per  M  for  the  timber  is  a  little  too  high,  or  that  the  percentage  of 
timber  was  not  quite  25%. 


1620  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  material  was  excavated  and  discharged  from  the  working 
chambers  with  a  Morrison  sand  pump,  which  is  a  modification  of 
the  Eads  sand  pump. 

For  comparative  purposes  it  is  well  to  record  here  that  a  long 
timber  trestle,  built  at  the  same  time  by  company  forces,  cost  $7.42 
per  M  for  labor,  including  unloading,  framing  and  erecting. 

Wages  are  not  given,  except  for  "pressure  men,"  who  received 
$3.50  a  day,  and  worked  an  hour  at  a  time  for  2  or  3  hrs.  a  day 
when  at  the  greatest  depth.  It  is  probable  that  common  laborers 
received  $1.25  to  $1.50  and  carpenters  $2.50  per  day  of  10  hrs.,  at 
that  time  and  place. 

Materials  for  a  Caisson. — In  building  a  single-track  bridge  for 
the  Illinois  Central  R.  R.  across  the  Ohio  River  near  Cairo,  10  piers 
were^sunk  75  ft.  below  low  water.  The  f Fictional  resistance  was 
found  to  be  600  to  700  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  of  exposed  surface.  The 
largest  caisson  and  crib  is  30  ft.  wide,  70  ft.  long  and  50  ft.  high. 
The  total  height  of  the  pier  is  177  ft.  (50  ft.  of  caisson  and  crib 
filled  with  concrete,  and  127  ft.  of  masonry  on  top).  It  contains 
the  following  materials : 

331,000  ft.  B.  M.  lumber. 

137,000  Ibs.   iron. 

2,865   cu.  yds.   concrete  in  caisson  and  crib. 

3,800  cu.  yds.  masonry. 

The  pier  measures  14  x  43  ft.  on  top. 

The  weight  of  the  137,000  Ibs.  of  iron  was  distributed  as  follows: 

Lbs. 

Cutting    edge 26,583 

Corner  plates 8,108 

Air  locks    (1  pr.  doors  left  in) 7,287 

Sections   of    shaft 14,813 

Rods     30,570 

Washers    7,111 

Drift    bolts 21,606 

Boat    spikes 15,402 

Lag    screws 265 

Bolts     331 

Pipe   (334  ft.   of  4   in.) 3,495 

Pipe   (83  ft.   of  5  in.) 1,234 

Total    136,785 

Cost  of  Erecting  Three  Steel  Viaducts  and  a  New  Formula  for 
Computing  the  Weight  of  Viaducts.* — In  Engineering-Contracting  of 
April  3,  10  and  17  and  May  8,  we  gave  the  costs  of  erecting  a  num- 
ber of  steel  bridges  of  different  spans  and  types.  In  this  issue  we 
shall  give  the  cost  of  erecting  several  steel  viaducts,  and  shall 
briefly  discuss  methods  of  estimating  the  cost  of  steel  viaducts. 

The  modern  steel  viaduct  is  a  structure  consisting  of  deck  plate 
girder  spans  supported  by  steel  bents  resting  on  concrete  pedestals. 
Each  steel  bent  has  two  legs,  having  a  batter  of  2  ins.  to  the  foot. 
Bents  on  high  viaducts  are  spaced  30  ff  and  60  ft.  apart  alter- 
nately, so  that  the  plate  girder  spans  are  alternately  30  ft.  and 

+Engineering-Contracting,  June  19,   1907. 


BRIDGES.  1621 

60  ft.  long.  Every  pair  of  bents  30  ft.  apart  is  braced  by  horizontal 
and  diagonal  members,  thus  forming  a  "tower."  Ordinarily,  there- 
fore, the  number  of  towers  in  a  viaduct  is  just  half  the  number 
of  bents ;  and  the  number  of  plate  girder  spans  is  just  one 
more  than  the  number  of  bents. 

Estimating  Weight  of  Viaducts. — There  are  excellent  rules  or  for- 
mulas for  estimating  the  approximate  weight  of  plate  girders  and 
tru'ss  bridges  of  different  spans,  but  the  existing  formulas  for 
estimating  the  weight  of  viaducts  are  very  unsatisfactory.  The 
editors  of  this  journal  have  deduced  a  new  formula  for  estimating 
the  weight  of  steel  in  viaducts  of  the  type  just  described,  but,  be- 
fore presenting  the  deduction,  we  shall  quote  the  empirical  for- 
mulas proposed  by  Mr.  C.  P.  Howard,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.  They 
are  as  follows: 

W  =  26  A,  for  height  of  20  ft. 

W=  20  A,  for  height  of  60  ft. 

W=  17  A,  for  height  of  90  ft. 

W  =  total  weight  of  viaduct  in  Ibs. 

A  =  profile  area  of  viaduct  in  square  feet. 

The  above  formulas  are  for  Cooper's  E  40  loading.  Add  20%  for 
Cooper's  E  50  loading. 

This  method  of  estimating  the  weight  of  viaducts  by  profile  areas 
alone  is  a  very  common  one,  but  is  wholly  irrational,  as  is  seen  by 
the  fact  that  a  different  factor  is  necessary  for  different  heights. 
The  profile  area,  it  should  be  explained,  is  the  area  on  the  profile 
between  the  base  of  the  rail  and  the  ground  surface,  or  between  the 
lower  chord  of  the  plate  girders  and  the  line  joining  the  tops  of  the 
masonry  pedestals  on  which  the  towers  rest.  It  is  in  the  former 
sense  (which  is  most  common)  that  we  use  the  term  profile  area 
here,  although  the  latter  sense  is  to  be  preferred  and  should  be 
generally  adopted.  Obviously  the  weight  of  the  bents,  or  towers, 
bears  some  relation  to  this  area,  but  it  is  equally  obvious  that  the 
weight  of  the  plate  girders  bears  no  relation  whatever  to  the  profile 
area. 

For  a  live  load  of  two  116-ton  engines  and  a  train  weighing  3,000 
Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.,  the  average  weight  of  plate  girder  spans  (30  ft.  and 
60  ft.  alternating)  is  about  600  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  For  the  same  load- 
Ing,  the  weight  of  steel  in  each  bent  is  about  540  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  of 
height  of  bent,  for  viaducts  of  any  considerable  height.  Having 
these  data  in  mind,  we  are  able  to  deduce  a  very  simple  and  ra- 
tional formula  for  estimating  the  weight  of  steel  in  high  viaducts. 

Let  A  =  profile  area  in  sq.  ft. 
L  =•  length  of  viaduct  in  ft. 
W  =  weight  of  viaduct  in  Ibs. 

Then : 

A 

Average  height   of   bents  =  — . 
L 
L 

Number    of   bents  =  — . 
45 


1622  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

This  last  equation  is  slightly  in  error,  giving  one  bent  too  lev) 
when  the  average  length  of  girders  is  45  ft.  (%  of  30  +  60),  but  it 
Is  close  enough  for  practical  purposes.  Therefore: 

ALA 

Total  height  of  all  bents  =  —  X  —  =  — . 
L       45        45 
But  the  weight  of  bents  per  lin.  ft.  of  height  is  540  Ibs.  ;    hence: 

A 

Total  weight  of  bents  =54  OX  —  =12  A. 

45 

The  total  weight  of  girder  spans  =  600  L.     Therefore: 

W=  12  A  -f  600  L. 

This  is  a  formula  which  the  editors  have  used  in  estimating  the 
weight  of  many  viaducts  of  different  heights,  and,  except  for  very 
low  viaducts  (20  or  25  ft.),  or  for  viaducts  of  antiquated  design,  it 
gives  very  close  results.  Low  viaducts  are  really  trestles,  with 
bents  spaced  at  equal  distances,  and  not  built  with  bents  spaced 
and  braced  so  as  to  form  towers. 

We  shall  now  pass  to  a  consideration  of  the  cost  of  erecting  two 
viaducts,  and  at  the  close  of  this  article  will  discuss  the  design  of 
masonry  substructures,  indicating  wherein  we  believe  present  prac- 
tice to  be  extravagantly  wasteful  of  material. 

Cost  of  Erecting  a  500- ft.  Viaduct. — This  viaduct  weighed  34C' 
tons  and  was  erected  by  contract.  The  profile  area  was  31,500  sq. 
ft.,  and  the  average  height  was  63  ft.  The  following  costs  were  thM 
actual  costs  to  the  contractor. 

The  average  force  was: 

Per  day. 

1  foreman  at  $5.00 '. $  5.00 

1  foreman  carpenter,   at   $4.00 4.00 

1  foreman,  at  $3.50 3.50 

7  riveters,    etc.,   at    $3.25 22.75 

10  bridgemen,  at  $3.00 30.00 

8  carpenters,  at  $2.75 22.00 

3  laborers,  at  $2.50 7.50 

1  stationary   engineer,    at   $3.25 3.25 

1  water  boy,  at  $1.50 1.50 

33  Total     gang $99.50 

It  will  be  noted  that  foremen's  wages  constituted  12%  of  the 
total. 

Time  allowed  traveling — 

1  day    at  $5.00    $  5.00 

1  day    at  4.00    4.00 

1  day    at  3.50    3.50 

8  days  at  3.25 26.00 

10  days  at  3.00    30.00 

8  days  at  2.75    22.00 

3  days  at  2.50    7.50 

Total    .  98.00 


BRIDGES.  162fl 


Loading  derricks  and   tools — 

4  days  at  $5.00 $20.00 

4  days  at     3.50   . 14.00 

12  days  at     3.00   36.00 

2  days  at     2.50   5.00 

Total    $75.00 

Framing  traveler  and  rig  derrick  car — 

3  days  at  $5.00 $15.00 

3  days  at     3.50   10.50 

6  days  at     3.25   19.50 

7  days  at     3.00   21.00 

Total     $66.00 

Erecting  traveler — 

1  Va   days  at  $5.00     $   7.50 

9y2   days  at     3.25 30.87 

9  days  at     3.00 27.00 

Total     .  * $65.37 

Erecting  towers — 

12   days  at  $5.00 $   60.00 

12   days  at     3.50   .- 42.00 

36  days  at     3.25   117.00 

47  days  at     3.00   141.00 

12  days  at     2.50   30.00 

6  days  at     1.50 9.00 

Total    $399.00 

Riveting  towers — 

48  days  at  $3.25  $156.00 

52  days  at     3.00  156.00 

32   days  at     2.50 80.00 

7  days  at     1.50   10.50 

Total    $402.50 

Filling  bases  of  posts  with  concrete — 

4  days  at  $2.75   $11.00 

Erecting  girder  spans — 

10  days  at  $5.00   $   50.00 

10  days  at     3.50 35.00 

40  days  at  3.25  130.00 

60  days  at  3.00 180.00 

5  days  at  1.50 7.50 


Total    $402.50 

Riveting  girder  spans — 

24   days  at  $3.25    . $   78.00 

48  days  at     3.00 144.00 

12  days  at     2.75   33.00 

6  days  at     1.50 9.00 

Total $264.00 

Framing  ties  for  floor — 

10  days  at  $4.00 $  40.00 

33  days  at     2.75   90.75 

Total    $130.75 


1624  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Laying  floor — 

16  days  at  $4.00   $   64.00 

16  days  at     2.50 40.00 

43  days  at     2.75 118.25 

Total $222.25 

Painting — first  coat — 

23%   days  at  $3.25   $  76.37 

26        days  at     3.00   78.00 

20        days    at    2.50 50.00 


Total     $204.37 

Painting — second  coat — 

21  days  at  $3.25   .  .  .$   68.25 

24   days  at     3.00 72.00 

16  days  at     2.50 40.00 


Total    " $180.25 

Summary — 

Time    traveling $  98.00 

Loading  derricks  and  tools 75.00 

Framing  traveler,    etc 66.00 

Erecting    traveler 65.37 


Total  general   expense $  304.37 

Erecting  towers 399.00 

Riveting     towers 402.50 

Filling  bases  of  posts 11.00 

Erecting  girder  spans 402.50 

Riveting  girder  spans 264.00 

Framing  ties 130.75 

Laying  floor    222.25 

Painting,   first  coat v. 204.37 

Painting,     second    coat 180.25 

Total    labor $2,521.00 

Coal  for  derrick  engine 120.00 

Blacksmith     coal 45.00 

Train   service,    5    days,   at   $25 125.00 

Wear     of     tools.  .  125.00 


Total,  500  lin.   ft,  at  $6 $2,936.00 

Summary    per    ton —  Per  ton. 

General    expense,    $304 $0.90 

Erecting  and  riveting,    $1,479 4.32 

Painting,    2    coats,    $385 .1.13 

Framing   and   laying  floor,    $353 1.05 

Total    labor $7.40 

Coal,     $165 0.48 

Train    service,    $125 0.37 

Wear   of   tools,    $125 0.37 


Grand    total $8.52 

The  cost  of  framing  and  laying  the  floor,  it  will  be  seen,  was  $35  3. 
or  70  cts.   per  lin.   ft. 


BRIDGES.  16*5 


The  total  cost  of  this  viaduct  to  the  railway  company  was  as 
follows : 

Steel    superstructure,    labor $   4,240 

Steel    superstructure,    materials 19,000 

Masonry   substructure,    labor 4,360 

Masonry   substructure,   materials. 5,200 

Total    . '. $32,800 

This  is  equivalent  to  $46.50  per  lin.  ft.  for  superstructure,  and 
$19.10  per  lin.  ft.  for  substructure,  or  $65.60  per  lin.  ft.  of  viaduct. 
The  substructure,  therefore,  cost  30%  of  the  total.  Sincfe  the  steel 
superstructure  weighed  340  tons,  or  680,000  Ibs.,  it  cost  3.56  cts. 
per  Ib.  in  place.  As  previously  stated,  the  average  height  of  this 
viaduct  was  63  f t.  ;  its  maximum  height  was  89  ft.  from  top  of 
masonry  to  base  -of  rail.  It  was  supported  by  6  towers  (or  12 
bents),  the  length  of  the  "tower  spans"  being  31  ft.  The  remain- 
ing spans,  or  "open  spans,"  were  three  spans  of  57  ft.,  two  of 
38  ft.,  and  two  of  30  ft.  The  above  costs  for  labor  include  con- 
tract price  for  erection,  salaries  of  engineers,  inspectors,  etc.  The 
costs  for  materials  include  freight  and  train  service. 

Cost  of  Erecting  a  580-ft.  Viaduct. — This  viaduct  was  erected  by 
contract,  with  the  same  gang  as  the  500-ft.  viaduct  just  described. 
The  weight  of  the  steel  was  382  tons,  or  764,000  Ibs.  The  profile 
area  was  34,800  sq.  ft.,  the  average  height  was  60  ft.,  and  the 
maximum  height  from  masonry  to  base  of  rail  was  89  ft.  There 
were  7  towers  or  14  bents.  The  "tower  spans"  were  31  ft.  The 
"open  spans"  were:  One  61-ft.  span,  three  57-ft.,  one  38-ft.,  and 
three  30 -ft.  spans. 

The  cost  to  the  contractor  was  as  follows : 
Time  traveling — 

2  days  at  $5.00     $10.00 

2  days  at     3.50     700 

12  days  at     3.25     39  DO 

20  days  at     3.00     ...... .  60  00 


Total    $116.00 

Loading,  derricks  and   tools — 

4  days   at    $5.00    $20.06 

6  days  at     3.25 19.50 

10  days  at     3.00 30.00 

Total    $69.50 

Erecting  traveler — 

1  day  at  $5.00 $5.00 

1  day     at     3.50     3.50 

1  day  at   3.25    3.25 

10  days  at     3.00     30.00 


Total    .  41.76 


1626  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Erecting  towers — 

11  days  at  $5.00  .                                           .  .$   55.00 

10  days  at  3.50  35.00 

22  days  at  3.25  71.50 

104  days  at  3.00  312.00 

24  days  at  2.75  66.00 

5  days  at  1.50 7.50 

Total    ' 5547.00 

Riveting  towers — 

32  days  at  $3.25  ,                   ..$104.00 

88  days  at  3.00  264.00 

8  days  at  1.50  12.00 

Total    $380.00 

Filling  bases  of  posts  with  concrete — 

4  days  at  $2.75     : . .    $11.00 

Erecting  girder  spans — 

12  days  at  $5.00     .  ..$  60.00 

12  days  at     3.50     42.00 

24  days  at     3.25     78.00 

83  days  at     3.00     249.00 

6  days  at     1.50     9.00 


Total     $438.00 

Riveting  girder  spans — 

24  days  at  $3.25     $   78.00 

66   days  at     3.00 198.00 

9  days  at     1.50     13.50 

• 

Total    ,  .  .  $289. §0 

Floor,  framing  ties — 

18  days  at  $4.00 $72.00 

30  days  at     3.00     90.00 

10  days  at     2.75     27.50 


Total    5189.50 

Laying  floor — 

15  days  at  $3.50  $   52.50 

48  days  at     3.25  156.00 

100  days  at     3.00  300.00 

Total    $508.50 

Painting — first  coat — 

7  days  at  $5.00     $  35.00 

35  days  at     2.75     96.25 

25  days  at     3.25     81.25 

40  days  at     3.00     120.00 


Total    ?332.5« 

Painting — second  coat — 

2   days  at  $5.00     $   10.00 

28  days  at     3.25     91.00 

60  days  at     3.00     180.00 


Total $281.00 


BRIDGES.  1627 


Summary — 


Time    traveling    %      116.00 

Loading   derricks,    etc 69.50 

Erecting    traveler 41.75 


General    expense %  227.25 

Erecting    towers 547.00 

Riveting  towers 380.00 

Filling    bases 11.00 

Erecting   girder   spans 438.00 

Riveting   girder    spans 289.50 

Floor,  framing  ties 189.50 

Laying    floor 508.50 

Painting,   first  coat 332.50 

Painting,    second    coat 281.00 


Total     13,204.25 

Coal  for  derrick  engine 72.00 

Blacksmith  coal 45.00 

Train  service,  5  days,  at  $25 125.00 

Wear    of   tools 160.00 


Grand    total $3,606.25 

Summary  of  cost  per  ton —  Per  ton. 

General    expense,    $227 $0.59 

Erecting  and  riveting,   $1,665 4.36 

Painting,  2  coats,   $603 1.60 

Framing  and  laying  floor,   $698 1.83 

Total     $8.38 

Coal,     $117 0.30 

Train   service,    $125 0.33 

Wear   of   tools,    $160 0.42 

Grand    total $9.43 

Comparing  this  with  the  cost  of  erecting  the  500-ft.  viaduct,  we 
see  that  the  painting  cost  50%  more  per  ton,  and  that  the  work  on 
the  floor  (timber  deck)  cost  80%  more.  In  this  580-ft.  viaduct  the 
total  labor  on  the  deck  cost  $698,  or  $1.20  per  lin.  ft.,  which  is 
fully  double  what  it  should  have  cost. 

The  total  cost  of  this  580-ft.  viaduct  to  the  railway  company 
was  as  follows : 

Steel    superstructure,   labor $  5,750 

Steel  superstructure,  materials 21,950 

Masonry  substructure,  labor 5,860 

'  Masonry  substructure,   materials 4,240 


Total    $37,800 

This  is  equivalent  to  $47.80  per  Hn.  ft.  for  superstructure  and 
$19.70  per  lin.  ft.  for  substructure,  or  $67.50  per  lin.  ft.  of  viaduct. 
Therefore  the  substructure  cost  20%  of  the  total.  The  steel  super- 
structure cost  3.63  cts.  per  Ib.  in  place. 

Cost  of  a  1,170-ft.  Viaduct. — This  steel  viaduct  had  profile  area  of 
97,200  sq.  ft,  and  an  average  height  of  78%  ft.  It  had  12  towers 
and  2  "rocker  bents,"  making  a  total  of  26  bents.  The  extren-e 


1628  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

height  of  bent  from  top  of  masonry  pedestals  to  base  of  rail  was 
104  ft. ;  the  average  height  77  ft. ;  and  the  aggregate  height  of  all 
bents,  2,000  ft.  There  were  12  plate  girder  "tower  spans"  of  31  ft. 
over  the  towers,  11  plate  girder  "open  spans"  of  61  ft.,  and  4 
girder  "open  spans"  of  31  ft. 

The  weight  of  the  metal  was  1,690,000  Ibs. 

The  actual  cost  of  erecting  the  viaduct  was  $8.50  per  ton.  The 
viaduct  was  built  and  erected  by  a  contractor  at  the  following  cost 
to  the  railway  company  for  materials  and  labor : 

674,000  Ibs.  girder  spans  in  place,  at  3.9  cts %   25,286 

1,004,000  Ibs.    bents  and   towers,    3.9   cts 39,156 

5,400  Ibs.    sheet  lead,   at   6   cts 324 

132,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  floor  system,  at  $25 3,300 

Total    superstructure ?   68,066 

1,000  cu.  yds.  dry  excavation,  at  40  cts 4,000 

640  cu.  yds.    wet    excavation,    at    $2 1,280 

216,000  ft.   B.    M.   sheet  piling,  etc.,  in   cofferdams, 

at  $25 5,325 

8,000  lin.  ft.  piles  delivered  and  driven,  at  30  cts.  2,430 

3,000  cu.    yds.    riprap,    at    $1.50 4,500 

1,800  cu.  yds.  concrete,  at  $8 14,400 

1,800  Ibs.  iron  in  anchor  bolts,   etc.,  at  4   cts...  72 

Total    superstructure $32,007 

Engineering,   shop  inspection,  etc 5,500 

Grand    total $105,573 

The  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  viaduct  was : 

Per  lin.  ft.  Per  cent. 

Superstructure     $58.1 3  64.3 

Substructure    27.35  30.4 

Engineering    4.77  5.3 

Totals    $90.25  100.0 

The  foundations  of  two  of  the  towers,  eight  masonry  pedestals  in 
all,  were  in  water,  which  ran  up  the  total  cost  of  substructure  very 
considerably.  Nevertheless,  the  cost  of  the  substructure  of  the 
majority  of  steel  viaducts  of  large  size  is  usually  a  far  higher 
percentage  of  the  total  cost  than  it  should  be.  This  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  bridge  engineers  are  generally  very  painstaking  in  the 
economic  design  of  superstructures  and  not  so  painstaking  in  the 
design  of  substructures.  Because  the  design  of  a  superstructure  is 
an  exact  science,  there  is  an  attractiveness  about  such  work  easy 
to  understand.  Because  the  .design  of  foundation  is  merely  by 
rule  of  thumb,  there  is  less  of  fascination  in  the  work.  This  par- 
ticular viaduct  is  a  splendid  example  of  our  contention  that  engi- 
neers usually  put  altogether  too  little  brains  into  designing  sub- 
structures. 

The  concrete  pedestals  of  the  substructure  rest  on  rock,  with  the 
exception  of  eight  pedestals  which  have  pile  foundations.  Yet  every 
one  of  these  concrete  pedestals  is  designed  exactly  as  if  it  were  in- 
tended to  rest  on  soft  earth,  as  is  shown  in  Fig.  15,  ft  will  be 


BRIDGES. 


1629 


seen  that  each  pedestal  has  a  base  of  110  sq.  ft.  Even  at  a  point 
where  the  viaduct  is  90  ft.  high,  as  in  this  case,  the  weight  of  the 
steel  is  less  than  1,700  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  The  timber  floor  system 
would  add  only  a  little  more  than  300  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.,  making  a 
total  of  2,000  Ibs.  Adding  a  live  load  of  5,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  to 
this,  we  have  7,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  Each  bent  has  to'  support  the 
weight  of  45  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  or  45X7,000  =  315,000  Ibs.  But 
this  is  distributed  over  two  pedestals,  making  a  load  of  160,000  Ibs. 
per  pedestal,  or  80  tons.  If  wind  pressure  were  to  raise  this  to 
110  tons,  the  load  on  the  foundation  would  be  1  ton  per  sq.  ft.,  for 
we  have  110  sq.  ft.  of  foundation  area. 

From  this  it  is  clear  that,  even  where  resting  on  earth,  the  area 
of  the  pedestal  base  is  in  excess  of  any  reasonable  requirement. 


Fig.  15. — Pedestals  for  Steel  Viaduct. 


Reid's  "Concrete  and  Reinforced  Concrete  Construction,"  p.  408, 
gives  the  safe  bearing  power  of  soft  clay  at  1  ton  per  sq.  ft.,  and 
of  ordinary  loam  at  3  tons.  Hence  the  absurdity  of  providing  any 
such  area  of  base  as  in  this  pedestal  under  discussion,  for  it  is 
resting  not  on  earth  but  on  rock.  It  is  perfectly  clear  that  the 
designer  could  have  saved  60  or  70%  of  the  concrete  masonry  in 
each  of  these  pedestals,  had  he  not  followed  a  rule  of  thumb  which 
is  applicable  only  to  foundations  resting  on  earth,  and  not  always 
applicable  even  to  them. 

It  is  no  unusual  thing  for  earth  to  be  called  upon  to  support  10 
tons  per  sq.  ft,  and  there  are  few  places  where  5  tons  can  not  be 
safely  imposed  on  each  square  loot.  A  bridge  engineer  who  is 
seeking  to  effect  every  possible  economy  should  visit  the  site  of 
every  large  structure,  and  personally  test  the  bearing  power  of  the 
earth,  by  digging  test  pits  to  the  proposed  depth  of  foundation 
where  possible. 


1630  HANDBOOK   OF  COST   DATA. 

Another  noticeable  economic  defect  in  the  design  of  these  pedes- 
tals is  the  excavation  of  the  rock  so  as  to  form  a  square  footing. 
Solid  rock  having  so  slight  a  transverse  slope  as  that  shown  in  the 
illustration  need  not  be  excavated  at  all.  A  few  drill  holes,  in 
which  large  dowel  pins  are  placed,  will  serve  every  purpose  in  pro- 
viding against  possible  sliding  of  the  masonry  on  the  ledge  rock 
under  the  vibration  of  passing  trains. 

Cost  of  the  Pecos  Viaduct.*— The  Pecos  Viaduct,  Texas,  was  built 
in  1891  for  the  Galveston,  Harrisburg  &  San  Antonio  Ry.  It  is  a 
single  track  steel  viaduct  2,180  ft.  long,  and  321  ft.  high  at  the 
center.  The  viaduct  is  built  on  a  peculiar  profile.  For  1,070  ft.  of 
the  west  end  the  average  height  of  the  viaduct  is  57  ft.,  then  the 
ground  drops  off  precipitously,  so  that  for  a  distance  of  600  ft.  the 
towers  are  260  ft.  high  and  rest  on  masonry  piers,  of  varying 
heights  up  to  80  ft.  Then  the  ground  rises  on  an  almost  uniform 
slope  to  the  last  pier  on  the  east  end.  The  profile  area  between  the 
base  of  rail,  and  the  tops  of  masonry  piers  is  approximately  280,- 
000  sq.  ft.  Dividing  this  by  the  length  gives  129  ft.  as  the  average 
height  of  the  viaduct.  None  of  the  tower  ^)iers  is  under  water  at 
times  of  low  water,  but  three  of  them  are  submerged  at  times  of 
high  water.  There  are  33  towers  and  the  tower  spans  are  plate 
girders  35  ft.  span.  The  spans  between  the  towers  are  8  riveted 
lattice  girder  spans  of  65  ft.,  2-pin-connected  cantilever  spans  of 
172  ft.,  and  one  80  ft.  suspended  span.  The  masonry  piers  were 
built  in  229  working  days.  Ths  steel  work  was  erected  in  118  days, 
including  24  days  required  to  build  a  traveler  weighing  116  tons 
and  6  days  to  take  it  down  and  move  it  to  the  opposite  side  of  the 
river.  The  erecting  gang  average  60  men  and  at  no  time  exceeded 
79.  The  average  amount  of  steel  erected  were  41,000  Ibs.  per  day 
for  the  86  days,  or  39,600  Ibs.  per  day  for  the  118  days. 
If  wages  were  $2.50  a  day,  this  would  be  equivalent  to 
0.36  ct.  per  Ib. ;  exclusive  of  the  cost  of  erecting  and  moving  the 
traveler,  or  0.5  ct.  per  Ib.  including  erecting  and  moving  the 
traveler.  The  actual  wages  paid  are  not  available  but  were  appa- 
rently considerably  more  than  $2.50,  for  the  actual  cost 'of  erecting 
this  viaduct  was  0.87  ct.  per  Ib.  including  not  only  the  cost  of 
erecting  the  traveler  but  the  cost  of  the  traveler  itself. 

The  weight  of  this  viaduct  was  as  follows: 

Lbs. 

34  plate  girder  spans,  35  ft.  long 495,550 

1  plate  girder  span,    35   ft.   long 24,810 

8  lattice  girder  spans,   65   ft.    long 354,120 

1  lattice  girder  span,    80  ft.   long 57,870 

2  cantilevers,    172  y2    ft.    long 478,400 

Floor   bolts  and  railings 51,620 

Total  superstructure .  .1,462,370 

Towers  and  anchor   bolts 2,147,190 

Grand    total     3,609,560 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  2,   1908. 


BRIDGES.  1631 

The  cost  was  as  follows : 

3,270  cu.  yds.  masonry,   at   $13 $   42,505 

3,609,560   Ibs.    steel   delivered,    at   4.43    cts.    160,000 

Erecting,   including  cost  of  traveler 30,500 

256,600  ft.  B.  M.  timber  flooring,  at  $20.75        5,325 

Total     $238,330 

This  is  equivalent  to  $119  per  im.  ft.  ;  and  the  weight  of  steel  was 
1,650  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  masonry  pedestals  cost  only  18%  of  the 
total  cost  of  the  viaduct. 

Cost  of  the  Marent  Viaduct.*— In  1884  a  single  track  iron  viaduct 
was  built  for  the  Northern  Pacific  Ry.  across  Marent  Gulch  to  re- 
place a  timber  viaduct.  The  profile  area  of  this  viaduct  is  95,700 
sq.  ft.  below  the  top  of  the  stringers,  and  the  length  of  the  viaduct 
is  800  ft,  so  the  average  height  is  practically  96,000-^800=120  ft. 
nearly.  It  has  two  towers,  each  200  ft.  high;  two  towers  each  120 
ft.  high  ;  and  four  short  bents. 

There  are  4  plate  girder  spans  at  the  ends,  each  30  ft. ;  6  truss 
spans,  each  116  ft.  long;  girders  23  ft.  long  over  each  of  the  four 
towers.  The  foundation  piers  are  of  concrete,  of  which  there  was 
544  cu.  yds.  in  all.  The  viaduct  contained  the  following  amount  of 
iron  and  steel : 

Lbs. 

Towers    and    bents 872,900 

5  deck  truss  spans 466,700 

Floor    system 297,827 

)late  girder  spans 40,161 

iscellaneous    8,962 


4  pi 
Mis( 


Total,  at  2,133  Ibs.  per  lin.   ft 1,686,550 

This  is  equivalent  to  17.5  Ibs.  per  sq,  ft.   of  profile  area. 
The   iron  work   cost   3.85   cts.   per   Ib.   delivered  at  St.    Paul,   and 
the  "traffic  charges"  for  transporting  the  iron  and  other  materials 
from  St.  Paul,  at  1  ct.  per  ton  mile,  amounted  to  $24,743. 

The  total  cost  was: 

Foundations     $  21,664.59 

Masonry      30,079.81 

Towers,    materials  and   labor 49,188.44 

Superstructure,   materials  and   labor.  .  .  36,593.94 

Timber,     floor 4,701.43 

Painting     1,826.74 

Permanent     track 116.06 

Engineering    and    incidentals 9,085.15 

Permanent   track.  .  , 116.06 


Total     $153,362.16 

• 
Traffic     charges 24,743.18 


Total,   at  $222.63  per  lin  ft $178,105.34 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.   2,   1908. 


1632  HANDBOOK.    OF  COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  erecting  the  towers  was  $15,800,  and  of  erecting  the 
superstructure  (spans  and  floor)  was  $6,500,  or  a  total  of  $22,300 
for  erecting  840  tons,  or  nearly  $27  per  ton.  This  exceedingly  high 
cost  is  said  to  have  been  due  to  high  wages  and  to  working  in  the 
winter.  It  appears,  however,  to  have  been  due  to  the  usual  lazi- 
ness of  men  doing  "company  work." 

The  following  were  the  quantities  in  the  substructure,  including 
the  abutments: 

Cu  yds. 

Rock    excavation 1,645 

Earth  excavation    3,689 

Concrete 544 

Cut  stone  masonry 722 

-It  cost  $7,664  to  remove  the  old  wooden  viaduct,  which  con- 
tained 970,000  ft.  B.  M.,  or  about  $7.70  per  M.  for  removing  this 
timber. 

Skilled  labor  received  $3  to  $4.50  a  day.  The  cost  of  erecting 
and  removing  the  temporary  buildings  in  which  the  men  lived  was 
$2,700.  Depreciation  on  plant  was  estimated  at  $4,500.  Both  these 
items  are  included  above. 

For  comparison,  the  following  weights  of  a  viaduct  of  the  same 
average  height  are  given  by  Mr.  H.  G.  Tyrrell.  The  weight  of  a 
single  track  railway  viaduct  120  ft.  high,  with  tower  bents  30  ft.  c. 
to  c.,  and  intermediate  girder  spans  of  60  ft.  was: 

Wt.  per  lin.  ft. 

Spans     622  Ibs. 

Bents    955  Ibs. 

Traction   bracing 324  Ibs. 

Total    1,941  Ibs. 

Taking  the  cost  of  steel  in  place  at  3%  cts.  per  Ib.  for  girders  and 
4  cts.  per  Ib.  for  bents  and  bracing,  the  cost  per  lin.  ft.  is  $75  for 
the  steel.  To  this  must  be  added  the  cost  of  the  concrete  pedestal 
piers,. 

Cost  of  the  Old  Kinzua  Viaduct.— Mr.  Thomas  C.  Clark  gives  the 
following  data  relative  to  the  original  Kinzua  viaduct  built  in  1882  : 

The  viaduct  was  2,050  ft.  long,  3^02  ft.  high  at  the  center,  and 
weighed  only  1,400  tons,  or  7.36  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft  of  profile  area.  It 
was  designed  for  a  live  load  of  an  80  ton  consolidation  engine  fol- 
lowed by  a  train  of  3,000  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  Rough  calculations  from 
a  small  profile  indicate  that  the  profile  area  was  about  380,000  sq. 
ft.  below  the  base  of  rail.  The  viaduct  was  erected  by  a  gang  of  40 
men  in  4  mos.,  using  one  traveler.  The  iron  work  was  delivered 
at  only  one  end  of  the  ravine,  and  slid  down  along  a  trough  to  a 
point  below  the  traveler.  The  tower  girders  were  38%  ft.  long, 
and  the  intermediate  girders.  61  ft.  long.  Mr.  Clark  claims  that 
the  first  American  viaduct  was  designed  by  C.  Shaler  Smith,  the 
viaduct  being  really  a  high  trestle  with  iron  posts.  Mr.  Clark,  in 
1870,  designed  the  first  modern  type  of  viaduct,  consisting  of  braced 
towers  supporting  intermediate  girders. 

Mr.  Clark  states  that  the  cost  of  erecting  the  Kinzua  viaduct  was 
less  than  $12  per  ton,  which  is  equivalent  to  $-16,800  for  erecting 


BRIDGES.  1633 

the  entire  viaduct.  This  does  not  agree  very  well  with  his  state- 
ment that  40  men  erected  it  in  4  mos.,  for  that  would  be  about  4,000 
man-days,  and  it  is  not  likely  that  any  such  wages  at  $4  a  day 
were  paid,  unless  the  height  at  which  the  men  worked  led  to  a  de- 
mand for  high  wages.  If  wages  averaged  $2.50  a  day,  the  labor 
cost  would  have  been  about  $7  per  ton.  As  a  matter  of  fact  this 
same  viaduct  was  removed  in1 1900  and  a  new  one  fouilt  in  its  place, 
the  cost  of  erection  (including  removal  of  the  old  viaduct)  being 
given  below. 

Cost  of  the  New  Kinzua  Viaduct.— Mr.  C.  R.  Grim  gives  the  fol- 
lowing data  about  the  Kinzua  viaduct  on  the  Erie  R.  R.,  in  Mc- 
Kean  County,  Pa.  It  was  built  in  1900  to  replace  an  iron  viaduct 
built  19  years  before.  The  viaduct  is  2,053  ft.  long,  rests  on  the 
old  piers,  and  has  20  towers,  ranging  from  30  to  285  ft.  high  from 
masonry  to  base  of  rail,  and  has  a  profile  area  of  about  380,000-  sq. 
ft.  below  the  base  of  rail. 

'The  weight  of  the  deck  spans  is  638  tons,  and  that  of  the  towers 
is  2,715  tons,  total  3,353  tons.  Two  travelers  were  used,  working 
from  opposite  ends.  Each  traveler  spaned  a  clear  space  of  160  ft., 
having  an  old  tower  in  the  middle.  The  work  of  removing  the 
old  viaduct  and  erecting  the  new  one  consumed  4  mos.,  with  a  force 
of  about  120  men  at  10  hrs.  a  day.  Charging  the  entire  cost 
against  the  new  viaduct,  and  assuming  that  wages  averaged  $2.50 
a  day,  the  labor  cost  would  be  about  $30,000  or  $9  per  ton.  The 
weight  was  about  17.6  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  of  profile  area. 

Weight  of  a  Steel  Viaduct. — A  single  track  steel  viaduct  was  built 
In  1904  near  Paoli,  Ind.,  for  the  Chicago,  Indianapolis  &  Louis- 
ville Ry.  It  is  870  ft.  long,  and  87  ft.  high  in  the  center.  It  has  2 
abutments  and  36  small  pedestal  piers,  four  under  each  tower.  The 
abutments  are  60  ft.  high.  The  pedestal  piers  are  3%  ft.  square 
on  top  and  extend  down  to  solid  rock,  a  distance  of  3  to  12  ft.  below 
the  ground.  There  are  4,300  cu.  yds.  masonry  in  piers  and  abut- 
ments, and  1,091,000  Ibs.  steel  and  cast  iron  in  the  viaduct. 

Data  on  Riveting  a  Viaduct. — In  the  construction  of  the  Cuyahoga 
Valley  Viaduct,  there  were  18,869  seven-eighths  inch  rivets  driven 
in  the  field.  The  average  day's  work  for  a  gang  of  4  men  was 
192  rivets.  The  best  day's  work  was  315,  all  hand  driven.  The 
defective  rivets  amounted  to  less  than  2  per  cent. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Pedestals  for  a  Steel  Viaduct. — The  viaduct  was 
410  ft.  long  with  towers  30  ft.  high  on  the  Canadian  Northern  On- 
tario Ry.  The  concrete  work  consisted  of  10xlOx4-ft.  footings 
carrying  pedestals  5x5  ft.  on  top  with  sides  battered  1  in  12  to 
meet  the  footings.  The  tops  of  the  pedestals  were  all  at  the  same 
elevation  but  their  height  varied,  the  highest  being  18  ft.  above 
tops  of  footing.  The  pedestals  were  cored  for  anchor  bolts.  The 
total  amount  of  concrete  in  the  work  was  711%  cu.  yds.,  of  which 
298%  cu.  yds.  were  in  the  footings  and  405  cu.  yds.  were  in  the 
pedestals.  The  concrete  was  a  1-2  %-4  mixture,  taking  1  1/2  bbls. 
cement  for  the  footings;  and  a  1-2% -4  mixture,  taking  1%  bbls. 
cement  for  the  pedestals.  Altogether  3,350  bags  of  cement  were 


1634  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

used  for  the  711%  cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  including  44  bags  for  the 
1-2  mortar  top  dressing  and  15%  bags  for  washing,  plastering,  etc. 
Excavation. — The  pits  for  the  footings  were  12  ft.  square  car- 
ried down  into  hard  clay  through  6  or  6  ft.  of  sand  and  clay  and  a 
1-ft.  layer  of  driftwood.  The  average  depth  of  pit  was  11%  ft., 
the  maximum  depth  15.2  ft.  The  material  was  handled  by  a  horse- 
power derrick,  consisting  of  a  guyed 'mast  and  a  boom  set  at  45°. 
The  bucket  was  lifted  by  a  double  purchase  block,  the  fall  of  the 
line  being  carried  to  a  pulley  set  a  few  feet  to  one  side  of  the  mast 
and  thence  to  a  whiffletree.  This  gave  enough  side  pull  on  the 
boom  to  swing  the  bucket  clear  of  the  excavation.  To  hold  the 
boom  fixed  during  hoisting  and  lowering,  a  line  from  the  end  was 
carried  to  the  far  side  of  the  excavation  and  operated  by  one  man. 
One  man  drove  the  horse.  Two  %-cu.  yd.  buckets  were  employed, 
one  being  filled  as  the  other  was  being  dumped.  There  were  1,127 
cu.  yds.  of  excavation  which  cost  as  follows : 

Items.  Total.       Per  cu.  yd. 

General   expenses $194  $0.172 

Foreman,    35   days  at   $3 105  0.093 

Labor,    323   days   at    $1.60 517  0.458 

Horse,  26  days  at  $2 52  0.046 


Totals    $868  $0.769 

Forms. — The  forms  for  the  footings  were  rough  2 -in.  lumber 
braced  to  the  pit  walls.  The  pedestal  forms  were  made  of  2-in. 
dressed  lumber.  Five  sets  were  made.  Each  form  was  made  16 
ft.  high  and  was  added  to  at  the  bottom  for  the  taller  pedestals 
and  cut  off  for  the  shorter  pedestals,  which  were  built  last.  Two 
sides  of  each  form  were  built  in  panels  or  units,  and  the  two  other 
sides  were  built  up  board  by  board  as  the  concreting  progressed. 
The  solid  panel  sides  were  held  together  by  two  wire  ties  every  3  ft. 
in  height;  one  tie  every  3  ft.  held  the  other  two  sides.  These  ties 
were  No.  9  gage  wire  looped  around  studs  and  tightened  by  twist- 
ing. There  were  also  core  forms  for  the  anchor  bolts,  each  a  box 
4  ft.  long,  6  ins.  square  on  top  and  5%  ins.  square  on  the  bot- 
tom. The  cost  of  the  forms  was  as  follows: 

Lumber —  Total.     Per  cu.  yd. 

7,000   ft.    B.    M.    2-in.   derrick  at   $19    per  M $133 

2,000  ft.   B.   M.    2-in.   rough  at   $18   per  M 36 

750  ft.  B.  M.  2x4-in.   scantling 14 

Cartage,    $2.50  per  M.   ft 24 

Anchor  bolt   boxes,   etc 10 


Totals    $217 

Deduct  salvage  $10 $207  $  0.29 

Wire,   Ties,   Nails— 

5  rolls  No.  9  at  3  cts 

200  Ibs.  wire  nails  at  $2.50 


Totals     $   17  $0.024 


BRIDGES.  1635 

Labor — 

Carpenter,  28  days  at  $2.50 $   70 

Helpers,  38  days  at  $1.75 67 

Totals     $137  $0.193 

Grand  totals   $361  $0.507 

Concrete. — The  concrete  wa's  mixed  by  hand  on  "boards"  set  close 
to  the  piers  and  was  shoveled  directly  into  the  forms.  The  mate- 
rials were  transported  to  the  boards  in  wheelbarrows'.  A  gang  of 
1  foreman,  5  barrowmen,  6  mixers  and  1  man  in  the  form  aver- 
aged 25%  cu.  yds.  per  day,  or  a  little  over  2  cu.  yds.  per  man 
working.  The  maximum  day's  work  was  38  cu.  yds.  with  16  men. 
The  concrete  was  deposited  moderately  wet  and  the  mortar  was 
spaded  to  the  surface.  The  top  3  ins.  of  the  pedestals  was  built 
of  1-2  mortar.  The  exposed  surface  of  the  piers  was  washed  with 
a  thin  cement  grout ;  about  1  bag  of  cement  was  required  for  25 
sq.  yds.  of  surface.  One  man  covered  7%  sq.  yds.  per  hour,  using 
an  ordinary  whitewash  brush.  The  cost  of  the  concrete  work  was 
as  follows : 

Materials —  Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

173  cu.  yds.  rubble  stone  at  $0.85 $  147  $  0.207 

555  cu.  yds.  2-in.  stone  at  $1.875 1,041  1.463 

290  cu.  yds.  sand  at  $1.25 363  0.510 

840  bbls.  cement  at  $1.80 1,512  2.121 

Cartage  at  15  cts.  per  bbl 126  0.163 

Totals    $3,190  $   4.464 

Labor — 

Foreman,  28  days  at  $4 $112  $   0.157 

Laborers,    343   days  at  $1.75 600  0.843 

Totals     $712  $   1.000 

General   Expenses. — General   expenses   were   as    follows: 

Superintendence     $239.50 

General   labor    78.40 

Interest  and  depreciation  on  plant  tools...      70.50 


Total     $388.40 

This  gives  a  charge  of  27.3  cts.  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete. 
There  were   also  the  following   items  of  cost : 

24  M.  ft.  B.  M.   6x8-in.  hemlock  at  $20..      ..$480 

Labor  backfilling  piers    162 

Platforms,    runways,    etc 69 


Total    $768 

We  can  summarize  the  cost  of  concrete  work  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

General  expenses    (  %    of  $388) $0.273 

Platforms,   runways,   etc 0.097 

Forms     0.507 

Labor     1.000 

Materials 4.464 


Total    $6.341 

Mr.  J.  H.  Ryckerman  is  authority  for  the  above  data. 


163G  HANDBOOK   OF  COS!    DATA. 

Cost  of  Abutments  and  Pedestal  Piers,  Lonesome  Valley  Viaduct. 
— Mr.  Gustave  R.  Tuska  gives  the  following  on  the  concrete  sub- 
structure of  the  Lonesome  Valley  Viaduct,  near  Knoxville,  Tenn. 
There  were  two  U-shaped  abutments  and  36  concrete  pedestal  piers 
made  of  a  light  limestone  that  deteriorates  rapidly  when  used  for 
masonry.  Derricks  were  not  needed  as  would  have  been  the  case 
with  masonry  piers,  and  colored  labor  at  $1  for  11  hrs.  could  be 
used.  The  piers  were  made  4  ft.  square  on  top,  from  5  to  16  ft. 
high,  and  with  a  batter  of  1  in.  to  the  foot.  The  abutments  aver- 
age 26  ft.  high,  26  ft.  long  on  the  face,  with  wing  walls  27  ft. 
long ;  the  wall  at  the  bridge  seat  is  5  ft.  thick,  and  the  wing  walls 
are  S1/^  ft.  wide  on  top.  Batters  are  1  in.  to  the  foot. 

The  forms  were  made  of  2-in.  tongued  and  grooved  plank,  braced 
by  posts  of  2  x  10-in.  plank  placed  3  ft.  c.  to  c.  for  the  abutments, 
and  at  each  corner  for  the  piers.  At  the  corners  one  side  was 
dapped  into  the  other,  so  as  to  prevent  leakage  of  cement.  The 
posts  were  braced  by'  batter  posts  from  the  earth.  For  the  piers  a 
square  frame  was  dropped  over  the  forms  and  spiked  to  the  posts. 
The  abutment  forms  were  built  up  as  the  concreting  progressed. 
The  north  abutment  forms  were  made  in  sections  6  ft.  high,  held  by 
%-in.  bolts  burled  in  the  concrete.  The  lower  sections  were  re- 
moved and  used  again  on  the  upper  part  of  the  work,  thus  saving 
plank.  The  inside  of  forms  was  painted  with  a  thin  coat  of  crude 
black  oil.  The  same  form  was  used  for  several  piers. 

The  concrete  was  1:2:5,  the  barrel  being  the  unit  of  measure, 
making  about  %  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  per  batch.  The  mortar  was 
mixed  with  hoes,  but  shovels  were  used  to  mix  In  the  stone.  By 
passing  the  blade  of  a  shovel  between  the  form  and  the  concrete, 
the  stone  was  forced  back  and  a  smooth  mortar  face  was  secured. 
Rammers  weighing  30  to  40  Ibs.  were  used  for  tamping.  Two  days 
after  the  completion  of  a  pier  the  forms  were  removed.  The  con- 
crete was  protected  from  the  sun  by  twigs,  and  was  watered  twice 
a  day  for  a  week.  It  was  found  by  actual  measurement  that  1  cu. 
yd.  of  concrete  (1:2:5),  the  ingredients  being  measured  in  barrels, 
consisted  of  1*4  bbls.  of  Atlas  cement,  10  cu.  ft.  of  sand  and  26V2 
cu.  ft.  of  stone.  The  total  amount  of  concrete  was  926  cu.  yds.  of 
which  two-thirds  was  in  the  two  abutments.  The  work  was  done 
(in  1894)  by  contract,  for  $7  per  cu,  yd.,  cement  costing  $2.80  per 
bbl.,  sand  30  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  and  wages  $1  a  day.  A  slight  profit 
was  made  at  this  price.  A  gang  of  15  men  and  a  foreman  would 
mix  and  lay  about  40  cu.  yds.  in  11  hrs.  when  not  delayed  by 
lack  of  materials.  The  cost  of  making  the  concrete,  with  wages  at 
$1  a  day,  was: 

Cents  per 
cu.  yd. 

1  man  filling   sand   barrels  and   handling  water 2.7 

2  men  filling  rock  barrels   5.4 

4  men    mixing   sand    and    cement 10.6 

4  men  mixing  stone  and  mortar 10.6 


BRIDGES.  1637 

Cents  per 
cu.  yd. 

2  men  wheeling  concrete 5.3 

1  man   spreading  concrete  in  place    2.7 

1  man    tamping    2.7 

Total   labor    , . . 40.0 

1  foreman  at    $2 5.0 

Total  exclusive  of  forms    45.0 

If  wages  had  been  $1.50  a  day  instead  of  $1,  the  labor  cost  would 
have  been  68  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Cost  of  Paint. — Mr.  Walter  G.  Berg,  Chief  Engineer  of  the  Le- 
high  Valley  R.  R.,  gives  the  following  on  painting  iron  railway 
bridges : 

Oxide  of  Iron. 

6%   Ibs.  oxide  of  iron,  at  1  ct $0.06 

5/6  gal.  (6%  Ibs.)   raw  linseed  oil,  at  56  cts 0.47 

Cost  of  1  gal.  of  paint $0.53 

Red  Lead. 

20   Ibs.    red  lead,   at   5   cts $1.00 

%   gal.    (51/3   Ibs.)    raw  linseed  oil,  at  56  cts .  ..    0.42 

Cost  of   1    gal  of  paint    ! ... $1.42 

- 

Graphite. 

3%  Ibs.  graphite  paste,  at  12  cts $0.45 

%    gal.   boiled  linseed  oil,   at   59    cts.  . 0.45 

Cost   of   1    gal.    of   paint    $0.90 

Weight  and  Surface  Area  of  Steel  Bridges.— Mr.  C.  E.  Fowler. 
Chief  Engineer  Youngstown  Bridge  Co.,  gives  a  table  of  the  weights, 
of  iron  highway  and  single  track  bridge  trusses,  and  the  corre- 
sponding areas  of  metal  requiring  painting,  as  determined  "by 
actual  calculation  in  a  large  number  of  cases."  I  find  by  a  study 
of  the  tables  that  they  can  be  very  simply  expressed  in  rules  or 
formulas,  as  follows :  For  a  highway  bridge  divide  the  weight  of 
metal  in  pounds  by  7  to  get  the  area  of  metal  surface  in  square 
feet.  This  applies  to  highway  bridges  16  ft.  wide,  calculated  for  a 
floor  load  of  90  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  for  all  spans  from  40  to  300  ft.  For 
a  single  track  railway  bridge,  divide  the  weight  of  metal  in  pounds 
by  12  to  get  the  area  of  metal  surface  in  square  feet. 

The  weight  in  pounds  of  metal  in  a  highway  bridge  is  found  by 
adding  50  to  2  times  the  span  in  feet  and  multiplying  this  sum  by 
the  span  in  feet.  Expressed  in  a  formula  this  rule  is  w  =  L  (2  L  -f- 
50). 

The  weight  in  pounds  of  metal  in  a  single  track  railway  bridge 
is  found  by  adding  400  to  4.8  times  the  span  in  feet  and  multiply- 
ing this  sum  by  the  span  in  feet,  w  =  L  (4. 8  L  +400). 

Cost  of  Painting  a  Howe  Truss  Bridge. — The  bridge  was  painted 
with  two  coats  of  paint  costing  $1  per  gallon.  One  gallon  covered 
133  sq.  ft.,  two  coats  thick,  and  a  painter  averaged  166  sq.  ft.,  two 


1638  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

coats  thick,  per   10  hrs.,  or   332   sq.  ft.  of  one  coat  per  day.     The 
cost  was,   therefore,   as  follows: 

Cts.  per        Cts.  per 
sq.   ft.  sq.  yd. 

Paint,  two  coats    0.75  6.8 

Labor  painting,  two  coats  (17%  cts.  per  hr.) 1.15  10.3 

Total    .T90  17.1 

Cost  of  Painting  6  R.  R.  Bridges. — Three  spans  pin-connected 
Pratt  truss  bridges,  each  145  ft.  long,  14  ft.  wide  and  20%  ft.  high, 
were  painted  with  one  coat  at  a  cost  of  $48  per  span  for  labor.  One 
span  required  35  gals,  of  asphaltum  paint  costing  65  cts.  per  gal. 
The  other  spans  received  27  gals,  of  carbon  paint  each,  at  $1.50 
per  gallon. 

A  riveted  Pratt  truss  bridge,  94  ft.  long,  14  ft.  wide  and  20  ft. 
high  was  given  one  coat  of  black  carbon  paint,  23  gals.,  at  $1.50 
per  gal.  The  labor  was  $40. 

A  double-intersection  riveted  lattice  truss  bridge,  96  ft.  long,  14 
ft.  wide  and  20  ft.  high,  was  repainted  with  one  coat  of  carbon 
paint,  26  gals.,  at  $1.50  per  gal.  The  labor  cost  $46. 

A  single  intersection  lattice  truss  highway  bridge  (20-ft.  road- 
way and  two  8-ft.  sidewalks),  106  ft.  long,  was  painted  with  one 
coat  of  black  carbon  paint,  35  gals.,  at  $1.25  per  gal.  The  labor 
cost  $59. 

Cost  of  Painting  6  R.  R.  Bridges  and  2  Viaducts.— Mr.  O.  E. 
Selby,  in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  1897,  has  a  paper  on  the  cost  of 
painting  the  Louisville  and  Jeffersonville  Bridge  across  the  Ohio 
River.  The  work  was  begun  June  3,  and  finished  Aug.  7,  1895. 
There  was  practically  no  traffic  over  the  bridge  during  the  work, 
which,  of  course,  lessened  the  cost  of  painting ;  and  the  iron  being 
new  required  no  great  amount  of  cleaning.  The  force  averaged 
about  50  men  with  1  foreman,  1  assistant  foreman  and  1  time- 
keeper. The  men  were  mostly  ordinary  bridge  men,  erectors  and 
carpenters,  and  were  paid  $2  a  day  of  10  hrs.  Some  few  men  paint- 
ing sidewalk  railings  and  other  parts  not  hazardous  were  paid  $1.50 
a  day.  The  paint  was  oxide  of  iron,  and  was  used  just  as  it  came 
from  the  barrel,  except  for  a  little  occasional  thinning,  equivalent 
to  about  %  gal.  per  bbl.  of  paint.  The  cost  of  the  paint  was  67 
cts.  per  gal.  The  best  results  were  obtained  with  flat  brushes 
costing  $7.50  per  doz.,  of  which  19  doz.  were  used;  4  doz.  steel 
brushes  and  13  doz.  whisk  brooms  were  used  for  cleaning  the  iron. 
The  total  cost  of  the  work  was:  Paint,  $3,769  ;  labor,  $4,427  ;  equip- 
ment, $301;  accident  insurance,  $200  ;  total,  $8,697  distributed  as 
follows : 

Jeffersonville    Approach    (Viaduct)     and    Span    No.    1     (4,271    Ft 
Long;  1,762  Tons).  Per  ton. 

0.62  gallon  iron  oxide  paint $0.42 

Labor,  $2  per  10  hrs 0.51 

Total  per  ton  of  2,000  Ibs .  $0.93 

Total  per  lin.  ft $0.38 


BRIDGES.  1639 

This  Jeffersonville  approach  is  a  viaduct  having  an  average 
height  of  40  ft.  and  a  length  of  4,063  ft.,  all  single  track,  except 
1,000  ft.,  which  is  double  track.  Span  No.  1  is  single  track,  209 
ft.  c.  to  c.  The  Jeffersonville  approach  had  previously  been  painted 
with  one  coat  in  October,  1892.  The  work  of  which  costs  are  above 
given  consisted  in  going  over  the  viaduct,  cleaning  and  painting 
all  spots  where  rust  had  formed ;  then  after  this  had  dried  th« 
whole  viaduct  was  given  one  coat. 

Louisville  Approach  (2,585  Ft.  Long;  1,012  Tons).     Per  ton. 

0.90  gallon  paint,  first  coat $0.61 

0.58  gallon  paint,  second  coat 0.39 

Labor  on  first  coat    0.72 

Labor  on   second  coat 0.38 

Total   per   ton    .                                               .  .$2.10 
Total   per  lin-   ft $0.82 

This  Louisville  approach  is  2,585  ft.  long,  single  track,  and  has 
an  average  height  of  45  ft.  It  had  been  erected  a  year  before  it 
was  painted,  and  had  never  been  painted  before.  It  received  two 
coats  throughout. 

Bridge  Spans  Nos.   5  and  6    (Each  338  ft.   c.  to.  c.  ;  Total  Weight 
665   Tons).  Per  ton. 

0.66   gallon   paint,  first  coat $0.44 

0.44   gallon  paint,  second   coat 0.30 

Labor  on  first  coat 0.47 

Labor  on  second  coat   0.35 

Total   per   ton   of   2,000   Ibs $1.56 

Total  per  lin.  ft $1.53 

Bridge  Spans  Nos.  2,  3  and  4    (Each  Span  546*4  ft.  c.  to  c. ;  Total 
2,768  riTans).  Per  ton. 

0.50  gallon   paint,   first  coat $0.33 

0.32   gallon  paint,   second  coat 0.22 

Labor  on  first  coat    0.32 

Labor  on  second  coat 0.22 


Total  per  ton  of  2,000  Ibs $1.09 

Total  per   lin.   ft ".  $1.84 

All  these  bridge  spans  were  single  track,  erected  about  a  year 
before  they  were  painted.  All  the  iron  had  had  a  shop  coat  of  lin- 
seed oil.  All  the  spans  were  given  two  coats  of  paint  throughout, 
except  the  inside  of  the  top  chords  and  end  posts  which  received 
only  one  coat,  as  it  was  believed  that  this  one  coat  in  such  a  pro- 
tected location  would  outlast  the  two  coats  on  exposed  work. 

Spans  Nos.  5  and  6  were  erected  in  the  latter  part  of  1893,  while 
the  other  and  longer  spans  were  erected  a  year  later,  so  that  the 
rustier  condition  of  Nos.  5  and  B  may  account  for  their  taking 
more  paint. 

The  labor  cost  of  painting  5,700  lin.  ft.  of  sidewalk  railings  was 
$390,  or  $6.85  per  100  ft.  This  does  not  include  the  cost  pf  the 
paint,  which  was  a  small  item.  Half  of  this  railing  was  a  lattice 
railing  4  ft.  high  ;  the  other  half  was  a  gas  pipe  railing  consisting 
of  two  lines  of  1^4 -in.  gas  pipe. 


1640  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Painting  HO  Plate  Girder  Bridges. — Mr.  W.  J.  Wilgus 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  cost  of  repainjting  33  steel  bridges 
on  the  Rome,  Watertown  &  Ogdensburg  R.  R.  in  1896-8.  The 
bridges  were  originally  painted  with  two  coats  of  "patent  paint" 
that  had  failed  within  a  year.  The  following  costs  include  clean- 
Ing  with  wire  brushes,  and  repainting  with  one  coat  of  asphaltum- 
varnish  paint  made  of  4  Ibs.  lampblack  ground  in  pure  raw  lin- 
seed oil,  %  gal.  genuine  asphaltum  varnish,  %  gal.  pure  boiled 
linseed  oil,  and  ^4  gal.  drying  japan.  This  paint  cost  60  to  80  cts. 
per  gal.,  and  1  gal.  covered  350  sq.  ft.  Labor  cost  $2  a  day. 

The  calculation  of  the  exposed  areas  of  many  of  the  plate  girder 
bridges  showed  that  there  were  100  sq.  ft.  for  every  ton  of  2,000 
Ibs. 

Cost  of  Painting  50  Plate  Girder  Spans   (Av.  Length,  74  ft. ;  Total 
Weight,  1,884  Short  Tons).  Per  ton. 

0.30  gal.  paint $0.175 

Labor  cleaning  and   painting 0.340 


Total  per  ton    ..  $0.515 

Cost  of  Painting  5  Truss  Spans  (Av.  Length,  155  ft. ;  Total  Weight, 
638   Tons).  Per  ton. 

0.39   gal.   paint   $0.235 

Labor   cleaning  and   painting 0.490 


Total  per  ton    $0.725 

Cost  of   Painting   11    Spans   of   a   Viaduct    (Total   Length,    706   ft; 
Height,  88  ft.;  Weight,  342  Tons).  Per  ton. 

0.48    gal.   paint $0.39 

Labor  cleaning  and  painting    «^0.60 


Total   per   ton    $0.99 

Cost  of  Cleaning  and  Painting  W  Bridges. — Mr.  E.  D.  Graves 
gives  the  following  data  on  the  painting  of  light  double  triangular 
trusses  in  bridge  spans  from  80  to  136  ft.,  the  total  length  being 
1,000  ft.  painted  in  the  summer  of  1897.  The  steel  work  had  re- 
ceived one  shop  coat  of  iron  oxide  paint,  and  had  been  in  place 
one  year.  The  greater  part  of  the  surfaces  was  found  to  be  scaled 
off  and  rusted.  The  surfaces  were  scraped  with  a  steel  scraper  or 
brushed  with  a  steel  wire  casting-brush.  The  dust  t  was  removed 
with  a  whisk  broom,  and  one  coat  of  No.  38  Detroit  Graphite  paint 
applied,  costing  $1.10  per  gallon,  delivered.  The  floor  beams  and 
bottom  chords  being  most  likely  to  rust,  were  painted  a  second  coat. 
The  foreman  received  $3.50  per  day,  and  had  8  to  12  men,  at  $1.75. 
These  men  were  mostly  laborers,  except  a  few  bridge  men  for  the 
top  work.  The  cost  was  as  follows  per  ton  of  2,000  Ibs. : 

Cost  of  First  Coat —  Per  Ion. 

0.94   gal.   first   coat  on    202   tons $1.04 

Labor   cleaning  and  painting  202   tons 1.44 


Total  per  ton,   one  coat $2.48 


BRIDGES.  1641 

Cost  of  Second  Coat   (Bottom  Chord  and  Floor   Beams). 

Per  ton. 

0.35   gal.    second  coat  on   100   tons $0.38 

Labor  painting  second  coat  100  tons 0.58    . 

Total  per  ton  of  bottom  chord  and  beams. $0.9 6 

The  total 'cost  of  paint  and  labor  was  $598,  or  nearly  60  cts.  per 
lin.  ft.  of  bridge. 

Cost  of  Painting  Jt8  Bridges  and  2  Viaducts. — Mr.  C.  D.  Purdon 
gives  the  following  data :  These  bridges  were  new  and  painted 
with  two  coats  of  red  lead.  They  had  received  one  coat  of  oil  at 
the  shop. 

Cost  per  ton 

Paint       Labor.       Total. 
Two  deck  girders,  each  54  ft.    (34.3  tons).. $0.80          $1.34          $2.14 

Pratt  truss,   103  ft.    (62.9   tons) 0.58  1.45  2.03 

Pratt  truss,   180  ft.    (161.4  tons) 0.82  1.27  2.09 

Six  deck  girders,  each  54  ft.   (105.2  tons)..    0.65  1.12  1.77 

Iron  viaduct;  two  64  ft.,  two  48  ft,  and  two 

32    ft.    deck   girders    (182.4    tons) 1.40  0.76  2.16 

Iron  viaduct,  eight  64  ft.,  and  seven   32   ft. 

spans   (471   tons)    1.00  0.66  1.66 

Pratt  truss,  dbl.   track,   150  ft.    (228.7   tons)    0.51  1.17  1.68 

The  summary  of  the  amount  of  lead  and  oil  used  on  the  above 
bridges  is  as  follows: 

Per  ton 

Lbs.  Gals, 

of  lead.         of  oil. 

Deck    girders    (139.5    tons) 6.08  0.48 

Single  track  trusses  (224.3  tons)    7.12  0.56 

Viaducts    (653.3    tons)     13.80  0.44 

Summary   of   all    (1,245.6   tons) 10.10  0.42 

Judging  from  the  amount  of  paint  used,  a  truss  bridge  takes 
1.2  times  as  much  paint  per  ton  as  a  plate  girder,  and  a  viaduct 
takes  2.3  times  as  much  as  a  plate  girder.  This  is  confirmed  on  p. 
560. 

The  cost  of  cleaning  and  painting  17  spans  over  the  Arkansas 
River  is  as  follows :  These  bridges  received  two  coats  of  red  lead 
and  oil,  having  been  originally  painted  with  iron  oxide  which  was 
first  cleaned  off.  The  cost  of  cleaning  off  the  old  paint  is  included, 
and  almost  equaled  the  cost  of  applying  the  first  coat  of  red  lead. 

Cost  of  9  Spans  (153  Ft.;  Weight,   810.6  Tons). 

Per  ton. 

7  Ibs.    red  lead    $0.49 

Labor     C  58 

Second    coat 

2.3   Ibs.    red  lead 0.17 

Labor     0.25 

Total   per  ton    $1.49 


5642  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  8  Spans  (Three,  253  Ft. ;  Four,  162  ft. ;  One 
Draw,    370   Ft.  ;    Total   Weight,    1,451.2   Tons). 

First  coat —  Per  ton. 

6    Ibs.    red    lead    $0.42 

Labor     0.54 

Second  coat — 

1.9  Ibs.  red  lead    0.15 

Labor     0.26 

Total   per  ton    $1.37 

The  average  of  the  above  17  spans  was:  6.42  Ibs.  of  lead  and 
0.23  gal.  of  oil  per  ton  for  the  first  coat;  2.04  Ibs.  of  lead  and  0.074 
gal.  of  oil  per  ton  for  the  second  coat. 

The  cost  of  repainting  13  spans  with  two  coats  of  iron  oxide 
was  as  follows: 

— Gallons Cost  per  ton — — 

Paint.  Oil.    Paint.  Labor.  Total. 
200-ft.     deck    truss    and     two     50-ft. 

girders,  dbl.  track    (475.6  tons) 128        60      $0.20      ?0.62      $0.82 

Pony   lattice,    92y2    ft.    (115   tons) 30        10        0.31        0.33        0.64 

Three  through  spans,   150  ft.  and  302 

ft.    draw    span    (656.7    tons) 335      122        0.36        0.63        0.99 

Three   through    spans,    150    ft.    (313.3 

tons)      184        46        0.38        0.54        0.92 

Three    through    spans,    150    ft.    (297.6 

tons)      , 130        30        0.28        0.54        0.82 

These  13  spans  had  originally  been  painted  with  iron  oxide  which 
was  not  cleaned  off  except  at  rusted  spots. 

It  will  be  noted  that  about  %  gal.  of  oil  was  used  to  thin  each 
gallon  of  paint. 

The  cost  of  repainting  ten  old  bridges  with  one  coat  of  iron 
oxide  was  as  follows : 

— Gallons— Cost  per  ton 

Paint.  Oil.    Paint.  Labor.  Total. 
Double    track    truss,     126      ft.      (176 

tons)      75        25        $0.19      $0.55      $0.74 

Through    plate    girder,    50    ft.    (27.6 

tons)      15          3ya      0.34        0.34        0.68 

Six  spans  deck  truss,   150   ft.    (696.5 

tons) 280        62          0.25        0.51        0.76 

Deck  plate  girder,   70  ft.    (30.4   tons)    12        ..          0.20        0.22        0.44 
Through    plate    girder,    47    ft.     (24.5 

tons)      17        ..          0.32        0.34        0.66 

These  10  spans  had  been  originally  painted  with  iron  oxide  which 
was  not  cleaned  off  except  at  rusted  spots. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  average  of  these  ten  spans  is  0.51  gal. 
of  paint  and  oil  per  ton,  for  one  coat  work. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  and  Painting  Four  Bridges,  St.  Louis — Mr.  N. 
W.  Eayers  gives  the  following  data  on  painting  railway  bridges 
with  one  coat  of  carbon  paint.  This  paint  was  ground  especially 
for  the  bridge  work,  and  came  as  "semi-liquid"  taking  about  1  gal. 
of  oil  to  1  gal.  of  "semi-liquid."  It  was  laid  on  thick. 

The  St.  Louis  Merchants'  Bridge  is  double  track,  three  spans, 
each  of  517%  ft.,  trusses  75  ft.  deep  at  center.  It  was  erected  in 
1890,  and  had  had  one  shop  coat  and  one  coat  of  iron  oxide  after 


BRIDGES.  1643 

erection.  The  metal  was  very  rusty,  and  the  cost  of  cleaning  was 
quite  large,  but  could  not  be  separated  from  the  cost  of  painting. 
The  total  cost  of  cleaning  and  painting  these  three  spans  in  1895 
was  as  follows: 

493%   gals,  boiled  oil,  at  $0.58 $  286.08 

552 y<>   gals,   carbon  paint,  at  $1.25 690.62 

Sundry    supplies 69.96 

48      days'  labor,  at  $2.50 120.00 

91.4  days'  labor,  at  $2.25 205.65 

444.4  days'    labor,    at    $2.00 888.80 

51.5  days'   labor,  at   $1.00 51.50 

Total   $2,312.61 

The  cost  per  lin.  ft.  was,  therefore,  $1.49,  and  0.69  gal.  of  paint, 
costing  93.3  cts.  per  gal.,  was  required  per  lin.  ft. 

The  Ferry  St.  Bridge  is  a  double  track  deck  span,  126  ft.  resting 
on  iron  columns.  It  was  cleaned  and  painted  in  1895,  at  the  fol- 
lowing cost : 

32  gals,   boiled  oil,  at  $0.58 $  18.56 

22  gals,   carbon  paint,   at  $1.25 27.50 

Labor     97.70 

Total,  at  $1.14  per  lin.  ft $143.76 

The  Angelica  St.  Bridge  is  a  through  plate  girder  bridge,  68-ft. 
span,  having  a  total  painted  surface  of  6,250  sq.  ft.,  which  required 
1  gal.  of  paint  for  every  312%  sq.  ft.  The  cost  was  as  follows: 

10  gals,  boiled  oil,  at  $0.58 $   5.80 

10  gals,  carbon  paint,  at  $1.25 12.50 

Labor     22.00 

Total,  at  $0.59  per  lin.  ft $40~30 

The  Elevated  Structure,  Merchants'  Bridge,  consists  of  steel  col- 
umns supporting  plate  girder  spans  of  28  to  35  ft.,  carrying  a 
double  track  railroad.  It  was  erected  and  painted  in  1890,  but  in 
1897  it  was  badly  rusted  and  was  repainted  at  a  contract  price  of 
57  cts.  per  ft.  for  4,075  ft.  The  actual  cost  to  the  contractor  was 
as  follows : 

Carbon    paint    and   oil,    one   coat $    748.13 

Labor  for   cleaning 657.67 

Labor  for  painting 628.74 


Total,   exclusive  of  foreman's  time.  .$2,034.54 

The  St.  Louis  (Eads)  Bridge  was  repainted  in  1896.  It  consists 
of  three  arched  spans  of  a  total  length  of  1,524  ft.,  carrying  a 
double  track  railway  on  the  lower  floor  and  a  highway  on  the 
upper  floor.  The  floor  beams  for  the  highway  are  the  struts  for 
the  wind  truss.  The  bridge  is  54  ft.  wide  out  to  out.  The  metal 
was  quite  rusty,  in  places,  requiring  chipping  to  remove  scale,  espe- 
cially the  highway  floor  beams  exposed  to  locomotive  smoke.  It 


J644 


HANDBOOK   OP  COST  DATA. 


was  painted  with  one  coat.     The  cost  was  $0.70  per  ton  distributed 
as  follows : 

675   gals,   boiled   oil,  at   $0.35 $  236.25 

650  gals,  carbon  paint,  at  $1.25 812.50 

Sundry   supplies 52.55 

Labor,  130  days,    at    $2.50 325.00 


246  days,    at 
955  days,    at 


2.25. 
J.OO, 


Total,    at    $2.55    per  lin.    ft.. 


553.50 
,    1,910.00 

$3,889.80 


Cost  of  Painting  Two  Railway  Bridges. — The  following  data  or, 
scraping  and  painting  two  railway  bridges  are  given  by  Mr.  A. 
S.  Markley.  The  bridges  were  both  painted  in  1896,  bridge  No.  1 
being  painted  during  the  summer  and  bridge  No.  2  during  October 
and  November.  The  structures  are  viaducts  with  lattice  columns 
and  lattice  struts  in  towers.  The  total  number  of  tons  of  iron 
in  bridge  No.  1  was  719;  in  bridge  No.  2  there  was  154  tons 
of  iron. 


Bridge  No.  1,  first  coat — 

Total.       Per  ton  iron. 

Red   lead,    3,560    Ibs.,    at    $.049 $174.44  $0.242 

Boiled  oil.  177  gals.,  at  .40 70.80  .098 

L.  black,   18  Ibs.,  at  .085 1.53  .002 

Labor ..    558.39  .776 

Total     $815.16  $1.118 

Bridge  No.  1,  second  coat — 

Red  lead,  2,395  Ibs.,  at  $.049 $117.35  $0.163 

Boiled  oil,   160  gals.,  at  .40 64.00  .089 

L.  black,  55  Ibs.,  at  .085 4.67  .006 

Labor    372.08  .517 

Total $558.10  $0.775 

Bridge  No.  2,  first  coat — 

Red  lead,   500  Ibs.,  at   $.049..               ...$   24.50  $0.159 

B.  L.  oil,  181/2  gals.,  at  .40 7.40  .048 

L.   black,    5   Ibs.,    .085 43  .003 

Labor    121.41  .788 

Total     $153.74  $0.998 

Bridge  No.  2,  second  coat — 

Red  lead,.  335  Ibs.,  at  $.049 $   16.41  $0.106 

B.   L.   oil,   17  gals.,   at  .40 6.80  .044 

L.  black,   10  Ibs.,  at   .08V2 85  .005 

Labor 89.90  .584 


Total  $113.96 


$0.739 


BRIDGES.  1645 

Summary — 

-Per  ton  iron. 

Bridge  1.  Bridge  2. 

Labor     1.294  1.372 

Labor   and  material 1.896  1.731 

Material     $0.602  $0.359 

Labor,   scraping     194  .... 

Labor,  painting,   first   coat 776  .788 

Labor,  painting,   second  coat 517  .584 

Pounds  of  red  lead,  first  coat 4.95  3.25 

Pounds  of  red  lead,  second  coat 3.33  2.17 

Gallons  boiled  oil,  first  coat 246  .120 

Gallons  boiled  oil,   second  coat .222  .110 

Cost  of  Painting  Plate  Girders,  Truss  Bridges  and  Trestles  on  the 
C.  &  W.  M.  Ry.*— Table  XIX  gives  the  cost  of  painting  several 
bridges  on  the  Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry.  (Detroit,  Lansing  & 
Northern  R.  R.),  the  work  being  done  in  1894. 

Cost  of  Painting,  Cross- References. — For  further  data  consult 
the  index  under  "Painting." 

Cost  of  Bridge  Abutments.— Mr.  W.  A.  Rogers  gives  the  following 
data  relative  to  the  construction  of  bridge  abutments  on  the  C., 
M.  &  St.  P.  Ry. :  The  work  consisted  in  building  20  abutments 
for  10  four-track  plate  girder  bridges  over  street  crossings  in 
Chicago.  The  work  was  done  between  May  1  and  Oct.  1,  1898,  in 
which  time  8,400  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  were  placed,  all  the  work 
being  done  by  company  labor.  The  forms  were  made  of  2-in. 
plank  and  6  x  6 -in.  posts  bolted  together  at  the  top  and  bottom 
with  %-in.  rods.  The  lumber  was  used  over  and  over  again.  When 
the  dressed  plank  became  too  poor  for  the  face  it  was  used  for  the 
back.  The  concrete  was  1  Portland  cement,  3  gravel  and  4  to  4^ 
limestone  (crusher  run  up  to  3-in.  size.)  A  mortar  face  1%  ins. 
thick  was  built  up  with  the  rest  of  the  concrete.  The  concrete 
was  made  quite  wet,  and  each  man  ramming  averaged  18  cu.  yds. 
a  day  rammed.  The  concrete  was  mixed  by  a  machine  of  the  Ran- 
some  type,  operated  by  a  12-hp.  portable  gasoline  engine..  The 
load  was  very  light  for  the  engine,  and  8  hp.  would  have  been 
sufficient.  The  engine  made  235  revolutions  per  minute,  and  the 
pulley  wheels  were  proportioned  so  that  the  mixer  made  12  revs, 
per  min.  One  gallon  of  gasoline  was  used  per  hour,  and  the  mixing 
was  carried  on  day  and  night  so  as  not  to  give  the  concrete  time  to 
set.  The  time  required  for  each  batch  was  2  to  3  mins.,  and  about 
%  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  was  delivered  per  batch.  The  average 
output  was  70  cu.  yds.  per  10-hr,  shift,  with  a  crew  of  28  men; 
but  as  high  as  96  cu.  yds.  were  mixed  in  10  hrs.  The  concrete 
was  far  superior  to  aand  mixed  concrete.  The  water  for  the 
concrete  was  measured  in  an  upright  tank  and  discharged  by  a 
pipe  into  the  mixer.  The  sand  and  stone  were  delivered  to  the 
mixer  in  wheelbarrows,  and  the  concrete  was  taken  away  in  wheel- 
barrows. No  derricks  were  used  at  all.  Each  wheelbarrow  of 
concrete  was  raised  by  a  rope  passing  over  a  pulley  at  the  top 
of  a  gallows  frame  ;  one  horse  and  a  driver,  serving  for  this  raising. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  June  13,  1906. 


1046 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


•«*•**<  eo  o  o»  ta 


.C   '"JH    050LOOOIOOOO 

•"*    AH    OJrHCOCgovOCKOLrti-H 


l  rH  ^  <M  O  rH  TH  »-l 


r     ^ 
EH  O  w- 


rH  O  !>•  C<I  7-1 


-U 

go    rit^cd-^t 
Q  M  «*•     ^ 


s3 

^  T<  ^ooi-i 

O      w    <B  co  c<j  od  10  oi  o  o»  e^i  ^ 


O     *i 


T»«IO      .5 

<MN        Jj 

M  JO  t-^oo\fto»i>.    -eooo       pj 


' 


• 
tf  o  oo  c-  <£>  o  1-1  oo  co    •      f! 

tM^        ,_(        oot-«o<M      .         60 


j»  r1  M  i»i      ^ 

;-!  CL  d,  CL        I    >  J-  <P  3 


SI2V&1- 


•S   X 


BRIDGES.  1647 

A  small  gasoline  hoisting  engine  would  have  been  more  satisfactory 
than  the  horse  which  was  worked  to  its  full  capacity.  After  the 
barrows  were  raised  (12  ft),  they  were  wheeled  to  the  abutment 
forms  and  dumped.  The  empty  wheelbarrows  were  lowered  by 
hand,  by  means  of  a  rope  passing  over  a  sheave  and  provided  with 
a  counterweight  to  check  the  descent  of  the  barrow.  The  cost 
of  the  concrete  (built  by  company  labor)  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement,   gravel  and  stone  delivered $3.28 

Material   in   forms    (used  many  times) 11 

Carpenters   building   and   taking   down  forms 34 

Labor 1.18 

Total    per    cu.    yd $4.91 

The  labor  cost  includes  moving  the  plant  from  one  bridge  to  the 
next,  building  runways,  gasoline  for  engine,  oil  for  lights  at  night, 
and  unloading  materials  as  well  as  mixing,  delivering  and  ramming 
the  concrete.  Wages  were  $1.75  per  10-hr,  day  for  laborers  and 
$2.50  for  carpenters. 

Data  on  Thirty-two  Concrete  and  Reinforced  Concrete  Bridges 
(20  Highway  and  12  Railway),  Including  Yardage,  Cost,  Etc.*— An 
engineer  is  frequently  called  upon  to  estimate  the  probable  cost  of 
a  bridge  before  plans  are  drawn  for  the  structure.  In  such  cases 
it  is  very  desirable  to  have  at  hand  the  cost  of  several  similar 
structures  as  a  guide  to  the  judgment.  It  is  also  desirable  to  have 
a  short  description  of  each  structure,  and  a  statement  of  the  quan- 
tities of  material  involved  in  its  construction.  With  such  data  at 
hand  an  engineer,  even  though  somewhat  inexperienced,  is  not 
likely  to  go  far  wrong  in  his  preliminary  estimate  of  cost — his 
reconnaissance  estimate,  if  you  choose  to  call  it  so. 

Valuable  as  such  records  of  cost  are  for  the  purpose  just  indi- 
cated, they  possess  an  additional  value  that  should  not  be  under- 
rated— namely,  as  a  guide  in  comparing  the  relative  economy  of  the 
designs  of  two  similar  bridges.  For  this  latter  purpose  it  is  de- 
sirable to  have  a  record  not  merely  of  the  total  yardage  of  con- 
crete in  each  bridge,  but  the  distribution  of  that  yardage  in  the 
various  parts  of  the  bridge.  The  yardage  in  the  arch  ring,  the 
yardage  in  the  spandrel  walls,  the  yardage  in  the  abutments,  and 
so  on,  should  be  given,  together  with  the  weight  of  steel  reinforce- 
ment in  each  of  these  groups  of  concrete  yardage.  Unfortunately, 
however,  the  published  records  of  concrete  bridges  are  almost 
invariably  lacking  in  this  respect,  as  will  be  noted  in  the  follow- 
ing records. 

In  this  connection,  a  word  as  to  what  every  record  should  con- 
tain. The  following  dimensions  should  be  given :  The  total  length 
of  the  bridge  over  all,  total  length  between  abutments,  length  of 
barrel  or  true  width  of  bridge,  width  of  floor  surface,  width  of 
road  way  or  carriage  way,  width  of  side  walks,  clear  span  of  arch 
and  rise,  thickness  at  crown  and  at  spring  line,  height  of  abut- 
ments and  piers  up  to  the  spring  line,  width  of  piers  at  spring  line, 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  2,   1908. 


1648  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

width  of  abutments  at  base,  height  of  roadway  above  crown  of 
arch,  and  ditto  above  low  water. 

When  these  dimensions  are  given,  accompanied  by  a  general 
description  ef  the  type  of  bridge  and  a  detailed  tabulated  state- 
ment of  quantities,  the  reader  can  form  a  very  accurate  idea  of  its 
general  design. 

In  comparing  the  costs  of  any  two  concrete  bridges,  the  first  step 
should  be  to  ascertain  the  cost  per  lineal  foot  measured  between 
abutments.  If  there  are  several  arches  in  series,  the  same  holds 
true.  If  the  bridges  are  single  or  double  track  railway  structures 
a  direct  comparison  of  costs  is  then  possible,  but  if  they  are  high- 
way bridges,  it  is  necessary  to  ascertain  the  cost  per  square  foot 
of  floor  area,  for  highway  bridges  differ  so  greatly  in  width.  This 
floor  area  should  not  be  estimated  for  the  total  length  of  the  bridge 
over  all,  but  only  for  the  length  between  the  abutments  of  the 
extreme  spans.  The  retaining  walls  of  highway  bridges  are  fre- 
quently mere  extensions  of  the  spandrel  walls,  and  it  is  deceptive  to 
include  all  the  area  between  these  retaining  walls  as  floor  area, 
although  it  is  frequently  done.  The  fraction  of  a  yard  of  concrete 
per  sq.  ft.  should  be  stated.  Where  a  large  main  arch  is  ap- 
proached on  each  side  by  a  number  of  small  arches  or  by  a  con- 
crete trestle,  it  is  clear  that  the  major  part  of  the  cost  of  the 
bridge  may  often  be  charged  to  this  main  arch.  Hence  it  is  not 
good  practice  to  lump  both  the  main  arch  and  the  approaches  to- 
gether in  estimating  the  cost  per  lin.  ft.  or  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.  Yet 
this  is  almost  invariably  done,  as  will  be  seen  from  the  following 
records.  One  cost  per  lin.  ft.  or  per  sq.  ft.  should  be  estimated 
for  the  main  span  or  spans,  and  a  separate  unit  cost  for  the 
approach  spans. 

The  live  loads  should  be  stated  as  a  rule,  although  if  the  date  of 
construction  is  given,  together  with  the  type  of  bridge,  an  engineer 
can  readily  ascertain  what  was  the  prevailing  practice  as  to  load- 
ing at  that  time.  Since  nearly  all  the  bridges  recorded  in  this 
article  were  built  during  the  last  decade,  it  seems  unnecessary  to 
state  the  loading. 

The  reader  should  note  the  fact  that  many  of  the  concrete 
railway  bridges  have  replaced  steel  bridges  and  that  in  nearly 
every  case  the  steel  bridge  was  approximately  20  years  old  when 
replaced.  These  steel  bridges  had  in  all  cases  become  too  light 
for  the  heavy  locomotives  and  cars.  So  far  as  the  past  is  con- 
cerned, this  indicates  a  depreciation  in  steel  railway  bridges  of 
about  5%  per  annum  in  America — a  fact  which  is  itself  worthy  of 
sober  thought  on  the  part  of  the  bridge  designer.  We  may  also 
add  in  this  connection  that  the  average  life  of  an  American  loco- 
motive is  not  far  from  this  same  20  years. 

We  shall  first  give  the  records  of  materials  or  cost,  or  both, 
of  20  highway  bridges,  as  completely  as  was  possible  to  secure 
them.  It  will  be  noted  that  for  the  usual  spans  of  arches  and 
heights  of  piers,  reinforced  concrete  highway  bridges  have  cost 
about  ?4  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor  area. 


BRIDGES.  1640 

Cost  of  25-ft.  Arch  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete  highway 
bridge  was  built  in  1902  in  Wabash  county,  Ind.  It  is  an  arch  with 
a  span  of  25  ft.,  a  crown  thickness  of  8  ins.  and  a  roadway  16  ft. 
wide.  The  abutments  are  tied  together  by  steel  rods  buried  in  a 
concrete  pavement  below  the  bed  of  the  stream,  according  to  the 
Luten  method.  The  contract  price  was  only  $573,  which  is  equiva- 
lent to  $23  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $1.44  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.  This  price  bears 
testimony  to  the  economy  of  the  design. 

Cost  of  45-ft.  Arch  for  Highway.— A  reinforced  concrete  highway 
bridge  was  built  in  1902  over  the  River  Des  Peres,  Forest  Park, 
St.  Louis,  Mo.  It  is  a  single  arch  span  of  45  ft.,  with  a  rise  of 
12  ft,  and  a  width  of  45  ft.  out  to  out.  The  abutments  are  8  ft. 
high  to  the  spring  line.  The  bridge  cost  $12,600  (including  $2,000 
for  excavation  and  riprap),  which  is  equivalent  to  $280  per  lin.  ft., 
or  $6.20  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

Cost  of  54-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete  high- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1903  across  the  Kalamazoo  River  at  Plain- 
well,  Mich.  The  bridge  is  414  ft.  long  between  abutments,  and  has 
an  18  ft.  carriage  way  and  one  5-ft.  sidewalk.  It  consists  of  7 
arches  having  a  span  of  54  ft.  and  a  rise  of  8  ft.  Piers  are  only 
6  ft.  high  to  the  spring  line,  6  ft.  wide  at  the  spring  line  and  rest 
on  piles.  The  water  was  only  4  ft.  deep.  The  arches  are  1 :2 :4 
concrete  and  the  piers,  etc.,  1:3:6.  The  arches  are  reinforced 
with  4-in.  channel  steel.  The  materials  used  were  : 

Cu.  Yds. 

Concrete    in    foundations 570 

Concrete    in    arches 770 

Concrete    in    walls 150 

Concrete    total 1,490 

Steel,   36,000  Ibs. 

Earth  fill,   1,944  cu.  yds. 

The  contract  price  was  $19,900,  which  is  equivalent  to  $2.10  per 
sq.  ft.  of  floor.  There  is  less  than  0.16  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  per 
sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

The  detailed  cost  of  this  bridge  is  given  in  Gillette  and  Hill's 
"Concrete  Construction — Methods  and  Cost." 

Cost  of  60-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete  high- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1906  across  the  Hudson  River  at  Sandy 
Hill,  N.  Y.  The  bridge  is  984  ft.  long  between  abutments  and  35 
ft.  wide.  Its  deck  is  24  ft.  above  the  water  surface.  The  river 
is  shallow  and  flows  over  a  slate  rock  bottom.  The  water  is  8  ft. 
deep  only  at  times  of  very  high  water.  The  bridge  consists  of  15 
arches  of  60  ft.  span  and  8%  ft.  rise.  The  piers  are  13  ft.  high  to 
the  spring  line.  Each  arch  span  is  composed  of  7  reinforced  con- 
crete arch  ribs,  and  the  ribs  support  a  reinforced  concrete  slab 
flooring.  All  concrete  was  a  1:2:4  mixture,  except  the  heart- 
ing of  piers  and  the  footing  courses,  which  were  1  :  3  :  5.  About 
11,000  bbls.  of  cement  were  used.  The  outside  facing  of  the  piers 
and  parapet  walls  consisted  of  concrete  blocks.  The  bridge  was 
built  by  day  labor  at  a  cost  of  $80,000,  which  is  but  slightly  more 


1650  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

than  $80  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $2.30  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor,  which  is  an 
exceptionally  low  cost  per  sq.  ft,  and  indicates  excellent  design. 
The  bridge  was  designed  and  built  by  Mr.  M.  O.  Kasson  of  Sandy 
Hill,  N.  Y. 

Cost  of  66-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete  high- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1903  at  Bridge  St.,  Jacksonville,  Fla.,  over 
the  tracks  of  several  railways,  by  the  Concrete-Steel  Engineering 
Co.,  under  the  Melan  and  Thatcher  patents.  The  total  length  is  845 
ft.,  consisting  of  11  arches,  having  an  average  span  of  about  66  ft. 
and  a  rise  of  7  ft,  with  piers  about  20  ft.  high  and  126  piles  under 
each  pier.  The  width  of  the  bridge  was  58  ft  between  hand  rails. 
The  contract  price  was  $149,900,  which  is  equivalent  to  $177  per 
lin.  ft,  or  $3  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

Cost  of  80-ft.  and  65-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  con- 
crete highway  bridge  of  ingenious  design  was  built  in  1904  across 
Clifty  Creek,  six  miles  north  of  Greensburg,  Ind.,  by  the  National 
Bridge  Co.,  of  Indianapolis,  Daniel  Luten,  president.  The  bridge 
is  an  arch  of  80  ft.  span  and  12  ft  rise,  and  has  a  16  ft.  roadway. 
The  abutments  are  connected  by  steel  tie  rods  embedded  in  con- 
crete, which  forms  a  pavement  over  which  the  creek  flows.  The  use 
of  these  tie  rods  greatly  reduces  the  mass  of  concrete  required 
in  the  abutments.  The  mean  depth  of  water  was  3  ft.  There  were 
4,500  Ibs.  of  steel  used  in  the  ties  connecting  the  abutments,  and 
4,800  Ibs.  in  the  arch  and  spandrel  walls.  The  concrete  amounted 
to  only  265  cu.  yds.  and  the  contract  price  for  this  bridge  complete 
was  only  $2,695,  which,  so  far  as  we  know,  breaks  all  records  for 
low  cost  of  a  single  concrete  arch  bridge  of  80  ft  span.  The  cost 
was  therefore  only  $34  per  lin.  ft,  or  $2.10  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor,  or 
$10  per  cu.  yd.  There  is  only  0.26  cu.  yd.  per  sq.  ft  of  floor.  This 
design  of  Luten  arch  is  illustrated  on  page  785  of  Reid's  "Concrete 
and  Reinforced  Concrete  Construction." 

Another  highway  bridge  of  the  same  type  is  the  East  Washington 
St.  bridge  at  Indianapolis.  It  has  a  span  of  65  ft,  a  rise  of  10  ft. 
and  a  roadway  57  'ft.  wide.  It  contains  1,100  cu.  yds.  concrete  and 
the  contract  price  was  $10,885,  which  is  equivalent  to  $167  per 
lin.  ft.,  or  less  than  $3  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor,  or  $10  per  cu.  yd. 
There  is  0.3  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  per  sq.  ft  of  floor. 

Cost  of  75  to  100-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete 
highway  bridge  was  built  in  1905  across  the  WabasTi  River  at 
Peru,  Ind.  Its  length  is  700  ft,  and  the  roadway  is  30  ft  wide. 
The  height  of  roadway  is  30  ft.  above  low  water.  The  bridge 
consists  of  7  arch  spans;  one  100,  two  95,  two  85  and  two  75  ft. 
The  rise  of  the  arches  is  13  to  15  ft.  The  piers  average  30  ft.  high 
and  rest  on  solid  rock  6  to  16  ft.  below  low  water.  The  bridge 
contains  5,000  cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  which  required  6,000  bbls.  of 
cement.  The  concrete  was  reinforced  according  to  the  Luten  sys- 
tem. The  contract  price  was  $36,900,  which  is  equivalent  to  only 
$53  per  lin.  ft,  or  $1.80  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor,  or  $7.20  per  cu.  yd. 
There  is  0.24  cu.  yd.  of  concrete  per  sq.  ft 

This  is  a  remarkably  low  cost  and  is  indicative  of  good  design. 
This  contract  price  was  lower  than  competitive  bids  for  a  steel 


BRIDGES.  1651 

bridge  of  the  same  length  having  wooden  flooring.  This  bridge 
was  designed  by  the  National  Bridge  Co.  of  Indianapolis,  Ind., 
Daniel  Luten,  president. 

Cost  of  80-ft.  Arch  for  Highway. — A  concrete  highway  bridge  was 
built  in  1901  across  San  Leandro  Creek,  near  Oakland,  Cal.  It  is  an 
arch  (not  reinforced)  having  a  span  of  81  ft,  a  rise  of  26  ft.,  a 
crown  thickness  of  3  ft.  and  supports  a  macadam  carriage  way 
41  ft.  wide  with  8  ft.  sidewalks  on  each  side,  giving  a  roadway 
57  ft.  wide.  The  abutments  have  a  thickness  of  30  ft.  and  extend 
only  5  ft.  below  the  spring  line,  and  rest  on  clay.  There  were 
90,000  ft.  B.  M.  used  in  the  centers  and  forms,  or  24  ft.  B.  M. 
per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete.  The  spandrel  walls  have  a  length  of  192 
ft.  each.  There  are  3,384  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  bridge,  and 
the  contract  price  for  its  construction  was  $25,840,  which  is  equiva- 
lent to  $319  per  lin.  ft.  of  span,  or  $5.60  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.  There 
are  $.74  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.  The  concrete  was  a 
1:2:7  mixture,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  the  contract  price  for  the 
bridge  was  equivalent  to  about  $7.70  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete. 

Cost  of  85-ft.  Arch  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete  highway 
bridge  was  built  in  1903  at  Seeley  St.,  over ,  Prospect  Ave.,  Brook- 
lyn. The  arch  has  a  span  of  85  ft.  and  a  rise  of  8%  ft.  The  car- 
riage way  is  32  ft.  wide  and  the  sidewalks  are  each  12%  ft.  wide, 
making  a  total  width  of  roadway  of  57  ft.  The  total  length  of 
each  parapet  wall  is  144  ft.  The  abutments  are  15  ft.  high  to  the 
spring  line.  The  bridge  contains  1,300  cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  and 
91,400  Ibs.  of  corrugated  reinforcing  bars.  The  contract  price  was 
$21,800,  which  is  equivalent  to  $256  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $4.53  per  sq.  ft. 
of  floor,  or  nearly  $17  per  cu.  yd.  There  is  0.27  cu.  yd.  of  con- 
crete per  sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

Cost  of  69  to  88-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete 
highway  bridge  was  built  in  1903  across  the  Great  Miami  River  on 
Main  St.,  Dayton,  Ohio.  Its  length  is  588  ft.  between  abutments, 
and  it  has  a  carriageway  40  ft.  wide  and  two  7-ft.  sidewalks,  mak- 
ing a  total  width  of  54  ft.  It  consists  of  7  arches  having  spans 
of  69  to  88  ft.,  reinforced  according  to  the  Melan  system.  The 
rise  of  the  arches  is  1-10  to  1-13  of  the  span.  The  piers  are  31  ft. 
high  to  the  spring  line,  and  the  base  of  piers  is  about  15  ft.  below 
low  water.  The  contract  price  was  $123,170,  which  is  equivalent  to 
$210  per  lin,  ft,  or  slightly  less  than  $4  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

Cost  of  80  to  110-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete 
highway  bridge  was  built  in  1904  across  the  Great  Miami  River  at 
Third  St.,  Dayton,  Ohio.  The  bridge  consists  of  7  arches  and  has 
a  total  lerigth  of  710  ft.  between  abutments,  and  its  width  is  62  ft. 
between  balustrades.  It  is  of  the  Melan  type,  designed  by  the 
Concrete-Steel  Engineering  Co.,  which  received  a  royalty  of  $12,000 
paid  out  of  the  contract  price.  The  arch  spans  ranged  from  80  ft. 
to  110  ft,  with  a  ratio  of  span  to  rise  averaging  about  7%  to  1. 
The  piers  were  22  ft.  high.  The  contract  price  was  $179,600,  which 
is  equivalent  to  $253  per  lin.  ft,  or  about  $4  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor. 

Cost  of  100-ft.  Arch  for  Highway. — A  reinforced  concrete  highway 
bridge  was  built  in  1907,  in  Rock  Creek  Park,  Washington,  D.  C., 


1652  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

on  Ross  Drive  across  Rock  Creek.  The  length  is  163  ft.  and  its 
width  is  16  ft.  It  consists  of  a  main  span  of  100  ft.  having  a  15-ft. 
rise,  with  concrete  trestle  approaches  30  ft.  long  on  each  side.  The 
three  hinged  arch  span  consists  of  three  ribs  carrying,  at  inter- 
vals of  10  ft.,  light  spandrel  columns  supporting  the  reinforced 
concrete  beams  and  floor  slabs.  A  steel  handrail  is  provided  on 
each  side.  An  existing  timber  trestle  was  utilized  for  centering. 
The  bridge  was  designed  for  a  live  load  of  100  Ibs.  per  sq.  fit., 
with  a  concentrated  load  of  only  6  tons  on  a  four-wheel  wagon. 
The  bridge  was  built  by  day  labor  and  cost  $8,000,  or  $50  per  lin. 
ft.,  or  $3.20  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor,  including  approaches. 

Materials  in  50-ft.  and  100-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  concrete 
highway  bridge  was  built  in  1903  over  a  mill  pond  on  the  Anthony 
Kill,  near  Mechanicsville,  N.  Y.  Its  length  is  265  ft.  between  abut- 
ments, and  its  width  is  17  ft.  over  all.  It  consists  of  two  100-ft. 
arches  and  one  50-ft.  arch  not  reinforced.  The  rise  of  the  100-ft. 
arches  is  about  20  ft.  The  piers  have  a  height  of  about  15  ft. 
Piles  were  driven  to  support  the  centers.  There  were  140,000  ft. 
B.  M.  In  the  centers  and  forms,  which  lumber  was  used  but  once. 
About  2,500  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  were  required,  or  0.56  cu.  yd.  per 
sq.  ft.  of  floor.  Therefore  it  took  56  ft.  B.  M.  per  cu.  yd.  of  con- 
crete. The  centers  consisted  of  bents  supporting  lagging  laid 
parallel  with  the  center  line  of  the  roadway. 

Cost  of  125-ft.  Arch  for  Highway.— A  concrete  highway  bridge 
was  built  in  1906  at  16th  St.,  Washington,  D.  C.,  known  as  the 
Piney  Creek  bridge.  Its  length  is  272  ft.  and  its  width  is  25  ft. 
It  consists  of  a  parabolic  arch  having  a  span  of  25  ft.  and  a  rise 
of  39  ft.,  resting  on  abutments  about  12  ft.  high,  and  a  concrete 
viaduct  approach  on  each  side  of  the  arch.  The  arch  is  not  rein- 
forced and  is  5  ft.  thick  at  the  crown.  It  carries  a  solid  spandrel 
wall  on  each  side  and  reinforced  concrete  posts  between  the  walls, 
which  support  the  reinforced  concrete  slab  roadway.  The  viaduct 
approaches  are  merely  extensions  of  this  spandrel  construction, 
and  have  an  average  height  of  about  65  ft. 

The  design  of  this  bridge  is  illustrated  and  described  in  Reid's 
"Concrete  and  Reinforced  Concrete  Construction."  The  cost  of  the 
bridge  was  $52,231,  of  which  $3,000  was  for  engineering  and  $1,500 
for  inspection.  This  is  equivalent  to  a  cost  of  $200  per  lin.  ft., 
or  $8  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor  area. 

Cost  of  135-ft.  Arch  for  Highway .^A  reinforced  concrete  high- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1907  across  Cherry  Creek,  at  Bannock  St., 
Denver,  Colo.  The  bridge  is  a  one-arch  span  of  135  ft.,  consist- 
ing of  8  parabolic  three  hinged  arch  ribs.  This  design  was  adopted 
because  the  bridge  crosses  the  creek  on  a  skew  of  36°.  The  rise 
of  the  arch  is  13  ft.,  and  the  arch  is  24  ins.  thick  at  the  crown.  The 
arch  supports  a  reinforced  concrete  slab  floorway  resting  on  rein- 
forced concrete  spandrel  posts.  The  carriage  way  is  36  ft.  wide, 
flanked  by  an  8-f t.  sidewalk  on  each  side,  giving  a  total  width  of 
52  ft.  of  roadway.  The  bridge  contains  1,146  cu.  yds.  of  1  :  2  :  5 
concrete,  166,000  Ibs.  of  steel  reinforcement  and  33,000  Ibs.  of  steel 


BRIDGES.  1653 

castings.  There  is  less  than  0.28  cu.  yd.  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.  The 
contract  price  was  $28,325,  or  $210  per  lin.  ft,  -or  $4  per  sq.  ft.  of 
floor  space,  or  $24.60  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete.  This  low  cost  per 
square  foot  for  so  long  a  span  indicates  excellent  design  on  the  part 
of  Mr.  Charles  W.  Comstock,  M.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.  Contrast  this  de- 
sign and  cost  with  the  design  and  cost  of  the  Piney  Creek  bridge 
above  given. 

Cost  of  150-ft.  Arches  for  Highway. — A  concrete  highway  bridge 
was  finished,  in  1907  over  Rock  Creek,  Washington,  D.  C.,  and  is 
known  as  the  Connecticut  Ave.  bridge.  It  has  a  total  length 
of  1,068  ft.  between  abutments.  The  abutments  are  U  shape,  and 
are  filled  with  earth,  giving  a  total  length  of  1,341  ft.  of  bridge 
including  abutments.  The  bridge  consists  of  five  concrete  arches 
(not  reinforced),  each  of  150-ft.  span  and  75-ft.  rise,  and  two  82-ft. 
arches  of  41-ft.  rise.  The  150-ft.  arches  support  spandrel  arches 
that  carry  the  roadway.  The  roadway  is  about  150  ft.  above  the 
base  of  foundation  of  the  center  pier.  The  bridge  is  52  ft.  wide. 
It  contains  80,000  cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  or  1.62  cu.  yds.  per  sq.  ft. 
of  floor.  The  cost  was  $850,000,  or  $639  per  lin.  ft.  of  total  length, 
which  is  equivalent  to  $12.30  per  sq.  ft.  of  floor.  Full  detailed 
costs  of  'the  materials  and  labor  required  to  build  this  bridge  are 
given  in  Gillette  and  Hill's'  "Concrete  Construction — Methods  and 
Cost." 

Cost  of  233-ft.  and  53-ft.  Arches  for  Highway.— A  concrete  high- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1906  across  the  Wissahickon  Creek,  Phila- 
delphia, and  is  known  as  the  Walnut  Lane  bridge.  The  bridge  is 
585  ft.  long  and  60  ft.  wide,  having  a  40-ft.  roadway  and  two  10-ft. 
sidewalks.  It  consists  of  a  main  arch  of  233  ft.  span,  approached 
on  one  side  by  three  53-ft.  arches  and  on  the  other  side  by  two  53-ft. 
arches.  The  main  arch  has  a  rise  of  70  ft.  and  supports  8  spandrel 
arches.  The  abutments  for  this  main  arch  have  a  height  of  15  ft. 
and  rest  on  rock.  The  concrete  is  not  reinforced.  The  main  arch 
consists  of  twin  arch  rings,  side  by  side.  The  contract  price  for 
this  bridge  was  $253,551,  which  is  equivalent  to  $434  per  lin.  ft., 
or  $7.25  per  sq.  ft. 

Estimated  Cost  of  703-ft.  Arch  for  Highway.— Plans  for  a  rein- 
forced concrete  highway  bridge  of  unprecedented  size  have  been 
prepared  for  the  city  of  New  York,  and  the  estimated  cost  and 
amount  of  materials  are  worthy  of  record  here.  The  bridge  is  to 
be  known  as  the  Hudson  Memorial  Bridge,  and  is  to  cross  Spuyten 
Duyvil  Creek.  The  bridge  is  to  be  2,840  ft.  long  and  80  ft.  wide. 
The  main  arch  is  703-ft.  span  and  170-ft.  rise,  70  ft.  wide,  15  ft. 
thick  at  the  crown  and  28  ft.  thick  at  the  spring,  and  supports 
10  spandrel  arches.  The  approaches  consist  of  3  arches  of  100  ft. 
span  on  one  side  and  4  on  the  other  side.  The  bridge  is  to  carry 
two  decks,  one  for  highway  traffic  and  the  other  for  rapid  transit 
railway  traffic.  The  steel  in  the  arch  ring  is  to  be  used  in  com- 
pression and  is,  strictly  speaking,  not  a  reinforcement.  It  averages 
about  1%  %  of  the  volume  of  the  arch  ring.  There  are  to  be  17,000,- 
OuO  Ibs.  of  steel  in  the  47,000  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  arch  ring. 


1654  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA, 

The  total  amount  of  concrete  is  to  be  75,000  cu.  yds.  in  the  main 
arch,  including  the  spandrels,  foundations,  etc.,  which  will  con- 
tain 24,000,000  Ibs.  of  steel.  The  estimated  cost  of  the  arch  and 
approaches  (2,840  ft.  long)  is  $3,800,000,  which  is  equivalent  to 
nearly  $1,340  per  lin.  ft,  as  nearly  $17  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  a  Stone  Arch  Highway  Bridge. — A  stone  highway  bridge 
was  built  in  1904  across  the  Connecticut  River  at  Hartford.  It  is 
1,185  ft.  long  and  80  ft.  wide  between  parapets.  It  consists  of 
8  stone  arches,  having  spans  of  68  to  119  ft,  and  a  100-ft.  Scherzer 
rolling  lift  bridge.  The  foundations  for  the  piers  were  put  down 
with  pneumatic  caissons.  The  toe  of  each  caisson  averaged  about 
30  ft  below  low  water  level  and  50  ft.  below  the  spring  of  the  arch. 
The  piers  and  parapets  are  faced  with  granite,  and  the  backing  is 
concrete.  There  were  23,300  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  caisson  piers, 
32,000  cu.  yds.  concrete  backing,  9,300  cu.  yds.  granite  ashlar, 
10,000  cu.  yds.  granite  voussoirs,  9,500  cu.  yds.  arch  ring  concrete 
and  300.  cu.  yds.  granite  parapet  and  posts,  or  a  total  of  84,400 
cu.  yds.  masonry.  There  were  20,000  cu.  yds.  excavation  for  abut- 
ments and  37,800  cu.  yds.  dredging  and  excavation  for  piers.  The 
contract  price  for  the  masonry  and  foundations  was  $1,369,520  and 
the  total  was  $1,600,000,  or  $1,330  per  lin.  ft,  or  $17  per  sq.  ft  of 
floor. 

Cost  of  Longest  Stone  Arch  Bridge. — The  longest  stone  arch 
bridge  span  in  the  world  was  begun  in  1903  at  Plauen,  Saxony. 
It  is  a  highway  bridge  with  a  roadway  36  ft.  wide  flanked  by  two 
sidewalks  10  ft  wide  each,  making  a  total  width  of  56  ft.  The 
arch,  has  a  span  of  295  ft.  and  a  rise  of  59  ft,  and  a  crown  thick- 
ness of  4.9  ft.  It  springs  directly  from  ledge  rock.  The  bridge 
has  a  total  length  of  492  ft.  and  is  built  throughout  of  stone 
masonry.  There  are  about  15,000  cu.  yds.  of  masonry  in  the 
bridge,  and  848,000  ft  B.  M.  of  timber  were  required  for  the 
centers  and  falsework.  The  centers  rested  on  concrete  footings. 
The  cost  of  the  bridge  was  only  $120,000,  due  to  the  low  cost  of 
labor  in  Saxony.  This  is  equivalent  to  $8  per  cu.  yd.  of  masonry. 
Hence  the  bridge  cost  $244  per  lin.  ft,  or  $4.35  per  sq.  ft  of  road- 
way. 

Estimated  Cost  of  50,  75  and  100-ft.  Electric  Railway  Arches — 
In  estimating  the  cost  of  double  track  reinforced  concrete  bridges 
for  interurban  electric  lines,  Mr.  George  P.  Carver  gives  the  fol- 
lowing quantities  for  50,  75  and  100-ft  single  span  arches  having  a 
width  of  28  ft  These  arch  spans  were  all  designed  to  cross  streets 
(not  rivers)  and  had  hollow  reinforced  concrete  abutments. 

Span.  Concrete.  Steel. 

Ft  Cu.  Yds.  Lbs.  Cost. 

50  370  27,700  $4,780 

75  740  38,800  8,830 

100  1,008  55,650  12,150 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  estimated  cost  is  $12  to  $13  per  cu.  yd. 
of  concrete,  not  including  the  cost  of  excavation.  Prices  assumed 
in  making  the  estimates  were  as  follows : 


BRIDGES.  165o 

Steel,  2%  cts.  per  Ib. 

Placing  steel,  1  ct.  per  Ib. 

Cement,   $2   per  bbl. 

Stone,   $2  per  cu.  yd. 

Sand,  $1  per  cu.  yd. 

Forms,  $1  per  cu.  yd. 

Mixing  and  placing,  $1.50  per  cu.  yd. 

Add  for  incidentals,   15%. 

Add   for  profit,    10%. 

Materials  in  Concrete  Railway  "Trestle." — A  double  track  rein- 
forced concrete  bridge  was  built  in  1900  across  Ames  Creek  for  the 
Illinois  Central  Ry.  It  is  72  ft.  long  between  abutments,  and  is 
36  ft.  wide  out  to  out.  It  consists  of  4  spans  of  15  ft.  each,  which 
are  such  flat  arch  spans  that  they  are  really  girders.  Fourteen 
steel  I  beams  (9  in.)  are  embedded  in  these  spans  for  reinforce- 
ment. The  concrete  is  18  ins.  thick  at  the  crown.  The  piers  are 
3  ft.  thick  at  the  top  and  10  ft.  high,  resting  on  piles.  The  bridge 
contains  725  cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  or  10  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft. 

Materials  in  Concrete  Railway  "Trestle." — A  double  track  con- 
crete trestle  was  built  in  1906  across  Cave  Hollow  Creek  for  the 
C.,  B.  &  Q.  Ry.  The  total  length  is  80  ft.  between  abutments.  It 
consists  of  five  spans  of  14  ft.  each  resting  on  piers  2  ft.  wide  on 
top,  30  ft.  long  and  16  ft.  high.  The  footing  of  each  pier  is  5  ft. 
wide  and  rests  on  26  piles  16  ft.  long.  The  abutments  are  12  ft. 
high.  The  superstructure  is  composed  of  reinforced  concrete  slabs 
16  ft.  long,  28  ft  Wide  and  2  ft.  4  ins.  thick,  with  a  parapet  1  ft. 
high  on  each  side.  There  are  34,000  Ibs.  of  Johnson  corrugated 
bars  and  520  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  this  trestle,  or  6.5  cu.  yds.  per 
lin.  ft.  A  1  :  2  :  4  concrete  was  used  in  the  superstructure  and  a 
1  :  3  :  6  in  the  piers  and  abutments. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Railway  "Trestle." — A  single  track  concrete 
trestle  was  built  in  1905  for  the  Illinois  Central  Ry.  at  New  Athens, 
111.  Its  length  is  82  ft.  between  abutments  and  its  width  is  15  ft. 
over  all  or  12  ft.  between  prrapet  walls.  It  consists  of  5  arch  re- 
inforced spans  of  14  ft.  each  resting  on  solid  piers  3  ft.  thick  and 
19  ft.  high.  The  arches  are  eliptical,  having  a  rise  of  4  ft.  and  a 
crown  thickness  of  16  ins.  The  footing  of  the  piers  is  spread  at  the 
base  to  8x19  ft,  giving  a  load  on  the  earth  of  1%  tons  per  sq.  ft. 
The  extrados  of  the  arches  is  very  flat  and  is  at  subgrade  at  the 
crown,  so  that  the  parapet  wall,  which  is  18  ins.  thick,  has  a  height 
of  only  18  ins.  above  the  crown.  A  1:2:5  concrete  was  used. 
The  cost  was  about  $7,500,  which  is  equivalent  to  $91  per  lin.  ft., 
including  a  large  amount  of  excavation  for  piers  and  abutments. 

Cost  of  38-ft.  Arch  for  Railway. — A  three-track  reinforced  con- 
crete bridge  was  built  in  1905  across  Trim  Creek,  near  Chicago, 
for  the  Chicago  &  Eastern  Illinois  Ry.  The  bridge  is  a  reinforced 
concrete  arch  span  of  38-  ft.  having  a  rise  of  7  ft.  and  a  width  of 
48  ft.  The  abutments  are  15  ft.  high  to  the  spring.  The  arch  is 
26  ins.  thick  at  the  crown.  The  bridge  contains  1,578  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete  and  36,000  Ibs.  of  Johnson  corrugated  bars.  A  similar 
bridge  built  for  the  same  road  cost  $7.60  per  cu.  yd.,  including  the 


1650  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA, 

reinforcing  bars,  at  which  rate  this  bridge  would  cost  about  $12,000 
or  $315  per  lin,  ft.,  or  $6.55  per  sq.  ft.  There  is  0.86  cu.  yd.  per 
sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  64-ft.  Arches  for  Railway. — A  double  track  stone  and  con- 
crete bridge  was  built  in  1903  across  Rock  River,  at  Watertown, 
Wis.,  for  the  C.,  M.  &  St.  P.  Ry.,  replacing  a  single  track  iron 
bridge  built  19  years  previously.  It  is  2,80  ft.  long  between  abut- 
ments and  30  ft.  wide  over  all.  It  consists  of  4  stone  arch  spans 
of  64  ft  each,  with  a  rise  of  16  V£  ft.  and  a  crown  thickness  of  3 
ft.  The*piers  are  8  ft.  wide  at  the  spring  line  and  15  ft.  high  to  the 
spring  line,  and  rest  on  piles.  The  parapet  walls  are  each  360  ft. 
long.  The  bridge  contains  4,000  cu.  yds.  of  stone  and  concrete 
masonry,  and  its  cost  was  $40,700,  including  removal  of  the  old 
bridge,  building  a  temporary  bridge,  filling  and  new  track.  This 
is  equivalent  to  $145  per  lin.  ft,  or  $4.80  per  sq.  ft,  or  $10.20  per 
cu.  yd.  There  is  0.48  cu.  yd.  per  sq.  ft. 

Cost  of  68-ft.  and  82-ft.  Arches  for  Railway. — A  double  track  re- 
inforced concrete  railway  bridge  was  built  in  1906  across  the 
Sangamon  River,  near  Decatur,  111.,  for  the  Wabash  Ry.  Its  length 
is  386  ft.  between  abutments  and  its  width  is  25  ft.  between  para- 
pet walls.  The  bridge  consists  of  4  skew  arches  (45°  skew),  two 
of  which  have  a  clear  span  of  58  ft.,  measured  perpendicular  to  the 
piers,  or  a  span  of  82  ft.  measured  along  the  center  line  of  the  rail- 
way. The  other  two  arches  each  have  a  clear  span  of  48  ft.  meas- 
ured perpendicular  to  the  piers,  or  68  ft.  along  the  center  line. 
The  rise  of  the  arches  is  30  ft.  and  the  piers  have  a  height  of  35  ft. 
The  three  piers  are  in  water  about  5  ft.  deep.  At  each  end  of  the 
bridge  is  an  abutment  with  side  retaining  walls  125  ft.  long.  This 
bridge  was  reinforced  with  corrugated  bars.  It  replaced  a  steel 
bridge  built  21  years  previously.  The  following  quantities  were 
involved  in  the  construction : 

Earth   excavation,   cu.   yds 8,320 

Piling,   lin.   ft 36,775 

Foundation  slabs  for  piers,  concrete,  cu.  yds 1,300 

Piers  proper,  with  skewbacks,  concrete,  cu.  yds 2,270 

Arch  rings,   concrete,   cu.   yds 2,370 

Spandrel  walls   of  arches,    concrete,    cu.    yds 2,180 

Foundations  for  abutments,   concrete,   cu.  yds 1,580 

Abutments   above   foundations,    including  slabs   and 
intermediate  walls,   together  with  spandrel  walls, 

concrete,  cu.  yds 5,930 

Retaining  walls,  concrete,  cu.  yds 540 

Reinforcing  bars,   Ibs 430,000 

The  cost  was  $124,000,  which  is  equivalent  to  $321  per  lin.  ft.,  or 
$12.80  per  sq.  ft.  of  roadway.  The  total  amount  of  concrete  is  16,170 
cu.  yds.,  so  that  the  cost  of  the  bridge  was  equivalent  to  $7.65  per 
cu.  yd.  There  are  1.68  cu.  yds.  per  sq.  ft. 

Materials  in  74-ft.  Arch  for  Railway. — A  four-track  concrete 
bridge,  160  ft.  long,  was  built  in  1904  across  the  Ashtabula  River, 
Ohio,  for  the  Lake  Shore  Ry.  It  comprised  two  74-ft.  concrete 
arches  having  a  rise  of  37  ft,  resting  on  piers  and  abutments  only 
6  ft.  high.  The  arches  were  7  ft.  thick  at  the  crown  and  21  ft.  at 
the  spring,  and  were  not  reinforced.  An  earth  fill  30  ft.  deep  over 


BRIDGES.  1G5? 

the  crown  was  placed  upon  the  arches,  making  it  necessary  to 
have  the  barrels  of  the  arches  145  ft.  long.  There  were  17,500 
cu.  yds.  of  concrete  and  50,000  cu.  yds.  of  earth  fill.  This  bridge 
is  a  good  example  of  poor  design,  for,  at  $8  per  cu.  yd.  for  con- 
crete and  15  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  fill,  its  cost  would  be  $147,500,  or 
more  than  $900  per  lin.  ft.,  or  about  $18  per  sq.  ft.  of  roadway. 
A  narrow  bridge  with  spandrel  piers  supporting  the  roadway  could 
have  been  built  at  far  less  cost.  It  will  be  noted  that  there  were 
about  2.2  cu.  yds.  of  cnncrete  in  this  bridge  per  sq.  ft.  of  roadway. 

Materials  In  75-ft.  Arch  for  Railway.— A  reinforced  concrete  rail- 
way bridge  was  built  in  1903  over  Big  Rock  Creek,  51  miles  west  of 
Chicago,  on  the  line  of  the  C...  B.  &  Q.,  replacing  a  steel  bridge  built 
22  years  previously.  The  span  is  75  ft.  The  bench  walls  are  12  ft. 
high,  and  the  rise  of  the  arch  is  28  ft  It  is  a  three  center  arch 
3  ft.  thick  at  the  crown  and  the  barrel  length  is  44  ft.  There  is  no 
appreciable  fill  over  the  crown.  The  arch  is  designed  for  a  loading 
of  1,000  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  The  wing  walls  are  each  55  ft.  long,  and 
10  yz  ft.  thick  at  the  bottom.  The  abutments  of  the  arch  are  25  ft. 
Wide  at  the  base.  Abutments  and  wing  walls  rest  on  piles.  Cor- 
rugated steel  bars  are  used  for  reinforcement.  There  are  6,588  ft. 
of  %-in.  bars  and  24,046  ft.  of  %-in.  bars  in  the  bridge.  The  arch 
ring  is  1  :  2  :  4  concrete  and  contains  770  cu.  yds.  The  rest  of  the 
concrete  is  1:3:6.  The  total  concrete  in  the  structure  is  3,350 
cu.  yds.,  or  nearly  45  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.,  or  1  cu.  yd.  per  sq.  ft. 

Materials  In  80-ft.  and  100-ft.  Arches  for  Railway.— A  double  track 
concrete  bridge  was  built  in  1906  across  the  Vermillion  River,  for 
the  Cleveland,  Cincinnati,  Chicago  &  St.  Louis  Ry.  It  consists  of 
two  80-ft.  arches  and  one  100-ft.  arch  between  them.  The  piers 
of  the  100-ft.  arch  are  30  ft.  high  to  the  spring  line,  and  the  arch 
has  a  rise  of  40  ft.  These  main  arches  support  a  series  of  small 
spandrel  arches  having  spans  of  8  ft.,  resting  on  piers  2  ft.  thick. 
The  crown  thickness  of  the  100-ft.  arch  is  4  ft.  The  base  of  rail  is 
20  ft.  above  the  crown  and  90  ft.  above  the  foundations  of  the 
center  piers.  The  bridge  has  a  total  length  of  290  ft.  between 
abutments,  a  width  of  29  ft.  between  parapets,  and  contains  12,000 
cu.  yds.  concrete,  or  nearly  41  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.,  or  1.41  cu.  yds. 
per  sq.  ft.  The  bridge  is  designed  as  a  plain  concrete  bridge, 
although  steel  reinforcement  is  used  as  a  precautionary  measure. 
There  were  260,000  Ibs.  of  Johnson  corrugated  bars  used.  The 
bridge  required  500,000  ft.  B.  M.  for  centers  and  forms,  which  is 
equivalent  to  42  ft.  B.  M.  per  cu.  yd. 

Materials  In  100-ft.  Arches  for  Railway — A  single  track  concrete 
bridge  was  built  in  1906  across  the  Cumberland  River  for  the  Ken- 
tucky &  Tennessee  Ry.  It  is  500  ft.  long  between  abutments,  con- 
sisting of  5  spans  of  100  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  piers,  and  the  width  is  16  ft. 
between  parapet  walls.  The  bridge  is  on  a  30°  skew.  The  arches 
have  a  rise  of  18  ft.  and  a  crown  thickness  of  3  ft.  7  ins.  The 
piers  are  40  ft.  high.  There  are  6,470  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  and 
240,000  Ibs.  of  twisted  steel  reinforcement  in  this  bridge.  This  is 
equivalent  to  nearly  13  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.  of  bridge,  or  about  0.8 
cu.  yd.  per  sq.  ft.  of  roadway. 


1658  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  140-ft.  Arches  for  Railway.— A  double  track  concrete 
railway  bridge  was  built  in  1902  across  the  Big  Muddy  River  for 
the  Illinois  Central  Ry.,  to  take  the  place  of  a  single  track  steel 
bridge  built  13  years  previously,  which  was  getting  too  light  for 
the  traffic.  The  bridge  is  463  ft.  long  between  abutments  and  32 
ft.  wide,  or  26  ft.  between  parapet  walls.  It  consists  of  three  elip- 
tical  arches  (not  reinforced),  each  having  a  span  of  140  ft.,  a 
rise  of  30  ft.  and  a  crown  thickness  of  7  ft.  These  main  arches 
supported  spandrel  arches  of  13  ft.  span  reinforced  with  steel  skele- 
tons made  principally  of  rails.  The  piers  are  about  22  ft.  high 
to  the  spring  line  and  are  built  around  and  over  the  old  single  track 
bridge  piers. 

The  total  cost  was  $125,000,  which  is  equivalent  to  $270  per  lin. 
ft.,  or  $10  per  sq.  ft.  of  roadway.  There  were  12,000  cu.  yds.  of 
concrete,  or  26  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft.,  or  1  cu.  yd.  per  sq.  ft.  of  road- 
way;  5,000  cu.  yds.  of  excavation,  which  cost  76  cts.  per  cu.  yd.; 
400,000  ft.  B.  M.  in  cofferdams,  centers  and  forms,  and  300,000  Ibs. 
steel  reinforcement.  The  labor  cost  of  handling,  punching  and 
erecting  the  steel  was  0.61  ct.  per  Ib. 

Materials  In  140-ft.  Stone  Arch  for  Railway.— A  double  track  stone 
bridge  was  built  In  1899  across  the  Connecticut  River,  at  Bellows 
Falls,  Vt.,  for  the  Fitchburg  railroad.  It  consists  of  two  stone  arch 
spans  of  140  ft.  each,  having  a  rise  of  20  ft.  The  width  over  all 
is  27  ft.  The  arch  sheeting  is  4  ft.  thick.  The  bridge  is  peculiar 
in  that  it  has  no  masonry  abutments  or  pier,  the  arches  springing 
directly  from  ledge  rock  on  each  bank  and  from  a  rock  island  in 
the  center  of  the  stream.  This  natural  pier  in  the  middle  of  the 
river  is  32  ft.  thick  along  the  spring  line,  thus  giving  a  total  length 
of  bridge  of  312  ft.  between  the  natural  abutments.  There  were 
232,000  ft.  B.  M.  required  for  the  centers,  or  55  ft.  B.  M.  per  cu. 
yd.  of  masonry  in  the  bridge.  The  masonry  was  as  follows: 

Cu.  Yds. 

Ring  stones  and  skewbacks 1,262 

Coping    286 

Rubble     2,467 

Concrete    in    foundations 180 

Total .4,195 

This  is  equivalent  to  13%  cu.  yds.  per  lin.  ft. 

Price  of  a  Concrete  Arch  Highway  Bridge. — Mr.  William  B.  Bar- 
ber gives  the  following  data :  This  highway  bridge  crosses  San 
Leandro  Creek,  Cal.  It  has  a  macadam  roadway  41  ft.  wide,  and 
two  8-ft.  cement  walks.  The  span  is  81%  ft,  the  rise  is  26  ft.,  and 
the  thickness  is  3  ft.  The  footings  have  at  the  crown  a  width  of 
30  ft.  on  each  side  and  extend  5  ft.  below  the  bed  of  the  erect, 
resting  upon  a  bed  of  clay  without  any  pile  supports.  There  were 
90,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  in  the  centers.  The  concrete  was  a 
1:2:7  of  broken  stone.  The  bridge  contains  3,389  cu.  yds.  and  was 
built  at  a  contract  price  of  $25,840  by  the  B.  B.  &  A.  L.  Stone  Co., 
of  Oakland,  Cal. 


BRIDGES.  1659 

Materials  In  a  Concrete  Highway  Bridge.— A  concrete  arch  high- 
way bridge  was  built  across  the  River  Eyach,  near  Inman,  Ger- 
many, in  1896.  It  is  a  three-hinge  arch,  the  hinges  being  of  gran- 
ite with  intermediate  sheets  of  3/16  in.  lead.  The  span  is  98  ft.  ; 
the  rise  is  9.8  ft.  ;  the  thickness  at  the  crown  is  1.48  ft.  ;  at  the 
haunches,  2.62  ft.  ;  at  the  spring  joint,  1.64  ft.  The  carriageway  is 
only  8.2  ft.  wide,  and  the  two  sidewalks  are  each  2.46  ft.  ;  total, 
13.12  ft.  The  arch  spreads  in  width  to  11.48  ft.  at  the  spring  lines. 
The  roadway  rests  on  the  arch  at  the  center,  and  is  supported  by 
four  spandrel  arches  resting  on  three  piers  at  each  end.  Each 
abutment  rests  on  41  batter  piles,  13  ft.  long.  The  bridge  was 
designed  to  carry  74  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.  and  a  16%  ton  steam  roller, 
with  compressure  stress  not  exceeding  480  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.,  and  ten- 
sile stress  not  exceeding  57  Ibs.  There  are  408  cu.  yds.  of  concrete 
in  the  bridge,  including  foundations,  built  for  $3.20  per  cu.  yd.  for 
foundation  and  $8.24  for  arch.  Contract  price  was  $2,930,  includ- 
ing excavation  and  piles. 

Dimensions    and    Cost    of    Forty-five    Concrete   Arch    Bridges In 

Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.  17,  1909,  the  following  table  of  costs, 
by  Mr.  E.  P.  Goodrich,  is  printed. 

Table  XX  gives  some  of  the  dimensions  and  costs  of  a  number 
of  arches.  In  the  case  of  single  arch  spans,  the  cost  per  square 
foot  is  computed  from  face  to  face  of  abutments  and  out  to  out 
of  railings. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Bridges. — In  a  table  covering  eighteen  concrete 
arch  bridges  recently  built  in  Philadelphia  the  contract  price  spread 
upon  the  span  area — the  clear  span  by  the  width — varies  from  $3.11 
to  $9.74  per  sq.  ft.  and  it  varies  from  $1.73  to  $7.39  per  sq.  ft.  of 
area  occupied  by  the  ground  plan  to  ends  of  wings,  the  latter  ex- 
tremes being  not  on  the  same  bridges  as  the  other  two.  The  aver- 
age of  the  lot  was  $6.25  per  sq.  ft.  of  span  area  and  $3.50  per  sq. 
ft.  over  all,  most  of  them  being  single  span  bridges  with  long  wings, 
and  all  being  highway  bridges  designed  to  carry  loads  of  40  tons 
on  two  axles  20  ft.  apart.  All  have  ornamental  concrete  balus- 
trades and  washed  granolithic  surfaces  and  paved  decks,  with  elec- 
trical conduits  and  manholes,  and  water  pipe  and  sewer  well-holes 
and  some  have  pretty  deep  foundations.  If  the  whole  contract 
price  be  set  against  the  yardage  of  the  concrete  in  the  structure 
the  unit  costs  vary  from  $8.50  to  $11.25  per  cu.  yd.,  averaging 
$9.75.  Mr.  Henry  E.  Quimby,  Engineer  of  Bridges,  Philadelphia, 
Pa.,  is  authority  for  these  figures. 

Concrete  Arch  Bridge,  S.  P.,  L.  A.  &  S.  L.  R.  R.— Mr  A.  C. 
Ostrom  gives  the  following  facts  about  an  eight-arch  bridge  cross- 
ing the  Santa  Ana  River  on  the  San  Pedro,  Los  Angeles  &  Salt 
Lake  R.  R.  The  bridge  is  984  ft.  long,  17  ft.  wide,  55  ft.  high 
(averaged),  and  contains  14,000  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  without  any 
steel  reinforcement.  Each  arch  has  a  radius  of  43%  ft.,  a  rise  of 
37  ft.,  and  a  thickness  of  42  ins.  at  the  crown.  The  arch  ring 
projects  6  ins.  beyond  the  face  of  the  spandrel  walls.  The  piers 
have  a  footing  16  X  28  ft.  resting  on  granite,  and  narrow  by  steps 


1660 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


So    . 

SI* 


eo  eo  T*I  Tti  »o  «c«o     «o     ^oo     o         o  o     o   o  o  -H  »-<  M  e>»  -H  i  co  i  -^  tn 

CT>  0>  03  OS  05  05  05       OS       OJOl       0  000    OOOOOOOi-O    1  0    0 

00  00  00  OC  00  00  00       OO       OOOO       O>  OS    OS       OSO3O>O»O»O5OSOSOO>OSO5O» 


I 


Ti<OOOiOOO       0       00       0  0    "5       >0    OOOO"3OOOOOO 

OS  0  "3  •*  r-i  0  05       U3       r^CC       >«  t>-    ^H       <M    ,-H  "*  0  »-t  Tjt  <M  to  CO  00  CC  ^H  . 

...........  ..............  e^i 

•»*<  e^»  rfi  oo  ec  c^  co      rt<      ecco      ^  eo   oo      »o   »c  os  co  oo  -H  »o  »O  t^  ^H  TJI  co  >-i 


«MOOOO>00       O       0>0       0  0    00       CO    OOOOCOOOOOOO    0 

tCOOqOCOt^O       O       "500       t^-  ^t     CO       OO    t^OOOt^OOOOOO    O 

0  1^  **  0  1-1  -<*•  "5       0       tO<M       O  CO    -*       0    r-dOO"3«300005000    O 


oo  co  ~*  e<i  i--  I-H 


< 


CO  CO  eb  5<l  O  O  i«- 


bbbbbbbb     :'bbb 


bbb 


oo^obbbb     b     b^H     b          bb 
b     c^co     b         feoo 


bblobbbb^bbb  b 
«boc=bt^olob^lbbb  e<i 

<N  <N  (N  IM  ^H  •*  «0  CO  IM  CD  CO     lO 


^ofbbbbbbbbb^bbbbbbb  b  bbbbbb^bbbbbb 
=  b  b  ^-c 

^  O     t-    C<l« 


i 


b  b    :  b     b      :    :b 


b      •    -co    • 


.:bbbb  b 


O 
•j 

L 

g? 


"' 


<uj?  ca  S 


^ 


1    llffi 

z*  f>  o 


River  d 
Liabach 
Big  Muddy  R 
Kalamazoo  R 
Prospect  Ave 
Grunwald 


:'e 


abSRl  :  : 

•s  i^^e : : 

g^ilsjd 


:  :8  : 

:  :§  :. 


llilil!  ! 

f^^^piiWiwPQ     H 


i 


BRIDGES. 


166J 


iCOOCOOOSS.'O-.OTfriC^     O       O    OOOOOO 
<Mt~-t»-'*irt-<*<O.'O<M3J^    OO       OS    OO  O  O  O  T*  OS 

»   _  -H  o  O  O  »-O  O  O  O  O 'O  O    O       O    OOOOOO 

*J3  J  COt^OOOiOOOOOOTH    O       O    OOOOOO 

+J  W3  I>-^0<M_ 5005000  00  CO    »0       C0_   OOOOOO 

b    :wbbbbbbbbt-b  :    :bbb 

w  "         os    '" 

""^l  CO      -^^H^HrtrHr-H          ^H  .       .  ^         (M 

bbbbbbbbbbb     b 

b         .  § 

OOv     ' 
rr\  "3    '  C<l  < 

iM^COOOOv     l^t^«^!OCOTl<COCO^t^50CO. 

I 

^^  «     bb^b  :b  :bb  :  ;  b    b     bb    b 

c^oocob    -b    -bb    •    .  b     co       oo      co 

t^-OO'«*<O     -O     -O"3     •     .    OS       CO          iMOO 
d"5C<ICO     .U3     -00<M     •     .  CO 

•         '•  ^t  '.     «H     !J         !         '.         '.        '.  '. 

!u  o  -y ' 

>          c  8 

O  g.Spq 

^^^ 

>,+J  u 
5?  ^  c 

O^CJ 


.. 

ft 

' 


2J  ^l'   1  Illllj 


1662  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

to  9  X  21.  They  are  penetrated  vertically  by  two  wells  2%  X  5  ft. 
thus  saving  concrete  and  providing  drainage  by  weep  holes  below 
and  horizontal  tunnels  at  the  top  of  the  arch  haunch.  There  are 
two  sets  of  spandrel  walls  connected  by  cross  walls,  covered  by  a 
10-in.  concrete  floor  which  sustains -the  3%  ft.  of  ballast.  Cement 
and  gravel  in  the  ratio  1  to  11  were  used  for  the  foundations  and 
spandrel  walls.  The  arch  rings  were  made  of  1:2:4%  stone  con- 
crete. The  gravel  was  washed  by  means  of  a  sluice  passing 
through  a  box  where  the  coarse  gravel  and  clean  sand  settled, 
Three  Ransome  mixers  were  operated  by  a  25-hp.  engine.  The  arch 
centers  were  supported  on  four  bents  of  four  piles  per  bent  driver 
to  bed  rock.  These  were  capped  by  12  X  12-in.  caps.  The  thrusl 
from  the  segments  was  conveyed  by  radial  8  X  8-in.  struts  to  hor- 
izontal chords  which  were  upheld  by  wedges  placed  on  12  X  12-in 
stringers  that  rested  upon  the  caps. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Arch  Highway  Bridge.— Mr.  P.  A. 
Courtright  gives  the  following  on  the  cost  of  mixing  and  placing 
concrete  in  a  concrete  bridge  having  7  arches,  each  of  54  ft.  spar 
and  8  ft.  rise,  at  Plainwell,  Mich.,  in  1903,  as  follows: 

Total  Total 

per  day.  per  cu.  yd. 

13  men,  at  $1.80 $23.40  $0.78 

Engine    and    mixer 5.00  0.17 

1  team    3.00  0.10 

1  foreman    3.00  0.10 

Total  labor  for  30  cu.  yds $34.40  $1.15 

0.9     cu.  yd.  gravel,  at  $0.50 $0.45 

0.65  bbl.  cement,  at  $2.00 1.30 

Total,    per   cu.    yd $2.90 

The   concrete  yardage   was   as   follows: 

5.70  cu.  yds.  of  1 :8  gravel  concrete  in  foundations. 

770  cu.  yds.  of  1 :6  gravel  concrete  in  arches. 

150  cu.  yds.  of  1 :6  gravel  concrete  in  walls. 

One  sack  of  cement  was  considered  to  be  1  cu.  ft.  The  bridg< 
had  an  18-ft.  roadway  and  a  5-ft.  side  wall,  a  total  length  of  44( 
ft.,  and  the  estimate  of  its  cost  at  contract  prices  was: 

1,490  cu.  yds.  concrete,   at  $7.00 $10,430 

1,200  cu.  yds.  earth  fill,  at  $0.30 360 

36,000  Ibs.  of  steel,  at  $0.05 1,800 

2,800  ft.   of  piles  in  foundations,   at   $0.20 560 

2,230  sq.   ft.  of  cement  walk,  at  $0.10 223 

Total    $13,373 

Excavating,  pumping,  coffer  dams,  and  centers,  $791 

per  arch    ' 5,537 

Grand    total..  $18,910 


BRIDGES.  1663 

The  method  of  making  the  concrete  was  as  follows:  The  gravel, 
which  had  32%  voids,  and  contained  sufficient  sand,  was  shoveled 
into  a  1  cu.  yd.  wagon  at  the  pit,  and  hauled  to  a  platform  at  the 
intake  of  a  McKelvey  continuous  mixer.  Half  the  cement  required 
for  a  batch  was  spread  over  the  load  of  gravel  before  dumping  the 
load  through  the  bottom  of  the  wagon ;  then  the  rest  of  the  cement 
was  added  after  dumping.  One  man  shoveled  the  material  over  to 
another  man  who  shoveled  it  into  the  mixer.  After  the  material 
had  passed  one-third  the  length  of  the  mixer,  water  was  turned  in. 
The  mixer  delivered  the  concrete  into  wheelbarrows  from  which  it 
waK  dumped  to  place  and  spread  in  3-in.  layers.  Two  men  were 
employed  tamping  to  1  man  shoveling  the  concrete.  The  gravel  for 
the  arches  and  walls  was  screened  through  a  2 -in.  mesh  screen 
placed  on  the  wagon  while  loading  at  the  pit.  Regarding  the 
product  of  the  mixer,  Mr.  Courtright  says :  "A  more  complete 
blending  of  materials  would  be  difficult  to  produce."  This  state- 
ment is  noteworthy  in  view  of  the  common  prejudice  against  con- 
tinuous mixers. 

Centers. — The  heels  were  supported  on  the  benches  constructed 
upon  each  pier  and  abutment  foundation.  Each  center  was  sup- 
ported to  the  panel  joints  by  twelve  temporary  piles.  These  were 
driven  in  advance  of  the  foundation  work,  sawed  off,  capped  with 
timbers,  and  used  as  a  working  platform. 

The  centers  themselves  were  made  of  Georgia  pine  plank.  Each 
rib  section  was  built  up  with  three  planks,  two  2  X  12  inch  for  out- 
sidei  and  one  10  X  2-inch  between.  These  were  securely  nailed  and 
bolted  together,  the  panels  being  joined  by  bolting  on  two  pieces 
of  2  X  4 -inch  oak. 

The  top  chord  was  made  of  one  plank,  cut  in  sections,  and 
rounded  to  fit  the  intrados  of  the  arch.  The  panel  joints  were  sup- 
ported by  8  X  12-inch  timbers,  carried  on  posts  resting  on  8  X  12- 
inch  timber  caps  on  piles. 

Wedges  for  lowering  the  centers  were  used  at  all  bearing  points. 

Centers  were  covered  with  2  X  12-inch  planed  pine  lagging  and 
made  a  very  rigid  and  smooth  surface  for  concrete.  The  minimum 
of  time  allowed  for  the  removal  of  centers  after  the  completion  of 
an  arch  was  28  days. 

The  appearance  of  the  arch  rings,  showing  the  same  divided  as 
by  joints  between  stones,  was  produced  by  nailing  half  round  strips 
on  the  form,  and  gives  a  good  structural  effect  to  the  work.  The 
entire  structure  was  built  in  the  forms  with  the  single  exception  of 
the  fourteen  keystones,  which,  owing  to  their  peculiar  design,  were 
cast  separate,  and  set  in  the  form. 

Piling. — Each  abutment  foundation  has  31  piles,  the  piers  hav- 
ing 23  each.  Piles  were  oak,  elm,  beech  and  hickory,  not  less  than 
12  ins.,  nor  more  than  16  ins.  at  the  head.  They  cost,  delivered 
on  the  ground  and  sharpened  ready  for  driving,  15  cents  per  lineal 
foot.  The  average  number  driven  per  day  was  S1/^. 


1664  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  character  of  the  soil  rendered  driving  very  difficult ;  a  pene- 
tration of  2  or  3  ins.  when  starting  a  pile  was  the  exception  rather 
than  the  rule. 

Cost  of  driving — 

Engine  and  driver,   per   day %  5.00 

Engineer     2.50 

Fireman     1.80 

Four  driver  men,  at  $1.80 7.20 

Total    116.50 

Conditions  for  construction  were  very  favorable.  The  water  va- 
ried in  depth  from  3  to  5  ft.,  with  a  current  of  from  two  to  three 
miles  per  hour.  Under  the  silt  and  sand  which  formed  the  river 
bed,  gravel  was  found  to  depth  of  about  3  ft. ;  below  this,  quick- 
sand, filled  with  stones  of  varying  sizes,  was  encountered. 

For  foundations,  piles  were  driven  to  an  approximate  depth  of 
10  ft.  below  the  bed  of  the  stream.  Cofferdams  were  built,  the 
water  pumped  out,  and  the  excavation  carried  down  until  1  ft.  of 
gravel  was  left  above  the  quicksand.  The  piles  were  sawed  off  IVa 
ft.  above  the  bottom  of  the  excavation,  and  the  concrete  carried  up 
to  the  spring  line  of  the  arches. 

Cost  of  Three  Reinforced  Concrete  Arch  Bridges,  L.  S.  &  M.  S. 
Ry. — Mr.  Samuel  Rockwell  gives  the  following  as  to  the  size  and 
cost  of  three  reinforced  concrete  railway  arch  bridges.  The  bridge 
arches  had  a  span  of  30  ft.,  a  rise  of  9  ft.,  a  crown  thickness  of  33 
ins.,  a  thickness  at  the  spring  of  6V2  ft.,  and  a  barrel  length  of  40, 
60  and  160  ft.,  respectively.  The  abutments  were  8  ft.  high  and 
14  ft.  wide  at  the  base.  Johnson  corrugated  steel  bars  were  used, 
for  reinforcement.  The  concrete  was  1  sand,  3  gravel  and  sand 
(50%  each)  and  6  broken  stone  laid  wet.  In  all  there  were  4,833 
cu.  yds.,  including  wing  walls  and  parapets.  The  work  was  done 
by  company  forces  at  Elkhart,  Ind.,  in  1903.  It  will  be  noted  that 
the  sand  and  stone  were  unusually  low  in  cost. 

Total       Cost  per 
cost.         cu.  yd. 

Cement     $   8,860          $1.84 

Stone     1,789  0.36 

Sand   and   gravel    (obtained   from   founda- 
tions)               240 

Drain    tile 103 

Steel    rods 3,028 

Labor    on    concrete 8,091 

Engineering  and  watching 508 

Arch  centers  and  forms 3,529 

Sheet  piling  and  boxing 1,006 

Excavating  and  pumping 1,620 

Machinery,   pipe,    fittings,   etc 41( 

Temporary  buildings,  trestles,  etc 752 

.Total  for  4,833  cu.  yds $29,942          $6.19 

Cost  of  Small  Reinforced  Concrete  Highway  Bridges.*— Reinforced 
concrete  highway  bridge  construction  is  being  widely  advocated  by 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.   2,   1908. 


BRIDGES. 


1GC5 


the  Illinois  Highway  Commissioner,  Mr.  A.  N.  Johnson,  State  Engi- 
neer. To  encourage  the  building  of  such  bridges,  he  has  worked 
out  two  general  standard  designs.  He  recommends  reinforced  con- 
crete for  all  spans  under  50*  ft.  in  length.  It  has  found  that  for 

I 


j-a'-V 


Fig.  17. 


spans  under  40  or  50  ft.,  reinforced  concrete  can  be  used  at  very 
reasonable  cost  and  that  for  longer  spans  a  reinforced  concrete 
floor  does  not  add  an  excessive  amount  to  the  cost  of  the  bridge. 

/Spans  Under  18  Ft. — For  spans  under  18  ft.  in  the  clear  a  plain 
reinforced   concrete   slab   is  used  for  the  floor,    the  principal  rein- 


1666 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 


forcement  running  from  abutment  to  abutment.  Reinforced  con- 
crete side  rails  are  used  for  this  class  of  bridge  and  are  considered 
preferable  to  pipe  or  angle  rails  because  of  their  strength  and  dura- 
bility. Figures  16,  17  and  18  show  the  plans  for  one  of  these 
bridges.  In  constructing  these  bridges  Mr.  Johnson  says : 

"Where  a  number  of  slab  bridges  under  20  ft.  in  span  are  built 
the  same  season,  it  may  prove  cheaper  to  use  I-beams  to  support 
the  slab  until  the  concrete  has  set  than  to  use  mud  sills  and  timber 
posts.  If  this  is  done  the  abutments  are  carried  up  as  usual  to  the 
height  of  the  under  side  of  the  floor,  pockets  being  left  for  the  I-- 
beams ;  these  pockets  being  about  6  ins.  wide  and  deep  enough  so 
that  when  opposing  wedges  are  placed  under  the  ends  of  the  I- 
beams  the  top  flanges  of  the  I-beams  will  be  2  ins.  below  the 


Fig.   18. 

level  of  the  bottom  of  the  slab.  Two-in.  planking  is  used  to  sup- 
port the  slab.  When  the  concrete  in  the  slab  and  rails  has  hard- 
ened sufficiently  the  wedges  are  removed  and  the  floor  forms  drop 
down  ;  the  planks  are  drawn  out  at  the  sides  and  likewise  the  I- 
beams  through  the  pockets  in  one  of  the  abutments.  The  pockets 
are  then  filled  with  concrete.  The  I-beams  and  planks  may  be 
used  repeatedly." 

Spans  From  18  to  Jft  Ft. — For  spans  ranging  in  length  from  18 
to  42  ft.  the  concrete  rails  have  been  designed  as  girders  to  carry 
the  load  to  the  abutments.  The  floor  in  this  case  is  a  reinforced 
concrete  slab,  the  main  reinforcement  running  from  girder  to  gir- 
der. The  floor  is  suspended  to  the  girders  by  bending  every  third 
floor  bar  up  into  the  girders.  This  type  might  well  be  classed  as 
a  reinforced  concrete  through  girder  bridge.  This  has  proved  to 
be  a  very  economical  design.  The  forms  are  very  simple  and  much 


BRIDGES. 

of  the  lumber  remains  uncut.  The  bending  moment  in  the  floor 
slab  is  independent  of  the  length  of  the  span,  and  consequently  the 
amount  of  concrete  and  steel  in  the  floor  slab,  for  a  given  width 
of  roadway,  remains  constant  per  foot  of  bridge.  The  rails  or 
girders  for  bridges  18  to  30  ft.  in  span  contain  but  little  more  con- 
crete than  would  ordinarily  be  necessary  for  appearance  and  eco- 
nomical placing  in  the  rail  forms.  For  spans  over  30  ft.,  and  par- 
ticularly for  wide  roadways,  the  girders  become  heavier,  and  it  has 
been  found  necessary  to  design  the  girders  with  a  heavy  coping, 
giving  the  .girders  a  T-beam  section.  A  number  of  girder  bridges 
of  this  character  have  already  been  bulit  and  the  plans  drawn  for 
several  which  will  be  built  the  coming  season. 

The  dimensions,  quantities  and  costs  for  a  number  of  the  bridges 
built  on  these  plans  are  given  in  Table  XXI. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Highway  Bridge.— The  bridge  had 
a  clear  span  of  30  ft.  and  an  80-ft.  roadway.  The  arch  ring  was 
8  ins.  thick  at  the  crown  and  12  ins.  thick  at  skewbacks,  with  a 
rise  of  approximately  6  ft.  It  rested  on  12 -in.  abutment  walls, 
with  center  posts  and  21-in.  footing  slabs.  The  spandrel 
walls  were  12  ins.  thick  and  reached  well  beyond  the  abut- 
ment walls  on  each  side,  the  free  ends  having  inside  counter- 
forts. The  height  of  the  abutment  walls  from  skewback  to  water 
level  was  12  ft.  These  walls  were  continued  beyond  the  faces  of 
the  spandrel  walls  by  wing  walls,  which  held  the  slopes  of  the  deep 
fill  from  the  channel.  •  This  fill  reached  to  a  height  of  4  ft.  above 
the  crown  of  the  arches.  All  walls  were  founded  on  piles.  There 
were  872  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  structure.  The  general  design 
was  made  by  City  Engineer  M.  P.  Blair,  St.  Boniface,  Manitoba, 
where  the  bridge  was  built  and  the  reinforcement  was  designed 
and  supplied  by  Clarence  W.  Noble,  Winnipeg,  Manitoba.  The  re- 
inforcement was  high  carbon  square  twisted  steel  bars.  The  work 
was  done  by  day . labor  by  the  city  engineer  and  cost  as  follows: 

Foundations —  Total  Cost. 

5,336  cu.  yds.  excavation,  at  38.2  cts $2,034.63 

6,060  lin.  ft.  piling,  at  14.7   cts 893.85 

Driving  piles  at  15%  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  (by  contract)       939.30 


Total     $3,867.78 

Concrete  Materials —                                              Total.  Per-cu.  yd. 

1,446  bbls.  cement,  at  $2.45 $3,543  $4.063 

872  cu.  yds.  aggregate  f.  o.  b.  cars  at$l       872  1.000 

Lumber  for  forms,   etc.    (1/3   of   $1,491)..       497  0.570 

Reinforcing   bars 1,418  1.626 

Totals     .                                                        ..$6,330  $7.259 


1668  HANDBOOK   OF  COST   DATA. 

ti  •*»< 

X  +J  sc 
^7  *••  in 

•Jj     g    t- 

o  a  ** 


ti  •*»<  <M  O  SO  W  SO  &l  O  i-l  O  OO  O  SO  !>•  <O  O  SO  O 

X  +J  scsoosct-sousoo5OOi-iT-iiftTj«o>-ftLo 
^7  *••  in  o  o  o  so*  «<i  in  so  t-"  I-H  M"  eo  co  co  oo  oi  us  so 


SOUSOOOOTHOUSC005WU3O"*00>00 
-iJ    -ft"*  03  r-<  t0  ««  04  00  0»  &  r-t  «O  O  U»  10  A  O  A 


*3     W    Mi-H(MO"5COinirtCXI-*SOOCO'<*<OcOlCOO 
<£    ,Q    US  OO  W  O  l-l  •<*<  O  •«*<  <M  CN)  -*  US  SO  O  O  Ol  OO  •>* 

I  ™  ^.~~»2«^rt 

i». 

H  "S  ^  t-     05     t^^j     T-juius     t- so co co sot- co 
O    3  'H  T~l 

o  ° 


i— i  W SO  T-l      -t~      •      'O5OOCOSO 

®    ,/  °° o^<    -t-    •    -(Minoir: 

.      •      .      «OL—      -O5      •      -OlOOOlfl 


•£>.&- 

02   •— '   <M     I     .'     !     ^     I     IcgW    '.          '.     II-H'N 


o 


*  £    -2    BB 

I    1 1*£  i ; ; ;  i  ip|i  -Jiiii  I 
e     isa 


o 

N     •     •     -00 


•  us    •    'Tj<t-^fiooo    -i-i-^eooioo 

•rH     •     •  rt<  M<  M  Tt<  US     •  O -^"  TH  M  Tt< 


g     -2£  -....•;.- 

o 


£  Of    OB" 

^  "^    <^3   ^  *  *  *t—  *  •  iC  CXI  CO  CO  t>»     •  O5  W3  jH       CO 

S1  ;<    >>eo  "  *  [t-1  *  'Tj'ocooe^i    "TJ'TI'OCSCO 

r7?  2       •    «  .  .  .  (M  .  .COrH        TH!M:THCO        r-iiH 


I    6 


o    , 

j*  'CJ      .oooosososcoosososooso'tisosososcsoso 


C  *J 


BRIDGES.  1660 

Labor — 

Labor    on    forms $    652  $0.74 

Placing    reinforcement 129  0.148 

Hauling    aggregates 323  0.371 

Mixing  and  placing  concrete "...  1,408  1.614 

Finishing    concrete    work 56  0.064 

Erection    of    mixer 61  0.070 


Totals     $2,629          $3.007 

Supplies — 

Coal     .  .  $       24          $0.027 

Oil    for    forms 31  0.035 

Totals     .  . $55          $0.062 

Grand  totals  for  concrete  work $9,014       $10.335 

The  work  was  carried  on  under  considerable  difficulty.  The  ex- 
cavation was  interrupted  by  frequent  rains,  and  the  banks  slipped, 
causing  the  handling  of  considerable  additional  material.  The 
work  of  driving  piles  was  also  frequently  interrupted  by  rain,  and 
as  a  consequence  the  extra  work  of  placing  concrete  did  not  start 
until  late  in  the  fall,  and  had  to  be  prosecuted  by  two  shifts,  work- 
ing day  and  night,  Sunday  included,  until  it  was"  finished.  The 
conditions  are  reflected  in  the  high  unit  cost  of  excavation.  The 
cost  of  placing  reinforcing  bars  is  about  typical,  while  the  cost  of 
placing  concrete  at  $1.61  per  yard  is  abnormal,  owing  to  the  fact 
that  in  this  item  is  charged  considerable  general  labor,  which  could 
not  be  otherwise  apportioned. 

The  specifications  originally  contemplated  the  use  of  crushed 
limestone,  but  there  was  submitted  to  the  engineer  samples  of  very 
good  gravel  at  a  price  of  $1  per  cu.  yd.  This  gravel  was  clean, 
and  contained  enough  sand  to  fill  the  voids  without  additional  mate- 
rial ;  in  fact,  some  of  it  contained  slightly  too  much  sand.  The  cost 
of  sifting  out  the  coarse  material  and  again  sifting  out  the  fine 
material,  and  then  mixing  the  two  together  in  the  proper  propor- 
tions was  found  to  be  32  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  This  was  used  for  all  arch 
concrete,  but  for  abutments  the  mix  of  the  gravel  as  delivered  was 
deemed  satisfactory,  as  it  did  not  vary  greatly  from  the  proper 
proportions.  The  footings  were  made  of  crusher  rock  dust  and 
limestone,  which  had  been  owned  by  the  city  for  several  years. 
This  material  is  considered  as  costing  the  same  as  gravel. 

Cost  of  Mixing  and  Placing  Concrete  for  an  Arch  Bridge. — A 
natural  mixture  of  sand  and  gravel  was  brought  in  on  trucks  AA 
by  electric  railway  and  discharged  through  gratings  into  a  storage 
bin,  Fig.  19.  Five  parallel  charging  car  tracks  BB  ran  under  this 
storage  bin.  The  charging  cars  C  were  16  cu.  ft.  capacity,  just  one 
batch  for  the  mixer.  A  car  was  first  loaded  with  gravel  under  one 
of  the  hoppers,  then  moved  back  under  the  cement  chute  to  receive 
the  cement,  and  then  moved  forward  onto  the  truck  F  which  trav- 
eled on  the  transverse  track  passing  the  mixer.  The  mixer  dis- 
charged into  a  hoist  bucket  /  which  automatically  discharged  its 
load  into  the  hoppers  JJ  whence  the  concrete  was  chuted  into 
wheelbarrows,  two  wheeled  carts  or  dump  cars  and  taken  out  on 


1670 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Fig.  19. — Concrete  Mixing  Plant. 


BRIDGES.  1671 

trestles  to  the  work.     The  gang  charging  and  mixing  and  placing 
the  concrete  was  as  follows : 

Duty.  No.  men. 

Charging    cars 3 

Cement     1 

Operating    mixer 2 

At    hopper    in    tower 1 

Wheeling    concrete 3  to  5 

Placing    and    spading    concrete 3 

Hoist   engineer 1 

Fireman    (mixer  and  pump) 1 

Total     15  to  17 

This  gang  placed  on  an  average  150  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  per  day, 
or  about  10  cu.  yds.  per  man.  With  wages  averaging  $2  per  man 
per  day  this  would  give  a  labor  cost  of  20  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  mix- 
ing and  placing,  not  including  superintendence. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Arch  Bridge. — In  Engineering- 
Contracting,  July  22,  1908,  Mr.  John  Harms  gives  the  following 
data:  The  bridge  has  a  roadway  30  ft.  wide  in  the  clear,  and  two 
sidewalks  8  ft.  wide  each.  The  length  of  the  bridge  is  306  ft. 


Cfo-frntr 

Fig.  20. — Concrete  Arch  Bridge. 

divided  as  follows:  20  ft.  for  each  abutment,  81  ft.  for  each  outer 
arch,  88  ft.  for  center  arch  and  8  ft.  for  each  pier.  The  reinforce- 
ment used  in  the  arches  is  1  in.  twisted  steel,  2  ft.  c.  to  c.  in  two 
rows,  iy2  ins.  from  extrados  and  intrados  and  tied  to  %  in.  square 
transverse  rods  every  5  ft.  The  reinforcement  of  the  overhanging 
sidewalks  is  of  expanded  metal  No.  4  gage  6  in.  mesh,  which  is 
turned  down  at  the  outer  edge  for  about  4  ins.  and  fastened  to  a 
%  in.  square  rod,  and  on  the  inner  edge  is  hooked  to  a  1  in.  twisted 
rod  which  is  anchored  with  %  in.  twisted  rods  to  the  bottom  rein- 
forcing rods  of  the  arch,  as  shown  by  Figs.  20  and  21. 

The  thickness  of  concrete  of  the  arches  is  40  ins.  for  the  outer 
arches  at  haunches,  30  ins.  at  a  distance  of  16.5  ft.  from  haunches 
and  21  ins.  at  the  crown.  For  center  of  the  arch  the  thickness  is 
42  ins.  at  haunches,  30  ins.  at  distances  of  16.5  ft.  from  haunches 
and  22  ins.  at  the  crown. 

The  piers  are  of  monolithic  construction.  The  upstream  and 
downstream  ends  form  a  sharp  point,  reinforced  with  blocks  of 
brown  stone,  cut  to  the  proper  angle  to  break  the  ice.  Piers  and 


1672 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


abutments  were  built  up  to  an  elevation  of  9.5  ft.  above  low  water 
mark.  Since  the  bed  of  the  river  is  soft  mud,  each  of  the  piers  was 
built  on  a  foundation  of  60  piles  driven  3  ft.  c.  to  c.  and  cut  off  at 
an  elevation  of  2  ft.  below  M.  L.  W. 

On  account  of  the  kind  of  soil  it  was  necessary  to  drive  piles 
for  the  falsework,  and  this  was  begun  at  the  same  time  as  the  jet- 
ting for  the  sheetpiling  of  the  abutment.  The  piles  for  falsework 
consisted  of  nine  rows  of  five  piles  each  for  outer  arches,  and  ten 
rows  for  center  arch.  After  piles  for  first  arch  were  driven,  pile 
driving  for  pier  No.  1  was  started.  This  being  finished,  jetting 
of  sheetpiling  for  the  pier  was  started.  Up  to  this  time  the 


Jff' '0" 


ifpfp 

•f'e 


w/w 


^M\^//'\my//^^ 

i  L  U  U  U  U  u  }j  i 


Fig.    21. — Cross-Section  of  Bridge. 
% 

water  in  the  river  was  as  low  as  2  ft.,  making  it  impossible  to  float 
any  craft,  and  so  cribwork  had  been  used  for  handling  the  pile 
driver.  Heavy  rainfalls  raised  the  water  to  10  ft.  and  caused  at 
times  such  strong  currents  that  the  work  had  to  be  stopped.  This 
brought  the  cost  of  labor  much  higher  than  it  would  have  been 
under  ordinary  circumstances.  The  cost  of  jetting  the  sheetpiling 
on  the  pier  is  given  further  on.  After  the  sheetpiling  was  all  driven 
and  properly  shored  for  heavy  water  pressure  a  centrifugal  pump 
was  installed,  driven  by  the  pile  driver  engine,  and  the  enclosure 
was  kept  dry  until  concrete  was  in  place.  Excavation  was  ex- 
tended to  3  ft.  below  low  water  mark  and  the  piles  cut  off  2  ft. 
below  the  same  level,  so  as  to  enclose  them  in  about  12  ins.  of 
concrete.  The  whole  space  was  then  filled  in  with  concrete  up  to 
M.  L.  W.,  and  on  this  foundation  the  forms  for  the  pier  were  built. 
At  this  time  excavation  for  abutment  No.  1  was  finished  and  a 
Koppel  industrial  railway  had  been  laid.  This  railway  was  laid 


BRIDGES. 


1673 


on  a  temporary  trestle  across  the  river  and  was  provided  with 
switches  to  reach  abutments  and  piers. 

Sheetpiling  of  the  abutments  served  as  forms  up  to  about  4  ft. 
below  the  spring  line.  Above  this  point,  forms  of  2  in.  spruce  were 
built.  The  designing  of  an  18-in.  crown  molding  on  all  piers  and 
abutments  at  the  height  of  the  spring  line  of  arches  made  the 
forms  rather  expensive.  The  concrete  in  the  abutment  was  fin- 
ished in  broken  layers  on  the  arch  side  to  give  a  good  bond  between 
arch  and  abutment.  While  the  concreting  on  abutments  and  piers 
was  being  done,  the  building  of  falsework  for  the  first  arch  had 
proceeded. 

The  construction  of  this  falsework  was  as  follows:  Piles  were 
cut  off  at  a  height  of  3  ft.  below  the  bottom  line  of  the  concrete 


Fig.  22. — Falsework  and  Forms. 


arch.  On  these  piles  were  placed,  transverse  to  the  arch,  two 
6  x  12-in.  caps,  spiked  to  piles  well  spliced  together  at  joint  in 
center,  and  overhanging  about  6  ft.  at  outside.  An  upper  cap  was 
made  of  two  6  x  12-in.  timbers.  Between  the  two  caps  oak  wedges 
were  placed  about  every  5  ft.  On  top  of  the  upper  caps  were 
placed  3  x  12-in.  floor  beams  2  ft.  8  in.  c.  to  c.,  cut  on  top  to  proper 
line  of  arch.  A  2-in.  spruce  floor  was  nailed  to  these  floor  beams 
(see  Fig.  22). 

It  may  be  well  to  remark  here  that  the  centers  were  laid  out 
full  size  on  a  large  platform,  and  patterns  were  made  of  1-in.  pine 
boards  for  all  floor  beams  and  side  forms  of  arches.  The  cutting 
of  all  the  floor  beams  was  done  by  a  12-in.  circular  saw,  which  was 
run  by  a  belt  connected  to  the  hoisting  engine  which  pulled  the 
cars  up  the  incline  to  the  mixing  platform. 

•  The  different  radii  of  the  arches  made  the  curves  of  the  floor 
beams  vary  to  such  an  extent  that  the  amount  of  framing  of  center 
done  per  day  varied  a  great  deal.  The  side  forms  of  arches  were 
made  of  2-in.  spruce  and  built  in  sections  of  7  ft.  In  this  way  the 


1674  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

placing  of  forms  was  done  quickly  and  cheaply.  The  specifications 
stated  that  the  concreting  of  the  arches  should  be  done  in  ribs 
of  such  a  width  that  one  complete  rib  of  the  arch  could  be  finished 
in  a  day.  Three  more  forms  similar  to  the  outside  forms  weie 
made  and  so  placed  as  to  divide  the  arch  into  five  equal  ribs. 

Since  it  is  important  to  have  reinforcement  at  the  proper  dis- 
tance from  intrados  and  extrados,  little  eement  blocks  of  1^-in. 
thickness  were  made  to  hold  the  bars  at  the  proper  distance  from 
the  bottom.  The  advantage  of  using  concrete  blocks  instead  of 
wooden  blocks,  as  is  usually  done,  is  easily  understood.  The 
blocks,  being  of  concrete,  stay  in  place,  require  no  pointing  up 
afterwards,  and  the  cost  of  making  them  is  about  %  ct.  each. 

After  placing  upper  longitudinal  bars,  sticks  were  used  to 
hold  these  in  place,  but  the  writer  proposes  on  future  jobs  to  make 
concrete  blocks  as  shown  in  Fig.  23.  The  cost  of  such  a  block  the 
writer  believes  would  be  small,  while  its  efficiency  would  be  such 
as  to  make  it  economical. 


As  shown  in  plan,  Fig.  21,  the  reinforcement  of  spandrel  walls 
and  overhung  sidewalk  was  anchored  to  the  lower  rods  or  arch, 
and  the  1-in.  rod  was  suspended  at  the  proper  height  on  wooden 
brackets  nailed  to  the  outside  of  the  arch  forms.  From  this  bar, 
%-in.  twisted  rods  were  run  to  the  lower  rods,  every  18  ins.,  being 
hooked  on  both  rods  by  turning  the  ends. 

Pile  driving  and  sheetpiling  had  been  going  on,  and  when  high 
water  caused  this  work  to  be  stopped,  concreting  of  abutment 
No.  2  was  done. 

The  industrial  railway  proved  of  great  value  during  all  this 
time  for  handling  materials  in  an  economical  way. 

It  may  be  well  to  mention  the  method  used  for  handling  the  ma- 
terials. The  stone  and  sand  had  to  be  stored  on  building  Jots 
about  250  ft.  away  from  the  proposed  bridge.  A  platform  14  x  16 
ft.  was  built  about  60  ft.  from  this  place  at  an  elevation  of  16  ft. 
Under  this  platform  was  placed  a  Smith  mixer,  blocked  up  on 
timbers,  high  enough  to  allow  of  dumping  into  the  Koppel  side 


BRIDGES. 


lG7o 


dumping  cars.  A  timber  trestle  was  built  extending  from  stone 
and  sand  pile  to  the  top  of  the  platform  and  an  industrial  railway 
laid  on  this.  Cars  were  pulled  up  the  incline  by  a  hoisting  engine 
stationed  back  of  the  mixer.  See  Fig.  24.  A  switch  was  placed  at 
the  bottom  of  the  incline,  making  it  possible  to  work  two  cars. 
Those  cars  were  marked  to  give  the  proper  quantities  of  sand  and 
stone  for  a  %  batch  proportioned  1  :  3  :  6.  Atlas  cement  was 
used  and  as  it  was  taken  from  the  storage  house  it  was  put  on 
the  cars  in  bags  enough  for  every  batch,  and  opened  and  emptied  at 
the  platform.  Each  car  furnished  also  all  the  materials  required, 
and  in  this  way  an  output  was  obtained  of  35  to  40  batches  per 
hour.  Starting  from  the  mixer  was  the  other  industrial  railway 
previously  mentioned.  The  elevation  of  track  at  the  mixer  was 
14  ft.  3  ins.  above  M.  L.  W.  The  tracks  had  a  down  grade  of 
about  4  ft.  to  a  length  of  150  ft. 


Fig.   24. 


This  brought  the  rails  at  the  proper  height  for  dumping  con- 
crete into  piers  and  abutments,  and  at  the  same  time,  gave  the 
cars  enough  momentum  to  require  but  little  pushing. 

After  finishing  the  piers  and  abutments  to  the  spring  line,  the 
track  was  removed  and  laid  to  the  arches.  Heavy  timber  was 
placed  across  the  arch  forms  on  which  were  laid  longitudinal  timber 
to  carry  tracks.  At  the  crown  of  the  first  arch  the  track  was  ele- 
vated and  cars  were  pulled  up  this  grade  by  the  hoisting  engine, 
from  which  point  they  proceeded  by  their  own  momentum.  On  the 
crowns  of  the  first  and  center  arches,  switches  were  put  in,  and  by 
this  arrangement  three  cars  were  handled  so  rapidly  that  at  no 
time  did  the  mixer  have  to  stop  on  account  of  there  not  being  cars 
available. 

The  plant  proved  sufficient  to  do  the  work  in  remarkably  short 
time.  The  time  from  beginning  concreting  of  first  arch  until  the 
third  was  finished,  including  the .  erection  of  all  falsework  and 


1670  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

forms  for  the  last  two  arches,  was  only  29  days.  All  the  concrete 
was  placed  in  15  days,  working  not  longer  than  7  hours  a  day. 
If  four  ribs  instead  of  five  had  been  made  in  each  arch,  the  results 
would  have  been  even  better,  but  this  would  have  meant  taking  a 
great  risk,  on  account  of  doubtful  weather  at  this  season  of  the 
year  and  also  in  case  of  any  breakdown  of  machinery. 

The  building  of  falsework  for  the  spandrel  wall  and  overhanging 
sidewalk  proved  difficult  and  was  by  far  the  most  expensive  of  all 
form  work. 

This  falsework  was  constructed  by  resting  one  side  on  posts 
placed  on  the  caps  of  the  falsework  of  the  arches,  while  the  other 
side  was  held  up  by  posts  placed  at  a  slight  angle  and  rammed  in 
the  mud  of  the  river  bottom.  These  posts  and  the  caps  on  them 
were  8  x  10-in.  timbers.  On  these  caps  3  x  12-in.  floor  beams  were 
placed  3  ft.  c.  to  c.,  being  covered  with  2-in.  spruce  flooring,  cut 
into  4-in.  strips,  the  edges  being  tapered  to  make  tight  joints.  The 
whole  falsework  was  well  braced.  At  all  corners  of  forms,  molding 
was  nailed  to  the  forms  to  round  off  the  corners  of  the  concrete. 
Panel  effects  in  the  concrete  were  also  made  by  nailing  battens  to 
the  forms.  These  pieces  were  generally  planed. 

Each  arch  had  expansion  joints  of  %  in.  at  both  ends  and  also 
at  a  distance  of  24  ft.  3  ins.  from  both  ends.  Each  expansion 
joint  was  made  up  of  *4-in.  corrugated  paper  covered  on  both  sides 
with  3-ply  tar  paper. 

Balusters. — The  balusters  for  the  railway  were  all  made  on  the 
job,  there  being  350  required,  and  for  this  purpose  eight  forms 
were  made.  These  were  made  in  four  parts  each  and  were  held 
together  with  bolts  so  that  removing  the  form  was  easily  done. 

The  base  of  these  balusters  was  8x8  ins.,  the  height  being  2  ft. 
As  previously  stated,  eighl  forms  were  made  for  this  work.  The 
forms  were  made  on  the  job.  The  entire  labor  cost  of  making  the 
balusters  was: 

Carving  white  wood  blocks,  1  man,  12  days,  at  $3.  .$  36.00 

Making  8  forms,  1  man,   12  days,  at  $2.75 33.00 

Making  and  finishing  balusters,   1  man,   35  days,  at 

$2.75     96.25 

Total    $165.25 

A  man  made  10  balusters  per  day.  The  cost  for  forms  was  10.7 
cts.  per  baluster,  and  for  making  and  finishing,  each  27.5  els.. 
giving  a  total  cost  for  labor  of  47.2  cts. 

Sheet  Piles. — In  jetting  down  the  sheet  piles,  which  were  2x8 
ins.  x  20  ft.  long  on  an  average,  100  pieces  were  put  in  place  per 
day,  or  1  piece  every  6  minutes.  This  does  not  include  moving 
machine  from  one  pier  to  another,  but  does  include  moves  while 
working  on  a  single  pier.  The  labor  cost  was: 

1  Foreman     $   5.00 

1  Engineman     :*.:"•  0 

2  Hosemen,  at  $3.50 7.00 

2  Men  preparing  piles,  at   $2.50 5.00 

7  Helpers,   at   $1.75 12.25 

Total     .  ..$32.75 


BRIDGES.  1677 

There  being  2,000  lin.  ft.  of  piling  or  2,666  ft.  B.  M.  gives  a  unit 
cost  of  1  6/10  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  and  $12.25  per  M.  ff.  B.  M.  for  the 
labor. 

Forms. — The  labor  costs  for  forms  for  the  spandrel  wall  and 
overhanging  sidewalk  on  the  two  sides  of  an  arch  were  : 

Foreman    carpenter,    at    $5 %   20.00 

Building  falsework  : 

2  Carpenters,    at    $3.50 28  00 

3  Men,    at    $2 24.00 

Building  forms : 

2  Carpenters,  at    $3.50 28.00 

6  Carpenters,  at    $3 75  00 

2  Carpenters,  at    $2.75 22.00 

3  Helpers,   at  $2 26.00 

Total    $223.00 

There  was  about  12,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  used  in  these  forms, 
thus  giving  a  cost  of  framing  and  erecting  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  of 
$18.60.  With  180  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  put  in  these  forms  the  cost 
per  cu.  yd."  was  $1.24  for  the  labor  on  the  forms. 

The  cost  of  erecting  the  forms  ior  the  arch,  exclusive  of  the 
piling,  was : 

Foreman  carpenter,   6  days,  at   $5..  $  30.00 

Falsework,     8,300    ft.    B.    M.,    erecting 
crew :        « 

2    Men,    at    $3.50 $   7.00 

2    Men,    at    $2.50 5.00 

2  Men,    at    $2.00 4.00 

2    Men,    at    $1.75 3.50 

Total,    4    days,    at $19.50          78,00 

Floor  beams,  5,960  ft.  B.  M.,  carpenter 
crew : 

2  Men,    at    $3.50 $   7.00 

4  Men,    at    $3.00 12.00 

3  Men,    at    $2.75 8.25 

1  Man,    at    $2.00 2.00 

2  Men,    at    $1.75 3.50 

Total,    2    days,    at $32.75          65.50 

Erecting  crews,  2  days,  at  $19.50 39.00 

Forms,  bottom  and  sides,   11,000  ft.  B. 
M.,    carpenter   crew : 

Framing  forms,   2  days,  at  $32.75 98.25 

Setting  forms,   2  days,  at  $32.75 65.50 

1  man  making  patterns,  3  days,  at  $3.50.  10.50 

Total    $386.75 

There  was  25,000  ft.  B.  M.  of  lumber  in  the  falsework  and  forms 
exclusive  of  the  piles,  which  makes  a  cost  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  of  $15.47 
for  this  labor.  As  there  was  365  cu.  yds.  in  an  arch  this  gave  a 
cost  of  $1.06  per  cu.  yd.  for  this  labor. 

Concrete. — In  mixing  and  placing  the  concrete  for  the  arches, 
one  rib  was  done  in  a  day  so  that  it  would  be  monolithic.  There 


1678 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


were  73  cu.  yds.  in  a  rib.     The  following  was  the  cost  of  labor  per 
day  when  mixing  and  placing  was  being  done: 

1  Foreman $  5.00 

1  Sub-foreman     3.50 

1  Engineman    3.50 

1  Man  running  mixer 2.59 

1  Concrete    placer 2.75 

4  Concrete  placers,  at  $2.50 10.00 

6  Men  on  cars,  at   $2 7.80 

2  Men  on  mixer  platform,  at  $2 4.00 

1  Man  at  stock   pile 2.00 

22  Men  shoveling,  at  $1.75 , 38.50 

Total    $79.55 

The  actual  time  of  placing  a  ring  was  from  6  to  7-  hrs.,  thus 
giving  a  cost  of  mixing  and  placing  of  85  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  When 
the  concrete  work  was  done,  some  of  the  crew  was  knocked  off, 
and  the  rest  were  kept  busy  in  changing  tracks  and  other  details. 
As  stated,  a  larger  ring  could  have  been  placed  in  a  day,  but  the 


Fig.  25. — Casting  Concrete  Arch  Rings. 


risk  of  some  unforeseen  accident  that  might  have  held  up  the  work 
was  considered  too  great  to  take.  Fig.  25  shows  how  these  rings 
were  cast. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  Ribbed  Arch  Bridge  at  Grand  Rapids,  Mich.*— 
The  bridge  consisted  of  seven  parabolic  arch  ribs  of  75  ft.  clear 
span  and  14  ft.  rise.  The  five  ribs  under  the  21 -ft  roadway  were 
24  ins.  thick,  50  ins.  deep  at  skewbacks  and  25  ins.  deep  at  crown; 


^Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.    8,   1908. 


BRIDGES.  1679 


the  two  ribs  under  the  sidewalks  were  12  ins.  thick  and  of  the  same 
depth  as  the  main  ribs.  Each  rib  carried  columns  which  sup- 
ported the  deck  slab.  Columns  and  ribs  were  bound  together 
across  bridge  by  struts  and  webs.  All  structural  parts  of  the 
bridge  were  of  concrete  reinforced  by  corrugated  bars.  The  abut- 
ments were  hollow  boxes  with  reinforced  concrete  shells  tied  in  by 
buttresses  and  filled  with  earth.  There  were  in  the  bridge  includ- 
ing abutments  884  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  and  62,000  Ibs.  of  reinforcing 
metal  or  about  70  Ibs.  of  reinforcing  metal  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete. 
Of  the  884  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  594  cu.  yds.  were  contained  in  the 
abutments  and  wing  walls  and  290  cu.  yds.  in  the  remainder  of  the 
structure. 

Centers. — The  center  for  the  arch  consisted  of  4 -pile  bents  spaced 
about  12  ft.  apart  in  the  line  of  the  bridge.  The  piles  were 
12  x  12  in.  x  24  ft.  yellow  pine  and  they  were  braced  together  in 
both  directions  by  2  x  10-in.  planks.  Each  bent  carried  a  3  x  12-in. 
plank  cup.  Maple  folding  wedges  were  set  on  these  cups  over  each 
pile  and  on  them  rested  12  x  12-in.  transverse  timbers  one  directly 
over  each  bent.  These  12  x  12-in.  transverse  timbers  carried  the 
back  pieces  cut  to  the  curve  of  the  arch.  The  back  pieces  were 
2  x  12-in.  plank,  two  under  each  sidewalk  rib  and  four  under  each 
main  rib  of  the  arch.  The  back  pieces  under  each  rib  were 
X-braced  together.  The  lagging  was  made  continuous  under  the 
ribs  but  only  occasional  strips  were  carried  across  the  spaces  be- 
tween ribs.  This  reduced  the  amount  of  lagging  required  but  made 
working  on  the  center  more  difficult  and  resulted  in  loss  of  tools 
from  dropping  through  the  openings.  Work  on  the  centers  and 
forms  was  tiresome  owing  both  to  the  difficulty  of  moving  around 
on  the  lagging  and  to  the  cramped  positions  in  which  the  men 
labored.  Carpenters  were  hard  to  keep  for  these  reasons. 

Concrete. — A  1  :  7  bank  gravel  concrete  was  used  for  the  abut' 
ments  and  a  1 :  5  bank  gravel  concrete  for  the  other  parts  of  the 
bridge.  The  concrete  was  mixed  in  a  cubical  mixer  operated  by 
electric  motor  and  located  at  one  end  of  the  bridge.  The  mixed 
concrete  was  taken  to  the  forms  in  wheelbarrows.  The  mixture 
was  of  mushy  consistency.  No  mortar  facing  was  used  but  the 
exposed  surfaces  were  given  a  great  work.  In  freezing  weather 
the  gravel  and  water  were  heated  to  a  temperature  of  about '100° 
F.  ;  when  work  was  stopped  at  night  it  was  covered  with  tarred 
felt  and  was  usually  found  steaming  the  next  morning. 

The  cost  data  given  here  are  based  on  figures  furnished  to  us 
by  Geo.  J.  Davis,  Jr.,  who  designed  the  bridge  and  kept  the  cost 
records.  Mr.  -Davis  states  that  the  unit  costs  are  high,  because 
of  the  adverse  conditions  under  which  the  work  was  performed. 
The  work  was  done  by  day  labor  by  the  city,  the  men  were  all 
new  to  this  class  of  work,  the  weather  was  cold  and  there  was  high 
water  to  interfere,  and  work  was  begun  before  plans  for  the  bridge 
had  been  completed  so  that  the  superintendent  could  no*  intelli- 
gently plan  the  work  ahead.  Cost  keeping  was  begun  only  after 
the  work  was  well  under  way.  Many  of  the  items  of  cost  were 
Incomplete  in  detail. 


J680  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

The  following  were   the  wages   paid  and  the  prices  of   the  ma 
lerlals  used : 

Materials  and  Supplies — 

No.   1  hemlock  matched  per   1,000  ft $20.00 

No.   1  hemlock  plank  per  1,090  ft 17.00 

No.   2  Norway  pine  flooring  per  1,000  ft 19.00 

No.  2  yellow  pine  flooring  per  1,000  ft 20.00 

12  x  12  in.  x  16  ft.  yellow  pine  per  1,000  ft 2!). 00 

12  x  12  in.  x  24  ft.  yellow  pine  piling  per  1,000  ft..  .    27.00 

Maple  wedges  per  pair 50 

V&-in.  corrugated  bars  per  100  Ibs 2.61  r, 

%-in.  corrugated  bars  per  100  Ibs 2..~>  1  ."> 

%-in.  corrugated  bars  per  100  Ibs 2.515 

Coal    per    ton    4.09 

Electric  power  per  kilowatt 06 

Medusa  cement  per  bbl 1.75 

^Etna  cement  per  bbl 1.05 

Bank  gravel  per  cu.  yd 85 

Sand  per  cu.  yd 6"6 

Carpenters,  per  day $3  to     3.50 

Common   labor,    per   day 1.75 

The   summarized   cost    of   the  whole   work,   with    such   additional 
costs  as  the  figures  given  permit  of  computation,  was  as  follows : 

General  Services —  Total.          Cu.  Yd. 

Engineering    $451  $0.512 

Miscellaneous 75  0.084 

Pumping — 

Coal  at  $4  per  ton $210  ' 

Machinery,  tools  and  cartage 283 

Labor    497 

Total,    110    days,    at    $9 $990 

Excavation —  Total  Cost. 

Timber,  cartage,  etc $    375 

Tools    69 

Labor   at   $1.75 1,687 

Total    ,..  .$2,131 

Filling   (5,111    cu.    yds.)—  Total     Per  cu.  yd. 

Earth     $1,142  $0.20 

Labor,   including  ripraping 396  0.07 

Total    $1,538  $0.27 

Removing   Old    Wing    Walls —  Total. 

Labor   and    dynamite $346 

Tools    and    sharpening 61 

Total     $410 

Hand  Rail  (150  ft.)—  Total.  Per  11  n  ft. 

Material     $278  $1.85 

Labor     29  0.1!) 



Total     $307  $2.04 


BRIDGES. 


1081 


Wood!  Block  Pavement  (296  sq.  yds.) —        Total.  Per  sq.  yd. 

Wood   block,    etc $695  $2.35 

Labor     .  , 57  0.19 

Total     $752  $2.54 

Steel   (62,000   Ibs.) —                                          Total.  Per.lb. 

Corrugated    bars,    freight,    etc $1,498  2.41c 

Plajn   steel,   wire,   etc 75  0.12c 

Blacksmithing,    tools    and    placing 438  0.71c 

Total      $2,011  3.24c 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Centering —                                                         Total.  Concrete. 

Lumber  and  poles    $332  $1.14 

Labor     272  0.95 

Total    ?604  $2.09 

Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Forms   .' $   3,312  $   3.75 

Concrete     $   5,532  $   6.25 

Grand    total     $18,113  $20.50 

In   more  detail   the  cost   of  the  various  items  of  concrete   work 
I  was  as  follows  for  the  whole  structure,  including  abutments,  wing 
walls  and  arch,  containing  884  cu.  yds. : 

Form    Construction —                                      Total.  Per  cu.  yd. 

Lumber   and    cartage $1,547  $1.75 

Nails  and   bolts 12!)  0.15 

Tools     110  0.12 

Labor,    erecting    and    removing 1,526  1.72 

Total $3,312  $3.74 

Concrete  Construction — Materials — 

Medusa   cement,    at    $1.05 $1,218  $1.37 

yEtna  cement,   at   $1.75 499  0.56 

Sand,    at    66    cts.    per   cu.    yd 37  0.04 

Gravel,   at   85   cts.   per   cu.   yd 915  1.04 

Total    materials    $2,669  $3.01 

Mixing— 

Machinery   and   supplies $    569  $0.62 

Power,   at   6   cts.   per   kw 52  0.06 

Tools     22  .    0.02 

Labor    737  0.83 

Total    mixing $1,360  $1.53 

Placing    concrete $    609  $0.69 

Tamping     concrete $    481  $0.54 


1682  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Heating  Concrete — 

Apparatus  and  cartage $  47  $005 

Fuel     96  0.11 

Labor    270  0.31 

Total  heating   $    413  |0.47 

Grand     total $8,844  $9.98 

Considering  the  abutment   and  wing  wall  work,   comprising  594 
cu.   yds.,  separately,  the  cost  was  as  follows : 

Forms —  Per  cu.  yd. 

Materials     $1.20 

Labor 1.09 

Total $2.29 

Concrete — 

Materials     $2.92 

Labor     2.38 

Total    $5.30 

Heating    water   and    gravel $0.70 

Grand    total $8.29 

Considering  the  arch   span,   comprising  290   cu.   yds.,   separately, 
the  cost  was  as  follows: 

Forms —  Per  cu.  yd. 

Materials     $  3.70 

Labor     ,  3.03 


Total    $  6.73 

Concrete — 

Materials     $  3.32 

Labor     3.57 

Total    $   6~79 

Grand    total $13.52 

Cost  of  Centering  of  a  233-ft.  Arch. —  In  Engineering-Contracting, 
Jan.  6,  1909,  are  given  design  and  data  relating  to  the  Walnut 
Lane  Bridge,  Philadelphia,  as  furnished  by  Mr.  George  H.  Heller. 
Only  a  brief  summary  of  the  article  is  given  here. 

Dimensions  of  Arch. — The  main  arch  of  the  Walnut  Lane  bridge 
consists  of  two  arch  ribs,  each  18  ft.  wide  at  the  crown  and  21  ft. 
6  ins.  wide  at  the  skewback  ;  these  ribs  are  spaced  34  ft.  c.  to  c., 
and  are  5  ft.  6  ins.  deep  at  the  crown  and  9  ft.  6  ins.  deep  at  the 
skewback;  the  span  is  233  ft.  in  the  clear,  and  the  height  of  the 
soffit  at  the  crown  above  the  springing  line  is  70  ft.  3  ins. 

The  two  main  ribs  carry  spandrel  piers  and  a  series  of  spandrel 
arches  upon  which  the  spandrel  walls  are  built  up  to  the  height 
to  receive  the  floor,  which  consists  of  steel  beams  with  concrete 
arches  between,  and  it  is  upon  this  floor  that  the  roadway  and 
sidewalk  paving  is  laid,  the  roadway  being  40  ft.  wide  and  the 
two  sidewalks  each  8  ft.  wide.  The  height  of  the  soffit  of  the  arch 
above  the  surface  of  the  creek  is  about  136  ft.,  while  the  roadway 
of  the  bridge  is  about  14  ft.  higher,  making  about  150  ft. 

It  is  necessary,  while  considering  the  nature  of  the  design 
(Fig.  26),  to  remark  the  fact  of  the  arch  itself  being  composed 


BRIDGES. 


1683 


of  two  independent  and  separate  ribs.  This  feature  allowed  the 
construction  of  each  rib  by  itself  and  so  presented  an  opportunity 
of  reducing  the  cost  of  the  centering  by  permitting  one  arch  rib 
to  be  constructed  first  on  centering  necessary  for  one  rib,  and  then, 
when  the  arch  is  completed,  to  move  the  same  centering  trans- 
versely so  as  to  serve  for  the  construction  of  the  adjacent  areh 
rib.  This  feature  of  construction  was  embodied  in  the  design,  and 
it  was  found  not  only  to  be  feasible  but  also  simple  and  easy  of 
action,  even  though  the  mass  of  timbering  was  so  great  and  cov- 
ered so  large  an  area  It  was  also  thought  proper  to  use  steel  in 
the  construction  of  the  bottom  of  the  centering,  for,  as  a  material, 
it  afforded  better  facilities  for  making  joints  capable  of  with- 
standing possible  vibration  in  moving,  and  it  formed  a  firm  founda-* 
tion,  all  parts  of  which  acted  together  as  a  unit  and  allowed  the 
whole  mass  to  be  moved  true  to  line  and  without  distortion  or 
accident  to  its  new  position. 


Fig.   26. — Centering  for  Walnut  Lane  Bridge. 


Beginning  with  the  base  of  the  centering,  the  steel  trestle  sup- 
ports were  spaced  24  ft.  and  30  ft.  apart  and  were  carried  on  con- 
crete piers  founded  upon  and  doweled  into  the  solid  rock.  These 
piers  were  carried  up  to  a  uniform  height  above  all  danger  of 
freshet,  and  they  formed  the  basic  foundation  upon  which  the 
whole  mass  of  steel  and  timber  was  designed  to  move.  Each  steel 
trestle  was  securely  anchored  into  its  pier  by  1%-in.  steel  rods,  and 
these  rods  served  to  guard  against  freshets  and  wind  and  were  re- 
leased when  the  centering  was  moved. 

The  movement  of  the  centering  was  accomplished  by  placing 
on  each  pier  a  series  of  ten  steel  rollers,  each  6  ins.  in  diameter, 
rolling  on  steel  plates  built  into  the  tops  of  the  piers ;  each  roller 
was  capable  of  bearing  in  safety  10  tons,  making  100  tons,  which 
was  the  total  maximum  weight  at  the  center  pier  to  be  moved. 
The  steel  bents  rested  upon  these  rollers,  and  upon  completion  of 
the  erection  of  one  rib  of  the  arch  they  were  all  moved  in  unison 
by  placing  jacks  between  the  bottom  end  of  each  steel  bent  and  a 
studded  anchor  chain  which  formed  a  cradle  or  saddle  against  which 


1684 


HANDBOOK    OF   COST   DATA. 


the  jack  worked,  the  ends  of  the  chain  being  attached  to  timbers 
previously  built  into  the  piers  for  that  purpose ;  this  method  of 
translation  proved  to  be  quite  effective,  and  the  whole  distance  of 
34  ft.  was  covered  in  the  space  of  three  days. 

The  total  weight  moved  can  be  fairly  stated  to  be  about  1,000 
tons.  This  amount  is  found  by  taking  the  total  weight  of  bolts, 
steel  trestle  and  timber  trestle,  and  allowing  in  the  case  of  timber 
5  Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M.,  the  timber  being  probably  very  heavy  from 
the  absorption  of  water  from  the  structure.  This  great  weight, 
covering  a  length  of  say,  230  ft.,  and  a  width  of  50  ft.,  was  moved 
by  jacks  having  a  sum  total  capacity  of  345  tons  acting  at  15 
points. 

'3*f Lagging 


Fig.   27. — Arch  Centers. 


The  quantities  of  material  used  in  the  construction  of  the  center- 
ing were : 

Bolts,    washers,    nails 33,000  Ibs. 

Steel   trestle   and   it's   floor 232,000  Ibs. 

Lagging    and    joists 88,000  ft.   B.  M. 

Upper  trestle  and  bracing 116,000  ft.  B.  M. 

Lower  staging  and   bracing 136,000  ft.  B.  M. 

Concrete    piers ".      1,000  cu.  yds. 

The  cost  was: 

Timber     .  ..340,000   ft.   B.   M.  at   $65.00          $22,100 

Metal     265,000  Ibs. '  .04  10,600 

Masonry     1,000  cu.  yds.  10.00  10,000 


Total 


$42,700 


This  centering  served  for  two  ribs,  each  containing  1,550  cu.  yds., 
or  a  total  of  3,100  cu.  yds.  Hence  the  centering  cost  $13.80  per  cu. 
yd.  of  concrete  inbs. 

The  contract,  price  for  the  Walnut  Lane  bridge  was  ?262,000. 


BRIDGES. 

Design  of  Center  for  a  50-ft.  Span  Masonry  Arch.* — With  the 
present  high  prices  of  lumber,  the  designing  of  timber  centers  for 
arches  becomes  a  problem  that  requires  careful  study  to  save 
material  and  labor.  In  the  accompanying  drawing  we  show  a 
center  designed  for  a  50-ft.  masonry  arch  railway  bridge  to  be  built 
in  central  Ohio.  Owing  to  the  excessive  cost  of  pine  in  this  section, 
oak  will  be  used.  This  timber  costs  here  about  $16  per  M  ft.  B.  M. 
The  center,  36  ft.  long,  comprising  two  arch  ribs,  posts,  cups, 
wedges  and  lagging,  calls  for  16,464  ft.  B.  M.  of  timber  divided  as 
follows :  B  jy[ 

3x4  ins.  x  4    ft.    lagging 1,554   ft. 

140     2  x  12  ins.  x  8  ft.  3%  ins.  straight  ribs 2,332  ft. 

20      2  x  12  ins.  x  5  ft.   6%   ins.   straight  ribs 222   ft 

20     2  x  12  ins.  x  2  ft.  9%   ins.  straight  ribs 112  ft. 

20      3  x  12  ins.  x  7    f t  curved   ribs 420  ft 

60     3  x  12  ins.   x   8   ft.   curved   ribs 1,440  ft. 

40      3  x  12  ins.  x  7    ft.    braces 840  ft. 

40      3  x  12  ins.  x  7   ft.   6   ins.    braces 900   ft 

10      2  x  12  ins  x  26    ft.    bottom   chord 1,920  ft. 

40     2  x  12  ins.  x  24   ft.  bottom  chord 520  ft. 

40      3  x  12  ins.  x  lli/o    ft.   fillers  bottom  chord 1,380  ft. 

20     3  x  12  ins.  x  7  ft.  fillers  bottom  chord 420  ft.. 

20      3  x  12  ins.  x  21    ft.   piece  A 1,260  ft. 

40      2  x  12  ins.  x  3%   ft.  bottom  chord  end  con...       280  ft. 

20   10  x  12  ins.  x  9    ft.    posts 1,800  ft. 

2     6  x  12  ins.  x  38    ft.    wall    plates 456ft. 

2      8  x  12  ins.  x  38   ft.    caps 608  ft. 


Total .  16,464  ft. 

660    %  x    9    in.    bolts   for    ribs. 

320    %  x    9  in.  bolts  for  bottom  chord. 

120    %  x  13  in.  bolts  for  end  con.  bottom  chord. 

160   %  x  15  in.  bolts  for  piece  A. 

Figure  27  shows  the  framing  very  clearly.  With  carpenters  re- 
ceiving $4  per  day  it  is  estimated  that  the  framing  and  erecting 
will  cost  about  $12  per  M  ft.  B.  M.,  including  iron.  The  cost  of 
bolts  and  nuts  will  run  about  $1.50  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  Roughly,  then, 
this  center  will  cost  about  $30  per  M  ft.  B.  M.  in  place.  The  center 
was  designed  by  Mr.  J.  H.  Milburn,  Chief  Draftsman,  Office  of  the 
Chief  Engineer,  Baltimore  &  Ohio,  R.  R.,  Baltimore,  Md. 

Data  on  a  Concrete  Viaduct. — A  reinforced  concrete  viaduct  2,800 
ft.  long  has  been  recently  built  by  John  T.  Wilson,  of  New  York, 
for  the  Richmond  &  Chesapeake  Bay  Ry.  Co.,  at  Richmond,  Va. 
It  ranges  in  height  from  18  ft.  at  each  end  to  70  ft.  at  the  center. 
The  reinforced  concrete  girders  range  in  length  from  23%  ft.  t« 
67%  ft.  c.  to  c.  of  bents.  The  bents  are  two-post  bents,  with  legs 
?  ft.  square.  The  largest  girder,  having  a  length  of  67%  ft., 
weighs  54  tons,  its  cross-section  being  20x70  ins.  In  this  viaduct 
there  were  2,650  cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  and*  it  required  172  ft.  B.  M. 
of  timber  for  the  forms  and  falsework  per  cubic  yard  of  concrete. 
Kahn  bars  were  used  for  reinforcing.  The  forms  on  the  sides 
of  the  girders  were  removed  at  the  end  of  7  days,  but  the  column 
forms  and  those  supporting  the  girders  were  not  removed  for  at 
least  30  days.  While  it  is  a  single  track  viaduct,  it  is  so  designed 
that,  by  adding  another  series  of  posts  and  girders,  it  can  be  made 

*Engineerihg-Contracting,  Nov.  14,  1906. 


1686 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST   DATA. 


into  a  double  track  viaduct.  One  little  trick  in  filling  the  column 
forms  is  worth  bearing  in  mind.  They  were  built  U-shaped,  the 
fourth  side  being  left  open,  and  built  up  as  fast  as  the  concrete 
was  poured  in  from  that  side.  This  method  facilitated  working  the 
concrete  in  around  the  reinforcing  bars.  Mr.  J.  H.  McLure  is  Chief 
Engineer  of  the  R.  &  C.  B.  Ry. 

Cost  of  a  Concrete  Trestle  and  Three  Concrete  Girder  Bridges 
i^ith  Abutments.* — The  reinforced  concrete  trestle  and  the  three 
bridges  with  concrete  abutments  that  are  referred  to  in  this  article 
were  constructed  near  Easton,  Pa.,  by  Mr.  M.  P.  McGrath,  general 
contractor,  of  that  place.  The  contractor  or  his  engineer,  Mr.  J.  F. 
Mooney,  supervised  the  work  so  that  while  one  man  was  employed 
nominally  as  a  foreman  and  received  $2.75  per  day,  he  worked  like 

-I'SfttiffTrn* 

| /Of 4  —  if—  -i    0*  ^3  . 

&*4i  -      I  If  *v .  I K 


, 
X-sTl'   Y=28'0»  Z-ZI'tO" 'III  I 


L 


Fig>   28. — Details  of  Girder  Rail  Fastenings. 


the  other  laborers ;  generally  he  was  charged  to  placing  or  finish- 
ing. The  costs  given  are  actual  costs  except  for  the  form  lumber, 
which  had  been  used  before  and  the  cost  of  which  was  approxi- 
mated. The  costs  are  given  separately  for  each  structure. 

Coal  Trestle. — The  trestle  was  designed  as  a  coal  trestle  and 
was  constructed  as  shown  by  Figs.  28  and  29,  except  that  the 
bents  instead  of  being  made  solid,  were  built  with  a  4  x  8-ft.  open- 
ing in  each  to  permit  the  coal  to  flow  more  readily.  There  were 
8  bents  and  two  abutments  and  the  trestle  was  114  ft.  long.  It 
was  designed  to  carry  the  rails  directly  on  the  girders  without 
cross-ties,  so  that  the  girder  reinforcement  was  made  quite  heavy, 
as  is  clearly  shown  by  the  drawings.  It  will  also  be  seen  that  the 
rails  had  their  bases  partly  embedded  in  the  girders  and  were 
fastened  by  chairs.  The  chairs  were  of  cast  iron  and  were  held  by 


'Engineering-Contracting,   Feb.   5,   1908. 


BRIDGES. 


1687 


1688  HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 

bolts  extending  down  into  the  girder  and  secured  under  the  lower 
reinforcement  bar.  The  chairs  were  spaced  2  ft.  apart,  those  of 
one  rail  being  staggered  with  those  of  the  other  rail.  This  con- 
struction gave  excellent  results  in  operation  and  saved  some  6  ins. 
in  height  over  the  ordinary  cross-tie  construction.  The  remaining 
structural  details  and  dimensions  of  the  trestle  are  clearly  shown 
by  Figs.  28  and  29. 

The  wages  paid  on  this  trestle  and  also  on  the  bridge  construc- 
tion described  later,  were  as  follows : 

Laborers,    per   10-hour   day $1.50 

Blacksmiths,   per    10-hour  day 2.00 

Engineman,   per   10-hour   day 1.70 

Carpenter,   per    10-hour   day 3.00 

Foreman,  per  10-hour  day 2.75 

The  location  of  the  trestle  being  almost  flush  against  a  railway 
embankment  and  it  being  necessary  to  locate  the  stock  piles  some 
150  ft.  from  the  mixer,  made  the  cost  of  wheeling  the  materials 
high.  The  mixer  was  set  up  at  the  center  point  of  the  trestle  and 
discharged  into  barrows  which  were  hoisted  by  a  pole  and  yard 
arm.  The  pole  was  provided  with  a  yard  and  had  a  three-quarters 
swing.  A  rope  passing  over  a  pulley  at  the  end  of  the  yard  arm 
was  provided  at  one  end  with  a  three-line  sling  provided  with  a 
hook  to  attach  to  the  wheel  and  two  rings  to  slip  over  the  handles. 
This  rope  hoisted  the  barrows  to  the  top  of  the  trestle  by  means 
of  a  horse  hitched  to  the  free  end.  The  concrete  used  for  the 
reinforced  girders  was  a  1-2-4  mixture,  the  other  parts  of  the 
trestle  were  made  of  1-3-6  concrete  in  which  were  embedded 
stones  ranging  from  the  size  of  a  man's  head  to  the  size  of  a  half- 
barrel ;  these  rubble  stones  were  thrown  into  the  forms  in  1%-ft. 
layers.  The  total  amount  of  concrete  in  this  trestle  was  116  cu. 
yds.  and  its  cost  was  as  follows : 

Materials —  Per  cu.  yd. 

1,069  bbls.    cement,  at  $1.24 $1.325 

0.631  tons    sand,    at    70    cts 0.442 

1.11  tons  stone,  at   $1.25 1.387 

131V2    Ibs.   steel,   at  2   cts 2.630 

Lumber     ($112.63    charged    up) 0.971 

Total  materials $6.755 

Labor  and  Supplies — 

Making   and   erecting   forms $1.21 

Handling    sand 0.180 

Handling   stone 0.175 

Mixing    concrete 0.184 

Placing  concrete 0.300 

Finishing    concrete 0.103 

Miscellaneous 0.246 

Total    labor $2.398 

Total  labor  and  materials $9.153 

In  the  item  miscellaneous  were  included  blacksmith's  work  on 
reinforcement,  handling  cement,  coal,  oil,  etc.  As  will  be  noted 


BRIDGES.  lf>89 

the  cost  of  reinforcement  is  distributed  over  the  whole  structure 
116  cu.  yds.  of  concrete;  to  be  strictly  accurate,  the  total  15,250 
Ibs.  of  reinforcing  metal  should  be  divided  into  the  volume  of  con- 
crete in  the  girders  which,  figured  from  the  drawings,  was  approxi- 
mately 24  cu.  yds.  This  gives  the  great  weight  of  635  Ibs.  of  rein- 
forcement per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  in  the  girders. 

Bridge  No.  1. — This  structure  had  a  clear  span  of  10%  ft.  and 
consisted  of  two  concrete  girders,  one  under  each  rail,  with  ends 
embedded  into  concrete  abutments  with  wing  walls.  The  girders 
were  3  ft.  deep,  2  ft.  wide  on  top  and  1%  ft.  wide  on  the  bottom 
and  each  was  made  of  1:2:4  concrete  reinforced  by  five  1%-in. 
round  bars,  three  straight  and  two  bent,  with  stirrups  every 
1  %  ft.  The  abutments  were  made  of  1:3:6  concrete.  Conditions 
were  favorable  construction.  As  in  the  trestle  rubble  stones  were 
incorporated  in  the  abutment  concrete ;  some  cinders  were  also  used 
anO.  their  cost  is  included  in  the  cost  of  handling  the  stone.  The 
bridge  contained  altogether  102  cu.  yds.  of  concrete.  The  costs 
were  as  follows : 

Materials —  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement    $1.264 

Stone    1.688 

Sand 0.444 

Reinforcement     0.098 

Lumber     0.383 

Total    materials $3.877 

Labor  and  Supplies — - 

Forms    $0.479 

Handling     stone 0.175 

Handling    sand 0.077 

Mixing    concrete 0.100 

Placing    concrete     0.176 

Finishing   concrete 0.094 

Miscellaneous     0.224 

Total    labor    $1.325 

Total  materials  and  labor $5.202 

The  item  miscellaneous  includes  hauling  cement  and  water,  work 
on  reinforcement  and  coal.  As  in  the  trestle,  the  unit  cost  of  rein- 
forcement is  got  by  dividing  the  total  cost  into  the  total  yardage 
of  concrete  value  as  only  the  girders  were  reinforced. 

Bridge  No.  II. — This  bridge  had  a  clear  span  of  16  ft.  and  was 
13  ft.  high,  and  like  the  bridge  just  described  consisted  of  two  con- 
crete birders  with  ends  embedded  into  concrete  abutments.  The 
girders  were  22  ins.  deep,  2  ft.  wide  on  top  and  1  ft.  wide  on  the 
bottom.  Each  girder  was  reinforced  with  five  1%-in.  round  rods, 
three  straight  and  two  bent,  without  stirrups.  The  ties  were 
fastened  to  the  girders  by  embedded  anchor  bolts.  The  costs  of  ma- 
terials changed  somewhat  from  those  given  for  the  trestle  and 
bridge  No.  1.  The  cement  cost  $1.54  per  barrel,  and  the  stone 
(crushed  on  the  ground)  cost  73  cts.  per  ton.  Rubble  stones  were 
incorporated  in  the  abutment  concrete  as  in  the  work  previously  de- 
scribed ;  this  stone  had  all  to  be  collected  by  men  and  teams  and 


1690  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

this  fact  is  reflected  in  the  high  unit  cost  ot  handling  stone.  The 
mixer  was  located  so  that  its  discharge  chute  overhung  and  dis- 
charged directly  into  the  forms  for  one  abutment.  To  reach  the 
further  abutment  an  ordinary  coal  chute  was  provided  and  the 
concrete  chuted  directly  into  place.  The  bridge  contained  98  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete,  which  cost  as  follows: 

Materials —  Par  cu.  yd.     ' 

Cement,    at    $1.54 $1.596 

Stone    0.814 

Sand     0.453 

Reinforcement    0.176 

Lumber    0.316 

Total    materials    $3,355 

Labor  and   Supplies — • 

Forms    $0.520 

Handling    stone 0.236 

Handling    sand 0.180 

Mixing    concrete 0.073 

Placing    concrete 0.157 

Finishing    concrete 0.092 

Coal    and   water 0.041 

Handling  cement 0.078 

Total    labor $1.377 

Total  materials  and  labor $4.732 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  handling  the  stone  for  this 
bridge  ran  high  because  of  the  teaming  referred  to  above.  Rein- 
forcement is  charged  into  the  total  yardage  as  in  the  structures 
previously  described. 

Bridge  No.  III. — This  bridge  was  built  for  the  passage  of  farm 
wagons  of  5  tons  capacity.  It  had  a  clear  span  of  17  ft.  and  was 
15  ft.  wide  and  17  ft.  clear  height.  The  floor  consisted  of  four 
12  x  6-in.  girders  carrying  a  6-in.  floor  slab.  The  concrete  was  a 
1:3:6  mixture  throughout  and  was  mixed  by  hand.  The  concrete 
was  made  with  a  broken  tile  aggregate  obtained  from  a  nearby  tile 
works  at  the  cost  of  handling  only.  This  tile  was  very  easily 
broken  and  left  a  rather  poor  finish  to  the  concrete.  There  were 
107  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  in  the  bridge  and  it  cost  as  follows: 
Materials —  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement     '.  .  .  .$1.594 

Sand 0.459 

Reinforcement     0.127 

Lumber     ' 0.280 

Total     materials $2.460 

Labor  and  Supplies — 

Forms    $0.41 

Handling    tile '. 0.692 

Handling    sand 0.112 

Handling    cement 0.105 

Mixing    concrete 0.413 

Placing    concrete 0.341 

Total     labor $2.077 

Total  materials  and  labor $4.537 


BRIDGES. 


1691 


In  noting  these  cost*  the  very  heavy  cost  of  handling  the  broken 
tile  aggregate  will  be  observed  ;  on  the  other  hand  this  aggregate 
cost  nothing  itself.  The  lumber  charge  is  only  that  for  new  lum- 
ber, the  old  lumber  that  was  re-used  was  not  charged  in.  The  cost 
of  sand  was  94  cts.  per  ton. 

Cost  of  a  Reinforced  Concrete  Trestle. — Mr.  C.  C.  Mitchell  gives 
the  following  data : 

The  trestle  replaced  an  old  wooden  trestle  286  ft.  long  on  a  cable 
incline  railway  up  Catskill  Mountain,  New  York.  The  main  struc-' 
tural  features  of  the  trestle  and  the  slope  of  the  ground  on  which 
it  was  built  are  indicated  by  Fig.  30.  The  work  was  done  by 
contract  after  the  cable  incline  had  closed  down  on  Oct.  17,  1908, 
for  the  season.  Parts  of  the  old  timber  structure  were  thus  avail- 
able for  supporting  forms  and  for  such  other  purposes  as  the  con- 
tractor required  this  kind  of  timber. 


Fig.  30. — Concrete  Trestle. 

4 

While  waiting  for  the  materials  to  arrive  and  the  road  to  close 
down,  excavation  was  begun  on  the  footings,  stone  for  the  concrete 
was  broken,  a  pipe  line  1,000  ft.  long  was  laid  to  a  waterfall,  a 
cement  house  and  a  shanty  in  which  to  fabricate  the  steel  were 
built. 

In  excavating  for  the  footings  it  developed  that  there  were  alter- 
nate strata  of  slate  rock  and  earth,  with  boulders  in  about  half  of 
them,  so  that  to  get  a  good  foundation  on  bedrock  it  was  necessary 
to  go  from  4  to  10  ft.  below  the  ground,  the  surface  of  which  was 
so  steep  that  it  was  very  difficult  to  work  on  it.  Slides  and  caving 
caused  a  much  larger  quantity  of  material  to  be  handled  than  that 
represented  by  the  holes  excavated. 

The  excavations  were  walled  up  in  pyramidal  form  on  a  batter 
of  2  ins.  to  the  foot  outward  to  within  2  ft.  of  the  ground  surface, 
there  narrowing  to  a  section  30x30  ins.,  on  top  of  which  a  wooden 
box  30  ins.  square  and  24  ins.  high  was  set  up.  Every  bent  had 
two  such  forms  for  the  batter  post  footings,  and  every  alternate 


1692  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DAT. I. 

bent  had  in  addition  a  third  for  the  diagonal*  bracing  struts  to  meet 
on.  Then  footings  were  concreted  with  a  mixture  of  1-3-6,  the 
stone  being  broken  by  hand  to  1^-in.  size  and  the  wooden  top 
forms  being  shifted  ahead  as  the  work  progressed,  the  stone- 
breaking,  mixing  board,  etc.,  being  likewise  shifted  ahead.  Half 
of  the  lumber  was  stored  at  the  lower  end  of  the  trestle  and  half 
at  the  middle ;  half  of  the  sand  at  the  middle  and  half  at  the  upper 
end ;  half  of  the  steel  at  the  lower  end  and  half  at  upper  end,  and 
•all  cement  at  the  middle. 

Five  mixing  boards  were  established  along  the  trestle,  and  stone 
was  broken  successively  at  each  as  it  was  needed  for  the  concrete. 
The  water  pipe,  which  ran  alongside,  was  shortened  as  the  work 
progressed.  The  sand  and  gravel  were  separated  by  screening  and 
sent  to  the  mixing  boards  through  temporary  chutes,  the  super- 
structure concrete  being  1  part  cement,  2  parts  sand,  2  parts  %-in. 
gravel  and  2  parts  %-in.  stone. 

Work  was  begun  with  a  force  of  10  men  working  9  hours,  of 
whom  1  was  a  foreman  drawing- $4  a  day,  1  carpenter  at  $2.50,  1 
steel  bender  at  $2.25,  and  7  laborers  at  $1.75  each.  When  the  road 
closed  down  the  force  was. doubled,  8  more  laborers  being  added  at 
$1.75  and  2  carpenters  at  $2  and  $3.25,  respectively,  these  latter 
working  for  a  bonus. 

Concreting  the  footings  began  on  Oct.  18  and  dismantling  the  old 
trestle  at  the  same  time,  with  some  men  fabricating  steel,  some 
building  forms,  some  breaking  stone  and  some  excavating  the  upper 
footings. 

The  pulleys  were  first  removed  from  under  the  cable,  and  the 
latter  supported  by  2x4-in.  plank  spiked  to  the  old  trestle  bents,  on 
which  were  also  preserved  the  line  and  grade.  The  guard  rails  and 
track  rails  were  next  removed,  then  the  cross  ties  and  four  inner 
stringers  were  unbolted  and  lowered  by  ropes  to  the  ground  and 
piled  so  as  to  form  mixing  boards.  The  remaining  outside  stringers 
were  then  shifted  out  to  the  ends  of  the  bent  caps,  leaving  a  clear 
space  in  the  center  8  ft.  .6  ins.  by  26  ins.  deep.  In  some  places  the 
tops  of  these  stringers  were  2  ins.  above  grade  and  in  other  places 
2  ins.  below,  otherwise  they  represented  approximately  the  level 
for  the  new  work  and  allowed  a  clearance  of  3  ins.  for  the  outside 
girder  form  of  the  new  work.  Next  2x6-in.  spruce  -floor  timbers 
for  the  girder  forms  were  hung  at  3-ft.  intervals  on  a  grade  27*4 
ins.  below  by  2x4-in.  battens  spiked  to  the  outside  of  the  old 
stringers.  The  old  bent  caps  were  then  gained  out  for  each  new 
girder  to  the  grade  of  the  floor  timber,  and  a  I1/4xl2-in.  by  16-ft. 
bottom  board  for  each  of  the  three  new  girder  forms  nailed  in 
place.  These  girder  forms  were  then  built  up  to  a  depth  of  26  ins. 
of  1^4x9-in.  spruce  matched  boards,  I^x4-in.  pieces  being  used  for 
battens  every  36  ins.  These  sides  were  braced  internally  at  3-ft. 
intervals  by  tablets  taken  from  the  footing  forms  and  placed  like 
cross-partitions  between  the  girder  forms.  The  outer  sides  were 
braced  by  wedging  against  the  2x4-in.  hangers  and  old  supporting 
stringers,  the  tops  of  the  latter  being  held  from  gaping  outward  by 
I1/4x4-in.  strips  nailed  across  the  top  over  the  floor  timbers.  The 


BRIDGES.  1693 

three  floor  timbers  at  the  center  of  each  span  were  then  further 
supported  from  below  by  struts  composed  of  old  ties  and  braces 
from  the  dismantled  structure. 

The  forms  for  the  batter  posts  and  bracing  struts  were  made  up 
in  trough  form,  leaving  the  outer  and  upper  side  open,  then  set  in 
place  on  the  foundation,  and  the  tops  sawed  to  fit  the  bottom  of  the 
girder  forms.  The  webs  were  then  built  between  their  tops,  uniting 
the  whole  with  the  girders.  The  post  and  strut  forms  were  then 
properly  braced  and  supported,  the  reinforcing  steel  put  in  place, 
a  section  of  the  fourth  side  put  in  place  and  the  whole  securely 
clamped  together  by  %x26-in.  bolts  passing  tangent  to  two  sides  and 
drawing  2x4-in.  yokes  against  the  remaining  two  sides. 

The  reinforcement  having  been  placed  in  the  girders,  the  concrete 
was  then  poured  in  and  carefully  rammed  and  spaded,  and  the 
third  side  built  up  and  clamped  directly  ahead  of  the  concreting 
so  as  to  permit  the  most  careful  placing  of  the  latter  without  chance 
of  displacing  the  reinforcement.  These  posts  were  concreted  to- 
gether up  to  the  level  of  the  girders  for  two  bents  usually.  Owing 
to  the  30°  surface,  the  tops  of  the  girders  had  to  be  boarded  over 
continuously  as  the  concreting  progressed  to  keep  it  from  running 
out,  and  a  section  of  1-in.  pipe  had  to  be  left  in  place  every  4  ft. 
in  the  outer  girders  through  which  to  bolt  the  track  to  the  new 
structure.  When  concreting  stopped  for  the  day  bulkheads  in  the 
form  of  saddles  were  placed  in  the  web  at  a  bent,  these  bulkheads 
being  removed  the  next  day,  allowing  the  concrete  of  each  girder 
an  the  succeeding  day  to  begin  half  way  in  the  web  of  the  preceding 
bent. 

Each  batter  post  was  reinforced  by  a  rack  composed  of  %-in. 
rods  wired  to  dowels  in  the  footing  or  let  into  holes  drilled  in  bed- 
rock, extending  up  through  the  girder  above  it  nearly  to  the  top 
surface  and  bound  together  every  18  ins.  by  a  rectangular  hoop  of 
% -in.  corrugated  bar,  previously  bent  to  the  right  form  and  se- 
curely wired  together.  These  racks  were  made  up  as  needed,  and 
when  set  in  place  inside  the  forms  had  about  1  in.  of  clearance 
around  them  and  had  to  be  constantly  watched  by  the  man  ram- 
ming the  concrete  to  keep  them  centered.  Each  strut  brace  had  a 
%-in.  rod  within  1  in.  of  each  of  its  two  lower  corners,  wired  to 
the  footing  dowels  and  passing  up  through  the  central  girder  nearly 
to  the  surface,  and  requiring  great  care  in  placing  the  concrete  to 
maintain  them  in  place. 

Each  girder  had  two  %-in.  bars  suspended  from  the  cross-hatters 
on  top  of  the  forms  by  wire,  so  that  they  lay  1%  ins.  below  the- 
upper  surface  continuously,  and  two  intermediate  8-ft.  bars  over- 
each  web  for  continuity.  At  6-in.  intervals  eleven  stirrups  were 
hung  on  them  at  the  bent  webs  and  two  more  were  hung  near  the 
center  of  span,  so  that  they  lay  in  V-shape  normal  to  the  axis  of 
each  girder  and  1  in.  distant  from  its  bottom  and  sides.  Four  %-in. 
bottom  bars  were  then  hung  or  laid  in  these  stirrups,  the  length 
being  34  f  t. ;  two  were  made  to  break  joints  at  each  bent.  When 
these  bars  were  all  in  place  and  securely  wired,  two  %-in.  bars  were 
sprung  into  the  cross-struts  at  the  center  of  span  and  four  more  in 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

each  of  the  webs  and  wired  in  place.  Whereupon  the  girders  were 
ready  for  concreting. 

The  congestion  of  steel  at  the  webs  made  it  difficult  to  place  the 
concrete  and  properly  ram  it  at  and  near  the  webs,  and  particularly 
to  place  and  remove  bulkheads  and  clean  out  the  forms  before  going 
ahead  with, the  concreting.  It  was  also  hard  to  place  the  concrete 
in  the  top  of  the  bracing  struts.  The  best  results  in  placing  the 
concrete  were  attained  with  a  very  wet  mix,  poured  so  that  the 
water  would  flow  up  the  forms  ahead  and  be  followed  by  a  grout, 
which  ran  all  around  and  between  the  reinforcement,  leaving  the 
stone  and  gravel  to  be  rammed  down  into  it  at  last. 

The  mixing  was  done  by  hand  the  gang  being  divided  so 
that  one  batch  was  being  separated  while  the  other  was  being 
deposited.  The  sand  and  gravel  were  sent  to  the  board  by  a  chute, 
the  stone  broken  at  the  edge  of  the  board  as  used,  and  the  cement 
carried  to  the  board,  each  man  taking  a  bag  as  he  came  to  work 
and  after  lunch.  Inclined  runways  of  plank  were  shifted  from  bent 
to  bent  for  the  posts  and  others  built  from  the  mixing  board  to 
the  top  of  structure  and  planks  laid  along  the  sides  of  the  girder 
forms  in  such  manner  that  the  employes  could  return  to  the  board 
without  interfering  with  the  loaded  pails.  Owing  to  the  steepness 
of  the  ground  and  of  the  grade  on  the  finished  work,  there  was 
unusual  danger  of  accidents  and  need  of  constant  vigilance  to  pre- 
vent bad  results  from  careless  work,  and  this  is  the  reason  why 
only  so  many"  men  were  employed  and  in  such  a  manner. 

Because  of  the  unexpected  depth  of  thirteen  of  the  footings,  a 
%-in.  steel  bar  encased  in  6  ins.  of  concrete  was  placed  as  a  tie 
between  the  batter  post  feet  wherever  the  latter  did  not  reach 
directly  to  bedrock.  This  and  37  cu.  yds.  of  extra  concrete  not 
indicated  on  the  plans  and  a  corresponding  quantity  of  excavation 
not  originally  called  for  delayed  the  completion  of  the  work,  which 
was  to  have  been  finished  on  Dec.  1,  so  that  it  took  until  Dec.  12 
to  complete  it.  The  weather  was  unusually  favorable,  being  dry 
and  warm  until  Nov.  3,  from  which  time  on  there  were  light  squalls 
of  snow,  succeeded  by  mild  weather  till  Dec.  1,  when  it  became  so 
cold  that  the  aggregates  had  to  be  heated.  An  old  section  of  steel 
smokestack,  4  ft.  in  diameter  and  12  ft.  long,  was  filled  with  fire 
and  sand  and  gravel  piled  over  it,  the  water  being  hearted  in  pails 
over  a  fire. 

The  14  M.  ft.  of  form  lumber  sufficed  to  complete  about  half  the 
forms,  and  thereafter  the  forms  first  concreted,  having  been  filled 
.ten  days,  were  stripped  and  the  lumber  used  as  the  form  work 
progressed.  When  the  clamps  were  removed  the  post  forms  came 
off  in  four  pieces  in  good  shape  to  be  set  up  again  at  once,  but 
the  girder  and  web  forms  had  to  be  taken  apart  and  rebuilt. 

The  top  boards  and  tie  strips  were  first  pried  off  the  top  of  the 
girders,  the  hangers  and  floor  timber  next  removed,  then  the  old 
stringers  pried  off  and  lowered  with  ropes,  all  the  girder  batters 
then  knocked  off,  and  the  form  boards  taken  off  separately  from 
both  the  outside  and  inside  of  girders,  webs  and  struts.  The  bot- 
tom boards  to  the  girders  and  diagonal  strut  braces  were  left  in 


BRIDGES,  1695 

place  two  weeks  longer,  with  props  under  them,  and  then  the  old 
bent  caps  were  sawed  in  two  and  the  bent  timber  unbolted  and 
dismembered,  releasing  the  bottom  boards,  which  were  then  re- 
moved, leaving  the  concrete  completely  stripped. 

There  was  very  little  pointing  necessary,  except  on  the  posts, 
which  was  done  from  a  ladder,  after  which  the  exterior  surfaces 
were  given  a  wash  of  cement,  alum  and  lye,  rubbed  in  with  a 
cement  brick  to  waterproof  the  structure  and  remove  board  marks. 
The  cable  was  blocked  up  on  the  concrete  webs,  the  ties  and  guard 
rails  bolted  on,  the  pulleys  rehung  and  track  laid  back  in  place  by 
the  Otis  Railway  Company,  replacing  track  not  coming  under  the 
contract. 

The  amount  of  work  done  under  this  contract  was  as  follows : 
Excavation  called  for  87  cu.  yds.  earth,  and  extra  excavation  un- 
called for  63  cu.  yds.  boulders,  making  a  total  of  150  cu.  yds.  ;  dis- 
mantling and  piling  34  M.  ft.  yellow  pine  structure ;  37  cu.  yds. 
concreting  (1-3-6)  in  extra  footings;  125  cu.  yds.  concreting  called 
for  (1-2-4),  reinforced;  13  tie  rods  for  batter  post  feet;  cleaning 
up  and  removal  of  debris;  total  cost,  $4,332.14;  contract  price, 
$4,000  ;  extras,  $677.75  ;  total,  $4,677.75  ;  profit  on  contract,  $345.61. 

Daily  records  were  kept,  showing  kind  of  weather,  temperature, 
amount  of  each  kind  of  work  done,  with  proportion  of  pay  roll 
spent  in  doing  it  and  the  unit  cost  noted  down  for  the  immediate 
purpose  of  more  economically  planning  the  next  day's  work.  A 
distribution  statement  showed  the  cost  of  both  labor 'and  material, 
charged  up  against  each  item  of  work  performed  during  the  week 
and  the  unit  costs  computed  for  each.  A  comparison  was  made 
between  weekly  average  and  daily  rates,  and  the  conditions  pre- 
vailing on  those  days  showing  the  most  economic  rates  were  then 
planned  for  the  succeeding  week's  work. 

Separate  records  were  kept  for.  the  items  applying  to  the  general 
contract,  the  costs  on  extra  work  being  kept  apart.  Finally  all 
the  costs  were  referred  to  the  quantity  of  work  done  under  them 
in  the  form  of  unit  prices  -per  cubic  yard  and  the  percentage  which 
each  represented  to  the  whole. 

The  itemized  cost  of  the  work  is  given  in  Tables  XXII,  XXIII 
and  XXIV. 

TABLE  XXII. — COST  OF  REINFORCED  CONCRETE. 
Materials —  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cement    $2.31 

Sand     1.73 

Stone    2.00 

Gravel     0.33 

Water    0.35 

Total    materials $6.72 

Labor — 

Mixing   and    placing    $1.94 

Pointing   up    concrete    0.37 

Waterproofing   concrete    0.60 

Total   labor    $2.91 

Grand  total  concrete   $9.63 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Forms — 

Lumber,   butts  and  nails    $4.75 

Fabricating   and    erecting    3.58 


Total    forms    $8.33 

Reinforcement — 

Materials,   bars,  wire,  etc $3.77 

Fabricating    0.37 

Placing     0.74 


Total    reinforcement    $4.88 

Grand  total  for  concrete  work,    125  cu. 

yds $22.84 

Miscellaneous — 

Excavation,  87  cu.  yds $0.56 

Dismantling   old   trestle    1.00 

Cleaning  up  at   completion 0.40 

General    expenses,^  superintendence,    etc 4.45 


Total  miscellaneous    $6.41 

Grand  total    $29.25 

TABLE  XXIII. — COST  OF  EXTRA  FOOTINGS. 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Excavation,   63  yds.   rock,  at  $2.89 $  4.91 

Aggregates:  Cement,   $1.94;   sand,   $0.97;  stone,  $1.01  3.92 

Forms,   material    1.20 

Forms,    labor     1.44 

Concreting,   labor    2.07 


37  cu.  yds.  concrete    $13.50 

TABLE  XXIV. — THIRTEEN  EXTRA  TIE  RODS. 

Per  cu.  yds. 

Excavation     $   6.01 

Bending  and  placing  steel  rods 7.80 

Form   labor    8.35 

Form    material    ' 8.30 

Reinforcement    (steel   bars),    %    in 5.10 

Concreting  labor   5.00 

Aggregates:  Cement,   $2.70;  sand,   $1.35;   stone,   $3..      7.00 

1%    yds.    concrete    $47.50 

These  tie  rods  were  of  concrete,  6x6  ins.,  reinforced  by  %-in. 
steel  rods.  The  tie  rods  connected  the  feet  of  the  batter  posts,  as 
shown  in  Fig.  30. 

Standard  Designs  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Culverts,  C.,  B.  &  Q. 
Railway.* — Standard  culvert  designs  for  use  on  the  Chicago,  Bur- 
lington &  Quincy  Ry.  have  been  worked  out  in  reinforced  concrete 
for  box  culverts  ranging  from  4x4  ft.  to  10x12  ft.  in  size  and  for 
arch  culverts  from  4x4  ft.  to  6x6  ft.  in  size.  Up  to  and  including 
in  box  culverts  clear  openings  7  ft.  wide  the  pattern  of  structure 
shown  by  Fig.  31  is  used  ;  for  clear  openings  of  8  ft.,  and  over,  the 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   3.    1906. 


BRIDGES. 


169' 


TABLI 

3  XXV. 

Box 

Culverts. 

Pattern 

Fig.  31. 

Thick 

Length 

Cu.  yds. 

Cu.  yds. 

ness. 

Inside 

of  wing 

concrete 

cone., 

side 

dimen- 

walls. 

wing 

Lin.  ft. 

walls. 

sions  in  ft. 

Ft.  Ins. 

walls. 

Barrel. 

Ins. 

4  x     4.  ... 

5—10 

7.4 

0.75 

12 

4  x    5  

7—  6 

9.2 

0.83 

12 

4   x     6i  ... 

9—  2 

11.6 

0.9 

12 

5  x    4.  ... 

6—   1 

9.0 

0.91 

12 

5  x    5.  ... 

7  —  9 

11.3 

0.99 

12 

5  x    6  

9—  6 

13.9 

.06 

12 

6x5 

8  —  0 

13.5 

.18 

12 

6x6.. 

8—  0 

16.5 

.25 

12 

6  x    8  

12—  9 

18.3 

.60 

15 

7  x    5  

8—  4 

15.65 

.39 

12 

7  x    7.  ... 

11—  5 

24.9 

1.72 

15 

7  x    8  

13—  0 

29.13 

1.82 

15 

Box 

Culverts. 

Pattern 

Fig.  92. 

8x6.. 

10—  0 

31.0 

1.89 

15 

8   x    8  

13—  4 

39.7 

2.08 

15 

8   x  10  

10—  5 

5.71 

2.51 

18 

10  x   10  

17—  0 

62.3 

3.07 

18 

10  x  12  

20  —  4 

76.0 

3.3 

18 

Thick- 


roof 
slab. 

Ins. 
12 
12 
12 
14 
14 
14 
16 
16 
16 
18 
18 
18 

20 
20 
20 
24 
24 


Thick- 
ness. 
floor 
slab. 
Ins. 

12 

12 

12 

14 

14 

14 

16 

16 

16 

18 

18 

18 

20 
20 
20 
24 
24 


pattern  is  modified  as  shown  by  Fig.  32.  Figure  33  shows  the 
pattern  of  arch  structure  used.  The  dimensions  L  and  I  in  the  box 
culvert  designs  are  determined  by  the  formulas, 

10 
£  —  —  ft  +  #  +  3  f  t.  ;  and 

3 

10 
I  =  —  h  +  x. 

O 


Inside  dimensions 
in  ft. 

4x4 

5x5 

6x6 


Length 

of  wing 

walls. 

Ft.  Ins. 

5—  3 

6—11 

8—  6 


TABLE  XXVI. 

Cu.  yds.  Lbs.  of 
concrete  metal 
in  wing     wing 
walls.        walls. 


236 

401.7 

553.5 


Cu.  yds. 
cone,  per 
lin.  ft. 
barrel. 
0.5 
0.71 
1.00 


Lbs.  of 

metal  per 

lin.  ft. 

barrel. 

54 

76.7 
103.4 


in  which  x  —  the  width  of  roadbed  at  crown  and  h  =  the  height  of 
the  fill  above  the  culvert.  In  the  arch  culvert  pattern  the  dimension 
L  is  determined  by  the  formula, 

10 

L  =  — 
3 


1698 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


3  Ry.M  8c5. 
|K I 

P L 


Fig.    32. 

All  other  dimensions  are  determined  by  the  cross-sectional  size 
of  the  waterway.  They  are,  for  the  various  sizes  adopted  and  with 
the  exception  of  the  reinforcement,  shown  in  Table  XXV. 

Structural  details  of  the  4x6-ft.  culvert  of  pattern  Fig.  31  are 
shown  in  Fig.  34,  and  Fig.  35  shows  the  similar  details  for  the 
10xl2-ft.  culvert  of  pattern  Fig.  2.  The  same  general  details  are 
employed  for  the  culverts  of  intermediate  and  smaller  dimensions. 


H  *•'• 


Fig.    33. 

Turning  now  to  the  arch  culvert  pattern,  Fig.  36  shows  the  struc- 
tural details  of  the  6x6-ft.  size.  The  main  features  of  the  other 
sizes  of  this  pattern  are  shown  by  Table  XXVI. 

For  culvert  work  the  company  uses  a  1-3-6  concrete  composed 
of  1.08  barrel  of  cement,  0.45  cu.  yd.  sand  and  0.9  cu.  yd.  broken 
stone,  or  1.25  barrels  of  cement  and  1  cu.  yd.  of  gravel. 


Par,  Longi+udino.  Section. 
Fig.   34. 


BRIDGES. 


1699 


Cost  of  Concrete  Culverts,  References.— In  Engineering-Contract- 
ing, Sept.  1,  1909,  are  given  standard  designs  of  box  and  arch 
culverts  on  the  C.,  M.  &  St.  P.,  together  with  quantities  and  costs. 
See  Tyrrell's  "Concrete  Bridges  and  Culverts." 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Culvert.— The  following  data  relative 
to  the  construction  of  a  4-ft.  reinforced  concrete  box  culvert  in 
Missouri.  The  work  was  done  under  the  supervision  of  P.  S.  Quinn, 
County  Engineer.  The  culvert  contained  28  cu.  yds.  of  cement  and 
2,'500  Ibs.  of  steel  bars.  The  concrete  was  a  1-4-8  mixture.  Com- 


Part   Longitudinal  SecKon. 
Fig.  35. 


fy.M.fcS. 
Sectional 
End  Elevation. 


H-~-***_ 


IIUJL"::. 

liLU| 

piLuiLaujjiUJili 
i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  i  I  i  it 


g"-****** 

I*?*** 

Part      Side     Elevation.  Sectional  End  Elevation. 

Fig.  36.— Arch  Culvert. 

mon  labor  was  paid  15  cts.  per  hour  and  carpenters   35   cts.  per 


hour.     The  cost  was  as  follows: 

Material: 
Cement,   23   bbls.,   at  $1.50 


Total. 

,   at  $1.50.... $  34.50 

Sand,  15  cu.  yds.,  at  $0.65 9.75 

Crushed  limestone,  28  cu.  yds.,  at  $1.75 49.00 

Steel,  2,500  Ibs.,  at  2.3 57.50 

Lumber,  delivered   33.60 

Total  material    $184.35 


Per  cu.  yd. 

Concrete. 

$1.23 

.35 

1.75 

2.05 

1.20 

?6.58 


ITou  HANDBOOK   OP  COST  DATA. 


Labor: 

Carpenter,  forms,  27     hrs $  9.45  $0.34 

Helper,  forms,  34  hrs 5.10  .18 

Steel  placing,  20  hrs 3.00  .11 

Concrete,  mix  and  place,  101  hrs 15.15  .54 


Total   labor    $   32.70  $1.17. 

Grand  total .  .$217.05  $7.75 

The  cost  of  placing  the  steel  was  $0.0012  per  Ib. 

Cost  of  an  Arch  Culvert. — The  cost  of  a  concrete  arch  culvert, 
26-ft.  span,  62-ft.  barrel  (exclusive  of  excavation),  with  wing  walls 
and  parapet,  built  near  Pittsburg  in  1901;  was  as  follows,  the  con- 
crete being  1  to  8  and  1  to  10,  hand  mixed: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

0.96  bbl.   cement,  at   $1.60 $1.535 

1.03  tons  coarse  gravel,  at  $0.19 0.195 

0.40   ton  fine  gravel,  at  $0.21 0.085 

0.32  ton  sand,  at  $0.36 0.115 

Tools,  etc 0.078 

Lumber  for  forms  and  centers 0.430 

Carpenter  work  on  forms  (23  cts.  hr. ) 0.280 

Carpenter  work  on  platforms  and  buildings 0.050 

Preparing  site  and  cleaning  up. 0.210 

Changing  trestle . 0  085 

Handling  materials 0.037 

Mixing  and  laying,  av.  15 y2  cts.  per  hr 1.440 

!<--  -ttftK 

Total  per  cu.  yd .' ..^  $4.540 

Wages  per  hour  were:  General  foreman,  40  cts.;  foreman,  25 
cts.;  carpenters,  22%  to  25  cts.;  laborers,  15  cts.  The  finished 
structure  contained  1,493  cu.  yds.,  total  cost  being  $7,243,  including 
$463  for  excavation.  The  work  was  done  for  a  railway  by  company 
forces. 

Cost  of  Six  Arch  Culverts  and  Six  Bridge  Abutments,  N.  C.  & 
St.  L.  Railway.— Mr.  H.  M.  Jones  is  authority  for  the  following 
data:  An  18-ft.  full-centered  arch  culvert  was  built  by  contract 
on  the  N.  C.  &  St.  L.  Ry.,  near  Paris,  Tenn.  The  culvert  was  built 
under  a  trestle  65  ft.  high,  before  filling  in  the  trestle.  The  railway 
company  built  a  pile  foundation  to  support  a  concrete  foundation 
2  ft.  thick,  and  a  concrete  paving  20  ins.  thick.  The  contractors 
then  built  the  culvert,  which  has  a  barrel  140  ft.  long.  No  expan- 
sion joints  were  provided,  which  was  a  mistake,  for  cracks  have 
developed  about  50  ft.  apart.  The  contractors  were  given  a  large 
quantity  of  quarry  spalls,  which  they  crushed  in  part  by  hand, 
much  of  it  being  too  large  for  the  concrete.  The  stone  was  shipped 
in  drop-bottom  cars  and  dumped  into  bins  built  on  the  ground  under 
the  trestle.  The  sand  was  shipped  in  ordinary  coal  cars,  and 
dumped  or  shoveled  into  bins.  The  mixing  boards  were  placed  on 
the  surface  of  the  ground,  and  wheelbarrow  runways  were  built 


BRIDGES,  1701 

up  as  the  work  progressed.     The  cost  of  the  1,900  cu.  yds.  of  con- 
crete in  the  culverts  was  as  follows  per  cu.  yd. : 

1.01    bbls.   Portland   cement $2.26 

0.56  cu.  yd.  of  sand,  at  60  cts 32 

Loading  and  breaking  stone 25 

Lumber,  centers,  cement  house  and  hardware 64 

Hauling  materials 04 

Mixing  and  placing  concrete 1.17 

Carpenter  work 19 

Foreman  (100  days  at  $2.50) 13 

Superintendent   (100  days  at  $5.50) 29 

$5.29 

It  will  be  seen  that  only  19  cu.  yds.  of  concrete  were  placed  per 
day  with  a  gang  that  appears  to  have  numbered  about  21  laborers, 
who  were  negroes  receiving  about  $1.10  per  day.  This  was  the 
first  work  of  its  kind  that  the  contractors  had  done.  It  will  be 
noticed  that  the  cost  of  42  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  superintendence  and 
foremanship  was  unnecessarily  high. 

The  work  in  Tables  XXVII  and  XXVIII  was  "company  work" 
done  by  negro  labor  under  company  foremen. 

TABLE  XXVII. — COST  OF  Six  CONCRETE  CULVERTS  ON  THE  N.  C.  & 
ST.  L.  RY. 

No.   of  culvert 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Span  of  culvert 5ft.     7.66ft.  10.  ft.  12ft  12ft.  16ft. 

Cu.  yds.  of  concrete.  ..      210  199  354  292  406  986 

Ratio    of     cement      to 

stone   1:5.5  1:6.5  1:5.8  1:5.8  1:6.1  1:6.5 

Increase      of     concrete 

over  stone   16.0%  9.9%  6.3%  12.3%  8.3%  5.3% 

Bbls.  cement  per  cu.yd.     1.02  0.90  1.06  1.01  1.00  1.09 

Cu.yds.   sand  per  cu.yd.      0.43  0.49  0.44  0.46  0.46  0.47 

Cu.yds.  stone  per  cu.yd.     0.86  0.90  0.95  0.89  0.94  0.94 

Total  days  labor  (incl. 

foremen  and  supt. )..     702  607  784  726  768  1,994 

Av.     wages     per     day 
( incl.     foremen     and 

supt.)      $1.61  $1.33  $1.59  $1.19  $1.47  $1.46 

Cost  per  cu.  yd. : 

Cement    2.18  1.94  2.27  1.82  2.11  2.01 

Sand                 0.17  0.20  0.18  0.18  0.19  0.14 

Stone     .                                0.52  0.52  0.47  0.54  0.47  0.58 

Lumber    0.88  0.43  0.48  0.43  0.31  0.57 

Unload,  materials ...      0.23  0.17  0.18  0.18  0.16 

Building    forms 1.07  0.33  0.62  0.47  0.72  0.41 

Mixing  and  placing.      1.59  1.74  1.6!)  1.35  1.23  1.26 

Total  per  cu.  yd ..    $6.65       $5.30       $5.8!)       $4.97        $5.19        $4.97 

Note: — All  these  arches  were  built  under  existing  trestles,  and 
in  all  cases,  except  No.  2,  bins  were  built  on  the  ground  under  the 
trestle  and  the  materials  were  dumped  from  cars  into  the  bins, 
loaded  and  delivered  from  the  bins  in  wheelbarrows  to  the  mixing 
boards,  and  from  the  mixing  boards  carried  in  wheelbarrows  to 
place.  Negro  laborers  were  used  in  all  cases,  except  No.  5,  and 


1702  HANDBOOK   OF -COST  DATA.. 

were  paid  90  cts.  a  day  and  their  board,  which  cost  an  additional 
20  cts.  ;  they  worked  under  white  foremen  who  received  $2.50  to  $3 
a  day  and  board.  In  culvert  No.  5,  white  laborers,  at  $1.25  without 
board,  were  used.  There  were  two  carpenters  at  $2  a  day  and  one 
foreman  at  $2.50  on  this  gang,  making  the  average  wage  $1.47  each 
for  all  engaged.  The  men  were  all  green  hands,  in  consequence  of 
which  the  labor  on  the  forms  in  particular  was  excessively  high. 
The  high  rate  of  daily  wages  on  culverts  Nos.  1  and  3  was  due 
to  the  use  of  some  carpenters  along  with  the  laborers  in  mixing  con- 
crete. The  high  cost  of  mixing  concrete  on  culvert  No.  2  was  due 
to  the  rehandling  of  the  materials,  which  were  not  dumped  into 
bins  but  onto  the  concrete  floor  of  the  culvert  and  then  wheeled 
out  and  stacked  to  one  side.  The  cost  of  excavating  and  back- 
filling at  the  site  of  each  culvert  is  not  included  in  the  table,  but 
it  ranged  from  70  cts.  to  $2  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete. 

TABLE  XXVIII. — COST  OF  CONCRETE  ABUTMENT,  RETAINING  WALLS 
AND  FOUNDATIONS. 

No.    of   structure 7  8  9  10  11           12 

Cu.   yds.   of  concrete.      310  99  '  282  78  71            72 
Ratio     of     cement     to 

stone .1:5.7  1:6.3  1:5.9  1:6.6  1:5.7 

Increase     of     concrete 

over  stone 6.2%  10.0%  12.8%  4.0%  10.9% 

Bbls.  cement  per  cu.yd.     1.09  0.95  0.99  0.96  1.03          1.39 

Cy.yds.   sand  per  cu.yd.     0.47  0.45  0.44  0.51  0.45          0.56 

Cu.yds.  stone  per  cu.yd.  0.94  0.91  0.90  0.96  0.90  1.09 
Total  days  labor  (incl. 

foremen)    573  226  599  128  131           224 

Av.     wages     per     day 

(incl.  foremen) $1.43  $1.88  $1.46  $1.69  $2.05       $1.55 

Cost  per  cu.  yd. : 

Cement    $2.32  $1.66  $1.98  $2.07  $2.19  $2.95 

Sand    0.19  0.18  0.18  0.21  0.18  0.17 

Stone 0.52  0.18  0.22  0.48  0.18  0.65 

Lumber    0.56  0.09  0.26  0.26  0.51  0.34 

Building  forms 0.35  0.40  1.09 

Mixing  and  placing.  1.94  3.38  1.36  2.21  1.74  2.59 

Totals    $5.88      $5.91      $5.09    .$5.23       $4.80       $6.70 

Note: — Structure  No.  7  consists  of  two  abutments  to  carry  a  2 4 -ft. 
span  bridge  made  of  I-beams.  Bins  to  hold  stone  and  sand  were 
built  on  the  railway  embankment.  At  the  head  of  the  bin  a  part 
of  the  bank  was  dug  away  under  the  track,  and  long  stringers  put 
in  to  carry  the  track.  The  rock  was  dumped  from  the  car  into  this 
opening  and  shoveled  into  the  bin.  The  forms  for  the  concrete 
were,  of  course,  simpler  than  for  the  arches  in  Table  XXVII ;  hence 
the  labor  on  them  cost  less. 


BRIDGES.  1703 

Structure  No.  8  consists  of  concrete  side  walls  to  support  a  cedar 
cover,  forming  a  culvert.  Slag  was  used  instead  of  crushed  stone 
in  this  structure  as  well  as  in  Nos.  9  and  11. 

Structure  No.  9  is  a  retaining  wall.  There  was  much  handling 
of  materials  due  to  lack  of  room  for  storage  near  the  work.  Old 
material  was  used  for  the  forms. 

Structures  Nos.  10  and  12  are  foundations  for  track  scales.  It  is 
not  clear  why  the  labor  cost  of  this  work  was  so  very  high. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Railroad  Culvert  in  Montana.— In 
Engineering-Contracting,  July  1,  1908,  Mr.  Henry  A.  Young  gave  the 
following :  The  following  cost  data  were  obtained  from  the  Huntley 
Project  of  the  U.  S.  Reclamation  Service,  located  at  Huntley,  Mont, 
and  show  in  detail  the  construction  costs  for  a  culvert  carrying  the 
canal  under  the  Burlington  &  Missouri  River  R.  R.  The  culvert  was 
known  as  the  "1st  Culvert  under  the  B.  &  M.  R.  Ry.,"  and  was  of  a 
type  similar  to  the  designs  of  W.  W.  Colpitts,  Assistant  Chief  Engi- 
neer, Kansas  City,  Mexico  &  Orient  Ry.,  having  two  barrels,  each 
barrel  being  6  ft.  6%  ins.  x  7  f t.  6  ins.  and  24  ft.  long.  The  roof  was 
flat,  the  walls  provided  with  .fillets  at  top  and  bottom,  and  the 
entrance  and  outlet  consisted  of  warped  walls  20  ft.  long  opening 
into  a  canal  section  20  ft.  wide  at  bottom  and  having  side 
slopes  of  1%  on  1.  The  entire  structure  was  of  concrete,  heavily 
reinforced  with  Johnson  high  carbon  corrugated  bars,  1  in.  and  % 
in.  in  diameter. 

The  work  was  not  done  cheaply,  and  the  figures  are  given  to  show 
the  outside  cost  for  this  class  of  structure,  built  under  the  most 
unfavorable  conditions.  This  was  the  first  structure  built  on  the 
project,  the  entire  gang,  mechanics  and  laborers,  was  green,  and 
the  work  was  done  in  November  and  December,  1905,  the  weather 
being  very  cold.  An  8-hour  day  was  worked.  After  the  experience 
on  this  culvert  the  same  gang  did  work  for  about  two-thirds  of  the 
costs  recorded  here.  The  forms  for  the  warped  walls  in  this  case 
gave  considerable  trouble. 

A  Municipal  Engineering  and  Contracting  Company's  1-3  cu.  yd. 
cubical  mixer  was  set  about  50  ft.  in  front  of  the  culvert.  A  gaso- 
line pump  took  water  from  a  creek  60  ft.  away  and  delivered  it  to 
a  tank  near  the  mixer.  The  delivery  pipe  froze  often  and  delayed 
the  work.  The  mixer  was  fed  by  and  the  concrete  was  carried  by 
wheelbarrows. 

The  concrete  was  put  in  wet  and  spaded.  A  1-in.  course  of  1-2 
mortar  was  placed  on  floor,  copings,  etc.,  and  troweled.  Chamfer 
strips  were  used  on  all  sharp  angles  and  fillets  in  culvert. 

The  earth  was  a  sandy  clay  and  was  removed  with  slips,  though 
considerable  hand  work  was  done  in  shaping  up. 

Sand  and  gravel  were  obtained  from  a  pit  about  1%  miles  from 
the  culvert.  The  wheel  at  pit  was  about  40  ft.,  the  material  being 


1704 


HANDBOOK   OP   COST  DATA. 


screened  into  a  bin.  The  haul  was  down  hill.  Cost  delivered  is 
recorded  in  table. 

Cement,  steel  and  other  materials  were  hauled  from  a  station 
about  1  mile  from  culvert. 

The  costs  recorded  do  not  include  backfill,  which  was  paid  for 
under  puddling,  the  trimming  and  finishing  of  exposed  concrete 
walls,  nor  the  construction  and  removal  of  a  temporary  railroad 
bridge.  The  work  was  done  by  contract,  but  actual  costs  are  given 
whether  borne  by  the  contractor  or  the  government,  and  no  allow- 
ance is  made  for  depreciation  or  for  engineering  expenses.  The 
quantities  consisted  of  338  cu.  yds.  of  excavation  and  162  cu  yds. 
of  reinforced  concrete,  the  latter  mixed  in  the  proportion  of  1-2  %  -5, 
the  maximum  size  gravel  being  2  ins. 

Lumber  was  taken  at  its  fuU  cost,  which  is  not  absolutely  correct, 
as  it  was  later  used  over  again  on  other  structures.  Probably 
one-third  of  the  lumber  charge  would  have  been  more  nearly  cor- 
rect. 


Excavation:  Days. 

Superintendent    ......................      3% 

Foreman    ............................      5 

Laborers   (loading  slips  and  excavat'g)    31% 
2-horse  teams,  slip  and  drivers  ........      8% 

Excavating    338    cu.    yds.     (sandy   clay, 
dry),  at  $0.361    ................... 

Forms   (162  cu.  yds.)  : 

Lumber,  10,550  ft.   B.  M  ........... 

Nails,    2   kegs  .......................  '. 

Total  material  for  forms.  . 

Carpenters    ..........................  90% 

Laborers    ............................  45% 

Hauling   (teams)    ....................  3% 

Total  labor,  building  and  remov- 
ing forms  ................... 


Materials: 
Cement,   225  bbls 
Cement,  12%   bbls  .......  : 

Sand,   71   cu.  yds 
Gravel,  134  cu.  yds 
Coal,    3V2    tons 
Gasoline,  25  gals 


Total  materials 


Labor- 
Laborers    .......    ....................  141  i/t 

Foreman    ............................   18% 

Cement   worker    ....................  7  13-16 

Cement  helper    ......  ..  ...............      2  % 

Teams  (hauling  cement  and  water)  ....      2% 

Total  labor,  mixing  and  placing.  . 

Reinforcement: 
Hauling  (labor  and  teams)  ............ 


Rate. 

$166.67 

50.00 

2.00 

3.60 


$20.25 
3.20 


$3.00 
2.00 
3.60 


$1.76 
1.86 
1.58 
1.58 
3.25 
.35 


$2.00 
2.40 
4.00 
1.60 
3.60 


Total. 

$19.44 

8.33 

62.75 

31.50 

$122.02 

$213.64 
6.40 

$220.04 

$272.00 

90.25 

11.25 


$373.50 


$396.00 

23.71 

112.18 

211.72 

11.37 

8.75 

$763.73 


$282.50 

43.50 

31.25 

4.40 

10.35 

$372.00 

$16.2,', 


BRIDGES.  1705 


Bending  bars: 

Laborers    11%          $     2.00  $22.25 

Blacksmith     11  %                 2.40  26.70 

Superintendent   (working  plans) 1                166.67  5.56 

Foreman 1                  50.00  1.67 

Blacksmith  coal,  3  sacks 1.00  3.00 

Total  labor,  bending $59.18 

Placing  bars: 

Laborers    34                  $2.00  $68.00 

Blacksmith 1  %                2.40  3.90 


Total   labor,   placing  bars $71.90 

Steel  bars,  25,585  Ibs $0.027       $690.79 

Installing  and  removing  plant: 

Laborers    4i/2               $2.00               $9.00 

Teams 5                    3.20              16.00 


Total   $25.00 

Superintendence  : 

Superintendent    32              $166.67          $177.78 

Foreman    31                  50.00              51.67 

Total     $229.45 

Summary  of  Concrete. 

Per  Cu.  Yd. 

Material  for  forms $1.358 

Labor   on   forms .2.306 

Materials  for  concrete 4.714 

Labor,  mixing  and  placing    2,296 

Steel  for  reinforcement 4.264 

Hauling  steel   0.100 

Labor,   bending  steel 0.365 

Labor,  placing  steel 0.444 

Installing  and  removing  plant 0.154 

Superintendence  and  foreman 1 1      1.416 


Total  cost  of  concrete $17.417 

The  cost  of  the  steel  reinforcement,  in  terms  of  the  pound  of  steel 
as  the  unit,  cost  as  follows: 

Per  lb. 
Cts. 

Steel  bars    2.70 

Hauling    0.06 

Bending 0.23 

Placing    0.28 

Total 3.27 

Cost  of  a  Stone  Arch  Culvert.*— This  culvert  was  erected  by  con- 
tract for  the  Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry.,  in  1891-1892.  The 
culvert  was  built  some  distance  from  the  original  channel,  and  a 
new  channel  was  cut  through  to  the  arch  after  it  was  completed. 
The  excavation  was  carried  4%  ft.  below  water  level.  A  cofferdam 
was  built  of  2x8  in.  x  8  in.x  7  ft.  sheet  piling,  which  was  driven  by 
hand.  Pumping  was  done  with  a  centrifugal  pump,  the  power  being 
furnished  by  a  traction  engine.  The  pump  was  run  only  one-quarter 
of  the  time,  for  the  water  did  not  come  in  rapidly.  All  excavation 
was  done  by  men  with  shovels  and  wheelbarrows. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.,  1906. 


1706  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  stone  for  the  culvert  was  a  sandstone  scabbled  at  the  quarry; 
and  but  little  work  had  to  be  done  on  the  top  and  bottom  beds. 
Joints  and  beds  were  laid  for  10  ins.  back  of  the  face  with  Portland 
cement,  and  the  rest  was  laid  with  Louisville  natural  cement.  Two 
derricks  were  used  alternately  and  were  run  with  steam  power. 

Work  on  the  excavation  commenced  Oct.  5,  1891  ;  a  hand  pump 
being  used  from  Oct.  21  to  29  ;  and  a  steam  pump  being  used  from 
Oct.  29  to  Nov.  26,  and  from  Jan.  29  to  Feb.  3,  1892.  The  first  stone 
was  laid  Nov.  7  ;  the  centers  were  raised  Dec.  4  ;  the  keystone  was 
finished  Jan.  20  ;  the  last  stone  was  laid  Jan.  25  ;  and  the  centers 
were  struck  Jan.  29.  The  plant  was  moved  away  Feb.  6.  After 
Dec.  7,  salt  was  used  in  hot  water  for  mixing  the  mortar. 

The  following  was  the  cost  to  the  railway  and  to  the  contractor : 

Price  Paid  to  Contractor. 

1,041  cu.  yds.  dry  excavation,  at  25  cts $    260.25 

617  cu.  yds.  wet  excavation,  at  75  cts. 462.75 

594  cu.  yds.  excavation  for  channel,  at  25  cts 148.50 

16,740  ft.  B.  M.  beech  timber  in  foundation,  at  $30 502.20 

20,286  ft.  B.  M.  3-in.  pine  plank,  at  $22 446.29 

495.9  cu.  yds.  first-class  masonry  cut  and  placed   (inclu- 
ding cement  and  sand),  at  $7.50 3,719.25 

504  ft.  B.  M.  sheet  piling  protection  for  ends  of  arch,  at 

$14 7.05 

140  hours'  work  driving  sheet  piling  and  riprapping  at 

end  of  arch,  at  $0.15 21.00 

20  hours,  engine  and  engineman,  ditto,  at  $0.40.  ...  I  ...  8.00 

10%    on   $29   labor 2.90 

Total    $5^57819 

Cost  to  C.  d  W.  M.  Ry. 

481.9  cu.  yds.  sandstone,  at  $6.82 $3,284.95 

Contractor's  payment  as  above 5,578.19 

Total    $8,863.14 

The  above  is  the  cost  of  sandstone  f.  o.  b.  La  Porte.  There  we^e 
57  carloads  of  stone,  of  272.4  cu.  ft.  of  stone  per  car,  weighing  157 
Ibs.  per  cu.  ft. 

Actual  Cost  of  Material  and  Labor. 
Materials: 

4,000  ft.   B.  M.   2  x  8  in  x  7  ft.  T.  &  G.  sheet  piling,  at  $14     $   56.00 
16,740  ft.   B.  M.   beech  timber,  12  in.  thick,  hewed,  at  $10..       167.40 
20,286  ft.  B.  M.   3-in.     pine  plank  in  foundation,  at  $14.  .  .  .       283.92 
1,800  ft.  B.  M.  rough  hemlock,   3  x  12  ins.,  in  centers,  at 

$10   18.00 

1,500  ft.  B.  M.  pine    (dressed  1  side),  3x12   ins.,  in  cen- 
ters, at  $14 21  00 

1,600  ft.    B.   M.    pine    (dressed   1   side,)    2  x  4  ins.,   lagging, 

at  $14    

Old  timber  in  bents  under  center 

Posts  and  walling  for  sheet  piling  (round  timber)  . . 

160  bolts  in  centers,   %  x  12  ins.,  200  Ibs.,  at  4  cts 

3,000  boat  spikes,   %  x  7  ins.,  1,000  Ibs.,  at  2%  cts 

65  cu.  yds.   sand,  at  75   cts 

95  bbls.  Louisville  cement,  at  $1 

2  bbls.  salt,  at  $1 

70  cords  16-in.  wood,  fuel  for  engines,  at  $1.25 

Total  for  materials..  .     $931.97 


BRIDGES.  1707 


Labor: 


34  days  foreman  of  laborers  excavating,  at  $2 $  68.00 

76  days  foreman  of  masons,  at  $2.50 190.00 

73%  days  engineman,  at  $2 147.00 

287 %  days  stone  cutters,  at  $3 1,162.50 

10  days  carpenters,  at  $2 20.00 

622  days  laborers,  at  $1.50 933.00 

23  days  team,  at  $3 :  69.00 

Total  for  labor $2,589.50 

General  expense: 

85  days  timekeeper,  at  $1 $   85.00 

Repairs  to  stonecuters'  tools 65.00 

30   days  traction  engine  and  engineman,   at   $3....- 90.00 

60  days  rent  on  engine  when  idle,  at  $1.50 90.00 

10%  value  of  $2,000  plant -. 200.00 

Total  general  expense . .     $530.00 

Summary: 

Total  materials $    931.97 

Total  labor   2,589.50 

Total  general   expense. .  .• 530.00 


Grand  total $4,051.47 

Profit  to  contractor :    1,526.72 


Contract  cost  to  railway $5,578.19 

Itemised   Cost. 

Dry    excavation    $    185.00  or  17.8  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Wet  excavation  and  driving  sheet 

piles  202.50  or  32.8  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Putting  16,740  ft.  B.  M.  beech  tim- 
ber in  place  40.00  or  $2.38  per  M. 

Putting  20,286  ft.  B.  M.  plank  in 

place 45.00  or  $2.22  per  M. 

Building    and    erecting    centers.  „ . .          31.00  or  $6.20  per  M. 

Unloading  stone   from  cars    37.50  or  $0.07%  Per  cu.  yd. 

Cutting  stone,   496  cu.  yds 1,282.25  or  $2.59  per  cu.  yd. 

Setting  stone,  496   cu.  yds 4-83.50  or  $0.97  per  cu  .yd. 

Handling  and  erecting  plant 150.00 

Excavating     channel     110.25  or  18.6  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 

Sheet   piling  and    riprap 22.50 

The  foregoing  record,  while  very  complete,  would  be  more  satis- 
factory if  it  contained  a  detailed  statement  of  the  organization  of 
the  forces.  For  example,  how  many  masons,  how  many  mortar 
mixers,  how  many  masons'  helpers  on  the  wall,  how  many  tag-men 
slewing  the  derrick  boom,  etc.,  were,  there  to  each  derrick?  Then, 
again,  a  sketch  of  the  plant  layout,  and  a  rough  drawing  showing 
the  general  design  of  the  culvert  would  be  a  valuable  addition. 

While  the  day  of  cut-stone  arch  culverts  is  rapidly  passing  away, 
such  culverts  are  still  specified.  Concrete  is  cheaper  than  cut-stone 
masonry,  but  it  is  not  always  cheaper  than  rubble.  We  may  ex- 
pect to  see  a  greater  use  of  rubble  masonry  when  engineers  come 
to  have  a  more  detailed  knowledge  of  costs. 

If  the  contractor  is  left  to  himself,  he  can  often  build  rubble 
masonry  at  less  cost  than  concrete.  Engineers,  however,  often  draw 


1708  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

indefinite  or  very  exacting  specifications  for  rubble,  and  get,  as  a 
result,  prices  that  are  higher  than  for  concrete.  Rubble  is  particu- 
larly cheap  where  the  job  is  small  and  where  broken  stone  can  not 
be  hauled  in  except  at  great  expense. 

In  considering  the  cost  of  excavation  above  given,  it  should  be 
remembered  that  conditions  were  such  that  the  material  could  be 
moved  in  wheelbarrows.  If  a  derrick  had  to  be  used,  the  cost 
would  have  been  much  more. 

Cost  of  Reinforced  Concrete  Subways.* — In  1903  the  Lake  Shore 
&  Michigan  Southern  Ry.  constructed,  with  its  own  workmen,  three 
reinforced  concrete  subways  at  Elkhart,  Ind.,  to  carry  a  highway 
under  its  tracks  and  thus  do  away  with  grade  crossings. 

The  three  subways  had  a  length  of  barrel  40  ft,  60  ft.,  and  160  ft. 
long,  respectively,  exclusive  of  wing  walls.  They  were  built  as 
arches  of  30-ft.  clear  span  and  13-ft.  headway,  with  a  thickness  of 
28  ins.  at  the  crown. 

Steel  bars  of  the  Johnson  corrugated  pattern,  made  by  the  St. 
Louis  Expanded  Metal  Fire  Proofing  Co.,  were  used  for  the  rein- 
forcement, circumferential  bars,  spaced  6  ins.  center  to  center,  being 
laid  2  %  ins.  from  the  extrados  and  intrados ;  across  these  were 
transverse  rods,  2  ft.  center  to  center,  running  the  full  length  of  the 
barrel.  -The  steel  rods  were  put  in  according  to  the  Monier  plan. 

The  concrete  used  in  the  construction  was  mixed  generally  in  the 
proportions  of  1  part  cement  to  3  parts  gravel  and  6  parts  sand. 
The  gravel  was  dug  from  the  foundations  and  was  about  one-half 
sand  _  and  one-half  gravel.  The  latter  component  varied  somewhat 
and  the  proportion  of  cement  was  varied  accordingly,  more  cement 
being  used  when  the  proportion  of  sand  in  the  gravel  increased. 
The  concrete  was  machine  mixed  and  a  wet  mixture  used. 

The  three  subways  contained  4,833  cu.  yds.  of  concrete,  the  cost 
per  cubic  yard  of  concrete  being  as  follows: 

Total.         Per  cu.  yd. 

Temporary  buildings,  trestles,   etc $      752  $0.15 

Machinery,    pipe,    etc 416  .08 

Sheet  piling  and  boxing 1,006  .21 

Excavating  and  pumping    1,620  .33 

Arch   Centers   and  Boxing — 

46   M.    ft.   at   $25 1,150  .24 

10  M.   ft.  at   $13 130  .03 

Labor    in    centers    (carpenters    at    22%    cts.  ; 

laborers,    15   cts.)    2,250  .46 

Concrete  Masonry — 

Cement   at   $1.83    8,861 

Stone     1,788 

Sand    and     gravel     (obtained    from     founda- 
tion)        240 

Drain    tile    103 

Labor     8,091 

Steel   reinforcing  rods,   at   2y2    cts.    per  Ib. .  .  3,028 

Engineering,    watchmen,    etc 508 

Total     .$29,944  $6.19 

*Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  17,  1906. 


BRIDGES. 


1709 


We  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Samuel  Rockwell,  Chief  Engineer  Lake 
Shore  &  Michigan  Southern  Ry.,  lor  the  above  data. 

Cost  of  a  Dry  Masonry  Box  Culvert. — Dry  masonry  box  culverts 
have  been  used  extensively  in  railroad  construction,  and  their  use 
will  no  doubt  continue,  especially  where  the  haul  of  cement  is  long, 
as  in  new  construction  in  mountainous  sections  of  the  country,  also 
where  the  amount  of  work  to  be  done  does  not  justify  the  installa- 
tion of  a  rock  crusher.  Records  of  cost  of  such  work  are,  conse- 
quently, of  value. 

Among  the  many  classes  of  culverts  constructed,  none  is  more 
lasting  than  a  well-built  dry  masonry  culvert.  See  Fig.  37.  Where 
large  stones  with  well  defined  faces  can  be  secured,  such  as  from 
rock  cuttings  on  railroad  work,  these  culverts  can  be  built  strong 
and  with  a  very  neat  finish.  Care  should  always  be  taken  to  secure 
good,  firm  bottom,  and  the  foundation  course  should  be  placed  well 
below  the  bed  of  the  stream,  and  thus  prevent  undermining  of  the 
walls.  The  paving  should  not  extend  under  the  walls  of  the  cul- 


Fig.  37. — Masonry  Culvert. 


vert,  for  should  a  part  of  the  paving  become  misplaced,  the  small 
paving  stones  will  be  washed  from  under  the  walls,  causing  the 
latter  to  cave  in  and  ruin  the  culvert.  The  lower  course  of  stones 
should  be  as  large  as  can  be  conveniently  handled,  so  that  heavy 
floods,  that  may  injure  the  pavement  will  not  misplace  the  wall 
stones. 

We  give  here  the  cost  of  a  3x3-ft.  dry  masonry  culvert,  36  ft. 
long: 

Excavation   for   foundation    20  cu.  yds. 

Laborers,    22   hrs.   at   20    cts %  4.40 

This  gives  a  cost  of  22  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  for  excavation. 

Masonry — 

Mason,   60  hrs.   at  40   cts $24.00 

Laborers,   130   hrs.   at   20   cts 26.00 

Team   and    teamster,    40    hrs.    at   45    cts....    18.00 
Derrick,   40  hrs.  at  15   cts 6.00 

Total    $74.00 

The  culvert  contained  50  cu.  yds.  at  a  cost  of  $74,  or  $1.48  per 
cu.  yd.  The  stone  for  this  culvert  was  taken  out  of  a  rock  dump 
20  ft.  away.  Some  of  the  large  covers  had  to  be  handled  400  ft. 
The  derrick  used  was  the  ordinary  three-leg  derrick,  legs  20  ft.  long, 


1710 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


and  the  derrick  boom  was  24  ft.  long,  one  set  reaching  the  full 
length  of  culvert,  the  derrick  cable  being  operated  by  horse  power, 
pulling  through  block  and  tackle. 

Cost  of  Concrete  Culvert  Pipe.* — The  methods  and  cost  of  molding 
4-ft.  concrete  culvert  pipe  given  in  the  following  paragraphs  have 
been  obtained  from  Mr.  O.  P.  Chamberlain,  Chief  Engineer,  Chi- 
cago &  Illinois  Western  R.  R. 

During  the  summer  of  1906  Mr.  Chamberlain  built  a  number  of 
culverts,  using  a  4-ft.  long  concrete  pipe  molded  in  the  form  of 


J 

*>\ 

Jt 

£* 
v. 

'   T    V 

*!      * 
jjj     -^ 

if  ! 

P 

jr.1  ±> 

Elevation  of  Oirber  Form, 

Sharp 
•STfrrt 

Ij 


Sect-ion  erf  Inner  Form., 


Horizontal  Section., 

Fig.    38. — Forms  for  Culvert  Pipe. 

hollow  cylinders  with  square  ends.  They  were  molded  with  an 
interior  diameter  of  4  ft.  and  with  6-in.  shells,  giving  an  outside 
diameter  of  5  ft.  These  pipes  were  laid  end  to  end  in  trenches 
whose  bottoms  were  cut  as  closely  to  a  circle  of  5  ft.  diameter  as 
could  be  done  with  pick  and  shovel  and  were  covered  with  earth 
thoroughly  tamped  around  the  tops  and  sides.  The  pipes  were 
used  in  low  embankments,  where  their  tops  are  but  18  ins.  below 
the  bottom  of  the  ties,  and  thus  far  they  have  given  satisfactory 
service  under  heavy  freight  traffic. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,   Feb.    13,    1907. 


BRIDGES.  1711 

Figure  38  in  a  reproduction  of  the  working  drawings  from  which 
the  forms  used  in  the  construction  of  these  pipes  were  built.  Both 
forms  are  of  wood,  of  ordinanry  wooden  tank  construction.  The 
inner  form  has  one  wedge  shaped  loose  stave  which  is  withdrawn 
after  the  concrete  has  set  for  about  20  hours,  thus  collapsing  the 
inner  form  and  allowing  it  to  be  removed.  The  outer  form  is 
built  in  two  pieces  with  2  x  %-in.  semicircular  iron  hoops  on  the 
outside,  the  hoops  having  loops  at  the  ends.  The  staves  are  fas- 
tened to  the  hoops  by  wood  screws  1%  ins.  long  driven  from  the 
outside  of  the  hoop.  When  the  two  sides  of  the  outer  form  are 
in  position,  the  loops  on  one  side  come  into  position  just  above 
the  loops  on  the  other  side,  and  four  %-in.  steel  pins  are  inserted  in 
the  loops  to  hold  the  two  sides  together  while  the  form  is  being 
filled  with  concrete  and  while  the  concrete  is  setting.  After  the 
inner  form  has  been  removed,  the  two  pins  in  the  same  vertical 
line  are  removed  and  the  form  opened  horizontally  on  the  hinges 
formed  by  the  loops  and  pins  on  the  opposite  side.  The  inner 
and  outer  forms  are  then  ready  to  be  set  up  for  building  another 
pipe. 

The  concrete  used  in  manufacturing  these  pipes  was  composed  of 
American  Portland  cement,  limestone  screenings  and  crushed  lime- 
stone that  has  passed  through  a  %-in.  diameter  screen  after 
everything  that  would  pass  through  a  ^-in.  diameter  screen  had 
been  removed.  The  concrete  was  mixed  in  the  proportions  of  one 
part  cement  to  three  and  one-half  parts  each  of  screenings  and 
crushed  stone.  All  work  except  the  building  of  the  forms  was  per- 
formed by  common  laborers.  In  his  experimental  work  Mr.  Cham- 
berlain used  two  laborers,  one  of  whom  set  the  forms,  and  filled 
them  and  the  other  of  whom  mixed  the  concrete.  The  pipes  were 
left  in  the  forms  till  the  morning  of  the  day  after  molding.  The 
two  laborers  removed  the  forms  filled  the  day  before,  the  first  thing 
in  the  morning,  and  proceeded  to  refill  them.  The  average  time 
the  concrete  was  allowed  to  set  before  the  forms  were  removed  was 
16  hours.  Mr.  Chamberlain  believes  that  with  three  men  and  six 
forms  the  whole  six  forms  could  be  removed  and  refilled  daily. 
Based  on  the  use  of  only  two  forms  with  two  laborers  removing 
and  refilling  them  each  day,  and  on  the  assumption  that  a  single 
set  of  forms  costing  $40  can  be  used  only  50  times  before  being 
replaced,  Mr.  Chamberlain  estimates  the  cost  of  molding  4-ft.  pipes 
as  follows: 

2   per   cent   of    $40    for   forms $0.80 

1.1   cu.   yds.   stone   and   screenings  at   $1.85..    2.04 

0.8   bbls.    cement   at    $2.10 1.68 

10  hours'  labor  at  28  cts 2.80 


Total   per  pipe    $7.32 

This  gives  a  cost  of  $1.83  per  lineal  foot  of  pipe  or  practically 
$7  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete.  The  pipe  actually  molded  cost  $2.50 
per  lin.  ft.,  or  $9.62  per  cu.  yd.  of  concrete,  owing  to  the  small 
scale  on  which  the  work  was  carried  on — the  laborers  were  not 
kept  steadily  at  work. 


1712  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  pipes  were  built  under  a  derrick  and  loaded  by  means  of 
the  derrick  upon  flat  cars  for  transportation.  At  the  culvert  site 
they  were  unloaded  and  put  in  by  an  ordinary  section  gang  with 
no  appliances  other  than  skids  to  remove  the  pipes  from  the  cars. 
As  each  four-foot  section  of  this  pipe  weighs  about  two  tons,  it 
was  not  deemed  expedient  to  build  sections  of  a  greater  length  than 
four  feet,  to  be  unloaded  and  placed  by  hand.  On  a  trunk  line, 
however,  where  a  derrick  car  is  available  for  unloading  and  plac- 
ing the  pipes,  there  is  no  reason  why  they  should  not  be  built  in 
six  or  eight-foot  sections. 

Basing  his  estimates  on  the  above  price  of  $7  per  cu.  yd.  for 
concrete,  Mr.  Chamberlain  has  computed  the  accompanying  table 
of  comparative  weights  and  costs  of  cast-iron  and  concrete  pipes 
of  various  diameters.  The  cost  of  cast-iron  pipe  per  pound  is 
assumed  to  be  1%  cts. 

TABLE  XXIX. — SHOWING  RELATIVE  THICKNESS,  WEIGHTS,  AND  COST 

OF  "STANDARD"  CAST-IRON  PIPE  AND  CONCRETE. 

Thickness  Weight  Ibs.  Cost 

Size  and  kind  of  pipe.                   in  ins.  per  lin.  ft.  per  lin.  ft. 

12-in.  cast-iron     0   33/64  75  $1.22 

12-in.  concrete     2  88  0.16 

18-in.  cast-iron     0  47/64  167  2.72 

18-in.  concrete     f3  220  0.36 

24-in.  cast-iron    &1  250  4.07 

24-in.  concrete     4%  420  0.68 

30-in.  cast-iron     1   1/16  334  5.43 

3 0-in.  concrete 4V2  602  0.88 

36-in.  cast-iron    1  %  450  7.32 

36-in.  concrete     4%  676  1.10 

4 2-in.  cast-iron    1%  600  9.75 

42-in.  concrete     5%  960  1.55 

48-in.  cast-iron     1   7/16  725  11.78 

48-in.  concrete 6  1131  1.83 

In  Table  XXIX.  the  thickness  for  concrete  pipes  of  various  diam- 
eters has  been  taken  as  approximately  proportional  to  the  thick- 
ness of  "Standard"  cast-iron  pipes  of  the  same  diameter,  the  4-ft. 
diameter  pipes  being  used  as  a  basis  for  calculation. 

The  first  cost  of  concrete  pipes  at  the  place  of  manufacture 
would,  according  to  the  above  table,  be  less  than  one-sixth  of  the 
cost  of  cast-iron  pipes.  The  cost  of  transportation  and  of  in- 
stalling the  pipes  would,  on  account  of  the  greater  weight  and 
greater  number  of  pieces,  probably  be  very  nearly  double  that  for 
cast-iron  pipes. 

On  account  of  the  lack  of  reliable  data  regarding  this  cost,  Mr. 
Chamberlain  is  unable  to  give  a  fair  comparative  estimate  of  the 
cost  of  the  two  styles  of  culverts  in  place.  However,  since  trans- 
portation and  installation  of  iron  pipes  is  but  a  small  proportion 
of  the  cost  of  the  completed  culverts,  it  is  evident  that  cost  of  a 
concrete  pipe  culvert  in  place  would  be  but  a  small  fraction  of  the 
cost  of  a  cast-iron  pipe  culvert  of  the  same  diameter,  provided  thf 
pipes  were  hauled  only  moderate  distances. 


BRIDGES.  1713 

Cost  of  Placing  Cast  Iron  Pipe  Culverts. — Mr.  John  C.  Sesser. 
Engineer  of  Construction,  C.,  B.  &  Q.  Ry.,  gives  the  following  data 
on  the  cost  of  unloading,  hauling  and  placing  cast  iron  pipe.  In 
1905  that  railroad  on  its  extension  from  Centralia,  111.,  to  Herrin, 
used  for  its  culverts  ordinary  cast  iron  pipes  up  to  a  size  of  48 
ins.  in  diameter.  The  contract  for  handling  the  pipe  was  let  to 
a  contractor  at  75  cts.  per  ton  per  mile  for  the  unloading  and  haul- 
ing and  $2.00  per  ton  for  placing.  A  careful  record  was  kept  of  all 
labor  employed  in  handling  this  pipe,  and  from  these  data  the 
following  i  esults  were  obtained : 

Number   of    tons   of   pipe    handled •.     591 

Cost  per  ton  for  unloading  from  flat  and  gondola  cars $0.33 

Average    miles   hauled    3.82 

Cost   of   hauling  per  ton  mile    0.44 

Cost  per   ton   mile  for  unloading  and  hauling    (av.    haul   3.82 

miles    0.53 

Cost  per  ton  for  laying   0.55 

Cost  per  ton  in  place    2.39 

The  greatest  distance  the  pipe  was  hauled  was  about  10  miles. 
From  the  data  obtained  it  was  deduced  that :  The  cost  per  ton  for 
unloading  the  pipe  is  the  same  regardless  of  size ;  that  the  cost  of 
laying  pipe  per  ton,  for  pipe  under  30  ins.  in  diameter,  is  about 
30  per  cent  more  than  for  pipe  over  30  ins.  in  diameter.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  it  costs  about  twice  as  much  per  ton  to  lay  18-in. 
pipe  as  it  does  to  lay  48-in.  pipe. 

Cost  of  Cast  Iron  Pipe  Culverts. — The  labor  cost  of  pipe  culverts 
depends  almost  entirely  upon  the  amount  of  excavation  involved.  If 
an  existing  railway  embankment  must  be  cut  through,  obviously  the 
labor  cost  will  be  far  higher  than  if  the^  pipe  is  laid  under  a  trestle 
that  is  to  be  filled  in. 

For  the  weight  of  cast  iron  pipe,  see  the  section  on  Waterworks. 
Also  consult  that  section  for  the  labor  cost  of  handling  pipe. 

Mr.  A.  W.  Merrick  gives  the  following  data  of  work  done  in 
1898  on  the  Chicago  &  Northwestern.  Where  the  embankment  is 
more  than  12  ft.  high,  an  open  trench  is  excavated  from  the  toe 
of  each  slope  to  a  point  6  ft.  from  the  center  of  the  track.  This 
leaves  a  core  12  ft.  wide  under  the  track,  through  which  a  tunnel 
is  dug.  It  is  often  well  to  insert  two  old  stringers  under  the  rails 
to  keep  the  weight  off  the  earth  over  the  tunnel  during  construction. 
The  trench  is  sheeted  with  vertical  planks  and  braced.  The  roof 
of  the  tunnel  is  supported  by  4-in.  plank  which  rest  on  3  x  12-in. 
posts  whose  feet  stand  on  3  x  12-in.  mudsills  running  lengthwise  of 
the  tunnel.  Wedges  are  placed  between  the  posts  and  the  mudsills. 
For  a  2 4-in.  pipe  the  tunnel  is  made  4  x  4  ft.  Two  planks  are  laid 
side  by  side  in  the  bottom  of  the  trench  for  dollies  to  run  on, 
and  each  length  of  pipe  is  drawn  in  on  a  dolly  at  each  end. 

The  cost  of  a  2  4-in.  pipe  culvert,  48  ft.  long,  in  a  bank  13  ft. 
high,  was: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

Cast-iron  pipe,  250  Ibs.,  at.  $16  per  ton $2.00 

Labor   1.08 

Total    .  ..$3.08 


1714  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  a  2 4 -in.  pipe  culvert,  84  ft.  long,  in  a  bank  24  ft 
high,  was: 

Per  lin.  ft. 

280  Ibs.  cast-iron  pipe,  at  $16  per  ton $2.00 

Labor    1.73 

Plank  and  nails 0.07 

Total    $3.80 

End   walls,    $69 0.80 

Total     $4.60 

The  detailed  cost  of  these  two  end  walls  was: 

2  cords  stone,  at  $3.25 $  6.50 

18  footing  stone,  at  $0.80 14.40 

20  coping  stone,  at  $0.50 10.00 

6  sacks  cement  1.37 

Mason  labor 36.85 

Total     $69.12 

Mr.  A.  S.  Markley  gives  the  following  costs  in  1898  of  work  on  the 
Chicago  &  Eastern  Illinois,  laborers  receiving  $1.50  per  day,  and 
foremen  $2.50. 


Size  of  Labor. 

pipe.  Condition.  Per  ton.         Per  ft. 

48-in.  Opening  provided    $1.25  $0.3€ 

36-in.  Tunneling  15  ft.  bank 4.96  0.88 

36-in.  Trench,  8  ft.  bank 3.18  0.63 

IS-in.  Trench,  4%  ft.  bank  (7  tracks) 1.06  0.16 

16-in.  Trench,  4%  ft.  bank 1.06  0.16 

Mr.  W.  A.  Rogers  gives  the  following  costs  in  1898  on  the 
Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul.  It  is  not  stated  just  what  the 
conditions  were,  but  many  of  the  pipes  were  drawn  through  existing 
timber  culverts  and  earth  tamped  around  then.  Most  of  the  pipes 
were  cast  in  6  ft.  lengths,  and  the  price  was  $14.50  per  ton. 

Cost  of  each 
Diameter.         Material.  Labor.  Total.         masonry  end. 

20  ins.  1.00  1.08  $2.08  $   43 

24  ins.  1.20  1.38  2.58  53 

30  ins.  1.72  1.42  3.14  66 

36  ins.  2.45  1.64  4.09  78 

42  ins,  3.35  1.98  5.33  90 

48  ins.  4.30  2.36  6.66  100 

No  pipe  smaller  than  20  ins.  is  used,  for  this  is  the  limiting  size 
that  a  man  can  crawl  through  when  it  is  necessary  to  clean  a  pipe 
out.  Larger  sizes  than  48  ins.  have  caused  trouble  by  breaking. 
Pipes  were  put  in  by  the  track  department. 

Mr.  Geo.  J.  Bishop  gives  the  following  cost  in  1898  of  work  on 
the  Chicago,  Rock  Island  &  Pacific.  The  pipes  were  all  laid  under 
trestles  that  were  to  be  filled  in.  Hence  the  labor  cost  was  lower 


BRIDGES.  1715 

than  in  the  preceding  cases.     The  price  of  pipe  was  $15.80  per  ton. 
The  following  is  the  cost  per  lineal  foot. 

Weight 

Diameter.  per  ft.  Ibs.  Pipe.  Labor.  Total. 

20  ins.  211  $1.67  $0.09  $173 

24  ins.  223  1.92  0.17  2.09 

30  ins.  367  2.90  0.22  312 

36  ins.  467  3.69  0.42  4.11 

42  ins.  634  5.00  0.70  570 

48  ins.  797  6.29  0.72  7.01 

60  ins.  1,263  10.61  1.26  11.87 

In  the  R.  R.  Gazette,  Vol.  19,  p.  122,  cast  iron  culverts  made  in 
quadrants  bolted  together  are  described.  The  quadrants  are  pro- 
vided with  outside  flanges,  and  with  a  recess  in  which  tarred  rope 
smeared  with  neat  cement  is  placed  before  bolting  together.  No 
skilled  labor  is  required.  A  7-ft.  culvert,  50  ft.  long,  contained  45 
short  tons  of  cast  iron.  The  labor  of  unloading  it  from  the  cars 
was  $17.50,  or  40  cts.  per  ton,  and  the  labor  of  putting  it  in  place 
was  $150,  or  $3.30  per  ton. 

Corrugated  Metal  Culvert. — The  metal  culvert  was  18  ft.  long  and 
4  ft.  in  diameter,  the  bottom  being  6  ins.  lower  than  the  grade  line 
of  the  ditch.  Concrete  solid  walls  were  built  rising  from  bottom  of 
culvert  to  the  ground  surface,  and  extending  into  both  banks.  These 
walls  were  20  ins.  thick  to  top  of  pipe,  18  ins.  thick  to  within  8 
ins.  of  the  surface,  and  the  top  8  ins.  was  12  ins.  thick.  The  top 
8  ins.  was  of  1 :6  mortar  and  the  remainder  was  of  1 :4  :4  broken 
tile  concrete.  Condemned  tile  was  broken  into  1  to  2-in.  pieces. 
The  walls  were  12  ft.  long  at  the  level  of  the  top  of  the  pipe  and 
20  ft.  long  at  the  surface.  The  forms  were  constructed  by  first 
placing  the  plank  parallel  to  the  slopes  until  the  concrete  was  car- 
ried to  the  top  of  the  pipe,  and  up  the  slopes  to  the  surface.  After 
this  had  hardened  for  24  hours,  the  planking  was  taken  down  and 
laid  horizontal  to  construct  the  center  part  of  the  wall.  This 
method  of  constructing  the  forms  required  a  minimum  of  lumber 
and  no  cuting  of  the  lumber.  The  cost  of  the  culvert  was  as  fol- 
lows: 


1  corrugated  metal  pipe,  4  ft.  diam.,  18  ft.  long,  $6  per  ft. .  .  .  * 
Hauling  culvert  from  depot,  2  men  and  team,  2  hrs.  at  65c 

per  hr 1.30 

Labor,  preparing  ditch  for  culvert,  2  men  3.5  hrs.  ea.  at  30c  1.40 
Bolting  pipe  together  and  lowering  into  ditch,  3  men,  3.5 

hrs.  at  20c 2.10 

37.5  sacks  of  cement  at  75c  per  sack 28.12 

5.6  cu.  yds.  of  sand  at  $t.50  per  cu.  yd 8.40 

5  cu.  yds.  broken  tile  at  54c  per  cu.  yd.  for  breaking 2.70 

Labor  of  building  abutment,  82  hrs.  at  20c  per  hr 16.40 

2  men  and  team  grading,  5  hrs.  at  65c  per  hr 3.25 

Incidentals     , 3.00 

Total    $175.64 

Cost  of  Tearing  Down  a  Small  Bridge. — A  small  highway  bridge 
of  35-ft.  span,  and  roadway  25  ft.  wide,  contained  10  tons  of  iron 
in  the  trusses  and  4,650  ft.  B.  M.  in  the  flooring.  The  flooring  was 
3-in.  oak  plank  pn  3  x  12-in.  stringers  spaced  2  ft.  apart,  and  two 


1716  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

8  x  14-in.  stringers  under  an  electric  car  track.  It  took  6  men  and 
1  foreman  3  days  to  tear  down  and  store  the  bridge,  at  a  cost  of 
IS*. 

A  wooden  footbridge,  6  ft.  wide  and  100  ft.  long  over  a  creek, 
contained  4,000  ft.  B.  M.  It  took  8  men  and  a  team  3  hrs.  to  tear 
down  and  remove  this  structure,  which  was  essentially  a  light 
temporary  trestle  floored  with  3-in.  plank.  The  cost  was  $1  per  M 
for  this  tearing  down.  The  same  gang  had  originally  erected  this 
structure  at  a  cost  of  $3.75  per  M. 

Cost  of  Moving  a  65-ft.  Bridge  and  New  Abutments. — A  steel 
highway  pony  truss  bridge  of  65-ft.  span  and  16-ft.  roadway  had 
been  erected  upon  timber  pile  abutments  that  had  rotted  badly. 
New  abutments  were  built  adjoining  the  old  abutments,  by  driving 
12  iron  piles  for  each  abutment  and  its  wing  walls.  These  piles 
were  of  old  steel  rails  30  ft.  long,  and  were  driven  20  ft.  deep.  A 
small  pile  driver  operated  by  5  men  and  1  horse  averaged  8  piles 
per  10-hr,  day,  for  3  days.  Then  1  day  was  spent  in  building  a 
falsework,  and  2  more  days  raising  and  shifting  the  bridge  from 
its  old  abutments  to  the  new.  The  cost  of  pile  driving  was  $30, 
or  $1.25  per  pile.  The  cost  of  building  the  falsework  was  $10,  and 
the  cost  of  moving  the  bridge  was  $20, 


SECTION  XIII. 
STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION. 

Need  of  More  Printed  Data. — Notwithstanding  that  this  has  been 
called  the  Age  of  Steel,  there  have  been  fewer  articles  printed  on 
the  cost  of  steel  work  than  on  any  other  class  of  engineering  con- 
struction. We  have  had  books  without  number  on  the  design  of 
steel  bridges,  but  next  to  nothing  in  those  books  on  the  itemized 
cost  of  steel  bridges.  Indeed,  aside  from  the  articles  on  the  cost 
of  steel  bridge  erection  published  in  Engineering-Contracting  within 
the  last  four  years,  practically  nothing  on  this  important  subject  has 
ever  appeared  in  the  engineering  journals.  In  the  section  on  Bridges 
will  be  found  the  data  just  referred  to.  For  some  time  to  come, 
too  much  cannot  be  published  on  the  methods  and  cost  of  steel  con- 
struction of  all  kinds. 

Cross- References.— To  avoid  duplication,  it  seems  advisable  not 
to  give  in  this  section  any  of  the  data  on  steel  and  iron  work  giver, 
in  other  sections  of  the  book,  but  rather  to  provide  a  very  complete 
index  of  Steel  Construction  and  another  of  Iron  Work.  Such  an 
index  will  be  found  in  the  back  of  this  book. 

As  an  indication  of  what  will  be  found  on  steel  and  iron  in  the 
various  sections,  it  may  be  well  to  bear  in  mind  the  following  facts : 
(1)  The  cost  of  shaping  and  placing  steel  for  reinforced  concrete  is 
given  in  the  sections  on  Concrete,  on  Sewers,  on  Bridges,  on 
Buildings,  etc. ;  (2)  the  cost  of  laying  cast  iron  and  steel  waterpipe, 
the  erecting  of  steel  standpipes,  etc.,  will  be  found  in  the  section  on 
Waterworks ;  ( 3 )  the  cost  of  building  steel  bridges  and  viaducts, 
iron  and  steel  culverts,  etc.,  will  be  found  in  the  section  on  Bridges ; 
(4)  the  cost  of  laying  steel  rails  will  be  found  in  the  section  on 
Railways ;  V  5 )  the  cost  of  putting  on  expanded  metal  lath,  gal- 
vanized iron  siding,  tin  roofing,  etc..  will  be  found  in  section  on 
Buildings. 

As  above  stated,  use  the  index  under  Steel  Construction  and  under 
Iron  Work. 

Cost  of  Pneumatic  Riveting.— Mr.  A.  B.  Manning  gives  the  fol- 
lowing data: 

One  12  hp.  gasoline  driven  air  compressor  (Fairbanks,  Morse  & 
Co.)  ;  two  galvanized  iron  water  tanks;  one  galvanized  iron  gasoline 
tank ;  one  large  main  reservoir ;  one  small  auxiliary  reservoir ;  hose 
and  fittings;  cost  mounted  on  car  $1,073.  Operating  at  90  Ibs. 
pressure  this  compressor  furnished  air  for  3  pneumatic  hammers,  2 
drills,  2  rivet  forges,  and  1  blacksmith  forge,  all  working  at  one 


1718  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

time.  The  3  hammers  and  the  2  drills  cost  (in  1899)  $627.  The 
cost  of  repairs  for  16  months  averaged  $3  per  month  on  this 
$1,700  plant.  The  cost  of  operating  was  as  follows  per  day: 

15  gals,  gasoline,  at  11.2  cts $1.68 

Oil,   waste,    etc 0.12 

Depreciation    (estimated    on    20%    basis,    for    313 

days)    1.09 

Repairs    0.11 

Total  per  day $3.00 

On  the  basis  of  running  3  rivet  hammers,  this  is  $1  per  hammer 
for  power. 

Power  for  one  hammer  per  day $1.00 

Oil  for  one  hammer  per  day 0.12 

2  men  driving  rivets,  at  $2.40 4.80 

1  man  heating  rivets 2.20 

Total  for  one  hammer  per  day $8.12 

A  pneumatic  riveter  on  bridge  work  averages  500  rivets  per  10-hr, 
day  for  $8.12,  or  $1.62  per  hundred  rivets.  On  one  day  700  rivets 
were  driven,  by  using  an  additional  man  to  take  out  fitting-up  bolts, 
etc.  The  above  costs  are  based  upon  the  erection  of  22  bridge 
spans,  aggregating  2,455  lin.  ft.  and  80,065  rivets. 

The  cost  of  riveting  by  hand  is  as  follows : 

2  men,    at    $2.40 $4.80 

2  men,    at    $2.20 4.40 

Total  per  gang  per  day $9.20 

Such  a  gang  averages  250  rivets  per  day,  which  is  equivalent 
to  $3.68  per  hundred  rivets. 

Mr.  F.  S.  Edinger  states  that  with  a  12  hp.  gasoline  driven 
compressor  and  an  80  cu.  ft.  air  receiver,  five  longstroke  hammers 
were  operated  at  one  time  without  reducing  the  air  pressure  below 
75  Ibs.  The  five  hammers  when  driving  50  rivets  (%-in.  diam.) 
per  minute  are  using  air  only  about  5%  of  the  time.  The  same 
compressor  will  run  2  hammers  and  2  drills  at  one  time.  The 
drills  use  more  air  than  the  hammers  as  they  run  uninterruptedly. 
The  drills  can  be  used  for  boring  timber  by  inserting  an  auger  in 
place  of  a  drill ;  but  the  speed  is  not  high  enough  for  wood  boring. 
Two  men  and  a  heater  form  a  riveting  gang  and  they  drive  twice 
as  many  rivets  as  three  men  and  a  heater  drive  by  hand.  The 
cost  of  fitting  up  and  riveting  on  new  steel  bridges  (all  rivets 
%-in.)  was  35  to  40%  less  than  if  the  work  had  been  done  by  hand, 
and  the  work  was  done  better. 

Pneumatic  and  Hand  Riveting. — Mr.  Charles  Evan  Fowler  gives 
the  following.  On  the  Northwestern  Elevated  Ry.  construction, 
Chicago,  percussion  riveters  were  used,  driving  as  high  as  500 
rivets  per  day,  with  three  men  at  the  riveter  and  a  heater.  Hand 
gangs  on  that  work  averaged  300  rivets. 

In  reinforcing  the  Manhattan  Elevated,  N.  Y.,  the  record  is  465 
to  525  rivets  per  day  with  percussion  machines,  and  careful  testa 
showed  that  it  required  5  cu.  ft.  of  free  air  per  %-in.  rivet. 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1719 

On  the  Boston  Elevated  Ry.,  in  1900,  the  long  gun  type  of  Boyer 
riveters  were  used.  Owing  to  the  cramped  condition  of  much 
of  the  work,  only  300  rivets  per  day  were  driven,  two  men  at  a 
riveter  and  a  heater  at  the  forge.  Hand  gangs  drove  as  many  as 
400  rivets  per  gang  per  day. 

Cost  of  Erecting  Steel  In  N.  Y.  Subway. — The  cost  of  erecting 
the  steel  posts  and  girders  in  the  N.  Y.  subway  was  as  follows  on 
one  section  where  4,300  tons  were  erected: 

Per  ton. 

Labor    trucking $   1.47 

Labor  placing  and  riveting 11.68 

Labor    painting 0.90 

Materials  for  painting 0.70 

Materials  for  placing  and  riveting 0.90 

Power     0.30 


Total $15.95 

Iron  workers  were  paid  $4  for  8  hrs. ;  iron  foremen,  $5 ; 
painters,  $2.  There  was  1  foreman  to  every  10  men. 

The  contract  price  for  erecting  and  painting  was  $13  a  ton,  so 
that  money  was  lost  by  the  contractor  on  this  work.  The  men 
worked  under  difficulties,  and  with  little  energy. 

Weight  of  The  Eiffel  Tower.— The  Eiffel  Tower  weighs  7,500 
tons.  It  is  906  ft.  high,  33  ft.  square  on  top,  and  330  ft.  square  at 
the  base.  The  power  plant  is  500  hp. 

Cost  of  a  Gas  Pipe  Hand  Railing. — A  gas  pipe  hand  railing  for  a 
small  stone-arch  bridge  was  made  of  three  lines  of  1^-in.  pipe 
rails  and  posts.  The  weight  of  the  pipe  was  800  Ibs.  for  100  lin.  ft. 
of  railing  (5C  ft.  on  each  side  of  the  bridge).  The  cost  was  aa 
follows : 

100  lin.  ft.  of  railing  ready  to  erect $65.00 

Hauling  1V2  miles 0.60 

1  qt.   asphaltum  paint 0.20 

Paint    brush 0.20 

9  Ibs.  sulphur,  at  8  cts 0.72 

Iron  kettle  to  melt  sulphur  in 0.40 

Labor  erecting  railing,  17  hrs.,  at  35  cts 5.95 

Labor  erecting  railing,  2  hrs.,  at  15  cts 0.30 


Total  for  100  ft.  of  railing $73.37 

The  principal  cost  of  erecting  was  the  drilling  of  48  bolt  holes 
( %  x  2  ins.)  in  the  stone  coping.  The  bolts  that  passed  through 
the  cast-iron  post  bases  were  held  with  sulphur.  The  posts  were 
made  of  1%-m.  gas  pipe,  crosses  and  tees.  The  1^-in.  pipe 
measured  about  2  ins.  outside  diameter,  which  is  a  good  size  for 
hand  railing. 

On  another  job  100  lin.  ft.  of  hand,  railing  were  built  along  an 
embankment.  The  railing  was  made  of  3  lines  of  %-in.  gas  pipe 
(1-in.  diam.  outside)  made  as  above  described,  except  that  each 
post  was  fastened  to  an  oak  plank  buried  in  the  ground,  and  an 


1720 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


inclined  brace  ran  from  each  post  to  the  plank, 
lin.  ft.  of  railing  was : 


The  cost  of  100 


100  lin.  ft.  railing  and  posts $37.50 

Labor  erecting.  . 31.50 


Total     $69.00 

Cost  of  Erecting  a  160-ft.  Steel  Stack.*— An  exceedingly  inter- 
esting job  of  hoisting  engineering  is  illustrated  in  Fig.  1.  The  job 
consisted  in  erecting  a  steel  stack  66  ins.  by  160  ft.  in  size  in  one 
piece,  after  it  had  been  assembled  on  the  ground,  with  an  erecting 
plant  consisting  of  a  72-ft.  mast  and  a  7  x  10-in.  Lidgerwood  hoist- 
ing engine  with  the  necessary  tackle. 


Fig.  1.— Erecting  Steel  Stack, 


The  stack  was  built  of  %-in.  steel  for  85  ft.  from  the  base  and  of 
Vs-in.  steel  for  the  top  75  f t. ;  %-in.  rivets  were  used  The  stack 
came  to  the  ground  in  four  40-ft.  sections.  These  were  la:d  in  line, 
with  the  base  t>f  the  bottom  section  as  close  as  practicable  to  the 
foundation,  and  riveted  together  on  the  ground.  After  be>nf 
riveted  and  lined  out  the  stack  was  braced  or  reinforced  insiae  xc 
prevent  buckling  and  crushing  of  the  plates  at  the  slings.  The 
bracing  consisted  of  +  frames  of  4  x  6-in.  timbers  placed  insidi 

*Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  10,  1909. 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1721 

the  shell  and  spaced  every  5  ft.,  beginning  at  a  point  20  ft.  from  the 
top.  These  frames  were  wedged  into  the  shell  tight  enough  to  hold 
firmly  and  yet  not  bulge  the  plates  or  seams. 

The  next  step  was  to  place  the  hoisting  plant.  A  72-ft.  mast 
was  erected  on  top  of  the  boiler  house  20  ft.  above  ground,  so 
that  its  total  height  was  92  ft.  The  mast  guys  consisted  of  five 
1%-in.  galvanized  wire  ropes  radiating  from  the  spider  casting 
at  the  top  of  the  mast.  In  addition  a  sixth  guy  was  attached  to  the 
mast  20  ft.  below  the  top  and  carried  back  directly  in  line  with 
the  stack.  This  guy  was  designed  to  prevent  the  mast  from 
buckling  under  the  pull,  which  failure,  if  it  occurred  at  all,  was 
figured  would  occur  at  the  point  mentioned;  that  is,  about  20  ft. 
below  the  top.  The  mast  was  a  12  x  12 -in.  timber.  At  the  top 
of  the  mast  there  was  fastened  a  triple  block  shackled  to  the  top 
casting  and  also  lashed  by  a  wire  cable  passing  four  times  around 
the  mast  and  securely  clamped.  The  hoisting  engine,  a  7  x  10-in. 
Lidgerwood,  was  set  25  ft.  to  one  side  of  the  stack  and  125  ft.  from 
the  base. 

The  line  used  was  1,400  ft.  of  %-in.  crucible  steel  rope  spliced  at 
one  point  with  an  18-ft.  splice.  .This  line  was  rigidly  inspected 
before  it  was  run  through  the  blocks.  It  was  carried  from  the 
engine  to  and  through  the  foot  block  casting  sheave ;  thence  up  the 
mast  to  the  top  sheave ;  thence  down  to  a  single  block  lashed  to 
the  stack  30  ft.  from  its  top  ;  thence  up  to  the  middle  sheave  in  the 
triple  block  lashed  to  the  mast  head  ;  thence  down  to  a  second  single 
block  lashed  to  the  stack  55  ft.  from  the  top ;  thence  up  to  the 
right-hand  outside  sheave  of  the  triple  block ;  thence  down  to  a 
third  single  block  lashed  to  the  stack  80  ft.  from  the  top  ;  thence  up 
to  the  left-hand  outside  sheave  of  the  triple  block,  and,  the  free 
end,  thence  to  an  anchor  in  the  ground  about  60  or  65  ft.  from  the 
base  of  the  stack. 

The  single  blocks  were  lashed  to  the  stack  by  several  turns  of 
wire  rope  passing  around  the  shell  and  6  x  6-in.  timbers  laid  along 
it  on  the  under  side.  These  timbers  acted  both  as  longitudinal 
stiffeners  and  as  spacers  to  keep  the  lashings  from  sliding  up  or 
down  the  shell.  To  prevent  possible  cutting  of  the  line  the  thimbles 
were  all  removed  from  the  shell  of  the  triple  block  and  the  lines 
were  kept  clear  by  running  them  through  the  middle  sheave,  then 
to  the  right  and  to  the  left  as  described  above. 

With  everything  ready  as  described  hoisting  was  begun  at  1 :30 
p.  m.  and  at  5  p.  m.  the  stack  was  in  .place  with  all  guys  fastened. 
The  first  lift  made  was  75  ft.  Then  hoisting  was  stopped  until  the 
permanent  guys,  24  in  all,  each  a  %-in.  wire  cable,  were  fastened 
to  the  stack  attachments.  Lifting  was  then  resumed  and  continued 
until  the  stack  stood  only  about  15°  out  of  plumb.  Hoisting  was 
then  stopped  and  the  guys  secured  to  their  ground  anchors.  The 
stack  was  then  raised  plumb,  jacked  over  the  stud  bolts  on  the 
foundation  and  the  guys  permanently  clamped. 

The  cost  of  the  work  described  was  not  kept  in  such  a  way  that 
it  can  be  itemized,  but  the  total  cost  including  riveting,  erecting  mast 
on  the  boiler  house,  raising,  buying  4  pairs  of  cone  clamps  for  the 


1722  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

guys  and  4  sets  of  %-in.  blocks  for  hauling  in  guys,  and  bracing  the 
stack  inside  was  $250.  A  gang  of  8  men  at  $1.30  per  day  and  one 
top  man  at  $2.25  per  day  were  employed,  with  some  extra  men  for 
about  2  hours. 

The  erection  as  described  was  planned  and  carried  out  by  Mr. 
George  B.  Nicholson,  a  hoisting  engineer.  Incidentally  it  may  be 
stated  that  Mr.  Nicholson  undertook  the  job  after  it  had  been 
rejected  as  impossible  by  expert  riggers.  We  consider  this  a 
rather  remarkable  job  of  hoisting  engineering.  Only  one  man, 
Mr.  Nicholson,  was  a  skilled  man,  all  the  others  being  ordinary 
laborers  with  no  experience  in  hoisting  and  rigging.  In  addition 
the  method  of  rigging  the  tackle,  using  only  one  fine  to  run  through 
three  sets  of  blocks  on  the  stack  and  one  block  on  the  mast,  is 
notable.  We  are  indebted  for  the  information  from  which  this 
description  has  been  prepared  to  F.  W.  Raymond. 

Cost  of  Cast- Iron  Work.*— The  total  weight  of  the  cast-iron 
stairway  trim,  manhole  covers,  etc.,  in  the  U.  S.  Government 
Printing  Office  at  Washington,  D.  C.,  was  80  tons.  The  total  value 
in  place  was  $221.25  per  ton.  The  cost  of  erection  was  $62.50  per 
ton,  which  is  an  enormously  high  labor  cost,  attributable  to  the  fact 
that  the  work  was  done  by  Government  forces. 

The  wages  paid  per  eight-hour  day  were  as  follows : 

Superintendent $5.25 

Foremen    4.25 

Ironworkers    3.45 

Helpers    1.60 

Smith    2.25 

The  total  weight  of  the  cast-iron  frames  and  baseboard  in  the 
building  was  743.4  tons  of  the  total  contract  amounting  to  $107,800 
or  $145  per  ton.  The  cost  of  erection  was  practically  $23  per  ton. 

Cost  of  Shop  Drawings  for  Steel  Work.f— Mr.  R.  H.  Gage  gives 
the  following: 

The  data  were  gathered  by  the  writer  while  in  charge  of  the 
Drafting  Department  of  A.  Bolter's  Sons'  Structural  Steel  and  Iron 
Works,  of  Chicago,  111.,  during  the  years  1904,  1905  and  1906. 

The  works  are  divided  into  three  different  departments,  the 
Structural  Shop,  the  Architectural  Shop  .and  the  Foundry.  The 
Structural  Shop  has  a  capacity  of  800  tons  per  month.  The  Draft- 
ing Department  employs  on  an  average  seven  or  eight  engineers. 
All  the  work  is  standardized  with  regard  to  details  to  as  great 
an  extent  as  possible,  in  order  to  decrease  the  work  in  the  Drafting 
Room,  yet  not  to  such  an  extent  that  it  would  be  difficult  for  the 
shop  men  to  read  the  drawings.  For  example,  all  beam,  steel  and 
cast  iron  column  connections,  with  the  exception  of  special  cases, 
are  not  drawn  and  dimensioned  completely,  but  merely  indicated. 
The  shop  and  drafting  room  have  been  provided  with  a  set  of  the 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Mar.  18,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   28.    1907. 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1723 

firm's  standards,  which  have  all  these  connections  drawn  out  com- 
pletely with  dimensions  and  which  give  lists  of  the  material. 

The  data  here  presented  were  taken  from  a  great  variety  of 
work,  such  as  public  and  private  school  buildings,  churches, 
breweries,  malt  houses  and  elevators,  grain  bins,  warehouses, 
libraries,  hospitals,  apartment  buildings,  factories  and  manufac- 
turing plants,  train  sheds,  mill  buildings,  office  buildings,  electric 
lighting  plants  and  pumping  stations. 

Table  I  shows  the  character  of  the  buildings  and  also  the  average 
cost  of  preparing  the  drawings.  The  cost  of  drafting  material 
and  blue  prints  is  not  included.  Where  the  material  for  the  work 
is  to  be  ordered  from  the  mill  and  not  taken  from  stock,  the 
cutting  bills  or  mill  orders  are  taken  as  being  part  of  the  details. 
Table  II  (not  reproduced  here)  shows  the  particulars  of  the  build- 
ings from  which  the  data  in  Table  I  were  derived. 

TABLE  I. — COST  OF  SHOP  DRAWINGS. 

Av. 

cost 

per 

Type.     Character  of  Building:  ton. 

1.  Entire  skeleton  construction,   i.   e.,  loads  all  carried  to  the 

foundation  by  means  of  steel  columns $1.45 

2.  Interior  portion  supported  on  steel  columns  ;  exterior  walls 

carry  floor  loads  and  their  own  weight 1.22 

3.  Interior  portion  carried  on  cast  iron  columns  ;  exterior  walls 

support  floor  loads  as  well  as  their  own  weight 0.70 

4.  No    columns    and    floor    beams    resting    on    masonry    walls 

throughout   0.85 

5.  Structure    consisting    mostly    of    roof    trusses    resting    on 

columns     2.47 

6.  Structure    consisting    mostly    of    roof    trusses    resting    on 

masonry    walls 1.25 

7.  Mill   buildings 2.56 

8.  Flat  one-story  shop  or  manufacturing  buildings 0.74 

9.  Tipples,  mining  structures  or  other  complicated  structures. .  4.S8 

10.  Malt  or  grain  bins  and  hoppers 2.47 

11.  Remodeling  and  additions  where  measurements  are  neces- 

sary before  details  can  be  made 1.87 

There  is  always  a  noticeable  decrease  in  the  cost  of  details  when 
the  plans  for  the  iron  work  are  made  and  designed  by  an  engineer 
and  separated  from  the  general  plans.  On  comparing  the  cost  of 
picking  out  the  structural  steel  and  making  the  shop  drawings  from 
the  architect's  plans  and  the  engineer's  plans,  it  was  found  that  the 
cost  of  the  former  is  on  an  average  of  35%  higher  than  the  latter. 
Where  the  engineer's  plans  are  made  with  no  dimensions,  with  only 
the  outline  and  sections  given,  it  being  necessary  to  refer  to  the 
general  plans  for  the  location  and  dimensions,  there  is  no  saving  of 
time,  and  the  detailing  runs  as  high  as  on  the  architect's  plans. 

Inaccurate  plans,  where  the  draftsman  is  continually  finding 
errors,  cause  an  increase  in  the  cost,  as  it  is  necessary  to  wait 
and  refer  the  matter  to  the  architect ;  and  in  most  cases  he,  in  turn, 
has  to  check  over  his  plans  before  he  can  settle  the  question,  all  of 
which  causes  considerable  delay  and  takes  time  that  might  otherwise 
be  spent  in  making  the  drawings. 


1724  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  structural  steel  details  depends  on  so  many  things 
that  it  is  hard  to  set  any  fixed  rule  for  determining  what  this  cost 
is.  The  type  of  the  building  is  the  first  consideration ;  then  the 
architect  and  engineer,  their  methods  of  drawing  up  their  plans ; 
and  finally  the  detailing  drafting  force  one  is  obliged  to  depend 
upon. 

Cost  of  Sheeting  a  Foundation  Pit  with  Steel  Sheet  Piling.*— 
The  old  U.  S.  Custom  House  on  Wall  St.  in  New  York  City  was 
reconstructed  in  1908  for  the  use  of  the  National  City  Bank.  The 
old  building  was  four  stories  high  with  heavy  stone  walls  founded 
on  spread  footings.  In  addition  there  were  on  the  front  16  heavy 
stone  columns,  12  in  a  row  across  the  front  and  4  inside  the 
entrance.  The  plans  for  reconstruction  involved  the  removal  and  re- 
newal of  everything  inside  the  main  walls  which  were  to  be  pre- 
served. The  new  interior  was  planned  to  be  of  steel  frame  construc- 
tion, the  foundations  for  which  would  be  some  7  ft.  to  12  ft.  below 
the  level  of  the  footings  of  the  old  walls  and  columns. 

The  problem  to  be  solved  was  the  construction  of  the  new  and 
deeper  foundations  without  undermining  the  old  footings  or  causing 
any  settlement  which  would  crack  or  otherwise  injure  the  structure 
supported  by  these  footings.  The  soil  was  a  mixture  of  clay  and 
sand  containing  many  10  and  12-in.  stones.  It  also  carried  consid- 
erable water.  Obviously  careful  precautions  were  under  the  con- 
ditions necessary.  The  plans  adopted  were  to  drive  a  row  of  Wem- 
linger  steel  sheeting  all  around  the  interior  of  the  building  about 
12  ins.  from  the  edges  of  the  footings  and  with  its  top  left  about 
18  ins.  higher. 

The  sheeting  used  was  the  Wemlinger  corrugated  double,  consist- 
ing when  driven  of  two  thicknesses  of  3/16-in.  steel  sheets;  each 
sheet  was  24  ins.  wide  and  14  ft.  long.  The  two  sheets  were  driven 
together,  thus  sheeting  a  width  of  34  ins.  each  driving.  The 
driving  was  done  in  two  steps  or  moves.  The  first  step  was  to  a 
depth  of  3  ft.  and  was  made  with  an  Ingersoll-Rand  Type  D  sheet 
pile  driver.  The  remaining  depth  of  about  11  ft.  was  secured  with  a 
Vulcan  No.  3  steam  hammer  having  a  2,000-lb.  ram.  A  steel  plate 
was  placed  over  the  pile  and  on  it  was  set  a  2-in.  steel  block  which 
took  the  blow  of  the  ram. 

The  mounting  of  the  drivers  was  novel.  A  1%-in.  steel  cable 
was  stretched  horizontally  along  the  inside  of  the  old  wall  and  from 
it  were  suspended  the  two  hammers  and  a  light  tackle  for  handling 
the  sheeting.  The  lighter  hamper  was  suspended  on  a  differential 
hoist.  The  Vulcan  hammer  was  suspended  from  a  block  operated  by 
a  crab  so  mounted  that  the  mounting  formed  a  guide  and  prevented 
the  swing  of  the  hammer.  The  maximum  span  of  suspending  cable 
used  was  190  ft.  • 

Inside  the  driven  sheeting  there  was  built  a  wall  of  concrete. 
Pockets  or  sections  about  10  ft.  wide  were  excavated  so  as  to  lay 
bare  the  sheeting  at  regular  intervals  and  have  a  supporting  core 
between  each  pair  of  sections.  As  soon  as  the  excavation  ot  each 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.   13,  1909. 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1725 

pocket  had  been  carried  down  about  3  ft.  a  12  x  12-in.  waling  tim- 
ber was  set  against  the  sheeting  and  braced  back  to  the  rear  and 
bottom  of  the  pocket.  The  excavation  was  then  carried  down  to  a 
depth  of  8  or  9  ft.  and  a  wall  or  block  of  concrete  was  deposited  in 
the  pocket  against  the  piling.  After  this  concrete  had  set  the  cores 
between  pockets  were  excavated  and  in  turn  filled  with  concrete. 
This  completed  a  concrete  wall  5  ft.  thick  entirely  around  the  sheet- 
ing inside.  The  remaining  excavation  went  on  inside  this  wall  and 
was  accomplished  with  absolutely  no  disturbance  of  the  old  masonry 
walls  and  footings. 

The  contractors  for  the  sheeting  were  the  Wemlinger  Steel  Piling 
Co.  of  New  York,  N.  Y.  The  cost  of  the  work  to  the  contractors  was 
as  follows : 

Rental  of  Plant: 

Boiler  at  $3  per  8-hr,  day $    134.37 

1  Inger soil-Rand  hammer  at  $1.50  per  dayl 


)-..       256.36 


1  Vulcan  hammer  at  $6  per  day 

Total  rental .  .$  390.73 

Repairs  to  plant - 184.18 

Permanent    plant 319.09 

Coal  at  $5.76  per  net  ton 80.52 

Supplies    22.64 


Labor : 

Driving  "I 

House  shorers  at  $3.50  \ $1,089.32 

Foreman  at  $4.50 

Unloading  piling  laborers  at  $2.25 32.00 

Steam 

1  engineman  at  $4.50  \ 112.91 

1  fireman  at  $2.25       J 

Constructing  and  erecting  plant 65.56 

Total    labor $1,299.79 

Freight  and  Haulage : 

Freight    $    334.01 

Hauling  105  tons  of  sheeting 179.76 

Hauling  supplies  and  equipment 38.16 

Total    $    551.93 

Liability    insurance $      50.77 

Grand  total $2,899.65 

The  amount  of  sheeting  driven  was  638  lin.  ft,  14  ft.  long,  or  8,932 
sq.  ft.  Including  the  cost  of  the  sheeting  not  given  above,  the  cost 
was  $0.88b  per  sq.  ft.  Exclusive  of  freight  and  hauling  charges  on 
sheeting,  $513.77,  which  may  be  charged  to  the  cost  of  sheeting 
ready  for  driving,  the  cost  of  driving  was  $2,385.88,  or  $0.267  per  sq. 
ft.  The  labor  cost  of  driving  was  $0.146  per  sq.  ft. 

In  further  comment  on  these  costs  the  Wemlinger  Steel  Piling 
Co.,  which  furnishes  them  to  us,  writes  as  follows: 

"You  will  note  that  the  cost  of  doing  this  work  was  somewhat 
high  which,  in  the  first  place,  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  we  had 


1726  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

to  employ  union  labor  at  high  wages.  Furthermore  the  expense  for 
rental  and  repairs  of  equipment  were  higher  than  they  would  have 
been  if  we  had  been  regularly  equipped  for  doing  this  class  of 
work.  This  was,  however,  a  contract  which  we  took  mainly  for  the 
purpose  of  introducing  and  demonstrating  our  material.  You  will 
note  that  we  have  charged  the  entire  cost  of  the  permanent  plant 
against  this  contract,  the  reason  for  this  being  that  most  of  the 
plant  was  purchased  especially  for  this  work.  Another  reason  for 
the  high  cost  is  our  own  comparative  inexperience  and  that  all  the 
labor  employed,  which  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  members  of  the 
House  Shorers'  Union  were  employed,  proved  rather  ineffective.  \Ve 
believe  that  considering  the  experience  we  have  now  we  could 
easily  do  the  same  work  for  at  least  25%  less  cost." 

Cost  of  Driving  Steel  Sheet  Piling  for  Cut-off  Wall  of  a  Dam.* — 
Mr.  Carl  P.  Abbott  is  author  of  the  following: 

The  construction  of  a  concrete  dam,  with  tide  gates,  to  replace  an 
old  wooden  dam  on  a  salt  marsh  was  completed  in  the  summer  of 
1906  by  the  Queens  County  Water  Co.,  of  Far  Rockaway,  N.  Y.  In 
planning  the  new  work  considerable  thought  was  given  to  the  kind 
of  sheet  piling  that  would  best  answer  the  purpose  of  keeping  the 
water  from  getting  underneath  the  dam  and  the  choice  was  made 
of  steel  sheet  piling  of  the  form  manufactured  by  the  United  States 
Steel  Piling  Co.,  of  Chicago,  111.  Besides  supplying  the  requisite 
water-tight  wall,  this  piling  seemed  likely  to  be  more  durable  and 
more  surely  driven  and  certain  to  add  considerably  to  the  strength  of 
the  structure. 

The  piling  was  driven  lengthwise  of  the  dam  and  in  the  center, 
and,  as  a  turf  dike  was  carried  from  each  end  of  the  concrete  dam 
to  shore,  the  piling  was  carried  five  lengths  beyond  the  concrete  to 
form  a  sort  of  bond  at  the  junction  of  concrete  and  turf.  There 
were  two  lengths  of  piling  used,  25-ft.  and  18-ft. ;  the  25-ft.  lengths 
at  each  end  of  the  dam  and  one  length  between  each  gate,  and  the 
18-ft.  lengths  under  the  gates.  The  25-ft.  lengths  were  driven  flush 
with  the  surface  of  the  marsh,  so  the  18-ft.  lengths  were  driven 
flush  and  then  the  pile-driver  was  moved  back  over  the  line  and 
the  18-ft.  lengths  run  down  7  ft.  further  with  a  10-ft.  piece  used  as 
a  runner  by  bolting  a  couple  of  wrought-iron  plates  on  the  lower  end 
to  hold  it  on  the  pile.  A  half-round  pine  filling  strip  was  used. 
The  material  encountered  was  about  8  ft.  of  turf,  then  3  or  4  ft. 
of  sand,  then  a  streak  of  hard  pan  and  then  sand  again,  and  where 
the  driving  cap  was  used  the  piles  were  not  battered  at  all.  Some 
bids  were  put  in  for  the  driving,  but  as  they  looked  pretty  high 
we  decided  to  do  the  work  ourselves. 

We  took  an  old  well  drilling  machine,  and  with  very  little  car- 
penter work  it  made  a  good  pile-driver.  A  1,500-lb.  hammer 
was  used  and  a  driving  cap  made  by  the  United  States  Steel  Piling 
Co.  was  also  used  for  most  of  the  work. 

The  driving  gang  usually  consisted  of  three  men,  who  were  taken 
from  the  company's  force  and  were  very  quickly  broken  in,  with 


*  Engineering-Contracting,   Jan.   16.   1907. 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1727 

some  extra  men  for  a  part  of  the  time  to  haul  the  piles  across  the 
channel  from  the  railway  track  and  to  move  the  machine  to  the  job. 
The  cost  of  driving  given  below  includes  hauling  the  piles  over  and 
moving  the  machine  to  the  job.  The  cost  of  moving  the  machine 
away  was  not  included,  as  the  machine  and  boiler  were  used  for 
other  purposes  for  some  time  after. 

The  cost  of  labor,  supplies,  etc.,  was  as  follows : 


2.25 $  45.00 

2.10 19.95 

2.00 17.00 

1.75 3.50 

1.50 51.00 


20  days'  labor  at 

9%  days'  labor  at 

8%  days'  labor  at 

2  days'  labor  at 

34  days'  labor  at 

Total   labor  cost .$136.45 

17  days'  use  of  machine  at  $2.00 34.00 

2  tons  coal  at  $5.00 10.00 

Superintendence  at  5  per  cent 9.00 

Total  machinery  and   supplies $   53.00 

Grand    total $189.45 

There  were  55  piles  each  driven  25  ft.,  making  a  total  of  1,375  lin. 
ft.  driven  at  a  cost  of  13.8  cts.  per  ft.  for  the  driving.  As  the  men 
were  inexperienced  it  cost  more  to  drive  the  first  few  piles  than 
afterward,  and  if  the  same  number  were  to  be  driven  again  the  cost 
of  driving  would  be  very  much  decreased.  As  a  whole,  the  steel 
piling  was  very  satisfactory  and  easy  to  handle  and  drive,  even 
by  men  not  accustomed  to  that  sort  of  work. 

Cost  of  Steel  Sheet  Piling  for  Cofferdam.* — The  cost  of  140  steel 
sheet  piles  in  place  was  as  follows.  The  piles  were  26  ft.  long, 
driven  to  an  average  penetration  of  22  ft. 

The  work  was  done  by  the  U.  S.  Reclamation  Service.     . 

The  type  of  piling  is  that  manufactured  by  the  Carnegie  Steel 
Company  for  the  United  States  Steel  Piling  Co.,  of  Chicago.  The 
piling  cost  at  the  factory  is  70  cts.  per  lin.  ft.,  and  as  its  weight  is 
35  Ibs.  per  running  foot,  the  cost  therefore  was  2  cts.  per  Ib.  The 
freight  rate  from  the  factory  at  Pittsburg  to  Whalen,  Wyo.,  was  $1 
per  100  Ibs.,  thus  making  the  total  cost  f.  o.  b.  cars  at  Whalen, 
about  $1.05  per  lin.  ft. 

The  line  of  piles  under  consideration  was  driven  in  August,  1907, 
and  forms  a  part  of  the  south  side  of  the  cofferdam  used  in  the 
construction  of  the  concrete  diversion  dam  on  the  North  Platte 
River,  at  the  head  of  the  Interstate  canal.  None  of  the  piles  were 
driven  under  water,  and  the  material  into  which  they  penetrated 
consists  of  sand  and  coarse  gravel.  The  piles  were  dragged  from 
the  railroad  siding  to  the  river  bank,  and  carried  across  the  river  on 
cables. 

The  pile-driver  outfit  used  was  a  Lidgerwood  single  drum  20-hp. 
hoisting  engine  and  a  2,800-lb.  hammer,  having  an  average  drop  of 
8  ft.  When  no  hindrance  occurred  by  accidents  to  the  machinery, 
the  average  number  of  piles  driven  per  twelve  hours  was  27,  with 
an  exceptionally  high  run  on  August  9  of  29. 

•Engineering-Contracting,  June  10.   1908. 


1728  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  regular  pile-driving  crew  consisted  of  one  foreman,  one 
engineer  and  four  laborers.  Each  of  these  men  received  35  cts.  an 
hour  for  his  work  except  in  transporting  the  piles  from  the  railroad 
station  to  the  driver,  in  which  case  the  laborers  were  paid  for  at  the 
rate  of  25  cts.  an  hour  and  teams  at  the  rate  of  20  cts.  per  hour. 
The  total  labor  cost  of  unloading  and  moving  the  piles  from  the 
railroad  to  the  driver  was  $53.25,  making  a  unit  cost  per  linear  foot 
of  pile  of  $0.015.  The  total  labor  cost  for  driving  was  $190.05,  mak- 
ing a  unit  cost  of  $0.052  per  linear  foot  of  pile. 

Below  are  tabulated  the  total  and  unit  costs  of  the  piles  in  place 
distributed  under  the  headings  of  plant,  depreciation,  labor,  ma- 
terials and  supplies.  The  depreciation  on  the  engine  was  about  2% 
of  its  original  cost,  while  that  on  the  driver  was  about  30%  of  its 
original  cost,  including  repairs  made  on  it.  The  charge  for  materials 
contains  in  addition  to  the  piling  and  freight  thereon,  $28  worth  of 
wood  fillers  used  in  connection  with  the  piling.  The  charges  under 
supplies  consist  of  coal  and  oil  for  the  engine  and  labor  for  carrying 
drinking  water.  Six  tons  of  coal  were. used,  at  $5.50  per  ton. 

Unit  cost  Unit  cost 

Distribution  of            Total  Unit  cost  per  foot  per  foot  of 

costs.                          cost.  per  pile.  of  pile  penetration. 

Plant  depreciation .$      60.00  $0.416  $0.016  $0.019 

Labor    243.30  1.742            0.067  0.079' 

Materials 3,850.00  27.508            1.058  1.250 

Supplies   44.18  0.312            0.012  0.014 

Total     $4,197.48          $29.978          $1.153          $1.362 

Cost  of  Driving  .Some  Steel  Sheet  Piling.*— The  work  for  which 
the  costs  are  given  consisted  of  the  construction  of  cofferdams,  pre- 
liminary to  building  the  substructure  of  a  double  track  bridge  for  the 
Norfolk-  &  Western  Ry.  at  Chillicothe,  O.,  the  work  being  necessi- 
tated by  a  change  of  line  at  that  point. 

The  cofferdams  were  built  of  the  steel  piling  manufactured  by  the 
U.  S.  Steel  Piling  Co.,  of  Chicago,  the  same  piling  being  reused  for 
the  three  piers.  The  cofferdam  was  16  ft.  x  62  ft,  and  156  pieces 
of  piling,  16  ft.  in  length,  were  used.  The  piling  was  driven  to  a 
depth  of  14  ft.  below  water  level,  the  water  being  from  3  ft.  to  6  ft. 
deep.  The  material  into  which  the  piles  were  driven  consisted  of 
coarse  gravel  ranging  in  size  from  *4  in.  to  8  ins.  in  diameter. 

In  driving  the  piling  for  the  first  cofferdam,  the  piling  was  picked 
up  from  the  shore  by  means  of  a  steam  derrick  and  put  into  place 
for  the  pile-driver.  An  ordinary  drop-hammer  pile-driver,  rigged 
on  a  scow,  and  having  a  2,000-lb.  hammer,  was  used. 

The  piling  in  the  first  cofferdam  was  driven  in  three  days,  the 
crew  and  their  wages  per  10-hr,  day  being  as  follows: 

Foreman    $  5.00 

Engineer    on    derrick 3.00 

Tagman    2.00 

Engineer  on  pile  driver 3.00 

Six  men  handling  pile  driver  and  boat 10.50 

Total     .  $23.50 


*  Engineering -Contracting,  June  6,   1906. 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1729 

The  total  cost  of  driving  the  156  pieces  of  piling  was  $70.50,  or 
45.2  cts.  per  piece. 

The  same  crew  constructed  the  next  cofferdam,  five  days,  however, 
being  consumed  in  the  work.  The  main  reason  for  the  difference  of 
time  was  in  the  facilities  for  handling  the  piling.  In  this  coffer- 
dam the  piling  was  picked  off  the  shore  by  the  derrick,  placed  on  the 
scow  on  which  the  pile-driver  was  rigged,  and  then  taken  to  the  site 
of  the  cofferdam,  where  it  was  placed  in  position  by  the  driver  in- 
stead of  by  the  derrick  as  in  the  first  case.  The  cost  of  driving  the 
piling  for  this  cofferdam  was  $117.50. 

The  above  figures  do  not  take  into  account  fuel  and  plant  rental, 
nor  the  cost  of  braces  and  waling  which  were  used  as  described 
below. 

In  order  to  make  the  cofferdam  ready  for  pumping  out  a  6-in.  x 
8-in.  waling  piece  was  bolted  to  the  inside  of  the  sheet  piling  and 
braces  placed  across  from  side  to  side  at  intervals.  From  three 
to  five  braces  were  used  along  the  top,  but  were  used  at  no  other 
point 

We  .are  indebted  to  Mr.  L.  E.  Sturm.  Railroad  Contractor,  of 
Columbus,  O.,  for  the  information  in  the  above  article  and  for  the 
illustrations. 

Cost  of  Steel  Sheet  Piling  in  a  Cofferdam  and  in  Caissons.* — 
As  it  is  only  within  the  last  few  years  that  steel  sheet  piling  has 
come  into  general  use,  the  experience  of  the  William  P.  Carmichael 
•  Co.,  Engineers  and  Contractors,  of  Williamsport,  Ind.,  with  this 
form  of  piling  will  be  of  interest  to  our  readers.  About  a  year  ago 
this  firm  purchased  enough  sheet  steel  piling  to.  construct  a  coffer- 
dam of  a  total  perimeter  of  132  ft.  and  a  depth  of  12  ya  ft.  This 
was  first  used  in  the  construction  of  a  pier  foundation  for  the 
Wabash  R.  R.,  in  the  Huron  River,  near  Detroit,  Mich.  The  water 
at  the  point  where  the  pier  was  to  be  constructed  was  from  5  to 
8  ft.  deep.  The  bottom  consisted  of  from  2  to  3  ft.  of  alluvium,  on 
top  of  a  blue  sandy  clay,  partaking  in  a  measure  of  the  nature  of 
quicksand.  This  being  the  company's  first  experience  with  steel 
sheet  piling,  they  attempted  to  assemble  the  units  and  complete 
the  box  before  driving.  This  was  finally  done,  but  at  the  expense 
of  a  good  deal  of  unnecessary  labor  and  time.  At  first  it  was 
proposed  to  drive  six  pieces  at  once  by  striking  a  cap  covering  that 
many  piles,  but  it  was  soon  found  that  a  pretty  stiff  blow  from  a 
2,600-lb.  hammer  was  required  to  drive  two  at  a  time.  The  piles 
were  driven  to .  a  depth  of  3  ft.  below  the  proposed  bottom  of 
concrete. 

After  the  piles  were  driven  to  the  required  depth,  an  attempt  was 
made  to  pump  out  the  water  from  the  caisson.  A  6-in.  centrifugal 
pump  was  used,  but  failed  to  lower  the  water  level  more  than  a  few 
inches.  An  outer  row  of  2-in.  wooden  sheet  piling  was  then  driven 
about  5  ft.  from  the  stto'i  box,  and  the  space  filled  with  clay  and 
puddled.  This  served  its  purpose,  f^r  with  the  exception  of  a  few 

*Engineering-Contracting,  May  9,   1906. 


1730 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


leaks,  very  little  water  came  into  the  caisson.  An  attempt  was 
made  to  stop  these  leaks  with  clay,  but  owing  to  the  presence  of 
sand  in  the  clay,  the  attempt  was  only  partially  successful. 

The  piles  were  withdrawn  in  practically  as  good  condition  as  when 
driven,  so  that  the  cost  of  material  was  only  charged  at  2%  on  ac- 
count of  the  foundation.  After  the  first  piece  was  loosened,  the 
piles  in  the  foundation  were  withdrawn  at  a  very  small  cost.  Owing 
to  an  accident  to  the  foremen,  no  accurate  cost  account  was  kept 
of  this  work. 

The  next  use  of  the  steel  piling  by  this  firm  was  in  caissons  for 
four  piers  for  a  highway  bridge  across  the  Wabash  River  ;  for  this 


Fig.  2.— Driving  Steel  Piling. 

work  some  excellent  cost  data  are  given  further  on.  Three  of  these 
piers  were  upon  an  island.  At  the  time  the  work  was  done  these 
sites  were  not  covered  by  water.  The  piles  were  driven  into  coarse 
sand  and  gravel.  The  plant  used  for  the  work  consisted  of  a  small 
land  pile-driver,  having  derrick  and  steam  hoist  for  handling  the 
hammer,  which  weighed  2,000  Ibs.  A  steel  bound  wood  driving 
head  was  fitted  between  leads  and  was  used  to  protect  the  head  of 
the  piles  in  driving.  An  illustration  of  the  plant  is  given  in  Fig.  2. 
In  pulling  the  piling,  it  was  often  necessary  to  use  a  pulling  lever 
with  a  4  to  1  purchase,  the  derrick  and  hoist  being  hitched  to  lever. 
On  this  job  strips  of  wooden  batten  were  used  in  the  batten  or  the 
groove  between  each  two  steel  piles,  and  in  this  way  the  coffer- 
dam was  made  practically  watertight.  So  much  so,  indeed,  that 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1731 

an  ordinary  diaphragm  pump  would  have  handled  all  the  water 
except  for  what  came  up  from  the  bottom  of  the  pit. 

The  piling  was  found  to  be  in  good  condition  after  being  pulled, 
only  two  pieces  being  in  bad  shape.  And  those  could  be  fixed  up 
by  an  ordinary  blacksmith  at  a  cost  not  exceeding  one-half  of  the 
value  of  the  pieces. 

Now  as  to  the  cost  of  driving  and  pulling  the  piling.  Below  is 
given  the  cost  record  on  the  third  pier.  Work  on  this  was  begun 
Oct.  6,  1905,  and  completed  Oct.  11.  The  gang  and  rig  worked  a 
total  of  55  hours  and  finished  driving  the  piling  in  4%  days.  Some 
days,  however,  the  gang  worked  for  15  hours,  as  is  shown  in  the 
labor  cost  below.  The  wages  of  laborers  were  from  17%  cts.  to 

20  cts.  per  hour,  depending  upon  proficiency  and  length  of  service. 
The  enginemen  and  derrickmen  received  22%  cts.  per  hour,  and  the 
foreman  on  the  job  for  which  the  data  below  are  given  was  paid 
25  cts.  per  hour.     The  low  rate  of  wages  paid  to  the  foreman  was 
due  to  the  fact  that  he  was  a  new  man  in  that  position  and  did  not 
have  to  assume  much  responsibility,  Mr.  M.  C.  Andrews,  of  the  con- 
tracting firm,  being  in  charge  of  the  work  in  person. 

The  cost  of  driving  and  pulling  was  as  follows : 
Driving: 

Labor    $   93.00 

Use  of  machinery,  fuel,  etc.,   5  days 15.00 

Total  for  driving .  $108.00 

Pulling : 

Labor   $   50.00 

Use  of  machinery,  fuel,  etc.,  8  days.  . 10.00 

Total  for  pulling $  60.00 

As  130  piles  were  each  driven  11%  ft.,  or  a  total  of  1,495  ft.,  the 
cost  per  foot  of  pile  for  driving  was  7.2  cts. ;  the  cost  per  foot  of 
pile  for  pulling  was  4  cts.,  making  the  total  cost  for  driving  and 
pulling  11.2  cts.  As  is  shown  in  the  table  below  this  11.2  cts.  also 
includes  the  cost  of  straightening  bent  and  warped  piles.  The  labor 
cost  of  driving  the  piles  can  be  further  summarized  and  in  the 
tabulation  below  is  given  the  rate  of  wages  and  the  hours  worked 
each  day  by  the  various  classes  of  labor. 

Labor  Driv-         Straighten- 

Rate.  Cost.  ing.  ing  piles. 

Oct.     6 $13.54  $13.54  

Oct      7 28.92  21.00  7.92 

Oct.     9 17.70  14.00  3.70 

Oct.  10 22.17  22.17 

Oct.  11 10.68  10.68  .... 

Totals   $93.01  $81.39  $11.62 

The  work  accomplished  each  day  was  as  follows :     Oct.   6,  drove 

21  piles  and  worked  straightening  bent  piles;    Oct.  7,  drove  25  piles 
and  finished  straightening  bent  piles;    Oct.  9,  drove  30  piles;  Oct.  10, 
drove  35  piles;    Oct.  11,  drove  19  piles. 

In  conclusion  we  would  call  especial  attention  to  the  Illustration 
showing  the  pile-driving  plant.  It  will  be  noted  that  the  hammer 


1732  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

was  suspended  from  the  boom  of  a  derrick,  and  that  the  engine 
used  to  operate  the  derrick  was  also  used  to  drive  the  piles.  The 
hammer  is  shown  outside  the  leads  of  the  pile-driver,  but,  in  driving, 
it  is  placed  between  the  leads.  In  fact,  the  same  engine  operated 
the  derrick,  shifted  the  driver  from  place  to  place,  placed  the  pile 
in  position  and  handled  the  hammer.  The  fall  was  not  usually 
greater  that  20  ft.,  and  consequently  very  little  damage  was  done 
to  the  derrick. 

The  steel  piling  used  on  the  above  work  was  made  by  the  United 
States  Steel  Piling  Co.,  of  Chicago,  111.  We  are  indebted  to  the 
William  P.  Carmichael  Co.  for  the  information  given  in  this  article. 

Cutting  Off  Steel  Sheet  Piles  with  the  Electric  Arc.*— In  the  in- 
teresting paper  on  steel  sheet  piling  by  Mr.  Wm.  A.  Fargo,  which 
was  published  in  our  issue  of  May  1,  1907,  some  data  were  given 
of  the  use  of  the  electric  arc  in  cutting  off  steel  piles  at  the  New 
Hoffman  House  foundation  work  in  New  York  City.  Since  the  pub- 
lication of  this  article  we  have  received  from  Mr.  Frank  C.  Perkins, 
Electrical  Engineer,  of  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  a  photograph  of  the  work  in 
progress,  together  with  a  brief  account  of  the  apparatus  employed. 

The  steel  piles  being  cut  are  %  in.  thick  in  the  web  and  3  ins. 
at  the  interlocking  points.  It  is  stated  that  the  time  required  in 
burning  the  %-in.  steel  is  four  minutes  per  foot  and  the  time  taken 
at  the  interlocking  points  is  said  to  be  8  minutes. 

The  arc  light  carbon  is  held  in  a  metal  clamp  fastened  to  a 
metallic  rod  and  socket,  which  is  in  turn  bolted  to  a  long  wooden 
pole,  the  cable  conducting  the  current  being  flexible  and  connected 
to  the  metal  clamp  of  the  carbon  terminal.  The  steel  to  be  cut  is 
connected  to  the  other  conductor  from  the  alternating  current  cir- 
cuit. As  shown  in  the  illustration  the  men  are  protected  from  the 
extreme  heat  and  terrific  glare  by  goggles  and  asbestos  masks  as 
well  as  gloves,  as  it  has  been  found  that  the  carbon  fumes  pro- 
duced by  the  high  power  electric  arc,  affected  the  lips  and  other 
parts  of  the  face  and  hands. 

About  1,200  amperes  are  being  utilized  at  50  volts  pressure,  alter- 
nating current  being  employed  stepped  down  to  the  above  voltage 
from  the  high  pressure  service  of  2,500  volts.  Single  phase  alter- 
nating current  is  employed,  taken  from  the  street  service  mains, 
the  frequency  being  60  cycles  per  second. 

Referring  to  this  work  Mr.  Fargo,  in  his  paper  says:  "The  cost 
of  cutting  steel  piling  with  current  at  10  cts.  per  kw.  and  the  attend- 
ant at  50  cts.  per  hour,  is  stated  to  be  as  follows  per  foot  of  piling 
cut: 

Cost  of  current $2.56 

Labor   0.40 

Total    .  $2.96 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  June  26,   1907. 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1733 

This  is  rather  high,  and  the  hack-saw  would  probably  be  cheaper. 
However,  with  current  at  say  3  cts.  per  kw.-hour  the  cost  per  foot 
would  be  but  $1.17.  Even  at  this  rate,  with  labor  competent  to  use 
a  hack-saw  at  25  cts.  per  hour,  the  saw  would  be  the  cheaper." 

Cost  of  Driving  Steel  Sheet  Piling.* — A  valuable  record  of  ex- 
perience in  driving  steel  sheet  piling  in  hard  soils  was  given  re- 
cently by  Mr.  Wm.  A.  Fargo,  Civil  and  Hydraulic  Engineer,  of  Jack- 
son, Mich.,  in  a  paper  read  before  the  Michigan  Engineering  Society. 
Through  the  kindness  of  Mr.  Fargo  we  have  received  some  addi- 
tional cost  data  on  steel  sheet  piling  work,  and  these,  with  the 
original  paper,  are  printed  in  the  following  paragraphs : 

Steel  sheet  piling  is  used  for  purposes  entirely  similar  to  wood 
sheet  piling,  but  is  much  more  certain  in  results  obtained.  The 
principal  applications  of  steel  sheet  piling  are  as  follows:  (1) 
Cofferdams:  For  building  and  structure  foundations,  including 
bridge  piers  and  abutments.  Also  for  mine  shafts  where  the  piling 
may  be  forced  down  in  the  manner  of  a  caisson  or  shield.  ( 2 )  Dams : 
For  the  dam  itself,  as  for  low  dams ;  thus  requiring  no  other  coffer- 
dam or  pumping  out  of  the  foundation  -pit.  As  a  cut-off  across  a 
valley  under  a  dam  or  beneath  a  core  wall.  As  a  permanent  en- 
closing wall  down  to  an  impervious  stratum  for  the  masonry  struc- 
ture of  the  dam,  or  for  power  house  or  other  building  not  neces- 
sarily part  of  a  dam ;  or  as  a  downstream  toe  protection  only. 
( 3 )  Retaining  Wall :  Temporary  or  permanent  as  required  in 
building  footings  close  to  an  existing  structure.  This  use  is  essen- 
tially similar  to  the  cofferdam. 

The  types  or  varieties  of  steel  sheet  piling  are  as  follows:  (1) 
Special  rolled  sections,  composed  of  forms  requiring  special  rolls  for 
producing  the  piling.  If  there  are  return  bends,  or  flanges  transverse 
to  the  plane  of  rolling,  the  piling  must  pass  through  a  series  of  spe- 
cial rolls.  C2)  Built-up  sections.  Usually  built  up  from  standard 
structural  steel  shapes.  These  may  consist  of  single  webs  with 
riveted  interlocking  members,  or  of  double  parallel  webs  held  in 
relative  position  by  bolts  and  pipe  separators.  The  double-web  sec- 
tions are  usually  driven  alternately  with  single  web  members.  A 
number  of  forms  of  steel  sheet  piling  are  shown  in  Fig.  1.  The  fol- 
lowing points  need  to  be  considered  in  selecting  a  design  of  piling 
for  any  work : 

Water-Tightness. — In  deep  cofferdams  a  prime  requisite  is  water- 
tightness.  The  clearance  of  interlock  of  adjoining  piles  must 
therefore  be  reduced  as  much  as  possible  and  still  allow  of  driving. 
The  clearances  used  on  the  built-up  typey  are  from  %-in.  to  *4-in. 
all  around  the  interlock.  In  hard  soils  ^4 -in.  is  none  too  much.  In 
many  sections  of  piling  over  15  ft.  or  20  ft.  long  there  will  be 
found  such  kinks  and  crimps,  partly  the  result  of  handling  on  and  off 
cars,  that  driving  with  a  tight  interlock  is  a  serious  problem. 
With  such  a  close  interlock,  piles  not  true  or  perfect  in  alignment 
often  refuse  to  drive  when  there  is  encountered  a  stratum  of  hard- 
pan  or  layer  of  small  boulders.  Under  such  conditions  piling  often 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  1,  1907. 


1734 


HANDBOOK    OF  COST  DATA. 


refuses  under  the  heaviest  drop  or  steam  hammer.  If  driving  is 
persisted  in  it  will  result  in  the  crippling  of  the  pile  either  at  the 
top  or  bottom.  Crippling  at  the  bottom  means  usually  an  escape 
from  the  interlock  and  a  curving  to  one  side  exactly  like  a  clinched 
nail  except  that  the  curve  of  the  clinch  may  have  several  feet 
radius. 


r  # 

No.  5  Vanderkloot. 


t 


No.  6  Quimby. 

f  fl 


No.  7  Williams. 


Wemlinger  (Corrugated.) 
Fig.    3. — Representative  Steel   Sheet  Pile  Sections. 


Stiffness. — In  locations  where  there  are  encountered  strata  of  hard 
material  such  as  often  occur  in  river  valleys,  where  the  drift  has 
been  eroded  and  redeposited,  the  steel  piling  to  be  a  success  must 
possess  considerable  stiffness  laterally  to  prevent  crippling.  There- 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION 


1735 


fore  examine  the  radius  of  gyration  of  the  proposed  section  of 
piling.  It  is  the  writer's  experience  that  for  hard  driving  the  free 
or  unengaged  edge  (see  X  in  No.  3,  Fig.  3)  of  the  pile  being  driven 
should  be  of  a  width  (at  right  angles  to  the  web)  of  one-third  to 
one-half  of  the  width  of  the  engaged  web  (see  Y  in  section  No.  3, 
Fig.  3). 

Methods  of  Driving. — The  friction  of  long  lengths  of  steel  piling, 
with  their  inevitable  crimps,  will  make  necessary  a  heavy  hammer, 
say  a  4,500-lb.  ram  on  a  steam  rig  or  a  3,000-lb.  or  heavier  drop 


Half 
Top    Plan 


Half 


Bottom    Plan 
Fig.  4. — Cast-Iron  Follower  for  Driving  Steel  Sheet  Piles. 

hammer.  Most  of  the  writer's  experience  in  driving  steel  sheeting 
has  been  with  the  heaviest  No.  1  Vulcan  steam  hammer  (4,500-lb. 
ram)  ;  total  weight  of  hammer  resting  on  the  pile,  10,000  Ibs.  These 
hammers  are  adjusted  to  strike  about  65  times  per  minute  with 
3% -ft.  stroke.  These  large  (No.  1)  Vulcan  hammers  are  prefer* 
ably  fitted  with  a  "McDermid  base"  consisting  of  a  1%-in.  circular 
steel  plate  about  13  ins.  in  diameter.  These  plates  are  slipped  into 


1736  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

a  slot  in  the  base  of  the  hammer  housing  and  receive  the  blow  of  the 
ram.  The  wood  striking  block  or  cushion  is  set  into  the  heavy 
cast-iron  follower  on  the  pile  and  projects  up  into  the  socket  of  the 
hammer  housing  so  that  the  McDermid  base  plate  rests  directly  on 
the  wood  block.  These  wood  blocks  are  made  about  20  ins.  long, 
15  ins.  in  diameter  at  the  center,  and  are  hewed  to  about  12  ins. 
at  top  and  bottom  to  enter  respectively  the  hammer  housing  and 
the  follower. 

In  driving  through  hard  clay  layers,  or  when  the  piling  is  bound 
slightly  by  crimps  in  the  interlock,  the  blows  of  such  a  hammer  may 
run  as  many  as  30  to  60  to  the  inch  of  penetration  on  such  driving. 
In  hard  driving,  one  or  two  fresh  blocks  per  30-ft.  pile  are  often  re- 
quired. The  time  consumed  in  stopping  and  changing  blocks  is  from 
two  to  five  minutes,  provided  the  block  is  not  badly  split  and 
wedged  in.  It  is  necessary  to  watch  the  failure  of  these  blocks 
closely,  as  with  a  crushed  or  broomed  block  the  efficiency  of  the 
hammer  is  very  low.  Therefore  the  blocks  are  removed  as  soon  as 
they  show  signs  of  failure.  The  crushing  usually  takes  place  toward 
the  middle  of  the  length  of  the  block,  making  a  hot,  steaming  pulp 
of  the  tough  oak  or  maple  fiber  for  a  length  of  3  to  5  ins.  Partially 
seasoned  swamp  oak,  rock  maple  and  blue  gum  have  given  the 
writer  the  best  service. 

The  form  of  cast-iron  follower  used  with  steel  piling,  and  shown 
in  Fig.  4,  was  designed  by  the  writer,  and  patterns  are  owned  by 
the  Vulcan  Iron  Works,  Chicago,  111.,  and  the  Jarvis  Engine  & 
Machine  Works,  Lansing,  Mich.  Fig.  5  shows  a  steel  pile  being 
driven,  fitted  with  the  cast-iron  follower  and  the  spindle-shaped 
follower  block  above  described.  Flat-base  followers  are  some- 
times used,  but  do  not  hqld  the  steel  pile  in  position. 

Process  of  Driving. — In  driving  steel  sheet  piling,  if  the  alternate 
sections  are  light  and  heavy  (that  is,  the  heavy  piles  having  double 
webs  or  double  "Z"  bars),  drive  first  a  heavy  section.  Go  slowly  and 
take  great  care  to  have  the  initial  pile  plumb  and  exactly  in  position. 
Then  interlock  a  light  section  with  the  first  one  driven.  On  account 
of  time  consumed  in  cutting  off  steel  sheeting  weighing  30  Ibs.  to  54 
Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  it  is  always  desirable  to  back  the  driver  away  from 
the  work.  In  close  quarters  approaching  a  wall,  or  in  the  end  of  a 
deep  cut  for  a  core  wall,  for  instance,  this  is  not  always  practicable. 
In  starting  small  cofferdams,  as  for  piers  or  foundations  on  build- 
ings where  close  adherence  to  the  line  is  required,  one  of  the 
manufacturers  of  piling  recommends  that  temporary  piles  about 
4  ft.  long  be  driven  and  taken  out  one  at  a  time,  and  the  long  pieces 
of  piling  substituted,  thus  insuring  starting  correctly  with  the  long 
piling. 

Borings  in  casings  are  made  along  the  proposed  line  of  steel  sheet- 
ing at  say  25-ft.  intervals,  and  the  steel  ordered  to  length  accord- 
ingly. Except  when  encountering  rock,  boulders  or  extremely 
tenacious  hardpan,  the  piles  can  usually  be  driven  to  a  fairly  uni- 
form top  level.  When  the  objective  foundation  soil  or  rock  bottom 
is  in  an  eroded  river  valley  which  has  again  been  refilled  with  drift 
the  hard  bottom  will  frequently  be  covered  with  a  generous  number 


STEEL  AXD  IROX  CONSTRUCTION 


1737 


of  boulders  which  have  dropped  out  of  the  eroded  material  because 
too  heavy  to  be  washed  down  stream.  This  boulder  stratum  is,  of 
course,  quite  irregular  and  not  so  desirable  a  material  in  which  to 
terminate  sheet  piling  as  a  good  clay  or  slightly  disintegrated  rock 


Fig.   5. — View  Showing  Arrangement  for  Driving  Steel  Sheet  Pilea 

(A)   Bottom  of  Steam  Hammer;   (B)  Wooden  Block;   (C)  Cast 

Iron  Follower ;    (D)  Steel  Pile. 


covering  sound  bedrock.  Often  too  sound  bedrock  is  deeply  chan- 
neled and  filled  with  pot  holes,  so  that  piling  may  need  some  cutting 
if  it  cannot  be  allowed  to  extend  above  grade,  as  into  concrete 


1738  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  process  of  cutting  steel  piling  by  means  of  the  electric  arc 
was  employed  on  the  construction  of  the  foundations  for  the  New 
Hoffman  House,  Broadway  and  25th  St.,  New  York  City.  The  cost 
of  cutting  steel  piling  with  current  at  10  cts.  per  kw.  and  the  at- 
tendant at  50  cts.  per  hour,  is  stated  to  be  as  follows  per  foot  of 
piling  cut : 

Cost  of  current $2.56 

Labor   0.40 

Total    $2.96 

This  is  rather  high,  and  the  hack-saw  would  probably  be  cheaper. 
However,  with  current  at  say  3  cts.  per  kw.-hour  the  cost  per  foot 
would  be  but  $1.17.  Even  at  this  rate,  with  labor  competent  to  use 
a  hack-saw  at  25  cts.  per  hour,  the  saw  would  be  the  cheaper. 
The  current  used  was  at  50  volts,  which  was  stated  to  be  more 
satisfactory  than  either  25  or  105  volts.  Tests  showed  650  amperes 
consumed  at  the  arc,  which  at  50  volts  equals  about  32  kw. 

Boulders.— In  passing  a  line  of  steel  sheeting  around  a  boulder  of 
large  size,  special  angle  or  bent  piling  sections  are  desirable  to 
make  the  departure  from  and  return  to  the  line  as  planned.  Some 
of  the  types  of  sheeting,  like  the  Quimby  or  the  United  States,  adapt 
themselves  readily  to  such  changes  of  alignment  without  using 
special  pieces.  Bending  a  %-in.  or  i^-in.  web  longitudinally  to 
short  radius  in  the  field  is  not  an  easy  matter.  When  using  rigid 
non-reversible  interlocked  piling  in  quicksand,  and  on  work  of  such 
character  that  close  water-tightness  is  required,  special  corner 
pieces  should  be  kept  on  hand  for  emergencies.  In  some  soils  it  may 
be  permissible  at  times  to  turn  corners  by  driving  outside  the  inter- 
lock and  tight  against  a  projecting  flange,  placing  the  new  piling 
at  any  angle  required.  Sometimes  it  may  be  feasible  to  fill  gaps  and 
make  closures  with  specially  prepared  squared  wood  piles,  with 
points  beveled  to  make  the  wood  piling  hug  the  steel. 

In  hard  driving  among  stones,  only  a  type  of  piling  of  great 
stiffness  laterally  and  with  perfect  interlocking  features  will  insure 
success.  On  such  work  there  must  be  no  alternate  unstiffened  sec- 
tions of  piling.  The  interlock  must  be  perfect  and  confining,  diffi- 
cult to  open  up  and  permit  the  escape  of  the  inside  member.  Even 
with  the  heaviest  and  most  confining  type  of  interlocked  piling  now 
on  the  market  in  this  country,  this  opening  of  interlock  will  some- 
times occur  when  boulders  are  encountered.  Small  boulders  in 
gravelly  soils  are  usually  displaced  without  trouble.  Sometimes 
the  aid  of  a  water  jet  is  a  help.  Usually  steel  piling  will  drive 
easily  enough  in  ordinary  soils  without  a  jet.  In  hard  clays  a  jet 
is  not  of  much  assistance  and  is  very  slow.  Obviously  it  is  not 
often  required  to  drive  steel  sheeting  far  into  hard  clays. 

In  driving  four  lines  of  steel  piling  across  the  valley  of  the 
Muskegon  River  in  Mecosta  and  Newaygo  counties,  Michigan,  the 
borings  showed  "floating"  masses  of  clay  hardpan  sometimes  several 
hundred  feet  across,  and  from  1  ft.  to  12  ft.  thick.  Below  was 
quicksand  before  reaching  a  bed  of  hardpan  continuous  across  the 
valley  at  a  depth  of  about  30  ft.  Hence  the  necessity  for  driving 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1739 

through  the  floating  hardpan.  (See  Fig.  6.)  The  hardpan  in 
question  consisted  of  about  70%  of  bluish  clay  and  30%  of  sharp 
sand,  well  mixed  and  compacted  by  water  deposition  and  pressure, 
to  the  texture  of  frozen  soil.  In  this  hardpan  were  stones  from 
gravel  up  to  boulders  of  5  tons  weight.  This  material  cost  $3  per 
cu.  yd.  to  trench,  and  angular  fragments  would  lie  for  months  in 
water  moving  with  a  velocity  of  5  ft.  per  second  without  material 
erosion  or  change  in  form.  This  was  at  the  Big  Rapids  dam  of  the 
Grand  Rapids  &  Muskegon  Power  Co.,  in  1905.  Lubricating  the 
piling  with  grease  before  driving,  and  with  a  stream  of  water 
under  pressure  when  driving,  seemed  to  be  of  no  special  aid  in  the 
hardpan  mentioned. 

On  the  work  at  the  Big  Rapids  Dam,  above  mentioned,  the  single- 
channel  Friestedt  piling  frequently  buckled  and  recourse  was  then 
had  to  double  Z-bar  Friestedt  sections  entirely.  This  piling  with 
two  Z-bars  on  all  pieces  weighs  about  54  Ibs.  per  sq.  ft.,  and  to 
reduce  the  weight  the  writer  has  had  a  single  Z-bar  riveted  to  every 
channel  instead  of  using  double  Z-bar  channels  exclusively  or 

# soo'o'1- 

r-tT  ! 

»%|3    o 


«^ 

Fig.   6. — Cross  Section  of  Muskegon  River  at  Big  Rapids  Dam. 


alternating  with  plain  channels.  The  single  Z-bar  to  every  channel 
permits  always  having  the  free  or  uninterlocked  edge  of  the  pile 
being  driven  stiffened  by  a  Z-bar.  On  this  type,  shown  at  No.  3  in 
Fig.  3,  the  writer  has  obtained  a  patent  and  has  used  over  1,000  tons 
with  satisfactory  results.  Nearly  all  of  this  was  driven  into  hard 
soils.  On  the  Muskegon  River  work  one  carload  was  used  of  a 
special  rolled  type  of  piling  having  less  radius  of  gyration  than  the 
built-up  types  above  mentioned.  Of  this  piling  fully  one-half 
buckled  ;  it  was  thrown  away  and  replaced  with  the  other  type. 

Pulling  Piling.— The  manufacturers  of  steel  piling  place  much 
stress  on  the  ability  to  pull  up  the  piles,  but  in  his  experience  in 
hard  soils  the  writer  has  never  been  able  to  get  jacks  enough  on  a 
piece  of  steel  piling  driven  12  ft.  in  the  ground  to  pull  it  out.  In 
soft  river  mud  and  silt,  pulling  with  heavy  tackle  can  be  done. 
Probably  a  hammer  striking  upward  blows  in  the  manner  similar  to 
that  used  in  pulling  pipe  casings  from  test  bore  holes  would  be  oper- 
ative except  in  cases  of  badly  crimped  and  bent  piles.  [Note. — Steel 
piles  can  be  pulled  with  stump  pullers,  as  described  in  the  section  on 
Timberwork.] 

Cost  of  Piling. — In  lots  of  500  tons,  Friestedt  steel  piling  sold  in 
1904  and  1905  at  $1.93  per  100  Ibs.  on  cars  at  the  mill ;  this  on 
alternate  double  Z-bar  and  channel  and  plain  channel  type.  In 


1740  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

May,  1906,  this  type  sold  at  $2.03,  and  $2.23  with  a  Z  bar  on  every 
channel,  the  additional  price  being  on  account  of  extra  handling 
when  every  piece  has  to  be  riveted.  The  plain  channels  require  only 
a  1-in.  hole  punched  in  the  end  for  lifting. 

The  cost  of  driving  per  lin.  ft.  of  piling  13*4  ins.  net  width,  with 
a  steam  hammer,  on  the  Muskegon  River  work  above  mentioned  ran 
from  7*4  cts.  to  20  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  in  place  ;  labor  at  20  cts.  per  hour  ; 
foreman,  25  cts.  The  7%  cts.  cost  was  on  land  in  sand  and  gravel 
with  some  clay  strata ;  piling  20  to  40  ft.  long.  The  average 
amount  of  piling  driven  per  hour  in  fairly  good  ground  is  40  to  50 
lin.  ft,  or  400  to  500  lin.  ft.  per  day  of  10  hours,  including  the 
time  of  moving  the  pile  driver.  In  general  the  cost  per  sq.  ft.  for 
driving  steel  sheeting  is  25%  less  than  for  driving  wood. 

Splicing  Piling. — The  longest  single  lengths  driven  on  the  writer's 
work  was  44  ft.,  but  spliced  lengths  up  to  58  ft.  have  been  success- 
fully used.  In  doing  spliced  work  it  is  not  necessary  actually  to  bolt 
or  rivet  the  splices,  the  procedure  being  to  use  two  lengths  so  as 
to  break  joints  in  the  interlock.  For  58-ft.  piling,  suppose  we  use 
36-ft.  and  22-ft.  lengths:  First  drive  the  36-ft.  piece  down,  then 
move  back  and  drive  a  24-ft.  pile  down  within  a  foot  of  the  top  of 
the  36-ft.  piece;  now  move  forward  and  set  a  second  22-ft.  piece 
on  top  of  the  first  36-ft.  piece  and  drive  both  down  to  full  depth. 
Now  move  back  past  the  24-ft.  pile  and  drive  a  36-ft.  piece  in  No.  3 
position  ;  then  a  32-ft.  piece  on  top  of  the  24-ft.  piece.  By  moving 
back  and  forth  so  as  not  to  lose  the  interlock  below  ground  only 
two  different  lengths  are  required. 

SUPPLEMENTARY  DATA. 

In  addition  to  the  cost  given  above  in  the  original  paper  the 
author  furnishes  us  some  figures  of  the  comparative  cost  of  oper- 
ating pile  drivers  by  electric  hoist  and  by  steam  hoist,  and  also 
further  figures  of  the  cost  of  sheet  pile  driving.  These  figures  we 
give  below. 

Cost  of  Operating  Pile-Drivers. — The  following  figures  show  the 
relative  cost  of  operating  two  2,000-lb.  drop-hammer  pile-drivers, 
one  equipped  with  electric  hoist  and  the  other  with  steam  hoist. 
These  drivers  had  38-ft.  leads  and  worked  side  by  side  under  the 
same  conditions  on  round  piling  in  sand  and  clay: 

DRIVER  WITH  ELECTRIC  HOIST. 

One    foreman,    at    $3 $  3.00 

Six  helpers,    at  $2 12.00 

One  team  delivering  at  y2  day  at  $4 2.00 

Interest     on     investment     at     5%      (100     days' 

service)    1.00 

Depreciation   1.00 

Superintendence    and    engineering 2.00 

Power    2.00 

Total    $23.00 

In  this  driver  the  hammer  was  returned  in  the  leads  at  a  speed 
of  250  ft.  per  minve 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1741 

DRIVER  WITH  STEAM  HOIST. 

One  foreman,  at  $3 $  3.00 

Five  helpers,  at  $2 10.00 

One  engineer,  at  $2.25 2.25 

One  fireman,  at  $1.75 1.75 

One  team  delivering  at  %  day  at  $4 2.00 

Interest     on     investment     at     5%      (100     days' 

service) 1.00 

Depreciation    1.00 

Superintendence  and  engineering 2.00 

Fuel,  y2  ton  coal,  at  $4 2.00 

Total    $25.00 

In  this  driver  the  hammer  was  returned  in  the  leads  at  a  speed  of 
360  ft.  per  minute. 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  electric  hoist  used  was  of  considerably 
.slower  rope  speed  than  was  the  steam  hoist.  Mr.  Fargo  notes  that 
had  the  speed  of  the  electric  hoist  been  as  great  as  that  of  the 
steam  hoist  it  would  have  shown  a  lower  cost  record  per  lineal  foot 
of  piling  driven  on  account  of  one  less  man  at  lower  pay  operating 
it.  He  states  that  any  ordinarily  bright  man  can  be  taught  to  oper- 
ate an  electric  hoist  in  a  day's  time,  but  that  a  steam  rig  takes  two 
men  of  more  experience. 

Cost  of  Driving  Steel  Sheeting  with  Steam  Hammer. — The  follow- 
ing figures  show  the  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  driving  steel  sheet  piling 
in  clay  and  sand,  using  a  Vulcan  steam  hammer,  with  a  4,500-lb. 
ram  and  a  total  weight  on  the  pile  of  10,000  Ibs.  The  driver  had 
5  5 -ft.  leads.  The  figures  are  for  a  10-hour  working  day. 

COST  OF  OPERATING  DRIVER. 

One  foreman,  at  $3 $  3.00 

Four  helpers,  at  $2 8.00 

One   engineer,   at  $2.50 2.50 

One  fireman,  at  $1.75 1.75 

One  team  delivering  at  %  day  at  $4 2.00 

Interest     on     investment     at     5%      (100     days' 

service)    2.50 

Depreciation    2.00 

Superintendence    and    engineering 2.00 

Fuel,  1  ton  coal,  at  $4 4.00 

Total    $27.25 

The  steel  piling,  consisting  of  one  15 -in.  channel  and  one  special 
Z-bar  as  shown  in  sketch  3,  Fig.  1,  weighed  38  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft.  and 
cost  delivered  2.385  cts.  per  Ib.  The  record  for  16  days'  driving,  8 
days  of  fairly  difficult  work  in  strong  soil  and  8  days  of  fairly  easy 
driving  in  sandy  soil,  was  6,400  lin.  ft.,  or  400  lin.  ft,  or  15,200  Ibs. 
per  day.  We  can  now  summarize  as  follows: 

Item.                                                      Per  day.  Per  lin.  ft. 

15,209  Ibs.,  at  2.385c $362.52  $0.9063 

Unloading  from  cars,  at  V2c  per  Ib. . .      76.00  0.1900 

Operating   steam  hammer 27.25  0.0682 


Total $465.77          $1.1645 


1742  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Cleaning  Steel  by  Sand  Blast  and  Painting  by  Com- 
pressed Air.— Dr.  De  Witt  C.  Webb  gives  the  following: 

At  the  U.  S.  Naval  Station,  Key  West,  Fla.,  are  two  large  steel 
coal  sheds  whose  vertical  side  walls  are  composed  of  ^4 -in.  steel 
plates,  and  are  from  16  to  20  ft.  high.  The  action  of  heat  and  im- 
purities in  the  coal,  combined  with  that  of  the  large  quantities  of 
salt  water  used  for  extinguishing  spontaneous  combustion  fires 
rapidly  corrodes  the  interior  steel  work  and  necessitates  its  thor- 
ough cleaning  and  painting  every  time  the  sheds  are  emptied. 

Shortly  after  the  writer  was  detailed  to  this  station  his  attention 
was  attracted  to  this  subject,  and  he  concluded  that  the  use  of  a 
portable  sand  blast  cleaning  and  spray  painting  outfit  would  be  very 
advantageous  in  point  of  efficiency  and  time  as  well  as  cost.  This 
idea  meeting  with  the  approval  of  the  Bureau  of  Yards  and  Docks, 
the  following  outfit  was  purchased,  at  a  cost  of  $2,090,  delivered  at 
the  naval  station : 

1  horizontal  gasoline  engine,  about  20  hp. 

1  air  compressor,  capacity  about  90  ft.  of  free  air  per  minute 

compressed  to  a  pressure  of  30  Ibs.  per  sq.  in.  in  one  stage, 

belt  connected  to  engine. 

1  rotary  circulating  pump,  belt  connected  to  engine. 
1  galvanized  steel  water  tank. 

1  air  receiver,  18x54  ins. 

(The  above  apparatus  was  all  mounted  on  a  steel  framed 
wagon  with  wooden  housing.) 

2  sand  blast  machines,  capacity  2  cu..ft.  of  sand  each. 

2  paint  spraying  machines,  one  a  hand  machine  of  %  gal. 
capacity  for  one  operator,  the  other  of  10  gals,  capacity  for 
two  operators. 

100  lin.  ft.  of  sand  blast  hose. 

200  lin.  ft.  of  pneumatic  hose  for  sand  blast  machines. 
400  lin.  ft.  of  pneumatic  hose  for  painting  machines. 
100  lin.  ft.  of  air  and  paint  hose  for  painting  machines. 

4  khaki  helmets,  with  mica-covered  openings  for  the  eyes. 
200  lin.  ft.  of  2-in.  galvanized  iron  pipe. 

Previously  to  the  delivery  of  this  material  shed  "A"  had  been 
emptied  of  coal  and  the  work  of  cleaning  the  inside  surface  of  the 
wall  plates  was  begun  by  hand  in  the  usual  manner.  About  7,000 
sq.  ft.  out  of  a  total  of  9,000  were  thus  cleaned  at  a  cost  of  slightly 
over  4  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  On  the  arrival  of  the  sand  blast  outfit  the 
hand  work  was  stopped  and  after  a  short  preliminary  trial  the 
machine  cleaning  was  started.  The  work  proceeded  rather  slowly 
until  the  men  became  accustomed  to  it,  yet  the  2,000  sq.  ft.  of 
previously  untouched  surface  was  thoroughly  cleaned  and  the  7,000 
sq.  ft.  of  hand  cleaning  was  all  gone  over  and  much  improved  at  a 


STEEL  AND  IRON  CONSTRUCTION  1743 

total  cost  for  labor  of  $97.68  and  for  gasoline  of  $16.15.     The  force 
consisted  of  the  following: 

Per  day. 
1  engine  tender   $  3.04 

1  helper    (in    charge   of    the    work    and    tending 

machines)    2.24 

2  laborers  on  machines,  at  $1.76  each 3.52 

1  laborer  drying  sand,  filling  machines,  etc 1.76 

Total    $10.56 

From  10  to  15  gals,  of  gasoline  were  required  per  day  of  8  hours 
(costing  19  cts.  per  gal.  here). 

For  the  painting  the  coal  tar  paint  originated  by  Civil  Engineer  A. 
C.  Cunningham,  U.  S.  N.,  was  used.  This  paint  was  prepared  with 
the  following  proportions  (by  volume)  :  Coal  tar,  4  parts;  kerosene 
oil,  1 ;  Portland  cement,  1. 

The  Portland  cement  was  first  well  stirred  into  the  kerosene  oil, 
forming  a  creamy  mixture ;  this  mixture  was  then  carefully  stirred 
into  the  coal  tar.  It  was  freshly  mixed  as  needed  and  kept  well 
stirred.  The  cost  of  this  paint  at  Key  West  is  about  15  cts.  per  gal. 
It  was  found  not  to  be  so  well  suited  to  the  pneumatic  spraying 
machine  as  oil  paint,  but  worked  very  well ;  though,  of  course, 
the  machine  used  considerably  more  than  hand  work.  In  all,  on  this 
shed,  64^  gals,  of  paint  were  required  for  9,000  sq.  ft.,  or  about 
1  gal.  to  140  sq.  ft.  The  force  used  in  painting  was  the  same  as  in 
cleaning,  with  the  addition  of  a  laborer,  who  followed  up  the  paint- 
ers with  a  long  handled  brush  arid  spread  the  paint  uniformly.  The 
cost  of  painting  this  shed  was:  For  labor,  $28.16;  for  gasoline, 
$3.80. 

On  shed  "B"  a  total  area  of  12,500  sq.  ft.  was  cleaned  and 
painted.  This  steel  work  was  covered  with  a  scale  nearly  %  in. 
thick  and  was  deeply  pitted.  The  scale  and  rust  were  very  tough 
and  extremely  hard  to  remove.  On  this  work  it  was  found  econom- 
ical to  keep  men  ahead  of  the  sand  blast  with  sledges,  loosening 
and  shaking  off  as  much  of  the  scale  as  possible.  The  labor  cost 
of  the  whole  work  on  this  shed  (cleaning  and  painting)  was  $460, 
including  the  cost  of  moving,  setting  up  and  removing.  Gasoline  cost 
$81.  A  total  of  86  gallons  of  ooal  tar  paint  was  used,  covering 
about  145  sq.  ft.  per  gal.  Total  cost  of  labor,  fuel  and  paint,  $553.90, 
or  4.4  cts.  per  sq.  ft.  It  is  impossible  to  separate  the  cost  of  clean- 
ing and  painting  on  this  work,  as  only  small  areas  are  painted  at  one 
time,  the  painting  being  done  by  one  operator,  the  other  working  the 
sand  blast.  This  was  done  in  order  to  expose  the  cleaned  steel  to 
the  atmosphere  for  as  short  a  time  as  possible. 

A  fine  silica  sand  was  used,  that  being  the  only  kind  available 
except  coral  sand,  which  was  tried,  but  found  to  be  too  soft.  A 
coarse  sand  would  probably  have  been  more  effective.  The  sand 
was  all  saved,  dried  and  re-used  several  times.  About  %  cu.  yd.  of 
fresh  sand  was  required  daily.  The  sand  must  be  kept  perfectly  dry 
for  this  purpose,  and  there  are  patent  sand  driers  manufactured. 
Very  good  results  were  obtained  on  this  work,  however,  by  the  use 


1744  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

of  a  sheet  of  boiler  plate  set  up  on  bricks  with  a  wood  fire  under- 
neath. 

No  claims  are  made  of  extreme  economy  in  the  above  work. 
The  extremely  thick  and  tough  scale  to  be  removed,  the  high  iuel 
and  labor  cost  of  compressing  air  simply  for  this  work,  and  (prob- 
ably) the  lack  of  the  best  kind  of  sand  for  the  purpose,  combined  to 
make  the  work  expensive.  With  these  drawbacks  it  was,  however, 
considerably  cheaper  than  hand  work  and,  what  is  more  important, 
the  cleaning  was  much  more  effective  and  thorough  than  could  nos- 
Bibly  have  been  done  by  hand. 


SECTION  XIV. 

ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS. 

Cost  of  Engineering.— When  work  is  done  by  contract,  engineer- 
ing costs  from  3  to  10%  of  the  total  cost  of  construction.  This  in- 
cludes surveys,  plans,  estimates  and  inspection  during  construction. 
The  major  part  of  this  cost  is  usually  the  supervision  and  inspec- 
tion of  the  contractor's  work.  Hence,  if  the  job  is  small,  and  if  the 
work  drags,  the  cost  of  engineering  will  approach,  or  even  exceed, 
10%.  • 

Throughout  this  book  are  given  actual  records  of  the  cost  of  engi- 
neering, for  which  consult  the  index  under  "Engineering." 

Engineering    Charges    For   Services.*— The   following   information 
as  to  the  minimum  charges  for  engineers'  services  in  Iowa,  was  col- 
lected by  the  Secretary  of  the  Iowa  Engineering  Society  and  printed 
in  the  Proceedings  of  the  21st  annual  meeting  of  the  society: 
Expert  Services: 

One  day $50.00 

Each  additional  day , 25.00 

Expert  testimony,  per  day • 50.00 

Services  of   hydraulic   or   sanitary    engineer    in   examinations, 

reports,   estimates,    per  day 25.00 

Construction  engineer's  and  detail  work,  per  day 10.00 

Special   rates   for   corps   of   engineers  and   inspectors  to   take 

charge  of  work  according  to  importance  and  degree  of  skill 

required. 

City  Surveys  and  General  City  Work: 

Field  and  office  work,  per  day  of  8  hours 8.00 

First  assistant,  per  day  of  8  hours 4.00 

Second  assistant,  per  day  of  8  hours 2.40 

Time  taken  going  to  and  returning  from  survey  to  be  included 

in  above  8  hours.    Not  less  than  half  a  day  to  be  charged. 

Surveys  of  single  city  lots,  not  less  than ' 6.00 

Unless  previous  surveys  have  been  made  of  adjoining  lots  in 

same   plan,    then 5.00 

No  description  to  be  drawn  for  less  than 1.00 

No  charge  to  be  less  than 1.00 

Laying  out  of  additions  of  not  less  than  20  acres,   $1.00  per  lot,  to 

include  working  plats  and  plat  for  record ;    but  owner  must  fur- 
nish the   design  of  plat  or  else  pay  engineer   for   time  consumed 

in  determining  method  of  division. 
All  expenses,   such  as  railway  fare,  hotel  expenses,   conveyances  of 

any  kind,  posts,  monuments,  are  to  be  charged  for  as  extra. 

County  Land  Surveys  by  County  Surveyor: 
Fees  prescribed   by  law.      Surveyor,    50    cts.    per  hour;    assistants, 

20  cts.   per  hour.     All  expenses  are  allowed  and  charged  for  as 

extra. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  20,  1909. 

1745 


1746 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


There  seems  to  be  doubt  as  to  what  constitutes  a  day  for  a  County 
Surveyor,  but,  as  the  law  prescribes  8  hours  in  councy  road  work 
and  various  other  service,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  8  hours  is  a  legal 
day,  and  it  has  been  held  so  in  the  courts. 

Cost  of  Engineering  on  City  Work. — During  the  years  1901  to 
1906,  some  $2,133,000  were  spent  for  sewers,  waterworks  and  pave- 
ments in  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah,  and  the  engineering  cost  4.8%  of  this 
amount. 

Cost  of  Engineering  in  Reservoir  Construction.* — On  the  East 
Branch,  the  Carmel,  the  Titicus  and  the  Jerome  Park  reservoirs, 
for  New  York  City,  the  cost  of  engineering  averaged  10%  of  the  con- 
struction cost  of  $9,532,000.  This  engineering  includes  all  surveys, 
test  borings,  designs  and  inspection.  However,  10%  is  a  very  high 
percentage  of  cost  for  work  of  such  magnitude. 

Rations  for  Men  Camping. — In  the  rules  for  a  railway  location 
prepared  by  McHenry  for  surveying  parties  on  the  Northern  Pacific 
Ry.,  the  following  list  of  rations  and  supplies  is  given :  The  food 
is  sufficient  to  support  14  men  at  least  30  days. 


400  Ibs.  flour. 

50  Ibs.  buckwheat. 

40  Ibs.  oatmeal. 

30  Ibs.  cornmeal. 

25  Ibs.  rice. 

10  Ibs.  tapioca. 

10  Ibs.  sago. 

10  Ibs.  barley. 

10  Ibs.  cornstarch. 

10  Ibs.  baking  powder. 
3  Ibs.  soda. 

12  packages  yeast  cakes. 
150  Ibs.   sugar. 

20  Ibs.  salt. 

50  Ibs.  coffee. 

10  Ibs.  tea. 
5  gals,  syrup. 

1  gal.   vinegar. 
400  Ibs.  potatoes. 

50  Ibs.  beans. 
20  Ibs.  onions. 

2  cases  (24  qts.)   tomato. 
2  cases  corn. 

1  case  peas. 
1  case  pears. 

1  case  cherries. 

2  cases  peaches. 
1  case  milk. 

1  case  coal  oil. 

2  Ibs.  mustard. 


1  Ib.  ground  pepper. 
%   Ib.  ginger. 
%   Ib.  cinnamon. 
*4   Ib.  allspice. 
%   Ib.  nutmegs. 

1  bottle  lemon  extract. 

1  bottle  vanilla  extract. 

6  bottles  pickles. 

5  bottles  catsup. 

8  bottles  Worcester  sauce. 
100  Ibs.  ham. 
100  Ibs.  bacon. 
25  Ibs.  dried  beef. 
25  Ibs.  codfish. 
40  Ibs.  lard. 
25  Ibs.  cheese. 
60  Ibs.  butter. 

1  case  cornbeef. 
50  Ibs.  dried  apples. 
50  Ibs.  dried  peaches, 
50  Ibs.  dried  prunes. 
10  Ibs.  dried  currants. 

1  box  raisins. 

1  box  crackers. 

1  box  macaroni. 

1  box  soap. 
12  boxes  matches. 

1  box  candles. 

2  Ibs.  lye. 

10  Ibs.  sal-soda. 


The  total  net  weight  of  food  in  this  list  is  about  2,100  Ibs.,  01 
about  5  Ibs.  of  food  per  man  per  day,  on  the  basis  of  420  man-days. 
This  is  certainly  ample.  In  fact  men  can  live  on  much  less  if  con- 
centrated food  that  swells  on  cookin.gr  is  used.  The  following  is  a 


^Engineering-Contracting,  July  8, 


Flour                            . 

One  man. 
30  days. 
25  Ibs 

Oatmeal 

8  Ibs 

Bice    

4  ibs 

Beans  (dried)    

8  Ibs 

Sugar        

12  Ibs 

Salt    .              

1  lb 

Butter 

2  Ibs 

Bacon 

10  Ibs 

Baking  powder 

1  lb 

2  Ibs. 

Tea  

Dried  prunes  

.        2  Ibs 

%  lb. 

Condensed  milk   , 

3  cans 

Total     , 

79  Ibs. 

ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS  1747 

• 

list  used  by  the  author  on  a  30-day  camping  expedition  where  every 
superfluous  pound  of  weight  was  cut  out : 

One  man. 
1  day. 
0.83  lb. 
0.27  lb. 
0.14  lb. 
0.27  lb. 
0.40  lb. 
0.03  lb. 
0.07  lb. 
0.33  lb. 
0.03  lb. 
0.07  lb. 
0.01  lb. 
0.07  lb. 
0.01  lb. 
0.10  lb. 

2.63  Ibs. 

This  list  furnishes  0.23  lb.  nitrogenous  food,  0.30  lb.  fat.,  and  1.30 
Ibs.  starch  and  sugar  per  man  per  day.  Dr.  Pavy  (Encyclopedia 
Britannica)  states  that  a  laborer  requires  daily  0.25  lb.  nitrogenous 
food,  0.10  lb.  fat,  and  1.18  Ibs.  starch  and  sugar  (carbohydrates). 
If  the  trip  is  to  be  a  long  one,  1%  ozs.  of  juice  of  limo  per  man  per 
day  should  be  taken  to  prevent  scurvy,  unless  potatoes  can  be  car- 
ried along. 

F.  W.  D.  Holbrook,  in  Jour.  Assoc.  Eng.  Soc.,  1883,  p.  180,  gives 
the  following  rations  for  20  men  for  12  days,  where  all  food  has  to 
be  packed  on  the  backs  of  men  (1,400  Ibs.  of  food  for  240  man- 
days)  : 

12  bottles  prepared  mustard.        100  Ibs.  granulated  sugar. 

25  Ibs.  butter.  50  Ibs.  brown  sugar  for  syrup. 

170  Ibs.  ham.  10  Ibs.  tea. 

75  Ibs.  canned  cornbeef.  15  Ibs.  coffee. 

50  Ibs.  mess  pork.  70  Ibs.  beans. 

300  Ibs.  flour.  25  Ibs.  rice. 

25  Ibs.  dried  apples.  %  lb.  ground  pepper. 

25  Ibs.  dried  peaches.  %  lb.  ground  ginger. 

50  Ibs.  prunes.  1  lb.  ground  cinnamon. 

25  Ibs.  raisins.  12  Ibs.  soap. 

10  Ibs.  currants.  15  Ibs.  candles. 

12  Ibs.  baking  powder.  6  boxes  matches  (300  in  box). 

10  Ibs.  salt. 

The  U.  S.  Geological  Survey  ration  list  is  as  follows  for  1  man 
for  100  days: 


1748  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

100  Ibs.  fresh  meat,  including  fish  and  poultry. 

50  Ibs.  cured  meat,  canned  meat,  or  cheese. 

15  Ibs.  lard. 

80  Ibs.  flour,  bread  or  crackers. 

15  Ibs.  cornmeal,  cereals,  macaroni,  sago  or  cornstarch. 

5  Ibs.  baking  powder  or  yeast  cakes. 

40  Ibs.  sugar. 

1  gal.  molasses. 
12  Ibs.  coffee. 

2  Ibs.  tea  or  cocoa. 

10  cans  condensed  milk,  or  50  qts.  fresh  milk. 

10  Ibs.  butter. 

20  Ibs.  dried  fruit,  or  100  Ibs.  fresh  fruit. 

20  Ibs.  rice  or  beans. 

100  Ibs.  potatoes  or  other  fresh  vegetables. 

30  cans  of  vegetables  or  fruit. 

4  ozs.  spices. 

4  ozs.  flavoring  extracts. 

8  ozs.  pepper  or  mustard. 

3  qts.  pickles. 
1  qt.  vinegar. 

4  Ibs.  salt. 

'Eggs  may  be  substituted  for  fresh  meat  in  the  ratio  of  8  eggs  lor 
1  Ib.  of  meat.  Fresh  meat  and  cured  meat  may  be  interchanged  on 
the  basis  of  5  Ibs.  of  fresh  for  2  Ibs.  of  cured.  Dried  vegetables 
may  be  substituted  for  fresh  vegetables  in  the  ratio  of  3  Ibs.  of  fresh 
for  1  Ib.  of  dried. 

This  ration  weighs  5.3  Ibs.  per  day  per  man,  and  it  costs  about 
50  cts.  per  day  per  man.  The  list  was  based  originally  on  the 
U.  S.  army  ration,  but  has  received  some  modifications  dictated  by 
experience. 

Cost  of  Rations,  U.  S.  Reclamation  Service.*— From  the  annual 
report  of  the  U.  S.  Reclamation  Service  for  1904-5,  the  cost  of 
rations  for  the  employes  of  that  body,  engaged  on  several  of  the 
reclamation  projects,  were  from  40  to  80  cts.  per  man  per  day,  aver- 
aging about  55  cts. 

Equipment  For  and  Cost  of  Railroad  Surveys.— Mr.  F.  Lavis  in 
his  admirable  book  on  "Railroad  Location,  Surveys  and  Estimates," 
has  given  valuable  information  on  railway  surveying  and  estimating, 
from  which  the  following  data  have  been  abstracted: 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  camp  outfit : 
1  office  tent  with  fly,  14  x  16  ft.     3  drafting  and  oflice  tables. 
3  tents,  14x16  ft.  6  camp  chairs. 

1  cook  tent,  16x20  ft.  Map    chest    with    necessary    sta- 

tionery, paper,  etc. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  24,  1906. 


ENGINEERING  AND   SURVEYS 


1749 


DINING  TABLE. 

3  dozen  agate  ware  dinner  plates. 
3  dozen  agate  ware  cups. 

2  dozen  agate  ware  saucers. 
2%   dozen  steel  knives. 

2^j   dozen  steel  forks. 

2^j   dozen  German  silver  teaspoons. 

iy2   dozen  German  silver   dessert  spoons. 

1  dozen  German  silver  tablespoons. 

%   dozen  tin  salt  boxes. 

%  dozen  tin  pepper  boxes. 

y±   dozen  round  agate  ware  pans,  2  qt. 

%   dozen  round  agate  ware  pans,  1  qt. 

1  dozen  round  agate  ware  pans,  1  pt. 

1  carving  knife  and  fork. 

7  yds.  oilcloth,  48  ins.  wide. 

3  standard  trestles. 

5  boards,  12  by  1%  ins.  by  18  ft.   (dressed). 

COOKING  UTENSILS. 


1  No.     8,     6-hole,     wrought-iron 

range. 
1  tea-kettle. 
1  large   cast-iron  pot. 

1  small  cast-iron  pot. 

2  large  frying  pans. 

1  gal.  teapot. 

4  dripping  pans. 

6  baking  tins  for  bread. 

12  tin  pie  plates. 

2  butcher  knives. 

1  steel. 

2  large  meat  forks. 
1  chopping  knife. 

1  meat  saw. 

2  large  iron  spoons. 
1  soup  ladle. 

1  cake  turner. 
1  flour  sieve. 
1  colander-. 
1  5-gal.  tin  dishpan. 
1  5-gal.     tin     bread     pan     with 
cover. 


1  small  frying  pan. 

2  griddles. 

4  tin    pans    with    covers,     1    gal. 

each. 

2  stewpans. 
1  3-gal.  coffeepot. 
1  chopping  bowl. 
1  bread  board. 
1  rolling-pin. 
1  biscuit  cutter. 
1  nutmeg  grater. 
1  coffee  mill. 

1  spring  balance. 

6  galvanized  iron  buckets. 
6  tin   dippers    (one   for   each   tent 
and  two  in  cook  tent). 

2  can  openers. 
1  corkscrew. 

1  broom. 

1  scrubbing   brush. 

1  alarm  clock. 

1  table  (same  as  drafting  tables). 


MISCELLANEOUS. 

Va   dozen  Dietz  lanterns. 

3  large  tin  lamps  (central-draft,  round  wicks). 
2  large  galvanized-iron  washtubs. 

1  washboard. 

4  Sibley   stoves    (4   lengths  of  pipe  with  dampers,   12   lengths  of 

plain  pipe). 

2  water  kegs,  2  gals.  each. 
6  washbasins. 


TOOLS. 


1  grindstone  and  fittings. 

1  monkey  wrench. 

1  pick. 

2  shovels. 

1  short  crowbar. 

1  hand-saw. 

1  cross-cut  saw. 

2  hand-axes. 


4  chopping-axee. 

%   dozen  axe  handlea 

1  bundle  sail  twine. 

ty  dozen  sail  needles. 

1  sail  palm. 

10  assorted  sizes  wire  nails. 

100   ft.   manila  rope,    %-in, 


1750  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

LUNCH  Box. 

2  dozen  agate  ware  dinner  plates. 

2  dozen  agate  ware  saucers. 

1%  dozen  steel   knives. 

1%  dozen  steel  forks. 

iy<i  dozen  German   silver   teaspoons. 

1%  dozen  German   silver   dessert  spoons. 

1  2-gal.  coffeepot. 

Each  locating  party  was  organized  as  follows : 

Locating   engineer    $150  to  f  175 

Assistant  locating  englnear .  HZ  to    125 

Transitman     90  to    100 

Leveler    80  to      90 

Draftsman 80  to      90 

Topographers,   two*    80  to      90 

Rodman   50 

Head  chainman   50 

Rear   chainman 40 

Tapeman,  two*   30 

Back  flagman 30 

Stake  marker 30 

Axemen   (three  to  five  as  necessary)  . 25  to      30 

Cook 50 

Cook's  helper 20 

Double  teams  and  driver,  furnish  their  own  feed,  driver 

board  in  camp 65  to      90 


*One  of  the  topographers  assisted  by  two  tapemen,  with  a  transit 
determined  land  lines  and  drainage  areas. 

Each  man  was  supplied  by  the  company  with  subsistence  when 
In  camp,  but  was  required  to  provide  himself  with  an  army  cot 
and  sufficient  bedding,  and  advised  to  provide  a  substantial  canvas 
covering  for  the  latter,  an  ordinary  wagon  cover,  costing  from  $3  to 
$5,  being  the  most  easily  obtainable  and  most  satisfactory. 

Most  of  the  lines  ran  through  a  rather  badly  broken  up,  rolling 
country  (Indian  Territory,  Oklahoma  and  Texas),  with  short  cross- 
drainage,  about  75%  being  wooded.  -Topography  was  taken  300  ft. 
on  each  side  of  the  line,  a  hand  level  and  rod  being  used,  dis- 
tances out  were  placed,  and  5-ft.  contours  located  and  sketched. 
The  average  amount  of  grading  was  100,000  cu.  yds.  per  mile;; 
maximum  grade,  0.5%  ;  maximum  curve,  2°.  The  cost  of  the  sur- 
veys was  as  follows  for  563  miles  of  preliminary  and  188  mileu  of 
located  lines : 


ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS 


1751 


PRELIMINARY   LINES. 


*2a 


^   CD 

!|! 

*-r  tCOi 

g| 

P 

y 

£*>> 

>>  .f 

-j-»-t->  O 

h  a-*-1 

pSo 

(£•§£ 

&S8 

87  days. 

90  days. 

111  days. 

30  days. 

Miles  run  and  topography  taken.    145.8 

166.3 

164.1 

23.2 

Miles  run,  no  topography  taken.  .      39.3 
Total  miles  preliminary  run.  .          185  1 

'ieeV 

16.0 
180.1 

3.6 
31.8 

Total  number  payroll  days              1380 

1323 

2033 

635 

Average  daily  number  of  men.  .  .  .      15.9 

14.7 

18.3 

21.2 

Average  miles  per  day  per  party.        2.12 

1.85 

1.62 

1.06 

Average    daily    cost,     subsistence 

per  man    $0  37 

$0.49 

$0.38 

$0.58 

Average    daily   pay   per   man....        1.81 

2.03 

Daily  cost  for  teams  6  00 

6.22 

6*92 

12.87 

Contingencies                                               88  48 

112.95 

91.84 

Daily  cost  of  party  41  72 

44.48 

45^57 

64  61 

Cost  per  mile                                            19  61 

94  n  7 

9«  ns 

cn'or; 

LOCATED   LINES. 

TH                                   N 

eo 

o5 

^ 

d                  d 

6 

|w| 

d 

t                 * 

£ 

•Pi 

I 

&            & 

Ps 

r5 

& 

65  days.    37  days. 

8  days. 

48  days. 

66  days. 

Miles  located   560            378 

7.6 

42.6 

39.2 

Total     number      payroll 

days  1400             709 

151 

1498 

1283 

Average  daily  number  of 

men    21  5            19  0 

19.0 

31.2 

19.4 

Average    miles   per   day 

per  party  ....                   0  86            1  02 

0.95 

0.89 

0.59 

Average  daily  cost  sub- 

sistence     .                           $0  37          $0  39 

$0.39 

$0.40 

$0.45 

Average    daily    pay    per 

man       .  .                                   1  72            1  61 

1  61 

1  71 

1  60 

Daily  cost  for   teams.  .  .        6.69            5.75 

5.'39 

10.'33 

6.'  7  6 

Contingencies                          143  36          46  76 

15  70 

196  00 

133  84 

Daily  cost  of  party  53.90          45.22 

45.12 

80^29 

48^54 

Cost  per  mile.  .                        62.57          44.33 

47.50 

90.47 

81.72 

The  preliminary  lines  run  by  Party  No.  1  were  over  a  severe  coun- 
*ry,  involving  the  heaviest  construction  work  on  the  whole  line. 
Party  No.  3  also  had  much  difficulty  in  getting  a  grade  between 
certain  points.  Party  No.  2  had  the  lightest  country.  Party  No. 
4  worked  only  a  short  time  and  the  cost  of  moving  a  long  distance 
from  other  work  is  included.  It  is  probable  that  the  cost  of  work 
done  by  this  party  was  really  about  60%  more  than  the  others  per 
mile,  Instead  of  100%  more. 

On  the  locating  work,  Party  No.  1  had  an  expensive  sounding 
party  consisting  of  a  man  in  charge,  4  or  5  laborers  and  a  team. 


1752  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Parties  Nos.  2  and  3  were  combined,  after  each  had  run  ",  short 
distance  of  located  line  separately,  which  increased  the  unit  cost 
of  the  located  line,  as  shown. 

The  total  cost  of  188  miles  of  located  line  was  $192  per  mile 
of  located  line,  and  this  includes  the  cost  of  running  the  prelim- 
inary lines. 

Cost  of  2,000  Miles  of  Railway  Surveys. — In  a  paper  by  Mr.  W.  S. 
McFetridge,  published  in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  1909,  and  reprinted 
in  Engineering-Contracting,  May  19,  1909,  is  given  a  very  complete 
description  of  the  methods  of  making  1,400  miles  of  preliminary  and 
600  miles  of  location  surveys.  The  following  is  a  very  brief  sum- 
mary of  the  cost. 

Field  parties  were  made  up  as  follows : 

Monthly  Salary. 

Assistant  engineer  in  charge $125  to  $150 

Transitman     .- .      85  to    100 

Levelman    75 

Rodman    65 

Head  chainman   • 50 

Rear  chainman    45 

Rear  flagman 40 

Stakeman    35 

Axeman    (from  two  to  five) ; 30 

Topographer    65 

Tapemen    (two)    45 

Draftsman  (part  time) 60 

Camp  outfits  were  not.  used.  The  parties  boarded  at  houses  along 
the  line.  This  was  often  a  disadvantage,  on  account  of  difficulty  in 
getting  quarters,  especially  for  a,  full  corps ;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  party  could  frequently  make  its  headquarters  at  some 
town  and  drive  to  and 'from  the  work,  so  that  probably  this  method 
served  just  as  well  as  furnishing  camp  outfits. 

It  may  appear  to  some  that  there  was  much  unnecessary  location 
and  running  of  preliminary  lines,  but  in  rough  country  like  this, 
and  on  work  of  this  magnitude  (in  220  miles  of  this  line  were  21 
tunnels,  the  longest  being  4,000  ft,  5  viaducts  from  400  to  1,000  ft. 
long,  and  more  than  100  ft.  in  height,  besides  numerous  other 
bridges),  it  is  time  and  money  well  spent.  In  no  other  way  can  the 
exact  data  be  gotten,  and  it  leaves  no  question  as  to  the  available 
routes  and  the  grades  obtainable.  The  topography  was  taken  (on 
practically  all  lines)  accurately  by  using  a  metallic  cloth  tape  for 
distances  and  a  hand-level  for  elevations.  Only  in  this  way  can  one 
get  a  projected  location  to  correspond  closely  with  the  actual  one. 
The  topography  was  ordinarily  taken  for  300  ft.  on  each  side  of  the 
center  line;  at  particularly  difficult  summits  or  similar  places  a 
strip  from  1,000  to  2,000  ft.  wide  was  often  shown.  The  lines  were 
plotted  to  a  scale  of  200  ft.  to  1  in.  The  topography  was  plotted  in 
the  field.  A  hollow  drawing-board,  18x24  ins.  was  used.  The 
sheet  in  use  was  tacked  to  the  board,  and  the  additional  sheets 
were  carried  inside.  A  strap  around  the  shoulders  of  the 
topographer  served  to  carry  the  board,  and  formed  a  support  while 
plotting  (Wellington's  method). 


ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS 


1783 


m 

p-i  .2        eo  c<J 


<M    00    00    t-    <M 


« 


3>  rH   U3   00   O 


o  ^/ 


^<  eo  in  eo  o 

o  N  M*  t-  oo 

eq  •*  us  N  eo 

M  rH    If5    IM    i-l 

to  to  eo  »-i  eo 


o        *5  eo  o  t-  os  J 

.rt^OONt-rHCq  \  °* 

"d  •*  eo  us  eo  od  rH  \  C* 

O)    O    ,H    CO    Irt  O 


<*<  y  v-'  C3    O    r-l 

^       o       ^^^ 

; 

M  i , 

5     I  s 

e  Li 


en  eo  to  to  r-i 


<rq  o  Tf  oo  «o 


154       HANDBOOK  OF  COST  DATA. 

Cost. — The  greatest  number  of  miles  of  preliminary  line  run  in 
one  day  by  one  party  was  7,  and  of  location,  4^.  The  location 
averaged  slightly  more  than  1  mile  per  day  per  party,  except  on 
two  lines,  where  it  averaged  %  mile.  Stakes  were  set  every  100  ft. 
on  tangents,  and  every  50  ft.  on  curves.  Special  pains  were  taken 
with  the  instrument  work  and  measurements,  in  order  to  avoid  the 
chance  of  serious  errors  in  the  center  line  after  construction  com- 
menced. The  speed  of  location  parties  was  usually  limited  by  the 
amount  of  clearing  that  could  be  done,  but  the  number  of  curves 
and  the  rough  character  of  the  ground  were  also  large  factors  in 
limiting  the  speed. 

Each  party  cost  from  $35  to  $40  per  day,  being  allowed  all  ex- 
penses in  addition  to  salaries. 

Table  I  gives  the  cost  per  mile  of  the  completed  surveys.  It  is 
to  be  noted  that  this  is  the  total  cost,  and  includes  office  rent, 
purchase  of  instruments  and  supplies,  general  expenses,  all  sal- 
aries, field  expenses,  and  the  preparation  of  final  maps,  plans, 
profiles,  and  estimates,  with  everything  in  readiness  to  make  con- 
tracts for  the  line. 

Column  7  gives  the  cost  per  mile  of  actual  location,  including  pre- 
liminary lines.  Columns  3  and  4  show  that  there  were  from  2  to 
5  miles  of  preliminary  lines  run  for  each  mile  of  location,  except  on 
one  line.  Table  I  also  includes  302  miles  of  check  levels,  the  cost 
being  distributed  among  the  various  accounts.  The  data  for  the 
Parkersburg  Bridge  and  Terminal  line  include  surveys  and  sound- 
ings for  the  Ohio  River  Bridge.  The  cost  per  mile  includes  the 
topography  on  practically  all  lines,  except  one  where  it  was  taken 
only  on  the  located  lines. 

The  cost  shown  in  Table  I  being  the  total  charge  against  engi- 
neering from  the  inception  of  the  project  to  the  beginning  of  con- 
struction, contains  a  few  items  which  might  well  be  charged  to 
other  accounts  than  location.  Instruments  purchased  could  be  a 
credit ;  some  elaborate  property  surveys  and  bridge  surveys  could 
be  charged  to  construction,  but  they  probably  are  not  large  enough 
to  have  much  effect  on  the  cost  per  mile.  If  taken  into  account, 
they  would  reduce  the  cost. 

A  line  run  in  midwinter  may  easily  cost  one-quarter  more   than 
if  run  during  more  favorable  weather. 
TABLE  II. 

Average  Cost  of  One  Mile. 

Of  pre-  Of  Of  location  includ- 

Company —  liminary.  location.       ing  preliminary. 

L.  K.  R.  R $25  $   74  $   99 

Z.  M.  &  P.  R.  R 23  79  102 

B.  &  E.  R.  R 35  105  140 

B.   &   N.   R.    R 31  94  125 

The  figures  in  Table  II  include  all  expenses,  as  in  Table  I. 

Table  I  shows  a  large  variation  in  the  cost  of  surveys  on  different 
divisions,  the  cost  varying  from  $128  to  $188  per  mile,  with  an  aver- 
age of  $151.  On  the  assumption  that  lines  located  for  comparison 
or  similar  purposes  should  be  included  in  the  average,  one-third 


ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS  1755 

should  be  added  to  these  amounts,  as  previously   noted ;    the  cost 

would  then  be  as  follows: 

Low    $171  per  mile 

High     .  . .  .' 251  per  mile 

Average    202  per  mile 

Throwing  out  of  the  account  the  mileage  of  abandoned  lines, 
branch  lines,  etc.,  and  charging  the  entire  cost  to  the  main  line, 

$91,258.20 

terminus   to   terminus,   would   give =  $278.23   per   mile, 

328 

which  would  be  rather  expensive.  This,  however,  is  not  a  fair  as- 
sumption, and  should  not  be  considered,  because  many  miles  of  lines 
not  needed  to  determine  the  main  line  were  located  for  other  reasons 
and  purposes.  Therefore,  the  plan  of  throwing  out  only  duplica- 
tions, for  comparisons,  as  shown  in  the  preceding  paragraph,  gives 
the  correct  average  cost  per  mile  for  the  development  of  the  coun- 
try, including  actual  comparative  locations  where  needed.  It  should 
also  be  borne  in  mind  that  a  large  proportion  of  this  duplication  was 
necessary,  owing  to  the  laws  of  West  Virginia,  which  require  an 
actual  line,  located  on  the  ground,  and  a  complete  map  and  profile 
of  that  line  to  be  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  State,  and  at  the 
county  seat,  before  a  railroad  company  has  any  rights,  of  priority 
or  otherwise,  to  that  route  or  line.  This  required  complete  locations 
for  all  proposed  branch  lines,  a  large  number  of  which  were  located, 
and  also  a  complete  location  over  any  route  for  which  it  was  de- 
sired to.  obtain  rights.  For  these  reasons,  the  lines  located  account 
for  the  excess  of  the  mileage  over  the  actual  length  of  the  main 
line. 

On  the  basis  of  Table  II,  it  may  be  assumed  that,  where  the  route 
has  been  previously  determined  within  such  narrow  limits  that  the 
preliminary  and  location  lines  are  of  equal  length,  the  surveys  will 
cost  from  $100  to  $140  per  mile.  This  is  borne  out  by  the  results 
on  the  Buckhannon  and  Northern  line,  where  the  location  and  pre- 
liminary lines  were  practically  equal  and  the  cost  was  $127  per  mile. 

These  two  statements  may  be  combined  and  put  in  the  following 
form: 

To  locate  one  mile,  including  an  equal  length  of  preliminary 
lines,  cost  from  $100  to  $140  ;  average $115 

To  locate  one  mile,  final  location,  including  from  two  to  five 
times  as  great  a  length  of  preliminary  lines,  cost  from  $128 
to  $188;  average 151 

To  locate  one  mile,  final  location,  including  from  two  to  five 
times  as  great  a  length  of  preliminary  lines,  and  one-third 
of  a  mile  of  location  for  comparison,  cost  from  $171  to  $251; 
average  202 

A  tabulation  of  the  mileage  of  the  Buckhannon  and  Northern  line, 
with  reference  to  the  actual  length  of  line  to  be  built,  and  showing 
how  the  results  agree  with  the  averages  deduced  from  Table  I,  is 
as  follows,  the  Buckhannon  and  Northern  line  being  used  because 
the  conditions  there  make  it  th«  best  average  of  "all  conditions" 
encountered  on  the  various  lines. 


1756  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Total   miles  located 151.29 

Miles  of  main  line  contracted  for 80 

Miles  of  main  line  not  contracted  for 4 

Miles  of  connecting  line  located,  but  which  may 

or  may  not  be  built,  about 26  110.00 

Making  actual  miles 110 

Leaving  duplications,  comparisons,   etc 41.29 

110  miles  cost  $19,249.94  =  $175  per  mile. 

Cost  of  a  Railway  Survey,  Canada.* — The  following  data  relate 
to  a  survey  made  in  Canada  in  1906  for  the  Grand  Trunk  Pacific 
Ry.  The  lines  were  run  through  gently  rolling  prairie  country,  with 
three  rather  difficult  river  crossings.  The  topography  was  taken 
800  ft.  on  each  side  of  the  line,  locating  5  ft.  contours.  The  maxi- 
mum grade  was  0.4%,  and  the  maximum  curve  was  4°.  Some  rather 
fast  work  was  done  in  the  survey,  for  on  Oct.  10  12.46  miles  of  line 
was  located  In  8  hours  and  20  minutes.  An  average  of  8.4  miles 
per  day  was  also  made  in  22  days  worked.  The  organization  of  the 
party  and  wages  paid  were  as  follows: 

Per  month. 

Locating    engineer     $  175.00 

Transitman    100.00 

Levelman    75.00 

Topographer     75.00 

Draughtsman    75.00 

Head  flag 45.00 

-Level  rodman   45.00 

Head  chainman    45.00 

Rear  chainman   30.00 

Topog.    chainman    30.00 

Topog.  rodman 30.00 

Rear  flagman    30.00 

Stakeman   30.00 

Axeman    30.00 

Cook    60.00 

Cookee    30.00 

One  saddle  horse   '. 30.00 

Three  teams  at  $100 ; 300.00 


Total     $1,235.00 

The  following  is  a  record  of  the  cost  of  the  survey  and  the  work 
accomplished : 

Preliminary.  Location. 

24  60 

Days.  Days. 

Miles  run  and  topography  taken 175.3  308.0 

Total  miles  location  and  alternative  location 308.0 

Total   miles  preliminary   run 175.3  

Total  number  payroll  days 384.0  960.0 

Average  daily  number  men 16.0  16.0 

Average  miles  per   day 7.3  5.13 

Daily  cost  of   subsistence  per  man $  0.41  $  0.41 

Average  daily  pay  per  man 1.85  1.85 

Daily   cost   for  teams 10.67  10.67 

Contingencies     18.00  77.00 

Daily  cost  of  party 47.83  47.87 

Cost  per  mile ; 6-55 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.  19,  1908. 


ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS  1757 

The  survey  was  made  under  the  direction  of  Mr.  C.  J.  Seymour, 
Kansas  City,  Mo.,  to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  the  above  infor- 
mation. 

Cost  of  Reconnaissance  Survey  for  Railway  in  Alaska.*— Mr.  Fred. 
Lavis  is  author  of  the  following: 

The  following  costs  of  a  reconnaissance  survey  for  railroad  loca- 
tion in  Alaska  in  the  winter  of  1906-7  were  furnished  the  writer  by 
Mr.  H.  R.  Gabriel,  Locating  Engineer,  Katalla,  Alaska.  The  pay- 
roll was  as  follows: 

Per  month. 

Chief  of  party $    250 

Transitman     125 

Topographer 100 

Draftsman     100 

4  dog   mushers 400 

2  axemen    200 

1  rodman 100 

Cook 100 

Total     $1,375 

The  total  cost  of  the  survey  was  $13,500,  distributed  as  follows: 

Salaries   $  8,050 

Subsistence   2,810 

Cost  of  22  dogs  at  $60  each 1,320 

Feed  for  dogs 1,320 


Total     .  , $13,500 

Average  cost  $50  per  mile. 

The  survey  covered  a  route  270  miles  long  between  Fairbanks  and 
Seward,  Alaska,  and  was  made  between  Jan.  1  and  May  25,  1907. 
For  a  period  of  three  weeks  no  work  was  done,  the  temperature 
ranging  from  60°  to  70°  below  zero,  but  work  was  carried  on  when 
<he  temperature  was  36°  below.  The  dogs  were  worked  in  four 
teams  and  on  newly  broken  trails  hauled  500  Ibs.  per  team;  they 
were  fed  on  bacon,  rice  and  fish  which  cost  40  cts.  per  day 
per  dog. 

The  camping  equipment  was  very  light,  consisting  of  one  10x12 
ft.  and  two  14  x  16  ft  tents,  two  Yukon  stoves  and  but  very  few 
dishes. 

The  average  distance  between  camps  was  10  miles,  and  but  4  or  5 
days  were  spent  in  each  camp. 

The  following  is  the  list  of  rations  allowed : 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  9,  1908. 


1758  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Lbs. 

Flour  per  man  per  day 1  to  1.25 

Beans  per  man  per  day. 0.25  to  0.50 

Rice  per   man  per   day 0.12 

Bacon  per  man  per  day 0.12  to  0.25 

Ham  per  man  per  day 1.00 

Dried  fruit  per  man  per  day 0.20  to  0.25 

Dried  corn  per  man  per  day 0.10 

Sugar  per  man  per  day 0.30 

Butter  per  man  per  day 0.16 

Salt  per  man  per  month 0.75 

Pepper  per  man  per  month 0.05 

Other  spices  in  proportion  to  pepper. 

Tea  per  man  per  month 0.50 

Coffee  per  man  per  month 0.67 

Cocoa  per  man  per  month 0.33 

Dried  potatoes  per  man  per  day 0.08 

Rolled  oats  per  man  per  day 0.08 

Corn  meal  per  man  per  day •  0.08 

Canned  milk   (can)  per  man  per  day 0.16 

Macaroni  per  man  per  day 0.14 

Cheese  per  man  per  day 0.08 

Lard  per  man  per  day 0.05 

Crystal  eggs  per  man  per  month 0.33 

Baking  powder  1.5   Ibs.  per  50  Ibs.  flour. 

Yeast  cakes,   12  men  per  month,    10  pkgs. 

Soda,    12    men  per  month,    1  pkg.      Sour  dough  bread 

was  used. 
Concentrated    vinegar,    12    men    6    months,    one    6-oz. 

bottle. 

Mustard,  12  men  6  months,  4.5  Ibs. 
Olive  oil,  12  men  1  month,  0.1  gal. 
Beef  tea,  12  men  1  month,  20  jars. 

This  reconnaissance  was  a  stadia  survey,  all  distances  both  ver- 
tical and  horizontal  being  measured  with  the  transit,  no  level  was 
used ;  topography  sufficient  to  make  a  rough  projected  location  and 
fairly  accurate  profile  where  it  varied  from  the  main  line  run,  was 
taken  with  a  clinometer. 

It  will  be  noted  that  all  the  information  necessary  to  make  a 
fairly  accurate  projected  location  was  obtained  on  this  survey  at  a 
comparatively  small  cost.  Its  value  lies  somewhere  between  the 
ordinary  reconnaissance  and  the  so-called  preliminary  location  which 
should  properly  be  a  preliminary  survey. 

A  preliminary  survey  of  this  line  if  properly  made  v/ould  have 
given  more  accurate  detailed  information,  but  its  cost  would  have 
been  between  $250  and  $350  per  mile  according  to  statements  of 
actual  costs  of  preliminary  surveys  in  Alaska,  made  by  Messrs. 
Cryderman  and  Kyle  in  a  paper  read  before  the  Pacific  Northwest 
Society  of  Engineers  early  this  year. 

The  stadia  furnishes  accurate  (within  the  really  necessary  prac- 
tical limits)  information  as  to  distance,  direction  and  elevation, 
which  can  be  obtained  in  no  other  way  as  cheaply,  and  without 
any  one  of  which  it  is  impossible  to  form  any  reliable  estimate  of 
the  practicability  of  any  line  or  its  cost,  the  addition  of  a  very 
limited  amount  of  topography  taken  by  an  experienced  topographer 
enables  a  projected  location  to  be  made  which  should  be  well  within 
a  close  approximation  of  the  final  line. 


ENGINEERING  AND   SURVEYS  1759 


In  regard  to  the  salaries  given  they  seem  too  low.  The  transit- 
man,  topographer  and  draftsman  were  not  paid  any  more  than 
good  men  get  in  the  older  parts  of  the  United  States  where  condi- 
tions of  existence  are  not  so  rigorous ;  without  intending  any 
reflection  on  the  men  composing  the  party,  the  writer  believes  that  in 
these  positions  competent  men  would  be  worth  at  least  50%  more 
than  was  paid  on  this  survey. 

Cost  of  Locating  Two  Railroad  Lines  in  Michigan  and  Wisconsin.* 
One  line  was  located  from  Traverse  City  to  Elk  Rapids  and  from 
Williamsburg  to  Petosky.  The  survey  was  begun  Sept.  1,  1889, 
and  finished  May  1,  1890.  The  country  was  covered  with  heavy 
hardwood  and  hemlock  timber  and  dense  cedar  swamps.  The 
ground  was  alternately  flat  and  very  rough,  in  sections  of  6  to  10 
miles  in  length.  About  25  miles  of  the  91  were  located  on  the  shores 
of  small  lakes  bounded  by  steep  bluffs  which  came  down  close  to  the 
shore,  the  latter  being  very  irregular.  The  winter  was  a  light  one, 
except  in  February,  when  the  snow  was  3  ft.  deep,  which  consid- 
erably reduced  progress. 

The  following  was  the  organization  of  the  part,  and  the  monthly 
cost  of  making  the  survey : 

Per  month. 

Chief  of  party $    100.00 

Transitman    75.00 

Leveler    100.00 

Rodman     40.00 

Chainman,  head    40.00 

Chainman,  rear 30.00 

Back  flagman    30.00 

4  axemen  at  $30 120.00 

Cook 40.00 

Cookee   "  15.00 

Team    and    driver 90.00 

1/2   time  of  Division  Eng.,  at  $125 62.50 

Expense    of   camp ._   270.00 

Total    , $1,012.50 

The  survey  occupied  8  months,  making  the  total  cost  $8,100,  which 
is  equivalent  to  $89  per  mile  of  located  line,  there  being  91  miles 
located.  The  total  number  of  miles  of  line  run,  including  prelim- 
inary lines,  was  250  miles.  Stated  otherwise,  there  were  nearly 
2  miles  of  preliminary  line  run  to  each  mile  of  located  line. 

In  all  there  were  208  working  days,  but,  in  moving  and  on  ac- 
count of  bad  weather,  20%  of  this  time  was  lost,  thus  reducing  the 
actual  number  of  days  worked  to  188.  The  following  was  the 
amount  of  line  run  per  day : 

Miles. 

Total  line  per  day  (208  days) 1.20 

Located  line  per  day  (208  days) 0.44 

Total  line  per  day  (188  days) 1.33 

Located  line  per  day  (188  days) 0.48 

It  will  be  noted  that  there  were  14  men  and  a  team  of  horses, 
and  that  the  expense  for  food,  etc.,  was  $270  per  month.  Counting 


* Engineering -Contracting,  January,  1906. 


1760  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

each  horse  as  the  equivalent  of  a  man  in  expense  of  feeding,  we  have 
a  daily  expense  of  slightly  less  than  60  cts.  per  man  per  day  for 
food.  That  is  a  liberal  estimate  for  present  conditions,  but  on  the 
other  hand,  salaries  and  wages  are  somewhat  higher  now  than  they 
vrere  15  years  ago. 

Another  line,  227  miles  long,  was  run  in  November  and  Decem- 
ber of  1891,  for  the  Saginaw  &  Western  R.  R.,  from  Sparta  to  How- 
ard City.  The  country  was  in  part  very  rough.  The  timber  was 
principally  very  light,  with  some  brush.  The  ground  was  generally 
covered  with  logs  and  stumps.  Considerable  of  the  line  was  in  old 
pine  choppings.  No  team  was  provided  for  carrying  the  men  to  and 
from  the  work.  The  following  was  the  monthly  payroll : 

Per  month. 

Assistant  engineer $125.00 

Transitman     100.00 

Leveler     100.00 

Rodman   40.00 

Chainman,   head    45.00 

Chainman,  rear   30.00 

Flagman    30.00 

3  axemen    90.00 

Cook 45.00 

Total     $605.00 

The  party,  which  was  composed  of  11  men,  was  paid  for  48  work 
days.  The  actual  number  of  days  worked,  however,  was  36,  Sun- 
days and  rainy  days  accounting  for  the  other  12.  The  party  was 
in  camp  for  42  days;  on  the  remaining  6  days  they  boarded  and 
roomed  at  hotels.  The  total  cost  of  the  field  work  was  $1,307.97, 
divided  up  as  follows: 

Payroll     $972.00 

Supplies   167.77 

Board  and  hotel  bill 50.25 

Axes,   grindstone,    etc 16.00 

Miscellaneous  expenses    98.75 

To  the  cost  of  the  field  work  must  be  added  the  cost  of  the  office 
work  for  maps,  profiles  and  estimates.  This  amounted  to  $219.75, 
making  the  total  cost  of  the  survey  $1,524.72.  A  total  of  71.4  miles 
of  line  was  run,  of  which  48.7  miles  was  preliminary  line  and  22.7 
miles  was  located  line.  The  actual  number  of  days  worked  on  the 
preliminary  line  was  25  ;  actual  number  of  days  on  located  line  was 
11.  The  following  table  gives  the  average  amount  of  line  run  per 
day  worked : 

Stations.          Miles. 

Preliminary   line    w 102.8  1.947 

Location 109  2.064 

Average  line  per  day 104.7  1.983 

Average  line  per  day  out 78.5  1.486 

Location  line  per    (36   days) 33.3  0.634 

Location  per  line  (48  days)  out 25  0.473 

The  cost  of  the  survey  per  station  and  mile  was  as  follows: 

Per  station.     Per  mile. 

Fieldwork $1.09  $5750 

Office  and  field  work 1-77  67.17 


ENGINEERING  AND   SURVEYS  1761 

As  was  stated  previously,  the  party  was  composed  of  11  men  and 
was  in  camp  for  42  days.  The  total  cost  of  food,  supplies,  etc., 
including  the  cook's  wages  for  this  time,  amounted  to  $228.70.  The 
cost  per  man  per  day  for  supplies  only  amounted  to  36  cts. ;  includ- 
ing the  wages  of  the  cook,  the  cost  per  man  per  day  was  49  cts. 

Cost  of  a  Railroad  Re-Survey,  Canada.* — In  a  paper  read  before 
the  Ontario  Land  Surveyors'  Association,  Mr.  W.  E.  McMullen,  de- 
scribes a  re-survey  of  the  Canadian  Pacific  Ry.  line  in  New  Bruns- 
wick, and  the  following  notes  have  been  taken  from  his  paper :  The 
general  scheme  of  the  survey  was  to  make  a  center  line  traverse 
and  tie  in  right-of-way  fences,  lot  lines,  parish  and  county  bound- 
aries, locate  the  properties  of  the  various  owners  along  the  line, 
run  rail  levels,  obtain  approximately  the  original  ground  line,  and 
note  the  dimensions  of  culverts,  etc.  For  the  field  work  two  box 
cars  were  fitted  up.  The  one  with  bunks  and  a  drawing-table,  and 
the  other  with  a  dining-table,  stove,  and  quarters  for  the  cook.  The 
party  was  composed  of  an  engineer  in  charge,  transitman  and  two 
picketmen,  a  draftsman,  a  leveler  and  rodman,  and  three  chainmen, 
who  went  ahead!  and  paint-marked  one  rail  every  hundred  feet. 
These  last  could  cover  eight  or  nine  miles  a  day  without  much 
trouble,  and,  after  getting  their  work  well  ahead  of  the  party,  were 
recalled  to  locate  right-of-way,  fences,  culverts,  etc.  The  leveler 
would  cover  about  41/£  miles  per  day,  and  when  he  got  too  far 
ahead  of  the  transit  was  recalled  and  ran  a  spare  transit  for  a  while. 
The  transitman  was  paid  $75  per  month  and  draftsman  the  same; 
leveler,  $60,  and  the  others,  most  of  them  engineering  students,  $1.35 
per  day.  The  cook  got  $40  per  month.  The  average  progress  of  the 
field  work  was  a  little  over  two  miles  a  day,  and  the  average  cost 
of  the  field  work,  exclusive  of  car  furnishings  and  inclusive  of 
wages  and  board,  was  $14  per  mile.  The  cost  of  fitting  up  the  cars 
with  stoves,  bunks,  blankets,  mattresses,  tables,  dishes,  etc.,  amount- 
ed to  about  $150. 

Cost  of  Two  Railway  Resurveys.f — The  resurvey  of  a  railway 
is  a  task  which  may  involve  little  or  much  work,  depending  on  the 
comprehensiveness  of  the  records  required.  When  the  task  is 
merely  that  of  retracing  alignment  and  locating  tracks  and  struc- 
tures the  work  is  simple.  When,  however,  the  task  comprises  in 
addition,  the  topographical  mapping  of  the  line,  right  of  way,  build- 
ings and  structures  and  the  recording  of  all  co-ordinate  informa- 
tion, an  organization  of  the  highest  character-  and  efficiency  is 
absolutely  necessary.  In  the  text  which  follows  we  give  from  actual 
records  the  methods  adopted  in  resufveying  581  miles  of  the  Chi- 
cago &  West  Michigan  Ry.  and  389  miles  of  the  Detroit,  Grand 
Rapids  &  Northern  Ry.  These  methods  are  not  only  of  interest  in 
themselves,  but  they  are  lent  particular  value  by  the  figures  of  cost 
which  accompany  them.  In  studying  these  figures,  however,  it  must 
be  kept  in  mind  that  they  represent  wages  and  prices  of  1893  to 
1898. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  14,  1908. 
t Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   5,   1906. 


1762  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

CHICAGO  &  WEST  MICHIGAN  SURVEY. 

In  1893  the  Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry.  started  a  resurvey  of 
its  road.  The  object  of  the  survey  was  to  obtain  data  for  the 
preparation  of  a  set  of  maps  to  show  in  as  complete  and  accurate  a 
manner  as  possible  all  of  the  company's  track,  right  of  way,  build- 
ings and  other  property,  and  all  such  other  information  relating  to 
these  items  as  could  be  obtained.  The  purpose  was  also  to  obtain 
similar  information  relative  to  the  track  and  property  of  other 
roads  at  junction  points. 

Field  Force  and  Outfit. — The  field  party  consisted  of  three  men : 
the  assistant  engineer  in  charge  of  the  work  and  two  rodmen.  They 
were  supplied  with  the  following  outfit :  one  double  velocipede  car,  a 
transit,  two  100-ft.  steel  tapes,  one  50-ft.  steel  tape,  one  50-ft.  cloth 
tape,  one  small  hand  instrument  for  taking  fence  angles,  etc.,  an 
axe,  a  maul,  a  set  of  branding  irons,  a  set  of  steel  dies,  a  tinner's 
stove,  a  paint  pot  and  brush,  a  spade,  a  pick  and  a  stock  of  pickets. 
The  men  boarded  at  hotels  or,  when  more  convenient,  at  private 
houses  and  usually  moved  every  10  or  15  miles  accordingly  as  it 
was  convenient  to  get  board.  Very  little  use  was  made  of  trains  to 
get  to  or  from  work ;  the  party,  however,  generally  moved  by  train 
when  going  to  new  headquarters. 

Chaining  the  Line. — The  first  work  was  to  chain  the  track.  This 
was  done  very  carefully,  and  one  of  the  100-ft.  steel  tapes  was  re- 
served for  this  work  alone.  Ten  (3/16-in.  diam.)  12-in.  chaining 
pins  were  used,  and  at  every  tally  an  8d.  nail  was  driven  into  the 
ballast  or  into  a  tie  for  reference  in  case  a  pin  was  lost  or  mis- 
placed in  the  next  1,000  ft.  The  chain  was  carried  in  the  center 
of  the  track  and  the  half-gage  was  laid  off  from  the  right-hand 
rail  at  each  station.  For  this  purpose  a  6-ft.  picket  was  arranged 
with  a  lug  on  one  end  and  a  center  mark.  No  corrections  were 
made  for  grades  or  temperatures. 

A  paint  mark  was  put  on  the  flange  of  the  right-hand  rail  oppo- 
site every  station  and  at  every  500  ft.  a  stake  was  driven  5  ft.  to  the 
left  of  the  center  line.  These  stakes  were  of  oak,  3x3x30  ins., 
with  8-in.  points,  and  were  purchased  already  sharpened.  They 
were  distributed  by  freight  train  in  lots  to  suit  the  distances  covered 
by  the  field  party  from  the  various  headquarters.  All  the  stakes 
used  from  any  one  headquarters  were  marked  at  one  time ;  for 
this  purpose  there  were  provided  a  firepot  or  tinner's  stove,  as  noted 
above,  and  a  set  of  from  0  to  9  cast-iron  branding  irons  fixed  to  a 
handle  of  round  iron  some  15  ins.  long.  Section  men  usually 
helped  to  deliver  the  stakes  between  station  stops.  The  stakes  were 
driven  so  as  to  project  from  4  to  6  ins.  above  ground  and  with  the 
branded  face  toward  the  track. 

It  may  be  noted  here  that  this  work  furnished  incidentally  an  op- 
portunity to  study  the  advantage  of  using  stakes  treated  with 
some  preservative  from  decay.  The  stakes  placed  in  1893-4  were 
untreated  and  those  placed  in  1895  were  dipped  in  hot  coal  tar  and 
pitch.  Similar  stakes  used  on  the  Detroit,  Grand  Rapids  &  Northern 
survey  in  1896  to  1898  were  treated,  those  used  in  1896  with 


ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS  1763 

"Woodiline"  used  cold  and  those  used  in  1897-8  by  dipping  in  hot 
Carbolineum.  It  was  found  upon  examining  in  1899  the  stakes 
placed  in  1893  that  fully  one-third  were  rotten  or  missing,  and  all 
of  them  had  to  be  removed.  It  was  also  found  that  none  of  the 
treated  stakes  set  in  1895  showed  any  signs  of  decay. 

The  stakes,  as  before  stated,  were  spaced  500  ft.  apart.  At  every 
mile  a  piece  of  T-rail  5  ft.  long  was  set  20  ft.  to  the  left  of  the 
center  line,  with  the  base  facing  the  track  and  marked  with  the 
mile  number  by  means  of  a  steel  stencil.  Station  and  mile  numbers 
were  both  continuous  and  read  from  the  actual  end  of  the  rail  at  the 
terminal  where  the  survey  was  begun. 

Retracing  Alignment. — The  alignment  was  retraced  by  means  of 
a  transit,  but  not  by  running  a  continuous  line.  On  tangents  the 
direction  was  checked  often  enough  to  find  all  swings,  by  setting  the 
transit  over  the  gage  side  of  the  rail  and  taking  a  back  sight  on  the 
rail  and  then  reversing  and  sighting  on  the  rail  ahead.  If  any 
change  in  direction  showed  it  was  noted  as  an  angle.  When  a  curve 
was  reached  a  point  was  marked  in  the  center  of  the  rail  at  or 
back  of  the  point  of  curve,  and  then  deflection  angles  were  read  to 
such  station  on  the  curve.  When  the  transit  had  to  be  moved  up  the 
vernier  was  set  at  zero  for  a  back  sight  on  the  last  point  and  then 
the  angles  ahead  were  read  on  as  before.  When  the  point  of  tangent 
was  reached  a  point  was  worked  in  the  center  of  track  between 
rails  at  or  just  ahead  of  the  point  of  tangent ;  the  angle  was  read 
to  this  and  then  the  transit  was  moved  up  and  the  angle  from  the 
last  rail  point  or  chord  to  the  tangent  ahead  was  read.  The  direc- 
tion of  tangents  was  kept  as  azimuth,  south  being  assumed  as  zero 
and  angles  recorded  around  by  the  west  or  clockwise. 

Azimuth  was  determined  by  Polaris,  stations  for  observations 
being  selected  so  that  the  meridian  would  intersect  a  tangent.  The 
angle  to  the  tangent  was  then  measured.  An  observation  was  taken 
about  every  15  miles  and  the  course  of  the  tangents  calculated  from 
the  angles  measured  along  the  center  line.  The  two  usually  lacked 
from  0°  to  0°-10'  of  checking,  and  the  difference  was  distributed 
among  the  angles  around  the  curves.  The  method  of  determining 
the  true  meridian  from  Polaris  was  the  one  in  the  manual  issued  to 
surveyors  by  the  Government  Land  Office,  and  known  as  the  hour 
angle  method.  Whenever  the  difference  in  the  longitude  of  two  ob- 
servations exceeded  about  5  miles  the  correction  made  necessary  by 
the  divergence  of  the  meridians  was  introduced.  This  amount  was 
distributed  over  the  line  by  adding  or  subtracting  from  the  azimuth 
of  tangents  at  their  ends.  By  reason  of  this  a  long  tangent  which 
was  in  reality  straight  would  have  a  difference  of  azimuth  at  its 
two  ends.  The  determining  of  the  azimuth  of  the  line  at  different 
points  was  intended  only  as  a  check  on  the  transit  work,  but  prob- 
ably the  course  of  each  tangent  was  correct  with  0°-!'  or  0°-2'. 

Topography. — The  topography  was  in  nearly  all  cases  taken  by 
measurements  referred  directly  to  the  center  line.  All  structures 
belonging  to  the  permanent  way,  such  as  bridges,  were  recorded  by 
plusses  to  each  end  or  by  a  plus  to  the  center  and  size.  The  length, 
size  and  kind  of  pipe  or  other  culverts  and  of  trestles,  bridges, 


1764  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

open  culverts  and  cattle  guards  were  recorded.  Right  of  way  fences 
were  carefully  located  by  stations  and  plusses  on  line  and  by  dis- 
tance out  at  all  points  where  any  change  in  direction  or  distance  out 
occurred.  Track  signs  were  located  in  the  same  way  and  usually 
the  terms  used  to  note  them,  as  "Wh.  Post,"  "Mile  Board"  and  "Hy. 
Cross.  Sign,"  indicated  the  use  and  construction  in  each  case.  Prop- 
erty line  fences  were  shown  by  noting  by  stations  and  plusses  the 
points  at  which  they  would  intersect  the  center  line  and  by  measur- 
ing the  angle  of  intersection.  Highways  and  farm  roads,  highway 
crossings,  farm  crossings,  gates,  side  drains  at  crossings,  and  ditches 
were  all  shown.  The  kind  and  make  of  rail  and  the  date  of  rolling, 
with  a  description  of  joints  and  fastenings;  the  kind  and  condition 
of  the  ties ;  the  kind  and  quality  of  the  ballast ;  the  kind  of  fence, 
and  the  location  and  number  of  wires  in  the  telegraph  line  were  all 
shown  and  noted  at  the  points  where  any  change  occurred.  The 
kind  of  switch  stand  and  kind  and  size  of  frog  were  noted.  For 
buildings  belonging  to  the  company,  the  class,  use,  kind  of  foundation 
and  point  were  noted.  If  possible,  note  was  also  made  of  the  date 
of  erection.  Water  stations,  interlocking  plants,  etc.,  were  usually 
described  in  detail. 

Section  lines,  property  lines  and  street  lines  were  determined  as 
accurately  as  possible.  All  monuments  that  could  be  found  were 
located,  the  usual  method  being  to  produce  the  lines  as  indicated  by 
the  monuments  to  an  intersection  with  the  center  line  and  record 
the  angle  with  the  distance  measured  along  the  monument  line. 
For  the  purpose  of  tying  the  line  to  the  village  plots  the  field  party 
was  furnished  with  copies  of  all  recorded  plots,  and  with  the  aid 
of  these  sufficient  tie  lines  were  run  to  form  a  network  on  which 
the  streets  and  lots  could  be  plotted  on  the  maps.  Any  additional 
information  as  to  the  company's  right  of  way  that  could  be  found 
was  secured.  In  these  tie  lines  and  also  for  all  cross  lines  that  in- 
tersect the  center  line  on  curves,  the  angle  was  read  with  the  chord 
between  the  two  adjacent  transit  points,  but  the  plusses  and  dis- 
tances out  are  from  the  actual  center  line  intersection.  No  attempt 
was  made  to  show  the  natural  topography  except  in  case  of  streams 
and  of  some  very  prominent  ravines  that  intersected  the  line. 

Mapping. — The  maps  were  drawn  on  sheets  of  mounted  egg-shell 
paper;  the  map  sheets  were  18x42  ins.  and  were  bound  in  books 
containing  about  25  to  30  miles  of  line.  Three  scales  were  used 
In  mapping,  2,000  ft.,  200  ft.,  and  50  ft.  to  the  inch.  The  2,000-ft. 
scale  was  used  for  an  index  map  bound  in  the  front  of  the  book  as 
a  title  page.  On  this  sheet  the  railway  was  designated  by  a  blue 
line  on  which  tenth  stations  were  numbered  and  mile  posts  shown 
by  red  lined  blocks,  with  numbers  referring  to  the  particular  large 
scale  map  (200  ft.  or  50  ft.)  on  which  the  post  came.  The 
maps  on  the  200-ft.  scale  showed  everything  in  the  open 
country,  but  in  cities  where  the  same  territory  was  cov- 
ered by  maps  on  the  50-ft.  scale,  much  of  the  detail  was  left  off 
in  order  that  (1)  what  the  company  owned,  (2)  all  recorded  plots 
and  (3)  the  lines  to  monuments  in  those  plots  might  stand  out 
clearly.  As  a  rule,  all  buildings,  etc..  were  put  on  and  all  figures 


ENGINEERING  AND   SURVEYS  1765 

left  off,  the  latter  being  confusing  while  outlines  are  not.  Every 
fifth  station  was  indicated  by  a  red  dot.  The  center  line  of  the 
railway  was  shown  by  a  ruled  red  line.  Any  territory  shown  also  on 
the  50-ft.  scale  map  was  enclosed  by  a  broken  line  in  blue,  with  a 
designating  number  inside  corresponding  to  the  number  of  the 
special  map.  These  special  or  detail  sheets  were  inserted  imme- 
diately after  the  general  sheet  referring  to  them.  On  the  50-ft.  scale 
maps  it  was  attempted  to  show  everything  that  appeared  in  the  note 
books ;  center  lines  were  drawn  in  solid  red  and  base  lines  in  solid 
black. 

The  stations  on  all  maps  were  numbered  from  right  to  left.  In 
the  upper  right-hand  corner  of  each  sheet  was  lettered  the  first  and 
last  station  number  included  in  that  sheet  and  also  the  number  of 
the  note  book  and  its  page  numbers  where  the  notes  corresponding 
to  the  map  data  were  to  be  found.  The  number,  length,  total  angle 
and  degree  was  written  near  each  curve.  Reverse  curves  counted 
as  two  curves.  Station  numbers  were  written  across  the  center  line 
and  the  numerals  designating  angles  were  written  on  an  arc  connect- 
ing the  two  legs.  Azimuths  were  noted  at  each  point  of  curve 
and  point  of  tangent. 

An  abstract  of  such  deed  and  indexed  paper  for  right  of  way  rep- 
resented on  any  sheet  was  written  on  that  sheet.  In  this  abstract 
the  following  order  was  followed  where  possible :  ( 1 )  Kind  of 
deed  and  number  by  which  it  is  known:  (2)  grantor;  (3)  grantee; 
( 4 )  date  of  transfer  ;  ( 5 )  description  ;  ( 6 )  consideration  ;  ( 7 )  agree- 
ment, and  (8)  date,  book  and  page  records. 

The  coloring  used  on  the  maps  was  as  follows:  For  fences,  yel- 
low lines ;  for  water,  blue  lines ;  for  frame  structures,  gamboge ; 
for  brick  structures,  light  red ;  for  stone  structures,  a  neutral  tint ; 
for  platforms,  sidewalks,  farm  crossings  and  for  iron  and  steel 
bridges,  Payne's  gray  ;  for  railway  property,  Lake  red ;  for  streets, 
Vandyke  brown.  The  tinting  on  the  200-ft.  scale  maps  was  ruled, 
but  on  the  50-ft.  scale  maps  only  a  narrow  wash  around  the  edges 
was  used. 

Time  and  Cost  of  Survey. — The  resurvey  described  was  begun  in 
April,  1903,  and  was  completed  in  October,  1905,  the  work  in  the 
field  occupying  only  eight  months  of  the  year.  Paying  the  assist- 
ant engineer  in  charge  $116.67  per  month,  rodman  $65  per  month, 
and  chainman  $60  per  month,  the  following  records  of  time  and 
cost  of  surveying  152  miles  were  obtained: 

Days.  Cost. 

Chaining  and  setting  stakes 28%  $279 

Topography,  taking  notes 57  %  561 

Running  section  lines  and  corners...      24  237 

Survey  of  station  grounds 28%  233 

Running  lines  to  village  plots 20% 

Total   205  $1,564 

The  totals  give  the  labor  cost  per  mile  surveyed  as  $10.22,  ex- 
clusive of  leveling.  The  labor  cost  of  leveling  127.8  miles  was  $166, 
making  the  cost  per  mile  $1.30,  and  the  time  required  for  the  work 


1766  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

was  20  days.     The  total  cost  of  labor  and  materials  for  surveying 

581  miles  was  as  follows: 

Total.  Per  mile. 

Fieldwork,  on  survey $  5,238  $  9.01 

Fieldwork,  material 392  0.67 

Fieldwork,  setting  monuments 899  1.55 

Material,  setting  monuments 415  0.71 

Office    work,    plotting    maps 5,546  9.54 

Office  work,  materials 446  0.77 

Copying  village  plots  at  county  offices.         752  1.30 

Office  work,  copying  notes,  tables,  etc...      1,050  1.81 

Totals $14,738  $25.36 

A  total  of  609  monuments  were  set  at  a  unit  cost  of  $1.25  for 
labor  and  44  cts.  for  material. 

DETROIT,  GRAND  RAPIDS  &  NORTHERN  SURVEY. 

The  resurvey  of  the  Detroit,  Grand  Rapids  &  Northern  Ry.  for 
389  miles  began  in  July,  1896,  and  was  completed  in  December, 
1898.  The  method  of  work  was  the  same  as  that  described  for  the 
Chicago  &  West  Michigan  Ry.,  and  the  wages  paid  were  the  same 
except  that  the  engineer  in  charge  received  $100  per  month.  The 
total  cost  of  the  survey  and  mapping  was  as  follows:  . 

Total.          Per  mile. 

Fieldwork,   on  survey $3,363  $  8.64 

Fieldwork,    material    437  1.25 

Fieldwork,   setting  monuments 765  1.97 

Materials,    setting   monuments 265  0.68 

Office    work,    plotting   maps 3,323  8.55 

Office   work,    materials 279  0.78 

Copying    village    plots 215  0.55 

Office  work,  copying  notes,  tables,   etc...       234  0.73 

Fieldwork,   running  levels,  351   miles....       437  1.25 

Fieldwork,    plotting    profiles 125  0.36 

Totals    $9,364  $24.06 

Cost  of  Railway  Surveys.— In  making  a  railway  survey  along  the 
Columbia  River,  in  open  rolling  country,  my  records  show  that  a 
topographical  party,  consisting  of  1  topographer  and  2  rodmen, 
averaged  l1/^  miles  a  day,  taking  a  strip  400  ft.  wide,  contours  5  ft. 
apart.  A  hand-level  and  tape  were  used.  In  this  same  country  a 
leveler  and  rodman  could  readily  run  6  miles  of  profile  levels  in  a 
day,  although  it  was  safer  to  count  on  4  miles. ' 

On  another  similar  survey  in  southern  New  York  state,  in  com- 
paratively level  country,  a  transitman,  3  chainmen  and  a  stake 
artist,  averaged  2  miles  of  transit  line  per  8  hrs.  Station  stakes 
were  set  every  100  ft.  This  same  party,  later,  took  a  belt  of 
topography  500  ft.  wide,  at  the  rate  of  1^4  miles  a  day,  setting  a 
transit  up  at  each  station  and  taking  telemeter  readings  for  dis- 
tance and  level  readings  for  elevation  with  long  bubble  of  transit. 

The  cost  of  a  preliminary  railroad  survey,  near  Lake  Erie,  was 
as  follows,  using  stadia  measurements : 

Chief  of  party $   5.00 

Transitman     3.00 

Recorder    3.00 

5  rodmen,   at   $2 10.00 

Total  salaries  per  day $21.00 


ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS  1767 

This  party  ran  46  miles  in  30  days,  several  of  which  were 
stormy,  and  they  took  a  belt  of  topography  800  ft.  wide.  The  cost 
was  about  $14  a  mile,  or  $90  a  square  mile  for  the  field  work. 

Using  the  chain  method  it  took  a  party  24  days  to  run  45  miles. 

In  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  31,  p.  81,  Mr.  M.  L.  Lynch  states 
that  one  mile  of  line  a  day  is  a  fair  average  in  partly  timbered 
country,  for  preliminary  work.  He  gives  the  average  cost  of  surveys 
at  $60  a  mile  of  located  line. 

Mr.  Kenneth  Allen  states  that  in  Kansas  prairies  he  ran  312  miles 
of  stadia  line  in  5.7  months,  or  2.1  miles  per  day,  a  party  costing 
as  follows  per  day: 

Transitman $  6.00 

Leveler     4.00 

2   rodmen,  at  $2.50 5.00 

Axman     2.00 

Teamster  and  team 3.00 

Total  per   day $20.00 

The  cost  was  $11  a  mile.  Bench  levels  were  run  ahead  of  the 
transit.  The  best  day's  run  was  8  miles. 

The  Cost  of  Transit  Lines  in  Heavy  Timber.— In  running  transit 
lines  through  the  dense  timber  of  western  Washington,  for  roads 
and  railways,  I  have  found  that  a  party  of  6  men  (consisting  of  a 
transitman,  two  chainmen,  two  axmcn  and  a  flagman,  who  also 
served  as  an  axman)  averaged  about  1,800  ft.  of  line  run  per  10 
hours.  It  was  exceptional  that  2,000  ft.  were  averaged  even  for  two 
or  three  days.  No  trees  more  than  a  foot  in  diameter  were  chopped  ; 
but  the  growth  of  great  firs  and  cedars  (occasionally  one  was  10  ft. 
in  diameter),  and  the  mass  of  fallen  timber  under  foot  made  the 
advance  slow.  Where  the  timber  was  not  so  dense,  it  was  possible 
to  run  from  3,000  to  5,000  ft.  a  day,  setting  station  stakes  every  100 
ft.  In  running  a  traverse  along  a  country  road,  where  there  was 
no  tree-chopping  at  all,  the  same  party  would  run  6  miles  a  day. 

In  running  profile  levels  over  these  transit  lines,  a  leveler  and  rod- 
man  would  average  4,000  ft.  a  day  in  rough  and  densely  wooded 
country;  and  6,000  ft.  in  wooded  country  where  the  fallen  timber 
did  not  retard  walking  so  much.  In  all  cases  the  actual  time  either 
on  transit  or  level  work  averaged  8  hrs.  per  day,  and  about  2  hrs. 
per  day  were  consumed  in  going  to  and  from  camp. 

The  foregoing  records  apply  to  lines  aggregating  several  hundred 
miles  in  length,  and  are  given  partly  from  memory  as  my  original 
detailed  notes  were  lost  in  a  fire. 

Cost  of  Topographic  Survey  for  160-Acre  Park. — In  the  State  of 
Washington  the  author  was  in  charge  of  a  survey  for  a  small  city 
park  of  160  acres.  The  work  was  done  in  August,  1892,  with  a  party 
of  5  men,  whose  daily  wages  were  as  follows: 

Transitman    $  5.00 

Recorder    3.00 

2  chainmen,   at   $2.50 5.00 

1  axman    2.00 


Total  per  day $15.00 


1768  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

This  party  was  engaged  26  days  in  field  work.  In  addition,  a 
draftsman  and  computer  was  engaged  for  40  days  reducing  the  notes 
and  plotting  the  map  to  a  scale  of  100  ft.  to  the  inch,  contours  10  ft. 
apart.  The  cost  of  the  survey  and  map  was,  therefore,  as  follows : 

Field  work,   26   days,  at  $15 $390 

Office  work,  40  days,  at  $3 120 

Total,  160  acres,  at  $3.20 $510 

This  is  at  the  rate  of  $2,040  per  sq.  mile.  This  high  cost  was  due 
to  the  roughness  of  the  ground  and  to  the  fact  that  about  half  the 
area  was  densely  timbered.  The  area  surveyed  was  a  hill  about  350 
ft.  high,  cut  up  by  a  number  of  gulches.  A  traverse  line,  2  miles 
long,  was  first  run  to  enclose  the  hill,  station  stakes  being  set  every 
100  ft.,  using  a  tape  and  transit.  Then  10  parallel  cross-lines  were 
run  along  ridges  through  the  woods  over  the  hill,  using  tape  and 
transit.  The  aggregate  length  of  these  cross-lines  was  3  miles. 
Profile  levels  were  taken  with  a  Y-level  along  all  the  transit  lines. 
Contours  were  located  by  means  of  the  stadia,  the  transit  being  set 
upon  hubs  on  the  transit  lines.  The  density  of  the  timber  greatly 
retarded  the  stadia  work,  due  to  the  axe  work  necessary.  Were 
1  to  repeat  this  work,  I  should  run  a  traverse  around  the  area  as 
before,  chaining  and  leveling ;  then  all  the  necessary  cross-lines 
over  the  hill  would  be  run,  using  the  stadia.  Where  woods  are 
heavy  it  is  necessary  to  run  such  cross-lines  close  together.  I  should 
increase  the  number  of  axmen,  and  have  rodmen  also  serve  as 
axmen. 

Cost  of  Topographic  Survey  of  St.  Louis. — Mr.  Oliver  W.  Connet 
gives  the  following:  The  area  covered  by  triangulation  was  30  sq. 
miles,  the  average  length  of  the  sides  of  the  triangles  being  1^ 
miles.  About  92%  miles  of  precise  levels  were  run  in  duplicate  at 
a  cost  of  $30  per  mile,  four  benches  per  mile.  The  stadia  method 
was  used  for  topography,  contours  being  3  ft.  apart,  about  300 
points  being  located  by  a  party  in  a  day.  The  party  consisted 
of  1  topographer,  .1  recorder,  3  stadia  men,  and  1  utility  man.  The 
average  was  3.65  points  per  acre.  The  time  of  a  party  occupied  in 
field  work  for  23%  sq.  miles  was:  Triangulation,  62  days;  precise 
levels,  114  days;  topography,  248  days;  total,  424  days.  The  cost 
was: 

Triangulation    $  1,812  or  11  % 

Precise  levels 2,762  or  16 % 

Topography    6,060  or  36% 

Office    work     (reduction    of    notes    and 

plotting)     _6,266  or  37 % 

Total $16,900  or  100% 

This  is  equivalent  to  $725  per  sq.  mile,  or  $1.13  per  acre. 
The  average  cost  of  the  pa.rty  per  day,  including  transportation, 
instruments,  etc.,  was : 

Triangulation $29.25 

Precise  levels 24.25 

Topography     24.50 


ENGINEERING  AND   SURVEYS 


1769 


Cost  of  a  Stadia  Survey,  Baltimore.— Mr.  R.  A.  MacGregor,  in 
Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  44,  p.  112,  gives  the  following  on  the 
cost  of  a  stadia  survey  of  the  City  of  Baltimore,  Md.  The  map  was 
plotted  on  a  scale  of  200  ft.  to  the  inch,  and  fences,  roads,  houses 
(with  some  details  of  houses),  5-ft.  contours,  wooded  and  cultivated 
areas,  creeks,  etc.,  were  shown.  Everything  was  plotted  in  the  field. 
The  average  error  of  closure  was  1  in  700.  The  average  number 
of  shots  was  6,400  per  sq.  mile.  The  number  of  shots  per  day 
averaged  180,  the  maximum  was  349,  all  the  plotting  and  sketching 
being  done  in  the  field.  The  shots  were  taken  and  recorded  by  the 
recorder,  and  plotted  by  the  draftsman,  who  stood  nearby ;  the 
topographer  in  charge  did  the  sketching.  The  cost  of  this  field  work 
alone  was  $850  per  sq.  mile  for  an  area  of  33.3  sq.  miles. 

Cost  of  Topographic  Survey,  Westchester  Co.,  N.  Y.— Mr.  G.  L. 
Christian,  in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  44,  p.  115,  gives  the  cost  of 
making  a  survey  in  July,  1896,  of  a  57-acre  tract  of  land  in  West- 
Chester  County,  N.  Y.  Three-fourths  of  the  tract  was  wooded,  with 
much  thick  underbrush.  The  land  was  much  broken,  having  a  total 
rise  of  150  ft.,  with  slopes  of  2%  to  40%.  The  transit  lines  (12,750 
ft.)  covered  the  controlling  points,  stakes  being  set  every  50  ft.,  and 
profile  levels  taken  with  Y-level.  From  these  lines,  with  a  hand 
level  and  tape,  the  5-ft.  contours  were  located.  The  map  was  plotted 
on  a  scale  of  100  ft.  to  the  inch.  The  cost  per  acre  was  as  follows: 

Running   transit    lines $0.40 

Running  Y-levels 0.19 

Contours  with  hand  level 0.53 

Stakes 0.07 

Plotting  transit  lines 0.13 

Plotting  contour  lines 0.15 

Total  per  acre $1.47 

This  is  at  the  rate  of  $9.40  per  sq.  mile. 

Cost  of  Topographic  Survey  Near  Baltimore. — Mr.- Kenneth  Allen, 
in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  44,  p.  113,  gives  the  following  rela- 
tive to  the  cost  of  stadia  surveys  made  for  the  Baltimore  Sewerage 
Commission : 


Survey. 


I. 


II. 


III. 


IV. 


V. 


Contour  interval  
Scale  of  map  .  .  .  .  1 

5ft. 

"  —  800" 

5-ft. 
1",  —  SOft' 

5ft. 
i"  —  400' 

2.5  ft. 
I/'  200' 

2.5  ft. 
•j"  —  ^00' 

Area,  square  miles.  .  .  . 
Area  timbered 

2.04 

2.75 

4.83 

47% 

0.823 

0.733 

27% 

Area,  water  surface  .  .  . 

3% 

12% 

18% 

Area,    per    day,    water 
surface      

0.157 

0  131 

0  079 

0  052 

0  052 

Sal.  per  sq.  mile  
Exp.  per  sq.  mile  

$54.90 
11.91 

$78.00 
16.49 

$140.20 
28.54 

$323.61 
30.73 

$256.21 
13.50 

Cost  per  sq.  mile $66.81       $94.49     $168.74     $354.34       $269.71 

These  costs  do  not  include  mapping  done  in  the  office,  but  do  in- 
clude maps  made  in  the  field.  In  surveys  I  and  V  the  ground  had 
gentle  slopes;  in  III  the  range  of  elevation  was  125  ft.,  but  in  the 
other  areas  it  did  not  exceed  40  ft.  Comparing  I  and  IV  shows  the 
increased  cost  where  2. 5-ft.  contours  are  located.  Comparing  I 


1770  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

and  II  shows  the  economy  of  reading  bearings  with  a  compass  (in- 
stead of  with  a  vernier)  and  setting  up  on  alternate  points  which 
was  done  in  survey  I. 

Mr.  Kenneth  Allen,  in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  30,  p.  614, 
gives  the  following  data :  A  stadia  survey  made  for  the  Philadelphia 
Water  Department,  in  1884,  covered  446  square  miles  and  occupied 
162  days  field  work  in  the  Perkiomen  Water  Basin,  in  Bucks,  Mont- 
gomery and  Lehigh  Counties.  The  contours  were  10  ft.  apart 
plotted  on  a  scale  of  400  ft.  to  the  inch.  All  roads,  buildings  and 
timber  outlines  were  shown.  The  party  consisted  of  1  transitman 
and  1  rodman  ;  the  average  area  covered  per  day  taking  notes  in  the 
field  was  0.434  square  mile;  the  average  area  covered  per  day  plot- 
ting in  the  field  was  0.31  square  mile. 

On  a  survey  in  the  Connellsville  coke  region,  a  survey  similar  to 
the  above,  but  more  detailed  and  plotted  to  a  scale  of  600  ft. 
to  the  inch,  contours  10  ft.  apart,  covering  an  area  of  168  square 
miles,  cost  $116  per  square  mile,  including  the  location  of  farm 
boundaries,  coal  outcrops  and  areas,  and  the  reduction  of  all  pre- 
vious surveys  to  the  same  scale.  The  cost  of  the  field  work  on  the 
topography  alone  was,  however,  only  $40  per  square  mile,  or  about 
one-third  the  total  cost.  The  cost  of  engraving  and  publishing 
was  about  $30  per  square  mile  more. 

Cost  of  Three  Stadia  Topographic  Surveys. — Mr.  F.  B.  Maltby, 
in  Jour.  Assoc.  Eng.  Soc.,  1896,  has  an  article  on  "Methods  and  Re- 
sults of  Stadia  Surveying,"  from  which  the  following  abstracts  have 
been  made : 

A  party  should  consist  of  an  observer,  a  recorder,  and  2  to  4  rod- 
men.  A  good  observer  in  open  country  can  locate  500  points  a  day 
for  a  map  of  500  ft.  to  the  inch.  This  means  about  5%  or  6  hrs.  of 
actual  observing,  and  gives  an  average  of  iy2  shots  per  minute. 
Two  men  using  the  Colby  protractor  (one  calling  off  and  one  plot- 
ting) plotted  216  shots  per  hour,  as  the  average  of  25^  hrs. 

A  stadia  line,  15  miles  long,  over  which  levels  were  run,  checking 
on  each  stake,  showed  discrepancies  between  consecutive  stakes  as 
high  as  0.2  ft.,  but  the  total  error  for  the  15  miles  was  less 
than  r.ft 

The  cost  of  stadia  surveys  varies  widely.  The  topographical  sur- 
vey of  Baltimore,  for  topography  alone,  excluding  triangulation  and 
precise  levels,  cost  $1.50  per  acre.  The  scale  of  the  map  is  200  ft. 
per  in.,  and  all  buildings,  streets,  alleys,  etc.,  are  located.  The  cost 
of  the  topography  of  the  survey  of  St.  Louis  was  73  cts.  per  acre, 
scale  of  map  the  same,  but  few  buildings  and  few  street  corners 
were  located.  A  topographical  survey  of  3,000  acres,  near  Madi- 
son, 111.,  in  1893,  cost  50  cts.  per  acre  including  mapping;  scale  was 
400  ft.  per  in.,  and  all  buildings,  fences,  railroads,  etc.,  were  located. 

Several  different  tracts  of  land  near  St.  Louis,  of  100  to  200  acres, 
were  surveyed  for  20  to  40  cts.  per  acre.  In  these  cases  a  scale  of 
400  ft.  per  in.  and  a  2 -ft.  contour  interval,  and  only  the  configura- 
tion of  the  ground  were  required. 


ENGINEERING  AND   SURVEYS  1771 

A  survey  of  9,300  acres  in  southwest  Texas,  in  1894,  was  made; 
2-ft.  contours;  and  400  ft.  per  in.  scale;  ground  was  rolling  and 
partly  covered  with  brush ;  condition  favorable ;  cost,  7  cts.  per 
acre. 

Topographical  work  on  the  Mississippi  River,  in  1891,  cost  $36 
per  sq.  mile;  on  the  Missouri  River,  in  1895,  $31  per  sq.  mile,  or  5 
to  5%  cts.  per  acre.  Scale  was  1,000  ft.  per  in.,  contours  5  ft.  apart, 
all  buildings,  roads,  fences,  limits  of  culture,  etc.,  located.  This 
cost  includes  a  system  of  tertiary  triangulation,  but  does  not  include 
mapping. 

Cost  of  Surveys,  Erie,  Canal.— Mr.  D.  J.  Howell  gives  cost  of 
making  surveys  for  the  Mohawk  Ship  Canal,  90  miles  along  the 
Mohawk  Valley  from  the  Hudson  River  westward  to  Herkimer.  The 
work  was  done  by  stadia  parties,  consisting  of  1  chief,  1  observer, 
1  recorder  and  4  rodmen.  The  area  mapped  was  47,400  acres,  of 
which  6,600  are  river.  The  average  cost  was  86  cts.  per  acre,  includ- 
ing soundings  of  the  river,  field  and  office  work,  but  excluding  test 
pits  and  borings.  Contours  were  2  ft.  apart;  map  scale  1  in  2,500. 
A  cross-country  survey,  25  miles  long,  embracing  7,600  acres  (no 
villages  or  cities),  cost  27  cts.  per  acre  for  the  field  notes  and  the 
reduction  of  the  notes  ready  for  plotting.  The  cost  of  the  plotting 
was  estimated  to  be  about  23  cts.  per  acre  more,  making  the  total 
cost  about  50  cts.  per  acre.  The  men  were  well  trained  and  the 
weather  was  favorable  on  this  25-mile  stretch. 

Mr.  William  B.  Landreth,  in  Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  44,  p. 
92,  discusses  the  methods  and  cost  of  stadia  topographic  surveys 
made  to  determine  the  location  of  reservoirs  and  conduit  lines  for 
the  Rome  level  of  the  Deep  Waterway  on  the  Oswego-Mohawk- 
Hudson  Route.  The  surveys  were  made  between  Aug.  1,  1898,  and 
June  1,  1899,  scarcely  any  time  being  lost  from  bad  weather.  A 
party  consisted  of  1  engineer  in  charge,  1  transitman,  1  recorder,  3 
or  more  stadia  rodmen,  2  or  more  axmen,  1  draughtsman,  and  1 
computer.  Each  rodman  was  given  a  particular  class  of  work,  one 
following  streams,  another  taking  roads,  another  woods,  and  so  on. 
When  convenient  all  rodmen  kept  on  the  same  side  of  the  transit. 
Contour  intervals  were  10  ft.  on  the  Salmon  River  and  the  Black 
River  surveys,  and  5  ft.  on  the  Fish  Creek  line.  At  the  close  of 
each  day  the  field  party  reduced  the  stadia  notes.  The  scale  of  the 
Salmon  River  and  the  Black  River  maps  was  1 :  10,000,  and  of  the 
Fish  Creek  map,  1 :  5,000.  About  65%  of  the  Salmon  River  area  is 
covered  with  small  second  growth  timber  and  swamps.  The  country 
is  rough.  The  Black  River  Valley,  between  the  villages  of  Carthage 
and  Lyons  Falls  was  surveyed  up  to  the  790-ft.  contour.  Only  25% 
of  the  area  is  wooded,  and  the  country  is  not  very  rough.  The  Fish 
Creek  Valley,  from  2  miles  above  Williamstown,  to  2  miles  below 
Taberg,  a  distance  of  21  miles,  was  surveyed,  the  survey  covering 
the  valley  and  a  portion  of  the  side  slopes  to  an  elevation  of  75  ft. 
above  the  creek.  The  ground  was  mostly  grazing  and  farm  land, 
40%  of  which  was  timbered.  The  cost  of  the  three  surveys,  includ- 
ing finished  maps,  traveling  expenses,  etc.,  was  as  follows : 


1772  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Salmon  Black  Fish 

River.  River.  Creek. 

Area,  square  mile 15  85  19 

Set-ups 771  600  451 

Shots     3,838  11,166  11,776 

Square  miles  per  day 0.32  1.81  0.45 

Field  work  per  square  mile $66.00  $16.50  $54.00 

Map  work  per  square  mile 14.00  7.00  25.00 


Total  per  square  mile $80.00  $23.50  $79.00 

Note. — The  cost  of  the  base  line  surveys  for  the  Salmon  River  and 
Fish.  Creek  work,  and  for  one-third  of  the  Black  River,  is  not 
included  in  the  costs  above  given ;  the  costs  include  no  leveling, 
but  only  the  stadia  field  work  and  mapping,  excepting  on  the  Black 
River  where  base  line  and  leveling  costs  for  two-thirds  the  terri- 
tory are  included. 

Cost  of  -U.  S.  Deep  Waterways  Survey,  N.  Y.— Mr.  A.  J.  Himes,  in 
Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  44,  p.  105,  gives  the  following  data  on 
the  U.  S.  Deep  Waterways  Surveys  for  a  30-ft.  canal  along  the 
Oswego  and  Mohawk  Rivers,  a  distance  of  91  miles.  A  sufficient 
number  of  stadia  readings  was  taken  to  develop  2-ft.  contours. 
About  83%  of  the  area  was  mapped  on  a  scale  of  1 :  5,000  ;  the  other 
17%,  on  a  scale  of  1 :2,500.  There  were  12  sq.  miles  of  soundings 
made  in  Oswego  Harbor  and  Oneida  Lake,  and  plotted ;  and  an  area 
of  about  78  sq.  miles  of  Oneida  Lake  and  Oswego  Harbor  was  de- 
termined by  triangulation.  There  were,  besides,  121  sq.  miles  of 
land  topography  taken.  All  buildings,  roads,  railroads,  property 
lines,  streams,  orchards,  swamps,  etc.,  were  located.  A  stadia  party 
consisted  of  1  instrumentman,  1  recorder  and  3  rodmen,  with  some- 
times 1  laborer  for  cutting  brush  or  rowing  a  boat.  Each  night 
the  party  reduced  the  stadia  notes  and  calculated  the  co-ordinates. 
The  error  of  closures  was  readily  kept  within  1  in  700  ;  and  errors 
in  elevation  seldom  exceeded  1  ft.,  being  usually  less  than  0.5  ft. 
Sights  2,000  ft.  long  were  often  taken.  Charts  were  found  to  be 
much  better  than  tables  for  stadia  reductions.  The  work  was  begun 
Oct.  23,  1897,  and  finished  Nov.  5,  1898.  In  no  month  were  more 
than  5  days  lost  on  account  of  bad  weather.  The  average  number 
of  readings  was  1,440  per  sq.  mile.  The  minimum  average  area 
covered  per  day  by  one  party  on  a  single  piece  of  work  was  0.058 
sq.  mile.  The  maximum  was  0.257  sq.  mile.  The  average  for  the 
whole  survey  was  0.123  sq.  mile  per  party  per  day.  The  cost  was  as 
follows  per  sq.  mile : 

Fieldwork $179 

Mapping    101 

Total  per  sq.  mile $280 

This  Is  exclusive  of  swamps  and  lakes  not  sounded. 
Cost  of  Government  Topographic  Surveys.— Mr.  Marcus  Baker,  in 
Trans.  Am.  Soc.  C.  E.,  Vol.  30,  p.  619,  gives  the  cost  of  Government 
topographic  surveys  in  many  European  countries,  to  which  the  read- 
er is  referred.  The  U.  S.  Geological  Survey  of  New  Jersey  was 
begun  in  1877  and  finished  in  1887,  covering  an  area  of  7,894  square 
miles,  with  contours  10  and  20  ft.  apart.  The  cost  was  $6.93  per 
square  mile,  which  includes  all  expenses  in  producing  a  map  ready 


ENGINEERING  AND   SURVEYS  1773 

for  the  engraver.  The  engraved  map  is  on  a  scale  of  about  1  mile 
per  inch.  A  similar  survey  of  Massachusetts,  made  1884-1888, 
contour  interval  20  ft.,  cost  $13  per  sq.  mile.  A  similar  survey  of 
Rhode  Island,  made  1888-1889,  cost  $9  per  sq.  mile.  A  similar 
survey  of  Connecticut,  5,004  sq.  miles,  made  1889-1890,  on  a  scale  of 
1  mile  per  inch,  20-ft.  contours,  cost  $9.80  per  sq.  mile  for  map 
ready  for  engraver. 

A  topographic  map  of  the  banks  of  the  Mississippi  River,  from 
Cairo  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  was  completed  by  the  Government  in 
18S4,  at  a  cost  of  $51  per  sq.  mile  for  1,954  sq.  miles  of  land  and 
water  surface.  The  manuscript  map  was  on  a  scale  of  1  :  10,000, 
embracing  the  river  and  a  strip  of  land  %  mile  wide  on  each  side. 
The  river  was  carefully  sounded. 

Mr.  Baker  gives  estimates  of  the  cost  of  surveys  made  by  the 
Coast  Survey,  but  these  estimates  are  strongly  disputed,  more- 
over they  are  of  minor  value  to  engineers  in  general  practice,  so  the 
reader  is  referred  to  the  Transactions  for  the  data. 

The    N.    Y.    State    Engineer's    Report,    1897,    gives    the    cost    of 
topographical  surveys,  for  the  Dept.  of  the  U.  S.  Geol.  Survey,  as  fol- 
lows per  square  mile,   contours   20   ft.   apart,   and  map   on   a  scale 
of  about  1  mile  to  the  inch  :  Sq.  mile. 

Triangulating   (1,370  sq.  miles)  ................    $2.00 

Topography    ..................................      8.70 

Office  work  .................................  .      0.60 


The  total  cost  of  15,118  sq.  miles,  for  field  and  office  work,  had 
been  $11.06  per  sq.  mile.  A  table  giving  the  cost  of  2,200  sq.  miles 
shows  a  range  of  $4.35  to  $25  per  sq.  mile,  the  average  being  $10.05 
for  field  and  office  work,  of  which  $8.43  was  the  cost  of  field  work. 
The  cost  of  office  work  ranged  from  $1.15  to  $4.05  per  sq.  mile,  and 
averaged  $1:62. 

Cost  of  Triangulation  and  Plane  Table  Surveys.*  —  During  the 
spring  of  1908  a  triangulation  system  consisting  of  48  signals  and 
controlling  about  150  square  miles  was  installed  on  the  Grand  Val- 
ley Project  (U.  S.  Reclamation  Service),  and  during  the  field  season 
of  the  same  year  a  plane  table  survey  of  approximately  127  square 
miles  was  made  and  maps  prepared  on  a  scale  of  1  in.  to  1,000  ft. 
with  10-ft.  contour  intervals.  A  careful  record  of  expenditures  was 
kept  and  the  itemized  costs  are  shown  below. 

In  the  triangulation  survey  the  signals  consisted  of  2  by  4-ln. 
posts  14  ft.  high,  erected  over  pieces  of  %-in.  gas  pipe  driven  from 
18  to  24  ins.  in  the  ground  and  held  erect  by  three  guy  wires  to  each 
post.  The  signals  were  arranged  2  y2  miles  apart  and  where  stations 
were  required  more  frequently  or  section  ties  were  required  out- 
side of  the  area  mapped  the  charge  for  such  work  was  made  against 
the  topographic  mapping.  The  costs  of  triangulation  survey  shown 
include  the  cost  of  measuring  base  lines  and  of  making  Polaris  ob- 
servations. No  camp  was  established,  and  subsistence  was  obtained 
at  hotels  and  farm  houses  in  the  vicinity. 

•Engineering-Contracting,  May  26,   1909. 


1774 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


COST  OF  TRIANGULATION  SURVEY,  GRAND  VALLEY   PROJECT. 

Av.  time 

Ser  sq. 
e,  days. 
Transitman   .  0.11 


Transitman 

Office  engineer   

Recorder    

Flagman    

Computer     

Draftsman    

Hired  horses 

Government    horses    (depreciation) . 

Depreciation  of  equipment 

Travel   

Subsistence    

Supplies,  miscellaneous 

Supplies,   stakes  and  monuments... 

Supplies,  repairs 

Supplies  forage    


Rate          Cost  per 
per  day.       aq.  mile. 
$7.50  $0.80 

.14  3.33  .46 

.05  3.00  .14 

.05  3.00  .15 

.25  2.25  .56 

.05  2.25  .12 

.01  2.25  .02 

.08  .50  .04 

.40  .25  .10 

.03 
.05 
.29 
.18 
.45 
.02 
.22 

Total  cost  per  square  mile $3.63 

In  the  plane  table  survey  the  field  party  usually  consisted  of  1 
plane  table  man,  1  recorder  and  2  rodmen,  but  at  times  a  driver 
was  necessary  for  teams  used  by  level  and  topographic  parties.  The 
camp  teamster  hauled  the  supplies  necessary,  but  the  men  furnished 
their  own  subsistence  by  organizing  a  club.  The  cost  of  hay  was 
$15  per  ton  and  of  oats  $1.90  per  hundred  weight.  The  area  mapped 
was  fairly  rough  on  the  average,  but  the  cost  was  quite  variable. 
On  level  mesas  the  cost  was  as  low  as  $18  per  sq.  mile,  but  where 
the  area  mapped  consisted  of  small  fruit  farms  with  numerous 
buildings,  roads,  fences  and  irrigation  and  waste  ditches,  the  cost 
ran  as  high  as  $75  to  $80  per  sq.  mile. 

COST  OF  PLANE  TABLE  TOPOGRAPHIC  SURVEY,  GRAND  VALLEY  PROJECT. 

Av.  time 

per  sq.  Rate  Cost  per 

Distribution.  mile,  days,     per  day..       sq.  mile. 

Project  office  expenses $1.63 

Transitman   0.02  $3.33  .07 

Flagman    02  2.00  .04 

Levelman     47  3.00  1.41 

Level  rodman 51  2.25  1.15 

Driver     31  2.00  .63 

Topographer   2.90  3.00  8.69 

Recorder    3.06  2.25  6.90 

Stadia  rodman   6.15  2.00  12.32 

Hired  horses    5.83  .50  2.92 

Government  horses   (depreciation)...      4.84  .25  1.21 

Computer     45  2.25  1.02 

Draftsman  (chief  of  party) 58  3.33  1.93 

Camp  cook  and  teamster 3.70  2.00  7.41 

Depreciation  of  equipment ...  2.68 

Veterinary   service    ...  .04 

Supplies,  miscellaneous    ...  1.28 

Supplies,  stakes  and  monuments ...  .63 

Supplies,   repairs    ...  .51 

Supplies,  forage ...  4.50 

Supplies,   shoeing    ...  .39 

Traveling  expenses  for  field  party ...  .02 

Subsistence    for    field    parties   remote 

from   camp    ....  .41 


Total  cost  per  square  mile. 


$57.79 


ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS  1775 

Cost  of  Topographical  Survey,  Texas.*— The  survey  covered  about 
900  acres  of  rolling  hills  near  San  Antonio,  Tex.,  the  range  of  ele- 
vations being  something  over  100  ft.  The  ground  was  heavily 
wooded  with  mesquite  brush.  Three  roads  in  each  direction  which 
had  been  previously  staked  and  cleared,  provided  a  skeleton  for 
horizontal  control.  Levels  were  run  from  a  distance  of  two  miles 
and  bench  marks  established  at  intervals  of  one-third  of  a  mile 
along  the  roads,  the  profiles  of  the  latter  being  taken  simultaneously. 
The  details  were  then  filled  in  by  random  stadia  lines,  run  by  com- 
pass and  with  short  courses  in  such  a  manner  as  to  avoid  clearing. 
No  permanent  marks  were  used  at  set  up  points  and  only  the  alter- 
nate points  were  occupied  by  the  instrument.  The  whole  survey 
was  made  by  a  party  consisting  of  instrumentman  and  rodman. 
Five-foot  contours  were  obtained  and  the  tract  was  mapped  on  a 
scale  of  200  ft.  to  the  inch. 

The  itemized  cost  of  the  survey  and  mapping  was  as  follows : 

Field  work:  Total.       Per  acre. 

Party  of  two,  7  days,  at  $7.20 $50.40 

Labor  extra 2.00 

Total     $52.40          $0.058 

Office  work: 

Platting  and  mapping,  1  man  10  days.  $35. 00 
Office   expenses  and  materials 5.60 

Total    .                                                   ..$40.60          $0.045 
Grand  total    . . $93.00          $0.103 

For  the  above  information  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Terrell  Bart- 
lett,  C.  E. 

Cost  of  Two  Small  Surveying  Jobs.f — The  first  job  consisted  of  a 
transit  traverse  up  Town  and  Hanging  Kettle  Creeks  in  Clay  County, 
Miss.,  the  work  being  done  in  November,  1907.  A  summary  of  the 
work  is  as  follows : 

Number  courses  Town  Creek 34 

Total   distance    1.97  miles  (10,415.4  ft) 

Number  courses  Hanging  Kettle  Creek 19 

Total   distance    126  miles  (6,629.3  ft.) 

Number  of  courses  in  both  creeks 53 

Distance,    both   creeks 3.23  miles  (17,044  ft.) 

Average  course 321.7  ft. 

In  the  field  work  3  %  days  were  spent ;  while  the  office  work, 
computing  and  mapping  was  6  days.  The  working  day  was  9  hours. 
The  cost  of  the  field  work  was  as  follows: 

Instrument  man,  at  $5 $17.50 

Two  chainmen,  at  $1 7.00 

Two  rodmen,  at  $1 7.00 

One  axman,   at   $1 3.50 

Total,  3 ya  days $35.00 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.   11,   1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,   April  22.   1908. 


1776  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  office  work  cost  $30 ;  a  draftsman  and  computer  at  $5 
being  employed  for  6  days.  The  total  cost  was,  therefore,  $65.00, 
and  the  cost  per  mile  was  $20.12.  The  1/16  section,  %  section  and 
section  lines  had  been  run  across  creeks,  and  ties  were  made  to  all 
such  lines.  All  lines  were  run  with  transit  and  steel  tape  and  all 
angles  and  lines  checked  before  areas  were  computed.  The  map 
shows  the  acreage  on  each  side  of  center  line  of  creek  in  each  1/16 
section  (40  acres)  crossed.  The  traverse  was  made  on  one  bank, 
the  creek  being  too  deep  to  cross.  The  country  was  flat  with  scat- 
tering woods  and  bushes.  The  second  job  consisted  of  the  survey 
of  a  convict  farm  in  Mississippi,  for  a  lumber  company,  the  work 
being  done  during  January,  1908  ;  a  summary  of  the  work  is  as 
follows : 

Cultivated  land: 

Number  cuts   58 

Smallest   acreage  per  cent 5        acres 

Largest  acreage  per  cent 16.54  acres 

Total  acreage   414.77  acres 

Average  acreage  per  cut 7.15  acres 

The  time  in  the  field  was  3%  days,  and  the  time  in  office,  com- 
puting and  mapping,  was  5  days ;  an  8-hour  day  was  worked.  The 
cost  of  the  field  work  was  as  follows: 

Surveyor,  at  $5 $.17.50 

Four  helpers,  at  $1 14.00 

Total,    3V2    days $31.50 

The  office  work  cost  $25,  a  draftsman  being  employed  for  5  days 
at  $5  per  day.  The  total  cost  was,  therefore,  $56.50,  or  13.5  cts.  per 
acre.  For  the  above  information  we  are  indebted  to  Mr.  Charles  L. 
Wood,  C.  E. 

Cost  of  a  Level  Survey  for  a  Drainage  Plan.* — In  August,  1904,  the 
U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture  had  a  level  survey  made  in  Clay 
and  Yankton  Counties,  South  Dakota,  for  the  purpose  of  developing 
a  plan  for  the  drainage  of  the  bottom  lands  of  the  Missouri  River 
In  those  counties.  A  description  of  the  manner  in  which  this  survey 
was  made  was  given  in  the  Annual  Report  of  Irrigation  and  Drain- 
age Investigations  of  U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture  and  is  repro- 
duced herewith. 

The  first  step  was  to  collect  such  information  concerning  the 
land  in  question  as  could  be  obtained  from  the  county  records. 
Convenient  plats  for  field  use  were  made  upon  land  office  township 
blanks  on  a  scale  of  2  ins.  to  the  mile.  Upon  these  were  traced  all 
land  office  data  and  such  roads,  ditches,  and  sloughs  as  were 
shown  on  the  county  maps.  A  day  was  then  spent  in  making  a  gen- 
eral reconnoissance  by  driving  over  the  area,  in  order  to  become 
somewhat  familiar  with  its  general  topography.  In  this  reconnois- 
sance it  was  seen  that  the  section  lines  could  be  easily  followed,  as 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  12,  1906. 


.  ENGINEERING  AND  SURVEYS  177? 

where  they  were  not  marked  by  highways  there  were  fences  or 
turning  rows  located  on  them,  and  nearly  all  the  one-quarter  and 
one-sixteenth  section  lines  could  be  approximately  located  on  the 
ground  by  fence  or  field  lines. 

From  the  reconnoissance  and  the  field  plots  it  was  found  that 
field  measurements  could  be  obviated  by  using  land  lines  for  loca- 
tions, and  all  additional  data  necessary  could  be  obtained  by  run- 
ning levels.  The  plan  decided  on  and  carried  out  consisted  in  run- 
ning levels  along  parallel  north  and  south  section  lines  two  miles 
apart,  extending  from  the  ridge  which  marks  the  high-water  bank 
of  the  Missouri  River  to  the  foot  of  the  bluff.  A  permanent  bench 
mark  of  the  Missouri  River  Commission  survey  furnished  the  datum 
for  the  levels.  Levels  were  recorded  at  each  one-quarter  mile  along 
the  lines  surveyed,  the  instrument  being  set  midway  between  the 
one-quarter  mile  turning  points.  Turning  points  were  taken  on  short 
wooden  pegs  driven  to  the  natural  surface  of  the  ground.  A  target 
rod  was  used  and  read  by  both  levelman  and  rodman. 

A  light  two-horse  rig,  with  driver,  was  kept  on  the  line  and  used 
to  convey  the  rodman  from  one  turning  point  to  another.  As  the 
rodman  moved  one-quarter  mile  at  a  time  and  there  was  usually  a 
good  road,  there  was  a  considerable  saving  of  time  in  the  use  of  the 
rig,  which  was  also  used  for  conveying  the  party  to  and  from  work 
and  for  carrying  water,  lunch,  and  such  survey  stakes  as  were 
needed. 

From  five  to  ten  miles  of  level  lines  were  run  per  day.  The  growth 
of  high  grass  and  weeds  often  retarded  the  work.  The  number  of  side 
shots  which  were  necessary  to  secure  desired  data  also  cut  down  the 
days'  run.  Side  lines  were  also  run  to  the  lowest  points  in  sloughs  or 
depressions  one  mile  each  side  of  the  main  line.  Where  there  was 
water  in  the  sloughs  the  elevation  of  the  water  surface  was  taken 
and  the  depth  found  by  sounding  from  a  boat  or  wading. 
The  level  of  the  surface  of  the  water  of  both  Missouri  and 
James  Rivers  was  also  obtained.  The  high-water  marks  were  also 
obtained  from  points  located  by  residents,  and  the  low-water  marks 
were  determined  from  the  plots  of  the  Missouri  River  Commission. 
Bench  marks  were  established  at  nearly  all  section  corners  and  were 
made  by  driving  30-penny  spikes  into  corner  fence  posts  or  telephone 
poles  at  the  surface  of  the  ground,  a  blaze  being  made  about  4  ft. 
above  the  spike  and  the  elevation  marked  upon  it.  Each  night  the 
elevations  were  recorded  in  their  proper  locations  upon  the  field 
plots. 

After  the  completion  of  the  level  work,  the  line  between  the  culti- 
vated and  wet  land  was  sketched  upon  the  field  maps  by  personal  in- 
spection. After  the  data  had  all  been  collected  and  platted  the 
interior  watershed  boundaries  and  lines  of  proposed  ditches  were 
located  on  the  field  maps.  A  corrected  map  on  a  scale  of  one  mile 
to  one  inch  was  afterwards  made  up  from  the  field  maps.  The 
cost  of  this  survey  (82  miles  of  levels)  was  as  follows: 


1778  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA.   • 

Survey:  Per  mile. 

Engineer,  leveling,  at  $6  per  day $1.06 

Engineer,  special  field  examinations,  at  $6  per  day...    0.40 

Rodman,  at  $1.75  per  day 0.31 

Livery  hire,  team  and  driver,  at  $3  per  day 0.73 

Railway  fare   0.03 

Total  cost  of  survey $2.53 

Plans: 

Engineer,  office  work,  at  $6  per  day $0.88 

Drafting  supplies 0.016 

Total  cost  of  plans $0.896 

Total  cost  of  survey  and  plans $3.43 

Regarding  this  preliminary  survey,  it  should  be  said  that  only 
sufficient  work  was  done  to  furnish  the  information  required  for 
developing  a  general  plan,  yet  all  levels  are  accurate  and  are  con- 
nected with  and  checked  upon  Government  river  survey  bench 
marks.  A  list  and  description  of  bench  marks,  which  were  fixed 
at  each  section  corner  of  the  surveyed  lines,  accompany  the  report 
and  map  which  were  filed  with  the  auditor  of  Clay  County,  the  ex- 
pense of  which  is  not  included  in  the  above  memorandum.  The 
survey  was  inexpensive,  yet  sufficiently  full  for  forming  a  compre- 
hensive plan  for  the  drainage  of  70,000  acres  of  land,  and  estab- 
lished a  sufficient  number  of  points  from  which  future  surveys  for 
detail  and  construction  work  can  be  made  whenever  required. 

Cost  of  Sounding  Through  Ice.— Mr.  Joseph  Ripley  gives  the  fol- 
lowing relative  to  the  use  of  an  ice  boring  machine,  operated  by 
bevel  gear,  for  boring  3-in.  holes  through  ice.  Before  the  use  of 
this  machine,  holes  were  chopped  by  axes  at  a  cost  of  about  8  cts. 
per  hole  through  2  ft.  of  ice.  With  the  machine,  operated  by  two 
men,  the  average  time  was  less  than  y?  min.  per  hole,  through 
26  ins.  of  ice,  overlaid  by  2  ft.  of  snow,  including  all  delays.  The 
time  of  actual  boring  was  about  8  seconds  per  hole.  The  sounding 
party  consisted  of  3  chief,  recording  soundings,  2  men  sounding,  6 
men  operating  three  boring  machines,  2  men  moving  tag  lines  and 
marking  places  for  holes,  3  men  shoveling  away  snow  after  holes 
were  bored,  1  gage  observer  and  1  cook.  Such  a  party  averaged 
3,000  holes  per  day  of  8  hrs.  at  a  cost  of  $  1,000  per  month,  the 
working  day  being  8  hrs.  With  25  working  days  in  a  month,  the 
cost  is  1%  cts.  per  hole. 

In  U.  S.  Eng.  Report,  1903,  Vol.  10,  Part  2,  p.  1896,  the  follow- 
ing is  given : 

An  ice  boring  machine  will  bore  a  2% -in.  hole  through  2  ft.  of 
solid  ice  in  5  sees.  A  party  can  take  300  soundings  per  hr.  through 
ice  2  ft  thick,  in  water  23  ft.  deep,  holes  spaced  10  ft.  x  50  ft. 
The  best  record  for  8  hrs.  was  2,749  soundings,  ice  being  13  ins. 
thick.  The  cost  of  soundings  was  3  cts.  each  for  field  work,  includ- 
ing locating  the  holes. 


SECTION  XV. 
MISCELLANEOUS    COST   DATA. 

Prices  of  Materials,  Supplies  and  Plant.— Prices  are  subject  to 
such  fluctuation  that  I  prefer  to  prepare  a  complete  schedule  an- 
nually, which  is  published  in  Engineering-Contracting,  the  first  issue 
in  April  of  each  year.  Rates  of  wages  of  different  classes  of  work- 
men in  different  parts  of  America  are  also  given  in  that  issue. 

The  Cost  of  Fences.— A  barbed  wire  fence  was  built  under  the 
following  specifications : 

"Posts  to  be  oak  or  tamarack,  5  ins.  diameter  and  8%  ft.  long, 
spaced  16%  ft.  apart,  c.  to  c.t  and  set  3%  ft.  deep  in  the  ground. 
The  height  of  fence  to  be  4  ft.  9  ins.,  formed  of  four  lines  of  4-barb 
wire,  spaced  12,  14,  15  and  16  ins.  apart  measured  from  the 
ground  up." 

Per  mile. 

350  posts,  including  braces,  at  lu  cts $  35.00 

1,500  Ibs.   4-point  barbed  wire,  at  5  cts. 75.00 

40  Ibs.  staples,  at  5  cts 2.00 

Labor 43.00 

Total     $155.00 

This  10  cts.  per  post  was  a  very  low  price,  due  to  the  fact  that 
posts  were  cut  from  trees  near  the  work.  Posts  are  frequently 
5  to  10  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  post,  where  they  are  imported  by  rail. 

Where  rail  fences  are  built,  the  posts  are  usually  spaced  8  ft. 
apart  c.  to  c.,  and  set  at  least  3  ft.  deep.  The  fencing  specified  by 
the  Mass.  Highway  Commission  consists  of  cedar  or  chestnut  posts, 
not  less  than  6  ins.  diam.  and  6%  ft.  long,  set  3  ft.  In  the  ground, 
and  spaced  8  ft.  c.  to  c.,  bark  peeled  off.  A  top  rail,  4x4  ins.,  and 
a  side  rail,  2x6  ins.,  are  specified  to  be  of  dressed  spruce ;  and  both 
rails  are  notched  into  the  posts  and  spiked.  The  fence  is  painted 
with  one  coat  of  white  lead  and  oil.  The  usual  contract  price  for 
such  a  fence  in  Massachusetts  is  15  cts.  per  lin.  ft.,  or  $890  per  mile. 
There  are  660  posts,  and  12,300  ft.  B.  M.  of  spruce  per  mile. 

The  wire  fences  of  the  Louisville  &  Nashville  Ry.  have  posts  7  ft. 
long,  with  seven  wires  spaced  4,  4,  6,  8,  10,  12  and  12  ins.  from  the 
ground  up.  For  one  mile  of  fencing  the  following  materials  and 
labor  are  required: 

1779 


1780  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Per  mile. 

3  barbed  hog  wires  (7.7  Ibs.  per  100  ft.) 1,218  Ibs. 

2  barbed  cattle  wires  (7.14  Ibs.  per  100  ft.)..     754  Ibs. 
2  plain  ribbon  wires   (6.66   Ibs.  per  100  ft.)..     704  Ibs. 

Total  wire  per  mile 2,676  Ibs. 

Staples    49  Ibs. 

Posts,  10  ft.  apart 528 

Bracing,  1  x  6-in.  yellow  pine,  ft.  B.  M 440 

Labor $105 

In  soft  soil  a  good  workman,  using  an  8-in.  post  hole  digger,  will 
dig  100  post  holes,  2  ft.  deep,  per  day  of  10  hrs. 

Cost  of  Barbed  Wire  Fences.*— The  practice  in  spacing  posts  la 
variable,  sometimes  being  15  ft.  centers,  sometimes  24  ft.  Farmers 
usually  space  fence  posts  a  rod  apart  (16^  ft.).  When  the  posts 
are  spaced  20  ft.  apart  it  is  customary  to  support  the  wires  between 
the  posts  by. means  of  two  wooden  slats  or  wire  stays,  each  4  ft. 
long,  and  spaced  about  7  ft.  apart.  These  slats  or  stays  prevent 
animals  from  spreading  the  fence  wires  apart  in  their  efforts  to 
get  between  them. 

Bill  of  Material — The  standard  fence  used  on  the  O.  R.  &  N.  has 
posts  7   ft.   long,   20  ft.   c.   to  c.,  and  bedded  28   ins.  in   the  ground. 
The  first  wire  is  13  ins.  above  the  ground  and  the  rest  are  13  ins. 
apart,   except   the   space  between   the  upper  two,   which  is    14   ins. 
The  bill  of  material  is  as  follows  per  mile  of  fence : 
265  posts,  7  x  7-in.  x  7-ft.,  split  cedar. 
530  slats,  1  x  3-in.  x  4-ft.  fir. 

21,120  lin.  ft,  or  1,410  Ibs.,  two-point  galvanized  cattle  wire: 
16  Ibs.  staples,  iy2-in.,  No.  9  polished. 
26  Ibs.  staples,  1%-in.,  No.  9. 

The  following  is  a  bill  of  materials  and  their  estimated  cost  (not 
including  labor)  for  the  standard  "second  class  fence"  on  the  N.  P., 
per  mile: 

1,340  Ibs,   (21,120  lin.  ft.)  galv.  barb  wire,  at  2%  eta.  7777 TV. $30.15 
280  Ibs.   No.   7  galv.   wire  stays    (675   stays,    4   ft.  long),   at 

2.8    cts. 7.84 

16  Ibs.  2-in.  galv.  wire  staples   (950  staples),  at  2.35  cts...  0.38 

2,800  galv.  anchor  fence  clamps,  at  80  cts.  per  M 2.24 

10  diagonal  braces,  4  x  4  in.  x  12  ft.,  160  ft.  B.  M.,  at  $15..  2.40 

225  cedar  posts  (6-in.),  7  ft.  long,  at  10  cts 22.50 

6  Ibs.  60d  nails,  at  2.25  cts 0.14 

1  Eureka  tubular  gate,  $4 4.00 

Total  materials $69.65 

For  the  last  ten  years  the  contract  price  for  the  labor  of  build- 
ing such  fences  as  this  has  not  varied  much  from  $75  a  mile  in  the 
far  West 

We  shall  now  give  the  actual  cost  of  a  number  of  jobs  of  fence 
work  on  a  western  railway,  showing  the  range  of  costs : 

Cost  of  a  Seven-Mile  Fence. — This  fence  was  7   miles  long,  built 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  21,  1907. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1781 

on  ground  that  was  rather  rocky,  making  the  cost  of  digging  post 
ioles  quite  high.     The  cost  of  the  fence  was  as  follows  per  mile : 
Materials: 

1,300  Ibs.  barb  wire,  at  2.65  cts $  34.45 

400  Ibs.  fence  stays  (100),  at  2.75  cts 11.00 

90  Ibs.  fence  clamps  (3,900),  at  6  cts 5.40 

16  staples   (1,390),  at  2.70  cts 43 

352  posts  (15  ft.  c.  to  c.),  at  11  cts 38.72 

12  Ibs.  40d  nails,  at  2.25  cts 27 

Total     $  90.27 

Labor:     Loading  and  Moving: 

3  hrs.  foreman,  at  25  cts $       .75 

16  hrs.  laborers,  at  15  cts 2.40 

Total    $  3.15 

Removing  Brush: 

1  hr.  foreman,  at  25  cts $  .25 

30  hrs.  laborers,  at  15  cts 4.50 

Total    $  4.75 

Distributing  Fence  Material: 

3  hrs.  foreman,  at   25  cts $  .75 

10  hrs.  laborer,  at  15  cts 1.50 

Total 7$~~~2^25 

Building  Fence: 

38  hrs.    foreman,    at    25    cts $     9.50 

240  hrs.  laborer,  at  15  cts 36.00 

Total     $  45.50 

Grand  total  labor $  55.65 

Cost  of  labor  and  materials $145.92 

It  will  be  noted  that  the  cost  of  moving  the  gang  of  men  once  on 
this  job  was  $3.15  per  mile  of  fence,  or  $22  for  this  one  move,  in 
lost  time  of  men.  Such  losses  as  this  should  not  be  forgotten,  espe- 
cially in  estimating  the  cost  of  small  jobs. 

Cost  of  a  2,000-Ft.  Fence. — This  was  a  short  fence  with  posts  16  ft. 
apart,  4  wires  to  the  post.  The  exact  length  of  the  fence  was  1,932 
ft.,  or  120  panels  of  16  ft,  exclusive  of  2  gates.  There  were  4 
posts  used  for  the  gates  and  8  posts  used  for  braces.  The  cost 
of  this  1,932-ft.  fence  was  as  follows: 
Material: 

129  cedar  posts,  7  ft,  at  7  cts $  9.03 

7,755  ft.  barbed  wire.  426  Ibs.,  at  2  cts 8.52 

500  fence  staples,  6%  Ibs.,  at  1.75  cts 11 

360  stays  (4  ft),   122  Ibs.,  at  3.15  cts 3.86 

1,440  fence  clamps,  36.6  Ibs.,  at  5.25  cts 1.89 

Freight   on    posts .- 2.00 

Total  for  1,932  ft $25~41 

Two    Gates: 

4  cedar  posts  (7  ft),  at  7  cts $     .28 

12  PCS.   1  x  6-in.  x  18-ft  =  96  ft  B.  M.,  at  $15...      1.44 
4  Ibs.  lOd  nails,  at  2.82 11 

Total  for  2  gates $~1.?3 

Labor: 

2.6  days  foreman,    at   $2.50 $  6.50 

7.8  days  laborers,  at  $1.50 11.70 

Total  labor  .  . .  $18.20 


1782  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Excluding  the  gates,  the  cost  of  the  materials  was  $69.40  per  mile, 
and  the  cost  of  the  labor  was  $49.70  per  mile,  or  a  total  of  $119.10 
per  mile. 

Cost  of  a  9,000-Ft.  Fence. — This  fence  was  of  the  same  design  as 
the  one  just  described,  the  actual  length  being  8,974  ft. 
The  materials  cost: 

2,154  Ibs.  barb  wire,  at  2.76  ct $  59.45 

649  Ibs.  fence  stays,  at  2.75  cts 17.85 

149  Ibs.  fence  clamps,  at  5.95  cts 8  87 

26  Ibs.   fence  staples,  at  2.70  cts 70 

577  posts,  at  11  cts 6347 

15  Ibs.  40d  nails,  at  2.25  cts 34 

1  Ib.  lOd  nails,  at  2.30  cts 02 

2  Ibs.   5d  nails,  at  2.25   cts .05 

24  pcs.   I"x6'-16'   192',  at   $8.50 1.63 


Total  cost  of  material $152.38 

This  makes  a  cost  of  $89.63  per  mile  of  fence,  including  farm 
gates,  there  being  4  such  gates  in  the  9,000  ft.  An  additional  cost 
was  32  posts  used  for  anchoring  and  for  braces,  the  15  Ibs.  of  40d. 
were  also  used  on  the  anchors  and  braces.  All  the  fence  material 
had  to  be  hauled  from  one  to  two  miles  on  push  car,s  by  the  crew 
to  distribute  it,  and  some  brush  had  to  be  cleared  away  to  build  the 
fence.  This  and  the  other  labor  co*sts  were : 
Distributing  Material  for  Fence: 

Foreman,  7  days,  at  $65 $  1.52 

Laborers,    9   days,    at    $1.50 13.50 

Clearing  Brush  to  Build  Fence: 

Laborer,  1  day,  at  $1.50 1.50 

Building  New  Fence: 

Foreman,   3.3  days,  at  $65 7.15 

Laborers,   37.3   days,   at  $1.50 15.95 

Putting  Up  Farm  Gate: 
Laborers,  2  days,  at  $1.50 3.00 

Total  labor $82.62 

A  cost  per  mile  of  $48.60,  making  a  total  cost  for  materials  and 
labor  of  $138.23. 

Cost  of  a  2,6^-Ft.  Fence. — This  fence  was  of  the  same  design  as 
those  previously  given  posts  16  ft.  apart,  with  4  wires.  The  fence 
was  exactly  half  a  mile  long,  but  the  costs  have  been  reduced  to  the 
^ost  per  mile  for  convenience  of  comparison. 

Materials:  Per  mile. 

21,360  ft.  barb  wire,  1,282  Ibs.,  at  2.65  cts $   33.98 

978  fence  stays,  394- Ibs.,  at  2.75  cts 10.84 

3,912  fence  clamps,   98  Ibs.,  at  5.95  cts 5.82 

1,304  fence  staples,  18  Ibs.,  at  2.70  cts 48 

330  fence  posts,  at   11  cts 36.30 

Total  materials  per  mile $  87.42 

Labor:    Distributing  Fence  Material: 

4  days  labor,  at  $1.50 $     6.00 

Erecting  Fence: 

2  days  foreman,  at  $2.50 5.00 

20  days  labor,  at  $1.50 30.00 


Total  labor  per  mile $  41.00 

Total  material  and  labor $128.42 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1783 

Labor  Costs  on  Four  Different  Fences. — Having  given  the  costs 
of  materials  and  labor  on  several  fences,  we  shall  now  omit  the  ma- 
terial item  and  give  only  the  labor  costs  on  fences,  all  of  which  ha  1 
posts  spaced  16  ft.  apart,  and  4  wires  to  the  post.  The  first  oi 
these  was  2,200  ft.  long  and  the  labor  of  erecting  it  cost  at  the 
following  rate  per  mile : 

Hauling  Out  Fence  Material:  Per  mile. 

1.2  days  foreman,   at   $2.50 $   3.00 

12  days  laborer,  at  $1.50 18.00 

Total    $21.00 

Building  Fence: 

1.4  days  foreman,  at  $2.50 $   3.50 

16.8  days  laborer,  at  $1.50 25.20 

Total    ..$28.70 

Grand  total $49.70 

This  did  not  include  $9  of  lost  time  moving  the  gang  from  another 
job  to  this  one. 

The  next  job  was  the  building  of  a  fence  2,600  ft.  long.  The 
ground  was  rocky,  making  it  necessary  to  anchor  most  of  the  posts. 
The  labor  cost  at  the  following  rate  per  mile : 

Clearing  Brush:  Per  mile. 

2  days  labor,   at  $2 $  4.00 

Building  Fence: 

2  days  foreman,  at  $3 6.00 

34  days  laborer,  at  $2 68.00 

Total     $78.00 

In  addition  it  cost  $18  for  the  lost  time  of  moving  the  men  from 
another  job  to  this  one.  Two  farm  gates  were  erected,  and  the 
cost  of  each  was : 

1  farm  gate   $0.90 

2  posts  for  gate,  at  10  cts 0.20 

Labor  placing  gate 2.00 

Total     $3.10 

The  next  job  was  a  fence  2,300  ft.  long.  The  labor  cost  at  the 
following  rate  per  mile : 

Distributing  Fence  Material:  Per  mile. 

1.1  day  foreman,  at  $3 $   3.30 

13.8  days  laborer,  at   $1.50 20.70 

Total     $24~00 

Clearing  Brush." 
2.4  days  laborer,  at  $1.50 $  3.60 

Building  Fence: 

1.1  day  foreman,  at  $3 3.30 

21.8  days  laborer,   at  $1.50 32.70 

Total    $36.00 

Grand  total  labor $63.60 


1784  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

In  addition  to  this,  the  lost  time  moving  to  this  job  amounts 
to  $10. 

The  next  job  was  a  fence  5,700  ft.  long,  and  the  labor  cost  at  the 
following  rate  per  mile : 

Distributing  Fence  Material:  Per  mile. 

3.8  days  laborer,   at   $1.50 $  5.70 

Building  Fence: 

1.8  days   foreman,    at    $3 5.40 

16.6  days  laborer  at  $1.50 24.90 

Loading  Barb  Wire  on  Car: 

0.5  day  foreman,  at  $2.50 1.25 

2.5  days  laborer,   at   $1.25 3.13 

Grand  total  labor $40.38 

Fence  5,000  Ft.  Long. — The  posts  in  this  example  were  20  ft.  center 
to  center.  One  gate  was  built.  The  material  cost: 

254  fence  posts,  4.5  cts $11.43 

1,215  Ibs.   No.   9   galv.  iron  wire,   2  cts 24.30 

285  Ibs.   fence  stays,   3.75 10.65 

96  Ibs.   fence   clamps,    6.25    cts 6.00 

13  Ibs.  fence  staples,  2.20  cts 29 

1  Ib.   40d  nails,    1.5  cts ..02 

3  pcs.   2"x  6"-16' 48',  $11.50 55 

$53~24 
Labor  cost  as  follows  : 

Foreman,  6  days,  at  $48.75: $  9.67 

Laborers,    18    days,    at    $1.50., 27.00 

$36~67 

Making  a  cost  per  mile  for  material  of  $55.96,  for  labor  $38.52, 
and  a  total  cost  $94.48.  This  includes  one  gate. 

Cost  of  a  Wire  Fence.*— Mr.  F.  W.  Doolittle  gives  the  following 
data  on  6,650  ft.  of  4-wire  fence,  posts  spaced  16  ft.,  as  built  re- 
cently about  the  top  works  of  a  coal  mine  near  Denver,  Colo.  The 
work  was  done  by  regular  employes  on  idle  days  during  the  sum- 
mer, which  accounts  for  lack  of  uniformity  in  day  wages,  and  also 
for  a  comparatively  high  labor  cost.  No  special  item  of  superin- 
tendence is  charged  as  the  force  was  so  small  that  the  overseer  also 
made  a  hand.  The  cost  of  the  6,650  ft.  was: 

Labor: 

Surveying  line,  3  days,  at  $2.50 $,    7.50 

Digging  holes,  14  days,  at  various 36.00 

Setting  posts,  7*/2  days,  at  $2.50 18.75 

Stretching  wire,  8%   days,  at  various 23.50 

Total  labor $  85.75 

Materials:              Cost.  Freight.     Hauling.  Total. 

Posts    $75.00          $25.00          $6.50  $106.50 

Wire 56.42"              2.59            1.25  60.26 

Staples    3.52  (Included  in  wire)  3.25 

Total  materials $170.01 

•Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  25,  1908. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1785 

An  8-hr,  day  was  worked.  The  item,  digging  holes,  includes  1 
day,  man  and  team,  at  $3.50,  and  the  item  setting  posts  includes  l^i 
days  at  $2.50,  setting  braces.  The  holes  were  dug  with  post  auger 
to  a  depth  of  about  12  ins.,  where  the  ground  was  too  hard  for 
further  progress.  The  holes  were  then  filled  with  water,  after 
which  they  could  be  deepened  to  from  20  ins.  to  24  ins.,  or  as  far 
as  the  earth  had  been  dampened. 

Wires  were  stretched  as  follows:  The  reel  was  mounted  on  back 
of  wagon  box  and  several  hundred  feet  of  wire  reeled  off.  The 
back  end  of  wagon  was  then  raised  off  the  ground  and  a  post  placed 
between  the  rear  axle  and  the  ground  to  prevent  the  wagon  run- 
ning back.  The  rear  wheel  was  used  as  a  tightener  by  taking  a 
couple  of  turns  of  wire  about  hub  and  turning  wheel  around  by 
hand,  or  by  a  bar  through  spokes  against  wagon  bed. 

A  comparative  cost  per  mile  of  the  above  fence  and  the  fence  at 
San  Antonio,  Tex.,  described  by  Mr.  Tyrrell  Bartlett,  in  our  Nov.  11 
issue  is  as  follows : 

San  Antonio.         Denver. 
Materials:  Per  mile.  Per  mile. 

Posts    $  56.30  %  85.20 

Wire  and  staples 48.20  50.80 

Total  materials $104.50  $136.00 

Labor: 

Digging  holes   $  40.40  $  28.80 

Setting      posts,      tamping      posts, 

stringing    wire 35.50  33.80 

Running  line 6.00 


Total  labor $  75.90  $  68.60 

Grand  total    $180.40  $204.60 

The  chief  difference  lies  in  cost  of  posts,  those  used  near  Denver 
costing  50%  more  than  those  used  at  San  Antonio.  At  San 
Antonio  5-in.  cedar  posts,  set  30  ins.  deep  and  15  ft.  on  centers, 
were  used,  with  four  strands  of  wire.  The  labor  on  the  holes  was 
paid  by  the  hole  according  as  each  was  in  earth,  part  in,  or  all  in 
adobe.  Other  labor,  $1.50  per  day. 

Cost  of  Digging  Post  Holes  for  a  Fence.* — In  building  the  levees 
along  the  Mississippi  River  to  retain  the  waters  within  its  banks, 
fences  are  erected  on  both  the  land  and  river  side.  The  price  paid 
for  this  work  is  included  in  that  for  excavation. 

The  fences  are  built  with  posts  5  ins.  square,  7%  ft.  long,  2^  ft. 
being  in  the  ground.  These  posts  are  of  oak,  mulberry,  black  locust 
or  sassafras,  cut  in  the  local  timber  lands.  They  are  spaced  12  ft. 
apart.  Four  galvanized  barbed  wires  are  stretched  and  attached  to 
the  posts. 

Along  the  Mississippi  at  present  foremen  are  paid  $100  per 
month  and  board,  while  laborers  are  receiving  $1.75  for  a  12-hr, 
day.  The  materials  and  labor  give  a  cost  of  a  single  line  of  fence 
per  mile  of  $125,  which  is  quite  low. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.   28,   1907. 


1786  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  poet  holes  are  dug  with  post  hole  augers,  the  holes  being 
6  ins.  in  diameter  and  2%  ft.  deep.  In  the  soil  that  occurs  along 
the  river,  one  man  with  a  6-in.  auger,  working  12  hrs.,  will  dig  on 
an  average  100  holes.  This  means  a  cost  of  1%  cts.  for  labor  for 
digging  a  hole,  and,  as  there  are  440  holes  to  a  mile  of  fence,  the 
cost  of  digging  the  holes  per  mile  will  aggregate  $7.70. 

From  each  hole  is  excavated  %  cu.  ft.  of  earth,  and,  with  a  6-in. 
auger  digging  to  a  depth  of  2%  ft.,  the  cost  of  excavating  a  cubic 
yard  of  earth  is  94%  cts. 

Assuming  that  for  a  10-hr,  day  a  man  would  do  proportionally 
the  same  amount  of  work,  with  wages  at  $1.50  per  diem,  we  then 
have  84  holes  dug  in  a  day,  making  a  cost  of  1.8  cts.  per  hole,  and 
cost  per  mile  of  $7.92.  With  the  national  government  enforcing  the 
8-hr,  law  on  the  levee  construction  that  is  to  be  done  under  United 
States  engineers,  the  number  of  holes  dug  a  day  may  be  decreased. 

Cost  of  Digging  Post  and  Pole  Holes.* — A  post  hole  digger  may  be 
termed  a  tool  that  does  its  digging  by  being  driven  into  the  ground, 
and,  as  it  loosens  the  earth,  picks  it  up  so  it  can  be  taken  out  of 
the  hole. 

An  auger  is  not  driven  into  the  ground  like  a  digger,  but  is  forced 
down  into  the  ground  by  a  man  pressing  on  it,  while  at  the  same 
time  he  turns  it  as  a  carpenter  does  an  auger  in  boring  a  hole 
through  wood. 

When  digging  a  hole  with  a  shovel  and  bar,  it  is  seldom  less  than 
12-in.  wide  at  the  top,  but  it  loses  about  one-third  of  its  diameter 
as  it  is  taken  down,  when  the  holes  are  not  over  3  ft.  deep.  This  is 
due  to  the  fact  that  the  shovel  used  for  this  purpose  cannot  be 
worked  in  a  smaller  hole.  Time  is  lost  in  hard  ground  by  having  to 
change  from  the  shovel  to  the  bar,  as  it  is  necessary  to  use  the 
latter  to  loosen  the  earth. 

We  are  enabled  to  give  a  record  of  digging  some  post  holes  by 
hand  with  the  bar  and  ordinary  long  handled  shovel.  The  fence 
posts  were  7%  ft.  long,  2%  ft.  being  put  into  the  ground.  The 
diameter  of  the  post  was  6  ins.  The  soil  was  a  red  clay.  The  holes 
being  2%  ft.  deep,  were  12  ins.  in  diameter  at  the  top,  but  averaged 
10  ins.  This  made  1%  cu.  ft.  of  excavation  for  each  hole.  The 
wages  paid  to  the  laborers  were  $1.50  for  a  10-hr,  day.  A  man  dug 
40  of  these  holes  per  day,  thus  excavating  about  2  cu.  yds.  of  earth 
each  day.  This  made  a  cost  of  3  %  cts.  per  post  hole  dug,  and  a  cost 
of  75  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  of  excavation.  With  440  post  holes  to  a  mile 
of  fences,  posts  being  on  12-ft.  centers,  this  cost  per  post  gives 
a  cost  per  mile  of  $16.50. 

A  comparison  of  this  with  the  cost  of  similar  work  done  with  an 
auger  will  no  doubt  be  of  interest.  In  Engineering-Contracting  for 
Aug.  28,  1907,  page  133,  are  given  some  costs  of  digging  post  holes 
with  an  auger.  On  that  .iob  5-in.  posts  were  used,  and  the  holes 
were  dug  with  a  6-in.  auger,  the  holes  being  2y2  ft.  deep.  Only 
ya  cu.  ft.  of  earth  was  thus  excavated  from  the  hole,  as  compared 
to  1%  cu.  ft.  One  man  in  a  10-hr,  day  with  wages  at  $1.75,  dig- 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  18,  1907. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1787 

ging  84  holes,  made  a  cost  of  1.8  cts.  per  hole,  or  a  cost  per  mile, 
440  holes,  of  $7.92.  Thus  it  is  seen  that  with  a  higher  wage  the  cost 
was  more  than  50%  less,  which  needs  no  comment  in  estimating  the 
value  of  the  patent  digger  and  auger. 

Another  example  of  the  cost  of  digging  holes  by  hand  was  in 
making  holes  for  some  12-in.  steel  channels  that  were  to  be  used 
as  the  posts  for  a  large  storage  bin  for  coal.  The  12-in.  channels 
were  24  ft.  long,  and  4  ft.  of  them  were  to  be  buried  In  the 
ground,  embedded  in  concrete.  For  this  reason  the  holes  were 
made  2  ft.  in  diameter  and  4  ft.  deep. 

The  tools  used  in  digging  the  holes  were  a  digging  bar,  a 
shovel  and  a  spoon.  The  holes  were  kept  2  ft.  diameter  to 
the  bottom,  the  spoon  allowing  this  to  be  done.  From  each 
hole  12  y2  cu.  ft.  was  excavated.  One  man  dug  3  holes  of  this 
kind  a  day.  The  ground  was  a  stiff  clay,  and  all  of  it  had 
to  be  loosened  with  the  bar.  With  wages  at  $1.50  per  10-hr,  day 
the  cost  per  hole  was  50  cts.  In  a  day  a  man  excavated  1.39  cu. 
yds.  of  earth,  which  made  a  cost  per  cu.  yd.  of  $1.08.  Some  of  the 
patented  diggers  are  adapted  to  this  wor.k  and  would  no  doubt 
have  reduced  this  cost. 

Cost  of  Digging  600  Trolley  Pole  Holes.* — Holes  for  trolley  poles 
are  generally  dug  by  hand.  Under  most  specifications  they -are  not 
paid  for  by  the  hole,  but  are  included  in  the  price  of  other  line 
work.  For  this  reason  few  records  of  the  cost  of  digging  these  holes 
have  been  kept.  Poles  used  in  large  cities  are  generally  of  iron,  and 
embedded  in  concrete,  while  those  used  in  the  smaller  towns  and  on 
suburban  roads  are  of  timber.  A  different  size  hole  is  needed  for 
each  kind,  so  the  cost  of  the  holes  varies  somewhat. 

In  this  article  we  will  give  the  cost  of  digging  more  than  600 
holes  for  trolley  poles  on  a  suburban  line.  The  overhead  construc- 
tion was  of  two  kinds,  span  wire  which  needs  a  pole  on  each  side 
of  the  track,  and  single  poles  with  a  bracket  to  hold  the  trolley  wire. 
This  divided  the  work  into  two  groups,  and  the  span  wire  construc- 
tion was  further  divided  into  double  and  single  track  work.  The 
class  of  material  in  which  the  holes  were  dug,  as  well  as  the  size 
of  the  butt  of  the  pole,  made  additional  division  of  the  work.  The 
cost  of  the  work  will  be  given  under  five  groups. 

A  10-hr,  day  was  worked  and  the  foreman  was  paid  $3.00  per  day 
and  the  laborers  $1.50.  The  work  was  done  during  the  months  of 
February  to  July.  The  gang  of  men  worked  at  digging  the  holes, 
raising  the  poles,  and  other  overhead  work  during  this  period  ol 
time,  but  the  cost  of  each  item  of  work  was  kept  separate.  In  dig' 
ging  the  holes,  the  tools  that  the  men  used  were :  A  digging  bar, 
see  Fig.  1  ;  a  round  point  shovel,  see  Fig.  2,  and  a  spoon,  see  Fig 
3.  The  length  of  the  handles  on  these  was  8  ft.  The  holes  were 
spaced  as  follows :  For  span  construction  on  tangents,  the  pole? 
were  110  ft.  apart.  On  12°  curves  or  less  they  are  from  80  to  110  ft 
apart,  while  on  curves  of  150  ft.  radius  or  less  they  were  spaced 
from  40  to  50  ft.  apart. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  March  4,   1908. 


1788 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


Group  I. — In  this  lot  82  holes  were  dug.  It  was  for  span  con- 
struction of  4,775  ft.  of  double  track.  The  poles  were  from  12  to  15 
ins.  in  diameter  at  the  butt,  so  the  holes  were  dug  about  2  ft.  in 
diameter.  The  depth  of  the  hole  was  governed  by  the  specifications, 
which  called  for  all  holes  to  be  6  ft.  deep,  this  depth  to  be  in  the 
natural  ground.  Hence,  where  there  was  an  embankment,  the  hole 
had  to  be  as  much  deeper  than  6  ft.  as  the  height  of  the  embank- 
ment was  above  the  natural  ground  at  the  place  where  the  pole 
was  to  be  planted. 


Flq.l 
Enq-Contr- 


This  is  an  instance  of  where  conditions  surrounding  work  may 
change,  yet  specifications  are  not  changed  to  suit  the  new  conditions. 
When  these  specifications  were  first  drawn,  all  the  poles  on  subur- 
ban lines  of  the  company  in  question  were  not  placed  equi-distant 
from  the  center  line  of  the  track.  In  cuts  they  were  so  spaced,  but, 
wherever  embankments  occurred,  longer  poles  were  used,  as  the 
poles  were  placed  outside  of  the  toe  of  the  slope  of  the  embank- 
ment. This  prevented  having  the  poles  in  line,  which  made  the  line 
of  poles  appear  unsightly,  and  it  also  added  to  the  length  of  the 
span  wire.  For  these  and  other  reasons,  the  arrangement  of  poles 
was  changed  and  they  were  set  equi-distant  from  the  center  line 
on  the  embankment  as  well  as  in  the  cut.  Under  these  circum- 
stances where  the  embankments  had  settled  and  were  made  of  good 
material,  there  was  no  need  of  making  the  holes  more  than  6  ft., 
but,  as  the  specifications  called  for  a  greater  depth,  the  holes  were 
so  dug.  They  varied  from  6  to  12  ft.  deep.  In  this  group  40  pole 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA 


1789 


holes  were  dug  6  ft.  deep,  the  rest  being  from  9  to  12  ft.,  30  holes 
being  of  the  last  named  depth.  The  roadbed  on  this  section  was  all 
embankment,  made  of  cinders  and  slag  from  a  steel  plant.  In  dig- 
ging the  30  deepest  holes  the  cinders  and  slag  kept  running  into  the 
holes,  causing  about  three  to  four  times  as  much  material  to  be 
excavated  as  would  otherwise  have  been  taken  from  the  hole.  It  was 
estimated  that  this  doubled  the  yardage  excavated  from  the  82  holes. 
In  order  to  brace  the  poles  under  ground,  an  8-ft.  second-hand 


A 


Span  Wire 


/U 


S '  Piece  of 


Fig.    4. 

sawed  tie  was  cut  into  two  pieces,  one  3  ft.  long  and  the  other  5  ft. 
long,  and  placed  as  shown  in  Fig.  4.  The  short  piece  was  put  in 
the  bottom  of  the  hole  and  the  large  pieces  at  the  top.  This  also 
increased  the  amount  of  material  that  was  taken  from  the  holes. 
This  extra  material  averaged  4  cu.  ft.  for  each  hole,  and  the  con- 
tractor was  paid  extra  for  this  work.  When  holes  were  dug  of  a 
greater  depth  than  the  length  of  the  shovel  handle,  a  foot  or  more 
of  earth  was  dug  out  of  the  surface  of  the  ground  at  the  side  of  the 
hole,  and  the  workman  stood  in  this  depression,  thus  allowing  him 
readily  to  reach  with  his  shovel  and  spoon  to  the  bottom  of  the 
hole. 

The  cost  of  digging  the  82  holes  was : 

Foreman    $   27.90 

Laborers 95.25 


Total     ?123.15 


1790  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

The  unit  cost  was  as  follows : 

Per  cu.  yd.  Per  hole. 

Foreman     $0.13  $0.34 

Laborers     .  0.47  1.16 


Total    - $0.60  $1.50 

The  high  cost  was  due  to  the  cinders  as  previously  explained. 

The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  double  track  for  the  hole  digging  was 
2.6  cts. 

Group  II. — All  of  these  holes,  88  in  number,  were  6  ft.  deep. 
The  poles  were  a  little  .heavier  than  those  in  Group  I,  so  the  holes 
were  2%  ft.  in  diameter.  Each  hole  had  28  cu.  ft.  of  earth  in  it, 
thus  making  91  cu.  yds.  for  all  the  holes.  This  was  the  first  work 
done,  and  the  men  were  not  accustomed  to  handling  their  long 
handled  shovels. 

The  cost  of  digging  the  holes  was : 

Foreman    $  23.10 

Laborers    83.10 


Total     $106.10 

This  gave  a  unit  cost  of  the  following: 

Per  cu.  yd.     Per  hole. 

Foreman     $0.25  $0.27 

Laborers    0.91  0.94 

Total    $1.16  $1.21 

As  there  was  4,590  lin.  ft.  of  double  track,  the  cost  of  digging 
holes  per  lineal  foot  was  2.3  cts. 

Group  III. — This  was  span  wire  construction  for  single  track 
work,  there  being  17,160  lin.  ft.  of  track.  In  all  320  pole  holes  were 
dug.  The  holes  averaged  3V6  ft.  in  diameter,  and  were  from  6  ft. 
to  12  ft.  deep.  About  20%  were  deeper  than  6  ft,  10%  being  8  or  9 
ft.  deep,  and  10%  from  10  to  12  ft.  deep.  From  the  holes  510  cu. 
yds.  of  earth  were  excavated,  being  1.6  cu.  yds.  as  an  average  from 
each  hole.  This  large  size  hole  was  needed  because  the  poles  were 
extremely  large  in  diameter  and  heavy — much  larger  than  they 
were  needed.  This,  too,  was  owing  to  the  specifications,  which  stated 
the  smallest  size  in  diameter  that  would  be  accepted,  but  failed  to 
state  the  largest  dimensions  that  would  be  taken.  Some  of  the  poles 
furnished  by  the  timber  contractor  were  3  ft.  or  more  in  diameter 
at  the  butt.  This  not  only  added  to  the  cost  of  digging  the  holes, 
but  also  to  the  setting  of  the  poles,  and  other  details  of  the  work. 
Special  eye  bolts  had  to  be  made  for  a  large  number  of  the  poles, 
and  some  longer  crossarms  had  to  be  obtained  to  carry  the  feed 
wires. 

Ten  of  the  6-ft.  holes  were  dug  in  quicksand.  These  gave  some 
trouble,  and  additional  expense.  An  expedient  used  in  digging  these 
holes  was  to  take  a  barrel,  and,  after  knocking  the  two  heads  out  of 
it,  to  put  it  in  the  hole.  Then  all  the  excavation  was  done  from 
within  the  barrel,  sinking  it  as  the  hole  was  dug.  Thus  the  sides 
of  the  hole  were  sheathed,  and  by  means  of  a  hand  pump  the  water 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1791 

was  kept  out  while  the  digging  was  going  on.  If  the  quicksand 
occurs  for  a  greater  depth  than  the  height  of  one  barrel,  a  second 
barrel  should  be  used  on  top  of  the  first.  This  second  one  should  be 
a  little  larger  than  the  first,  so  it  will  go  down  around  the  lower 
one.  The  pole  must  be  raised  in  such  a  hole  as  soon  as  it  is  dug. 

The  total  cost  of  digging  the  320  holes  was  as  follows: 

Foreman    $     77.80 

Laborers     .  349.35 


Total $427.15 

This  gave  the   following  unit  cost : 

Per  cu.  yd.  Per  hole. 

Foreman $0.13  $0.24 

Laborers     0.68  1.09 


Total    $0.81  $1.33 

The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  single  track  for  the  hole  digging  was 
2.5  cts. 

Group  IV. — This  was  for  2,188  lin.  ft.  of  single  track,  a  branch  of 
the  other  line.  The  curves  were  sharper,  hence  the  poles  on  the 
curves  were  closer  than  on  the  main  line.  The  poles  were  all  less 
than  20  ins.  in  diameter,  so  the  holes  were  made  2  ft.  in  diameter. 
There  were  64  poles,  and  only  a  few  of  the  holes  were  deeper  than 
6  ft.  About  19  cu.  ft.  were  excavated  from  each  hole,  no  under- 
ground braces  being  used.  This  made  45  cu.  yds.  excavated  from 
the  64  holes.  The  cost  of  digging  the  holes  was: 

Foreman    $   9.00 

Laborers    40.50 

Total     $49.50 

The  unit  cost  was  as  follows: 

Per  cu.  yd.  Per  hole. 

Foreman    $0.20  $0.14 

Laborers    0.90  0.65 

Total    $1.10  $0.79 

The  cost  per  lineal  foot  of  single  track  for  the  digging  was 
2.2  cts. 

Group  V. — This  was  side  pole  construction  for  single  track,  using 
a  bracket  made  of  pipe,  on  the  pole.  There  were  5,700  lin.  ft.  of 
this  construction,  the  poles  being  spaced  about  80  ft.  apart.  Only  a 
few  of  the  holes  were  deeper  than  6  ft.,  but,  as  the  poles  were  large, 
the  holes  were  3V2  ft.  in  diameter.  The  bracing  blocks  were  used 
for  these  poles.  An  average  of  36  cu.  ft.  was  excavated  from  each 
hole,  and,  as  there  were  69  holes,  92  cu.  yds.  were  excavated. 

The  cost  of  digging  the  holes  was: 

Foreman    $12.00 

Laborers     54.00 

Total     .  $66.00 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


This  gives  a  unit  cost  of : 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Foreman     . $0.13 

Laborers 0.59 


Per  hole. 

$0.18 
0.78 

$0.96 


Total     $0.72 

The  cost  per  lin.  ft.  of  single  track  was  1.2  cts. 
A  comparison  of  the  cost  of  each  group  is  shown  in  the  follow- 
ing table,  also  the  average  cost  for  the  entire  job : 


Group  I 

Cost  per 
hole. 
$1  50 

Group  II 

1  21 

Group  III  .  . 

1  33 

Group  IV    .  .  . 

0.79 

Group  V 

0  96 

Average    .... 

.  .  .  .        1.24 

Cost  per 

cu.  yd. 

$0.60 

1.16 

0.81 

1.10 

0.72 

0.82 


Cost  per  lin.  ft. 

Double  track.     Single  track. 


$0.026 
0.023 


0.0245 


$0.025 
0.022 
0.012 
0.0235' 


*Bracket  construction   (Group  V)   left  out  of  this  average. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  cost  per  hole  varied  directly  with  the 
size  of  the  hole.  Adding  to  the  diameter  and  the  depth  increased 
the  cost.  The  cost  per  cubic  yard  was  high  when  the  hole  was  small 
and  low  when  the  hole  was  large.  The  cost  per  lineal  foot  for  span 
wire  construction  varied  but  little.  Naturally  the  single  track  was 
about  the  same  as  double  track. 

Weight  of  Ashes,  Garbage,  Etc.*— In  the  Transactions  of  the 
American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers  for  April  there  is  a  valuable 
paper  by  Mr.  H.  de  B.  Parsons,  entitled  "Disposal  of  Municipal 
Refuse  and  Rubbish  Incineration."  From  that  paper  we  have  ab- 
stracted data  that  may  be  of  use  to  our  readers. 

Mr.  Parsons  gives  the  following  as  average  weights  per  cubic 
yard : 

Lbs.  per  cu.  yd. 

Rubbish  (paper,  rags,  old  furniture,  etc.) 200 

Street    sweepings    850 

Garbage 1,150 

Ashes     1,350 

The  weight  of  ashes  varies  from  1,200  Ibs.  to  1,500  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd. 
Ordinary  household  ashes  contain  about  15%  of  unburned  coal ;  but 
steam-ash  averages  about  24%  to  30%  coal,  the  lower  figure  being 
for  bituminous,  and  the  higher  figure  for  anthracite  coal. 

Mr.  Parsons  states  that  the  mixed  ash  collections  from  New 
York  City  contains  30%  to  35%  combustible  matter. 

Rubbish,  as  ordinarily  piled  in  carts,  or  without  extra  packing, 
weighs  130  Ibs.  to  225  Ibs.  per  cu.  yd.  In  Boston  it  averages  202 
Ibs.  per  cu.  yd. ;  in  New  York  it  averages  about  140  Ibs. 

The  weight  of  street  sweepings  ranges  from  800  Ibs.  to  1,400  Ibs. 
per  cu.  yd.,  depending  upon  the  dry  ness  of  the  weather  and  the  time 
of  collection. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  July  18,  1906. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1793 

A  large  table  is  given  by  Mr.  Parsons  showing  the  average  per 
capita  weights  of  city  refuse  collected  in  different  cities.  From  that 
table  the  following  was  deduced,  showing  the  average  collection  of 
refuse  per  capita  per  day : 

Lbs.  per  day. 

Garbage     0.53 

Street  sweepings 0.50 

Ashes    2.23 

Rubbish 0.21 

Total  per  capita 3.47 

Cost  of  Garbage  Reduction  and  Collection  at  Cleveland,  O.*— The 
city  of  Cleveland,  O.,  owns  and  operates  its  own  garbage  collection 
and  reduction  plant.  This  plant  had  cost  the  city  on  Dec.  31,  1906, 
a  total  sum  of  $181,307,  divided  as  follows: 

Reduction  plant   (incl.   $15,000   bldgs.) $146,297 

Collection  plant 35,010 

Total     $181,307 

In  acquiring  the  plant  the  city  has  assumed  a  debt  of  $155,000  in 
bonds,  the  interest  on  which  is  paid  by  the  city  out  of  general  funds. 
The  reduction  plant  includes  50  acres  ($25,000). 

During  the  year  1900  there  were  collected  and  treated  by  the  city 
plant  69,872,000  IDS.,  or  34,891  tons  of  garbage.  The  cost  of  this 
collection  and  treatment  is  given  in  detail  in  a  report  presented  to 
the  Cleveland  City  Council  by  the  Board  of  Public  Service,  Mr.  W. 
J.  Springborn,  President.  Mr.  Springborn  has  furnished  us  a  copy 
of  this  report  for  examination,  and  from  it  we  have  taken  the 
statistics  given  above. 

The  figures  of  most  value  and  interest,  however,  are  those  show- 
ing by  items  the  income  and  the  operating  expenses  of  the  plant 
for  the  last  calendar  year.  These  figures  are  of  value  particularly 
because  they  give  us  specific  costs  of  collecting  and  of  treating 
garbage  by  the  reduction  process  with  a  well  managed  and  reason- 
ably well  designed  and,  equipped  plant.  Prices  of  supplies  and 
wages  of  labor  are  not  given  and  various  other  important  data  are 
omitted. 

We  give  in  Table  I  the  itemized  operating  expenses  for  collecting' 
and  reducing  34,891  tons  of  garbage  at  Cleveland,  O.,  in  1906.  The 
totals  are  as  they  are  given  in  the  report,  but  the  several  items  have 
been  extended  by  us  to  give  the  unit  costs  as  well  as  the  totals.  It 
may  be  noted  also  that  the  totals  are  given  separately  in  the  report 
for  the  two  half-year  periods,  Jan.  1  to  June  30  and  July  1  to 
Dec.  31 ;  we  have  not  made  this  separation.  The  figures  given  are 
the  actual  costs  of  collecting  and  reducing  the  garbage ;  these  costs 
may  be  summarized  as  follows  : 

Per  ton. 

Collection    $2.127 

Reduction,  per  ton 2.385 

Extraordinary   expenses    0.253 

Total $4.765 

* Engineering-Contracting,  May  2,  1907. 


1794 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


This  total,  it  is  to  be  noted,  does  not  include  interest  on  the  bonds, 
which  at  4%  would  be  $6,200,  or  nearly  18  cts.  per  ton  of  garbage 
handled ;  nor  does  it  include  any  charge  for  general  administration 
expenses,  a  wholly  indeterminate  sum.  Adding  the  interest  charges 
brings  the  total  cost  per  ton  to  $4.945. 

The  net  cost  to  the  city  of  collection  and  reduction  is  of  course 
a  less  amount  since  the  reduction  process  preserves  the  grease  and 
other  salable  products,  which  are  disposed  of  and  constitute  a  source 

TABLE  I. — ITEMIZED  COST  OF   OPERATING  GARBAGE  COLLECTION  AND 
REDUCTION  PLANT  AT  CLEVELAND,  O. 

Total.  Per  ton. 

Labor  at  plant $  43,732  $1.254 

Coal    at    plant 19,980  0.572 

Superintendence   and   clerk 3,363  0.096 

Repairs  and  renewals .  4,763  0.136 

Press    cloths    2,565  0.073 

Insurance    288  0.008 

Office  supplies 146  0.004 

Oil,    waste,    light,    water,    etc 5,113  0.146 

Press  racks    806  0.023 

Taxes 346  0.009 

Commission,    analysis,    etc 826  0.023 

Freight,   purchase   dead  animals 1,455  0.041 

Total    reduction    expenses $  83,383         $2.385 

Labor,    teamster,    etc 43,829  1.256 

Feed     10,991  0.315 

Freight  on  garbage 5,285  0.151 

Superintendence   and   clerk 2,870  0.082 

Shoeing,   etc 2,431  0.069 

Harness  repairs  and  renewals 1,204  0.034 

Painting  garbage  cars 919  0.026 

Repair  cars  and  wagons. . 4,280  0.123 

Rent  and   taxes 473  0.014 

Insurance     450  0.012 

Oil,  light,  telephone,  etc 1,601  0.045 

Total  collection  expenses $  74,334         $2.127 

Auditing     150  0.004 

Loss  of   horses 1,473  0.042 

Depreciation  reduction  plant,  at  10%  ....  3,382  0.097 

Depreciation  collection  plant,  at  10%...  3,351  0.095 

Depreciation  new  reduction   equipment..  536  0.015 

Total  extraordinary  expenses $     8,892          $0.253 

Grand   total   operating  expenses. ..  .$166,609         $4.765 

of  income  which  is  credited  against  operating  expenses.  There  are 
also  at  Cleveland  minor  sources  of  income.  The  report  mentioned 
above  summarizes  the  income  account  as  follows: 

Product  sold $  96,351 

Inventory   of  product 8,694 

Sale  of  raw  material 354 

Rents    

Miscellaneous  revenue 1,465 

Total    income c $106,991 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1795 

We  have  then  the  following  net  cost  to  the  city  of  treating  one  ton 
of  garbage : 

Total  cost  of  disposal,  per  ton $4.945 

Total   income  from  operation,  per  ton 3.07 

Net  cost  of  disposal,  per  ton $1.875 

It  will  be  seen  by  referring  to  Table  I  that  the  total  cost  of  re- 
duction proper  was  $2.385  per  ton,  not  including  depreciation  and 
interest  on  cost.  Adding  these  two  items  we  get  a  cost  of  about 
$2.62  per  ton,  so  that  the  income  for  operation  gives  a  profit  on  re- 
duction alone  of  45  cts.  per  ton.  These  figures  are  significant,  not  as 
specific  guides  as  to  the  cost  and  profit  of  reduction,  but  as  indi- 
cating that  the  reduction  process  of  garbage  disposal  may  be  made 
self-supporting. 

The  income  from  operation  comes  chiefly  from  the  sale  of  product. 
The  nature  and  amount  of  this  product  are  indicated  by  Table  II, 
rearranged  from  figures  given  in  the  report.  In  addition  to  the 
character  and  quantities  of  materials  produced  for  sale  the  table 
shows  the  prices  fetched  by  these  materials  in  the  market.  It  is 
interesting  to  note  that  the  amount  of  grease  per  ton  of  garbage 
treated  was  61.05  Ibs.,  or  3.06%. 

In  considering  the  figures  given  it  is  important  to  remember  that 
they  are  a  record  of  an  individual  case.  They  are  interesting  as 
being  almost  the  first  and  certainly  the  most  complete  published 
figures  of  the  cost  of  garbage  disposal  by  reduction,  and  for  this 
reason  they  have  been  given. 

TABLE  II. — SHOWING  CHARACTER  AND  VALUE  OF  SALABLE 
PRODUCT    FROM    CLEVELAND,    O.,    GARBAGE 

REDUCTION  PLANT. 
Article. 

Grease,    2,140,SOO    Ibs $41,940 

Dry    tankage,    6,282,500    Ibs 13,724 

Pressed   tankage,    2,315,400    Ibs 2,564 

Hair    87 

Tails 45 

Hides 1,493 


Total    $59,853 

Cost  of  Garbage  Disposal,  Milwaukee. — Mr.  Rudoph  Hering  is 
authority  for  the  following  data.  The  weight  of  garbage  is : 

Per  cu.  yd., 
Ibs. 

Ashes  and   rubbish   mixed 1,040 

Dry  manure   970 

Clear    ashes    1,210 

Rubbish  alone    650 

A  horse  produces  22  Ibs.   of  manure  daily. 

In  1906  the  city  had  a  population  of  350,000.  The  garbage  col- 
lected was  48,400  loads,  or  38,500  tons,  of  which  35,300  tons  were 
burned  in  a  furnace.  It  required  160  Ibs.  of  coal  to  burn  a  ton 
of  garbage,  coal  costing  $3.80  per  ton,  which  is  equivalent  to  19  cts. 


17%  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

per  ton  of  garbage.-  There  are  8  tons  of  residual  ash  from  each 
150  tons  of  garbage. 

The  cost  per  ton  in  1906  was: 

Per  ton. 

Collection     $1.66 

Operating  hoist 0.10 

Operating  furnace 124 

Burial 0.01 

Total     $3.01 

The  cost  of  the  crematory  plant  was  approximately  as  follows: 

Buildings     $16,795 

Steel    trestles 3,510 

Hoists     2,900 

Engines  and  dynamos 4,113 

Pump     494 

Chimney    (150  ft.   high) 6,399 

Three    furnaces 27,750 

Patent  rights 12,500- 

Total     $74,461 

Garbage  Incineration,  San  Francisco.— The  garbage  is  cremated 
by  a  private  company  for  20  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  garbage  being  deliv- 
ered by  the  city  at  the  plant.  The  plant  was  built  in  1897  at  a  cost 
of  $75,000,  and  handles  650  cu.  yds.,  or.  about  260  tons  per  day, 
which  is  less  than  half  its  capacity  as  no  force  works  nights. 

The  following  gang  works  11  hrs.   (in  1900)  : 

1  foreman   $  2.50 

1  office    man 2.50 

1  night  man 2.50 

5  firemen,  at  $1.75 8.75 

5  firemen-helpers,    at    $1.50 7.50 

10  men  on  garbage  floor,  at   $1.625 16.25 

Total     $40.00 

This  labor  is  equivalent  to  6  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  or  15  cts.  per  ton, 
but  does  not  include  the  disposal  of  the  ash  and  clinker.  There  were 
169,200  cu.  yds.  of  garbage  burned  in  1899. 

Cost  of  Removing  Ashes. — The  average  cost  of  removing  ashes, 
exclusive  of  dump  maintenance,  at  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  in  1906,  was 
$0.353  per  cu.  yd.  The  average  weight  of  a  cubic  yard  of  ashes  was 
921  Ibs.  The  average  cost  of  maintenance  of  dumps,  ashes,  scrapings 
and  sweepings  was  $0.1073  per  team  load.  A  team  load  weighed 
3,683  Ibs.,  the  average  weight  of  the  wagon  being  2,100  Ibs. 

Cost  of  Tile  Drains. — Clay  tiles  for  drainage  purposes  are  usually 
round  in  section,  and  are  usually  made  in  1-ft.  lengths.  In  soil  that 
can  be  spaded,  a  special  ditching  spade  should  be  used.  The  blade 
of  this  type  of  spade  is  narrow  and  very  long  (18  ins.),  and 
strongly  curved  forward  to  give  greater  stiffness.  With  such  a 
spade,  a  trench  5  ft.  deep,  and  .not  more  than  15  ins.  wide  at  the 
top,  can  be  dug.  Trenches  3  ft.  deep  are  10  to  12  ins.  wide  on  top, 
and  are  taken  out  in  two  spadings,  or  benches.  The  bottoms  of  the 
trenches  are  shaped  so  as  to  fit  the  tile,  by  using  a  tile  hoe  or  scoop 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1797 

of  proper  shape,  different  widths  being  used  for  different  sizes  of 
tile.  The  tiles  are  laid  by  a  man  standing  on  the  surface  of  the 
ground,  using  a  tile  hook  for  the  purpose  of  placing  the  tiles  in  the 
trench.  The  trench  is  backfilled  by  a  team  dragging  a  plow  pro- 
vided with  a  long  evener,  so  that  there  is  one  horse  on  each  side  of 
the  trench. 

Mr.  C.  G.  Elliott  gives  the  following  as  the  actual  cost  of  drain- 
ing an  80-acre  farm  in  Illinois: 

Tile. Cost  per  lin.  ft. 

Size,  Lin.  Depth,  Tile,  Laying,  Total, 

ins.               ft.  ft.  cts.  cts.  cts.  Total. 

3 7,030  3  1.32  2.00  3.32  $233.40 

4 8,280  3ya  2.00  2.00  4.00  331.20 

5 850  4  3.00  2.42  5.42  46.07 

6 2,700  5  4.00  3.66  7.66  206.82 

7 1,000  5  6.00  3.72  9.72  97.20 


Total,  80  acres,  at  $11.43  per  acre $914.69 

The  cost  of  "laying,"  as  above  given,  includes  the  cost  of  digging 
the  trench,  laying  the  pipe  and  backfilling.  The  men  were  paid  $2  a 
day,  being  skilled  diggers  and  tile  layers.  The  soil  was  a  black 
loam  2%  ft.  thick,  under  which  was  a  yellow  clay  subsoil. 

For  tile  up  to  6  ins.  diameter,  Elliott  estimates  1%  cts.  per  lin. 
ft.  for  labor  of  trenching  3  ft.  deep  and  laying  the  tile ;  and  he 
allows  0.3  ct.  per  lin.  ft.  for  backfilling. 

The  manufacturers  of  tile  do  not  have  uniform  list  prices  from 
which  discounts  are  given.  The  following  net  prices  are  quoted 
(1905)  for  New  York  delivery  in  carload  lots: 

Weight,  Net  price  per 

Size  of  drain  tile,  ins.  Ibs.  per  ft.  ft.,  cts. 

2 3  1.45 

2ya 4  1.72 

3 5  2.18 

4 7  3.04 

5 9  3.93 

6 12  5.38 

8 19  8.20 

10 28  14.50 

12 40  18.80 

Tile  drains  are  frequently  vised  for  road  drainage.  In  such  cases 
the  trench  is  usually  filled  part  way  up  with  broken  stone  or  gravel, 
the  cost  of  which  must  be  included  in  the  bidding  price  per  lin.  ft. 
of  drain.  Tile  collars  to  be  used  at  joints  are  occasionally  specified, 
but  they  are  of  questionable  value,  and  are  rarely  used  in  land 
drainage.  On  roadwork  done  by  the  author,  the  cost  of  laying  4-in. 
tile  in  a  trench  was  *4  ct.  per  lin.  ft.,  exclusive  of  digging  the  trench 
and  filling  with  gravel.  The  man  laying  tile  received  16  cts.  per  hr., 
and  he  averaged  640  ft.  laid  per  10-hr,  day. 

In  New  Jersey  roadwork,  where  tile  drains  are  used,  the  4-in.  tiles 
are  frequently  specified  to  be  laid  on  a  1-in.  yellow  pine  plank,  6  ins. 
wide,  in  a  trench  2  ft.  deep.  If  plank  costs  $20  per  M  delivered  this 
item  adds  1  ct.  per  lin.  ft.  The  average  bidding  price  in  Ne\V 


1798  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

Jersey   has   been   about   12    cts.   per   lin.    ft.    for   a    4-in.   tile   drain 
complete. 

Weight  of  Drain  Tile. — Porous  or  farm  tile  laid  3  or  4  ft.  deep  on 
one  or  both  sides  of  the  roadway  is  the  best  method  of  securing 
underdrainage  for  highways.  Tile  may  be  had  from  3  to  30  ins.  in 
diameter.  The  smaller  sizes  are  usually  1  ft.  long  and  the  larger 
sizes  are  2  or  2^  ft.  long.  The  accompanying  table  shows  the 
weight  per  foot  and  the  average  carload  for  various  sizes  of  tile : 

Weight  Av.  carload, 

per  ft.,  Ibs.  No.  pieces. 

4-in.  tile 6  6500 

5-in.  tile 8  5,000 

6-in.  tile 11  4000 

7-in.  tile 14  3,000 

8-in.  tile 18  1200 

10-in.  tile 25  800 

12-in.  tile 33  500 

14-in.  tile 43  400- 

15-in.  tile 50  300 

16-m.  tile 53  250 

18-in.  tile 70  200 

20-in.  tile 83  166 

22-in.  tile 100  160 

24-in.  tile 112  150 

30-in.  tile 192  65 

Prices  of  Tile  Drains  in  Place.*— Table  III  was  compiled  by  Mr. 
George  M.  Thomson,  County  Surveyor  of  Green  County,  Iowa,  to 
facilitate  the  making  of  estimates  on  county  ditches.  Mr.  Thomson 
writes  us  that  the  table  agrees  very  closely  with  bids  received  dur- 
ing the  last  two  years  for  doing  such  work  in  Greene  County.  The 
prices  given  in  the  table  are  for  excavating  the  trench,  laying  the  tile 
and  refilling  the  trench.  The  prices  given  are  per  foot  deep  and  rod 
long.  For  instance,  suppose  the  drain  is  to  be  7.15  ft.  deep  and  is 
to  be  laid  with  12-in.  tile.  In  the  column  under  7  ft.  and  opposite 
12  ins.  will  be  found  40  cts.,  the  price  per  foot  deep;  then  7.15  X  40 
=  $2.86,  the  price  per  rod  for  12-in.  tile  laid  7.15  ft.  deep. 

Cost  of  Digging  a  Trench  and  Laying  Tile  Drain.f— In  laying  some 
tiles  for  the  drainage  of  a  wagon  road  a  trench  2  ft.  wide  on  the 
top  and  1  ft.  on  the  bottom,  with  an  average  depth  of  3  ft.,  was 
excavated.  The  tiles  used  were  4-in.  and  8-in.  They  were  laid  in 
the  trench  and  broken  stone  placed  around  them,  and  over  them, 
before  backfilling  the  trench.  This  allows  the  water  to  enter  the 
tiles  much  easier  than  when  dirt  is  put  around  them.  In  all,  7,500 
lin.  ft.  of  trench  was  dug. 

There  were  excavated  1,250  cu.  yds.  from  the  trench,  75  cu.  yds. 
being  rock.  The  rock  was  all  in  the  bottom  of  the  trench,  some- 
times running  across  the  bottom,  while  in  some  places  it  was  only 
found  on  one  side  of  the  trench.  Some  of  it  was  loosened  with  bars 
and  picks,  but  the  most  of  the  rock  had  to  be  blasted.  The  rock  ex- 
cavated was  broken  up  by  hand  into  about  2-in.  ring  stone,  and 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Jan.  22,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.   16,  1908. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  (798 


.joinoinoinr-oinoinoooeooinoinom 
j£<£>noc-c~ooooooa5CiOOi-iiH<MeoooTt<Tj<ir5u3 


jjinoinoincxMinoinoincooocooinOin 

i£u5COtC>t-t-OOOOOOO5a>OOT-lT-IC<ICOCO-'fTt< 


•oinoinoinc-oinoinooocoooinoinom 
^min'iC'^t^t— t^oooo^i^iOOi— (T-HC^COCO^I^ 


,jino>noino<Minoinomeooocoou5OinO 
;£-.*iinin<io?oc-t-t-ooooaiOiOOT-iiNie<icoeo-'* 


•oinoinoint-oinoinoooeoooinoinom 
^rti-^imm«ci«o»c~t-ooooos«ooi-(irqwfoco 


ft 

oc'< 


oo  oo  CT>  os  o  r-i 


tinoinoinotMinoinOeocooocooinomo 


.omoinoint-oinoinTHoocoooinoinom 


^  s 
1*3 


1800  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

was  used  around  the  tiles,  very  little  stone  being-  purchased  for  this 
purpose. 

The  wages  paid  on  the  job  for  a  9-hr,  day  were  $3.50  for  foremen, 
$1.35  and  $1.40  for  laborers,  and  75  cts.  for  water  boys.  One  fore- 
man and  one  gang  of  16  men  worked  for  9  days,  and  the  job  was 
completed  by  2  foremen  and  26  men,  working  10  additional  days. 

The  total  labor  cost  for  excavating  the  trench,  breaking  up  the 
stone,  laying  the  tile,  and  placing  broken  stone  around  it,  and  back- 
filling the  trench  was  $674.15,  or  52  cts,  per  cu.  yd.  of  trench. 

The  tile  laying  was  done  by  one  man  and  an  assistant,  who 
wheeled  the  tiles  and  laid  them  alongside  of  the  trench,  the  tile 
layer  then  placing  them.  These  two  men,  in  a  half  day,  could  lay 
tiles  in  the  trench  that  the  entire  gang  had  dug  during  a  day.  After 
they  had  laid  the  tiles,  with  the  assistance  of  a  few  additional  men, 
they  did  the  backfilling  of  the  trench.  The  labor  cost  of  placing 
the  tiles  was  $26.14,  making  a  cost  of  0.35  ct.  per  lin.  ft.  The  cost 
per  lin.  ft.  for  excavating,  breaking  rock  and  backfilling  was  8.6 
cts.,  making  a  total  cost  per  lin.  ft  of  the  completed  drain  of 
about  9  cts. 

Cost  of  Farm  Drainage. — Several  excellent  articles  on  the  methods 
and  cost  of  farm  drainage  appeared  in  Engineering-Contracting, 
Dec.  4,  1907,  Oct.  21,  Nov.  4  and  Nov.  18,  1908,  Oct.  13  and  Oct.  20, 
1909.  These  articles  occupied  about  25  pages,  of  which  the  follow- 
ing is  a  very  brief  summary. 

Mr.  L.  G.  Hicks  states  that,  in  draining  a  farm  near  Omaha,  the 
cost  of  tile  drainage  was  $23  per  acre.  Wages  were  $1.50  per 
10-hr,  day  and  board,  the  board  amounting  to  $0.50,  making  a  total 
of  $2  per  day.  Material  was  black  loam,  which  cost  21  cts.  per  cu. 
yd.  to  excavate  from  ditches  3%  ft.  deep  and  12  to  15  ins.  wide. 
The  ditch  was  shaped  up  with  a  tile  spoon,  at  a  cost  of  2%  cts.  per 
lin.  ft.,  which  is  equivalent  to  adding  another  20  cts.  per  cu.  yd. 
The  backfilling  was  done  by  two  men  and  two  horses  with  a  plow 
at  a  cost  of  1  ct.  per  cu.  yd.  Hence  the  total  cost  was  42  cts.  per 
cu.  yd.  The  cost  of  laying  the  tile  was  as  follows : 

Per  100  ft., 
cts. 

3   or  4-in.   tile 

6-in.    tile 6.7 

8-in.    tile 10 

With  a  tile  hook  a  man  lays  100  ft.  of  3-in.  tile  in  15  mins.,  or  at 
the  rate  of  4,000  ft.  per  day. 

The  cost  of  this  work  on  a  75-acre  farm  where  25,150  lin.  ft.  of 
tile  were  laid  was : 

Per  acre.     Per  lin.  ft,  cts. 

Surveys $   1.46  0.43 

Labor     12.82  3.82 

Material   8.55  2.55 

Total    ~$2~2~.  182  ~OO 

A  476-acre  "experimental  farm"  in  Minnesota  was  drained,  using 
4,  6  and  8-in.  tile.  Farm  laborers  received  $2  a  day,  and  team  with 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1801 

driver  was  rated  at  $4.50  per  day.  The  cost  of  loading,  unloading 
and  hauling  was  80  cts.  per  ton  for  the  first  mile,  plus  30  cts.  per  ton 
for  each  additional  mile,  load  averaging  2*4  tons  over  ordinary 
fields.  The  contract  price  for  trenching  (by  hand),  tile  laying  and 
backfilling  was  $2.42  per  100  lin.  ft.  of  trench  3  ft.  deep,  plus  6  cts. 
for  each  additional  foot  of  depth.  The  average  trench  work  done 
by  one  man,  at  $2  per  day,  was: 

Lin.  ft. 

3-ft.  trench 100 

3.5-ft.  trench   95 

5-ft.  trench 80 

After  a  man  had  acquired  some  experience,  4  to  6-in.  tile  were  laid 
with  a  tile  hook  at  the  rate  of  2,000  ft.  in  10  hrs.,  where  the  trench 
was  in  good  condition  and  the  tile  convenient. 

After  the  tile  were  laid  they  were  covered  with  earth  4  to  6  ins. 
deep,  called  "blinding."  A  man  astride  of  the  trench  cuts  off  earth 
from  each  side  with  a  tile  spade.  This  blinding  is  done  at  the  rate 
of  4,000  ft.  in  10  hrs.  The  blinding  holds  the  tile  in  place. 

The  backfilling  was  done  in  three  ways:  (1)  By  hand;  (2)  by 
drag  scraper ;  ( 3 )  by  plow  and  road  machine.  The  costs  were  as 
follows : 

A  trench  3  ft.  deep  was  backfilled  by  hand  at  a  cost  of  $0.56  per 
100  lin.  ft,  wages  being  $2.00  per  10-hr,  day. 

A  trench  3%  ft.  deep  was  backfilled  by  a  drag  scraper,  two  horses 
and  two  men,  for  $0.60  per  100  lin.  ft.  of  trench. 

A  similar  trench  was  backfilled  for  $0.32  per  100  lin.  ft.,  using  a 
plow  first  and  a  road  machine  afterward.  Two  teams  and  drivers 
were  used  on  the  plow,  one  team  on  each  side  of  the  trench.  A  long 
evener  was  used,  and  the  plow  shifted  as  desired.  After  two  round 
trips,  the  same  gang  completed  the!  filling  by  means  of  a  road 
machine. 

In  Illinois  the  average  depth  to  lay  tile  is  about  3  ft.,  and  the  dis- 
tance apart  of  lateral  drains  is  about  as  follows : 

Ft.  apart. 

Light,    sandy   soil 150  to  300 

Heavy  loam 75  to  150 

Gumbo 30  to  100 

The  cost  in  dollars  per  acre  for  tile  drains  may  be  roughly  esti- 
mated by  dividing  1,500  by  the  distance  apart  (in  feet)  of  the  lateral 
drains.  Thus,  if  the  drains  are  150  ft.  apart,  the  cost  per  acre  is 
1,500 -f- 150  =  $10. 

In  Utah,  40  acfes  of  irrigated  farm  land  were  drained,  using  4, 
5  and  6-in.  tile,  laid  4  to  5  ft.  deep.  The  cost  was  $13.50  per  acre. 
There  were  5,300  lin.  ft.  of  tile  used,  at  the  following  average  cost : 

Per  100  lin.  ft. 

Tile    $   6.40 

Laobr   3.80 

Total $10.20 

Mr.  Jas.  T.  Taylor  gives  the  following  relative  to  pipes  laid  in 
1891  for  irrigating  4,200  acres  in  the  Alessandro  District,  California. 


1802  HANDBOOK   OF   COST   DATA. 

The  pipes  were  vitrified  sewer  pipes  and  cement  pipes,  6  to  12  ins. 
diam.,  and  these  pipe  lines,  including  trenching,  etc.,  cost  $76,300 
for  40  miles  of  pipe,  or  $18.15  per  acre  for  the  lateral  system.  This 
is  equivalent  to  50  ft.  of  lateral  pipe  per  acre,  at  an  average  cost  of 
36  cts.  per  ft.  laid. 

Cost  of  Tile  Trenching  With  a  Machine.*— A  machine  made  by 
the  Buckeye  Traction  Ditcher  Co.,  of  Findlay,  Ohio,  was  used  on  the 
Northwest  Experiment  Farm,  University  of  Minnesota,  in  1903. 
The  machine  dug  a  trench  14%  ins.  wide  and  4%  ft.  deep.  It  had 
an  8-hp.  boiler  and  consumed  450  Ibs.  of  coal  and  4  bbls.  of  water 
per  day.  It  dug  34,000  lin.  ft.  of  trench  in  45  days  actual  working 
time,  or  744  lin.  ft.  per  day.  The  men  who  handled  the  machine 
were  inexperienced. 

The  following  was  the  cost : 

Per  100  ft. 

Labor   running   machine $0.45 

Coal  at   $7.50  per  ton 0.19 

Water 0.13 

Oil     0.01 

Repairs   0.13 

Total   ditching    $0.91 

Laying  tile 0.18 

Blinding 0.05 

Incidentals 0.09 

Total    $1.23 

The  price  of  the  machine  was  $1,400. 

Although  the  machine  was  not  well  handled  and  had  not  at  that 
time  (1903)  been  perfected,  it  made  a  very  creditable  record  of  cost, 
as  contrasted  with  hand  work,  for  the  latter  cost  $3.88  per  100  lin. 
ft.  on  the  same  farm. 

Two  men  operated  the  machine. 

I  recently  saw  a  machine  of  the  same  make  and  size  on  a  farm 
in  New  Jersey  where  it  was  averaging  2,000  lin.  ft.  of  trench 
(15  ins.  x  3  ft.)  in  10  hrs. 

Cost  of  Laying  Small  Gas  Mains  on  Six  Jobs. f— Mr.  W.  H.  Mat- 
lack  is  author  of  the  following: 

In  this  article  the  cost  is  given  of  laying  4-in.,  6-in.  and  10-in.  gas 
mains  on  6  different  jobs,  there  being  a  total  of  10,924  lin.  ft.  of 
pipe  laid.  The  10-in.  main  was  first  laid,  the  6-in.  and  4-in.  follow- 
ing. The  work  was  done  in  the  months  of  May  and  June,  1908. 
The  weather  during  that  spring  was  unusually  wet  and  all  costs  are 
a  little  higher  than  they  should  be,  yet  the  tables  will  give  a  fair 
idea  of  what  work  will  cost  under  such  conditions. 

The  ditch  averaged  3  ft.  6  ins.  in  depth  and  was  28  ins.  wide. 
The  soil  was  half  and  half  sandy  clay  and  gumbo,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  about  150  ft.  of  quicksand  encountered  in  laying  the  10-in. 
line.  The  10-in.  line  was  almost  all  laid  on  rainy  days  in  a  wet  ' 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  4,  1908. 
^Engineering-Contracting,  March  31,  1909. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1803 

ditch.  From  1,500  to  2,000  ft.  of  the  ditch  were  one-third  full  of 
water  at  one  time,  which  caused  it  to  cave,  and  about  900  ft.  had 
to  be  redug,  aside  from  bailing  the  water  with  buckets  from  some 
2,000  ft.  of  it. 

A  creek  was  crossed  with  the  10-in.  line.  Here  lead  joints  were 
used,  but  all  other  joints  on  the  six  jobs  were  made  with  cement. 
The  following  fittings  were  put  in  on  the  10-in.  line :  Three  10-in. 
drips,  thirteen  5-in.  tees,  one  10-in.  cross,  and  one  10  x  16-in. 
reducer. 

The  6-in.  line  No.  1  was  laid  next  and  under  similar  conditions, 
and  the  following  fittings  used:  Three  6-in.  crosses  and  three 
6  x  4-in.  tees. 

The  4-in.  lines  were  put  in  when  the  weather  was  good  and  the 
soil  dry.  Records  kept  in  laying  the  4-in.  pipe  showed  that  3  ft.  of 
yarn  would  make  four  joints  and  that  one  sack  of  cement  would 
caulk  and  cap  32  joints.  Lehigh  Portland  cement  was  used,  and 
tests  previously  made  showed  tensile  strengths  of  from  500  to  600 
Ibs.,  per  sq.  in. 

The  gang  averaged  25  men.  The  best  day's  work  consisted  of  52 
lengths  of  6-in.  pipe  and  29  lengths  of  4-in.  pipe,  the  ditch  being 
opened,  pipe  laid  and  caulked  in  10  hours.  In  backfilling  the  trench 
the  earth  was  hand  tamped  in  from  6  to  8-in.  layers.  The  team  was 
used  in  handling  pipe  and  other  supplies  from  the  plant  to  the  job, 
an  average  distance  of  two  miles. 

The  following  wages  were  paid:  Foreman,  27%  cts.  per  hour; 
caulkers,  22  to  25  cts.  per  hour;  laborers,  17  cts.;  team  and  driver, 
45  cts.;  watchman,  17%  cts.,  and  water  boy,  15  cts.  per  hour.  A 
night  watchman  was  employed  throughout  the  job  and  a  man  for 
Sundays. 

The  cost  of  the  work,  divided  into  various  items  of  labor  for  each 
lineal  foot,  is  as  follows: 

Job    No "A"  "1"  "2" 

Size   4-in.  6-in.  10-in. 

Total   ft.   laid 1,412  1,302  5,781 

Team   and    driver $0.007  $0.014  $0.023 

Foreman    0.007  0.005  0.007 

Superintendence    0.005  0.007 

Excavation    0.040  0.033  0.058 

Caulking    0.004  0.007  0.012 

Backfilling     0.040  0.032  0.058 

Sundry  expenses    0.002  0.006 

Total  cost  per  ft $0.098          $0.096          $0.171 

Job  No "B"  "C"  "D" 

Size .     4-in.  6-in.  6-in. 

Total  ft.  laid .- 595  841  993 

Team  and  driver ...$0.009  $0.011  $0.120 

Foreman    0.009  0.003  0.150 

Superintendence   0.005            

Excavation    0.052  0.409  0.500 

Caulking     0.007  0.009  0.110 

Backfilling     0.050  0.125  0.137 

Total  cost  per  ft $0.127          $0.125          $0.137 

The  sundry  expense  item  is  for  the  watchman  and  water  boy. 


1804  HANDBOOK    OP   COST   DATA. 

All  the  pipe  was  tested  before  going  into  the  ditch  and  all  leaky 
joints  were  cut  out  and  redriven.  There  were  18  such  joints  on  the 
10-in.  line  due  to  rain  over  night  on  green  joints.  After  the  pipes 
were  all  laid  they  were  all  tested.  The  10-in.  line  was  tested  from 
four  parts.  The  others  were  tested  once.  This  testing,  which  was 
all  in  the  air,  was  done  with  an  old  style  hand  pump  that  required 
10  men  to  operate.  In  testing,  12  men  were  used,  10  to  pump  up  the 
line,  1  to  snap  joints  and  1  to  look  after  the  gage.  The  time  con- 
sumed by  a  test  varied  from  45  mins.  to  1%  hrs.  This  time  is  dis- 
tributed as  well  as  possible  between  the  laborers  and  caulkers,  as  all 
took  a  hand. 

After  completing  the  work  a  final  test  was  made,  as  shown  by 
Fig.  5.  The  piping  was  placed  and  a  meter  set ;  the  pressure  was 
then  equalized  by  running  gas  from  an  old  10-in.  line  through  the 
1-in.  line  and  into  the  new  line,  this  line  being  opened  at  B  for 
15  mins.  At  the  end  of  this  time  B  was  closed  and  A  opened, 
allowing  the  gas  to  pass  through  the  meter  and  to  register.  After 

„  B  c. 


-  £00  fa 

Fig.   5. 

the  register  was  made,  which  took  almost  10  mins.,  the  meter  was 
read  and  noted,  then  left  standing  for  2%  hrs.  At  the  end  of  that 
time  it  was  reread  and  finding  the  reading  to  be  the  same  as  at  the 
time  of  the  first  registering,  it  was  known  that  no  gas  had  passed 
through  the  meter,  hence  there  were  no  leaks  in  the  new  line.  The 
following  day  men  were  sent  along  the  line  and  all  drip  leads  were 
opened,  allowing  all  air  to  pass  out. 

Cost  of  Laying  Wrought  Iron,  Screw-Joint  Pipe  for  Compressed 
Air  Main. — Mr.  E.  E.  Harper  gives  the  following: 

The  work  consisted  of  laying  7,000  ft.  of  8-in.  and  4,000  ft.  of  6-in. 
wrought-iron,  screw-joint  pipe  for  a  compressed  air  line  carrying 
80  to  90  Ibs.  pressure.  The  work  was  all  performed  by  common 
labor,  none  of  the  men  being  experienced  in  pipe  laying. 

The  greatest  cause  of  delay  in  laying  screwed  pipe  is  the  diffi- 
culty in  getting  each  successive  length  of  pipe  into  line  and  keeping 
it  there  until  the  first  threads  take  hold  and  the  pipe  begins  to  screw 
together.  To  overcome  this  difficulty  a  cradle  for  supporting  the 
pipe  at  the  joint,  a  jack  for  adjusting  and  supporting  the  outer  end 
of  the  pipe  and  a  straight-edge  for  lining  the  pipe  were  devised. 
The  cradle  holds  the  threaded  end  of  the  pipe  in  position  to  enter  the 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA 


1805 


sleeve  coupling  on  the  last  joint  laid ;  the  jack  allows  both  vertical 
and  horizontal  adjustment  of  the  joint  of  pipe ;  and  the  straight- 
edge shows  when  the  pipe  is  in  line  ready  to  screw  together.  The 
cradle  was  simply  a  wood  block,  8x8  ins.  x  24  ins.  in  length,  with  a 
groove  having  a  4-in.  radius  cut  in  its  top.  The  jack  is  shown  by 
Fig.  6  and  the  straight-edge  by  Fig.  7.  The  movable  block  on  the 
straight-edge  is  necessary  because  it  is  almost  impossible  to  make 
a  12-ft.  straight-edge  that  will  remain  true  for  more  than  a  day. 


Fig.   6. — Jack. 

These  devices  saved  fully  50%  over  the  crude  and  unsatisfactory 
method  of  using  blocks  to  hold  the  pipe  in  line.  There  was  no 
straining  and  lifting  to  hold  the  pipe  in  place,  and  as  the  pipes 
were  started  together  straight  there  were  no  stripped  threads  and 
bad  joints,  and  the  pipe  made  up  so  easily  that  one  man  with  a  pair 
of  3-ft.  tongs  often  screwed  an  8-in.  pipe  half  way  up  ;  it  was  then 
completed  by  four  men  using  two  pairs  of  tongs  with  8-ft.  handles. 


~nq.-Contr 


C/oss  Section 

A-B      , 
(Enlarged) 


Fig.    7.— Straight   Edge. 


The  threads,  both  male  and  female,  were  cleaned  with  wire 
brushes.  Dixon's  pipe  joint  compound  was  used  on  all  screwed 
joints.  Ring  gaskets  of  1/16-in.  Rainbow  packing  were  used  on 
flange  joints,  the  gasket  being  pasted  to  one  flange  with  coal-tar 
roofing  paint,  which  held  it  in  position  while  the  joint  was  being 
made. 

Six- Inch  Pipe  Line. — The  total  length  of  6 -in.  pipe  was  4,118  ft. 
The  pipe  was  6-in.  lap  welded  casing  weighing  15  Ibs.  per  lin.  ft. 


1806  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

It  was  laid  with  sleeve  couplings,  11%  threads  per  inch,  with  a 
flange  union  every  150  ft.  and  U-bends  for  expansion  every  500  ft. 
The  average  length  of  joints  was  20.1  ft. ;  an  average  of  588.2  ft. 
of  pipe  or  of  29.3  joints,  was  laid  per  10-hr,  day.  The  best  day's 
work  was  1,065  ft.,  or  53  joints,  with  6  men  working  9  hrs.,  making 
177.5  ft.  per  man  ;  the  poorest  day's  work  was  120  ft.,  or  6  joints, 
by  6  men  working  9%  hrs.  The  work  was  done  from  Aug.  15  to  24, 
1907,  in  fair  weather  except,  for  one  day,  when  the  men  worked 
4  hrs.  in  rain  and  laid  22  joints.  The  men  walked  2y2  to  3  miles  to 
and  from  work.  The  average  gang  was:  4.85  men  at  20  cts.  per 
hour,  1  foreman  at  30  cts.  per  hour,  and  1  waterboy  at  10  cts.  per 
hour.  The-  cost  of  pipelaying  was  as  follows  per  100  ft. : 

Per  100  ft. 

Clearing  right  of  way $0.327 

Hauling  and   distributing 1.578 

Blocking  to   grade 0.116 

Constructing  bents 0.450 

Anchors  for  U-bends 2.290 

Painting    0.900 

Tools     0.100 

Testing    0.300 

Laying   3.137 

Surveying  and  superintendence 0.700 

Total $9.898 

The  total  cost  per  foot  exclusive  of  cost  of  pipe  was  9.898  cts., 
or,  say,  10  cts.  The  following  notes  explain  the  work  included  in  the 
various  items : 

Clearing.— Removing  small  brush  for  a  width  of  10  ft. 

Hauling. — The  average  hauls  were  3,000  ft.  over  bad  roads,  steep 
and  rough.  This  item  includes  loading  pipe  on  cars  and  unloading, 
hauling  and  distributing,  including  seven  U-bends.  Teams  and  driv- 
ers got  $3  per  day. 

Blocking. — Includes  temporary  blocking  and  bending  pipe  in  five 
places  by  building  fires  on  it. 

Anchors  for  U-Bends. — Includes  8  piers  at  $12  each,  including 
bolts  and  clamps. 

Bent  Construction. — Includes  carpenter  work  only  on  about  20 
bents,  averaging  3  ft.  in  height  and  made  4  x  6 -in.  stuff. 

Painting. — Includes  cost  of  painting  and  cleaning  pipe  with  wire 
brushes  with  paint  costing  $1  per  gallon  and  labor  at  20  cts.  per 
hour.  The  pipe  was  painted  one  coat. 

Tools. — includes  shopwork  and  depreciation. 

Eight-Inch  Pipe  Line.— The  total  length  of  8-in.  pipe  was  7,101  ft. 
The  pipe  was  8-in.  O.  D.,  lap-welded  casing  weighing  20  Ibs.  per 
foot,  laid  with  sleeve  couplings,  11%  threads  per  inch.  The  average 
length  of  joints  was  19.15  ft.  There  was  a  flange  union  every  150 
ft.,  and  U-bends  for  expansion  every  600  ft.  An  average  of  503.6  ft. 
was  laid  per  day,  of  10  hrs.,  or  26.3  joints.  The  best  day's  work 
was  613  ft.,  or  32  joints,  by  6  men,  including  foreman;  the  poorest 
day's  work  was  380  ft.,  or  20  joints,  by  7  men,  including  foreman. 
The  work  was  done  from  July  2  to  Aug.  5,  1907,  the  weather  being 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1807 

hot   and   sultry,    the   thermometer   ranging   from    85°   to    100°,    and 

averaging  90°  in  shade.     The  average  gang  was:    5.92  men  at  20  cts. 

per  hour,  1  foreman  at  30  cts.  per  hour,  and  1  waterboy  at  10  cts. 

per  hour.     The  cost  was  as  follows  per  100  f t. : 

Per  100  ft. 

Surveying  and  superintendence $   1.000 

Laying   3.580 

Clearing 0.187 

Hauling  and   distributing 1.032 

Blocking  to  grade 1.110 

Constructing  bents   1.069 

Anchors  for  U-bends 2.535 

Painting 1.200 

Tools    0.102 

Testing 0.388 

Total   cost   of  laying $12.203 

Cost  of  pipe 76.400 

Grand  total  cost $88.603 

The  total  cost  per  foot,  exclusive  cost  of  pipe,  was  thus  12.2  cts., 
and  including  cost  of  pipe  88.6  cts.  The  following  notes  explain  the 
work  included  in  the  various  items : 

Clearing. — Removing  small  brush  for  a  width  of  10  ft. 

Hauling. — Includes  12  U-bends,  which  cost  $1  each  to  haul ;  teams 
and  drivers,  30  cts.  per  hour  ;  laborers,  20  cts.  per  hour,  and  fore- 
man, 30  cts.  per  hour. 

Bent  Construction. — Includes  carpenter  work  only  on  about  80 
bents  of  4  x  6-in.  stuff,  spaced  30  ft.  apart  and  ranging  in  height 
from  I  ft.  to  16  ft,  averaging  6  ft.  high. 

Anchors  for  U-Bends. — Includes  12  piers  at  $15  each,  including 
bolts  and  clamps. 

Painting. — Same  as  for  6-in.  pipe. 

Testing. — Includes  laying  and  connecting  200  ft.  of  4-in.  pipe  to 
pump  line.  Tested  to  110  Ibs.  hydraulic  pressure.  Leaks  developed 
in  two  tees  in  line  and  these  were  repaired,  line  tested  again  and 
found  tight.  The  pipe  cost  $76  per  ton  (100  ft.)  f.  o.  b.  McKees- 
port,  and  the  freight  to  Flat  River  was  40  cts.  per  ton. 

Cost  of  Maintaining  Teams — I  have  maintained  teams  at  the  fol- 
lowing cost  per  month  per  team  of  two  horses : 

%   ton  of  hay,  at  $10 $   5.00 

30  bu.  oats,  at  35  cts 10.50 

Straw  for  bedding 1.00 

Shoeing  and  medicine 2.00 

Total     $18.50 

A  generation  ago  there  were  2,000  horses  used  on  the  Brooklyn 
street  railways.  The  cost  of  feeding  each  horse  was  $10  a  month, 
and  the  depreciation  in  value  of  each  horse  was  25%  per  annum. 

Contract  work  is  not  so  severe  as  street  car  work ;  still  the 
annual  depreciation  is  probably  not  less  than  15%.  A  team, 
wagon  and  harness  costing  $300  should  be  charged  with  about  $60 
per  annum  for  -interest  and  depreciation.  When  the  team  is  work- 
ing it  must  be  fed  oats,  when  not  working  it  can  be  fed  on  hay  at 
half  the  usual  cost. 


1808  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  following  gives  the  average  feed  of  horses  and  mules  used 
by  the  H.  C.  Frick  Coke  Co.,  extending  over  a  period  of  6  years: 
500  Ibs.  of  hay,  7  bus.  of  oats,  4  2/5  bus.  of  corn  on  the  ear  per  head 
per  month.  The  daily  feed  of  each  animal  was  two  feeds  of  corn, 
13  ears  to  the  feed  (70  Ibs.  per  bu.),  one  6-qt.  feed  of  oats,  and 
about  16%  Ibs.  of  hay.  Each  animal  averaged  about  13  miles  trav- 
eled per  day  underground,  15  miles  being  the  maximum  10-hr,  day's 
work. 

It  is  not  ordinarily  possible  to  get  more  than  180  days  of  work  per 
annum  out  of  a  contractor's  team  in  the  North,  and  very  frequently 
much  less.  We  may,  therefore,  say  that  $1.50  for  each  day  actually 
worked  by  the  team  will  cover  its  feed,  interest  and  depreciation,  for 
the  year.  If  the  driver  is  paid  only  while  at  work,  then  his  $1.50 
added  to  that  of  the  team  makes  $3  a  day  for  each  day  worked. 

The  cost  of  feeding  25  horses  at  work  building  roads  near  San 
Francisco,  for  a  period  of  12  mos.,  was  as  follows,  per  horse 
p'er  day : 

28  Ibs.  wheat  hay,  at  $15.50  per  ton $0.215 

12  Ibs.  rolled  barley,  at  $24.10  per  ton 0.150 

1%   Ibs.  oats,  at  $27.40  per  ton 0.020 

%   lb.  bran,  at  $21.20  per  ton.  . 0.003 

1%  Ibs.  straw  bedding,  at  $13.80  per  ton 0.009 

Wages,  1  stableman  ($775  for  year),  and  hauling 

forage  ($281  for  year) 0.113 

Total  per  horse  per  day $0.510 

The  above  shows  a  consumption  of  nearly  42  Ibs.  of  feed  per 
horse  per  day,  which  seems  large,  but  is  not  excessive  for  heavy 
draft  horses  working  daily.  A  conservative  estimate  of  the  food 
waste  is  5%. 

A  four-horse  team  averaged  16%  miles  traveled  per  day  over 
fair  macadam  roads  with"  some  5%  grades.  The  load  was  3  short 
tons,  plus  the  0.65-ton  wagon  ;  and  the  haul,  one  way,  was  %  to 
1  mile. 

Cost  of  Horse  Maintenance.*— In  a  report  to  the  Street  Cleaning 
Department  of  Boston,  Mass.,  Mr.  Richard  T.  Fox,  Sanitary  Ex- 
pert, Chicago,  111.,  gives  some  figures  as  to  the  stable  and  yard  ex- 
penses of  that  department  for  1906.  The  following  matter  has  been 
taken  from  that  report.  The  street  cleaning  department  owns  128 
horses,  which  are  used  for  driving  purposes  for  machine  sweeping 
and  the  removal  of  street  dirt.  Of  these  horses  95  are  maintained 
directly  by  the  department  and  33  are  boarded  by  the  Sanitary  De- 
partment. The  net  cost  in  1906  for  rent,  repairs,  shoeing,  veterin- 
ary services,  medicines  and  feed  for  the  128  horses  amounted  to 
$66,283.  The  cost  per  horse  per  year  is  therefore  $517.83  or  $43.15 
per  month.  As  a  comparison  Mr.  Fox  found  that  the  S.  S.  Pierce  & 
Co.,  wholesale  grocers  of  Boston,  paid  $27.65  per  horse  per  month 
for  maintenance,  the  cost  including  shoeing,  veterinary  service  and 
boarding  in  a  public  stable.  Mr.  Fox  considers  that  $19  per  month 
is  a  fair  average  yearly  price  per  horse,  if  maintained  at  private 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Nov.  13,  1907. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1809 

fcxpense.  The  horse  shoeing  bill  for  the  Street  Cleaning  Department 
amounted  to  $33.43  per  year  per  horse  or  $2.78  per  month.  The 
veterinary  services  and  medicine  amounted  to  $17.97  per  horse  per 
year.  In  comparison  with  this  Mr.  Fox  found  that  S.  S.  Pierce 
&  Co.  pay  a  little  less  than  $12  per  year  for  veterinary  service  and 
medicine;  the  Boston  Fire  Department  pays  $12  per  year  per  horse, 
and  the  Knickerbocker  Ice  Co.,  Chicago,  111.,  pays  $5  per  year 
per  horse. 

Cost  of  Maintaining  Horses,  New  York  City.*— A  report  made  by 
the  Parsons-Herring- Whinery  Commission  on  the  cost  of  municipal 
street  cleaning  contains  data  on  horse  maintenance,  of  which  the 
following  is  a  brief  summary.  The  cost  of  maintaining  each  of  1,174 
horses  for  one  year  (1906)  in  Manhattan  and  The  Bronx  was: 

Stable    rental $  41.44 

Labor  at  stables  (hostlers  at  $720  yr.) 237.00 

Feed  and  bedding 171.00 

Shoeing    18.36 

Veterinary 5.63 


Total,  at  $1.30  per  day  (365  days) $473.43 

The  commission  states  that  private  corporations  in  New  York 
City  pay  about  $330  per  year  per  horse  for  the  same  maintenance 
that  costs  the  city  $473. 

Feed  for  Street  Car  Horses. — The  daily  mileage  of  street  car 
horses,  working  in  teams,  is  15  miles  traveled  in  3  hrs.  In  cool 
Weather  this  mileage  may  be  covered  in  one  trip,  but  in  summer 
the  time  should  be  divided.  For  this  sort  of  work  a  horse  weighing 
about  1,100  Ibs.  is  best. 

A  weekly  report  of  feed  should  show. 

Used  during 
-    week.          On  hand. 

Hay    

Straw 

Corn     ........ 

Oats 

Bran 

Salt    

Proportion  of  feeding 

Average  number  of  horses 

Pounds  of  hay  and  meal  per  horse 

Remarks 

Required  during  week 

In  Brooklyn  the  old  horse  car  companies  prescribed  the  following 
feed  per  horse : 

In  summer,  15  Ibs.  of  mixed  grain  ground  (5  Ibs.  corn,  10  Ibs. 
oats).  In  winter,  10  Ibs.  corn  and  5  Ibs.  oats.  About  15  Ibs.  of  cut 
hay  moistened  and  mixed  with  the  meal.  About  4  Ibs.  of  cattle 
salt  to  each  100  horses.  Hours  for  feeding,  5  :30  and  10  a.  m.  and 
4  p.  m.  Quantities  at  each  feed,  10.8  and  12  Ibs.  respectively.  Road 
mileage,  16  miles  per  day;  rest  Sunday.  Average  working  life 
(based  on  20  years  experience)  7  years. 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  May  20,  1908. 


1810  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

In  Providence,  R.  I.,  about  35  Ibs.  of  straw  for  bedding  required 
per  horse  per  month.  Horses  in  groups  of  16  under  the  care  of 
bne  stable  man,  who  also  harnesses  them. 

Cost  of  Maintaining  Farm  Horses  and  of  Raising  Hay  and  Oats  in 
Minnesota.* — The  following  data  should  be  of  value  both  to  the 
highway  engineer,  for  estimating  the  cost  of  hauling,  and  to  the 
contractor  who  may  wish  to  raise  feed  for  his  horses.  The  data 
have  been  abstracted  from  bulletins  Nos.  48  and  73  of  the  U.  S. 
Department  of  Agriculture,  entitled  "The  Cost  of  Producing  Minne- 
sota Farm  Products."  The  bulletins  contain  very  complete  sum- 
maries of  the  results  of  careful  investigations  during  the  years 
1902  and  1907  inclusive,  covering  about  70  farms  in  five  counties 
"of  Minnesota.  These  bulletins  mark  the  beginning  of  the  scientific 
application  of  cost  analysis  to  farming,  and,  so  far  as  we  know, 
are  the  only  records  of  their  kind  in  print. 

The  first  step  in  ascertaining  the  cost  of  producing  crops  is 
to  determine  the  cost  of  a  horse  hour  and  of  a  man  hour.  To 
do  this  the  "route  statisticians"  (assisted  by  the  farmers)  kept 
accurate  records  of  the  number  of  hours  that  each  horse  was 
actually  worked  each  day,  as  well  as  the  number  of  hours  worked 
by  each  man. 

For  the  purpose  of  condensing  the  results,  while  at  the  same 
time  giving  the  data  in  considerable  detail,  we  have  selected  the 
records  of  Rice  county,  where  24  farms  of  about  170  acres  each 
were  recorded.  There  were  5.4  work  horses  (not  including  colts  or 
driving  .horses)  per  farm.  The  time  of  the  farm  owner  was 
counted  as  being  of  no  more  value  than  of  his  hired  men.  The 
following  is  the  average  number  of  hours  worked  per  day  during 
the  years  1902  to  1907,  including  the  time  of  the  farm  owner: 

Week  Days.     Sunday. 
Man.      Horse.     Man. 

January    6.80          1.16          4.85 

February    6.62          1.14          4.80 

March   • 7.57          1.34          4.63 

April  9.88          4.54          4.02 

May     9.03          4.00          3.46 

June    .  9.64          3.11          3.11 

July     9.32          3.44          2.82 

August    10.25          4.78          2.66 

September    11.03          4.07          2.93 

October     9.56          3.86          2.84 

November    9.08          3.05          3.55 

December 7.29          1.55          4.57 

Average   8.94          3.03          3.64 

On  20  farms  in  Lyon  county  (averaging  250  acres  each)  there 
were  6.8  work  horses  per  farm;  and  on  18  farms  in  Norman 
county  (averaging  210  acres  each)  there  were  7  work  horses  per 
farm ;  and  the  average  number  of  hours  worked  was  as  follows : 

Lyon.       Norman. 

Per  week  day  per  man 8.66  8.10 

Per  week  day  per  horse 3.29 

Per  Sunday  per  man 3.05  2.76 


^Engineering-Contracting,  June  2,  1909. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1811 

It  would  appear  that  the  Sunday  work  consisted  mainly  in 
caring  for  the  stock  and  milking  the  cows.  There  were  about  12 
milch  cows  per  farm. 

If  the  3.64  hours  of  Sunday  work  represents  the  average  daily 
time  spent  caring  for  the  stock,  etc.,  it  would  seem  that  this 
accounts  in  large  measure  for  the  small  number  of  hours  worked 
daily  by  each  horse.  Nevertheless,  there  is  a  surprising  loss  of 
horse  time.  According  to  the  bulletins,  this  is  in  part  due  to  the 
practice  on  many  farms  of  having  from  "one  to  three  unnecessary 
horses,"  kept  "mainly  that  they  may  be  available  during  a  few  days 
when  the  crops  were  being  harvested." 

In  round  numbers,  we  may  say  that  each  horse  averaged  only 
1,000  hrs.  worked  per  year,  which  is  equivalent  to  100  days  of  10 
hrs.  each.  The  cost  of  feeding  horses  averaged  $65  per  year 
(1905-1907)  in  Rice  county,  $55  in  Lyon  county,  and  $43  in 
Norman  county.  The  detailed  cost  of  the  feed  in  Rice  county  was 
as  follows  per  horse  during  1905  to  1907  : 

Grain  for  4  winter  mos.,  1,477  Ibs.  at  0.7  ct $10.38 

Hay  for  4  winter  mos.,  1,924  Ibs.  at  0.27  ct 5.34 

Grain  for  8  active  mos.,  3,736  Ibs.  at  0.88  ct 33.05 

Hay  for  8  active  mos.,  5,149  Ibs.  at  0.31  ct 16.21 

Total,  12,290  Ibs $64.98 

The  prices  for  grain  and  hay  were  the  local  market  prices  less 
the  cost  of  hauling  from  the  farm  to  the  market.  The  grain 
was  oats,  barley  and  corn,  weighing  32,  48  and  56  Ibs.  per  bushel, 
respectively.  Oats  at  0.88  ct.  per  Ib.  is  therefore  equivalent  to 
27%  cts.  per  bushel.  During  the  years  1905  to  1907,  the  average 
farm  prices  of  farm  products  throughout  Minnesota  were  as  follows : 
Oats,  31  cts.  ;  barley,  45  cts.  ;  corn,  39  cts.  ;  hay,  $6.27. 
"  The  feed  per  horse  per  day  was  as  follows  in  Rice  county  : 

Winter        Active 

season.       season. 

Lbs.  Lbs. 

Grain 12.1  *  15.4 

Hay    15.8  21.2 

Total    27.9  36.6 

No  account  was  kept  of  pasturage  nor  of  any  straw  fed  to  horses. 
It  is  not  clear  whether  the  lower  price  (0.7  ct.  per  Ib.)  for  grain 
in  the  winter  season  was  due  to  feeding  corn  instead  of  oats,  or 
not.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  feed  during  the  winter  season 
cost  $3.93  per  horse  per  month  as  compared  with  $6.18  per  month 
during  the  active  season.  In  Norman  county  the  cost  of  feed  was 
much  lower,  due  to  the  practice  of  feeding,  very  largely  with  straw 
in  the  winter  months.  The  extent  to  which  this  was  done  is  well 
shown  by  the  following  records  per  horse  per  day  in  Norman 
county :  Winter  Active 

season.       season. 
Lbs.  Lbs. 

Grain     6.0  11.4 

Hay    6.4  23.4 

Total    .  .    12.4  34.8 


1812  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

The  average  annual  cost  of  maintaining  a  horse  in  Rice  county 
was  estimated  as  follows : 

Average  for      For 
1904  to  1907.      1907. 
Interest     on     horse    at     5%     on     de- 
preciated    value $5.54          $     6.74 

Depreciation  (too  low) 5.56  4.35 

Harness  depreciation 2.10  1.39 

Shoeing 1.42  1.46 

Feed     63.49  75.03 

Labor     11.88  15.01 

Miscellaneous    0.40  9.29 

Total    .$90.40          $104.27 

Thei  item  of  interest  is  estimated  on  the  average  depreciated 
value  of  the  horse;  thus  a  horse  worth  $220  in  its  prime  (4  yrs. 
old),  has  a  working  life  of  10  to  15  years,  and  at  the  end  of  that 
time  is  worth  nothing,  hence  the  interest  is  estimated  on  its  average 
depreciated  value  of  $110. 

The  bulletin  states  that  the  annual  depreciation  of  $5.56  is  too 
low  for  an  average,  and  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  increase  in 
the  market  prices  of  horses  has  offset  largely  the  actual  depreciation. 
This  method  of  accounting  is  fallacious,  for  fluctuating  market 
values  should  not  be  allowed  to  affect  the  depreciation  charged 
off  annually,  for  this  depreciation  charge  is  really  a  sinking  fund 
charge  intended  to  return  the  original  investment  at  the  end  of 
the  life  of  the  animal.  If  a  $150  horse  has  an  average  working  life 
of  10  years,  $15  should  be  charged  off  each  year  for  depreciation, 
which  is  $9.44  more  than  the  average  depreciation  charge  above 
given.  An  item  that  has  been  entirely  omitted  is  the  cost  of  shelter- 
ing. The  bulletin  estimates  this  item  at  about  $6  a  year  for  each 
cow,  which  covers  its  pro  rata  share  of  interest,  insurance,  de- 
preciation and  repairs  on  a  barn  costing  $80  per  head  housed.  If 
we  add  the  $9.44  and  the  $6  to  the  $90.40  above  given,  we  have 
a  total  of  $105  as  the  average  cost  of  maintaining  a  horse  during 
1904  to  1907.  The  corresponding  cost  for  1907  would  be  nearly 
$120.  Hence,  on  the  basis  of  1,000  hours  worked  annually,  the 
cost  of  maintenance  was  12  cts.  per  horse  per  hour  in  Rice  county 
in  1907.  Including  cost  of  housing  and  a  fair  allowance  for  de- 
preciation, there  was  no  county  where  the  average  annual  cost  of 
maintenance  fell  below  $100  per  horse  in  1907.  Regarding  the 
assumed  depreciation  of  10  per  cent  per  year,  the  bulletin  says: 

"The  experience  of  many  farmers  would  incidate  that  the  average 
working  life  of  a  farm  horse  is  ten  years." 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  feed  was  charged  at  its  market 
value  less  the  cost  of  hauling  to  market.  Strictly  speaking  this 
is  not  correct,  but  the  feed  should  be  charged  at  its  actual  cost  of 
production.  This  cost  will  next  be  considered,  but,  before  doing 
so,  it  is  desirable  to  record  the  cost  of  hired  farm  labor  in 
Minnesota. 

The  average  monthly  cost  wage  during  the  "crop  season"  (8  mos. 
April  1  to  Nov.  31)  was  $26.16  in  Rice  county  during  1905  to 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1813 

1907,  to  which  must  be  added  the  cost  of  board,  which  was  $14.36, 
making  a  total  of  $40.50.  During  the  four  winter  months  (Dec.  1 
to  Mar.  31),  the  cash  wage  was  $15.80.  This  makes  an  average 
wage,  including  board,  of  $37  per  month  throughout  the  year,  or 
$444  for  the  year.  As  above  given,  the  total  number  of  hours 
worked  per  man,  including  Sundays,  was  nearly  3,000  hrs.  per  year. 
Hence  the  cost  of  regular  hired  farm  labor  was  nearly  15  cts.  per 
hr.  in  Rice  county.  The  average  for  the  three  counties  was  12  cts. 
per  hr.  In  1907,  the  cost  of  board  was  $2  more  per  month  than 
the  average  of  the  years  1905  to  1907  in  Rice  county. 

In  addition  to  the  regular  hired  men  on  each  farm ;  a  number 
of  men  are  employed  by  the  day  during  the  active  season,  and 
in  1907,  these  men  received  20  to  25  cts.  per  hr.  including  board. 
Unfortunately  no  record  is  given  of  the  percentage  of  men  thus 
employed  by  the  day,  so  that  it  is  impossible  to  state  accurately 
what  was  the  average  wage  paid  to  all  men,  including  both 
classes. 

With  wages  of  regular  hired  men  at  15  cts.  'per  hr.  worked, 
and  cost  of  horses  at  12  cts.  per  hr.  worked,  the  cost  of  team 
and  driver  was  39  cts.  per  hr.  in  Rice  county  in  1907,  and  in  no 
county  was  it  less  than  30  cts.  It  may  fairly  be  assumed  to  have 
averaged  (in  all  counties)  at  least  35  cts.  per  hr.  worked  in  1907. 
If  men  hired  by  the  day  were  employed  as  drivers,  the  cost  was 
40  to  45  cts.  per  hr.  for  team  and  driver.  These  data  dispose 
of  Prof.  Ira  O.  Baker's  contention  that  team  time  on  a  farm  is 
worth  only  a  fraction  of  the  ordinary  rates  at  which  teams  are 
usually  hired. 

As  above  stated,  the  cost  of  board  in  Rice  county  averaged  $14.36 
per  month  per  man  in  1907,  or  $172  per  year,  or  47  cts.  per  day. 
It  is  not  given  in  detail  for  any  particular  county,  but  the  following 
are  typical  examples  of  the  daily  cost  of  board  on,  two  farms 
in  1905: 

No.  1.     No.  2. 

Pood $0.181  $0.190 

Fuel  and  light 0.041  0.027 

Labor  (woman  at  $20  per  mo.) 0.171  0.120 

Labor   (man  at  about  $35  per  mo.) 0.019  0.012 

Total    $0.412     $0.349 

The  higher  cost  on  farm  No.  1  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  average 
number  of  men  boarded  was  only  3l/2  as  compared  with  5  on  farm 
No.  2,  thus  increasing  the  daily  cost  of  the  labor  of  household 
work  charged  to  each  man's  board. 

The  cost  of  producing  various  crops  is  given  in  the  bulletin, 
but  unfortunately  only  the  average  cost  for  the  period  of  1902  to 
1907  is  given,  and  not  the  cost  for  1907  also,  for  wages  and 
prices  were  considerably  higher  in  1907,  and  seem  likely  to  remain 
so.  The  costs  are  given  in  terms  of  the  acre  as  the  unit,  but, 
as  the  average  amount  of  product  per  acre  is  also  given,  we  can 
arrive  at  the  cost  per  bushel  or  ton.  Interest  on  the  land,  at  5 


1814  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

per  cent,  is  properly  included  as  a  part  of  the  cost.     The  following 
is  the  average  cost  per  acre  of  hay  in  Rice  county : 

Per  acre. 

Seed    SO  293 

Mowing  (first  crop) 0.368 

Raking   (first  crop) 0.178 

,  Cocking  and  spreading   (first  crop) 0.199 

Hauling  to  barn  (first  crop) 1.099 

Mowing  (second  crop) 0.264 

Raking  (second  crop) o!l!5 

Cocking  and  spreading  (second  crop) 0.150 

Hauling  to  barn  (second  crop) 0.460 

Machinery,  interest,  deprec.  and  repairs 0.548 

Land  rental  ($70  at  5%) 3.500 

Total     $7.178 

The  cost  of  the  seed  per  acre  was  determined  thus : 

8  Ibs.  timothy  at  3  cts $0.24 

4  Ibs.  clover  at  16  cts 0.64 

Seed  for  3  yrs.  at  $0.293  per  year $0.88 

To  the  above  total  of  $7.18  per  acre  should  be  added  about  $1 
for  general  expense,  according  to  the  bulletin,  which  would  give 
a  grand  total  of  $8.18  per  acre  of  hay.  The  average  yearly  produc- 
tion of  hay  (two  crops)  was  2.25  tons  per  acre  in  Rice  county, 
hence  the  cost  was  $3.64  per  ton.  The  average  for  three  counties 
was  1.85  tons  per  acre,  hence  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  cost 
averaged  not  far  from  $4  per  ton. 

It  will  be  noted  that  there  is  no  item  for  plowing,  the  reason 
being  that  the  hay  seed  is  sown  with  the  grain  crop  against  which 
the  full  cost  of  plowing,  etc.,  is  charged.  It  may  well  be  questioned 
whether  this  is  correct  accounting.  The  cost  of  plowing  is  $1.25 
per  acre. 

The  average  farm  price  for  hay  in  Minnesota  was  $6.05  per  ton 
during  the  period  of  1902  to  1907. 

The  cost  of  producing  oats  in  Rice  county  during  1902  to  1907 
averaged  as  follows: 

Per  acre. 

Seed $0.997 

Cleaning  seed 0.023 

Plowing  (in  the  fall) 1.256 

Dragging 0.285 

Seeding 0.261 

Cutting 0.401 

Twine 0.335 

Shocking    0.165 

Stacking 0.772 

Stack  thrashing   (labor) 0.568 

Thrashing  (cash  cost) 0.774 

Machinery,  interest,  deprec.  and  repairs 0.517 

Land  rental  ($70  at  5  %  ) 3.500 

Total $9.854 

To  this  should  be  added  about  $1  for  general  expense,  making 
a  grand  total  of  $10.85  per  acre.  The  average  production  in  Rice 
county  was  41  bu.  per  acre;  hence  the  cost  was  nearly  26%  cts. 
per  bushel.  The  average  price  of  oats  in  Minnesota  was  29.2  cts. 
per  bushel  during  1902  to  1907. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1815 

The  bulletin  does  not  give  the  average  wage  paid  during  1902 
to  1907,  but  it  gives  enough  data  to  enable  us  to  say  that  it  was 
about  1214  cts.  per  hr.  worked,  including  board.  The  cost  of  a 
horse  averaged  about  8  cts.  per  hr.  worked,  during  the  same  period, 
on  the  basis  of  depreciation  assumed  (which  was  confessedly  too 
low)  and  without  any  allowance  for  cost  of  shelter.  But,  making 
proper  allowance  for  depreciation  and  shelter,  the  cost  of  a  horse 
was  about  9  cts.  per  hr.  worked.  It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  a 
team  and  driver  cost  more  than  30  cts.  per  hr.  worked,  during  the 
period  of  1902  to  1907. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  farm  owner's  time  was  counted  the 
same  as  an  ordinary  farm  workman,  which,  as  above  stated,  was 
12%  cts.  per  hr.  Obviously  this  is  a  questionable  procedure.  The 
farm  owner  is  really  a  superintendent,  even  though  he  works  with 
his  men,  and  he  is  of  a  grade  of  intelligence  that  would  command 
much  higher  payv  than  an  ordinary  workman.  The  farm  owner 
really  gets  his  pay  in  the  form  of  "profits."  If  proper  allowance  is 
made  for  "supervision,"  it  is  evident  that  the  costs  above  given 
will  be  considerably  increased — probably  by  at  least  10  per  cent. 

The  permanent  value  of  the  data  in  these  bulletins  would  be 
much  greater  were  the  averages  made  into  a  sort  of  composite 
picture,  giving  a  typical  average  farm  organization  thus: 

1  farm-owner. 

3  regular  hired  men. 

2  extra  men   (4  extra  for  6  mos.). 
5  work  horses. 

1  woman,   household  work. 

Then  the  average  farm  "plant"  should  be  listed,  giving  prices  of 
«ach  item,  including  buildings  and  land,  cows,  sheep,  hogs,  etc. 
Then  the  total  annual  product  should  be  itemized,  giving  actual  unit 
costs  per  bushel,  pound,  ton,  etc. 

Then  should  follow  the  unit  costs  per  acre,  and  these  should  be 
tabulated  so  as  to  show  the  amount  of  work  on  each  item,  thus : 

Per  acre. 

Plowing:  1  team  and  driver,  4  hrs.  at  30  cts $1.20 

Dragging:   1  team  and  driver,  iy2  hrs.  at  30  cts...    0.45 

This  should  be  followed  by  the  number  of  units  produced  per  acre. 

The  information  in  these  bulletins  is  excellent,  but  is  not 
arranged  as  above  indicated,  and,  therefore,  any  item  of  cost 
on  any  given  farm  cannot  be  compared  with  another  except  in 
terms  of  dollars  and  cents,  which  is  often  very  misleading  due 
to  differences  in  rates  of  wages.  In  brief,  farm  costs  should  be 
recorded  exactly  like  engineering  construction  costs,  giving  the 
organization  of  the  working  forces,  rates  of  wages,  prices  of  plant, 
number  of  hours  (or  days)  of  work  at  stated  prices  are  required 
to  perform  each  item  of  work.  When  recorded  in  this  manner, 
accurate  comparisons  are  readily  made,  and  correct  conclusions 
drawn. 

By  way  of  comparison  we  add  some  data  taken  from  the 
"Encyclopedia  Brittanica,"  under  the  head  of  Agriculture.  There 
it  is  stated  that  during  the  30  weeks  of  active  season  on  the  farm. 


1816  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

each  horse  is  fed  16  Ibs.  of  oats  and  24  Ibs.  of  hay  per  day.     The 
annual  cost  of  maintaining  a  farm  horse  is  estimated  thus: 

30  weeks'  feed  (active  season)  "at  $2.75 $  82.50 

22  weeks'  feed  (inactive  season),  clover,  at  $1.25     27.50 

Total  feed $110.00 

Interest,  $200  at  5% 10.00 

Depreciation,  etc.,  $200  at  12 y2  % 25.00 

Total  annual  cost $145.00 

The  $200  includes  not  only  the  cost  of  the  horse,  but  its  pro  rata 
of  farm  implements.  There  was  about  1  horse  for  every  30  acres 
of  farm. 

It  is  stated  that  unmanured  land  yields  (in  1873)  16  bushels  of 
wheat  per  acre,  but  that  the  application  of  400  Ibs.  of  guano  per 
acre  doubles  the  yield.  In  1873  the  average  yield  in  England  was 
27  bushels  of  wheat  (63  Ibs.  per  bu.)  per  acre,  an  increase  of  14 
per  cent  over  what  it  had  been  80  years  before.  The  present  yield 
(1909)  is  about  32  bu.  of  wheat  per  acre  in  England. 

In  1873  the  following  were  regarded  as  being  "good  crops"  per 
acre: 

1  ton  (2,240  Ibs.)  of  grain  plus  2  tons  straw. 

1  ton  of  beans  plus  1^  tons  straw. 

8  tons  potatoes. 

17  tons  beets  or  turnips. 

35  tons   cabbage. 

Cost  of  Maintaining  Mules.— Mr.  Chas.  E.  Bowen  gives  the  fol- 
lowing data  as  to  costs  in  1906  in  Alabama. 

A  first  class  mule  costs  $200.  Its  useful  life  is  6  years,  at  the 
end  of  which  it  will  bring  $50.  The  average  cost  of  maintenance 
in  7  mines  was  as  follows  per  mule  per  calendar  day: 

Food $0.30 

Stableman 0.05 

Interest  and  depreciation 0.10 

Total    $0^5 

The  daily  ration  was  as  follows : 

Lbs. 

Hay  10 

Grain 16 

Total   26 

The  U.  S.  army  ration  is  14  Ibs.  of  hay  and  9  Ibs.  of  grain  for 
a  mule,  and  14  Ibs.  of  hay  and  12  Ibs.  of  grain  *or  a  horse. 

Due  to  holidays,  Sundays,  etc.,  about  276  days  in  the  year  are 
worked  in  the  mines,  hence  if  all  the  mules  worked  the  cost 
would  be  60  cts.  per  mule  per  day  worked.  However,  about  10% 
are  idle,  due  to  sickness,  etc.,  so  that  the  actual  cost  per  working 
animal  per  day  is  66  cts.,  to  which  must  be  added  4  cts.  for 
shoeing  and  harness,  making  a  total  of  70  cts.,  not  including  any 
allowance  far  stable  rental. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1817 

Mr.  E.  Hogg  says  that  a  mule  weighing  1,000  to  1,100  Ibs.  eats 
12  Ibs.  of  grain  and  15  Ibs.  of  the  best  hay  per  day.  He  feeds 

•  %  cracked  corn  and  %  oats,  and  gives  bran  twice  a  week. 

Shipping  Contractors'  Horses  in  Cars.*— We  understand  that  in 
the  northwest  the  railroads  receive  from  14  to  16  horses  to  be 
shipped  in  a  stock  car,  charging  the  minimum  shipping  weight, 
28,000  Ibs.,  or  an  average  per  horse  of  2,000  Ibs.  A  30,000-lbs. 
capacity  car,  30  ft.  long,  would  accommodate  this  number  of  horses 
giving  them  each  about  2  ft.  of  space. 

In  the  south  the  writer  has  been  accustomed  to  ship  20  mules 
in  a  car  paying  for  the  actual  weight  of  the  mules.  The  length 
of  the  car  would  vary  from  30  to  33  ft.,  thus  giving  a  little  over 
IMs  ft.  of  space  to  a  mule.  In  a  36-ft.  car  21  or  22  mules  could  be 
shipped. 

In  a  palace  stock  car  ranging  in  length  from  54  to  57  ft.,  the 
writer  has  shipped  30  mules,  thus  giving  a  space  of  about  1.8 
ft.  per  mule.  A  few  horses  were  generally  shipped  with  the  mules, 
but  horses  cannot  be  crowded  as  much  as  mules  can,  and  at  times 
a  separate  stall  must  be  built  for  a  valuable  horse  to  keep  the 
mules  from  crowding  or  injuring  it. 

In  loading  mules  into  a  car  a  well  broken  horse  is  frequently 
a  great  help,  as  mules  will  follow  horses  as  a  rule,  and  by  leading 
in  the  horse,  several  mules  can  be  taken  into  the  car  right  behind 
him. 

Unless  shipped  in  palace  stock  cars,  animals  must  be  unloaded  on 
a  long  journey  once  every  24  hours,  so  as  to  be  fed  and  watered. 
The  help  of  a  horse  in  taking  the  mules  in  and  out  of  a  car  is  of 
great  assistance,  and  saves  much  time.  Railroad  companies  allow 
at  least  one  care-taker  to  accompany  a  shipment  of  horses  or 
mules,  and  he  is  a  busy  man  when  the  time  arrives  for  feeding 
the  stock. 

Hauling  Heavy  Machinery  on  Wagons.— In  hauling  cement  and 
coal  to  the  Spiers  Falls  Dam  from  Glens  Falls,  N.  Y.,  I  found  the 
average  load  was  2  net  tons  per  team  of  horses.  The  loads  ranged 
from  3,500  to  4,500  Ibs.  The  haul  was  9  miles,  one  way,  and  a 
round  trip  constituted  a  day's  work.  Teamsters  were  paid  by  the 
ton.  The  road  was  sandy,  but  level,  except  for  about  half  a  mile 
at  the  end.  Two  teams  were  hitched  onto  a  wagon  to  pull  up 
this  hill  at  the  end. 

Some  very  heavy  pieces  of  machinery  were  hauled  on  wagons. 
One  piece  of  machinery  weighing  14  tons  was  slung  between  two 
heavy  timber  beams  whose  ends  rested  on  bolsters  on  the  wagons. 
Thus  the  piece  of  machinery  was  really  slung  between  two  wagons, 
one  wagon  in  front  and  one  behind.  In  order  to  steer  the  rear 
wagon  a  simple  steering  gear  was  made,  very  much  like  the  steering 

•  device  for  controlling  the  rudder  of  a  ship.     It  consisted  of  a  pilot 
wheel    mounted    at    the    forward    end    of   the    rear    wagon,    and    a 
drum    from   which   two   ropes   passed   around    pulleys    to   fie    stub 
tongue  of  the  wagon.     One  man  could  thus  steer  the  front  wheels 

•Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  25,  1907. 


1818  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

of   the  rear  wagon.     With   12   horses   this   14-ton   load  was  hauled 
aver  the  sandy  road. 

A  heavier  load,  28  tons,  was  not  loaded  on  wagons,  but  was 
hauled  on  rollers,  a  temporary  timber  way  being  laid  in  front  of 
the  rollers,  as  in  house  moving.  It  took  12  teams  9  days  to  haul 
this  load  the  9  miles. 

Handling  Teams  With  a  Jerk  Line.*— Mr.  W.  A.  Gillette  is  author 
of  the  following: 

I  have  been  especially  impressed  with  the  difference  between 
the  extreme  West  and  East  in  handling  teams.  When  I  did  con- 
struction work  in  the  East,  I  did  as  Easteners  do,  namely,  sub- 
mitted to  the  dictation  of  teamsters  in  the  determination  of  each 
driver  to  drive  his  own  team.  Consequently,  when  we  wanted  to 
use  three  or  four  teams  on  a  road  grader  or  plow,  three  or  four 
teamsters  walked  along,  not  driving  but  "herding"  the  teams. 
Once  in  a  while  we  could  find  a  man  who  could  drive  four  horses, 
but  not  often  ;  and,  when  he  knew  how,  he  wouldn't  do  it. 

Consider  what  it  means  to  a  contractor  to  have  three  extra 
drivers  on  a  plow,  drawn  by  four  teams  and  two  extra  drivers 
on  a  road  grader  drawn  by  three  teams.  It  is  just  as  ridiculous 
as  having  two  men  loading  wheel  scrapers.  Five  extra  men  on  an 
outfit  as  mentioned  above  means  $7.50  a  day,  drivers'  wages  being 
$1.50  a  day. 

In  the  West  we  use  one  driver  for  one,  two,  three,  four,  five  or 
more  teams,  and  these  drivers  will  handle  three,  four  or  more 
teams  with  one  rein  or  jerk  line  with  as  much  ease  as  the  ordinary 
driver  handles  one  team.  It  is  a  comparatively  simple  matter  to 
train  these  teams  to  respond  to  a  jerk  line,  and  to  the  shout  of 
"gee"  or  "haw." 

For  the  benefit  of  those  who  do  not  know  how  to  hitch  a  jerk 
line,  I  will  explain.  It  is  customary  to  use  a  strong  braided  clothes 
line.  This  line  reaches  from  the  "nigh"  wheel  animal  to  the  "nigh" 
lead  animal,  and  is  fastened  to  the  left  hand  side  of  the  bit ;  from 
this  main  line  a  short  piece  of  the  line  passes  under  the  jaw  to 
the  right  side  of  the  bit,  making  a  "Y."  Fastened  to  the  names  on 
the  right  side  of  the  "nigh"  lead  is  a  "jockey  stick"  (a  short  piece 
of  wood  or  iron)  which  reaches  to  a  curb  strap  fastened  to  the  bit 
of  the  "off"  lead  animal.  A  straight  pull  on  the  jerk  line  pulls  the 
"jerk"  line  or  "nigh"  animal  to  the  left,  or  "haw,"  and  the  "jockey 
stick"  guides  the  "off"  animal.  A  succession  of  jerks  on  the  line 
causes  the  "nigh"  or  left  lead  animal  instinctively  to  throw  its  head 
to  the  right,  to  escape  from  the  jerking,  and  the  "jockey  stick" 
guides  the  "off"  animal  to  the  right  also,  or  "gee." 

A  little  patience  will  teach  the  lead  team  to  "gee"  or  "haw"  if 
the  guiding  words  "gee"  or  "haw"  are  shouted  every  time  the 
line  is  used.  By  fastening  the  following  teams  to  the  double- 
trees of  the  team  ahead,  they  will  soon  learn  to  follow  the  team 
ahead  without  being  tied,  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  not  as 
handy  in  turning  around  if  each  team  is  fastened,  as  it  does  not 

* Engineering-Contracting,  Apr.   14,  1909. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1819 

permit  them  to  cross  over  and  out  of  the  way  of  the  chain  while 
turning. 

When  a  team  has  been  properly  trained  in  turning  to  the  right 
or  "gee,"  for  example,  the  teams  following  the  lead  teams  will 
step  over  on  the  left  of  the  draft  chain  and  follow  it  around  until 
the  chain  is  straight  for  the  return  trip  ;  then  each  animal  will  cross 
over  to  his  place  on  the  right  side  of  the  chain. 

In  all  of  our  team  work  we  use  but  one  driver,  no  matter  how 
many  teams  are  hitched  to  the  load.  In  the  hauling  of  gravel, 
sand  or  broken  stone  we  use  two  or  three  wagons  in  a  train.  The 
trail  wagons  have  a  short  trail  tongue  just  long  enough  to  permit 
the  wheels  to  clear  about  three  or  four  feet.  The  economy  of  this 
method  of  teaming  is  apparent  when  one  driver  is  used  to  handle 
three  wagons  with  three  teams,  for  the  wages  of  two  teamsters  are 
saved. 

Cost  of  Plowing  Farm  Land  With  a  Steam  Traction  Engine.*— It 
is  only  within  the  last  ten  years  or  so  that  the  feasibility  of 
plowing  with  traction  engines  has  become  generally  recognized. 
The  results  obtained  have  been  very  satisfactory,  and  when  it  is 
remembered  that  one  man  with  a  plowing  outfit  can  do  much  more 
work  than  six  or  eight  with  horses,  the  advantages  of  this  method 
on  the  large  farms  of  the  West  are  obvious.  Some  data  on  the  cost 
of  steam  plowing  taken  from  letters  written  to  the  manufacturers 
by  users  of  the  traction  engine  are  given  below. 

The  first  piece  of  work  for  which  data  are  given  was  done  in 
Missouri  last  year,  a  20  hp.  Rumley  Standard  traction  engine 
and  an  8-gang  14-in.  Moline  steam  plow  being  used.  An  average 
of  18  acres  per  day  was  plowed,  the  cost  of  operating  per  day 
being  as  follows: 

Total.       Per  acre. 

Engineering   $   3.00          $0.166 

Water  and  fuel,  hauled  with  team 2.50  0.139 

Plowman     1.00  0.055 

Coal   3.00  0.166 

Plow  sharpening,  oil,  etc 0.50  0.027 

Total    $10.00          $0.553 

The  next  piece  of  work  was  done  in  North  Dakota,  a  30  hp. 
Rumley  engine  and  Emerson  16 -in.  plow  being  used.  The  cost  was 
as  follows : 

Per  acre. 

Coal,  at  $6  per  ton,  90  Ibs.  per  acre $0.27 

Cylinder  oil,  at  40  cts.  per  gallon 0.01^4 

Machine  oil,  at  20  cts.  per  gallon 0.01 

Fireman,  $2.50  per  day 0.06^4 

Water,  team  and  man  for  hauling,  $4  per  day..    0.10 

Sharpening  lays 0.01 

Gear  grease,  4  cts.  per  Ib 0.00  % 

Total     $0.47 

It  will  be  noted  that  there  is  no  allowance  made  for  engineer  in 
the  above,  the  owner  of  the  outfit  probably  acting  as  such. 

* Engineering-Contracting,  June  16,   1909. 


1820  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  J).ITA. 

Charging  this  item  up  at  $4.00  per  day  would  bring  the  cost  per 
acre  to  57  cts.  The  fireman  also  probably  acted  as  plowman.  The 
outfit  traveled  2*4  miles  per  hour,  cutting  IG1/^  ft.  wide,  thus 
averaging  four  acres  per  hour,  allowing  for  stops. 

The  last  piece  of  work  was  also  done  in  North  Dakota,  a  30  hp. 
Rumley  plowing  engine  being  used.  The  ground  was  stony  and 
hilly  and  a  disc  plow  with  14  discs  and  cutting  11  ft.  wide  was 
used  for  breaking  the  ground.  An  average  of  16  acres  of  ground 
was  broken  per  12-hour  day,  the  cost  being  as  follows: 

Total.     Per  acre. 

Coal,  2,300  IDS.,  at  $7.50  per  ton $   8.05  $0.50 

.     Water,  team  and  man  for  hauling 4.50  0.28 

Engineer 3.00  0.11 

Plowman  (who  also  fired) 2.00  0.12 

Oil  and  incidentals 1.00  0.06 

Total    $18.55          $1.07 

Later  on  this  ground  was  put  in  shape  for  the  drill  at  a  cost  of 
about  50  to  60  cts.  per  acre.  To  do  this  the  traction  engine  was 
used  to  three  sections  of  21  discs  cutting  18  ft.  wide  with  a  large 
drag  and  float  behind. 

None  of  the  above  costs  include  interest,  repairs  and  depreciation. 

Cost  of  Traction  Engine  Haulage  of  Ore.*wThe  hauling  of  crude 
ore  from  its  mines  in  Lemhi  County,  Idaho,  to  Dubois,  on  the  Oregon 
Short  Line  Ry.,  a  distance  of  85  miles,  is  being  done  with  traction 
engine  trains  by  the  Gilmore  Lead  Mining  Co.,  Ltd.,  and  the  follow- 
ing statement  of  the  method  and  cost  of  operating  these  trains  has 
been  furnished  by  Mr.  Robert  N.  Bell,  State  Inspector  of  Mines, 
Boise,  Idaho.  Formerly,  it  may  be  noted,  the  hauling  was  done 
by  teams  at  a  cost  of  from  $10  to  $12  per  ton. 

The  train  consists  of  four  wagons  or  cars  of  steel  and  of  15  tons 
capacity  each  and  a  110  hp.  traction  engine.  The  route  is  over  a 
flat  plain  of  fine  gravelly  soil  and  small  sage  brush,  crossed  by  a 
number  of  creeks  and  irrigating  ditches  which  are  bridged.  The 
road  never  gets  very  muddy  and  dries  out  rapidly  as  soon  as  the 
snow  goes.  There  is  one  hill  of  about  10  per  cent  grade  and  three- 
quarters  of  a  mile  long  approaching  the  mine  ;  the  engine  handles 
one  loaded  or  four  empty  cars  on  this  hill.  It  also  sets  the  cars 
one  at  a  time  at  the  loading  bin  on  a  15  per  cent  grade.  The 
coal  used  in  making  the  trip  amounts  to  about  4  tons  per  24  hours, 
and  is  distributed  in  bins  at  intervals  along  the  route.  Water  is 
available  about  every  15  miles,  for  which  distance  the  tank 
capacity  of  the  front  car  is  sufficient. 

The  following  costs  of  haulage  are  based  on  the  records  of  the 
first  trips  made  with  the  road  practically  in  its  virgin  condition. 
A  round  trip  took  four  days,  working  two  12-hour  shifts  per  day 
and  traveling  24  hours  per  day,  with  a  total  load  of  40  tons. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  May  29,   1907. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1821 


Per  shift.  Per  trip.  Per  ton. 

1  engineer  at  $6 $   6.00  $  48.00  $1.20 

1  fireman  at  $4 4.00  32.00  .80 

1   swamper  at  $3.50 3.50  28.00  .70 


Total  labor $13.50          $108.00          $2.70 

Coal     3.00  12.00  0.30 

Grand  total.. $16.50          $120.00          $~JU)0 

Cost  of  Handling  and  Screening  Cinders. — Cinders  are  often  used 
in  concrete  and  for  other  purposes.  The  following  data  are  given 
by  Mr.  Ernest  McCullough: 

The  cost  of  unloading  and  screening  soft-coal  locomotive  cinders 
for  a  filter  bed  was  as  follows :  The  filter  bed  consisted  of  a  lower 
layer  of  cinders  27  ins.  thick  and  an  upper  layer  9  ins.  thick. 
The  lower  layer  comprised  all  cinders  that  would  pass  a  screen 
of  1-in.  mesh,  but  that  would  not  pass  a  %-in.  mesh.  The  upper 
9-in.  layer  would  pass  a  %-in.  mesh,  but  not  a  %-in.  mesh. 
Unscreened  cinders  were  shipped  in  gondola  cars  holding  about 
32  cu.  yds.  each,  and  were  unloaded  near  the  filter  bed,  screened 
and  conveyed  in  wheelbarrows  to  place.  The  freight  on  car  load 
was  about  $36.  In  one  shipment  of  16  cars  there  were  2  cars  of 
ashes  so  fine  as  to  be  rejected  without  screening.  The  others 
gave  the  following  proportions : 

Per  cent. 

Clinkers  not  passing  1-in.  mesh 10 

Cinders  passing  1-in.,  but  not  passing  %-in.  mesh..  75 
Cinders  passing  %-in.,  but  not  passing  %-in.  mesh.  .  5 
Fine  dust,  under  %-in 10 

Tota-1    TIoO 

It  was  found  that  cinders  in  a  pile  exposed  for  two  weeks  to  the 
rain  and  weather  were  so  disintegrated  that  33%  would  pass  a  %-in. 
mesh. 

One  man,  using  a  coal  scoop,  would  unload  32  cu.  yds.  from  a 
car  in  10  hrs.,  and  as  this  yielded  about  24  cu.  yds.  of  coarse 
screened  cinders,  the  cost  of  unloading  was  6  cts.  per  cu.  yd.,  wages 
being  $1.50  a  day.  Another  man,  using  a  scoop,  would  shovel  the 
cinders  upon  the  first  (1-in.)  screen  at  the  same  rate.  But  it  took 
two  men,  using  ordinary  square  pointed  shovels,  to  screen  through 
the  %-in.  screens,  and  these  men  screened  the  material  twice, 
because  it  would  not  pass  through  these  screens  rapidly,  nor  at 
the  first  screening.  A  fair  estimate  of  the  cost  of  unloading  and 
screening  the  coarse  ('1-in.  to  %-in.)  cinders'  is  as  follows,  the 
cinders  being  measured  in  place  in  the  filter  bed: 

Per  cu.  yd. 

Unloading    cars $0.06 

Coarse   (1-in.)   screening. 0.06 

Fine  (%-in.)  screening  twice '0.24 

Wheeling  and  spreading  in  bed 0.08 

Total     $0.44 

The  freight  was  about  $1.50  per  cu.  yd.  of  screened  cinders, 
and  the  cost  of  loading  the  cars  about  16  cts.  more,  making  a  grand 


1822  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

total  of  $2.10  per  cu.  yd.  of  coarse  screened  cinders  in  place  in 
filter  beds. 

Since  all  the  cost  of  loading,  unloading  and  freight  has  been 
charged  to  the  coarse  cinders,  the  cost  of  the  fine  cinders  (%  to 
%-in.)  was  merely  the  cost  of  screening  them  twice  through  a 
%-in.  screen,  or  24  cts.  per  cu.  yd.  plus  8  cts.  for  wheeling  and 
spreading.  When  these  fine  cinders  were  perfectly  dry,  once  over 
the  %-in.  screen  was  enough;  but,  if  very  wet  and  largely  dust, 
screening  three  times  over  the  %-in.  screen  was  necessary.  « 

Since  the  proportion  of  fine  screenings  (%  to  %-in.)  was  so  small, 
it  was  necessary  to  buy  a  number  of  car  loads  of  screenings  and 
waste  all  the  material  over  %-in.  size.  The  freight,  when  charged 
against  the  fine  screenings,  was  about  $12  per  cu.  yd.  due  to  the 
fact  that  not  more  than  3  cu.  yds.  of  fine  screenings  could  be 
obtained  from  a  car  load.  An  attempt  was  made  to  grind  up  some 
of  the  coarse  screenings  using  a  farmer's  feed  mill  operated  by 
horsepower.  The  mill  would  grind  at  the  rate  of  7%  cu.  yds.  of 
cinders  in  10  hrs.,  but  so  many  iron  bolts  and  nuts  were  in  the 
cinders  that  the  mill  was  continually  forced  to  stop,  and  finally  had 
to  be  abandoned. 

The  specific  gravity  of  soft  coal  cinders  is  1.5,  and  the  voids  are 
frequently  as  high  as  60%,  in  which  case  1  cu.  ft.  of  cinders  weighs 
37%  Ibs. 

Size,  Weight  and  Price  of  Expanded  Metal. — The  following  are 
standard  sizes  of  expanded  metal : 

Gage  of          Width  of         Sectional  area  Lbs.  per 
Mesh.  Metal.  Metal.         per  ft.  of  width,     sq.  ft. 

3-in.  No.  10  5/32  in.  0.185  sq.  in.  0.65 

3-in.  No.  10  15/64  in.  0.278  sq.  in.     •       0.94 

3-in.  No.  10  5/16  in.  0.370  sq.  in.  1.25 

6-in.  No.  4  1/4    in.  0.259  sq.  in.  0.86 

6-in.  No.  4  3/8    in.  0.389  sq.  in.  1.29 

The  3-in.  mesh  is  sold  in  6  x  8-ft.  sheets ;  the  6-in.  mesh  in 
5  x  8-ft.  sheets ;  and  in  both  cases,  5  sheets  per  bundle.  These  are 
the  common  sizes,  but  expanded  metal  of  the  following  meshes  is 
also  made;  %-in.,  %-in.,  1%-in.,  and  2-in.  The  mesh  is  measured 
the  short  way  across  the  diamond. 

Expanded  metal  is  sold  by  the  square  foot,  but  at  prices  equivalent 
to  about  5  to  6  cts.  per  lb.,  depending  upon  the  locality  and  the 
size  of  mesh.  For  expanded  metal  lath  see  index  under  "Lath, 
Metal." 

Price  of  Mineral  Wool. — Mineral  wool  is  ordinarily  made  by  pour- 
ing molten  slag  into  water.  It  is  largely  used  as  a  filling  in  hollow 
walls,  because  of  its  heat  insulating  property.  I  have  also  used 
it  as  a  packing  around  water  pipes  that  were  exposed  to  the  air. 
In  carrying  a  pipe  line  across  a  bridge,  for  example,  the  pipe  may 
be  laid  in  a  box  and  surrounded  with  mineral  wool.  A  steam  pipe 
may  be  jacketed  in  the  same  way. 

Ordinary  mineral  wool  weighs  about  12  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  and  may 
be  bought  for  about  1  ct.  per  lb. 

Cost  of  Sodding.— Mr.  Arthur  Hay  gives  the  cost  of  sodding  a 
park  in  Illinois.  The  best  sod  shovel  is  a  "moulder's  shovel,"  with 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1823 

a  flat  blade  10  ins.  wide  and  12  ins.  long.  The  edge  should  be 
drawn  down  thin  on  an  anvil  and  sharpened  on  a  grindstone.  The 
sod  is  cut  through  in  parallel  lines  14  ins.  apart,  with  the  shovel 
held  at  an  angle  so  as  to  give  bevel  edges  to  the  roll  of  sod.  The 
sod  strip  is  cut  off  square  at  the  ends  so  as  to  make  a  strip  about  8 
ft.  long  (a  square  yard),  and  rolled  up.  One  hundred  of  these 
rolls  make  a  good  wagon  load,  80  being  about  the  usual  load. 
Sod  should  be  cut  as  thin  as  possible,  say  1%  to  2  ins.  thick. 
Sod  cut  thicker,  with  the  idea  of  saving  all  the  roots,  never  unites 
with  the  bank  when  laid  on  an  earth  slope.  When  the  rolls  are 
laid,  fine  earth  should  be  sifted  into  any  cracks  between  the  rolls. 
The  sod  should  be  thoroughly  soaked  with  water  after  it  is  laid, 
and  tamped  to  expel  air  underneath.  A  good  tamper,  or  spatter, 
consists  of  a  piece  of  2-in.  oak  plank  10  ins.  wide  by  18  ins.  long, 
strengthened  by  cleats  across  the  ends  and  with  a  tough  wood 
handle  2  ins.  in  diameter  and  4  ft.  long.  One  end  of  this  handle 
is  beveled  off  and  bolted  to  the  plank  so  that  when  the  plank  lies 
flat  on  the  ground  the  end  of  the  handle  is  waist  high. 

The  following  was  the  average  cost  of  laying  20,000  sq.  yds.  of 
sod  by  day  labor  for  the  city  of  Springfield,  111. : 

Cts.  per  sq.  yd. 

Cutting  sod 1.6 

Hauling   sod 0.9 

Laying   sod 2.6 

Watering  sod ,..  .    0.6 

Spatting  sod 0.1 

Total 5.8 

Men  were  paid  $1.50  per  8-hr,  day,  and  the  sod  cutters  had  a 
theory,  very  difficult  to  contend  with,  that  71  sq.  yds.  should 
constitute  a  day's  work.  Average  contract  prices  in  the  vicinity 
were  10  cts.  per  sq.  yd.  of  sod  in  place. 

Seeding  can  be  done  for  about  $20  an  acre,  the  cost  of  80  Ibs. 
of  seed  being  $10,  and  the  cost  of  labor  being  about  $10  more. 
On  slopes  gentle  enough  to  hold  the  seed  without  washing,  seed 
is  preferable  to  sod  on  account  of  Ms  cheapness.  An  acre  of  sod, 
at  6  cts.  per  sq.  yd.,  would  cost  about  $300. 

A  Device  for  Cutting  Soil  for  Sodding.* — Mr.  A.  N.  Tolman  gives 
the  following: 

Fig.  8  shows  a  sod  cutter  used  at  Sioux  Falls,  S.  Dak.  The 
construction  is  clearly  shown  by  the  illustration,  but  it  may  be 
well  to  add  that  the  knife  is  curved  (in  plan)  and  pitches  downward 
about  %  in.  in  its  width  of  2y2  ins.  It  can  be  adjusted  so  that  the 
sod  can  be  cut  in  different  thickness  as  required.  I  have  not  seen 
the  cutter  in  use  but  two  men  and  a  boy  with  a  team  cut  enough 
sod  to  load  a  slat  wagon  (1^4  cu.  yds.)  and  rolled  the  sod  and 
loaded  the  wagon  in  a  trifle  over  an  hour.  This  was  so  much  faster 
than  I  had  anticipated  that  I  arrived  on  the  scene  only  in  time  to 
find  that  the  loaded  wagon  was  more  than  the  team  could  haul  on 

*  Engineering-Contracting,  Aug.  11,  1909. 


1824 


HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 


the  muddy  road.  As  the  cutter  is  easily  and  cheaply  made,  and 
evidently  a  great  improvement  on  the  spade,  it  may  be  of  interest 
to  your  readers. 

Painting  Data — A  gallon  of  iron  oxide  paint  will  cover  400  sq.  ft. 
of  wood  surface,  or  500  sq.  ft.  of  iron  surface,  first  coat.  It  requires 
about  two-thirds  as  much  paint  for  the  second  coat  as  for  the  first ; 
and  half  as  much  paint  for  the  third  coat  as  for  the  first.  Further 
data  will  be  found  on  page  558. 

A  man,  working  9  hrs.  can  paint  (one  coat)  2,000  sq.  ft.  of 
tin  roof,  or  1,000  sq.  ft.  of  frame  house,  or  300  sq.  ft.  of  bridge 
trusses.  The  shifting  of  scaffolds  on  house  work  accounts  for  the 


Fig.   8. — Sod  Cutter. 

decreased  time ;  and  the  smaller  area  of  the  surfaces  of  bridge 
trusses  makes  the  work  slower  in  bridge  painting. 

Consult  the  index  under  "Painting." 

Cost  of  Painting  a  Tin  Roof. — Mr.  J.  M.  Braxton  gives  the  fol- 
lowing : 

An  old  tin  roof  was  showing  rust  spots,  most  of  the  paint  being 
worn  off.  The  tin  was  first  rubbed  with  palmetto  brushes  and 
then  swept  clean.  The  area  painted  was  151,000  sq.  ft.,  requiring 
563  gals,  of  paint  for  two  coats,  or  267  sq.  ft.  per  gallon  for  the 
two  coats.  The  paint  was: 

396  gallons  raw  linseed  oil. 

35  Ibs.  dryer. 

2,120  Ibs.  dry  oxide  of  iron. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1825 

This  mixture  yielded  563  gals,  of  paint.  Each  man  averaged 
1,920  sq.  ft.,  or  220  sq.  yds.  per  day  of  9  hrs.  painted  with  one 
coat.  It  took  158  man-days  to  paint  the  roof,  not  including  fore- 
man's time. 

Unloading  Coal  From  Cars  With  a  Clamshell."1 — Broken  stone, 
sand  and  gravel  can  be  unloaded  from  cars  very  cheaply  with  a 
clamshell  bucket,  wherever  the  amount  to  be  handled  warrants  the 
use  of  such  a  plant.  The  following  data  on  unloading  coal  may  also 
be  applied  to  handling  other  materials. 

At  the  Navy  Yard  at  Washington,  D.  C.,  a  locomotive  crane, 
fitted  with  a  50--ft.  boom  and  a  1^-cu.  yd.  Hayward  clamshell 
bucket  has  been  in  use  for  unloading  coal  from  cars.  A  description 
of  the  crane  is  as  follows :  Track  gage,  4  ft.  8  %  in. ;  wheel 
base,  8  ft. ;  greatest  width,  9  ft.  10  in.  ;  maximum  working  radius, 
30  f t. ;  hoisting  speed  per  minute,  250  f t. ;  rotating  speed,  three 
revolutions  per  minute;  traveling  speed,  350  ft.  per  minute; 
capacity,  one  trip  per  minute.  The  machine  will  lift  20,000  Ibs. 
at  a  12-ft.  radius,  and  7,500  Ibs.  at  a  30-ft.  radius.  The  engine 
is  a  9  x  12-in.,  double  cylinder,  double  drum  engine,  fitted  with 
the  necessary  clutches  and  brakes  for  controlling  the  swinging  and 
propelling  movements  of  the  machine.  The  crane  was  manufactured 
by  the  McMyler  Mfg.  Co.,  of  Cleveland,  O. 

According  to  data  furnished  by  Mr.  F.  E.  Beatty,  commandant  of 
the  Washington  Navy  Yard,  the  machine  will  unload  approximately 
400  tons  of  coal  in  eight  hours.  The  crane  used  in  loading  coal 
cars  from  the  coal  bin  will  dip  and  load  48  tons  in  20  minutes. 
In  unloading  a  car,  the  bucket  easily  takes  out  three-fourths  of  the 
contents  of  the  car.  The  remainder  of  the  coal  is  taken  into  the 
boiler  house  by  opening  bottom  run  to  bunkers  with  a  chute,  and 
thus  requires  no  rehandling.  In  unloading  the  coal,  one  car  is 
ahead  of  the  crane,  and  the  other  behind,  on  the  same  track.  The 
bucket  takes  a  load,  and,  without  stopping  the  swing  of  the  boom, 
the  coal  is  dropped ;  then  the  second  car  is  reached,  and  the  bucket 
filled.  Commander  Beatty  considers  that  this  makes  not  only  less 
work  for  the  man  handling  the  levers,  but  also  increases  the  output 
by  10  to  15  per  cent. 

A  clamshell  bucket  is  also  used  at  the  Polk  street  plant,  Chicago, 
of  the  Western  Electric  Co.,  in  handling  coal  from  cars  to  storage 
bin.  In  this  case,  however,  the  bucket  is  operated  by  an  electric 
overhead  traveling  crane.  This  machine  was  built  by  the  Whiting 
Foundry  &  Equipment  Co.,  of  Harvey,  111.,  for  the  Western  Electric 
Co.  It  is  of  the  three-motor  type,  and  has  a  working  load  capacity 
of  10,000  Ibs.  The  span,  center  and  center  of  runway  rails  is 
73  ft.  10  in.  The  lift  (maximum  vertical  travel  of  hook)  of  the 
main  hoist  is  37  ft.  The  average  travel  is  50  ft.  A  2-cu.  yd. 
Hayward  clamshell  bucket  is  used. 

Mr.  G.  A.  Pennod,  factory  enginer  for  the  General  Electric  Co., 
states  that  a,  40-ton  car  can  be  unloaded  in  1^  to  2  hrs.,  depending 
on  the  travel  of  the  crane.  From  5  to  6  cars  a  day,  allowing  for 


'Engineering-Contracting,  May  23,   1906. 


1826  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

switching,  etc.,  can  be  unloaded  in  a  day.  It  takes  two  men  to 
unload  a  car  ;  one  man  to  operate  the  crane,  and  one  man  to  shovel 
what  coal  remains  in  the  corners  of  the  car  which  the  bucket,  on 
account  of  its  bulky  nature,  cannot  pick  up. 

This  last  operation  takes  about  as  much  time  as  unloading  with 
the  bucket  alone,  that  is,  the  bulk  of  the  coal  in  a  40-ton  car  can 
be  unloaded  in  about  45  minutes,  and  it  takes  the  same  length 
of  time  for  one  man  to  shovel  out  what  remains.  The  time  of  this 
last  operation  can,  of  course,  be  reduced  by  putting  on  more  men. 

It  we  assume  that  a  man  shovels  coal  at  the  rate  of  4  tons  per 
hour,  it  is  evident  that  the  clamshell  bucket  removes  all  the  coal 
in  a  car  except  about  3  tons  which  must  be  shoveled  out  by  hand. 

It  is  apparent  from  the  two  foregoing  examples  that  a  contractor 
need  not  be  afraid  that  a  clamshell  bucket  will  not  clean  up  a 
carload  of  broken  stone  sufficiently  well  for  practical  purposes. 

For  data  on  handling  stone  with  clamshells,  consult  the  index 
under  "Clamshell." 

Cost  of  a  28-Mile  Telegraph  Line.*— The  data  to  be  given  relate 
to  a  telegraph  line  28  miles  long,  built  in  British  Columbia.  There 
were  32  poles  to  the  mile,  strung  with  a  single  No.  8  B.  B.  galvanized 
iron  wire.  The  cost  of  the  poles  was  very  much  less  than  it  would 
be  in  most  localities,  but,  since  quotations  on  poles  are  readily 
secured,  proper  substitutions  can  be  made  in  the  following  tabu- 
lated values  for  any  particular  case. 

Regarding  telegraph  wire,  a  word  of  explanation  may  be  helpful. 
Until  recently  the  size  of  wire  commonly  used  for  lines  of  medium 
length,  up  to  400  miles,  was  No.  9,  weighing  305  Ibs.  per  mile, 
but  No.  8  is  now  used  more  frequently.  There  are  two  grades  com- 
monly used :  The  E.  B.  B.,  or  "extra  best  best,"  and  the  B.  B.,  or 
"best  best."  A  third  grade,  S,  or  "steel,"  is  also  used  for  short 
circuits.  The  following  are  the  weights  of  galvanized  wire : 


Lbs. 
Per  mile. 
570 

Lbs. 
Per  ft. 
0.108 

Ft. 
Per  lb. 
9.2 

No      7  

450 

0.085 

11.7 

No      8                   .  .  .  . 

380 

0.072 

14.0 

No      9    

305 

0.058 

17.4 

No.   10.  . 

250 

0.047 

21.2 

The  itemized  cost  of  this  28-mile  line  was  as  follows: 

Labor:  Per  mile. 

1.0  day,  foreman   at  $3.50 $  3.50 

1.0  day,  sub-foreman   at    $3.00 3.00 

2.7  days,  climber  at   $2.50 6.75 

2.5  days,  framer    at    $2.25 5.62 

0.7  day,  blacksmith  at  $2.25 1.58 

4.6  days,  groundman    at    $2.00 9.20 

12.5  days  total  at  $2.40 $29.65 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  July   10,   1907. 


LUST  DAI  A 

Materials: 

32  poles   (25-ft.)   at  $1.25 $40.00 

32  wooden  brackets  at   1  %    cts 0.40 

32  glass  insulators  at  0.4  cts 1.28 

5  Ibs.  nails  at  2%   ets 0.12 

%   Ib.  staples  at  0.3  cts 0.02 

380  Ibs.  No.  8  BB  galv.  wire  at  5  cts 19.00 

2  Ibs.  tie  wire  at  3  cts 0.06 

Total   materials $60.88 

Total  labor  and  materials 90.53 

The  labor  includes  the  cost  of  digging  holes,  erecting  poles,  string- 
ing the  wire,  etc.  The  poles  were  distributed  by  train,  and  the 
price  of  $1.25  per  pole  does  not  include  the  train  service. 

A  pole  12  ins.  diameter  at  the  butt  and  7  ins.  at  the  top,  contains 
%  cu.  ft.  of  wood  per  lin.  ft.  Hence  there  are  about  12%  cu.  ft. 
of  timber  in  a  25-ft.  pole.  Knowing  the  kind  of  timber,  it  is  easy 
to  estimate  the  weight  of  poles,  and  consequently  the  freight  for  any 
given  haul.  If  the  timber  weighs  40  Ibs.  per  cu.  ft.  the  weight  of  a 
pole  is  about  500  Ibs.  With  32  poles  per  mile,  the  weight  is  8  tons 
for  the  poles.  See  page  952  for  weights  of  poles. 

Cost  of  a  Telephone  Line.— In  Engineering-Contracting,  May  27, 
1908,  an  article  by  Mr.  L.  E.  Hurtz  gives  in  detail  the  methods  of 
building  an  all-cable  telephone  plant  in  a  suburb  of  a  city,  the  popu- 
lation of  the  suburb  being  3,000.  The  following  is  the  summary  of 
unit  costs : 

Cost  each. 

Poles,  unloaded,  363 $0.07 

Poles  shaved  (average,  30  ft.  long) 0.22 

Poles  roofed  (and  a  very  few  gains  cut) 0.07% 

Poles  hauled  (average,  30  ft.  long) 0.25 

Poles  set   (average,  30  ft.  long) 0.33 

Poles  set  (average,  40  ft.  long) 0.69 

Poles  bored  for  steps 0.18 

Poles  stepped. 0.20 

Pole  holes  dug,  average,  30  ft,  pole  holes  5%  ft. 

deep    0.47  % 

Anchors,  holes  dug,  99 0.45 

Anchors  set,  99 0.58 

X-arms  fitted 0.07 

X-arms  distributed 0.09 

X-arms  put  on 

Guys  put  on 1.00 

Stringing  and  pulling  messenger,  per  ft 0.00% 

Cable  pulled,  average  25  pr.,  per  ft 0.00% 

Cable  clipped  (hangers  put  on),  per  hanger 0.00% 

Staking  out  line,  per  pole 0.10 

Poles  pulled  and  holes  filled,  per  pole 0.65 

Cable  unloaded,  average,  25  pr.  per  ft 0.00  1/5 

Drops  strung,  per  drop 1.04 

Bare  wire  strung,  per  single  wire  per  mile 2.75 

Average  total  cost  of  labor  and  material  for  splicing  lead  cov- 
ered, paper  insulated  telephone  cable : 

25  pr.    cable $2.86 

50  pr.  cable 2.95 

75   pr.   cable.  .  .  : 4.40 

100  pr.   cable 5.75 

150   pr.   cable 6.22 

200    pr.   cable 8.37 

250   pr.    cable 10.00 

300  Dr.   cable 10.00 


1828  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

Cost  of  Two  Telephone  Lines.*— Two  short  lines  were  built,  one 
10  miles  long  and  the  other  14  miles  long.  The  cost  of  the  10-mil« 
line  was  as  follows  per  mile : 


Labor:  Per  mile. 

1.7  days  foreman  at  $4.00 $     6  80 

1.7  days  sub-foreman  at   $3.00.  .  . 

4.0  days  climbers  at  $2.50 ift'An 

10.5  days  groundmen  at  $2.25 .  .  .  . 


17.9  days  total  at   $3.10 $  55.53 


28  poles   at    $1.50 $   4900 

28  cross  arms  at  $0.15 

28  steel  pins  at  $0.04 

28  glass  insulators  at  $0.04 

56  lag  screws  and  washers  at  $0.015  o'84 

305  Ibs.  No.  9  galv.  wire  at  $0.042 12-81 


Total   materials $  62  09 

Total  labor  and  materials 117. 62 

More   than   90%    of  the  poles  were   25   ft.    long.     The   rest  were 
30  to  40  ft.  In  length. 

The  cost  of  the  14-mile  line  was  as  follows  per  mile: 

Labor:  per  mile. 

2.2  days  foreman  at  $3.50 $  7.70 

2.2  days  sub-foreman  at   $3.00 6  60 

5.3  days  climber    at    $2.75 14.58 

11.4  days  groundman  at   $2.25 25  64 


21.5  days  total  at   $2.54 $   54.52 

Materials: 

32  poles  at  $1.50 .  .$  48.00 

32  brackets  at  $0.015 048 

380  Ibs.  No.'  8  galv.  wire,  $0.042 15.96 

10  Ibs.  No.  9  galv.  wire,  $0.042 042 

1%  Ibs.  fence  staples,  $0.025 0.04 

32  insulators,     $0.04 1.28 

Total   materials $  66.18 

Total  labor  and  materials 120  70 

2  telephones  at  $12.50 25.00 

200  ft.  office  wire 1.40 

Considering  the  low  cost  of  telephone  lines  of  this  character,  it  is 
surprising  that  they  are  not  more  frequently  built  for  use  on  con- 
struction work.  For  temporary  purposes,  a  much  cheaper  kind  of 
poles  could  be  used.  For  example,  a  very  substantial  pole  could  be 
made  by  nailing  together  two  1  x  4-in.  boards,  so  as  to  form  a  post 
having  a  T-shape  cross-section.  Such  a  pole  would  contain  only  two 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  July   24,    1907. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1829 

thirds  of  a  foot,  board  measure  (  %  ft.  B.  M.  )  per  lineal  foot  of  pole. 
At  $24  per  M  for  the  boards,  a  pole  20  ft.  long  would  cost  32  cts. 

Hence  the  poles  would  cost  less  than  $10  per  mile  of  line.  The 
No.  9  wire  would  ordinarily  cost  less  than  $13  per  mile,  and  $3  more 
would  cover  the  cost  of  the  remaining  line  materials,  making  a  total 
cost  of  $26  per  mile  for  materials.  We  have  no  data  as  to  the 
labor  of  erecting  such  a  line,  but  it  would  certainly  be  less  than  $15 
per  mile  ;  and  in  soil  where  post  hole  diggers  could  be  used  the 
cost  would  be  considerably  less.  In  fact,  a  telephone  line  built  for 
$35  a  mile  might  easily  be  obtained  under  fairly  favorable  condi- 
tions. Moreover  it  could  be  taken  down  and  used  many  times  on 
subsequent  construction.  Such  a  light  pole  line,  however,  would  not 
stand  up  in  severe  winter  weather. 

Life  of  Telephone  Line  Equipment.*—  Some  time  ago  the  city  of 
Chicago  appointed  a  special  commission,  consisting  of  Prof.  Dugald 
C.  Jackson,  Dr.  George  W.  Wilder  and  William  H.  Crumb,  to  in- 
vestigate matters  pertaining  to  the  telephone  situation  in  that  city. 
In  connection  with  its  report  the  commission  gave  the  following 
data  as  to  the  life  and  depreciation  of  telephone  equipment  : 


1-3  . 


*jj    £ 

o  d        rt 


Property:  g  £p  §3  fcca-H 

H!  PH  Pn  k 

Underground  conduit,  main,  clay  in  concrete..  50         .89  0     l1/^ 

Underground  conduit,  main,  fibre,  etc 20  3.72  0  1% 

Underground   conduit,    subsidiary 20  3.72  0  2 

Underground  cable,  main 20  3.72  . .  2 

Underground  cable,   subsidiary 15  5.38  40  2 

Aerial   cable 15  5.38  . .  3 

Poles,   including  crossarms,   etc 10  8.73  0  4% 

Aerial  strand 12  7.05  0  3  M» 

Aerial  cable,   terminals 12  7.05  0  3 

Aerial   wire,    copper 15  5.38  70  3 

Drop  wires,  copper 8  11.25  15  4 

Subscribers'  station  instruments 10  8.73  5  2 

Private  branch  exchange  switchboards 8  11.25  20  2 

Central    office    switchboards 8  11.25  20  2 

Buildings,  fireproof 40  1.33  0  1 

Teams,  tools,  furniture,  etc 4  23.92  10  0 


Vitrified  Conduit  Data — Vitrified  conduits  for  carrying  electric 
wires  underground  are  made  in  single  or  multiple  ducts.  A  single 
duct  is  a  pipe  18  ins.  long  with  a  round  or  square  bore  ranging 
from  3*4  to  4  ins.  diameter.  Multiple  ducts  are  made  with  two  or 
more  ducts  in  one  piece.  The  common  multiples  are  2,  3,  4,  6  or  9 
ducts  in  one  piece.  The  lengths  of  the  pieces  are  24  or  36  ins.  Ducts 
are  sold  by  the  duct-foot,  and  the  present  price  in  New  York  City 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Feb.   12,   1908. 


1830  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

is  about  3^  cts.  per  duct-foot.  A  6-duct  multiple  has  6  duct-feet 
per  lin.  ft,  and  its  price  is  therefore  6  X  3^,  or  21  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of 
the  6-duct  piece.  The  weight  varies  somewhat  with  different  manu- 
facturers, but  8  Ibs.  per  duct  foot  may  be  used  for  estimating  freight 
and  haulage. 

I  am  informed  by  one  of  the  large  manufacturers  that  the  9-duct 
multiple  is  not  so  popular  as  it  once  was,  due  to  loss  by  breakage. 

The  outside  dimensions  of  vitrified  conduits  are  about  as  follows : 
Number  of  ducts  in  the  piece.  ..123  4  6  9 

Dimensions  of  the  piece,  ins 5x5     5x9     5x13     9x9     9x13     13x13 

These  ducts  are  all  square  bore,  3^4  ins.,  square  with  rounded 
corners. 

Cost  of  Laying  Electric  Conduits. — My  own  cost  records  for  this 
class  of  work  cover  only  two  sizes  of  vitrified  pipe  conduits  encased 
in  concrete.  One  of  these  conduits  was  made  of  4-duct  pipe,  each 
duct  being  3*£  ins.  inside  diameter,  the  4  ducts  being  baked  together 
In  one  piece  18  ins.  long.  First  a  trench  was  dug  2  ft.  8  ins.  deep 
and  18  ins.  wide,  then  a  bed  of  concrete  4  ins.  thick  was  laid  in  the 
trench.  Upon  this  concrete  the  conduit  was  laid,  every  joint  being 
wrapped  with  a  strip  of  cheap  cotton  cloth.  Then  concrete  was 
packed  on  both  sides  of  the  conduit  and  4  ins.  thick  over  its  top. 
The  labor  cost  of  laying  this  conduit,  not  including  the  cost  of 
trenching  and  the  cost  of  making  and  placing  the  concrete,  was  as 
follows:  Two  men  laying  the  duct  pipe  and  one  helper  delivering 
pipe  from  piles  along  the  sidewalk,  averaged  60  lin.  ft.  of  4-duct 
conduit  laid  per  hour,  which  is  equivalent  to  120  ft.  of  single 
duct  per  hour.  With  wages  of  duct  layers  at  20  cts.  each 
per  hour,  and  helper  at  15  cts.  per  hour  the  cost  of  laying  was  a 
trifle  less  than  1  ct.  per  lin.  ft.  of  4-duct  conduit,  or  %  ct.  per  ft.  of 
single  duct. 

In  laying  a  9-duct  conduit  (each  piece  of  pipe  having  9  ducts 
instead  of  4  as  above),  two  men  laying  were  supplied  with  pipe  by 
two  helpers.  This  gang  averaged  30  lin.  ft.  of  9-duct  conduit  per 
hour,  at  a  cost  of  2.3  cts.  per  lin.  ft.  of  conduit,  or  %  ct.  per  ft.  of 
single  duct.  From  this  it  appears  that  the  labor  cost  of  laying 
the  pipe  is  practically  the  same  per  duct-foot,  whether  4-duct  or 
9-duct  conduit  is  laid. 

At  another  time,  one  man  laying  a  single  duct  line  (exclusive  of 
trenching  and  concreting)  averaged  66  lin.  ft.  per  hour,  at  a  cost 
of  a  trifle  less  than  *4  ct.  per  ft.  The  work  in  all  these  cases  was 
done  by  day  labor  for  the  company. 

Cost  of  Vitrified  Conduits,  Memphis,  Tenn.— Mr.  F.  G.  Proutt 
gives  the  following  data  on  electric  vitrified  conduit  construction  at 
Memphis,  Tenn.,  in  1903  :  The  work  was  done  by  day  labor,  the 
wages  of  common  laborers  (negroes)  being  $1.50  per  day.  There 
were  about  3,700  ft.  of  trenches  containing  27  ducts,  and  7,200  ft. 
of  trench  containing  18  ducts,  besides  which  there  were  575  ft.  of 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1831 

trench  containing  from  6  to  60  ducts,  making  in  all  11,475  ft.  of 
trench  and  252,000  duct  feet.  An  18-duct  conduit  was  made  up  of 
three  6-duct  sections  (no  single  duct  sections  were  used),  each 
section  measuring  9x13  ins.,  sections  being  laid  one  on  top  of  the 
other.  The  ducts  were  surrounded  on  all  sides  with  concrete  3  ins. 
thick,  making  6  ins.  of  concrete,  27  ins.  of  ducts  and  30  ins.  of 
backfill,  or  a  trench  5*4  ft.  deep  for  an  18-duct  conduit.  The 
width  of  the  duct,  13  ins.,  plus  6  ins.  for  concrete,  gives  a  trench 
19  ins.  wide,  or  about  8%  cu.  ft.  (less  than  %  cu.  yd.)  of  excavation 
per  foot  of  trench.  The  27-duct  conduit  was  made  up  of  4  multiple 
ducts  of  6  ducts  each,  and  one  multiple  of  3  ducts,  laid  in  tiers, 
making  the  trench  6*4  ft.  deep  and  19  ins.  wide,  or  about  9.4  cu.  ft. 
per  foot  of  trench.  Roughly  speaking,  all  the  trench  work  averaged 
%  cu.  yd.  excavation  per  foot  of  trench.  All  6-duct  sections  were 
3  ft.  long,  and  all  3-duct  sections  were  2  ft.  long. 

The  executive  force  consisted  of  1  general  foreman  at  $3  ;  1  fore- 
man of  pipe  layers ;  1  foreman  of  concrete  mixing  gang ;  1  foreman 
in  charge  of  digging  for  manholes ;  1  foreman  in  charge  of  back- 
filling and  hauling  away,  and  1  timekeeper.  There  were  8  men  on 
manholes  and  service  boxes,  80  men  trenching,  concreting  and  pipe 
laying.  The  best  day's  work  was  703  ft.  of  trench  and  15,156 
duct-feet. 

In  laying  the  ducts,  the  3 -in.  concrete  bottom  was  first  placed, 
then  2  men  in  the  trench  laid  the  lower  tier  or  run,  2  men  on  the 
bank  handling  the  sections  down  by  means  of  a  rope  run  through 
one  of  the  holes.  This  run  was  followed  by  a  similar  gang  of  4  men 
working  a  few  lengths  back.  Three  dowel  pins  were  used  in  each 
section.  The  joint  was  made  with  a  strip  of  cheap  canvas  5  ins. 
wide  by  5  ft.  long  laid  on  the  bottom  before  placing  the  ducts. 
A  boy  followed  along,  wrapping  the  canvas  over  the  top  joint  and 
painting  the  lap  with  asphaltum.  To  cut  the  canvas  into  strips 
a  table  was  made  with  a  saw  kerf  in  it  5  ins.  from  one  edge  and  at 
this  edge  was  a  strip  against  which  to  push  the  bolt  of  cloth.  A 
large  butcher  knife  was  then  run  through  the  saw  kerf  and  cloth, 
cutting  off  a  strip  5  ins.  wide  and  the  length  of  the  bolt.  This  strip 
was  wound  on  a  reel  whose  circumference  was  5  ft.,  and  a  cut 
through  the  cloth  at  the  circumference  made  strips  5  ft.  long. 

The  concrete  was  mixed  with  "Dromedary"  mixers  costing  about 
$200  each.  A  "Dromedary"  mixer  holds  about  %  cu.  yd.  of  con- 
crete, and  is  hauled  by  two  horses  in  tandem.  Half  the  charge  of 
sand  is  shoveled  in,  then  the  cement,  then  the  rest  of  the  sand,  and 
finally  the  stone.  The  door  is  closed  and  the  mixer  hauled  about 
150  ft.  to  the  water  tank  and  from  6  to  8  pails  of  water  are  thrown 
in.  If  the  concrete  must  be  rehandled  the  mixer  is  hauled  to  a 
dumping  board  6  ft.  wide  by  24  ft.  long,  made  in  two  6  x  12-ft. 
sections. 


1832  HANDBOOK    OF   COST  DATA. 

The  cost  of  252,000  duct-feet,  laid  in  11,475  ft.  of  trench,  was  as 
follows : 

254,500  duct  feet   (1%   broken),  at  5%  cts $13,997 

45  cars  of  ducts  unloaded,  at  $7.50 338 

Labor  trenching,  backfilling,  concreting  and  duct 

laying 7,745 

Materials  for    882   cu.    yds.   of   1 :4 :8   concrete,* 

at  $5.22 4,604 

32  brick  manholes,  j-  at  $115 3,680 

31  manhole  drains.j  at  $86 2,666 

48    service   boxes,  §   at    $30 1,520 

4,300  lin.  yds.  canvas  (5  ft.  wide),  at  5  cts 215 

5  bbls.  asphalt  paint,  at  $30 150 

40,000  dowel  pins  for  ducts,  at  %  ct 200 

Tools    800 

City    water 50 

Plumbers  repairing  water  pipes 100 

New  sidewalks 600 

Repaving   city   streets 1,000 

City  inspection 195 

Engineering    . 1,000 

Incidentals 1,140 

252,000  duct  feet,  at  nearly  16  cts $40,000 

*Each  cubic  yard  of  1:4:8  concrete  required  0.96  bbl.  (a  bbl. 
being  counted  as  4  cu.  ft.)  cement  at  $2.10  per  bbl. ;  0.56  cu.  yd.  of 
sand  at  $1.25  per  cu.  yd. ;  and  1.36  short  tons  of  broken  limestone  at 
$2  a  ton. 

tEach  manhole  was  8-sided,  5  ft.  wide  by  7  ft.  long  and  6y2  ft. 
deep,  inside  measure,  with  13-in.  brick  walls,  a  6-in.  concrete  floor, 
and  a  12-in.  concrete  top  reinforced  by  old  rails.  There  were  3,200 
bricks  in  each  manhole  at  $7.50  per  M;  there  were  nearly  4  cu.  yds. 
of  concrete  in  the  bottom  and  top  at  $5.75  per  cu.  yd.  for  materials. 
Masons  were  paid  $6  a  day  and  helpers  $2.  The  cost  of  excavating 
for  and  building  a  manhole  averaged  about  $40.  The  iron  rails  cost 
$5.  The  cast-iron  cover  for  each  manhole  weighed  1,150  Ibs.  costing 
1.9  cts.  per  Ib. 

JManhole  drains  averaged  170  ft.  long  of  6-in.  sewer  pipe,  cost- 
ing $10  for  materials  and  $76  for  labor. 

§Service  boxes  contained  325  bricks  each,  and  were  3  ft.  square 
inside,  with  9-in.  walls,  and  provided  with  cast-iron  covers  like  the 
manhole  cover. 

The  designs  of  manholes,  methods  of  construction  and  other  de- 
tails as  to  this  work  are  given  in  Mayer's  "Telephone  Construction — 
Methods  and  Cost,"  p.  243  et  seq. 

Cost  of  Brick  Manholes  for  Electric  Conduits.— Square  manholes 
were  built  with  brick  walls  12  ins.  thick.  The  bottom  of  the  man- 
hole was  concrete,  and  the  top  was  reinforced  concrete.  The  fol- 
lowing data  relate  only  to  the  brick  work :  Each  manhole  contained 
4.6  cu.  yds.  of  brick  masonry,  and  the  following  gang  averaged  1% 
days  to  each  manhole,  the  day  being  8  hrs.  long: 

2  masons,  at  $3.00 ..  $  6.00 

3  helpers,  at  $1.50 4.50 

Total  per  day $10.50 

Therefore,  it  cost  $18.35  per  manhole  for  the  labor  on  the  brick 
work,  which  is  equivalent  to  $4  per  cu.  yd.  of  brick  masonry.  Since 
each  manhole  contained  2,140  bricks,  each  mason  averaged  about  600 
bricks  laid  per  8-hr.  day.  This  was  very  slow  work.  It  was  done  by 
day  labor  for  a  company.  See  Mayer's  "Telephone  Construction— 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1833 

Methods   and    Cost"    for   the   design,    methods    of    construction   and 
itemized  costs  of  several  hundred  brick  and  concrete  vaults. 

Methods  and  Cost  of  Laying  Vitrified  Conduits  for  Electric 
Wires.* — Considering  the  large  amount  of  vitrified  conduit  work 
that  is  being  done,  there  is  surprisingly  little  in  print  on  the  cost 
of  laying  conduits  for  electric  wires.  In  our  issue  of  July  11  we 
gave  the  costs  of  excavation  and  of  concrete  work  on  the  Atlantic 
Ave.  subway  work  of  the  Long  Island  R.  R.  The  concrete  retaining 
walls  of  that  subway  contained  many  'thousand  feet  of  vitrified 
ducts,  and  we  give  herewith  some  data  bearing  upon  the  cost  of 
hauling  and  laying  the  ducts  for  the  electric  wires.  The  ducts  were 
of  'standard  3-ft.  length,  having  an  inside  diameter  of  3%  ins. 
Multiple  duct  conduits  were  laid,  being  for  the  most  part,  4-hole 
pieces. 

The  conduits  were  unloaded  from  boats,  hauled  about  1%  miles, 
and  piled  up  ready  for  use.  The  cost  of  unloading,  hauling  and 
piling  was  0.8  ct.  per  duct-foot;  and,  as  a  duct-foot  weighs  about 
8  Ibs.,  this  is  equivalent  to  $1.30  per  ton.  Laborers  received  15  cts. 
an  hour,  team  and  driver  45  cts. 

The  cost  of  laying  conduits  during  the  year  of  1903  was  as 
follows : 

Duct-f  t.  Labor,  Pay  Cost  per 

laid.  days.  roll.  duct  ft. 

January 1,942  10  $       15  0.8  ct. 

February 1,636  9  13  0.8  ct. 

April    4,512  32  55  1.2  ct. 

May 30,653  154  254  0.8  ct. 

Tune 37,715  205  357  0.9  ct. 

July     27,893  179  288  1.0  ct. 

August   15,293  92  142  0.9  ct. 

September    14,170  '63  108  0.8  ct. 

October 10,037  43  74  0.7  ct 


Total 143,851  787  $1,316  0.9  ct. 

From  this  it  appears  that  the  cost  of  laying  was  a  trifle  less  than 
1  ct.  per  duct-foot,  and  that  the  average  wages  were  $1.66  per  day 
of  10  hrs.  This  is  the  average  of  the  common  laborers  delivering 
ducts  and  the  skilled  men  laying  ducts. 

It  required  150  bbls.  of  Portland  cement  to  lay  the  143,851  duct- 
feet,  or  1  bbl.  per  960  duct-feet. 

During  the  year  of  1904,  there  were  227,600  duct-feet  laid,  re- 
quiring 240  bbls.  of  cement  and  975  days  labor.  The  average  wages 
paid  were  $1.71  per  day,  and  the  average  cost  was  0.8  ct.  per  duct- 
foot  for  laying.  During  the  best  month,  30,700  duct-feet  were  laid  at 
a  cost  of  0.6  ct.  per  duct-foot  for  laying,  which  indicates  that  the 
workmen  were  not  very  efficient  during  the  previous  months. 
.  In  our  February  issue  we  gave  the  itemized  cost  of  building  a  sec- 
tion of  the  New  York  Subway,  and  from  that  article  we  have  ab- 

* Engineering-Contracting,  July  25,   1906. 


1834  HANDBOOK   OF  COST  DATA. 

stracted    such    data    as    pertain    to    conduit    construction,    for    the 
purposes  of  comparison,  as  follows  :  per  <juct_ft 

Labor 1  ct 

Materials    5  ct's 

Total    6  ctsT 

The  cost  of  materials  for  123,483  duct-feet  in  the  New  York  Sub- 
way were  as  follows : 

123,483  duct-ft,  at  4 %  cts $5556 

6,000  sq.  yds.  burlap,  at  4  V2  cts 270 

275  bbls.  Portland  cement,  at  $1.58 435 

68  cu.  yds.  sand,  at  $0.50 34 

13  sets  mandrels,  at  $2 26 

Total,  123,483  duct-ft,  at  5  cts $6,32! 

One  barrel  cement  was  used  for  every  440  duct-feet. 

As  an  average  of  a  large  amount  of  work  on  the  New  York  Sub- 
way, the  following  data  were  deduced:  100  duct-feet  require  0.22 
bbl.  cement,  0.055  cu.  yd.  sand  and  4.86  sq.  yds.  burlap.  The  con- 
duits used  were  4-hole  pieces  in  2-ft.  lengths,  9  ins.  square,  built  up 
in  advance  of  the  concrete  side  walls  which  surrounded  them. 

On  another  section  of  the  New  York  Subway  where  more  than 
500,000  duct-feet  were  laid,  the  cost  of  the  labor  of  laying  was  \% 
cts.  per  duct-foot.  And  on  still  another  section,  where  60,000 
duct-feet  were  laid,  the  cost  was  as  high  as  2%  cts.  per  duct-foot 
for  labor  of  laying.  This  last  appears  to  indicate  an  immense 
amount  of  loafing ;  although  the  New  York  Subway  work  at  best 
was  poorly  managed  by  the  contractors. 

However,  the  wages  paid  on  the  New  York  Subway  work  were 
high,  being  $5.20  per  8-hr,  day  for  the  bricklayers  who  laid  the  ducts. 
We  are  informed  that  the  men  who  handed  the  ducts  to  the  layers 
were  classed  as  "mason's  helpers,"  in  which  case  they  would  have 
received  about  $3  a  day,  being  union  men.  But  in  the  itemized  list 
of  workers  and  wages  of  men  on  the  New  York  Subway,  given  in  our 
February  issue,  we  find  no  "mason's  helpers."  This  makes  it 
doubtful  whether  the  helpers  were  credited  as  receiving  more  than 
the  wages  of  common  laborers,  or  $1.50  a  day. 

In  laying  the  ducffe,  there  were  sometimes  2  helpers  to  1  brick- 
layer, sometimes  2  helpers  to  2  bricklayers.  It  was  the  duty  of  one 
of  the  helpers  to  prepare  the  muslin  sheets  that  were  wrapped 
around  the  joints  of  the  ducts.  The  sheets  were  cut  into  strips  8  ins. 
wide  and  3%  ft.  long;  then  they  were  laid  on  boards  and  soaked 
with  neat  cement  grout,  using  a  whitewash  brush  for  the  purpose. 
This  helper  sometimes  passed  the  cemented  cloths  to  the  layer ;  but 
sometimes  a  helper  passed  the  cemented  cloths  and  the  ducts  to  the 
layer. 

The  conduits  were  laid  16  ducts  high,  usually  back  of  the  steel 
side  columns  and  against  the  waterproofed  4 -in.  backing  wall  of 
brick  on  each  side  of  the  subway.  The  ducts  were  laid  to  break 
joint,  with  a  cemented  cloth  around  each  joint,  then  a  little  mortar 
was  slushed  in  to  smooth  up  the  line  of  ducts.  Mandrels  were  used 
in  laying,  the  mandrel  being  4  ft.  long,  and  extending  through  two 
ducts. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1835 

The  specifications  for  this  Long  Island  R.  R.  work  are  given  in 
Mayer's  "Telephone  Construction — Methods  and  Cost,"  p.  278  et  seq. 

Cost  of  Pole  Lines,  Vitrified  Conduits,  Manholes,  Etc. — References. 
— A  complete  treatise  on  the  methods  and  cost  of  telephone  line  con- 
struction, with  data  equally  applicable  to  electric  power  transmis- 
sion lines,  is  Mayer's  "Telephone  Construction — Methods  and  Cost." 
The  cost  data  were  secured  from  work  aggregating  50  miles  of 
underground  conduit,  and  the  pole  line  costs  cover  an  even  more 
extensive  mileage.  The  same  book  contains  other  similar  data 
gathered  by  Mr.  J.  C.  Slippy. 

Labor  Cost  of  an  Electric  Transmission  Line.— In  Engineering- 
Contracting,  Feb.  5,  1908,  two  pages  are  devoted  to  the  methods 
and  cost  of  constructing  a  20-mile  electric  power  transmission  line. 
A  full  abstract  of  the  same  is  given  in  Mayer's  "Telephone  Construc- 
tion— Methods  and  Cost,"  p.  227  et  seq.  The  following  is  merely 
a  brief  summary  of  the  labor  cost  per  mile  of  line : 

Per  mile. 

Hauling  poles $  18.75 

Digging   (46  poles)   holes 45.47 

Raising  poles    35.47 

Dapping  crossarms 14.14 

Hauling  and  placing  crossarms  and  insulators..  21.01 

Labor  on  guy  poles 18.28 

Trimming  trees  and  bushes 20.94 

Stringing  and  fastening  wires 74.06 

Changing  old  poles 35.31 

Total     $283.43 

Laborers  received  $1.50;  linemen,  $2.50;  teams,  $4.50.  The  p^ 
were  32  ft.  long,  set  5  ft.  deep.  There  were  two  crossarms  to  a  pole, 
each  holding  8  pins ;  but  a  third  dap  was  made  in  each  pole  t .  pro- 
vide for  a  future  crossarm.  Twelve  wires  were  strung. 

Cost  of  Transmission  Line  for  Interurban  Electric  Railvt  *ys.* — 
The  following  is  a  rather  brief  abstract  of  an  article  by  Mr.  E.  P. 
Roberts  and  Mr.  J.  C.  Gillette: 

The  following  data  on  overhead  line  construction  for  h  ^erurban 
electric  railways  are  based  on  actual  practice  and  on  the  average 
costs  of  a  large  number  of  lines  in  different  sections  of  the  United 
States.  The  elements  of  interurban  electric  railway  overhead  line 
construction  are:  (1)  A  conductor  from  which  the  cars  take  elec- 
trical energy,  and  (2)  the  supporting  of  this  conductor,  Arhich  may 
be  directly  by  brackets  or  by  cross  spans,  which  in  tu^n  are  sup- 
ported by  poles.  These  two  methods  of  construction  are  termed  re- 
spectively bracket  suspension  and  cross-suspension.  The  trolley  wire 
may  be  supported  either  directly  from  insulators  ca/ried  by  the 
brackets  or  spans,  or  by  steel  cable,  which  in  turn  is  supported  by 
the  brackets  or  spans.  The  former  is  the  old  and  standard  method 
of  trolley  construction  so  long  used  on  direct  current  lines,  while 
the  latter  is  the  new  "catenary"  type  of  construction.  The  work 
for  a  600-volt  direct  current  line  will  be  considered  first  and  then 
the  work  for  a  line  for  higher  voltage  alternating  or  direct  current 
motors. 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Dec.  11,  1907. 


1836 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


The  costs  submitted  are  probable  costs  between  limits,  but  even 
though  a  maximum  limit  is  given,  the  actual  cost  may  sometimes 
exceed  these  figures,  depending  on  local  conditions. 

Starting  from  the  standpoint  of  the  cheapest  practicable  con- 
struction, we  have  30-ft.  poles,  90  to  100  ft.  spacing,  and  bracket 
supports,  and  with  double  overhead  No.  000  trolley.  The  cost  of 
such  construction  will  aproximate  the  figures  given  by  Table  IV. 

TABLE  IV. — COST  PER  MILE  OF  BRACKET  CONSTRUCTION  SINGLE  TRACK 

600  V.  Two  No.  000  TROLLEY  WIRES,  POLES  SPACED  100  FT. 
Fifty-three   30-ft.   poles   in   place  'and   framed, 

poles  delivered  on  cars  $4.00  to  $6.00 $     325.00 


Fifty-three  brackets  in  place  with  fittings 180.00 

Ears,  hangers,  etc.,  in  place 50.00 

Two    miles   No.    000    trolley   with    splicers,    at 

20c-26c    1,100.00 

Erecting   same    100.00 

Siding  construction  pro  rated 75.00 

Curve  construction  1,500  ft.  additional  cost...  50.00 

Five  anchors 8.50 

Two  hundred  ft.  strand  for  guys 2.25 

Two  half  anchorages 5.00 

Lags,   clamps,   etc 5.00 

Per  cent  on  material   for  handling 75.00 


Add  for  lightning  arrester , 

Add  for  telephone  system  pro  rated, 


$1,975.75 
10.00 
75.00 

$2,060.75 

If  all  poles  are  anchored  add 160.00 

If    35-ft.   poles  are   used   add    (poles    $6.00   to 

$8.50)     , ' 130.00 

Total    .  ..$2,350.75 


$    475.00 
210.00 
75.00 

1,400.00 

150.00 

100.00 

75.00 

15.00 

2.50 

10.00 

8.00 

100.00 

$2,620.50 

20.00 

100.00 

$2,740.50 
265.00 

160.00 
$3,165.50 


If  for  any  reason,  it  is  decided  to  use  cross  suspension  instead  of 
bracket  construction  with  the  same  pole  spacing  and  size  of  trolley, 
then  the  approximate  cost  will  be  as  given  by  Table  V. 
TABLE  V. — COST   PER   MILE   OF   SPAN   CONSTRUCTION   SINGLE  TRACK 


600  VOLT  Two  No.  000  TROLLEY  WIRES,,  POLES  SPACED 
One  hundred  and  six  30-ft.  poles  in  place  and 

framed,  poles  delivered  on  cars  $4.00-$6.00. .  $     650.00 

Ears,    hangers,    etc.,    in   place 50.00 

Span  wire  erected 60.00 

Two  miles  No.  000  trolley  at  20c-26c 1,100.00 


100 


Erecting   same    

Siding  construction,   pro  rated 

Curve  construction,  additional  cost 

Five  anchors   

Two  hundred  ft.  strand  for  anchor  guys. 

Two  half  anchorages 

Lags,   clamps,   etc 

Per  cent  on  material  for  handling : 


100.00 
75.00 
35.00 
8.50 
2,25 
5.00 
5.00 
100.00 


Lightning  arresters   .  .  .  . 

Telephone  system,  pro  rated 

If.  all  35-ft.  pojes.  are -used   (poles  at  $6.00  to 

If  poles  are  anchored  add 

Total    .  ,.....$2,856.75 


$2,190.75          $3,005.50 
10.00  20.00 

75.00  100.00 


260.00 
320.00 


320.00 
530.00 


$3,975.50 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA 


1837 


In  case  transmission  wires  are  required  for  transmission  of  elec- 
tric energy  from  the  power  -house  to  substations,  such  transmis- 
sion wires  may  be  placed  entirely  on  crossarms,  or  in  the  case  of 
three-phase  transmission,  two  of  such  wires  may  be  on  one  two-pin 
arm  and  the  third  wire  on  a  pin  on  the  top  of  the  pole  or  on  a 
bracket  on  the  side  of  the  pole.  Of  course  the  pole  top  cannot  be 
used  if  a  ground  wire  is  located  at  such  point.  The  cost  of  con- 
struction on  a  three-phase  transmission  line  Will  approximate  the 
figures  given  by  Table  VI. 

TABLE  VI. — COST  PER  MILE  OF  BRACKET  CONSTRUCTION  SINGLE  TRACE. 

660  VOLT  Two  No.   000  TROLLEY  WIRES,  POLES  SPACED  100  FT. 

WITH  THREE  PHASE ,83, 000  VOLT  TRANSMISSION  LINE  ON 

TROLLEY    LINE    POLES,    2-Pm    CROSSARM    AND 

POLE    TOP    PIN    CONSTRUCTION. 
Fifty-three   35-ft.   poles  in  place   and   framed, 

poles  delivered  on  cars  at  $6.00  to  $8.50. . .  .$    455  00  $    635  00 

Ears,  hangers,  etc.,  in  place. . 50.00  75  00 

Fifty-three  brackets  in  place  with  fittings 180.00  210.00 

Two   miles   No.    000    trolley    with    splicer    at 

20c-26c    1,100.00  1,400.00 

Erecting  same 100.00  150.00 

Siding  construction;  pro  rated 75.00  100  00 

Curve  construction   1,500   ft.  additional  cost..         65.00  100.00 

Five    anchors     8.50  15  00 

Two  hundred  ft.   strand  for  guys 2.25  2.50 

Two  half  anchorages 5.00  10.00 

Lags,   clamps,   etc 5.00  800 

Fifty-three   4  x  5  in.  x  4  ft.  6  in.   crossarms 16.00  22.00 

One  hundred  and  fifty-nine  2  x  13-in.  oak  pins 

paraffined   9.00  11.00 

One  hundred  and  fifty-nine  33,000  volt  porce- 
lain  insulators    90.00  120  00 

One  hundred  and  six  20  x  1%  x  %  in.  crossarm 

braces  galv 5.00     ^  6.50 

One  hundred  and  six  %  x  5  cge.  bolts 1.00  1.25 

Fifty-three  %  x  4  lag  bolts .60  75 

Fifty-three   %  x  13  mch.  bolts. 3.00  3.75 

Erecting  arms,  pins  and  insulators 25.00  35.00 

Three  miles  No.  2  copper  wire  with  splicers  at 

20c-26c    638.40  829.92 

Erecting  same 125.00  170.00 

Per  cent  on  material  for  handling. .' 140.00  190.00 

Total   $3,098.75  $4,095.67 

Add  for  trolley  lightning  protection. . : 10.00  20.00 

Add  for  transmission  lightning  protection....         50.00  250.00 

Add  for  telephone  system  pro  rated 75.00  100.00 

Total    $3,233.75          $4,465.67 

If  all  poles  are  anchored  add 160.00  265.00 


Total    $3,393.75 


$4,730.67 


From  the  above  the  principal  unit  costs  of  the  cheapest  practicable 
character  of  line  work  can  be  ascertained,  and  such  additions  must 
be  made  as  are  necessary  for  special  overhead  work  around  car 
shops,  and  in  connection  with  bridges,  city  work  or  other  special 
conditions ;  also  the  cost  of  copper  for  feeders  or  for  transmission 
must  be  added  in  accordance  with  the  ^  T-?r*  decided  upon. 


1838 


HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 


Tables  VII  to  IX  show  the  average  cost  between  limits  of  differ- 
ent types  of  catenary  construction. 

TABLE    VII. — COST    PER    MILE    SINGLE    TRACK  9 -POINT  CATENARY 
150-FT.  POLE  SPACING,  6.600  VOLT. 

36  35-ft.  poles  in  place  and  framed,  poles  taken 

at  $6.00  to  $8.00  delivered.  .  . '. $  310.00  $  430.00 

36  brackets  with  fittings,  in  place 120.00  150.00 

5,280  ft.  No.  0000  trolley,  3,382  Ibs.,  at  20c  to 

26c  per  Ib 676.00  87900 

5,300  ft.  %-in.  high  strength  steel  messenger 

cable  110.00  130.00 

36  messenger  insulators 15.00  30.00 

36  spans  catenary  hangers 40.00  72.00 

5  anchors  ;  8.50  15.00 

200  ft.  %-in.  high  strength  strand  for  guVs..  2.25  2.50 

10  steady  braces  for  curves 30.00  40  00 

10  strain  insulators .  11.00  15.00 

Per  cent  on  material  for  handling,  etc 100.00  130.00 

Labor  erecting  curve  trolley  1,500  ft.  additional  50.00  75.00 

Labor  erecting  catenary  trolley 160.00  200.00 

2  half  anchorages 20.00  30.00 

Siding  construction,  pro  rated 100.00  150.00 

Lags,  clamps,  etc 10.00  15.00 

$1,762.75  $2,363.50 

Add  for  lightning  arresters '  10.00  60.00 

Add  for  galv.  wire  lightning  protection 150.00  200.00 

Add  for  telephone  system,  pro  rated 100.00  150.00 

$2,022.75  $2,773.50 

If  all  poles  are  anchored  add 108.00  180.00 

If  brackets   are  insulated 40.00  60.00 


Total    $2,170.75 


$3,013.50 


TABLE  VIII. — COST  PER  MILE  OF  DOUBLE  TRACK  9 -POINT  CATENARY, 
CENTER  POLE,  150-Fr.  POLE  SPACING,  6,600  VOLT. 

36  35-ft.  poles  in  place  and  framed,  poles  de- 
livered on  cars  $6.00  to  $8.00  each $  310.00 

72  brackets  with  fittings  in  place 240.00 

10,500    ft.    trolley,    6,764    Ibs.,    at    20c    to    26c 

per  Ib 1,352.00 

10,600  ft.   %-in.  high  strength  steel  messenger 

cable 220.00 

72  messenger  insulators 30.00 

72  spans  catenary  hangers 80.00 

10  anchors 17.00 

300  ft.   %-in.  strand  for  guy 3.50 

20  steady  braces  for  curves 60.00 

20  strain  insulators 22.00 

10  30-ft.  pull-off  poles  in  place  and  framed.  ...  100.00 

Per  cent  for  handling  material,  etc 110.00 

Labor  erecting  catenary  trolley 320.00 

Labor  erecting  curve  trolley,  3,000  ft.  add 100.00 

2  half  anchorages 40.00 

Siding  construction,  pro  rated 200.00 

Lags,  clamps,  etc 10.00 


$3,214.50 

Add  for  lightning  arresters 10.00 

Add  for  galv.   wire  lightning  protection 150.00 

Add   for    telephone  line 100.00 

Total    .  $3,374.50 


$  430.00 
300.00 

1,758.00 

260.00 
60.00 
144.00 
30.00 
4.00 
80.00 
30.00 
130.00 
140.00 
400.00 
150.00 
60.00 
300.00 
15.00 

$4,291.00 
120.00 
400.00 
150.00 

$4,961.00 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA 


1839 


TABLE  IX. — COST  PER  MILE  OF  DOUBLE  TRACK  9-PoiNT  CATENARY, 

DOUBLE  POLE  LINE,  150-FT.  SPACING,  6,600  VOLT. 

72   35-ft.  poles  in   place  and  framed,  poles  at 

$6.00  to  $8.50  each  delivered  on  cars $  620.00  $  860.00 

72  brackets  with  fittings  in  place 240  00  300  00 

10,560  ft.  No.  0000  trolley,  6,764  Ibs.,  at  20c 

to  26c  per  Ib 1,352.00  1,758.00 

10,600  ft.  %-in.  high  strength  steel  messenger 

cable 220.00  260.00 

72  messenger  insulators 30.00  60.00 

72  spans  cat.  hangers 80.00  144.00 

10  anchors 17.00  30.00 

300  ft.  %-in.  strand  for  guy 3.50  4.00 

20  steady  braces  for  curves 60.00  80.00 

20  strain  insulators 22.00  30.00 

Per  cent  for  handling  material 130.00  160.00 

Labor  erecting  2  miles  catenary  construction ..  320.00  400.00 

Labor  erecting  3,000  ft.  curve  construction  add  100.00  150.00 

2  double  track  half  anchorages 40.00  60.00 

Siding  construction  pro  rated 200.00  300.00 

Lags,  clamps,  etc 10.00  20.00 

$3,444.50  $4,616.00 

Add  for  lightning  protection 20.00  240.00 

Add  for  galv.  wire  lightning  protection 150.00  400.00 

Add  for  telephone  line 100.00  150.00 

$3,714.50  $5,406.00 

If  all  poles  are  anchored 216.00  360.00 

If  all  brackets  are  insulated 80.00  120.00 


Total    $4,010.50 


$5,886.00 


In  deciding  whether  the  pole  line  for  double  track  shall  be  a 
double  pole  line  or  a  center  pole  line,  the  character  of  the  grading 
on  the  right-of-way  will  have  to  be  taken  into  consideration.  If, 
as  in  the  Middle  West,  the  country  is  practically  level  and  no  ex- 
pensive cuts  or  fills  are  required,  possibly  the  single  pole  construc- 
tion will  show  a,  saving  over  the  double  pole ;  however,  where 
there  are  expensive  fills  and  cuts,  the  double  pole  construction  will 
show  a  saving  over  the  single  pole,  not  in  itself,  but  in  the  fact 
that  the  roadbed  will  not  have  to  be  as  wide  as  for  the  single  pole 
construction. 

Estimating  the  Horse  Power  of  Contractors'  Engines  and  Boilers.* 
— The  size  of  an  engine  is  usually  expressed  in  terms  of  the  diam- 
eter of  the  cylinder  bore  by  the  length  of  the  piston  stroke.  In  a 
6x8  engine,  the  cylinder  has  a  bore  of  6  ins.  and  the  piston  has  a 
stroke  of  8  ins.  This  stroke  is,  of  course,  just  twice  the  length  of 
the  "throw"  of  the  crank  arm.  Bear  in  mind,  therefore,  that  the 
"size  of  cylinder"  as  given  in  catalogues  is  the  bore  of  the  cylinder 
by  the  stroke,  of  the  piston,  and  not  by  the  full  length  of  the 
cylinder. 

If  a  contractor's  engine  is  designed  to  have  a  piston  speed  of  300 
ft.  per  minute,  and  is  using  steam  with  a  boiler  pressure  of  100  Ibs., 
it  is  an  easy  matter  to  deduce  a  very  simple  rule  for  estimating  the 
horsepower  of  the  engine.  The  following  rule  is  precisely  correct 


* Engineering-Contracting,  Sept.  2,  1908. 


1840  HANDBOOK   OF   COST  DATA. 

when  the  product  of  the  piston  speed,  by  the  mean  effective  pressure 
by  the  mechanical  efficiency  is  equal  to  1,050  ;  and  this  is  ordinarily 
the  case  with  contractors'  engines  having  cylinders  of  8  ins.  or  more 
in  diameter. 

Rule:  To  ascertain  the  horsepower  square  the  bore  of  the  cylin- 
der and  divide  by  four. 

Thus,  if  the  engine  is  8x8,  we  have  a  cylinder  bore  of  8.  Hence, 
squaring  8  we  have  64,  and  dividing  by  4  we  get  16,  which  is  the 
horsepower.  This  is  the  actual  delivered,  or  brake,  horsepower. 

For  smaller  engines,  whose  piston  speeds  are  usually  less,  it  is 
safe  to  divide  the  square  of  the  bore  by  five  instead  of  by  four.  A 
6x6  engine  would,  therefore,  have  7  horsepower. 

If  the  engine  has  two  cylinders  (duplex),  of  course  the  horsepower 
is  twice  that  of  a  single  cylinder. 

A  boiler  is  usually  estimated  to  give  one  horsepower  for  every 
10  sq.  ft.  of  heating  surface.  Hence  the  horsepower  of  a  vertical 
tubular  boiler  is  found  thus : 

Rule:  Divide  the  total  heating  surface  of  the  tubes  and  fire  box 
(expressed  in  square  feet)  by  ten,  and  the  quotient  is  the  horse- 
power. 

The  square  foot  heating  surface  of  a  tube  is  quickly  calculated  by 
multiplying  the  length  of  the  tube  in  feet  by  0.26  and  then  multi- 
plying by  the  outside  diameter  of  the  tube  in  inches.  Since  tubes 
are  ordinarily  2  ins.,  the  total  heating  surface  of  the  tubes  is  found 
by  multiplying  the  number  of  tubes  by  their  length  in  feet  by  0.52  ; 
or,  for  all  practical  purposes,  take  half  the  product  of  the  number  of 
tubes  by  the  length  of  tube  in  feet.  To  this  heating  surface  of  the 
tubes  must  be  added  the  heating  surface  of  the  firebox,  which  is 
ascertained  thus :  Multiply  the  circumference  of  the  firebox  in  feet 
by  its  height  above  the  grate  in  feet  and  add  the  square  foot  area  of 
the  lower  flue  sheet 

The  diameter  of  the  firebox  or  furnace  is  usually  4  to  5  ins.  less 
than  the  outside  diameter  of  the  boiler.  The  height  of  the  firebox 
is  usually  2  to  2%  ft. 

The  amount  of  coal  required  for  a  contractor's  boiler  is  about 
6  Ibs.  per  horsepower  per  hour,  or  60  Ibs.  per  horsepower  per  day  of 
10  hours.  Nearly  one  gallon  of  water  will  be  required  for  each 
pound  of  coal.  About  2%  Iks.  of  dry  wood  are  equal  to  1  Ib.  coal, 
or  2  cords  of  wood  equal  1  ton  of  coal. 

Cost  of  Cutting  Cord  Wood.* — Frequently  a  contractor  must  fig- 
ure on  using  wood  for  fuel,  in  which  case  it  is  desirable  that  he  know 
the  cost  of  cutting  and  piling  cord  wood.  The  following  average 
record  relates  to  work  done  in  the  state  of  Washington  under  the 
direction  of  one  of  the^  editors  of  this  journal.  The  work  involved 
the  felling  of  the  trees,  which  were  fir,  sawing  them  into  cordwood 
lengths  (4  ft.),  splitting  and  piling.  Axmen  averaged  2  cords  per 
10-hour  day,  but  an  extra  good  woodman  will  readily  average  3 
cords  per  day.  With  wages  at  $2.50,  a  cord  of  wood  cost  $1.25 
ready  for  hauling. 


*  Engineering-Contracting,  Oct.  7,  1008. 


MISCELLANEOUS  COST  DATA  1841 

A  cord  measures  128  cu.  ft.,  of  which  about  65%  is  solid  wood, 
the  remaining  35%  being  the  voids  or  spaces  between  the  sticks. 
Washington  fir  when  green  weighs  about  3.5  Ibs.  per  ft.  B.  M.,  and 
about  3.2  Ibs.  when  dry.  Hence  a  cord  of  green  fir  weighs  about 
3,200  Ibs.,  or  1.6  tons,  which  is  a  good  wagon  load  on  most  roads. 
About  10  cords  is  the  ordinary  carload. 

The  daily  papers  of  Sept.  27  contained  an  Associated  Press  dis- 
patch from  which  we  have  abstracted  the  following  record  of  wood 
chopping  on  a  wager.  A  Vermont  woodsman  undertook  to  cut 
down,  chop  up,  split  and  pile  5  cords  of  basswood  between  sunrise 
and  sunset.  He  did  it,  with  nearly  an  hour  and  a  half  to  spare,  for 
he  had  completed  his  work  in  10  hours,  and  had  half  a  cord  of  un- 
piled  wood  left  over.  The  trees  ranged  in  length  from  60  to  70  ft. 
and  were  9  to  13  ins.  diameter  at  the  butt.  At  the  end  of  4  hrs.  and 
40  mins.  he  had  felled  18  trees  and  had  chopped  and  split  3% 
cords.  It  took  him  about  2  hrs.  and  40  mins.  to  pile  the  5  cords. 

This  record  is  said  to  be  the  best  ever  made.  It  is  interesting  to 
note  that  this  man's  output  was  about  double  what  is  regarded  as  a 
good  day's  work,  and,  in  this  respect,  the  record  bears  out  the  gen- 
eralization that  a  man  can  perform  on  a  wager  about  double  the 
physical  work  that  he  is  accustomed  to  do  day  in  and  day  out 


INDEX. 


Page 

Absorption    process 958 

Abutment  (see  also  Bridge)  .    972 
Acid,    finishing   walk   with..  448 
removing    efflorescence 

with 637 

washing  stone  with . . .  527 

Adze,     price 1398 

Air  compressor    1598,  191 

Allardyce    process 1262 

Alum,     price 631,  632,  765 

Alumina    sulphate,    price 765 

Angle    bars     1253 

Annuity    tables 12 

Anvil,    price 1398 

Appraisal,   see  Valuation. 

Aqueduct,  timber 986 

Ash    pit 1285,1325 

Ashes,    weight 1792,   1795 

Ashlar,  see  Stone  Masonry. 

Asphalt,     price 334,  394,  399 

407,     412,     414,     417,     420, 
430,  633,   768,   770,   1398. 
Asphalt  block  pavement. 344,   380 

Asphalt  macadam 314 

Asphalt  pavement,   price 

339,    348,    352,    388 

plant. 397,  403,  412,  416,  421 
repairs..  400,     424,     425,428 

specific     gravity 429 

Asphalt    reservoir   lining 766 

Asphalt    roller,    price 397,416 

Asphalt    walk 429 

Asphaltic  oil,   see  Road  oil. 

tie  treatment  with....   962 

Auger,     earth 141,  163 

price     1398 

stump    1048 

Ax,    price 1398 


Backfill,  see  "Earth  excava- 
tion, backfill." 
Backing,  see  Tunnel  Lining. 

Ballast 1242,  1313,  1325,  1354 

gravel     1266,  1375 

life    of    221 

rock    218,    221,  1268 

Band    stand 630 

Barn     1127 

Barrel,    cement 540 

size     258 

Base,  see  Concrete  base. 

Baseboard    1089 

Battery,     blasting 1398 

Belgian     block,     see     Stone 
block. 

1843. 


Page 

Belt,   price 221,  226 

Bids,    making 41 

unbalanced   50 

Bitulithic    340,  419 

specific    gravity 429 

Black  powder,  see  Powder. 

Blast,  chamber 257 

stumps    1047 

Blinds,     window 1090 

Blocks,     concrete 1171 

concrete     sewer 920 

pulley    1398 

Board   measure 945,  950 

Boiler    215,  222, 

741,  1398,  1445,  1568 

horsepower  of 1839 

life  of 797 

Bolts,     track 1253 

Bonds,    surety 51 

Bonus     system Ill 

Bookkeeping    88 

Boring     964 

earth     141 

wash    144 

Bort    228 

Bran,    price 408 

Brick,  gravity  conveyor  for.  353 

laying     769,  1094 

in    asphalt 633,1391 

price 334,    769,    838,  847 

removing  tar  from....   367 

sizes 1094 

unloading. . . . 352,    769,  1153 

weight 358,  1094 

Brick  Masonry,   buildings... 

"1094,  1153 

casing    of    standpipe.. 

... 727,  728 

cement     required.  .844,  851 

chimney    1099,   1405 

conduit    724 

flush    tank 926 

manhole 835,   836,   922, 

925,    930,    1832. 

mortar     required 1096 

piers     745 

reservoir    lining 766 

sewer.... 839,  847,  851,  854, 
857,  862,  863,  866,  881, 
896,  899,  906. 

slope    paving 739 

subway     1391 

tunnel 528,   1187,   1233, 

1237,    1239. 
vault     689,  1408 


1844 


INDEX. 


Page 

Brick    pavement 352 

excavating     367 

joints    of 357 

laying    356 

prices 334,    335,    337, 

344,     367,     420,  834. 

Brick    sidewalk 352 

Bridge,    Section    XII 1471 

abutment..  591,     1312,  1323, 

1702. 

anchorage    of    suspen- 
sion     1569 

area  of  steel  surface. .1637 
arch,  steel.. 1486,  1541,  1583 

Brooklyn    1543 

caisson  (see  also  Cais- 
son)       986 

cantilever..  1482,    1488,  1541 

City  Island 1577 

combination     1539 

concrete   1647  to  1696 

draw 1475,    1480,    1481, 

1482,  1483,  1488,  1504, 
1528,  1535,  1537,  1540, 
1577. 

falsework..  972,  1493,  1495, 
1501,  1506,  1519,  1531, 
1532,  1533,  1536,  1560. 
foundations..  155,  488,  509, 
583,  591,  1506  to  1620, 
1645,  1702. 

Frazer    River 1539 

highway...  1471,    1478,    1539 
Howe  truss.. 970,  971.  1368, 

1375,   1506,  1533,  1529. 
Hudson     Memorial. ..  .1653 
life  of  steel.1487,1488,1490 

life   of   timber..'. "..   954 

lift    1483 

moving     1495,1716 

painting,  see  Painting, 
pier,   see  Bridge  foun- 
dation,      also      Con- 
crete,      also       Stone 
Masonry. 

plate    girder.... 1471,    1506, 
1511,   1519,    1527. 

rail    279 

removing    1715 

St.     Lawrence 1542 

shop    work 1493 

span,  economic 1489 

steel     1368 

stone    arch 493 

suspension     1542 

timber,     life 954 

trestle    966 

Walnut    Lane 1653 

Washington    1583 

Williamsburg     1544 

weight  of  steel 1471 

Broken  Stone,  see  Macadam, 

see   Stone. 
Bucket,   price 1392,   1398,  1352 


Page 

Buildings,    Section    X 1069 

camp    593 

concrete..  1072,  1076,  1084, 
1104,  1108.  1155,  1159, 
1162,  1163,  1165. 

cubic   feet  of 1070 

life    797 

mill     1076 

moving    1176 

Park     Row 1172 

per  cent  of  cost  items.1069 

power 1417 

railway     1303,  1313, 

1325,    1354,    1362. 

square    feet    of 1070 

steel 1171,     1074,  1723 

Building   paper 1092 

Burlap,   price 1398 

Burnettizing    957,  1259 

Burnt  clay  road 328 

Brush    mattress 1028 

Cable,    wire,    life 1406,   1408 

price    716 

Cableway    210,  503. 

510,    578,   813. 

moving    578,  814 

Cable    railway 1405 

Caisson 986,    1545,    1606,    1612, 

1616,    1618,   1620. 

Calcium    chloride 294 

Calyx    drill 243 

Camps 593,   1139,  1228,  1518, 

1746. 

Canal,     Chicago 207 

lock,    see  Lock. 

Candles,     price 1614 

Canthook,    price 1398 

Caps,     price 226 

Car  (see  also  Equipment).  .1376, 

box     992 

cable    1405 

dump    136,  993 

freight    992,  1464 

motor    1417,  1439, 

1446,  1452. 

passenger    1464 

repairs     21,1452,1466 

Car    mile 1457 

Car     shop 1147 

Carbons     228 

Card    process 960,  1262 

Carting   (see  also  Hauling) .   124 

Cast   iron   pipe,    prices 278 

Cast  iron  stairway 1722 

Catch    basin,    cleaning 935 

price    278 

Cattle     guard 1313,  1354 

Ceiling    1088 


INDEX. 


1845 


Page 
Cement,  amount  in  concrete  539 

amount   in   mortar 538 

barrel    of 540 

finishing  surface  of. . .   558 

handling     585 

manufacturing    534 

storing    574 

testing    793 

unloading    1160 

weight     540 

Cement    blocks 920 

Cement    curb 449,  451 

Cement    gutter 451 

Cement   lined   pipe 679 

Cement  pipe.... 628,  927,  928,  931 

Cement     walk 442  to  449 

acid    finish   for 448 

Centers    494,  776,  845 

Cesspool     140 

Chain,     price 1398 

Chamber    blast 257 

Chart,     cost 107 

Chimney,    brick    (see   Stack) 

741,   1099,   1405 

Chisel,    price 1398 

Cinders,    screening 1821 

weight     1822 

Cinder-Clay    road 327 

Cinder    pit 1151 

Clamshell 198,    838,    1151,  1825 

Clay,    burning 328 

Cleaning,    sewers    (see    Sewers). 

streets     459 

Clearing  and  grubbing 790, 

1045,       1303,      1323,      1354, 
1375. 

Closets     1091 

Cobble    gutters 279,  352 

Cobblestone    pavement 379 

Cofferdam 514,   575,   737,   986, 

1512,  1547,  1578,  1584, 
1587,  1601,  1602,  1609, 
1726. 

Coal,   price 394,  407,  417 

unloading    1825 

Coaling    station 1151 

Compound  interest 9 

Compressed  air 188,   197 

Compressor .191,   1568 

Concrete,  Section  VI 530 

abutment      (see      Concrete 

bridge  foundation), 
anchorage   for  bridge.  1572 

bandstand   630 

base  for  pavement.  .  .  .360, 
384,  386,  390,  392.,  400,  430 

beams     540 

blocks     920,  1171 

breakwater     569 

bridges    .1647  to  1696 

bridge    foundations 583, 

1511,      1520,      1581,      1597, 
1599.      1602,      1645.      1702. 
buildings..  1072,    1076,    1155, 
1159,  1162j  1163,  1165. 


Concrete,  Cont'd.  Page 

bush   hammering 637 

caisson....  1550,    1610,    1614, 
1617,  1619. 

car    1523 

cart    551 

cement    required 539 

cleaning  with  acid 637 

conduit    719,  724 

core   wall 792 

culvert.. 1696    to    1705.  1710 

dam 588,   589,   590,  592 

excavating 437,    441,  638 

facing 558,    578,    637,  786 

fence     post 596 

filter    roof 745,  748,  763 

finishing.. 558,  578,  637,  786 

floor     1104 

forms.... 563,  572,  576,  577, 

'    580,     583,     749,     773,     776, 

777,    781,    792,    1156,    1160, 

1162,      1170,      1634,      1677, 

1680,   1704. 

fortification    567 

foundation  (see  also 
Concrete  bridge 

foundation)     508 

groined    arches 748 

items  of  cost ' 78 

hand  mixing ,   552 

lock    570 

manhole    925 

materials    required 535 

mixer,     gravity. .  .563,  1403 

mixer,    price 580,  582 

mixer    used    for... 433,  439, 
444,    562,    1704. 

pedestals,   viaduct 1636 

pile     610 

pile,     Raymond 624 

rolled     626 

Simplex    627 

pipe     628,    918,  1710 

pipe     culvert ...1710 

pole    596 

ramming 557,    574,    579, 

774,    905. 

reinforcement,    see    Steel- 
work  reinforcement. 

reservoir  lining 766,  771 

roof    775 

retaining    wall 577,  1702 

rolling     558 

sand    required 539 

sewer     844,  899 

slabs     542 

standpipe     730 

steel  reinforcement, 
se.e  Steelwork  rein- 
forcement. 

stone    required 539 

street  railway  founda- 
tion   1426 

subaqueous    583,    793, 

1522,   1581 

subway..  1390,    1403,  1708 


1846 


INDEX. 


Concrete,  Cont'd.  Page 

Sylvester     786 

tamping,    see   Concrete 
ramming. 

tank     627 

tar    1109 

trestle     1655,  1686 

tunnel  lining 1187,   1202, 

1225,     1232,    1237. 

vault    693 

viaduct     1686 

water    required 546,  567 

waterproofing         (see 

Waterproofing). 
Conduit,   see  also   Sewer. 

Conduit,     brick 724 

concrete     719 

electric     1391 

vitrified   ...1393,    1398,  1829 

Contingencies     46,  1344 

Contractors'  plant,  see    Plant 

Converter    1445 

Copper  wire,   price 1420 

Cord     183 

Cordwood,    see   Wood. 

Corduroy     330 

Corrugated    steel 1174 

Cost  Charts 107 

Cost   keeping 87 

Cost,   schedule  of  items 43 

Crane,    mail 1286 

Creosoting 958,    961,  1259 

Creosoted  ties,  see  Ties. 
Creosoted    wood    block,    see 
Wood     block     pave- 
ment. 
Crib,        see        "Timberwork 

crib." 

Cross  ties,   see  Ties. 
Crushed  rock,   see  Stone. 

Crusher,     gyratory 226 

•jaw     226 

price 215,    221,    580,  582 

repairs.. 213,   214,    215,    225, 
226. 

Culvert    1312,  1323 

cast   iron   pipe.... 278,   299, 
280,   1712. 

cement     pipe 1710 

concrete.. 1696  to  1705,  1710 

corrugated    iron 1715 

log     976,  1375 

stone     495,  1709 

timber     977 

vitrified  pipe   (see  also 

Sewer    pipe) 278,279, 

280,    1368. 
Curb,  see  also  Cement  curb. 

resetting    456 

stone     352,  4a6 

Cyclopean  masonry,  see 
Stone  Masonry,  see 
Rubble  Concrete. 


Page 

Dam,     Boonton 586,  590 

concrete.. 588,  589,   590,  592 

crib    ' 504,  978 

earth    788,  791 

Hemet     589 

rock-fill    515 

rock    excav.    for 206 

Spier    Falls    588 

stone    masonry 488,  497, 

499,   510,    796. 

Day   labor   system 55,     57 

Depot     1111,1362 

Depreciation     796,  1317 

formulas    34,  35,  36 

Derrick,     price 222,  1392,  1398 

work  with 200,  510,   589, 

817,  1499,  1563,  1577,  1603, 
1616,    1623,     1625. 

Diamond,     price 229 

Diamond   drill,    price 229 

Diamond     drilling 228 

Diary,    foreman's 100 

Dike     1042 

Dinkey 135,  594 

Ditch,   see  also   Trench. 

Ditch   work 141 

Ditcher    651 

Dock    1314 

pile     1561 

Docking,     pile 1008 

Dolly,     timber 965,1399 

Dome,    steel 1172 

Doors     1090 

Drafting,    steel   work..  1174,  1722 

Drag     scraper 126 

Drain,     tile 1796 

Drainage,  ditch  work 141 

Drawings,     shop 1174,  1722 

Dredging    745 

Driver,   see  Pile  Driver. 

Drill,    Calyx 243 

pneumatic     plug     (see 
also    Pneumatic 

hammer)     1394,  1398 

price    215,   222.  1398 

repairs    195,   222,  226 

well     246 

Drilling   (see  also   Boring) .  .1385 

air 188 

diamond     228 

hand     184,  1199 

lost    time     191 

plug    holes    492 

spacing    holes 203 

speed     194 

steam    190 

Ducts,    see   Conduit. 

Dump  car 136,  993 

Dust,    preventing 294 

Dynamite,  price 211,  213,  222, 

225,    256.    874,    1182,    1211, 
1229,    1398,   1445. 

Earth,    kinds 120 

measurement     119 

weight     791 


INDEX. 


184' 


Page 

Earth  excavation,   Section  II  119 
backfill         (see        also 
Trench)....  140,   508,    575, 
656,  783,  850,  1595,  1597. 

bracing     795 

caisson,  see  Caisson. 

culvert     1704 

dam     514 

dike    596 

filter     ; 740 

foundation    507,   1526, 

1569,      1584,      1592,      1594, 
1603,    1634,    1667. 

harrowing    791 

hydraulic... 804,  830,  1029, 
1589. 

lock    575 

manhole     835 

orange  peel  bucket. .  .816, 
852. 

pole    holes 1064,  1786 

price    278,  337,  352 

pumping 804,    830,    1029, 

1589. 

railway....  1178,  1304,  1305, 
1311,  1323,  1354.  1357, 
1365,  1374,  1375,  1414, 
1415. 

reservoir  779,  791,  795 

river  bank 1038 

road  331 

rolling  791 

scraper  (power) .  .848,  852, 
856. 

spreading 791 

sprinkling  791 

street 390,  392,  1415 

subway 1386,  1390,  1399 

trench,   see  Trench. 

Economizer,    fuel 741,  1444 

Efflorescence,    removal 637 

Eiffel    Tower 1719 

Ejector,     sand 551 

Electric    conduits,    see    Con- 
duits. 

Electric    machinery,    life 797 

Electric     power     plant,     see 

Power  plant. 

Electric    railway,    see    Rail- 
way. 
Electric    transmission    line..  1835 

Elevating  grader 132 

Elevator,  grain 1173 

Engine    (see    also    Locomo- 
tive)      1445 

horsepower     1839 

life    797 

price    215,  1279,  1280 

Engine    roundhouse 1147 

Engineering,    Section   XIV.. 1745 
bridge    ....1495,  1511,  1542, 
1583. 

charges    for 1745 

city     I?4® 

conduit    -.1832 

dam     »14 


Engineering,  Cont'd.  Page 

definition 2 

drafting 1174 

filter.... 737,    738,    739,    740, 

742. 

railway...  1289,  1291,  1303, 
1306,  1308,  1321,  1331, 
1380,  1408. 

reservoir  1746 

road  280 

shop    drawings 1722 

tunnel     1228,  1235 

viaduct     1628 

Equipment  (see  also  Car).. 992, 
1288,  1295,  1310,  1314, 
1321,  1326,  1332,  1364, 
1376,  1455,  1464. 
depreciation  of... 21,  1295, 
1463. 

Estimates     41,     47- 

Excavation,  see  Earth  Ex- 
cavation, see  Rock 
Excavation,  see 
Trench,  see  Tun- 
nel. 

Exciter     1445 

Expanded    metal... 279,  722,  1822 
Explosives    (see   also   Dyna- 
mite,   see   Powder)..  205 
Factory    building,     see    Mill 

building. 
Falsework    (see  also   Bridge 

falsework) 972,   1493 

Farm    drain,    see   Drain. 

Farming     1810 

Feed,   see  Horse. 

Felt    633,  1092,  1399 

Fence    1417,  1779 

post     596,  955 

Ferroinclave     1094 

Filler,   see  Pitch,   see  Tar. 

Filter    736 

mechanical    753,   764 

sewage     938 

Fireproofing,    tile 1102 

Flagging     279,  352 

Floor    1085,   1087 

concrete   1104 

tar    concrete 1109 

tile     1104 

Flume     988 

Flush  tank 926 

Flushing,    street 469,  473 

wagon     469 

Food,  men  (see  also  Ra- 
tions)   1746 

Foremen,     instructions 61 

Forge,   price 1398 

Forms,   see  Concrete  forms. 

Fortification    work 567 

Foundation,  see  Bridge 
foundation,  see  Con- 
crete base,  see  Earth 
excavation  founda- 
tion. 
Freight,  rate 1456 


1848 


INDEX. 


Page 

Fresno   scraper 129 

Frog     1253,  1274 

Fuel,  see  Boiler,  see  Coal, 
see  Wood. 

Furnace,    price 1399 

Fuses,    price 225 

Gallon     261 

Gang    plow 316 

Garbage,    disposal 1793 

weight     1792,  1795 

Gas    pipe 1802 

Gasoline,    price 191,    1614 

Gate,     price 676 

Generator     1445 

General    expense 45 

Going  value 39,    796 

Grader,     elevating 132,  270 

Grading,  see  Earth  Excava- 
tion, see  Rock  Ex- 
cavation. 

Grain    elevator     1173 

Granite,  see  Stone  Block, 
see  Stone  Masonry, 
see  Rock  Excava- 
tion. 

Gravel,    voids    172 

washing     1271 

Gravel    road 331 

Gravel    roof 1092 

Gravity    mixer 563 

Grindstone,     price 1399 

Grout    357,  363 

Grubbing  (see  also  Clear- 
ing)   790,  1045,  1375 

Guard   rail,   price 278,  279 

Gutter,   cement 451 

cobble     279,  352 

Hair,    price 1102 

Hammer,     price 1399 

Handcar  house 1131 

Harbor   pier 583 

Haul,     defined     121 

Hauling   (see  also  Horse) . .  124, 
268,  276. 

locomotive     135 

machinery     1817 

time    card 100 

tracting    engine 1820 

units    of 80 

Hay,     price 408,1808 

raising    1810 

Highway  bridge,  see  Bridge. 

Hod,     price 1399 

Horses  (see  also  Team), 
driving  with  jerk 

line 1818 

maintenance     1807 

shipping     1817 

Hose,    air 1398,  1399 

Howe  truss,  see  Bridge, 
Howe  truss. 

Hydrant,     life 797 

maintenance     703 

placing     669,  691 

price    676 


Page 
Hydraulic  jack,  price..  1393,  1394 

Ice,     boring 1778 

Ice    house, 1139,  1146 

Inspection,   cost 793,   1368 

Iron    (see  Steel). 
Iron  pipe,   see  Pipe. 

Iron   work    (see   Steel) 1379 

Kerosene,    price 1614 

Key    letters 85 

Jack,    hydraulic 1399 

Jute    (see   also    Oakum,    see 

Yarn),   price. 670,  676,  834 

Lantern,    price 1399 

Lath     1100 

"Lead,"    defined 121 

Lead,  price. ..  .649,  659,  670,  676, 
1399. 

Leveler,    or  spreader 270 

Life,    see    Depreciation,    see 
structure     in     ques- 
tion. 
Load,   see  Hauling. 

Lock,    canal 496,    513,   570,  989 

Locomotive  (see  also  Equip- 
ment)..1376,    1455,    1463, 
1467. 

dinky  135 

handling    14G9 

repairs    1466 

Log    crib 974 

Log    culvert 976 

Logs,     driving 1061 

Logging    railway 1290 

Lowry    process 959 

Lumber  (see  also  Timber). 

making    951 

quantity  in  a  building.  1085 
Macadam    (see    also    Crush- 
ing,    see    Quarrying, 
see      Rock      excava- 
tion),   cost  summary  266 

maintenance     293 

materials    required 266 

prices... 277,    279,    342,    350, 
352. 

resurfacing     288 

scarifying    286 

Machine     (see    also    Plant), 

life   of 21 

when     repairs    justify 

removal    27 

when  to  retire  an  old.     20 

which   to    select 17 

Mail    crane 1286 

Management,    laws    of 66 

Mandrel,     price 1399 

Manhole  (see  also  Vault)..  833, 
836,  866,  922,  923,  925, 
930,  1832. 

Manure,    weight 1795 

Masonry,    see   Concrete,    see 
Stone  Masonry. 

Materials,   report   on 105 

Mattress,     brush 1028 

Measure,  units  of . . . » 79,     84 


INDEX. 


1849 


Page 
Meter,   see  Water  Meter. 

Mill  building 1076,   1151,   1162, 

1173. 

Mile     262 

railway     1287 

Mineral   wool 1822 

Miscellaneous      Cost      Data, 

Section    XV 1779 

Mortar    (see   also    Concrete, 

see  Stone  Masonry).  480, 
1096. 

cement    required 538 

sand    required 633 

water   required 546 

Mixer,    see    Concrete    mixer. 
Mold,   see  Concrete  forms 

Nails,    price 715,  1634 

Oakum,      price       (see      also 

Jute)     1548,  1608 

Oats,    price 408,  1808 

raising    1810 

Office    building 1171 

Oil,     price 226,  1614 

road,     price 306,  307 

Oiled   road    302 

Oiled    suits 1379 

Orange  peel 816     852- 

Packing,    see   Tunnel   lining. 

Pail,     price 1399 

Paint     -.1548,  1637 

brush 1638 

cement    1743 

life     729 

Painting 528,   1115,  1141,   1368 

1824. 

bridge....  1504,  1506,  1528, 
1538,  1568,  1624,  163  / 
to  1645. 

Steel     729,  1719,  1743 

viaduct    1624,  1626 

Paper,     building 1092 

Passenger   car,    see   Car. 

Passenger    station 1111,  1176 

Pavement,    Section    IV 258 

asphalt,  see  Asphalt, 
base,       see       Concrete 


brick,   see  Brick  pave- 
ment. 

macadam,       see      Ma- 
cadam. 

removing,      see      Con- 
crete excavation. 

repairs    27 

stone  block,  see  Stone 

block, 
wood  block,   see  Wood 

block. 

Paving,   see  Slope  wall. 
Paving  pitch,   see  Pitch. 

Perch,     defined 182 

Petrolithic     315,  321 

Piece    rate    system 110 

Pier,     see     Bridge     founda- 
tion, 
harbor    5S3,  619 


Page 

Pick,    price 1399 

Picking   earth 122 

Piles,     blasting 1017 

cubic  contents 951 

docking     1008 

jetting  down.. 611,  620,  828 
830. 

making     993 

pulling 1010,    1014,    1017, 

1526,   1739. 

sawing    off.. 708,  1012,  1013 
sheet.. 983,  1007,1025    1513 
1570,  1596,  1676 

steel 1724,    1732,   1738 

test     1017 

trestle    970,  971 

weight    951 

Pile  driver.  .994,  1000,  1005.  1026, 

1530,    1577,    1730,    1735. 

Piling.... 972,  975,  994,  998,  1375 

1526,   1531,   1532,   1536! 

1538,   1561,   1571,   1604 

1615,   1628,   1663,   1667! 

concrete.  .610,  624,  626,  ,627 

Pipe,    cast   iron,    life 796 

loading    650 

Price     646,   670,   1712 

weight     648 

cement     628 

cement    lined 679 

cleaning   698 

concrete     918 

dipping  in   tar 696 

gas 1802 

laying     oiy,  65t>,  t><»,  1804 
laying   under  water. . .   703 

life    796,   797,   800,  801 

maintenance    702 

scraping     698 

screw    joint 1804 

service     672,  687 

sewer,  see  Sewer  Pipe. 

taking    up 679 

terra  cotta,  see  Sewer 
pipe. 

thawing   water 703 

wood    716,  797 

wrought    iron 678,  1802, 

1804. 

Pitch  (see  also  Tar),  price.  358, 
363,  366,  374,  375,  698, 
1092,  1105,  1548. 

Plank    road 993 

Plant  expense 43 

Plant,    repairs 222 

Plaster    1101 

cement... 767,  773,   777,  782 

of  Paris 1102 

Plow,   gang 316 

Plowing   122,   320,  1815 

traction     engine 1819 

Plug  hole   drilling 492 

Pneumatic  hammer. .  .492,  1394, 
1568,  1717. 


1850 


INDEX. 


Page 

Pole     (see    also    Telegraph, 
see  Telephone). 

concrete 596,  1437 

cubic  contents 951 

holes 1786 

price   1420 

trolley 1437 

weight 951 

Post,  concrete 596 

hole 1785 

life  of  fence 955 

Potash,  price 632 

Portland    cement,     see     Ce- 
ment. 

Powder     (see     also     Dyna- 
mite)    256,  1211 

Prices,  indexing 48 

Profits,   per  cent 47 

Progress  chart 107 

Power,   electric   cars 1451 

house 1405 

plant 1417,  1439,  1440 

1444,    1447. 

Puddle 788,  794,  1588,  1589 

Pump,   life 797 

price 741,  1393,  1399 

Pumping 804,  848,  854,  857 

Punch   card 99 

Quarrying     (see    also    Rock 

Excavation) 210,  492 

499,    503,    506,    521,    529, 
581,  594. 
Quicksand. 6 5 4,  828,  848,  852,  890 

Rack  Railway 1413 

Ramming,       see       Concrete 
ramming. 

Rail  bender 1274 

brace   1274 

chair    1274 

Rails,  life 1459,  1462 

loading 1242 

price 279,  1239 

relaying 1249 

unloading 1249 

weight 1239 

welding 1429,  1432 

Railing,  hand 1719 

Railway,  Section  XI 1178 

appraisal   1291 

bridges,   see   Bridges. 

cable    1405 

C.  M.  &  St.  P 1352 

cost  in  America 1288 

curvature    1462 

electric.  .  .1414,  1416,  1438, 
1440,  1786,  1835. 

elevated 1376,  1451 

employes 1456 

engineering,  see  Engi- 
neering. 

equipment,   see  Equip- 
ment. 

Fairhaven    Southern.  .1306 
Great  Northern.,1302,  1363 

income    1458 

logging    1290 


Railway,   Cont'd.  Page 

Massachusetts 1448 

Michigan 1335,  1348 

mile   1287 

mining 1289 

Minnesota    1339 

Northern  Pacific.  1319,  1355 

operating  cable 1407 

operating   electric.  ...  1438, 
1447. 

operating  elevated 1379 

operating  steam 1453 

O.  R.  &  N 1331 

rack 1413 

service 1456 

S.    F.   &  N 1307 

street,  see  "Railway, 
electric,"  see  Sub- 
way. 

surveys   1748 

Texas   1354 

trestle,    see   Trestle, 
underground,  see  Sub- 
way. 

valuation   1291 

Washington 1291,   1374 

Wash.  &  G.  N 1308 

Wisconsin 1332,  1335 

Rations 1746,  1758 

Red  lead,  price 1615 

Reinforced       concrete,       see 

Concrete. 

Reinforcement,      see      Steel 
work  reinforcement. 
Repairs,  growth  of  annual.  .      21 
Reservoir,  asphalt  lining.  .  .    766 

brick  lining 766 

capacity  and  price...    776, 
796. 

concrete   lining 766 

covered,  see  Reservoir 
roof. 

earth    786 

roof    (see    also    Filter 

roof) 775,  790,  977 

Retaining  wall 506,  577,  1702 

Riprap.  .  .279,  524,  788,  972,  981, 
984,  985,  1374,  1536,  1588, 
162*. 

River  bank  protection 1028 

Riveting,      see      "Steelwork, 
riveting." 

Road,  Section  IV 258 

dragging 330 

dust  laying 294 

grading        (see        also 

Earth  excava.) 331 

gravel 331 

macadam  (see  Macad- 
am). 

maintenance 293 

oiling 305,  320 

Petrolithic 315,  321 

plank 993 

plant  for  building.  ...    215 

prices 277 

sand-clay 323 


INDEX. 


1851 


Page 

Telford   (see  Telford). 
tractive  resistance ....   121 

Road  machine 271,   332 

Rock,  hauling 202 

loading 197 

specific  gravity 173 

weight 197 

Rock     crushing     (see     also 

Crusher)    680 

Rock     excavation,      Section 

III 171 

caisson 1557 

foundation    1696 

measurement 182 

price  278,  SOA 

railway....  1305,  1354,  1374 

steam  shovel 201,  204 

subaqueous 257 

subway 1384,  1390 

trench.. 207,  843,   859,   865,- 

858,  916. 
Roller  (see  Steam  roller)...    271 

asphalt    397 

Rolling  concrete.  .- 558 

earth    123,   791 

stone 271 

Rolling    stock     (see    Equip- 
ment. ) 

Rolling  tamper 316 

Roof   1094 

cement  felt 1153 

concrete 1165,  1166 

dome 1172 

Ferroinclave 1094 

filter    (see   Filter). 

gravel 1092 

painting 1824 

shingle   1089 

slate 1093 

steel    1172 

tin .1091 

Rope 716,  1399,  1563 

steel 1399 

Rosin;  price 226 

Roundhouse 1147,  1362 

Rubber  boots,  price.. 1399,   1614 

Rubber  packing,  price 1613 

Rubble   (see  also  Stone  ma- 
sonry)    1099 

Rubble  concrete.  .  .587,  590,  592, 
1688. 

Rueping  process 959,  1262 

Rutger  process 1262 

Sal  soda,  price 226 

Sand,  amount  in  mortar. . .    538 

cost 549 

voids 542,  586 

washing 550,  752,  758 

Sand  filter  (see  Filter). 

Sand-clay  road 323,  327 

Saw,  cross-cut 1399 

Sawing 953,  964 

Scales 222,  1274,  1361 

Scarifying 286,  287 

Scow 987,  1608 

Scraper 126 


Page 

Scraping  pipe 698 

Screen   222 

Screenings    266 

Section  house 1121 

Septic   tank 940 

Service  connections 672 

Sewage  disposal. ..  936,  938,  997 

Sewer,  Section  VIII 802 

blocks 920 

brick    839 

cement  pipe.. 927,  928,  931 

concrete 899 

cleaning 934,  942 

flushing 943 

manhole  (see  Manhole). 

pipe 278,    817,   818,    820, 

861,   864,   866,   926. 
tunnel..  865,   881,  887,   893, 
896. 

Shacks   1139 

Shaft 876,  878,  1218 

Sheet  pile   (see  Pile). 
Sheeting  (see  Trench  sheet- 
ing). 

Shield 882,  887 

Shingles 1089 

Shop,   blacksmith 1127 

car 1147 

machinery 1468 

railway 1352 

Shoring    (see   French   brac- 
ing). 

Shovel,  price 1399 

Shoveling 122 

Shrubs 1064 

Side  track 1252 

Sidewalk,  brick .' .'    352 

Siding 1088 

Signal  plant 1287 

Signs 1313,   1353 

Sinking  fund,  diagrams 797 

tables 12 

Slate  roof 1093 

Slip  scraper 126 

Slope  wall.  .  .517,  739,  788,  1030, 
1037,   1044. 

Smoke  jack 1148,  1274 

Smoke  stack  (see  also  Chim- 
ney)   222,  1720 

Snow  fence 1286,  1361 

Snow  plow 1439 

Snow  shed 1285 

Soap,   price 631 

Sod 1822 

Sounding   1778 

Spreader,  stone 270 

Sprinkling,  earth 123 

macadam 273 

roads  and  streets 457 

wagon,  price 215 

Spur 1255 

Square 264 

Stack   (see  Smoke  stack). 

Stairs   1084,   1091 

Standpipe,  brick  casing 727 

concrete  730 


1852 


INDEX. 


Page 

life 7y/ 

steel 725 

Station  (see  Depot). 

Steam  roller.  .- 215,  271,  284 

Steam  shovel 134 

work 201,  204,  1267 

Steelwork,  Section  XIII 1717 

bands  for  wood  pipe.  .1368 
bridge          (see         also 

Bridge) 1368,  1471, 

1488,   1559,  1575. 

bridge  shop 1493 

buildings.  .1074,  1152,  1173 

elevated    ry 1376 

•  lock 575 

piling    1724 

reinforcing  concrete ...  .546 
723,  905,  909,  914,  917, 
918,  1105,  1108,  1158, 
1160,  1161,  1168,  1526, 
1679,  1696,  1704,  1822. 
riveting..  .1394,  1399,  1519, 
1565,  1633,  1717. 

standpipe 725,  726 

subway 1391,  1394,  1719 

tank  and  tower 728 

Steel,  cleaning 1742 

corrugated 1174 

expanded  metal...  9 09,  1101 

forms 1170 

inspection 1368 

lath  1101 

rails    (see  Rails), 
reinforcing.  .548,    620,    911, 
1163. 

ties 1427 

twisted  bars 548 

unloading   . 1497,  1499, 

1502,    1566,    1567. 
weight  in  buildings. .  .1171 

wire  fabric 911 

Stock  yard : 1361 

Stoker,  price 741,  1444,  1445 

Stone    (see  Rock). 

crushing     (see    Crush- 
er). 

cutting  and  dressing.  .  485, 
487,  514,  1100,  1541,  1581, 
1592,  1594,  1597,  1611, 
1707. 

hand  breaking 228 

hauling 268,  276 

loading ,197,  267 

sawing   486 

settlement    179 

sizes  of  broken 183 

spreading 269 

unloading.. 1592,  1597,  1907 

voids 171 

weight 171,   177 

Stone  curb 456 

Stone  dust,  price.. 409,  414,  415, 

417,   420. 
Stone  masonry,  Section  V.  .    475 

ashlar 1100,  1574 

bridge  anchorage 1569, 

1573. 


Stone  Masonry,  Cont'd.  Page 

bridge,  arch 493,  1654, 

1658. 

bridge  foundation 509 

1557,     1578,     1592,     1593, 

1595,     1611,     1612,     1618. 

cleaning  with  acid.  527,  637 

culvert 1705,  1708 

dam. 488,  497,  499,  510,  796 

dry  wall 789" 

excavating.  .528,  1594,  1597 

laying 483 

lock 513 

miscellaneous...  1495,   1536, 
1541,    1584. 

mortar 480 

pointing   528 

retaining   wall 506 

riprap    (see  Riprap), 
rubble    (see  also  Rub- 
ble concrete) . .502,    1099 

sewer  foundation '844 

slope   wall    (see   Slope 
wall). 

tunnel    1239 

Stone  block  pavement.  .279,  341, 
352,  368,  378,  420. 

dressing  old 378 

excavating   376 

Stop  cock  box 703 

Store   keeper,    report 104 

Streets,   Section  V 258 

cleaning    459 

sprinkling 457 

work,  prices 352 

Street  railway  (see  Railway). 
Structural  steel   (see  Steel). 

Stump,  auger 1048 

blasting 1045 

grubbing     (see     Grub- 
bing). 

puller 1045 

Subway   (see  also  Conduit). 

Berlin 1383 

concrete 1708 

Long  Island 1399 

New  York 1384,  1387 

Sub-contracts    60 

Suits,   oiled 1399 

Superintendence 45 

Superintendents,         instruc- 
tions          61 

Surfacing    (see    also    Track 

surfacing)    124 

Switch..  .1242,   1252,   1354,  1360, 
1375. 

stand 1253,  1274 

Switchboard 1445 

Survey,  charges 1745 

hydrographic 1778 

leveling 1776 

railway 1748 

topographic 1767 

triangulation    1773 

Sweeping  machine,  life 474 

Sweeping   street 459 

Sylvester,  waterproofing.  6 31,  735 


INDEX. 


1853 


Page 

System,   Gilbreth's 61 

Tamping  (see  also  Concrete 

ramming)    320 

Tamping1  roller 316 

Tank,  concrete 627 

steel 728 

track    1277 

water 222,  1274 

wooden    729 

Tar  (see  also  Pitch). 

price.  .  .309,  378,  698,  1092, 
1548,    1608. 

Tar  concrete 352,  1109 

Tar   felt,    waterproofing.  ...    632 
Tar  paper.  ..594,  632,  1092,  1114, 
1608. 

Tarring  joints 358,  376 

macadam 296,  309 

Team   (see  also  Hauling,  see 
Horses). 

defined    121 

work    of 121 

Telegraph  line 1354,  1826 

office    1127 

Telephone  line 1827 

pole 596 

Telford 279,  322,  352 

Telpher   1062 

Terra  cotta .1103 

Test  holes 141 

Testing,  cement 793 

Thawing  water  pipe 703 

Thermit    1429 

Tie 1253,  1257 

asphaltic  oil  treatment  962 

creosoting 961 

life 956,  1263 

making    1375 

price   1266 

replacing   1266 

spacing   1265 

steel 1427 

treating   960,   1259 

Tie  plate 1242,  1375 

Tile   Drains 1796 

Tile  fireproof  ing 1102 

Timber,  creosoting 961 

growing   tie. 1257 

life 954,  1263 

manufacturing   951 

treating    956,    1259 

unloading   1160 

weight 951 

Timberwork,  Section  IX 945 

bridge  deck.  ...  1496,  1497, 

1500,  1502,  1503,  1505, 

1508,  1510,  1529,  1624, 

1626. 

buildings.  .  .594,  1085,  1113 

caisson 986,  1545,  1606, 

1612,  1616,  1618. 
centers.  749,  776,  1682,  1707 
cofferdam      (see      also 

Cofferdam)..  .1579,   1587 
crib  ...575,  974,  1533,  1616 


Timberwork,  Cont'd.  Page 

cord  wood 1840 

crib  dam 504,   978 

culvert   977 

erecting 962 

falsework.  14  93,  1495,  1501, 
1506,  1519,  1531,  1532, 
1533,  1536,  1560. 
forms.  ..563,  572,  580,  583, 
1156,  1160,  1162,  1177, 
1680,  1704. 

framing 962 

.       grillage   1572 

hauling   963 

Howe         truss         (see 
"Bridge, Howe  truss") 

loading 963 

measurement 950 

reservoir  roof 790,  977 

scow 1608 

sheet  piling 1513,  1598 

sheeting 795,  802,  805, 

831,   850,   857,   1402. 

snow  fence 1286 

snow  shed 1285 

trestle.. 586,  966,  1006,  1562 

tunnel  lining.  ..  1196,  1199, 

12.01,  1210,  1221,  1230. 

viaduct  969 

Time  card 114 

Time  keeping 91 

Timing  work 116 

Tin  roof 1091 

Ton 264 

Tool  box 993 

Tool  house 1131,  1132 

Torch  1399 

Tower,  Eiffel 1719 

Track  laying.  .  .1240,  1249,  1303, 
1305,  1354,  1375,  1377, 
1378,  1380,  1405,  1414, 
1415,  1416,  1438. 

Track  materials 1274 

Track  scales 1274 

Track  surfacing 1240 

Track    tank 1277 

Traction  engine 134,  1819 

Tractive  resistance 121,  136 

Train  mile 1456 

service 12.43 

stopping 1468 

Tramway 1062 

Transformer 1445 

Transmission  line 1446 

Transportation       (see      also 

Hauling)    80 

Traveler,  bridge 1496,  1499, 

1502,  1563,  1623,  1625. 
Trestle     (see    also    Timber- 
work)  .  .  .966,  1291,  1323, 
1354,    1562,    1966. 

concrete 1655,  1686 

life 954 

pile 970,  971,  1002 

wagon  road. 970,  1001 

Trolley  pole  (see  Pole). 


1854 


INDEX. 


Page 
Trolley  road  (see  Railway). 

Truck,  timber. 1399 

Truss   (see  Bridge).     . 
Treating  (see  Timber  treat- 
ing). 

Trees,  planting 1063 

Trench 650,  802,  1798 

backfill..  140,  825,  827,  831, 
833,    837,    843,    847,    855, 
858,    900. 
bracing        (see        also 

Trench  sheeting)  900,  930 
excavator... 6 51,  804,  1802 

machine 805,  871 

pumping.. 654,  848,  854,  857 

rock 207,  859,  868,  916 

sewer 782 

sheeting 802,  805,  831, 

850,  857,  1402. 

water  pipe 1802 

Trestle   (see  Timberwork). 
Tunnel.  .1180  to  1239,  1312,  1323, 
1360,  1367,  1375. 

Alaska  Central 1203 

Busk 1207 

Cascade   1192 

Mount  Wood 1197 

Mullan 1232 

Peekskill    1201 

Raton 1215 

Stampede 1181 

sewer... 865,  869,  8817887, 

893,  896. 

Tunnel  lining.  .  .528,  1181,   1186, 
1199,     1201,     1210,     1225, 
1230,     1232,     1237,     1239! 
Turnout   (see  Switch). 

Turntable 1278,  1325 

Value,  going  concern.  .  .  .39,  796 

Valuation,  commercial 40 

physical    38 

railway 1291 

waterworks 796 

Valve 659 

Vault 689,  693,   1408 

Viaduct,  concrete 1686 

Kinzua 1632,  1638 

Marent 1631 

painting 1641 

Pecos 1630 

steel 1620 

timber .    969 


Vise 

Vitrified   sewer    (see    Sewer 
Pipe). 

Voids,  gravel 172 

sand 542 

stone 171 

Wages 333,  1779 

•Wagon  .    125,  215 

Wainscoting 1088 

Walk      (see     also     Cement 
walk). 

asphalt 429 

Wash  boring  (see  Boring). 

Washing  gravel 1271 

sand 550 

Waste,  price 226,  1614 

Water,  softening 766 

Water  crane 1151 

jet 828 

meter... 687,  689,  690,  797 
pipe  (see  Pipe). 

station 729,   1274,   1314, 

1326. 

tank 728 

Waterproofing 631,  635    735 

782,   786,   1391,   1393. 
Waterworks,  Section  VII...   641 

appraisal   795 

depreciation 643 

operating 643 

systems 643 

Well 165.  253,  736 

Well  drill. .165,  246,  251,  253,  255 

Wellhouse  process 957 

Wharf 1314,  1361 

Wheelbarrow 124,  1399 

Wheelscraper    127,  215 

Willows    (see    Brush). 

Window 1090 

Wire,  price 1634 

telegraph 1826 

Wood,  cutting 1840 

price...  407,  414,  417,  1062, 

1210,    1230. 

Wood  block  pavement.  .342,  344, 
352,   383,    1681. 

life   387 

removing 383 

Wood  pipe 716 

Yarn,  price 671,  672 

Zinc,  chloride  process 962 


'£C-  27950, 


487(. 


JZJzigt 


DEI 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


